Guest Commentary: Dealing with the Kavanaugh Nomination

Greg Williams, Guest Commentator
​@GregsListLive
​
​Greg Williams is the host of the internet radio talk show "Greg's List" and has hosted Sam as an on air guest on several occasions. Sam and Greg have also appeared together on the Georgia Public Broadcasting program "On Second Thought." Greg is active in the Republican Party in Metro Atlanta.

Greg Williams, Guest Commentator

Observing the Washington DC theatrics regarding the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court has proven to be a full time job for many folks. Part Twilight Zone, part dystopic reality TV, the political theater has dominated the airwaves for more than a week, culminating in a Senate hearing held to investigate criminal allegations against Kavanaugh and presumably a full Senate vote sometime next week.

The social media mob has grown in size every day, with an increasing number of self-proclaimed experts on everything from the statute of limitations on reporting sex crimes to discerning a person's honesty through their body language during a televised interview.

Senate Democrats have reached proverbial new lows on a daily basis in their quest to prevent Trump from placing another justice on the Supreme Court.

The cavalcade of Kavanaugh accusers paraded out by attorney Michael Avenatti continues to mount, with each story more bizarre, salacious, and nonsensical than the preceding one. Accusations of sexual misconduct shouldn’t be dismissed or ignored, but it’s fair to question the coincidental timing and seemingly coordinated effort to besmirch Trump’s second SCOTUS nominee.

At this rate, I fully expect the Democrats to present High Priest Mola Ram at a presser, stating that Kavanaugh assisted him with Temple of Doom human sacrifices in 1936 India. Don't laugh too hard, I hear Ruth Bader Ginsburg was there too.

The emotive, partisan vitriol has spawned everything from valid, sincere debate to “jump the shark” histrionics. Republicans have thrown out the trite "Well, Bill Clinton did worse" defense while Democrats have threatened nearly every Constitutional right with their growing hysteria. Yes, Senator Chuck Schumer did say:
"There's no presumption of innocence or guilt when you have a nominee before you."

That sentiment flies in the face of a cornerstone principle of our Republic — the idea that one is presumed innocent and guilt must be proven.

Taken at face value, statements from leading Democrats threaten the very fabric of freedom enjoyed by citizens of the United States. Their hatred for Trump (and the fact they lost the 2016 election) blinds them from an unpleasant truth. They are espousing the same fascist views they profess to fight. Case in point the documented harassment and physical intimidation of Texas Senator Ted Cruz and his wife at a DC-area restaurant the other night.

---

From an optics standpoint, I do believe Trump erred when nominating Kavanaugh instead of Judge Amy Coney Barrett, another highly qualified candidate. Undoubtedly, Barrett would have faced the same level of resistance as Kavanaugh, but it would have been somewhat unnatural for Democrats to run a hate campaign against a woman weeks ahead of the midterms. Their apparent gains among female voters during the past two years might have been mitigated in time for Republicans to maintain their numerical advantages in both the House and Senate. Retaining the Senate and possibly gaining a few seats should be the electoral endgame strategy of the Trump administration. Hold serve there and you have all the time in the world to nominate Justices for the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh was seen as the safer choice though, previously vetted six times by the FBI during his judicial career and considered a seasoned beltway insider. 

The first accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, does seem to have suffered a traumatic event. A possible case of mistaken identity has emerged, where two men have now come forward admitting their involvement with her.

While we won't “witness bash” and go into detail about each of the Avenatti produced witnesses, according to the sordid testimony, it seems the movie "Risky Business" was based on Judge Brett Kavanaugh's experiences in the early 80s.
​
Surely some of these stories would have been mentioned during the numerous FBI investigations Kavanaugh endured during his judicial career. Surely there would be corroborating witnesses as the events detailed dozens of attendees at the events in question. Instead, in less than two weeks, Senate Democrats have abandoned the idea of innocence before guilt and tossed out the notion that evidence should be produced when criminal complaints are made.

A recent facebook post opined about ending the drama:
“Two Republican senators in public opposition ends this. Just stand up and say no.” 
I believe the corollary of this statement is true.

A handful of rational Democratic senators could end the charade. Claire McCaskill, Heidi Heitkamp, and Joe Manchin, the time is now, the American people need your voices. The states of Missouri, North Dakota, and West Virginia are watching. They are watching to see if you join the unhinged wing of your Party or come back to Earth and stress the return to rational, civilized debate.

It's not too late for sane Democrats to disavow this maniacal chorus of the absurd. 
​