• Keyden Smith-Herold

The Politicization of The Judiciary — The Kavanaugh Hearing Analysis

Photo: Getty/AP

“You have replaced ‘advise and consent’ with ‘search and destroy’”

On Thursday, the two hearings of Judge Brett Kavanaugh and the woman who accuses him of sexual assault, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford were held. It was a complete whirlwind of an event, with several facts swirling around the media.

Dr. Ford began with her hearing that lasted a few hours. She said that she is 100% sure that her accusations against Judge Kavanaugh are true. Ford accuses Kavanaugh of attempted rape at a high school gathering, when she was 15 and he was 17. Ford states that this alleged event had haunted her periodically throughout her adult life.

The Republican Senators yielded all their questions directed toward Ford to a former sex crimes prosecutor from New York, Rachael Mitchell. The only substantive fact Mitchell was able to gather was that Ford is not as scared to fly on an airplane, contrary to statements previously made before this hearing. It was discovered that Ford actually travels fairly often on a plane, for both business and recreational reasons.

When it came time for Judge Kavanaugh’s statement, he said “I never sexually assaulted anyone. Not in high school. Not in college, not ever,”... “You may defeat me in the final vote, but you'll never get me to quit. Never.” Kavanaugh also noted that this event “is a circus” and that “The consequences will extend long past my nomination,”... “I fear that the whole country will reap the whirlwind.” Kavanaugh was stern in his opening statement, also declaring that this event is “a national disgrace”, and that the Democratic Senators “have replaced ‘advise and consent’ with ‘search and destroy’”.

The big question is who do we believe? Let’s examine the facts that we know:

Senator Dianne Feinstein was given this information in late July. She held onto the information about the alleged assault for 6 weeks. 6 weeks. This information was not brought up in the many Judiciary hearings the committee had with Judge Kavanaugh, nor was it brought up in his hearings a few weeks ago.

This information was simply dropped like a nuclear bomb, the day before his scheduled vote. The Democrats went against Dr. Ford’s wishes of confidentiality by holding this information for so long, causing her letter to be leaked to the press— which then caused her to go public.

In August, while Sen. Feinstein was holding this letter in secret, Dr. Ford proceeded to get an attorney, (one of them was recommended by Sen. Feinstein’s office) and took a polygraph test.

If Dr. Ford was not prepared to go public, then why did submit to a polygraph test? Why did she hire attorneys?

When asked in the hearing, Dr. Ford could not remember the exact date when she took her polygraph test, she couldn’t remember if she was even being recorded during her polygraph test, and she couldn’t explicitly state who was paying for her polygraph test.

On top of that, polygraph tests are inadmissible in court and are scientifically inaccurate. Moreover, there were only 2 questions asked during the polygraph test: “Is any part of your statement false?” and 2. “Did you make up any part of your statement?”. Dr. Ford’s testimony made is appear as if she was barraged with questions, but the exact opposite is true.

It was also brought to attention that Dr. Ford revealed information about this alleged incident to her therapist and husband at a counseling session in 2012. But, she couldn’t remember in the hearing exactly when or if she even handed her therapy notes over to a reporter, and we do not have the exact dates on when this session was.

Pertaining to the event itself: Dr. Ford says that there were 4 boys at the house, but all 4 people allegedly at the event have recalled no such event and/or deny it ever happened. Dr. Ford says that her friend Leland Keyser was there, but Keyser states that she does not know Kavanaugh and that she was not at this described event.

The boy who was allegedly in the room with Dr. Ford and Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, completely denies the event, and refuses to speak to the press. Dr. Ford said that the event occurred close to the ‘Columbia Country Club’, but Judge Kavanaugh says he never lived close to that country club.

All the alleged witnesses completely refute her claims. This simply does not help Dr. Ford’s testimony.

Ford doesn’t remember when it happened, where it happened, what time it happened, how she got there, and how she left. There are serious holes in her story. But, the Democrats fail to mention or acknowledge any of this — they only care about the apparent emotion shown by Dr. Ford.

Additionally, there are 3 specific times where Dr. Ford seemed to contradict herself:

1. She claimed to have locked herself in the bathroom after escaping the bedroom, but she remembers Kavanaugh and Judge “Ping-ponging down the stairs”. “Ping-pong” is a visual description.

2. Ford stated that she can draw a floorplan of the house where the attack occurred, but she doesn’t remember where it happened or who’s house it was.

3. She said that is was not loud in the living room, but no one could hear her scream from the bedroom. Was it because the music coming from the bedroom was too loud? Someone should have asked her to elaborate on this information, as it is crucial to understanding this incident more clearly.

The FBI Lie:

The Democrats brought up, countless times, that this incident should be investigated by the FBI, and Kavanaugh should have called for it. Do they seriously expect a person who believes they are innocent to call for an investigation of themselves?

On top of that, there were 6 different FBI background checks on Kavanaugh over the years. The Democrats, as stated above, had 6 weeks to either ask questions pertaining to this allegation, or call for an investigation.

Moreover, the FBI doesn’t make the final legal decision, they only flag what should be looked at more clearly. The information would go right back to the judiciary committee, the same body that heard these testimonies to begin with. Another point is that this alleged incident is most likely out of the FBI’s jurisdiction— it is not an alleged federal crime.

Do not be fooled. This is a partisan hit job— a complete and utter smear:

This does not mean Dr. Ford is lying. She may very well have been sexually assaulted, and she is obviously messed up from her situation. At the same time, this does not mean that the person who did it was Kavanaugh. There is simply no substantive evidence that it was Kavanaugh. There is absolutely no corroboration.

Democrats simply have nothing, so they proceeded to question Kavanaugh on high school drinking and silly yearbook phrases. Asking these types of questions is completely inappropriate and irrelevant to a hearing on alleged sexual assault.

Democrats called out Kavanaugh for having a bad temper, but who wouldn’t be mad after being the victim of a complete character assassination?

Today was supposed to be about facts and evidence, but instead, it was simply about emotion. The democrats and leftists know that there is no evidence that Kavanaugh did anything — it is complete hearsay. But that still does not stop women from screaming “believe her” in the streets, or for Senators to call Kavanaugh “evil”. We simply do not have enough credible evidence that Kavanaugh did anything. Believing the accuser simply because she is a woman is complete nonsense and degrades our social fabric.

At the end of the day, this is all about Roe v. Wade and not wanting to give President Trump another Supreme Court win. People are afraid that they won’t be able to have their execrable abortions anymore— but that isn’t how the supreme court works. They do not simply revisit cases without certiorari being granted first.

What happened to the days of Sandra Day O'Connor, Antonin Scalia, and Anthony M. Kennedy when they were confirmed unanimously? Members of congress should be confirming nominees who they know are qualified, regardless of differences on personal ideology.

Even aside from the Judiciary, Senators should be voting on what is best for their constituents, but instead they vote based off of their own predilections and prejudices.

No one is safe if we live in a country where simply “believing” the accuser without evidence is enough to derail and destroy someone and their life forever. We need substantive evidence— never hearsay.

We are completely throwing out the presumption of innocence. It’s no longer innocent until proven guilty— it’s exactly the opposite. Remember the little statement “Trust but Verify”? That’s out of the window.

The politicization of the Judiciary needs to stop, or this country will be in serious trouble. This kind of behavior from the left is unacceptable is not what the founding fathers intended when they established this government.


Keyden Smith-Herold is the Editor-in-Chief of The Daily Analytical, (dailyanalytical.com) a brand new publication.