Latest Post

Content Patterns: How to Create Better Content, Faster How to Cancel an Order on Bonanza The man who tricked Nazi Germany: lessons from the past on how to beat disinformation

Democrats turned the confirmation hearings for Brett Kavanaugh, a distinguished federal judge and well-respected neighborhood member, into a strange circus of disruptions, both from shrieking audience members and from Democratic committee members who complained fanatically on document production, despite the fact the custodians of Bush presidential records had actually cleared for release every specific document requested by Democrats.Now we know that

while they were preening and positioning and proclaiming “I am Spartacus!” they were also doing precisely what they were wrongly accusing Republican politicians of– hiding a document. Specifically, hiding a letter from Christine Blasey Ford implicating Kavanaugh of sexual assault someplace in suburban Maryland sometime in the 1980s. That document– which, if not hidden prior to the hearings could have been resolved through background examination or through public interrogation– was instead held by committee Democrats for dripped public release (in offense of Senate guidelines) after the hearings, on the eve of an arranged vote.The technique?

Delay, hold-up, hold-up. Win the Senate. Keep the seat open through the next presidential election. Win the White Home. Designate a liberal. We understand that since the Democratic point woman in the character assassination, Senator Mazie Hirono of Hawaii, was asked point blank by Politico if a Democratic Senate would keep the Kavanaugh seat uninhabited for two complete years and she stated: “I think we have actually had those kinds of vacancies prior to … so the world does not come to an end.”

The Blasey Ford letter was not credible on its face. The function behind its release was to stall and postpone, and for that it worked.Blasey Ford claimed

that at some point in the 1980s, somewhere in Montgomery County– a county with a population of about a million individuals– Brett Kavanaugh devoted sexual assault. Blasey Ford never informed anybody about this occasion until at least 3 years later. Her spouse informed the Washington Post that Blasey Ford told a variation of the story for the very first time in couples counseling in 2012, when she “voiced concern that Kavanaugh– then a federal judge– might one day be nominated to the Supreme Court.”He was commonly reported at the time to be Romney’s leading choice.The Washington Post needed to fudge Blasey Ford’s story to describe away a significant disparity between the 2012 therapist

notes and the letter being hidden by Senate Democrats. In the 2012 variation, there were 4 attackers, versus two in the letter. The Post claimed the therapist misinterpreted that there were four kids at the party for 4 young boys being in the space. Except the Post understood– however declined to notify their reader– that in the more current variation of the tale there were only 3 boys at thecelebration– and a lady, LelandKeyser.Kavanaugh immediately issued a categorical rejection, stating to the Senate Judiciary Committee under penalty of felony that he had never ever devoted any such act against Blasey Ford or any other person.Blasey Ford, with a team of Democratic consultants and lawyers,

participated in days of will she testify cat-and-mouse games. She even claimed a worry of flying meant she could not get to D.C. for the originally set up hearings. Throughout all the stalling, committee Democrats refused to share

the original letter with the bulk, which had only a redacted version. Among the redactions was the truth that Blasey Ford was available to satisfy in D.C. from July 30 to August 7, and would be offered in California on August 10– which means she was planning to drive 40-plus hours directly without any stops, or the worry of flying was brand-new this month.By Sunday the three other supposed partygoers had all sent the committee statements, under penalty of felony, rejecting any recollection of any celebration like the one explained in the letter. Keyser, the only woman named by Blasey Ford and a lifelong friend of hers, went even more. Her declaration says:”Put simply

, Ms. Keyser does not understand Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a celebration or gathering where he existed, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”So we had an allegation about a mystery party at an unidentified place on an unknown date that all 4 individuals who were apparently there stated didn’t happen. The story had actually collapsed. However Democrats had stalled long enough to encourage a media outlet to run a second smear.The brand-new accuser, Deborah Ramirez, was discovered and cultivated by committee Democrats according to the New Yorker’s Ronan Farrow, whose story with Jane Mayer broke the Ramirez claims, which had actually already been turned down by the mainstream media.According to the New Yorker,” she hesitated to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the supposed incident with certainty. After 6 days of carefully examining her memories and seeking advice from

with her attorney Ramirez stated that she felt great enough of her recollections to state that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at an intoxicated dorm celebration.”Even the liberal New York Times, which had actually put substantial investigative resources into the Ramirez ideafrom committee Democrats, had refused to run the story.”The Times talked to lots to support second claims versus Kavanaugh,”Times reporter Peter Baker tweeted,”and might find no one with direct knowledge. Ramirez told ex-classmates she could not be certain Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.” 2 vague, dubious, uncorroborated accusations do not add up to a pattern of anything except a profane smear project against an excellent and good guy on whom no real dirt could be found. (Keep in mind the initial attacks on Kavanaugh for putting baseball tickets on his credit card and topping his spaghetti with ketchup?)All of this totals up to a desperate effort by the minority party and sympathetic media to utilize character assassination to prevent judicial conservatives from securing a 5-4 majority on the Supreme Court. Hirono even confessed that she believes the claims in large part because Kavanaugh is pro-life. Hirono was asked by CNN’s Jake Tapper:”Doesn’t Kavanaugh have the exact same presumption of innocence as anybody else in America?” She responded: I put his denial in the context of whatever that I understand about him in regards to how he approaches his cases. As

I stated, his reliability is already really questionable in my mind and in the minds of a lot of my fellow Judiciary Committee members, the Democrats.So he comes, and– when I say that he’s really outcome-driven, he has an ideological agenda, is really outcome-driven. And I can sit here and talk to you about some of the cases that exemplifies his, in my view, failure to be fair in the cases that come before him.This is a person that is going to be sitting on our Supreme Court, making decisions that will

affect ladies’s reproductive choice. He has a– he very much protests women’s reproductive choice.Evidence doesn’t matter. There is no anticipation of innocence. Whatever disgusting smears Kavanaugh and his wife and two children suffer are worth it, Dems think, if they can keep a pro-life justice from resting on the Supreme Court.(This, despite the reality that Kavanaugh has actually stated Roe v. Wade is settled law and a lot of pro-lifers chosen Amy Coney Barrett over him for this vacancy.) Every Senator now deals with a very plain option. Either vote to verify Brett

Kavanaugh or vote to confirm the authenticity of the most obscene, vicious, unproven smear campaign we have actually ever seen. And if the Senate does the latter there may be no depths to which our political culture will not sink.