Brett Kavanaugh and the Star Chamber

By Timothy Birdnow —— Bio and Archives September 22, 2018

Comments | Print This | Subscribe | Email Us

The Republicans inside the Beltway, and many outside as well, are forever mystified by the tactics employed by the "loyal opposition". Like statuary of deer, they remain frozen as the Democrats and their media allies do donuts all over their lush green lawns, defecate on the flower beds, and toss beer cans into the bushes. They seem constitutionally incapable of understanding their enemies. Take the case of Judge Kavanaugh and Mrs. Ford (I will not call her Doctor as the media has been doing; that is customarily reserved for M.D.'s, not Ph.D.'s and is being used to inflate her "gravitas" in the public mind Oh, and Doctors of Psychology are often viewed as patients who worked their way to trustee status..)

The Republicans should have seen this coming

The Republicans should have seen this coming. Back in July Henry Enten wrote about his statistical analysis of the upcoming Kavanaugh hearings, and made it quite plain that the Democrats had only one option. From CNN:

"But is it possible Kavanaugh doesn't get confirmed? The answer to that question is yes. It's likely to happen only if the public turns against his confirmation, though, as they did with Robert Bork in 1987."

Enten explains his modeling and shows how Kavanaugh has it in the bag unless the Democrats can "Bork" him.

"Put another way, Kavanaugh needs to be unpopular enough that he won't be seen as an electoral liability for moderate Democratic senators to vote against. These include red state senators up for re-election such as Joe Donnelly of Indiana, Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Claire McCaskill of Missouri. On the other end, Collins needs to feel electoral pressure to vote against Kavanaugh. Keep in mind, Democratic senators and liberal groups were able to pull off such a feat with the Bork nomination. Bork's net favorability ended up at -11 points nationally. Bork finished the nomination process so unpopular because Democrats and liberal groups went after him for his views on the Constitution, such as privacy and the right to an abortion. They also brought up his views on executive privilege, which could be the cornerstone of a Democratic argument against Kavanaugh. The obvious difficulty for Democrats is that it's unlikely Kavanaugh will end up as unpopular as Bork was or Trump is. Among those who form opinions of Supreme Court nominees, their feelings are usually positive. Kavanaugh wins confirmation under most realistic scenarios. "

Ricki Seidman, a former Clintonista and now adviser to Mrs. Ford, held a conference call outlining plans to Bork Kavanaugh

(Please notice that this fits with the scenario Rush Limbaugh laid out where the media is guiding the Democrats, not the other way around.) Interestingly enough, Mrs. Ford contacted the Washington Post tipline in July, right about the time that Enten and others were concluding that the only way to stop Kavanaugh was to Bork him. Strange that she didn't do it at another time; Kavanaugh was formally announced on July 9 as the pick, and the Washington Post states she contacted them in "early July". Interesting timing, no? Why, it's as if someone did a head count and realized they had to take swift action. In point of fact, this smells like another "insurance policy" akin to the one mentioned by our old buddy Peter Strzok. The Democrats had a pretty good idea at that point that Trump would pick Kavanaugh. Notice Mrs. Ford did not come any earlier, nor any later. She mysteriously appeared, one of the eyeless creatures to crawl from the dank, dark cavern of academia to make an unsubstantiatable accusation in the light. Also back in July Ricki Seidman, a former Clintonista and now adviser to Mrs. Ford, held a conference call outlining plans to Bork Kavanaugh. Gateway Pundit has the audio here. Now there are many ways to Bork a guy, but perhaps the most effective is to accuse him of attempted rape. Rape is such a vile, evil act that there is no way whatsoever to excuse it. The Democrats had to excuse it as long as Bill and Hillary Clinton held sway over their party, and it seriously restricted them. That's why the #Metoo movement had to be created, and they had to sacrifice several rooks and Bishops, good soldiers in the Progressive revolution, in order to give the movement credibility. And they have had wonderful success with it since. Consider Roy Moore, who was brought down by one unsubstantiatable claim. (People have forgotten but there were only two accusations of lawbreaking against Moore, and one was quickly disproved. The other women had merely dated Moore or knew the accuser.) Take Missouri's ex-Governor Eric Greitens; Greitens had a consensual affair with a woman and was pursued by a radical Democrat prosecutor with the complicity of the Missouri GOP, who were angry at Greitens for being an outsider. I wrote about it here.

I believe the Left wants to create these star chambers for any sexual assault case that could not succeed in court

Yes, she has received some death threats, but so has the Kavanaugh family, and it is her fault. But if it was not Mrs. Ford it would have been someone else, and likely will be as the Democrats learned from their mistake when they tried this same dirty trick on Clarence Thomas. One accuser does not establish a pattern. They need two or more. This worked with Roy Moore down in Alabama and that is not going to be lost on them. I am sure they are out in the swampland busily scraping with their spades to dig some slimy mud dweller up, or bribe one willing to perjur herself. I have theorized in the past that the endgame of the #metoo movement was to enshrine the Obama policy towards "sexual assault" that was implemented on college campuses, where the accused stood condemned unless he could prove unequivocally that he was innocent and would be punished administratively, into civil and criminal law in society as a whole. I believe they want to create a board that deals with accusations outside of the criminal courts, one which fundamentally alters the rules involving discovery and presumption of innocence. It seems hard to imagine, but we've seen them do all manner of terrible things to college kids based on weak or hazy accusations. See COLLEGE FIX for an example. I believe the Left wants to create these star chambers for any sexual assault case that could not succeed in court. And what they are doing to Kavanaugh here is very much like that. He has to prove his innocence in this case. It is horribly un-American. Increasingly, having a Y chromosome is prima facia evidence of guilt. And our society is criminalizing what had been normal interaction between men and women. It is the implementation of Mussolini's dream of Fascism "Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state". This is putting all relationships under the thumb of the State.

If the GOP allows Kavanaugh to be rejected they will be complicit in not just an injustice, but a crime against the American People and all of humanity

And an originalist like Kavanaugh will never allow that. Someone who thinks like that must never, ever be allowed on the Court. If he has to be accused of the most vile of things, if his life must be destroyed, if he must lose his family, so be it. As Fay Voshell points out at Lifesitenews:

"What we are seeing played out is an ideological proxy war. It is a struggle between progressive mythos of collective guilt and the Western concept of individual guilt. "For decades, progressives have seen the dynamic of history only in terms of categories and classes of people, not in terms of individual innocence or guilt." "In the courtroom of the progressive mind, Judge Kavanaugh is automatically guilty of oppression because he is a white male and a symbol of patriarchal oppression. Whether or not he committed the assault he is accused of is very nearly irrelevant. He is an archetype who is seen as inherently evil, as he might wind up impinging on "rights” crucial to radical feminist progressives, who automatically count themselves among the oppressed."

And, as former Communist Arthur Koestler pointed out in his novel Darkness at Noon, the Left sees any display of individual thinking as an imminent threat and will destroy even their own "heroes" to promote the cause. Or, as Saul Alinsky put it, the opponent must be demonized " Saul Alinsky, the Prophet of the modern Left, stated: "One acts decisively only in the conviction that all the angels are on one side and all the devils on the other." And Alinsky also said: "The fifth rules of the ethics of means and ends is that concern with ethics increases with the number of means available and vice versa. To the man of action the first criterion in determining which means to employ is to assess what means are available. Reviewing and selecting available means is done on a straight utilitarian basis — will it work? Moral questions may enter when one chooses among equally effective alternate means." Clearly, the Democrats had few choices here and no moral scruples whatsoever. This star chamber approach is only going to get worse over time. The Democrats are now fully totalitarian, ignoring law and custom and morality in favor of nothing but raw power. If the GOP allows Kavanaugh to be rejected they will be complicit in not just an injustice, but a crime against the American People and all of humanity. And they will deservedly lose power as a result, perhaps losing Congress in the next election. Frankly, they deserve to, given their unwillingness to take any sort of moral stand. America lies in the balance.