“This is a circus. It’s a national disgrace. And from my standpoint, as a black American, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the US Senate rather than hung from a tree.” —Clarence Thomas, in answer to the Democrats’ racist accusations against him—in order to punish a black man for not pursuing his suppositious Democrat masters’ anti-Constitution agenda—based upon the uncorroborated accusations of Anita Hill, who followed Thomas to a second job after Thomas’alleged sexual advances were to have taken place (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZURHD5BU1o8)
“This confirmation process has become a national disgrace. . . . [Y]ou have replaced advise and consent with search and destroy. . . . You sowed the wind for decades to come. I fear that the whole country will reap the whirlwind. . . . This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election. . . . Revenge on behalf of the Clintons. . . . This is a circus. The consequences will extend long past my nomination. . . . This grotesque and coordinated character assassination will dissuade competent and good people, of all political persuasions, from serving our country.” —Brett Kavanaugh, defending his good name against the Democrats’ smears—intended to block his nomination for being a Constitutional textualist—based upon uncorroborated allegations by those who have accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct despite their own witnesses denying it occurred (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRmGxgxMhO4)
“A man’s life is in tatters, a man’s life is shattered. His wife is shattered—his daughters who are beautiful, incredible young kids. . . . They destroy people, these are really evil people. Guilty until proven innocent—that’s very dangerous for our country.” President Donald Trump, explaining why Democrats endanger America’s free republic (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4peOU7TNP4)
Down the Memory Hole: The Orwellian Left’s Google-esque Campaign of Organized Forgetting
George Santayana once said, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” As the nation relives—through Brett Kavanaugh’s character assassination—Clarence Thomas’ high-tech lynching by Democrats, it has become obvious that the Democrats are hoping that America has forgotten the Democrat Party’s historic role as the party of lynchings and Jim Crow as well as our love of being innocent until proven guilty.
We all know that justice delayed is justice denied, and the latest delay, orchestrated by Democrats in cahoots with Jeff Flake, is yet a seventh Federal Bureau of Investigation background check. An important lesson learned during the Thomas hearings was taught to us by then-Senator Joe Biden; lest the lesson be lost down an Orwellian Leftwing memory hole, here is the lesson: FBI background checks never reach conclusions (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZdaVTJ_cHg): “The reason why we cannot rely on the FBI report—you wouldn’t like it if we did, because it is inconclusive. They say, ‘he said, she said, and they said.’ Period. . . . So when people wave an FBI report before you, understand they do not, they do not, they do not reach conclusions. . . . They do not make recommendations!” stated Biden emphatically. So, with regard to Brett Kavanaugh, a new background check will only collect already-known accusations. And no conclusions will ensue.
Once the Political Purpose Has Been Served, the Accusers Always Drop the Charges
There is a contemporary legend, involving Lyndon Baines Johnson, about how LBJ wanted to accuse his political opponent, in a Texas election, of bestiality. A political aide said to Johnson, “We can’t do that, Lyndon, there’s absolutely no proof that he’s a pig-f***er.” To which LBJ countered, “I know that, I just want to hear him deny it.”
Anyone who witnessed the Thomas hearings, in 1991, can see that the Kavanaugh accusations are from the same page of the same Democrat playbook. The same kinds of sexual allegations, involving multiple women for good measure, were also used against presidential candidate Herman Cain (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Cain) and senatorial candidate Judge Roy Moore (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Moore). In Cain’s and Moore’s cases, the accusers summarily vanished after Cain’s suspension of his campaign and Moore’s electoral loss. This happened because the charges were never true; the Democrats just wanted to hear their opponents deny them.
“Don’t Be Evil” & “Democracy Dies in Darkness”: Mottos the Left Does Not Really Mean
Here is how presidential elections work: The people elect whom they want to be president, and that president makes appointments on behalf of We the People, as our duly-elected representative—the only representative elected nationwide by the sovereign states. But democracy does, indeed, die in darkness. And a death in darkness of America’s free democratic republic has become the goal of the Democrat Party, which is why the Democrats are seeking to overthrow a duly-elected President of the United States, largely by undemocratic means and based largely on the false propaganda published by Democrat-owned media. All of this has made Brett Kavanaugh the target of a royal smear job, “courtesy” of the Democrats, because the Democrats are seeking to block Trump’s restoration of the Constitution and the Rule of Law, even by means of opposing his nominations to the Supreme Court and other posts.
One major propaganda outlet for the Democrats, The Washington Post, claims to be a guardian of freedom and democracy; however, The Washington Post’s use of the motto “Democracy dies in darkness” (https://thehill.com/homenews/media/320619-the-washington-post-democracy-dies-in-darkness) makes an ironic statement at best, akin to the claim of the Soviet Union’s propaganda newspaper, Pravda, that it would always tell its readers the truth (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Pravda); Pravda is Russian for “Truth.” And the truth is this: Kavanaugh’s record of enforcing the Constitution and the Rule of Law frightens the Left, since its ability to change America has largely depended upon having Leftwing jurists legislate from the bench.
Interestingly, Google has also seen fit to change its longstanding motto (https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393), from “Don’t be evil” to “Do the right thing.” Evil doings—such as censoring Internet content by guaranteeing a 96-to-4 ratio of favorable-to-unfavorable search results involving Donald Trump—lying by algorithm, as it were—are now approved behavior at Google, so long as such deeds are the “right thing” to do to help the Left. One especially important subject wherein the results were politically skewed in an anti-Trump direction was Trump’s Travel Ban (https://www.mrctv.org/blog/google-employees-sought-manipulate-search-results-according-report). The problem with such bad behavior is this: Many people rely on Google to provide truthful, unbiased information that has not been rigged in any way; if Google is actively manipulating search results to advance a Leftist political ideology, then it has rendered itself invalid as a trusted source of information retrieval. Google has become no better than an Orwellian Ministry of Truth, deciding what information to make available and what to hide, in order to ensure the success of the [Democrat] Party. With regard to Brett Kavanaugh, we can easily determine the negative overall tone with regard to Trump’s nominee. Just typing “Brett Kavanaugh” into Google’s search engine reveals the anti-Kavanaugh bias instantly; one of the first articles to come up is one from The Atlantic (https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/kavanaugh-confirmation/571021/) entitled “Kavanaugh Bears the Burden of Proof.” It is a very well-written and persuasive piece of rhetoric that argues against the American Constitutional principle of Innocent Until Proven Guilty: “The only plausible defense now for him [Kavanaugh] is self-exculpation on the facts. And in this endeavor, Kavanaugh [the accused] himself bears the burden of proof [rather than the accuser]. This sounds like unjust ground to stake out in a society in which the accused is innocent until proven guilty. . . . The injustice, in fact, is largely optical.” The Atlantic ranks high in Google searches only because it is a reliable proponent of Leftist positions, not because it is a democratically popular media site; many other sites are more valued for their information—Breitbart News, CNS News, and Gateway Pundit, for example—but their voices and opinions, at this writing, are muted or silenced by Google’s algorithm, to keep them from democratically influencing the opinions of voters. In this way, Google reshapes the American landscape of ideas and, along with it, the choices voters make—all according to the Leftist tradition of going around true democratic methodology, while lying to say they protect democracy, so it will not die in darkness. Perhaps the biggest Big Lie out there is the very name of the Democrat Party.
Here is how Google’s code of conduct used to read before they swore allegiance to the evil ways of the Democrat Party (https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393): “‘Don’t be evil.’ Googlers generally apply those words to how we serve our users. But ‘Don’t be evil’ is much more than that. Yes, it’s about providing our users unbiased access to information, focusing on their needs and giving them the best products and services that we can.”
Here is how Google’s code of conduct reads now (https://gizmodo.com/google-removes-nearly-all-mentions-of-dont-be-evil-from-1826153393): “The Google Code of Conduct is one of the ways we put Google’s values into practice. . . . We set the bar that high for practical as well as aspirational reasons.”
“Don’t be evil” would be a good motto for Google and other search engines to actually abide by, but that ship seems to have sailed. Allum Bokhari of Breitbart News reports the following, with regard to Twitter’s search engine (https://www.breitbart.com/tech/2018/09/30/kill-kavanaugh-tops-twitter-search-and-hashtag-suggestions/): “Typing ‘kill’ into Twitter’s search function currently returns a shocking result at the top of its search suggestions: ‘#KillKavanaugh.’ It’s also currently the third autocompleted suggestion in searches for ‘ki’ and the fourth suggestion in searches for ‘k’ as of this writing.” While this is tolerated behavior for Leftists, it is noted that conservatives are banned for simply for opposing the Left, as James Woods did recently (https://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2018/09/24/james-woods-blasts-jack-dorsey-over-truly-egregious-twitter-ban-this-is-about-an-american-being-silenced/ ).
Witch-Hunting, from Proctor to Kavanaugh: After Three Centuries, Evil Women Still Command Attention
The Kavanaugh case has much in common with that of the Salem Witch Trial of John Proctor. According to the Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Proctor_(Salem_witch_trials)#Accusations_and_trial), “Although Abigail Williams was John Proctor’s chief accuser, he was also named by Mary Walcott, who stated he tried to choke her and by his former servant Mary Warren on 21 April . Warren told magistrates that Proctor had beaten her for putting up a prayer bill before forcing her to touch the Devil’s Book. Further allegations of an increasingly salacious nature followed. Proctor continued to challenge the veracity of spectral evidence and the validity of the Court of Oyer and Terminer [the Court of Hearing and Determining] (say OH YAY AND TEHR MEE NAY), which led to a petition signed by 32 neighbors in his favor. The signatories stated that Proctor had lived a ‘Christian life in his family and was ever ready to help such as they stood in need.’ The Proctors were tried on 5 August 1692, found guilty, and sentenced to death by hanging.” Thus, regardless of Proctor’s lifetime of good behavior, his accusers were believed without any corroborating evidence, simply because the accusers seemed so sincere, as is often the case with women who lie under oath. Since John Proctor could not prove he did not do something, he was sentenced to death by hanging. John Proctor was killed, because—as so many Democrats have insisted—girls and women “deserve to be believed!” But, in reality, women are no better or worse than men.
In Kavanaugh’s own “witch trial” (https://www.breitbart.com/news/women-supporting-kavanaugh-find-themselves-in-storms-center/), an honorable man has found support among lifelong friends who all have reported that Kavanaugh has led a good and moral life. “It started as a series of phone calls among old high-school friends and ended up embroiling 65 women in the firestorm over a sexual assault allegation that could shape the Supreme Court. In a matter of hours, they all signed onto a letter rallying behind the high court nominee and their high school friend Brett Kavanaugh as someone who ‘has always treated women with decency and respect.’” Why Kavanaugh’s women do not deserve to be believed, per the Democrats’ own creed that women deserve to be believed, is not known.
Patterns of Evidence
The truth is that the behavior patterns established early in life are not easily departed from. If it were true that Kavanaugh had been predatory of women in high school, then how is it that he so easily left that behavior behind to morph into a man whose reputation with women is sterling? A family man, revered by his wife and daughters? A man whose coaching of girls’ basketball teams is highly respected? (It is a shame that Kavanaugh’s bullying at the hands of corrupt Democrat women may end up putting an end to his coaching of girls’ basketball.)
Perhaps Christine Blasey Ford is a bully, cut from the same cloth as those women who caused the unjust death of John Proctor. Many defenders of Brett Kavanaugh have found it interesting that Christine Blasey Ford’s Rate My Professors web page was wiped of all student reviews once she came forward to accuse Kavanaugh. Is it not reasonable to suppose that, if Ford had received good ratings, the deletion of all her student reviews would have been unnecessary? Could the professor be hiding something that could ruin her credibility as an accuser of sexual misconduct? Ray Fava writes the following (https://noqreport.com/2018/09/18/christine-blasey-fords-rate-professors-conveniently-blank/): “As soon as Christine Blasey Ford went on the record, it became known that she was a professor in the field of psychology at the Palo Alto University. . . . Recent reports circulated on Twitter and Facebook of how students brutalized Professor Ford in their reviews.” At a minimum, Ford must have been unfair to her students. This would explain why her student reviews were deleted. So, why must we assume that Professor Ford was fair with Brett Kavanaugh? She is the accuser, so the burden of proof rightly lies with her, and not the accused.
Kavanough’s Accusers & the Issue of Memory Recovery
Ford and Ramirez are women who have issues with memory gaps (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2018/09/25/kavanaugh-accusers-ford-ramirez-admit-memory-gaps-what-experts-say/1408498002/). Therefore, the question must be asked as to whether or not the suppressed memories recovered by these women are valid.
With regard to Christine Ford, Austin Lewis shares these comments (https://conservativedailypost.com/christine-ford-claims-designed-for-romney-appointees/): “Some . . . have suggested that her sudden revelation of sexual assault in 2012 may not be evidence of the veracity of her claims, as those on the left seem to believe. Rather, they have pointed to evidence that seems to indicate her sudden recovery of those memories could have been spurred on by the Mitt Romney campaign, and names it mentioned for the United States Supreme Court. Were these claims planned to derail a Romney appointee? The facts are too suspicious to be completely ignored.” Kavanaugh has been on the lists of possible nominees to the Supreme Court for most Republicans ever since the Romney campaign designated Kavanaugh as a top contender in 2012.
When it comes to Deborah Ramirez, it is well-known that she was assisted in recovering her memory of sexual assault by people motivated to make it true that it was Brett Kavanaugh (https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/24/yes-lets-see-emails-led-deborah-ramirezs-accusation-kavanaugh/). It is also true that recovered memories tend to be valid when they occur spontaneously, spurred by something in the environment when the place of trauma is revisited, for example, or when the perpetrator is encountered again and says or does something to jar the victim’s memory. When memory recovery is assisted, however, the recovered memories are often not valid memories, which is why recovered memories tend not to be admissible in a court of law.
According to the Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recovered-memory_therapy), Recovered Memory Therapy “does not refer to a specific, recognized treatment method, but rather [to] several controversial and/or unproven interviewing techniques, such as hypnosis and guided-imagery, and the use of sedative-hypnotic drugs, which are presently rarely used in the responsible treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder and other dissociative disorders. . . . The term is not listed in DSM-IV [Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition] nor is it recommended by mainstream ethical and professional mental health associations.”
In light of the problems with so-called “recovered memories,” the issue of False Memory Syndrome (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_memory_syndrome) arises: “False memories may be the result of recovered memory therapy, a term also defined by the F[alse] M[emory] S[yndrome] F[oundation] in the early 1990s, which describes a range of therapy methods that are prone to creating confabulations [memory errors defined as fabricated, distorted, or misinterpreted memories about oneself or the world]. . . . False memory syndrome is a condition in which a person’s identity and interpersonal relationships center on a memory of a traumatic experience that is objectively false but that the person strongly believes occurred.” The term False Memory Syndrome (FMS) is not addressed in the DSM-IV, owing to the fact that Recovered Memory Therapy (RMT) is likewise not listed.
Back to Basics: Even the Witnesses Named by Kavanaugh’s Accusers Sided with Kavanaugh
After all the explanations have been aired, however, with regard to alleged suppressed memories and their recovery, the preëminent fact remains this: Every single witness named by Kavanaugh’s accusers has sided with Brett Kavanaugh (https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/24/every-witness-named-kavanaughs-accusers-sides-kavanaugh/). Democrats May like saying that women deserve to be believed; but Democrats patently choose to disbelieve all of the women who testify that the pattern of Kavanaugh’s life proves his goodness (https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/25/nolte-believe-all-women-except-kavanaughs-witnesses-apparently/).
Innocent Until Proven Guilty Is the Proper Legal & Moral Standard: America’s Secular Bible Says So
It has become obvious to many Americans, since the election of Donald Trump, that the Democrat Party has become a hardcore socialist enterprise that seeks to destroy individual rights and the presumption of innocence. Although President Trump is well-known for having a bombastic style on the stump, he has actually been pretty careful as president only to make claims that are credible. Recently, at a rally in West Virginia, on September 29, 2018, Trump made the following assertions (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lifJAWZm5nE): “The Democrat Party is radical socialism . . . and open borders. It’s now called . . . the party of crime. . . . You see the meanness, the nastiness; they don’t care who they hurt, who they have to run over to get power and control [such as the wife and young daughters of Brett Kavanaugh and the basketball girls Kavanaugh coaches].”
It has been said of the US Constitution that it is America’s secular Bible. As such, its principles work to inform the entire culture. Innocent Until Proven Guilty is not only a principle used in America’s law courts, it also guides schools, employers, and even families in how they practice fairness. It would be a sad day in America if this cultural standard were to change, for, if we are to be judged guilty by accusation, then We the People are all guilty all of the time. Thus, the cautionary words of former US Attorney Joe DiGenova (https://www.breitbart.com/radio/2018/09/28/joe-digenova-kavanaugh-inquisition-is-our-future-with-democrats-in-power/) must be heeded: “This is the future of our country if the Democrats get control of the House and Senate. They are vile people. There is nothing good anymore to be said about the Democratic Party. They have eschewed all integrity [and] honesty in pursuit of power. They are an ugly people, and they need to be beaten down politically and defeated.” Friedrich Nietzsche famously wrote, “Beware that, when fighting monsters, you yourself do not become a monster.” The Democrats may have been fighting false monsters, but, by doing so, they have become real monsters all the same.
Who Is Paul Dowling?
Paul Dowling is an American patriot whose mission is to educate and enlighten his fellow citizens about the correct principles for facilitating a life of freedom and a culture based upon the Golden Rule. Paul believes that individual freedom and minority rights are more important than majority rule and, therefore, he values the fact that America was not founded as a democracy, but as a republic. (In fact, the word “democracy” is nowhere to be found within the text of the US Constitution.) Paul has written a book on the Constitution, explaining the republican values on which it is based and how they protect against the dangers of a strictly majoritarian system of governance. The book is called Keeping a Free Republic: Learning the Blueprint for Liberty in the Constitution & the Bill of Rights. (It is on sale at Amazon, for $6.25 in paperback and $0.99 as a Kindle download: https://www.amazon.com/Keeping-Free-Republic-Blueprint-Constitution/dp/1724679082/ref=sr_1_1_twi_pap_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1536890421&sr=8-1&keywords=keeping+a+free+republic.)