Christine Blasey Ford and the ACLU: Now accusations count more than evidence.

By Rubashov

Once upon a time, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) could be relied upon to follow its core beliefs to their logical conclusions. Freedom of Speech was Freedom of Speech – even if it meant defending the right of American National Socialists to conduct a public demonstration in a town where a large community of Holocaust survivors resided.

While the ACLU’s defense of the Nazis was in poor taste, it was in keeping with their purist – admirably so, many would argue – view of the freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights, that gift from all the Americans who have gone before us. That is who the ACLU was, with a stated mission "to defend and preserve the individual rights and liberties guaranteed to every person in this country by the Constitution and laws of the United States".

But no longer. The ACLU has “jumped the shark” as is said. We cannot tell if this is due to a growing presence of a new generation, unhistorical, overloaded on so much information from today that no room remains for all that came before; or if it is due simply to the whims of those who underwrite the ACLU – its contributors and benefactors. We cannot tell. We can only observe what they have done.

Those funding an organization inevitably call its tune. Today, there are many more groups asking for money than there were back in 1920, when the ACLU was formed. And an annual budget of more than $230 million is a big nut. One can only imagine the arguments between the group’s purists and those whose concerns focus more on fundraising.

And then there is the ever present pressure of political correctness, illustrating that America has never really moved on from its puritan roots. The need to shun, to censure, to shame remains within our DNA. Only the subject changes. If a company like Chick-fil-A can be brought to heel from the outside, how much easier for an organization like the ACLU, from within?

And so, this past weekend, the ACLU presented an award to an accuser whose accusations could not be substantiated and whose own supporters later doubted her account. An accuser who made her accusation in 2018 – about something that she said happened in 1982 (Yes, wouldn’t we all wish to live under a tyranny in which government investigators could conjure an accusation from our long past that could be made fresh to destroy us? Wouldn’t we all wish to apply such to our own lives?) In presenting an award for “courage” to this accuser, the ACLU made clear that innocent until proven guilty no longer matters.

The accuser is Christine Blasey Ford. The accused, one Brett Kavanaugh. Of course they did. What else matters?

The accuser is painting herself as a victim of a crime and the ACLU is accepting this. And yet no crime had been adjudicated. So we say again, the principle that the accused is innocent until proven guilty no longer matters.

This is quite a turnabout for the ACLU. Most everyone has heard of the Miranda case and that the police, when arresting someone, must “Mirandize” them or read them their Miranda rights. This came out of a 1963 case in which the accused was arrested for the kidnapping and rape of an 18-year-old girl. The accused admitted to the rape and confessed to police. The accused was convicted at trial of kidnapping and rape. Later, it was found that the police had neglected to inform the accused of his right to counsel, so the ACLU and others successfully argued for his release. It led to the famous decision by the United States Supreme Court, in favor of the accused – who had been convicted of kidnapping and rape.

Ernesto Miranda went to trial again in 1967. Witnesses testified that Miranda himself had bragged about the rape at the time of the offense. He was convicted in 1967 and sentenced to serve 20 to 30 years in prison. However, this was before the Reagan/Clinton era of tough-on-crime mandatory sentencing laws and such, so he was released in 1972. Miranda was stabbed to death in a bar fight in 1976.

(NOTE: America is now in the process of regressing to the past – of going back to those halcyon days when a man convicted of kidnapping and rape was back on the streets in five years. The victim, in this case, was just 27 years old when the man convicted of kidnapping and raping her was released. Hopefully, she moved so she didn’t have to look at him. Remember this well, because this is where we are going – here and to the great re-learning that will of necessity follow. Look forward to a new wave of mandatory sentencing laws in the 2030’s and 2040’s.)

This was who the ACLU was back when it believed that the accused was innocent until proven guilty – back when the ACLU would take on the case of a convicted rapist and kidnapper and insist that – no matter the public outcry, no matter how loud this mob or that howled – the rules had to be adhered to. How you played the game mattered to the ACLU. Then. Not now.

Now the howls of the mob are all that matters. And the money. Bet the fundraising is going great!

The Left in America (and throughout the West) has embraced a kind of Modernist justice that leaves it “free” from empirical evidence and facts. Going forward, they tell us, “justice” will be based on “imagination” and “feeling” – whether of the individual or of the mob (be it in body or on social media). Of course, even the most ardent Modernists had to later admit that the “oakness” of the truncheons did intrude on the mind’s abstractions. Then, when the darkness fell, and “justice” became whatever the government, with its men with guns, said it was.

Let us mourn the passing of the old ACLU. Too bad, it almost made a hundred.

The same NJ media that covered up for Clinton, tries to do the same for Menendez

Remember how the newspapers tried to discredit the source for the claim that Bill Clinton had seduced Monica Lewinsky in the White House?  Remember how the media told us that Linda Tripp was a “liar” and that she used “right wing” media outlets to peddle her "meaningless" allegations?

All part of the “vast right-wing conspiracy” Hillary Clinton assured us.  And NOW – the National Organization for Women – stood by their man, and so did legions of Democrat women politicians.  They all assured us that Bill Clinton would NEVER act so inappropriately.

Yep, the media was right on that!  We all know today that Bill Clinton DID NOT have sex with Monica Lewinsky, right???

And as more and more evidence piled up, the media just dismissed it.  When other women came forward and said they were raped.  The media trashed them, called them trailer park trash, said it was all a plot to damage the good name of William Jefferson Clinton.  They advised us to Move On…

One New Jersey newspaper published an editorial with the title:  "GOTCHA" POLITICS HIT A NEW LOW WITH STARR'S SEX INVESTIGATION. 

Another New Jersey newspaper did an editorial that simply said:  TIME TO END IT.

Well, it’s déjà vu all over again!

On Wednesday, there was United States Senator Bob Menendez and, like Bill Clinton once upon a time, he was surrounded by NOW and a bevy of female Democrat office holders whose political fortunes (for better or for worse) are tied to the Senator’s.  There was Bob Menendez himself, doing his best… “I did not have sex…” imitation of Bill Clinton.  And there was the media, once again failing to read what they wrote last time, talking about “gutter” politics and “right wing blogs” and trashing the women, and the prosecutors, and the GOP. 

Hey Tom Moran, Fred Snowflake, Hand of Hand, Moe of Moe, and all those media mavens who want to shake their tallywhackers at us to make it so…

Guys, you bullshit us once.  Then – along comes Brett Kavanaugh – and you went back on your bullshit and said the opposite of everything you said when it was Bill Clinton.  Now (and it’s just been a few weeks for Christ sake!) you want to go back on everything you just said about Brett Kavanaugh and tell us there’s a new set of rules – and why?  Because it’s about Bob Menendez???

Fellas, keep your bullshit.  You have the collective credibility and moral authority of an unwiped ass.  Nobody is buying it besides those phonies from NOW.

Fred Snowflake tries to make excuses for Menendez and the underaged girls.

We remember when Fred was the editor for a legit newspaper – a real journalist.  Then he went corporate and ended up writing for a blog that shills for a Democrat vendor – yes, a greaser greasing the grease machine of contributions and contracts – a guy who lives so far up Bob Menendez’ ass that he wanted him to be Vice President instead of Joe Biden. 

Writing from the perspective of a Left Wing Blog, Fred tries to dismiss something because he claims it was written in a “Right Wing blog” and fails to see the irony in doing so.  It’s kind of pathetic.

Hey Fred, BelieveWomen!  Women made the accusation against Bob Menendez and just because those women are darker-skinned than Dr. Christine Blasey Ford or don’t have her economic and educational “privilege” – and maybe they don’t speak English, so what – that doesn’t make them liars, does it?  What’s wrong with you, Fred, are you some kind of racist?

Oh, you say they say they got their stories wrong?  After what?  After some corrupt criminal billionaire calls up the local Establishment he’s paid into down there and sets the “man” on them?  And the “man” down there don’t do due process, Fred.  Read up on it sometime, Fred, they have death squads down there.

And how about those lovely young ladies from Eastern Europe who the Honorable Member from New Jersey helped traffick into the United States for his old-assed buddy to play with?  Are you going to argue that they just hold hands?  Huh, Fred?  No Fred, it’s  a crime against nature that’s what that is.

Fred tries to dismiss what the FBI said and President Obama’s Justice Department said (that’s right – President Obama’s Justice Department – not Trump’s) about the scumbag behavior of Bob Menendez.  But Fred doesn’t examine the documents, he just waves his tallywhacker and expects all that documentation to magically disappear.

Documentation like this…

And this…

menendez Doc 2 by Sussex Watchdog

 And don’t forget this…

Yeah, it all comes down to hypocrisy, don’t it Fred?  Bob Menendez brought this upon himself the day he wanted to play “butter-doesn’t-melt-in-my-mouth” at the Kavanaugh confirmation.  The old Fred, the journalist, would have got it.  The new Fred, the shill for the greaser vendor and Menendez fundraiser, not so much.  Hey, things change. 

The people who teach our children are shilling for a human trafficker. Yes, the world is a bad place.

Throughout the confirmation process of Brett Kavanaugh, we heard a lot from the Democrats and their allies – from newcomers like Antifa and the Women’s March to usual suspects like NOW and the NJEA.  We heard them shout in unison about “accusations” and “FBI investigations” – and how these things are enough to block someone from high office.  Well, there were enough allegations against Senator Bob Menendez, for President Obama’s Justice Department to indict him on federal corruption charges and to take him to trial.  It ended in a mistrial.  Out of that came a formal admonishment by the Senate Ethics Committee in April of this year.

What came out of the FBI investigation was that Senator Menendez was helping to bring young women into the United States for his friend and donor, Salomon Melgen to use as sexual objects.  It is our opinion that these women were being trafficked for sexual purposes and the FBI investigation appears to have led to the same conclusion. 

As was reported in the national and New York media, the FBI investigation came up with “corroborating evidence” concerning uncharged allegations of underage prostitution.  Specifically, prosecutors claim that the Senator and his donor friend traveled to the Dominican Republic to have sex with prostitutes, some of whom would have been underaged. 

If, in the era of #MeTooism, allegations are enough – as we were endlessly told by the Democrats and their Antifa allies – then why are Democrats and groups like the NJEA supporting Bob Menendez?  Why are they allowing RealPolitik to trump #MeTooism?

There is a lot more evidence of #MeTooism with Senator Menendez than ever existed in the case of Brett Kavanaugh.  And yet we still hear the self-serving dribble from the likes of Democrat congressional candidates Mikie Sherrill, Tom Malinowski, and Andy Kim.  Not to mention Senator Cory Booker – who wants to turn Israel, or what would remain of it after he removed their defensive wall, into a vast Yugoslav-style rape camp.  Does anyone doubt what would happen to the Israeli population – particularly its women and children – if they were ever turned over to the tender mercies of Hamas, Hezbollah, or even the garden variety governments of its “neighbors”?

In addition to their hypocritical support of Menendez and opposition to Kavanaugh, the indictments against these three candidates are as follows:

Mikie Sherrill worked with far-left radical elements allied with Antifa and the Jihadist Linda Sarsour (a racist allied with Louis Farrakhan) to drive out a moderate, bi-partisan member of Congress, who had served in-country during the Vietnam War.  They knew he was elderly and in failing health, but they worked on him until he had to give up.

Tom Malinowski turned a career as a human rights advocate on its head when he joined Obama’s Clinton-Kerry State Department and promptly became an apologist for those who use slave labor and who engage in human trafficking and the exploitation of women and children.  Far from standing up to dictators and authoritarian governments, he made excuses for them.

Andy Kim is one of the founders of “The Resistance.”  And he has lied about his record from the first – at one point even describing himself or allowing himself to be described as a “veteran” when he has never served in the military.  Now he’s running on a ticket that includes – not only Senator Menendez – but a Freeholder candidate who has been arrested for domestic violence and who had stalking complaints filed against him. 

These candidates are not pro-women or pro-anything, they are Democrat Party politicians looking for votes, and they will do anything or say anything to get them.  They are committed to getting power so that they can take away YOUR freedom.

So now we know how far they’ll go.  What are we going to do to stop them?  How determined are we?  Are we determined enough to tell our neighbors about their hypocrisy?  Are we determined enough to stand up after the church social and put it out there?  Are we determined enough to let everyone we know on Facebook where we stand and what the stakes are?  Or are we too pussy to do any of that?

Republicans who want to stay pussies are not going to make this fight any easier.

Don’t be pussies.  There’s too much at stake.  At the very least, think of those young women – the trafficked and the sexually exploited – those women the NJEA and Mikie Sherrill, Tom Malinowski, and Andy Kim conveniently forgot about.

Now go to it and motivate your friends, family, and neighbors to vote for reform.  Go to it like you really mean it… and don’t be afraid if the coddlers of human traffickers and sexual exploitation call you names.  Suck it up.  Embrace it.

Democrats who oppose Brett Kavanaugh are hypocrites if they support Bob Menendez.

For the past weeks, we’ve been hearing from Democrats about “accusations” and “FBI investigations” – and how these things are enough to block someone from high office.  Well, there were enough allegations against Senator Bob Menendez, one of those who will be voting on Brett Kavanaugh, for President Obama’s Justice Department to indict him on federal corruption charges and to take him to trial.  It ended in a mistrial.  Out of that came a formal admonishment by the Senate Ethics Committee in April of this year.

What came out of the FBI investigation was that Senator Menendez was helping to bring young women into the United States for his friend and donor, Salomon Melgen to use as sexual objects.  It is our opinion that these women were being trafficked for sexual purposes and the FBI investigation appears to have led to the same conclusion. 

As was reported in the national and New York media, the FBI investigation came up with “corroborating evidence” concerning uncharged allegations of underage prostitution.  Specifically, prosecutors claim that the Senator and his donor friend traveled to the Dominican Republic to have sex with prostitutes, some of whom would have been underaged. 

So there is a lot more evidence of #MeTooism with Senator Menendez than ever existed in the case of Brett Kavanaugh.

And yet we still hear the self-serving dribble from the likes of Democrat congressional candidates Mikie Sherrill, Tom Malinowski, and Andy Kim.  Not to mention Senator Cory Booker – who wants to turn Israel, or what would remain of it after he removed their defensive wall, into a vast Yugoslav-style rape camp.  Does anyone doubt what would happen to the Israeli population – particularly its women and children – if they were ever turned over to the tender mercies of Hamas, Hezbollah, or even the garden variety governments of its “neighbors”?

In addition to their hypocritical support of Menendez and opposition to Kavanaugh, the indictments against these three candidates are as follows:

Mikie Sherrill worked with far-left radical elements allied with Antifa and the Jihadist Linda Sarsour (a racist allied with Louis Farrakhan) to drive out a moderate, bi-partisan member of Congress, who had served in-country during the Vietnam War.  They knew he was elderly and in failing health, but they worked on him until he had to give up.

Tom Malinowski turned a career as a human rights advocate on its head when he joined Obama’s Clinton-Kerry State Department and promptly became an apologist for those who use slave labor and who engage in human trafficking and the exploitation of women and children.  Far from standing up to dictators and authoritarian governments, he made excuses for them.

Andy Kim has lied about his record from the first – at one point even describing himself or allowing himself to be described as a “veteran” when he has never served in the military.  Now he’s running on a ticket that includes – not only Senator Menendez – but a Freeholder candidate who has been arrested for domestic violence and who had stalking complaints filed against him.

These candidates are not pro-women or pro-anything, they are Democrat Party politicians looking for votes, and they will do anything or say anything to get them.

Rasmussen: 56% See Media Witch Hunt of Public Figures Accused of Sexual Wrongdoing

A new Rasmussen Reports national survey finds that just 28% of Likely U.S. Voters say, when a public figure is accused of sexual wrongdoing, it is more likely that the media will regard him as innocent until proven guilty. Fifty-six percent (56%) believe it’s more likely the media will regard the public figure as guilty until proven innocent. Seventeen percent (17%) are not sure.

There is little disagreement on this question between men and women. Fifty-eight percent (58%) of men think it’s more likely the media will regard a public figure accused of sexual wrongdoing as guilty until proven innocent, a view shared by 54% of women.

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is accused of attempting to sexually assault a girl when he was in high school, but only 33% of all voters believe the California woman who made those allegations. Slightly more (38%) believe Kavanaugh, who has denied those claims.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters was conducted on September 19-20, 2018 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.

Most Republicans (74%) and voters not affiliated with either major political party (55%) think the media is more likely to regard a public figure accused of sexual wrongdoing as guilty until proven innocent. Democrats are evenly divided on this question.

Eighty percent (80%) of voters who Strongly Approve of the job President Trump is doing think the media is more likely to regard him as guilty until proven innocent. A plurality (43%) of voters who Strongly Disapprove of Trump’s job performance think the media is more likely to regard that person as innocent until proven guilty.

Voters who view media coverage of the Kavanaugh nomination positively are more likely to believe the media will give public figures accused of sexual wrongdoing a fair shake. Most voters who rate the Kavanaugh coverage as poor disagree.  

The wording of the question is here…

National Survey of 1,000 U.S. Likely Voters

Conducted September 19-20, 2018
By Rasmussen Reports

1* When a public figure is accused of sexual wrongdoing, which is more likely – that the media will regard him as innocent until proven guilty or guilty until proven innocent?

NOTE: Margin of Sampling Error, +/- 3 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence

The Kavanaugh show trial. Is this Booker’s “Darkness at Noon” moment?

By Rubashov

We have all seen how United States Senator Cory Booker has morphed from a rather lightweight celebrity whore into a novitiate Stalinist, with a particular dislike for Israel…

All that remains to be determined is the kind of interrogator Booker will be.  A starched-assed Gletkin?  Perhaps.  Or a cynical Ivanov?  Whatever… just as in 1938, Booker’s position is already determined.

Ben Shapiro has written a great piece on the coming show trial…

On Monday evening, Wonkette founder Ana Marie Cox let the cat out of the bag regarding the Left’s perspective on the allegations of sexual assault against Judge Brett Kavanaugh: it doesn’t matter whether he’s guilty or innocent. He’s guilty.

Cox was appearing on Lawrence O’Donnell’s The Last Word on MSNBC when she made this shocking claim:

“We need to judge Brett Kavanaugh, not just by what he may or may not have done, but how he treats a woman’s pain. And that is something I’m going to be paying attention to on Monday. How does he respond to what’s happening. Whether or not he agrees that this happened with her, does he take her pain seriously? Do the people interrogating her pain take her pain seriously? Now, I’ll give you a spoiler alert, I don’t think Brett Kavanaugh takes women’s pain very seriously, and I know that because of the decisions he’s made as a judge.”

This is a morally abhorrent statement. So if a woman falsely accuses a man of rape, we don’t judge him based on whether he actually raped her – we judge him based on whether he feels the pain of a person falsely accusing him of rape. The real question of the Duke lacrosse case, by this standard, wasn’t whether a stripper was actually raped – the question is whether the members of the Duke lacrosse team were sensitive to her feelings while she was falsely accusing them of rape.

That would be an insane statement enough. But Cox goes even further: she already knows that Kavanaugh won’t meet her standard of sympathy because he hasn’t decided cases how she likes on key “feminist” issues, presumably like abortion. Now, never mind that Kavanaugh hasn’t actually signaled that he’d be willing to overturn Roe v. Wade. Think about the underlying contention: we can tell whether you are a bad person by your level of sympathy for a rape accuser whom you believe is lying about you, and we can judge your level of sympathy by looking at your political decisions. The logic is simple: if you’re a person who disagrees with Ana Marie Cox, you can be slandered as a rapist, and any attempt to rebut such accusations will amount to a lack of sympathy.

This is Stalinist show trial stuff. It’s immoral and perverse. But presumably Cox knows that and doesn’t care. She knows, deep in her heart, that Kavanaugh is a bad man – and if he was just maligned as a rapist, that’s a merely secondary concern. It’s hard to come up with a more bad-faith approach to a serious allegation than that.

In honor of Comrade Booker of the Democratic Socialists, we advance this theme music to be played at the start of the show trial…

Tom Malinowski needs to quit lying to his donors.

Tom Malinowski needs to quit lying.

We all understand that he needs money.  Every candidate does.  But to use the confirmation of a United States Supreme Court Justice to get it is an injustice to his donors.  One of them was so pissed-off that he sent us the Malinowski campaign’s latest fundraising plea… the one in which he pretends that (1) the next Supreme Court nominee will be confirmed after the next Congress is seated in January 2019, and (2) that the United States House of Representatives has something to do with confirming Justices of the Supreme Court.

Hey Tommy, did you fail to pay attention to that lesson in your high school civics class?  The United States Senate, not the House of Representatives, confirms Justices of the Supreme Court.  Maybe you think you are running for a different office?

And here is another lie by Tom Malinowski… or his campaign (or both)…

“Big Money has been chipping away at the integrity of our elections at a breakneck pace since Supreme Court Justice Kennedy authored the decision on Citizens United. We risk an even bigger hit with Trump’s Supreme Court justice pick, Brett Kavanaugh… We can’t allow another Big Money justice get to the Supreme Court.”

Hey, it didn’t begin with Citizens United and Princeton University proved that!

In fact, every good-government group knows that the problem started decades before Citizens United.  They also know that BOTH political parties are funded by special interests looking out for number one. 

Tom Malinowski’s old boss – Hillary Rodham Clinton, Incorporated – could teach a master class at how to make government work for NUMBER ONE.  And like so many Democrats, she tried to play the game of saying she wasn’t taking money from corporate PACs, while taking millions from corporate leadership and lobbyists.  Even the Left called her out on it…

So quit the b.s. Tommy… nobody is more BIG MONEY than your old boss Hillary Clinton.  Stop spreading the fantasy that ending Citizens United is all that needs to be done.  That is a lie.  Tell us the truth about what YOU intend to do about ending BIG MONEY’s chokehold on Congress… and don’t raise money by inferring you will vote against Brett Kavanaugh.  Sheesh.