In the United States of America, we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights — including the presumption and preponderance of innocence until proven guilty. This applies to Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike. Believe it or not, this even applies to Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
“Justice, though due to the accused, is due to the accuser also… We are to keep the balance true.” Those are the words of Supreme Court Justice Benjamin Cardozo from 1934.
They key word here is “balance” — something Democrats, both currently and formerly in the Senate, Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford, and her attorney Debra Katz seem to have conveniently forgotten.
“This woman is to be believed. This was attempted rape,” said former California Sen. Barbara Boxer.
“I believe her,” said Sen. Kamala Harris. “Coming forward to testify takes an extraordinary amount of courage,” she added.
“During every step of this process, I’ve found every single piece of information from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford eminently credible, sincere, and believable,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein.
“Not only do these women need to be heard, they need to be believed,” said Sen. Mazie Hirono. “There’s not even a modicum of fairness extended to her through an appropriate FBI investigation so there can be at least some attempt at corroboration.”
“She must be believed,” said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, adding that Ford should not participate in the hearing, calling it “a sham.”
“I believe Dr. Ford, the survivor. There’s every reason to believe her,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal.
To this collective group of fawning, obsequious sycophants who have forgotten about the presumption of innocence until guilt is proven, where is the proof? An accusation has been levied, and Ford, 51, a professor at Palo Alto University in California and research psychologist, should most assuredly be heard by the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Heard? Absolutely. But the tough questions must be asked. Believed? Not so fast. The women quoted above are sexist in their expectation that the mere accusation be taken at face value. Courtroom or not, Kavanaugh is still innocent until proof of guilt is produced. Four so-called witnesses named by Ford have each denied any knowledge of these accusations — either they were not present, did not know Kavanaugh, or simply do not recall any such incident. Of the four people who refuted Ford’s assertion, one, a woman and lifelong friend of Ford’s, Leland Ingham Keyser, said she does not know Kavanaugh nor has any recollection of the event in question.
As Ford’s allegations pertain to an alleged incident dating back more than three decades, the statute of limitations has expired. Three decades-plus ago, both Kavanaugh and Ford were teenaged high schoolers. Kavanaugh attended the upper-crust Georgetown Prep in North Bethesda, Maryland, while Ford attended the equally hoity-toity Holton-Arms School minutes away in Bethesda. While Ford and her supporters have described the all-male school as white, privileged, rich, and elitist, little has been said of Holton-Arms. Having lived and worked in the Capitol region for years, Holton-Arms is a female version of Georgetown Prep, and the schools have earned their reputation as more than its fair share of immoral behavior — sex, drugs, alcohol — has been executed by both males and females.
To Boxer, it must be asked, how do you know it was attempted rape? Because Ford said so? And no woman has ever lied about rape or sexual assault before. Oh wait…
In March 2006, Crystal Gail Mangum, a student attending North Carolina Central University falsely accused three Duke University lacrosse players of rape. This reduced the reputations of the three innocent Blue Devils to cinder, virtually unable to show their faces publicly.
In September 2012, Jackie Coakley lied about being gang-raped at the University of Virginia fraternity house Phi Kappa Psi. This story appeared in Rolling Stone magazine before ultimately being fully discredited. No retraction can return the reputations to the accused.
Sadly, false accusations and lies only hurt legitimate victims who must get justice, not a slap on the wrist, as was meted out to Brock Turner, the scumbag at Stanford University, thanks to an ineffective judge. That judge, Aaron Persky, this year, became the first California jurist recalled in 86 years — long overdue.
This is not a war on women, but instead, a war by an insidious group of political hacks hellbent on keeping the last shred of power they are able to hang onto regardless of who gets destroyed in the interim – be it a Supreme Court nominee, his marriage, or his young daughters, forced to endure the smarmy and the salacious. With no evidence, justice clearly will not be served for Brett Kavanaugh.
To Feinstein, it must be asked, what are all these pieces of information to which you referenced? Where are they? Have you been sitting on them since the receipt of the July 31 letter about these accusations in the first place? Why did you not come forward sooner? It should be noted that Feinstein later admitted that she’s not sure “everything’s truthful” from Ford. Speaks volumes, but barely registered above a whisper from the mainstream media who is working in concert with the Democrats in their complicit efforts to derail the Kavanaugh appointment to the High Court.
To Hirono and Gillibrand, it must be asked, are you aware that the FBI does not conduct the type of investigation you are demanding? That this would be a state matter were the statute of limitations not expired?
To Sen. Blumenthal, it must be asked, what are the specific reasons to believe Ford? Do you know something the rest of us don’t know, including, apparently, Ford herself, who said she neither remembers the when or where of the alleged attack?
As for coming forward to testify, Ford won’t take yes for an answer. Virtually all her demands have been acquiesced to by the Republicans serving on the Judiciary Committee. Chairman Grassley said, “we’re doing everything we can to make her comfortable,” including, but not limited to, having the hearing open or closed, public or private, next Monday, next Thursday, could be next Shavuot for all anyone knows at this point.
Once certain demands had been agreed to, Ford and her attorney moved the goal line with increasing demands such as only committee members could question Ford — no outside attorneys, that Kavanaugh cannot be in the room, and that Kavanaugh should be questioned first. That last one is ridiculous, because as George Washington University Constitutional Law Professor Jonathan Turley said, “you swing, then we pitch.”
Crafty demands — make Kavanaugh testify first. To what? “I didn’t do whatever it is my accuser will accuse me of later?” Not allowing him in the same room with Ford. Whatever happened to the right to face one’s accuser? Has the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution been eviscerated? I realize this witch hunt is an attempt to destroy the reputation of a potential Supreme Court nominee, but to deny him the standard rights afforded to any accused as found in the Constitution?
Another crafty demand of not permitting outside attorneys to question Ford, just the stodgy, old, white men sitting on the Judiciary Committee. Think of the optics. Apparently Gillibrand already has when she called the potential hearing “a sham” while recommending Ford not sit for the hearings. Gillibrand also said the mere attempt to have Ford testify in the first place is “bullying,” assuming Ford is some waif or wallflower who is unable to face the committee without falling apart.
Then the goal line was moved yet again, when Ford said she is afraid to fly and the testimony would have to be delayed until she could drive to Washington from California. Anyone ever hear of Skype? Even a technologically stunted individual such as myself is still able to manage Facetime (thanks to my daughters, of course).
This is an obvious political ploy by the Democrats to prevent an otherwise qualified jurist from being seated on the Supreme Court, in hopes the clock will run out until the midterm election this November, not that that should stunt the proceedings. During the Bill Clinton administration, it famously was “deny, deny, deny,” while now the mantra is “delay, delay, delay.”
“Sexual assault allegations should not be deployed strategically for political gain,” wrote Grassley in a letter to Feinstein. He is right, of course, and even liberal pundit Jessica Tarlov, a frequent guest on Fox News agreed as much, saying, “this is absolutely political.”
The Democrats are defending Ford while the Republicans are defending the process.
Additionally, Kavanaugh said this is a case of mistaken identity. Ford’s lawyer, Katz, said “zero chance,” yet ignoring that Ford herself cannot recall the when and where.
“People can have false memories and still pass a polygraph,” Turley said.
Further, for Kavanaugh to suggest a case of mistaken identity, is to consider that something did happen to Ford, sadly, but that Kavanaugh was not the perpetrator. My words, not Kavanaugh’s.
Now, at the 11th hour, with Ford’s assertions lacking credibility, and with Kavanaugh publicly supported by a cadre of women who have known him personally and professionally for decades, another accuser came forward. Deborah Ramirez, a classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Yale claimed Kavanaugh flashed her at a party. Statements from named people close to both Ramirez and Kavanaugh during their time at Yale have categorically refuted her claim, attesting to his character, including Ramirez’s best friend from college.
“This is a woman I was was best friends with. We shared intimate details of our lives. And I was never told this story by her, or by anyone else. It never came up. I didn’t see it; I never heard of it happening,” said the friend, as reported by the Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative group supporting Kavanaugh.
To be fair, there are numerous sexual assault/rape victims who do not talk about their assault, do not report the assault, block out the assault for years, for myriad reasons. There is no procedural timetable by which victims must adhere. They should all be heard, as averred above, but the level of credibility by which they should or should not be believed, should be on a case by case basis. Further, The New York Times, hardly a conservative bastion by any stretch of the imagination, reported it could not corroborate the allegations from the second accuser, Deborah Ramirez.
What’s actually more disturbing than the accusations themselves, is the absolute rush to judgment sans evidence. This is a mockery of the system of jurisprudence under which we the people of the United States have lived for the last 231 years.
Worse than that, is the possibility that should Kavanaugh’s nomination fail, he will not only appear guilty, but the nomination process will be destroyed in perpetuity with only a mere baseless accusation enough to implode the nomination of anyone for any reason, or worse yet, no reason other than politics.
The Supreme Court is to be devoid of politics, and not too long ago that was evidenced by the near unanimous support for two polar opposite justice — the late Justice Antonin Scalia and current Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. In 1986 Scalia secured his place on the High Court with a 98-0 vote of approval, including yea votes from such liberal luminaries as senators Joe Biden, Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, and Pat Leahy.
On the flip side, in 1993, Ginsburg earned her seat on the Court by virtue of a 96-3 favorable vote, including yea votes from such conservative senators as the aforementioned Grassley, Orrin Hatch, Mitch McConnell, and Strom Thurmond. If Kennedy could vote for Scalia and Thurmond could vote for Ginsburg, the political shenanigans should, and must cease. The continued polarization and politicization of the Senate process and the Supreme Court itself is damaging the Republic.
Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, Indiana. He is currently working to open a charter school in Indianapolis. He has taught grades six through college in the areas of American History, Geography, Western Civilization, World History, Civics, and Language Arts. Politically active more than 35 years, Horn has twice sought public office.
The views expressed in this opinion article are those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by the owners of this website. If you are interested in contributing an Op-Ed to The Western Journal, you can learn about our submission guidelines and process here.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.