Update no.873

Update from the Sunland

No.873

24.9.18 – 30.9.18

Blog version:  http://heartlandupdate.blogspot.com/

            To all,

            Sadly, I was consumed by and riveted to the broadcast of the Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation for Judge Brett Michael Kavanaugh [862] of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to fill the seat of retired Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy [860].  After two weeks of negotiations with Kavanaugh’s first accuser Doctor Christine Blasey Ford, PhD, who is a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine, we finally heard her voice, saw her eyes and listened to her story.  Her opening statement was clear, compelling and surprisingly detailed; she delivered a calm, measured and careful testimony and as unemotional as she could deliver.  The majority (all white men) chose Deputy County Attorney Rachel Mitchell, former chief of the Sex Crimes Bureau, Special Victims Division, Maricopa County Attorney’s Office (MCAO) [Arizona]—an experienced and accomplished sex crimes prosecutor—to be the voice and face of the majority’s questioning of the judge’s accuser.  To my surprise, Mitchell (undoubtedly at the behest of the politicians) focused her questions on the process of Ford’s disclosure and accusation, not on the crime itself. The majority’s questions spoke volumes.  After four hours, Dr. Ford departed and it was the judge’s turn.  He chose to give us an emotional, impassioned and angry denial of the accusations.  As I listened to their words, they are both believable.  It is quite possible that Kavanaugh is an innocent victim of mistaken identification.  The Senate Judiciary Committee majority abandoned their attempt at propriety and illuminated their true colors, when at Senator Graham turn, they rejected their plan and proceeded with the usual political vitriol.  I really wanted to see her approach to both parties, not just to save face for the majority.  Regardless, there was insufficient evidence to validate either the professor’s accusation or the judge’s denial; however, this is not a criminal prosecution or trial; it is a job interview (a very important one) and the threshold is credibility and believability, not probable cause or beyond a reasonable doubt.  There is doubt. And, as is my nature and intellectual commitment, I am compelled to make judgment regarding who was more believable; in that judgment, I must stand with Dr. Ford.  At the end of the day, Kavanaugh is NOT appropriate for the Supreme Court . . . or the Appeals Court, either; for that, I know the BIC will be a very unhappy, angry and vengeful person.  I do not trust the Senate to do the right thing; regardless, whatever the Senate does, it will be our new reality, and we must endure.

            Then, as soon as the testimonial portion of the hearing concluded, the BIC just could not resist any longer.  He tweeted:

“Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him. His testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting. Democrats’ search and destroy strategy is disgraceful and this process has been a total sham and effort to delay, obstruct, and resist. The Senate must vote!”

3:46 PM - 27 Sep 2018                        [note: the time is MST or PDT, not EDT]

I understand the BIC’s observation; he wanted a Trumpian angry response; he got it; but, that does not make him correct or absolve Kavanaugh.

            In our local newspaper, the following article appeared quite appropriate and reflective of the hearing and testimony.

“Arizona prosecutor who questioned Christine Ford says she wouldn't prosecute Brett Kavanaugh”

by Ledyard King, USA TODAY

Arizona Republic

Published: 8:44 a.m. MT Sept. 28, 2018 | Updated 8:51 a.m. MT Sept. 28, 2018

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/politics/arizona/2018/09/28/rachel-mitchell-says-she-would-not-prosecute-brett-kavanaugh/1454956002/?utm_source=azcentral-Law & Order=null&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=baseline&utm_term=hero

Mitchell is precisely correct; at present, there is insufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to prosecute this case, even if charges were brought.  Yet, this is not a prosecution; it was a job interview to determine qualification and suitability for the highest judicial posting in this Grand Republic.  There is no question regarding his qualification.  The circumstantial evidence surrounding this time period of his life illuminates his unsuitability.

            As the committee held their public hearing for their procedural vote, Senator ‘Jeff’ Flake of Arizona left the meeting and gestured for Senator ‘Chris’ Coons of Delaware to join him.  Together, they worked out a bipartisan recommendation for an FBI supplemental investigation into the allegations before a full Senater floor vote.  There is conflicting information regarding the BIC’s instructions to the FBI with respect to the supplemental investigation.  The BIC publicly proclaims that the FBI has free rein to pursue the facts.  Just last week, the BIC also publicly proclaimed, “Facts don’t matter.” There are various corroborated reports that the BIC constrained the investigation to two of three accusations: Dr. Ford’s incident and Deborah Ramirez’s claim.  He apparently excluded the accusation of Julie Swetnick, presumably because Michael Avenatti, who is representing Stormy Daniels [837], also represents Ms. Swetnick.  To limit the FBI investigation in this way contaminates the investigation at the get-go . . . at least that is my fear. We shall hold judgment until the FBI investigation is complete.  A further obstacle is, the FBI report of findings will remain confidential, accessible to the Senate alone.  We shall see how this plays out.

            “America’s Dad” William Henry ‘Bill’ Cosby Jr., 81, was sentenced by Judge Steven O’Neill to 3-to-10 years in state prison for aggravated indecent assault in the only criminal case to emerge from dozens of allegations against the once-beloved comedian.  The judge classified Cosby as a “sexually violent predator,” and with that designation, the erstwhile entertainer will have to undergo lifetime counseling and will be listed on a sex-offender registry, if he survives prison.  Cosby is the first to be convicted and punished within the illumination of the “Me Too” movement.  For the expanse and seriousness of the array of accusations against him, his sentence is shamefully light; although I must admit that his sentence is appropriate for the crime for which he was convicted.  I trust there will be other convictions where possible beyond Cosby.

            I started to write about the BIC’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly, and then his abominable news conference.  I will state for the public record that I agree with much of what the BIC was trying to say in his UN speech in terms of sovereignty, defense, equal trade, respect for intellectual property, and such.  However, the number of lies, falsehoods, misinformation and outright subterfuge were simply overwhelming and beyond my capacity to dissect.  He opened with “He” had accomplished more than any previous administration, which instigated the Assembly to laugh at him, to which the BIC said, “I didn’t expect that response, but that’s OK.” The BIC wants to put his accomplishments up against the Emancipation Proclamation, the 13^thAmendment, the Louisiana Purchase, World War I, stemming the Great Depression, supporting Great Britain in her darkest hour, World War II, the atomic bomb deployment decision, the Marshal Plan, desegregation, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 . . . I could go on.  The BIC was so far off the mark of historic reality that he deserved to be laughed at, but the United States of America did not deserve that response.  I truly wish he was a better speaker, with high credibility, and with far better speechwriters; he had a good message for the world to hear, but the message was lost in his carnival barker, snake-oil salesman pitch.  Then, later that day, he held a rare Press conference.  The simply grotesque hypocrisy of the BIC standing before the Press and the world and claiming false charges by women against him (untrue) as his rationale for unilaterally touting his Supreme Court nominee is outrageous, disgusting and deeply nauseating.

            My attention focused on the lead up to the Thursday confirmation hearing and the aftermath.  I am trying to concentrate on completing a writing project for a different novel that is approaching 20 years in process. This week was a total bust beyond the BIC and his SCOTUS nominee.

            Comments and contributions from Update no.872:

Comment to the Blog:

“On the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination, I’ll point out that Kavanaugh’s supporters are the people opposing a deeper investigation. (The usual meaning of due process doesn’t apply to his nomination.)  His opponents and accusers favor a longer look at his past. If due process were involved in this, the apparent offender seeks to avoid it.  I have seen a picture of a writing by Kavanaugh (his short-form bio somewhere) and quotes of other people that strongly imply that Kavanaugh and his friend were blackout drunks at the time of the Ford incident.  If that’s true they may not remember the specific incident.  Speaking as a (recovering) blackout drunk, I support your statement that it excuses nothing.

“I support the larger #metoo movement and have no conflict with as many of the accused as possible going through due process. (Some of the accusations aren’t subject to prosecution, and many of the accused don’t want due process or any attention at all.)  I doubt any significant number of the accusations are false.  It happens at some time, but I’m sure it’s rare.  Others may be exaggerated by the t nature of human memory, but that’s why we have due process.

“As long as we’re discussing due process, Trump clearly doesn’t want that either.  Contemporary jurisprudence has fallen behind the state of events. I doubt the Founders envisioned the scale and danger of the criminal behavior that has become possible for him today.

“The statement that Trump won’t be able to start World War III rests on the shaky ground of his advisors invariably being able to contain his whims.  I can’t support that idea.”

My response to the Blog:

            Yes, quite correct; I noticed that fact as well.  However, there could be many reasons for that opposition . . . not least of which is time.  They do not want to allow the time to investigate and process the results.  Of course, the overlying, potentially dominant reason is quite likely the same reason the BIC has resisted the Special Counsel investigation; he does not want to truth or other bad conduct to come up.  I’ve seen far too many people use the alcohol excuse; I reject it and condemn it whenever and wherever I hear it.

            I’m with you completely on the “larger #metoo movement.”  This is a cathartic period we must get through to achieve a more respectful and fair society.  I have seen the Kavanaugh behavior too many times.  He may be an innocent casualty, but the mounting circumstantial evidence suggests he is not the innocent one.  He appears to have led a respectable life as an adult, but the doubt I hold that he was the perpetrator of the sexual assault on Dr. Ford is rapidly evaporating; the bill has come due and rightly so.  The same price should have been paid by the BIC for his professed sexual assaults.  The BIC’s conduct is exactly the same as that suffered by Dr. Ford in high school.

            And then, Kavanaugh resorts to a “Bill Clinton” excuse—that depends upon what the definition of ‘is’ is.  Kavanaugh claimed he did not have “sexual intercourse” with any females in those years.  Hey idiot, no one accused you of rape or even consensual sexual intercourse.  You are accused of sexual assault, not rape . . . yet.

            Quite right; the BIC does not want due process, because he recognizes the likely outcome, which is precisely why he has relentlessly attacked the Justice Department, the FBI, and the Special Counsel—they search for facts.  He absolutely does NOT want the facts illuminated; he wants only his version of what he wants and dictates reality to be.

            Well, I hope we never test your hypothesis. POTUS possesses enormous power that can be unilaterally exercised.  I do not want to test the restraint of those around him.

 . . . follow-up comment:

“Memory is a strange thing, and most drunks don't realize about the blackouts. At least, they don't see how much is lost unless/until they are well into recovery.  In Kavanaugh's case, I'm sure he doesn't want to do any deep exploration.  My point is that we have no way to know what he remembers.  We're all better off assuming other witnesses tell the truth better than Kavanaugh.”

. . . and my follow-up response:

            Good points all and fully concur.  The facts we have and the circumstantial information is not looking good for him.

Another contribution:

“How is this an assault on the "victim" (whom it has been disclosed just happens to be a friend of Soros who is known to pay these so called victims).

‘Judge Brett Kavanaugh is a fine man, with an impeccable reputation, who is under assault by radical left wing politicians who don’t want to know the answers, they just want to destroy and delay. Facts don’t matter. I go through this with them every single day in D.C.’

“This tweet is absolutely true that the left just wants to delay .. Just like the Russian collusion, it will go from one fabrication to another in the name of destroying and delaying ..

“And why the delay??  What is the fear???

“That should be the big question to ask the Democrats ... Me thinks they have much to fear over what they've been hiding ... .”

My reply:

            I am still digesting what happened yesterday . . . what I saw and heard.  I am writing my opinion for this week’s Update, so I will not waste your time redoubling my observations.

            A couple of summary thoughts might be useful here.

            This Grand Republic is undergoing a long overdue transformation to achieve a day when women are treated with respect, dignity and true equality.  The days of paternalism have yet to banished to the trash heap of history. Because of the constraints of our legal system and the enormous weight of the latent paternalism is our society, sexual assaults of this nature are vastly underreported and even less prosecuted.  I had to deal directly with four such cases during my tenure as a university chancellor; they were heartrending.  During this necessary transformation, there will inevitably be collateral damage, but even at its worst, it pales in comparison to the unpunished sexual assault endured by women in this country.  As a woman, statistics suggest you have most likely suffered a similar sexual assault at least once in your life.

            There is no doubt Christine Blasey was sexually assaulted 36 years ago, as she claims.  Kavanaugh offered an impassioned and compelling defense. He may well be innocent of this specific charge.  He may well be collateral damage in the transformation.  The circumstantial evidence we have beyond their testimony is not fully supportive of his innocence.

            The hypocrisy on display in this process is revolting.  The Senate Majority Leader unilaterally stonewalled President Obama’s constitutional nominee for 11 months—not even a meeting or a hearing, nothing, stone cold dead. Then, they seek to fast-track, steamroll the BIC’s 2^nd constitutional nominee, and their outrage is palpable. Where was their outrage when the Majority Leader was defying the Constitution?  So, Lindsey Graham’s emotional outburst is truly rich. This is tribalism at its bloody worst.

            Kavanaugh may well be regrettable collateral damage.  We have NO evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was the direct perpetrator of the Blasey assault.

            You ask, what is the fear?  Plainly stated, the fear is Kavanaugh’s well right of center jurisprudence embodied in his self proclaimed “strict constructionist” approach to the law and his clearly visible conservative, verging on moral projectionist attitude.  To me, the risk here is a citizen’s fundamental right to privacy.

. . . follow-up comment:

“If it is true which i have an inner sense it is not, and if it bothered her so much,  why has she waited more than 30 years to bring it up .. People she claimed were at this supposed party are not recalling it .. Its all nonsense ..”

 . . . my follow-up reply:

            Oh my, Dr. Ford answered that very question. Her response was identical to virtually every other woman who has suffered sexual assault—she was ashamed and afraid she would not be believed.  She repressed those events, until she had to confront that incident.  It has been the same for all of the accusers in the “Me Too” movement, including the vast majority of ‘Bill’ Cosby’s accusers, except for the last one, which unfortunately for ‘Bill,’ did not occur beyond the statute of limitations.  He has gone to prison and rightly so.  In virtually every other case—Weinstein, Spacey, Lauer, O’Reilly, et al—the victims coming forward are all outside the statute of limitations, thus not prosecutable, all for the same reason, even the male assault victims. They would not be taken seriously, and suffer a similar figurative fate as Muslim women under Sharia Law—stoned to death as the victims.

            We shall respectfully disagree.  This is not nonsense—far from it.  The sexual assault and victimization of women in this Grand Republic is very serious.  Brett Kavanaugh may well be innocent, if he was prosecutable under the law.  He may very well be an innocent casualty, collateral damage, but that is the price we must pay for the societal correction that is underway, long overdue and necessary.  If Kavanaugh is completely innocent of this and all other charges, I am terribly sorry for him and the injustice of it all, but I must stand with Dr. Ford and the other women.

            My very best wishes to all.  Take care of yourselves and each other.

Cheers,

Cap                        :-)

-->