#BrettKavanaugh

Joe Biden is Joe Biden

Nancy Pelosi unsurprisingly endorsed Joe Biden and was only too pleased to show her happiness. How quick the Democrats were to run with the “believe all women” argument during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. All of a sudden, due process matters. Believe all women? Only when it serves one’s political interests.

Joe Biden is Joe Biden.” What else matters?

Babylon Bee decided to pre-empt Pelosi’s little presser by publishing the following parody.

Democratic presumptive presidential nominee Joe Biden was cleared in federal court today of charges that some claimed were based upon credible allegations of sexual assault when the judge quickly realized that Joe Biden was not a Republican.

“Well, this looks pretty serious… let’s see who is on—wait a minute. He’s a Democrat! I can find no fault with him,” declared a fourth circuit federal judge hearing preliminary claims.

“It is well established in this court that Republicans are the ones who want to silence women and control their bodies. Haven’t you seen The Handmaid’s Tale?” the judge further added before banging down the gavel.”

“This is a victory for the judicial standard in our country of assuming the accused are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law,” stated Alyssa Milano. “We always need to maintain this standard of maintaining silence and withholding judgment on such cases when it is convenient and maintains our narratives.”

Yesterday, Alyssa Milano actually wrote a piece where she said that she supported Joe Biden despite believing in the allegations, mixed in with a dig at the white patriarchy. She wrote,

It falls upon women to navigate within the system of men’s design to make pragmatic choices that we hope will lead us to a more equal future. I still support Joe Biden because I believe that’s the best choice for that future, and again it is not up to women to absolve perpetrators. How do progressive women choose between the pussy grabber in chief who has done so much damage to our country and a man who has allegations made against him?…

…The allegations against Joe Biden concern me, deeply. He’s a man I know, respect, and admire, and who I can’t picture doing any of the things of which he’s accused. But I’ve thought that before, and been wrong. And sexual assault is always wrong.

So much for the #METOO movement she led. How happy she was to sit with a face of thunder during the Kavanaugh hearings. Then again hypocrisy and Hollywood go hand in hand.

Who could forget when Trump’s Hollywood Walk of Fame Star was vandalized and then removed?

“The resolution on which the West Hollywood City Council voted urged the removal of Mr. Trump’s star “due to his disturbing treatment of women and other actions that do not meet the shared values of the City of West Hollywood, the region, state, and country.

Yet the response of Hollywood to now convicted rapist Bill Cosby was,

“In response, the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce released a statement politely asking fans not to deface anyone’s stars, no matter how many rapes they may be accused of: “When people are unhappy with one of our honorees, we would hope that they would project their anger in more positive ways. 

Except if they are Republicans.

Media bias, fake news & censorship

We have argued for some time that media bias is a large problem. The GDELT Project conducts research which outlines the number of times that certain topics are mentioned by the major TV networks. Left or right-wing media, we can be assured that it is not the principle that matters, but the side.

Take the Brett Kavanaugh sexual assault allegations before his confirmation. CNN mentioned his name over 15,000 times, mostly in the negative. Fox News talked of him some 24,000 times, mostly in the positive.

Despite the more credible evidence that came out with respect to Epstein (surrounding Prince Andrew) and Weinstein we saw these networks devoted mere fractions of the attention vs Kavanaugh. 18% to be precise.

So now that sexual assault allegations have come out with respect to presidential candidate Joe Biden, we can see the mainstream media has all but ignored it, especially after the 1993 video resurfaced.

It doesn’t need to be the US media either. The Chinese media has a damning trend with respect to COVID19. It is a dark zone of statistics about who knew what when. This chart lists the number of “censored posts”.

Figure

The global media’s focus only got interested post-January 20th when China finally admitted the virus spread beyond its borders. The chart below documents the frequency of mentions of coronavirus, SARS or pneumonia.

After Trump’s Jan 31st travel ban, global media interest waned until late February when countries like Italy and Iran were experiencing logarithmic infection rates. March 12th marks the day of WHO’s declaration of a pandemic.

Figure

The media may throw shade at the relative handling by governments (especially the US) but they need only reflect on their perfect 20-20 hindsight.

Which sums up much of media today – reactive, not proactive. So much for the in-depth investigative journalism that made waves in the past, now it is all Bout chasing clickbait.

This recent article from ABC News which led with the title, ‘Maryland agency receives more than 100 disinfectant use calls‘ bears this out.

No mention of the title was contained in the written content.

A pandemic of the novel coronavirus has now killed more than 195,000 people worldwide.

Over 2.7 million people across the globe have been diagnosed with COVID-19, the disease caused by the new respiratory virus, according to data compiled by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering at Johns Hopkins University. The actual numbers are believed to be much higher due to testing shortages, many unreported cases and suspicions that some governments are hiding the scope of their nations’ outbreaks.

Since the first cases were detected in China in December, the United States has become the worst-affected country, with more than 890,000 diagnosed cases and at least 51,017 deaths.

Tune into ABC at 1 p.m. ET and ABC News Live at 4 p.m. ET every weekday for special coverage of the novel coronavirus with the full ABC News team, including the latest news, context and analysis.

The video content made no mention of the title either. But hey, why would anyone wish to link the content to the sensationalist headline?

Shameless.

Supreme Court rules Peace Cross can stay

It is amazing that activists can be up in arms over a near century old monument that honours 49 dead WWI soldiers in Maryland. It required the US Supreme Court to vote 7-2 to keep it there. No prizes for guessing who the dissenters were.

The Peace Cross was erected just after WW1 to honour those that sacrificed their lives for the country. It was the brainchild of mothers of the fallen. Most likely they were all Christian mothers.

The protest was that it didn’t properly represent the religious beliefs of all those that had fallen in WW1. In that sense activists were offended by the government’s endorsement of religion plus the reality that the cross is maintained with taxpayer funds.

Monica Miller, a lawyer representing the American Humanist Society, argued the memorial should be moved to private property or modified.

Leftist activist Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said, “Just as a Star of David is not suitable to honor Christians who died serving their country, so a cross is not suitable to honor those of other faiths who died defending their nation,”

Her Liberal sidekick Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented with, “Soldiers of all faiths ‘are united by their love of country, but they are not united by the cross.”

Justice Alito said, “destroying or defacing the Cross that has stood undisturbed for nearly a century would not be neutral and would not further the ideals of respect and tolerance embodied in the First Amendment.”

Justices Stephen Breyer and Elena Kagan, both of whom are Jewish, ruled in favour of keeping the cross.

Almost 100 years ago it is likely that 98% of those that died in WW1 were of Christian faith. If one visits a memorial with individual gravestones anywhere around the world, the religion is always reflective of the person who sacrificed their life.

How is it that people can become so triggered by a stone structure that honours those that gave up their lives to protect the very freedom they enjoy? Why can’t people respect the values of the time? What is the obsession with rewriting history so some intolerant people can feel assuaged of bereavement they’ve never suffered personally?

Senate Democrat poll backfires

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) claims to be the only organization solely dedicated to electing a Democratic Senate.

Hoping that they’d get an overwhelming response on their own Twitter poll, it seems that 72% want another Supreme Court Justice like Brett Kavanaugh over Ruth Bader Ginsberg. The DSCC has since deleted the poll. At the last count after 230,000 votes Kavanaugh led 71% to 29%.

Ironically the DSCC wrote the following tweet. It seems the people don’t agree.

Mud-wrestling Mazie Hirono impugns the integrity of the AG

Democratic Party Senator from Hawaii, Mazie Hirono,  launched a disgraceful Trump Derangement Syndrome laced slander of Attorney General William Barr during a hearing over the Mueller Report. She accused him of lying and demanded he resign. It was bile that maintained the class of questioning that was so evident during the Brett Kavanaugh hearing. The Democrats can’t seem to grasp that this 2-year media-led Russia collusion conspiracy has become such a dead horse that Rasmussen has Trump’s monthly approval rating at a two year high.

The best argument put forward by the Democrats was that the 19-page memo requested by Mueller (which was made entirely public) was several weeks late. Barr chose to release it with the entire 448 pages of the report. 

Where was Ms. Hirono when A-G Loretta Lynch happened to meet Bill Clinton on an airport tarmac where they spoke about golf and grandkids immediately before the Clinton email probe? Deathly silent.

When will the Democrats learn that driving for impeachment is wearing thin on the American public? When will they put forward some real policies other than “reject whatever Trump puts forward“? A Rasmussen Reports survey on March 28th revealed that just 31% of all Likely U.S. Voters thought congressional Democrats should do their own investigation even though the Mueller probe has failed to prove that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government. 61% said Democrats in Congress should move on to other issues. 

All this hearing has revealed is that Mariko Hirono, Kamala Harris, Dianne Feinstein and other Democratic senators have shown themselves to be so out of touch. There is no way the Democrats will win 2020 with such pitiful displays of madness. Get over it and start convincing the American people that you are a credible choice otherwise, we will have to endure another 4 years of TDS.

Yale Law School students fail their most important test

A3ACD964-7108-4787-8473-5EC3B95F9D72.jpeg

Yale Law School is supposed to be one of the most prestigious places one can graduate. However the multitude of students who staged a sit down protest over Supreme Court Justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged sexual misconduct just failed one of the most important tests in the very subject they wish to practice – the presumption of innocence.

Despite holding next to no credible evidence to base their judgement at this stage nor have any witnesses come forward, these students have shown blind prejudice. It may well turn out that Kavanaugh is found guilty of the allegations. However he like they are equal under the law until proven guilty.

Nonetheless it seems these students have no compunction. They are clearly so poisoned with partisan politics that they are willing to convict a potentially innocent man of a crime he may not have committed. These students are the very same future justices they vehemently protest in the man they attack.

Or could it be they are guilty of being irrational teenagers/millennials at university who think social justice allows for a kangaroo court? So devoid of understanding how the real world works. Either way, their protest shows how brainwashed and lacking in the ability to think for themselves to stage a protest based on such flimsy evidence which has conveniently rolled out to stall his confirmation hearing.

Maybe they’d dazzle their professors by stating their concerns in “law” in what they’d be looking for to ensure “both” sides of the story we’re heard? Or at the very least how they’d represent either side based on the evidence to date? Alas, no. Best just jump on the despicable Democrats band wagon and wish Kavanaugh gets smeared so he isn’t confirmed as a SCJ (the real aim).

While in no way justifying sexual harassment/assault on any level, looking back over CM’s university days three decades ago should witnessing the Forestry students conduct drinking games while sitting stark naked in the refectory and drinking their own vomit from an old Adidas Rome sneaker or even worse “animal acts”  to get back in the game worthy of a full police investigation? Or do we put it down to kids being stupid as many get their first grips with alcohol? No one in CM’s year of students (male or female) who saw it ever made a big deal of it then or now. We most likely laughed at the cringeworthy nature of it all.

Yet this is the future. Shame on the Yale Law Faculty for not teaching these kids the most important values of fair trials. Perhaps evidence of how the professors could be more radical than the students. True colours?

Kavanaugh may yet be found guilty but at the very least let him and Christine Blasey Ford set out their evidence.

Finally, will  these same students protest if Ford is outed as lying? Of course not!

Feinstein’s timing truly defending the rights of a sexual assault victim?

FFC44C27-733C-40EB-B3C9-D45A89939278.jpeg

There is absolutely nothing right about sexual harassment of any kind. CM wrote extensively here on the subject last year. CM also warned of the dangers of #MeToo turning into baseless witch hunts that could permanently stain the character of otherwise innocent people. CM contends that false claims should be equally punishable under the law to prevent false claims getting air.

Whether Supreme Court Justice-in waiting Brett Kavanaugh is guilty of harassment 36 years ago is nothing more than an allegation at this stage. All claims should be heard under the legal framework. However studying the timeline of events, there is a touch of convenience in Senator Diane Feinstein’s use of Christine Blasey Ford’s accusation letter.

Kavanaugh’s announcement as SC nominee was made mid July, 2018. Ford documented her supposed harassment encounter in a letter to Feinstein two weeks later, dated July 30th. Yet it would appear Feinstein sat on this nugget til September in order to maximize its utility to prevent Kavanaugh’s confirmation if all other political stunts failed. With any luck she can drag an FBI investigation into the mid-terms (i.e. the real goal).

If Feinstein truly wanted to defend the rights of a supposed sexual harassment victim, surely she should have acted immediately? No doubt she would need a bit of time to discuss with lawyers to understand if this constituted substantial evidence but sexual harassment is a serious claim and crime. Surely the united forces within the Democratic Party could summon the resources to expedite the allegation and use its validity to block.

As the party of supposed social values, what better way to derail the candidate than to release a real claim ASAP after legal checks and balances, including meeting the openly Trump hating Democratic professor were completed. Provided the evidence was incontrovertible it would sell itself. Could it be that the evidence is so sketchy that Feinstein knew it only served as a stalling tactic, hence delaying it by 6 weeks? This says more about the moral compass of the Democrats than Ford.

It seems that Ford does not want to testify under oath before the Senate Judiciary Committee until the FBI investigation. Yet the FBI will investigate what? The crime scene is 36 years old. Her recollection is vague at best. Interviewing people who were likely underage kids who were drunk at a party

Alas, as all of the stunts from Democrats, including Cory Booker admitting he may lose his position for leaking certain documents which turned out to support Kavanaugh not being racist, they pull out claims of sexual misconduct, in the hope it drags the confirmation beyond the Novemeber elections whereby a potential blue wave will potentially allow them to block Trump’s choice. Tactically a shrewd move, but utterly disgusting to true victims if proved untrue.

There is no reason to fault the Democrats wish to block a Republican choice for a vacant SCJ seat (which by the way was on the 2016 ballot given the subject was raised in the presidential debates because it was the first time since Eisenhower that an SCJ seat was empty at election time) on the basis of supposed conflicts in convictions and beliefs. No doubt the Republicans would do likewise. Yet citizens were given the chance to vote on a SC judge with their presidential choice. The names were all out there.

Unfortunately, to use a sexual assault allegation based on sketchy information given by the accuser who admits she doesn’t remember much 36 years ago is utterly reprehensible if the claims turn out to be false. There will be no surprise if the Dems get their goal achieved that Ford will quietly withdraw her claims.

Let’s be perfectly clear. If Kavanaugh is guilty of such a serious crime then he is unfit to serve on a SC bench. Should Ford’s claim turn out to be completely baseless then the Dems will reveal themselves as morally bankrupt to use such a tactic to besmirch someone’s reputation. The timing of the letter is convenient to say the least.

Is this the way forward? Everything that doesn’t stand on its merits or via democratic process will somehow be stopped by claims of sexual impropriety?

In this battle the only thing everyone should be united behind is that “justice” is properly served for the right reasons. Certainly not to dish up political character assassinations for convenience.

True victims tend to bottle trauma for substantial periods, usually decades. Yet rarely would they openly come out on a whim and chuck around claims which don’t help their own healing process.