Since the election of president Trump Democrats have simply decided that they are going to seek to reverse Republican election victories or oppose any traditional appointments like that of judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.
Why? We conservatives did not disrupt the nation and political decorum and traditions over Obama’s election or his Supreme Court appointments. We have never upset Supreme Court confirmation hearings like the crazy, hollering leftists did with judge Kavanaugh.
That was achieved with the cooperation of Democrat senators on the Judiciary Committee who made sure that the disruptors got tickets to the hearings. These senators are pure sleaze – Booker, Feinstein, Harris, Leahy, Durbin, etc., – acting like legitimate representatives of the people.
We conservatives are decent people who accept our wins and our losses in free and fair elections. But Democrats have simply decided that they will no longer accept any losses.
There is good reason for panic on the left. Democrats today have less power than they have had in 100 years. They cannot afford to lose any more.
They have decided that they will seek to de-legitimize Republicans victories like Trump’s. They have been promising to remove president Trump from office rather than meeting him in a legitimate 2020 election.
This is happening since Democrats have moved to the far, radical left where elections don’t matter, where power is all that is important, and that any Republican who has power must be smeared, destroyed, removed from office or denied office, like judge Kavanaugh.
Of course ‘search and destroy’ is nothing new. Democrats have been doing it since the 1960s and Richard Nixon. They did it to presidents Reagan and Bush and many other Republicans.
It makes no difference how it is accomplished. They trashed Republican US Senate candidate Roy Moore without a shred of evidence from 40-year-old accusations. Christine Blasey’s hearsay allegations from 36 years ago against judge Kavanaugh have not been backed up in any way by evidence, much less proof.
We can assume that Kavanaugh was targeted since he had a history of drinking beer heavily in his high school and college years, as millions of student do. Democrats obviously looked into his high school yearbook on the internet and then built on this narrative of drinking by tossing on a sexual assault charge. Very convenient.
President Trump has been the victim of dozens of smears after winning an election the good old-fashioned way – he won it fair and square by out-campaigning the presumed favorite Hillary Clinton.
But when Obama was first running for the US Senate in Illinois in 2004 he and his media cronies got sealed documents from the court that revealed that his opponent had engaged in sleazy sexual activity. This forced his opponent Jack Ryan out of the race.
On the other hand, we certainly had the right to see Democrat senator Ted Kennedy expelled from the US Senate after he allowed Mary Jo Kopechne to drown in 1969. He even tried to cover it up and then clearly lied about it. But he served until 2009 without a peep of protest. Where were the Republicans?
They were cowards. Who could forget Democrat candidate Al Gore trying to win the electoral vote in Florida in 2000 – and thus the White House – by using any flimsy technicality to disqualify overseas military ballots that would largely support Republican candidate George W. Bush. It almost worked. Gore had almost 1,500 military ballots thrown out but then lost Florida by only 537 votes.
These sleazy attacks do not only focus on political candidates. Who could forget the 2006-7 Duke University case in which white players on the Duke lacrosse team were falsely accused of raping a black stripper.
After months in which the players were assumed guilty by the media and the Democrats, they were exonerated. Meanwhile the black stripper Crystal Mangum is currently in jail for murdering her boyfriend.
Today we have the bizarre case of judge Kavanaugh. There is no evidence whatsoever that he attacked Christine Blasey in 1982 at a party. This is merely an allegation from the distant past that is wholly out of character for Brett Kavanaugh according to hundreds of people who know him.
Blasey does not recall when or where the alleged incident happened, or how she got to or from the party. All of the people named by Blasey in the case have said that they have no recollection of the party in question.
Blasey even claims that she had “one beer” at the party. This is a standard defense, for instance when stopped for erratic driving (“Officer, I only had one beer”…)
Yet “one beer” consumed by a 15-year old girl can make her drunk. Was she drunk? Did she have two or three beers? Or other types of stronger alcohol? Was she looking to have sex at the party, as many young girls do? Nobody has asked those questions since we are automatically supposed to believe all women accusers.
But the point of the accusation is not necessarily to prove that judge Kavanaugh had assaulted Blasey. The point was to raise just enough doubt about Kavanaugh to deny his Supreme Court seat by just two Republican votes out of 100 US senators, which would kill the nomination. It is also intended to cast a permanent cloud over judge Kavanaugh.
And you can be sure that when judge Kavanaugh is confirmed to the Supreme Court that he will become the permanent target of Democrats, as Trump is today. They will pursue him for decades and fundraise off his name. They will never be satisfied with his innocence because Democrat always need a target for their bottomless rage. Once an enemy of the Democrats, always an enemy. Guilty until proven guilty.
Meanwhile Blasey has offered no evidence whatsoever that she ever knew Brett Kavanaugh, or ever had met him. Yet we have an actual photograph of Bill Clinton with the woman who claims that he raped her, Juanita Broaddrick. But still Democrats refuse to accept Broaddrick’s story.
How about Dan Rather putting out the false allegation in September 2004 that Bush’s National Guard records had been cooked. Rather lost his job and his legacy over that one and Bush was re-elected in November. So judge Kavanaugh can certainly weather this storm.
In 2012 Democrat US senator Harry Reid claimed that he had heard that Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney was not paying his taxes. But rather than producing any evidence Reid simply directed the media to ask Romney.
For years we have heard allegations that president Trump does not pay any taxes. Yet one tax return from 2005 showed that he paid a higher rate than Obama, Bush, Romney, Kerry or almost every other American.
And of course we have the loony charges against president Trump over Russia. And hiring hookers in Moscow. It never ends.
The Supreme Court nomination process will never be the same after this Kavanaugh debacle. In short, if a Democrat president wants a nominee but Republicans control the Senate, the nominee may never get seated. And vice versa.
Friends, prepare yourselves. There already are conservatives joking about making false accusations next time that a Democrat emerges for a presidential race, a Senate race or a Supreme Court seat.
Someone could claim, for instance, that US senator Elizabeth Warren “rubbed up against me sexually when she walked past me during a public appearance.” And there would be no way to disprove the claim.
But this is no joke. We can assume that these accusers will come forward on both sides. The New York Times already has a “hot line” for people to contact them with information about bad behavior by candidates.
But when recent charges are corroborated, verified and written down against a Democrat like Keith Ellison, his fellow Democrats and the media simply ignore them as they did with Ted Kennedy’s known deceptions.
And considering that accusers can virtually never be found guilty of lying over a false accusation in the distant past liberals will continue to bring forward accusers who can feel confident of never being prosecuted.
Since the founding of America Supreme Court nominees have generally been subjected to “advise and consent” by the US Senate. But the Kavanaugh hearings show that Democrats have replaced that with “search and destroy”, in the words of nominee Kavanaugh.
Here are the Senate votes for Supreme Court nominees going back to the 1970s. Notice that the liberals almost always get high numbers of Republican votes but that Democrats do not return the favor.
Conservatives: Neil Gorsuch — 54-45… Samuel Alito — 58-42… John Roberts — 78-22… Clarence Thomas — 52-48… William Rehnquist — 65-33
Conservatives who turned out to be moderates or liberals: Sandra Day O’Connor — 99-0… David Souter — 90-9… Anthony Kennedy — 97-0
Conservative who was not confirmed: Robert Bork — 42-58
Conservative who got support from both parties: Antonin Scalia — 98-0
Liberals: Elena Kagan — 63-37… Sonia Sotomayor — 68-31… Ruth Bader Ginsburg — 96-3… Stephen Breyer — 87-9… John Paul Stevens — 98-0
So notice that 63 votes is the lowest that any liberal got out of 100, but a conservative (Bork) got 42 while other conservatives got 54, 58 and 52.
But today Democrats are refusing to support Republican nominees under Trump. This war on Brett Kavanaugh is a real game changer and this will come back to bite them if we have a Democrat president and his nominee needs Republican approval.