{"id":63352,"date":"2018-09-30T19:23:53","date_gmt":"2018-09-30T23:23:53","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=63352"},"modified":"2018-09-30T19:23:59","modified_gmt":"2018-09-30T23:23:59","slug":"the-daily-gouge-archive-friday-september-28th-2018","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/?p=63352","title":{"rendered":"The Daily Gouge Archive, Friday, September 28th, 2018"},"content":{"rendered":"

It’s Friday, September 28th, 2018,…but before we begin, we offer two thoughts on the Kavanaugh kangaroo court: first, our adaption of Cordell Hull’s response to the Japanese ultimatum of December 7, 1941: In all our 62 years, we have never seen a spurious accusation more crowded with infamous falsehoods and distortions – on a scale so huge that we never imagined until today that any political party in this country was capable of uttering them.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Second, the despicable nature of Progressives’ obviously political assault on Brett Kavanaugh was never better-illustrated than by the reaction of my sister’s 10th-grade AP class, who compared Kavanaugh’s travails to the Salem witch trials and the HUAC\/McCarthy investigations of the ’50s…though the HUAC\/McCarthy hearings at least were rooted in fact.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Oh,…and Rachel Mitchell was a HORRIBLE CHOICE as the Republican interrogator<\/em><\/span><\/a>.\u00a0 Personally, it’s our belief Mitchell’s cross-examination skills have been clouded by too many free lunches.<\/strong><\/p>\n

That being said, Republicans have scheduled a vote for tomorrow.\u00a0 Stay tuned<\/em><\/span>!!!<\/strong><\/p>\n

Now, here’s The Gouge<\/em>!<\/strong><\/p>\n

First up in the last edition of September, the WSJ<\/em>\u00a0details why Senate Republicans need to…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Confirm Brett Kavanaugh<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

The Judge rightly called out the politics of \u2018search and destroy<\/span><\/a>.\u2019<\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“Thursday\u2019s Senate hearing on Brett Kavanaugh\u2019s Supreme Court nomination was an embarrassment that should have never happened<\/em><\/span>. Judge Kavanaugh was right to call the confirmation process a \u201cdisgrace\u201d in his passionate self-defense, and whatever one thinks of Christine Blasey Ford\u2019s assault accusation, she offered no corroboration or new supporting evidence<\/span><\/em>.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Ms. Ford certainly was a sympathetic witness\u2014by her own admission \u201cterrified\u201d at the start and appearing to be emotionally fragile. Her description of the assault and its impact on her was wrenching. She clearly believes what she says happened to her.\u00a0(An assertion with which we vehemently<\/span> disagree!!!<\/em>)<\/strong><\/span> Her allegation should have been vetted privately, in confidence, as she said she would have preferred. Instead ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein held it for six weeks and it was leaked\u2014perhaps to cause precisely such a hearing circus.<\/p>\n

Yet there is still<\/em> no confirming evidence beyond her own testimony<\/em><\/span>, and some<\/em><\/span>\u00a0(most<\/span>, if not all<\/span>!!!<\/em>)<\/span> of what she says has been contradicted<\/em><\/span><\/strong><\/span>…<\/p>\n

The real<\/em><\/span> Democratic goal is to push a confirmation vote past Election Day<\/em><\/span>. They can then<\/em><\/span> spare their incumbents running for re-election from taking a difficult vote.<\/span> If they win the election, they will then<\/em><\/span> try to block any confirmation until they take over the Senate in January. No nominee to the right of Merrick Garland would then<\/em><\/span> be confirmed in the final two years of the Trump Presidency.<\/span> The Supreme Court would be divided 4-4 until 2021 at least<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Senate Republicans should understand that these<\/em><\/span> are the real<\/em><\/span> political stakes.<\/strong><\/span> This nomination isn\u2019t only about the fate of a single man whose reputation can be discarded like some tabloid celebrity.<\/strong><\/span> This is about the future of the Supreme Court and who will control the Senate<\/em><\/span>. If Republicans reject Mr. Kavanaugh based on what we know now, millions<\/em><\/span> of voters will rightly be furious<\/em><\/span>.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

But as important, a rejection will bring dishonor to the Senate. (Whatever dubious level of honor is left that vacuous body.<\/em>)<\/strong><\/span> It will validate the ambush and smear politics that Democrats are using<\/em><\/span>. And it will turn Supreme Court nominations over to the justice of the social-media mob and the politics of accusation<\/span><\/em>.<\/span> It\u2019s time for Senators to stand up and confirm Brett Kavanaugh.<\/strong><\/span>“<\/p>\n

There’s just three problems…<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

…two of which owe no allegiance whatsoever to the Republican Party: the aptly-named Jeff Flake, who, having read the tea leaves of voter unrest back in Arizona, didn’t even bother to run for reelection; and Lisa “Ursula the Sea Witch” Murkowski, who, similarly shunned by Alaskan Republicans, retained her Senate seat by running as an Independent.<\/strong><\/p>\n

In a related item, Kimberly Strassel highlights the overarching importance of…\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Kavanaugh Stakes<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

A vote against the judge is a vote for ambush tactics and against due process<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“The Ford-Kavanaugh hearing consumed most of Thursday, and unsurprisingly<\/span> we learned nothing<\/span> from the spectacle<\/em>.<\/strong><\/span> Christine Ford remains unable to marshal any evidence for her claim of a sexual assault. Brett Kavanaugh continues to deny the charge adamantly and categorically, and with persuasive emotion.<\/p>\n

Something enormous<\/span><\/em> nonetheless has shifted over the past weeks of political ambushes, ugly threats and gonzo gang-rape claims.<\/strong><\/span> In a Monday interview, Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski noted: \u201cWe are now in a place where it\u2019s not about whether or not Judge Kavanaugh is qualified.\u201d Truer words were never spoken. Republicans are now voting on something very different and monumental\u2014and they<\/span>\u00a0 <\/em>(<\/span>At least three<\/span> of them!<\/span><\/em>)\u00a0<\/span>need to be clear on the stakes<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

To vote against<\/em><\/span> Judge Kavanaugh is to reject<\/em><\/span> his certain, clear and unequivocal denial that this event ever happened<\/em><\/span>. The logical implication of a \u201cno\u201d vote is that a man with a flawless record of public service lied not only to the public but to his wife, his children and his community.<\/span> Any<\/em><\/span> Republican who votes against<\/em><\/span> Judge Kavanaugh is implying that he committed perjury in front of the Senate<\/em><\/span>, and should resign or be impeached from his current judicial position, if not charged criminally<\/em><\/span>. As Sen. Lindsey Graham said: \u201cIf you vote \u2018no,\u2019 you are legitimizing the most despicable thing I have seen in my time in politics.\u201d\u00a0(A number<\/span> of which less<\/span>\u00a0despicable things were committed by Senator Grahamnesty!<\/em>)<\/span><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The stakes go beyond<\/span><\/em> Judge Kavanaugh. A \u201cno\u201d vote now<\/em><\/span> equals public approval of every underh<\/span><\/strong><\/span>anded tactic deployed by the left in recent weeks. It\u2019s a green light<\/em><\/span> to send coat hangers and rape threats to Sen. Susan Collins and her staff.<\/span> It is a sanction<\/em><\/span> to the mob that drove Sen. Ted Cruz and his wife out of a restaurant. It is an endorsement<\/em><\/span> of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who kept the charge secret for weeks until she could use it to ambush the nominee with last-minute, unverified claims.<\/span> It\u2019s approval<\/em><\/span> of the release of confidential committee material (hello, Spartacus), the overthrow<\/em><\/span> of regular Senate order, and\u00a0Twitter\u00a0rule<\/em><\/span>. It\u2019s authorization<\/em><\/span> for a now thoroughly unprofessional press corps<\/em><\/span> to continue crafting stories that rest on anonymous accusers and that twist innuendo into gang rapes<\/span><\/em>.<\/span> A vote against Brett Kavanaugh<\/em><\/span> is a vote for Michael Avenatti<\/em><\/span>. No senator can hide<\/em><\/span> from this reality.<\/span> There is no muddy middle<\/em><\/span><\/span><\/strong>…”<\/p>\n

Case in point, as NRO’s Andy McCarthy recounts…<\/strong><\/p>\n

Another Anonymous Allegation\u00a0amid a Bungled Process<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

Grassley could have told committee Democrats that, having abused the process, they\u00a0had waived the right to present more evidence<\/span><\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“…Each passing day now, we see the wages of abuse of the committee process.<\/strong><\/span> In the best of times, it is a commonplace for prominent people to be accused of misconduct. Some allegations are concrete and provide real investigative leads. Others are empty smears. There is a process in place for the FBI and committee staff, which is well-resourced at taxpayer expense, to vet these allegations. By the time a nominee testifies, decisions have been made about what matters are worth pursuing \u2014\u00a0in public hearings and private sessions \u2014\u00a0and which additional witnesses could add value with committee testimony (as opposed to written submissions). As I pointed out again on Wednesday<\/a><\/span><\/em><\/strong><\/span>, this confirmation process is not supposed to be a trial. It is not supposed to resemble a criminal investigation. The objective is to assemble enough information that the Senate can exercise its constitutional advice-and-consent function \u2014\u00a0so senators can responsibly<\/em><\/span> decide whether to approve the nomination.<\/span> The point is not to resolve every claim or render a \u201cguilty\u201d or \u201cnot guilty\u201d verdict.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Here Democrats willfully thwarted the process<\/span> and Republicans let them get away with it<\/span><\/em>. Rather than submitting Christine Blasey Ford\u2019s allegations to the process, Senator Feinstein sat on them, then sprang them at the last second, after Kavanaugh met with any senator who would meet him privately (apparently 65 did), gave 31 hours of masterful testimony, and appeared poised to have his nomination approved by the committee, albeit on a party-line vote.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Committee chairman Chuck Grassley could<\/em><\/span> have told committee Democrats that, having abused the process<\/em><\/span> (after making a despicable circus out of the hearing), the minority had waived the right to present more evidence<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span> Of course, Grassley has the thinnest of margins; thus, he had to weigh the fact that Republican moderates (including those sensitive to the party\u2019s standing among women) were less concerned about procedural regularity than\u00a0with\u00a0the potential perception that the committee had given a wronged woman the back of the hand. But any solicitude was going come with costs \u2014\u00a0that\u2019s why leadership jobs are hard<\/em><\/span>.\u00a0(Though far<\/span> less hard than earning a living in the real<\/span> world!<\/em>)<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Rather than allowing the process to be derailed, Chairman Grassley could<\/em><\/span> have invited Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh to submit affidavits for the record. Or, if Grassley felt he had to hold a hearing, he could<\/em><\/span> have set it on a short date<\/em><\/span> and given Ford a choice<\/em><\/span>: Show up and testify, content herself with submitting a sworn statement, or decline to participate<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> Meantime, a vote could<\/em><\/span> have been scheduled and held right after the short hearing date<\/em> <\/span>\u2014\u00a0after all, this exhibition is optics<\/span>, it is not<\/span> actually about changing anyone\u2019s mind<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span> Democrats would have cried foul through their media megaphone; Republican moderates would have whined. But the blunt fact would remain: Democrats strategically orchestrated this sideshow, and there has already been more relevant information amassed about Kavanaugh than about any nominee in the nation\u2019s history<\/span><\/em>.<\/span> It was past time to vote \u2014\u00a0to dare GOP moderates to be the ones to block Kavanaugh\u2019s nomination, because the moderates are not going to grow more backbone with more delay<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Instead, Senator Grassley decided to bend over backwards to show how fair he and Republicans are. He negotiated terms with Ford\u2019s counsel \u2014\u00a0empowering them as if they had cards to play<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> He indulged demands for delay, postponing the vote<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span> Naturally, the delay undermined any sense that there is a procedure for raising allegations \u2014\u00a0to ensure that they are timely raised, that they are subjected to a vetting process to separate corroborated accusations from unsupported slander. This made more<\/span><\/em> unverifiable smears inevitable<\/em><\/span>, and created an expectation that there must<\/em><\/span> be more delay while the new<\/em><\/span> smears are investigated.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Meanwhile, the point<\/span> of the hearing was lost<\/span><\/em>. It is no longer about whether there is enough information for senators to exercise their constitutional advice-and-consent function.<\/span> It is a Kafkaesque criminal trial in which Kavanaugh must establish his innocence<\/em><\/span>, his accusers must be presumed credible because of our #MeToo moment<\/em><\/span>, and nothing<\/em> dispositive can happen<\/em><\/span> until the FBI conducts a full-blown investigation of decades-old allegations of state-law offenses that the Bureau has no jurisdiction over, and that no state would proceed on because doing so would offend the Constitution\u2019s speedy trial guarantee and state statutes of limitations.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

You want to say Grassley had no choice? I\u2019m not buying it<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> There is always<\/em><\/span> a choice, and when you make the short-term easy one<\/em><\/span> (What\u2019s the harm in letting them have their hearing? What\u2019s the harm in engaging in extended negotiations over a witness\u2019s presumptuous, outlandish demands rather than issuing a subpoena and getting on with it?), you<\/em><\/span> are responsible for the foreseeable, inevitable long-term consequences<\/span> \u2014\u00a0more delay, more demands for investigation, more public doubt about a patently qualified nominee\u2019s legitimacy<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

That\u2019s where we are today, with\u00a0a hearing that could be, at most, just the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end.<\/strong><\/span>“<\/p>\n

Which brings us to another WSJ<\/em> offering, this from Abigail Shrier, who documents the evolutionary progress as…<\/strong><\/p>\n

#MeToo Becomes a Political Ploy<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/h1>\n

Mazie Hirono makes clear that if Brett Kavanaugh were liberal, she\u2019d give him the benefit of the doubt<\/span><\/a>.<\/span><\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

“Pity Lady Justice; she\u2019s had a rough couple of weeks.<\/span><\/strong> On \u201cState of the Union\u201d Sunday, CNN\u2019s Jake Tapper tossed Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii what should have been a grapefruit: \u201cDoesn\u2019t Kavanaugh have the same presumption of innocence as anyone else in America?\u201d Ms. Hirono responded: \u201cI put his denial in the context of everything that I know about him in terms of how he approaches cases.\u201d Conservative jurists in America have been put on notice: They are to forfeit their most basic rights as punishment for their judicial philosophy<\/em><\/span>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

…If Judge Kavanaugh were liberal<\/span>, Sen. Hirono makes clear, she would give him the benefit of the doubt<\/span>.<\/span> If he adjudicates like a conservative<\/span>, that\u2019s evidence of rape<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

This is not<\/em><\/span> a fair hearing. This is not<\/em><\/span> any hearing at all<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> This is a series of political stunts calling itself \u201cdebate\u201d over who should sit on the Supreme Court<\/em><\/span>. Those who believe a sole witness\u2019s inchoate recollection of a never-reported incident 36 years ago have every right to this instinc<\/span>t, but they cannot pretend to have seen sufficient evidence to adjudicate the matter<\/span><\/em>.<\/span> Not without corroboration or any pattern of similar acts by the accused<\/em><\/span>. For those who are already convinced of Judge Kavanaugh\u2019s guilt, it is enough to believe no politically conservative Catholic<\/em><\/span>\u2014\u201csome frat boy named Brett\u201d\u2014as NARAL called him\u2014should ever sit on the highest court of the land<\/em><\/span>.<\/span> Who but a monster would refuse to endorse the right to abortion? And isn\u2019t that<\/span><\/em> tantamount to violence against women?<\/span> What other evidence do we really need<\/em><\/span>?<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Either we\u2019re going to take sexual assault seriously<\/span> because we\u2019re interested in protecting women, or we\u2019ll allow it to be transformed into merely the newest political weapon<\/span><\/em>. If we choose the latter<\/span>, we will have encouraged victims and witnesses of even the most heinous crimes to decline to report them for decades, waiting for the politically opportune moment<\/span>.<\/span> And we will have helped turn a grievous crime into a cheap register of public passion that flips like a weather vane at the next election<\/span><\/em>.<\/strong><\/span>“<\/p>\n

Any questions?!?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Finally, we’ll call it a wrap with\u00a0The Lighter Side<\/em>:<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a> \"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Magoo<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

It’s Friday, September 28th, 2018,…but before we begin, we offer two thoughts on the Kavanaugh kangaroo court: first, our adaption of Cordell Hull’s response to the Japanese ultimatum of December 7, 1941: In all our 62 years, we have never seen a spurious accusation more crowded with infamous falsehoods and distortions – on a scale […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1988,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_s2mail":"no","footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-63352","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63352","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1988"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=63352"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63352\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":63353,"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/63352\/revisions\/63353"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=63352"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=63352"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.thedailygouge.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=63352"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}