American Elephants


Here Comes the Propaganda Effort by The Elephant's Child

ed-markey-AP[1]

“Senator Edward Markey (D-MA) said the confirmation of Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh will be “the single most powerful animating force”to especially woman voters in the upcoming midterm elections.”

Markey said, of the Republican base:

“It’s not as galvanized as the Democratic base. It’s not as galvanized as those who were outraged at the way in which Dr. Blasey Ford was treated before the Senate Judiciary Committee and the entire process for the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh. What we are seeing here is a historic uprising, especially of women in our country who really do feel that this president has to have a check be placed upon him. Otherwise preexisting conditions, which are protections for those who have health care needs, or the entire Affordable Care Act or Roe vs. Wade can all just be swept away. It can be completely overturned by Brett Kavanaugh’s vote on the Supreme Court. This is going to be a referendum on Donald Trump, on Brett Kavanaugh, on the key votes, which he can now cast, that undermines protections for women in our country and families in general.”

He went on trying to squeeze every possible thing about “the mistreatment” of Christine Blasey Ford before the committee, in a splendid example of Leftist propaganda straight from the propaganda shop. Sigh. Christine Blasey Ford was quite definitely not mistreated. She was respectfully referred to as Dr. Ford at every instance, and treated courteously by every questioner. Senator Grassley had offered to go to California to get her testimony since she professed to have a fear of flying, which was, of course a lie, as she regularly flies all over the world, including multiple trips to Hawaii. Not one single element of her testimony could be confirmed by the witnesses she offered. Nothing in her testimony checked out. The second front door, instead of an extra escape route turned out to be the door to an illegal (city ordinance) rental, and the psychologist who had rented it was located in Oregon. It was all, every bit, a lie, under oath.

Does anything go in the effort to win at the polls?  Probably.

Advertisements


About the Politics of Personal Destruction by The Elephant's Child

f4495d8e-7632-4604-8dc9-6fd03fbf56ca

I just blamed what we have called the Trump Derangement Syndrome on Kathy Griffin’s severed head stunt, which demonstrated that there were no barriers of truth, taste, or decency for Democrats — they were now free to attack in any way they chose, a “can you top this” contest in which you got brownie points for being disgusting. Anything goes in the battle to attack Trump.

You wouldn’t go far astray in suggesting that Minority Leader Charles Schumer is the “Kathy Griffin” of the Senate.

“The Democrats have suddenly lost interest in the sexual assault claim that they claimed was central to Judge Kavanaugh’s fitness to serve on the Supreme Court? We’re now in the “temperament”phase. Judge Kavanaugh’s visible and justifiable anger at having his reputation destroyed, his years of public service attacked and his family publicly attacked — supposedly showed that he did not have the temperament to serve on the Supreme Court.  One is supposed to remain passive while his life is being destroyed publicly before the whole nation? simply for political gain. They are now hot on the trail of what might be a case of Judge Kavanaugh’s throwing ice at someone.

Victor Davis Hanson writes:

Conventional wisdom suggests that, if confirmed, Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh forever will be “smeared” and stained by past frenzied unfounded allegations of sexual assault.

Yet the opposite just as well may be true. As a Supreme Court justice, Kavanaugh would have withstood every imaginable smear and slander and yet stayed defiant in defending his character and past, proof of both his determination and principles. His near-solitary rebuttal to his Senate accusers may suggest that Kavanaugh could prove to be among the most fearless justices on the Court.

Indeed, the only lasting effect, if any, of the serial smears lodged against him might be that in the future, as in the case of Justice Thomas, Kavanaugh would be essentially immune from progressive media attacks. What he went through likely has inoculated him from the Georgetown-party-circuit syndrome of conservative Supreme Court judges’ eventually becoming more liberal by the insidious socialization within the larger D.C. progressive media, political, and cultural landscape.

Incidentally, contrary to popular opinion, Clarence Thomas hardly remains under a permanent cloud after his ordeal. What stopped further Robert Borking for a while was the resistance and pushback of Clarence Thomas. Far from being ruined by unproven charges, he resisted the mob, got confirmed, and thereby established a precedent that innuendo, ipso facto, would not derail a nominee. For three decades, Thomas has not been regarded as suspect by most Americans but is seen as inspirational for his courage in facing down character assassination.

Christine Blasey Ford’s story continues to fall apart. Nothing in her entire testimony seems to be supported by actual evidence. Those she claimed were with her have denied it. The “second door” thing turned out to be false. She is not a practicing psychoanalyst, she has never completed the requirements of the State of California for certification. Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley has renewed his requests “for material evidence relevant to allegations of sexual assault … as the Senate exercises its constitutional responsibility of advice and consent for a judicial nomination. I urge you to comply promptly with my requests.”



Slowly, Slowly, the Truth is Coming Out by The Elephant's Child

The more one reviews accuser Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony, the worse it gets — as I expressed in the previous post. There’s the little girl “up-talk”— the last syllable at the end of a sentence goes higher in tone. It’s another little girl thing. She’s just so unsure, she needs help to recall, doesn’t name anyone who can verify her memories.

I cannot imagine how anyone who talks like that could be a professor at a university and at Stanford Medical School. Nobody would take her seriously. Yet she seems so wounded, that it’s easy for viewers to take her defenseless little girl pose as the plaintive plea of a wronged woman, and assume that she is credible.

She pretends that she doesn’t understand the questions, needing more time to reply. When we first heard from her, she didn’t really know who it was, only that someone got on top of her and put his hand over her mouth. Then she was suddenly absolutely clear that it was Brett Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge.  All four of her confirming witnesses did not confirm her story. At Breitbart, John Nolte explores the veracity of her testimony with devastating results.

Christina Blasey Ford testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee that she began having memories of her abuse returned when she and her husband put, at her demand, a second front door on their house. She said she had never told anyone about anything until May 2012 when she went to couples counseling.

In explaining why I wanted a second front door, I began to describe the assault in detail. I recall saying that the boy who assaulted me could someday be on the U.S. Supreme Court, and spoke a bit about his background at an elitist all-boys school in Bethesda, Maryland. My husband recalls that I named my attacker as Brett Kavanaugh.

The second front door was already installed by March 2011, perhaps earlier,  and apparently installed as a door to an office where she had a private business called The Couples Resource Center.

According to information found on the Internet, a business was located at the exact same address as the Ford house (please note that the address of this house was released on the Internet weeks ago). The Couples Resource Center was located at the exact same location as the Ford’s home.

Michael Walsh takes on the profession of journalism as it relates to Ford, and the media does not come off well.

Victor Davis Hanson summed it all up nicely in a single paragraph:

The “process” of memorializing Ford’s testimony involved a strange inversion of constitutional norms: The idea of a statute of limitations is ossified; hearsay is legitimate testimony; inexact and contradictory recall is proof of trauma, and therefore of validity; the burden of proof is on the accused, not the accuser; detail and evidence are subordinated to assumed sincerity; proof that one later relates an allegation to another is considered proof that the assault actually occurred in the manner alleged; motive is largely irrelevant; the accuser establishes the guidelines of the state’s investigation of the allegations; and the individual allegation gains credence by cosmic resonance with all other such similar allegations.

The descriptions of the house, what one can hear of people going up and downstairs , she contradicts herself. Supposedly her friend Leland drove her home, but Leland denies the whole thing, says she never encountered Kavanaugh at all, and has no knowledge of the party. Ford reports proudly of her polygraph, (her lawyers made her do it) and neither the lawyers nor herself as a practicing psychologist should be unaware of the limitations of polygraphs.

And at Powerline, John Hinderaker comments on the smear:

Brett Kavanaugh enjoys one of the most spotless reputations of anyone in American public life. He has been enthusiastically endorsed by those who have known him all his life–by girls he knew in high school and college, by judges he has served with, by professors and students and Harvard and Yale law schools, by judges who have worked with him, by his judicial clerks–most of whom have been women–by the American Bar Association, by sitting Supreme Court justices. In short, everyone who has ever known or dealt with Brett Kavanaugh endorses him.

I think that Judge Kavanaugh’s pristine reputation is one reason why the Democrats have unleashed against him a smear campaign unparalleled in American history. This is the message they are trying to send: If we can do this to the Boy Scout Brett Kavanaugh, we can do it to anyone. Are you thinking of serving in a Republican administration? Or accepting an appointment to the federal judiciary from a Republican president? Think twice, and then think again.

Nope, I don’t believe a word of it, including her claim that she was sexually abused. Her story just falls apart.



Christine Blasey Ford’s Interview Explained by The Elephant's Child

A body language expert considers Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony. I noticed some of these oddities. I know nothing about the body language expert. This is a woman who teaches at the graduate level in a university and at the Stanford University medical school — and she sounds like a little girl. She reads her testimony, very prepared. I would assume that  someone in this position would like to sound strong and confident. This is a whiny little girl, so afraid. Is that the chosen mode of testimony. This is carefully written, all feelings, all practiced.

She says her friend Leland drove her home, yet Leland states under oath, that she has never met Brett Kavanaugh, has no information about such a party. Two front doors? Really?  What is that supposed to do? Is this hairdo new?

Rachel Mitchell is an experienced and expert sex crimes prosecutor from Maricopa County,  Arizona. The Committee wanted someone experienced, and she came highly recommended. She is certainly good at drawing the person she is questioning out, in a kindly manner. I was impressed with the body language expert, probably because she confirmed what I had been thinking.

Does this change your mind? Or reinforce what you had been thinking anyway? Ford said previously that she didn’t really know who the men were, she couldn’t remember anything about it except that she was very frightened, and that she was groped.  A strange episode to produce women activists screaming about believing”the survivor”, and attacking poor Jeff Flake and frightening him. Seems like the Democrats have overplayed this whole thing, doesn’t it?

There is no crime here, just slurs and insinuations about a man’s character and history, that is hugely damaging to Judge Kavanaugh and his family, that serves only the Democrats wish to destroy the Supreme Court and the Constitution that they neither respect nor understand in their greed and drive for control of our society. Charles Schumer said he would do anything and everything to keep Judge Brett Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court. This to probably the most qualified jurist who has ever been nominated.



The Kavanaugh Affair Winds On and On by The Elephant's Child

Last night I was left expecting that the committee would vote today and the matter would be voted on tomorrow by the full senate.  Stayed up too late and got up too late. We have worried Republican senators, so Jeff Flake  has decided that we need another FBI investigation. What has astounded me over this whole disgusting process is the extent to which Senators serving in the Senate of the United States are missing basic information. How about “innocent until proven guilty”— the basis of all our entire legal system.

Christine Blasey Ford, the accuser, first attempted delay after delay. She had a real fear of flying, it was going to be hard for her. Grassley offered to come out to California to interview her. He gave her a deadline. She flew. It was learned that she has flown all over the world, frequently to Hawaii. The object was apparently not to avoid flying, but to delay. Democrats are desperately trying to delay beyond the possibility of confirmation. Senator Feinstein has a lot to answer for. She had the letter accusing Kavanaugh since July, and held it until it was leaked that she had it, something like 60 days later. Senator Feinstein connected Ford with a good Democrat lawyer.

When Ford appeared for the hearing, with her new lawyer, she was treated with deference, called Dr. Ford.  People said she was convincing. I’m not so sure. She spoke in a little-girl voice, trembling and said she was “terrified.” Then asked for a cup of coffee. The sexual attack seems to be entirely some groping, and a hand over her mouth. She was sure, she said, that she was going to be killed. She told no one until she told a therapist when she went for counseling with her husband years later. She did not tell the therapist that it was Judge Kavanaugh who attacked her. The four people who were supposedly at the same party, had no memory of such an event. She did not know where the party was, nor whose house it was, nor how she got home—some 8 miles away. She seems to have decided, only when Judge Kavanaugh was nominated, that he was the attacker. She never told anyone about being attacked until she spoke to the therapist, at which point she didn’t know it was Kavanaugh. But, we are told, she was very credible.

Brett Kavanaugh has been thoroughly investigated by the FBI 6 times. Christine Blasey Ford has never been investigated at all, as far as we know. Nothing whatsoever about  any of her claims has confirmation from any of the people who were supposed to confirm it. The experienced Arizona sex crimes prosecutor, Rachel Mitchell, told Republican senators in a conference meeting that she would not charge Kavanaugh based on evidence from both parties and would not pursue a search warrant for the judge, which would require the standard of probable cause to be met. Ford recounted her “100 percent ” certainty that President Trump’s nominee for the Supreme Court had sexually assaulted her when they were teenagers. Brett Kavanaugh testified he was “100 percent certain” that he did no such thing.

Two men have contacted the Judicial Committee to say that they did it, not Kavanaugh. One of the men described the event in the summer of 1982 in some detail. Have you heard more about that? Me neither.

The FBI investigates, but they do not reach conclusions. Conclusions are to be reached by those for whom they have looked for evidence. Polygraphs, which Ford announced that she had, are meaningless. They measure things like sweating or trembling from extreme stress, and are essentially junk science.

Democrats are pulling out all the stops, urging their activists to protest, disrupt, attack. Even the Sierra Club is rounding up their activists to protest. Tee shirts have been printed, signs have been printed. From the talk in the media, the FBI investigation is to be once again of Judge Kavanaugh. Is no one investigating Christine Ford?

Michelle Obama is out around the country urging everyone to get registered to vote. The suggestion that the deranged Democrats are pushing for a civil war to return them to power suddenly seems  somewhat more possible. The Hollywood “celebrities” are out offering us all their wise and well-considered opinions vulgar inanities. Cannot someone shut these media hogs up? I’ve given up on movies. I’m tired of spectacular car crashes, and even more tired of the “celebrities.”

The activists who are out demonstrating, the ones who break into the Senate Chamber, are reportedly paid to do so. Being a little short of things to scream about, they of course make it a racist event, with Kavanaugh as a rich young  white man. That Ford was a rich young white woman is not mentioned.

This has gone far beyond what we consider normality. Where it is going, I don’t know, but I’m worried. You probably are as well.



Kavanaugh: Continued, On and On. by The Elephant's Child

The fourth person that Christine Blasey Ford identified as being at the fabled party when she was assaulted, put a damper on Ford’s charge. In a Saturday evening email, an attorney representing Ford’s former classmate, Leland Ingham Keyser, stated that his client “does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party of gathering where he was present, with, or without Dr. Ford.” She’s the fourth person to refute Ford’s story.

Claire Berlinski from the Manhattan Institute commented that: “news organizations could render a valuable service if, whenever they report that someone has taken or proposes to take a polygraph, they reminded readers (or explained to them) that polygraphs are voodoo.  Junk science. They are no more reliable than a pack of Tarot cards. Polygraph evidence is inadmissible in court. There is a good reason for that. To check Brett Kavanaugh’s qualifications for the Supreme Court, Congress would do well to ask him whether he believes Frye v. United States and United States v. Scheffer were correctly decided. …

A polygraph measures your heart rate, breathing, and galvanic skin response. There is no evidence that any pattern of physiological responses is unique to deception. Polygraphs are useful to investigators trying to elicit a confession, however: if you convince suggestible people that these measurements are associated with lying, they are more likely spontaneously to confess when you tell them, “The machine says you’re lying.”

And Heather MacDonald, also at Manhattan Institute: chimes in with a little common sense. “If Supreme Court Justice William Brennan were posthumously discovered to have aggressively groped a girl once in high school, should that fact discredit his landmark opinions expanding press freedom, legal protections for criminal defendants, and voting and welfare rights? Would it have been better for the country, from a liberal perspective, if Brennan’s judicial career had been derailed from the start? What about Justice John Marshall Harlan, whose groundbreaking 1896 dissent from the majority opinion in Plessy v. Ferguson declared that the Constitution was “color-blind” and rejected state-sponsored segregation? If Harlan had once jumped on a girl as a 17-year-old, should that one-time outbreak of boorish adolescent male hormones efface his contributions as a public thinker?

The Democratic response to the allegation that three and a half decades ago, Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh assaulted a girl during a pool party bears many hallmarks of campus culture, from the admonition that “survivors” should always be believed to the claim that the veracity of the accusation matters less than the history of white-male privilege. But the most significant import from academic feminism is the idea that a long-ago, never-repeated incident of adolescent sexual misbehavior (assuming that the assault happened as described, which Kavanaugh has categorically denied) should trump a lifetime record of serious legal thought and government service. (Now, a new allegation, reported by The New Yorker, that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a Yale classmate at a party—though the New York Times regarded the evidence as too flimsy to publish—has ramped up outrage to the point that feminists are demanding that the Ford hearings they had called for be cancelled.) The feminist nostrum that the personal is political is being weaponized to subordinate the public realm of ideas to the private realm of sexual relations—all, ironically, in the service of a highly political end: preventing a judicial conservative from being seated on the high court. The domain of Eros and the domain of public action are, however, in most cases distinct. If it turned out that James Madison had groped his domestics, it would be absurd to discard the constitutional separation of powers on that ground. Madison’s political insights are more important to civilization than any hypothetical chauvinist indiscretions.

Sleazy porn-star lawyer Michael Avenatti has located someone who will claim gross drunken college parties. Avenatti, with his representation of Stormy Daniels discovered media attention, and loves it so much that now he even wants to run for president. Apparently there is something intoxicating about appearing on camera, getting attention—we know that Hollywood celebrities will do or say anything to get the attention of the public. If it’s outrageous enough, maybe they will get into People or maybe just one of the movie magazines that you find at the beauty parlor.

I expect that most of you are as tired and angry about all this as I am. Judge Kavanaugh should be promptly confirmed, and enough of these phony stories.




%d bloggers like this: