Dear America,

Don't mistake what I am about to say for a judgment in favor of either side.  If the accusations of Christine Ford--I have excluded the presumably maiden/professional name Blasey as a redundant affectation like citing his middle name, Michael, when referring to Brett Kavanaugh--had been timely made to the police, Kavanaugh would have been entitled to the presumption of innocence just as Ford would have been entitled to file the charge.  But, like everyone else who is interested in this particular current event, I have formed an opinion...call it a credence predilection.   It's not so much a preference for one of the people involved or even a presumption of credibility.  We have a college professor and published scholar in a relatively obscure field accusing a federal circuit court judge who has been vetted several times as he has risen through the ranks of the federal judicial system.  A presumption of honesty and integrity seems natural with regard to each of them.  If none of this had happened...the publication of the accusation of sexual abuse, I mean...I would probably have bought a used car from either one of them, though Kavanaugh's "type" is less than appealing to me.

Kavanaugh is the son of a judge and a lawyer who represented a perfume industry advocacy group, which sounds an awful lot like a lobbyist.  In other words, Kavanaugh's father was an alligator in what Donald Trump refers to as "the swamp."  Of course, that wouldn't impede Trump's decision to nominate Kavanaugh as he has, rather than draining the swamp as he promised to do, restocked it with man-eating 'gators of his own ilk.  I don't know much about Ford at all, but she went to the same prep-school that Kavanaugh did, so her family probably traveled in the same kind of circles as Kavanaugh's did.  Neither seems like the salt of the earth, but neither seems like the progeny of patricians either.  I suppose I'm saying that I probably wouldn't be particularly interested in having either of them over for dinner.  Still, there is something about the Republicans' blind, subtle preference for Kavanaugh that I find disingenuous...something casuistic, and it's this.

While the Republicans insist that they want to be fair, their proposed elucidation of the issues favors Kavanaugh blatantly.  They have flatly refused to bring the FBI back into the process despite the fact that such an investigation as they might execute could produce sufficient evidence to make one or the other of them liable for perjury if he or she pressed on.  And notably, Ford wants such an investigation whereas Kavanaugh and his camp are intransigent in their objection to such a thorough inquiry.  Actually, I haven't heard anything in the way of a position taken by Kavanaugh himself, but sometimes silence is very informative.  In fact, in the face of an accusation the law permits an inference of admission.  Kavanaugh's silence on the issue of an investigation isn't quite the same as silence, but it leans that way in my thinking.

Ford, on the other hand, persists in advocating for an investigation, which suggests to me that she feels she has nothing to hide, and there is evidence that such is her true inclination, and it really is dispositive in my mind.  Ford could conceivably have a grievance against Kavanaugh to which she now wants to give vent.  Maybe she wanted him to invite her to the prom, or perhaps he just never looked at her with any sign of the admiration that her vanity demanded.  Maybe she just didn't like his "young Republican" veneer and his membership in the same fraternity that the Bushes were in put a cap on it for her that she finally has the opportunity to manifest in action.  But even if all that were the case, there is still this to consider.  If she is making this all up, why didn't she just say it happened when she and Kavanaugh were alone rather than naming a witness to the story, and not just a witness but a participant who would certainly do whatever he could to refute the allegation as it is against him too?  Why would she enlist an ally for Kavanaugh in the controversy rather than just make the claim and let the chips fall where they may?

Set aside my tendency to believe that women don't make things like this up as a general rule.  I'm not saying it never happens; there have been some famous cases of fabrication that wound up involving prominent people like that of Tawana Brawley and the intersession of Al Sharpton on her behalf.  Generally however,  all of the evidence demonstrates that women eschew these imbroglios; they don't volunteer to be dragged into them any more than they volunteer to be dragged into a dark room and assaulted.  So, I would say this to the Republicans: you are on thin ice.  Maybe you want to start heading back to shore.  After all, there's an election coming up.  

Your friend,

Mike

Categories

Pages

OpenID accepted here Learn more about OpenID
Powered by Movable Type 4.38

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Recent Comments

  • pairsupport: test comment submission, please ignore read more
  • pairsupport: Test comment submission, please ignore. read more
Political Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory

Recent Comments

  • pairsupport: test comment submission, please ignore read more
  • pairsupport: Test comment submission, please ignore. read more

Categories

Recent Comments

  • pairsupport: test comment submission, please ignore read more
  • pairsupport: Test comment submission, please ignore. read more

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Recent Comments

  • pairsupport: test comment submission, please ignore read more
  • pairsupport: Test comment submission, please ignore. read more