Moderates United

I do think there should be pretty wide latitude in allowing people to make claims–substantiable or not–against public officials. The alternative–allowing the unproven nature of the accusations to allow those in power to use their power to shut people up–I am even less comfortable than the current shit show.

In the interest of the more precise use of language, I would like to point out that a “porn star” is better described as a prostitute or gigolo who has done their job on camera.

Avennati (so?) represents a prostitute/stripper for hire, who wants more money.

And with regard to the new allegations: can we just stick with the vote Friday? It’s gone from the bad to the “do you really want to do this to yourselves Democrats”?

I know Sun Tzu said to never stop your enemy when they are making a mistake, but I think by now everyone who CAN figure out how insane and anti-American the Democrats have become has done so.

When you look at s Nazi flag, you represented an ideology that caused the unnatural deaths, through war, famine, and outright murder, of some 20 million people.

When you look at a Soviet flag you see repented an ideology that caused the unnatural deaths of some 100 million people.

When you see an American flag, you see represented the First Nation in human history which enshrined in its foundation the concept of universal human rights, and which was instrumental is n defeating the Nazis, and which remains, in the main, dedicated to the final defeat of the Communists, although it is hard to know when or how that may happen. We beat the Soviets, but the Chinese remain committed to their ideology of tyranny, oligarchy, and the repudiation of the right to do anything but conform.

And of course our nation is suffused with Communists calling for a reversal of everything promised and protected by the Constitution. But the fact that they feel the need to insult and burn our flag indicates it still stands for human decency and a belief in the power of ordinary people to grow and prosper, when given the freedom to do so.

https://www.mediaite.com/online/hearing-in-doubt-christine-fords-lawyer-rips-senate-plan-to-have-prosecutor-ask-questions-not-fair-and-respectful/

I can’t help but think that in the future people will ask, when a woman comes forward with an accusation, “is this a Christina Ford, or is she maybe actually telling the truth?”  Ford is creating, virtually singled-handedly, the category of the politically motivated liar.

I don’t believe her, and I don’t think anyone should believe her.  Serious people with nothing to hide don’t play all these games.  It’s a new demand, a new constraint, every single day.  If this really happened, she would be EAGER to get in front of Congress and tell her story any way she can.

It may be that some boy did what she alleges–I am inclined to think the story, itself, is true–but it was not Brett Kavanaugh.

They need to hold a vote on Thursday or Friday, and put an end to this ridiculous charade.

Ponder this: all of the people, male and female, who might be destined for the success which led to Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court, have very likely been surveilled covertly for at least the past five years or so.  It would not be hard to develop algorithms to determine who might be future movers and shakers.  Most high school parties will have as many cell phones as participants and through some combination of open mikes and computer software, very accurate recordings of every shot, every kiss, every lick, and every fuck can be made and stored.  The NSA may not know who will ultimately get ahead, but they can proactively record them all.

Fifteen years from now, if that person decides to try and buck the system, if they have EVER done anything wrong, evidence can be produced immediately.  It is most likely this process is in place now, and has been for some time.  Our system may very well operate on blackmail nearly entirely.  The net is simply getting wider and wider, to include substantially every waking moment spent within an arms length of your cell phone, which is to say substantially every waking (and sleeping) moment.

This thing would be quiet.  No one who is a victim of it would dare protest, for the very reason that they are plainly guilty.  Simple deals can be cut, in which relative compliance is bought for the price of silence; in which, in other words, our “leaders” prostitute themselves to unaccountable, invisible ghosts in the night, whose goals are unknown, whose activities are unknown, and who cannot be made answerable to anyone.

This is why the 4th Amendment exists.  There is nothing new under the sun, and no fundamental aspect of human nature has changed in the past 200 years.

I don’t know what the solution is, but as always, I hope to make a start by stating the problem clearly.

I meant to comment, and forgot, in the last post that New York, to take one example, has had many gangs, many gangsters, many mafias.  Over time, you have no doubt had rival Italian gangs, but you have also had Irish gangs, Jewish gangs, and now you have Russian gangs.

Self evidently, they fight with one another.

But to the point, if you hate the Italians, the Russians do not become saints because they are killing Italians.  It’s a fight over stuff and territory, and the geopolitics of gangsterism do not change when the people pursuing said politics still think like gangsters.

After World War 2, the Russian gangsters simply said “Eastern Europe belongs to us.  If you don’t like it, invade us.”  And just like that, the Russian Empire was expanded, the Russian gangsters had more power over more people, more potential to inspire terror, more things to steal, more swagger to their walks.

Very, very few people see with their own eyes.  It is not a particularly difficult thing to do, but we are trained from an early age to see through the eyes of those who want to speak for us, through the eyes of “experts” who, like all human beings, can be corrupted in many ways, not least through vanity, money, and complacency.

Most of these “Anti”fa rallies have people with Communist flags.  Why?  These kids have been taught that the Communists opposed the Fascists. Logically, then, anyone who opposes Fascists must be good.

But in reality it was AMERICA and Britain which opposed the Fascists.  Liberal, “capitalistic” democracies.  We are the ones who opened up a second front, enabling the Soviets to get their legs and push back.  We are the ones who loaned them the money, and sent them the equipment, which kept them in the war.  They are the ones who betrayed us when the war was over.

People forget that Hitler and Stalin signed a secret buddy pact.  Stalin was a huge admirer of Hitler.  He had a man crush on him.  He refused to believe it when Hitler invaded, and ordered his troops to ignore what he was quite sure was a fake invasion.  This cost the Soviet Union dearly, and it was based solely on Stalin trusting Hitler, who he regarded as a fellow, if you will pardon me using the term, Mensch.  He thought they were two peas out of the same pod, both saving the world, albeit in slightly different ways.

They split up Poland.  People remember–those who remember anything at all, which is a decreasing number–that Hitler invaded Poland.  They forget that the Soviets, imitating the Nazis from the east, invaded at the same time.  They did the same things.  They executed political prisoners and stole peoples stuff.

The Nazis built many of their death camps in Poland, so they killed more people outright, but the Soviets committed the Katyn Woods massacre of the intelligentsia of Poland.

Who opposed both of these regimes?  The people who marched behind American and British flags.  The people who embodied everything all totalitarians hate.

It is a mark of our times that these imbeciles burn the American flag, and fly the Soviet one.  We were the good guys.  This is absolutely, categorically unambiguous, even if no doubt people who want one standard for their people, and another for everyone else, can truthfully point to places where we fell short of our ideals.  Of course we did.  All men fall short.

But the difference is that in America we always try to learn, and to do better.  We allow criticism.  For the Soviets, SUCCESS still meant mass death, and the abolition of all human rights, including the right not to be executed for saying something unfashionable.

We are breeding a generation of morbid creatures who know nothing, but consider themselves unique and misunderstood geniuses.  It is an ugly sight to behold.  This is how Communism started in the first place: emotionally detached eggheads with vast underground reservoirs of hate, violence, and intolerance.

I’m no lawyer, but I have long had the vague understanding that slander could legally be argued to begin with a claim which cannot be proven by the accuser, or disproven by the accused.  It is something which is manifestly injurious, which cannot be resolved by the person being attacked by any means other than a protestation of innocence, which may or may not be believed, which may or may not help.

Put another way, injury can be done to innocent people, for which there is no legal recourse.  This is not a satisfactory state of affairs. I grant that for public officials the standards may need to be a bit different, but not so different that anyone can say anything any time without any evidence, and without any consequence, at least as far as things like confirmation–which deal directly with character–are concerned.

Kavanaugh did not deserve this.  He may not be the solid conservative I want, but he is certainly qualified for the job, and did nothing to warrant being run through the ringer.

It would likely be very politically imprudent but I wonder if Kavanaugh could sue Ford for defamation of character.  That used to be a thing, back when all sides believed there WAS such a thing as character, and back when half the populace was not being driven into hysterical rages by a relentlessly mendacious and hyperpartisan media.

I’m thinking of a country song “That’s my story”  He keeps saying “I ain’t got a witness, and you know I can’t prove it, but that’s my story, and I’m sticking to it.”  And of course, he is lying to her, as she proves.

If you don’t have a witness, in our court system, absent forensic or other evidence, you have no case.  You cannot prosecute a crime.

I read a second accuser has come forward, one who makes an allegation with no witnesses, despite the event allegedly happening at a crowded party.

Here is the thing: as long as the Democrats can find people willing to prostitute their credibility to further Leftist aims, this thing will never, ever end.

The proper response to their continuing to lower the bar for character assassination is to raise it.

How is this for a standard: If an account of an alleged event is not backed by sufficient evidence that a prosecutor could bring a case, then it should be rejected as anecdotal, unsubstantiated slander.  It should not even be allowed into the Senate, if it can’t pass a basic sniff test.  You can’t stop the media from running with everything, and doing what they do, which is confuse the shit out of everybody and throw all dissidents and free thinkers under the bus at every opportunity.

But we can prevent future shit shows by putting this policy in place. 

As I think about it, the strongest objection to be made to Ford’s claims is that she has no female supporters who knew both her and Kavanaugh back then.  Kavanaugh has 75 women asserting he is a good guy, and that he never did that sort of thing.  They are asserting that, as women, they believe him.  The views of these women should count, too.

It is no doubt true that women often don’t report unwanted sexual advances–which is really more or less what this was, as on her own account it was not rape, a fact which the news media insists on blurring by continually calling it a “sexual assault” which by their definition would be amply met by pinching a woman’s ass, which was quite a different animal 36 years ago (1982)–but they DO tell their friends.  There is nothing major that happens to any woman that, in nearly all cases, she does not immediately tell to a friend.  This is my view, from the outside looking in, but as someone who has had many female friends over the years.

All the women, seemingly, who knew both are on Kavanaugh’s side.  None of the women are on hers.  She has a hard Left, Soros funded lawyer on her side.  She apparently has the notes of a psychotherapist.  But she has no one willing to back her in her story, which she cannot even locate at a place, or a specific time. 

And the people she has claimed could corroborate her story have all said they remember nothing.

I would contrast this with Bill Clinton’s rape of Juanita Broaddrick.  She told several friends immediately.  They remembered it and backed her.  But she didn’t report it.  Her story only came out after the Paula Jones (I think it was) lawsuit, and I think she only testified in response to a subpoena.  And it is worth noting, too, that Broaddrick was a DEMOCRAT.  She was working on the Clinton campaign.  She was trying to help him get elected.

Ford, obviously, is trying to derail the nomination of a good man because he is not an unhinged Leftist.  The Democrats said they would oppose ANY nominee, and it is not hard to see Ford’s emergence after Spartacus failed as a fallback plan.  The same thing would be done to Mother Teresa.  It would be done to Gandhi if he did not fit their ideological agenda.

Dear God, can we please find a way to end this madness?