Editor’s note: Brett Kavanaugh remained Topic One for our audience as the Senate moved toward a 50-48 vote Saturday to confirm him to the Supreme Court. We’re turning over this space again to your views. Don’t forget to write us at [email protected]—Ken McIntyre
Dear Daily Signal: Where would we be without The Daily Signal and The Heritage Foundation? Your coverage on the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court is so refreshing.
Regardless of party, where is Christine Blasey Ford’s evidence? She plays games. She is a moving butterfly.
The #MeToo movement is a great awareness, not a fabrication ground.
In the 1990s, I worked in an engineering department where two women despised our boss. OK, he told corny jokes. Strictly on personality, I watched them gain his trust, get into his email.
I saw one woman go in and type sexual memos, to get him removed. With tears, fabrication, and now “evidence,” Vince was terminated.
They did a happy dance, high five and invited colluders for drinks. Meanwhile, clueless, naive Vince still did not really process the setup.
New to this A-class company, I watched the very perps giving hugs of condolences, acting puzzled. He bought it. At 25, my head hung low.
I take #MeToo with strong evidence, despite drunken boys trespassing in college.
Thankfully not a big drinker, I get furious and, though small, have taken karate. Also, I never dressed immodestly or sent any wrong signals. As a mother of two young men, I raised them to be careful about #girlpower.
I’m very grateful for The Daily Signal.—Vicki P. Maguire, Charleston, S.C.
— AmericaFirst ????? ? (@danco_1830) October 3, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: Regarding Rachel del Guidice’s report, “NBC Airs Interview With Julie Swetnick Without Corroborating Her Story”: They really needed to delay the investigation a few more days to investigate Kavanaugh’s traffic tickets. And then a few more days to investigate whether he cheated on any his girlfriends. And then, and I am indignant about this, delay it many more days to see how much saturated fat he ate when he was 16 years old. Peace out.—Joey Smith
Was Judge Kavanaugh ever given a ticket for speeding, jaywalking, parking, or any other traffic offense? Did he ever neglect doing any of his household chores? Did he ever glance at the cover of Hustler magazine?
Did he ever tell any of his teachers, beginning with kindergarten, that the dog ate his homework? Was his breath fresh when he first kissed a girl, including his mother?
All it takes is a little imagination to stall the investigation until No. 44’s dream of being our dictator for life comes true by Senate acclamation on some distant future Ides of March.—George Thompson
I heard that when Kavanaugh was in fourth grade he lied about brushing his teeth before bed. He even wet his toothbrush to “deceive” his mother. We cannot let this psychopath on SCOTUS, he’s clearly a liar. He even lied to his own mother.
Give me a break.—Teresa Barrett
This really takes the cake. Air an interview that is totally uncorroborated? Why does NBC still have a broadcast license?
It’s time for the FCC to require all news-related programming to be corroborated and fact-checked and unbiased before aired. That includes the nightly news. If they can’t do so, then it’s time they get out of broadcasting voluntarily or by force.
We the people are sick and tired of seeing hatchet jobs from the likes of George Stephanopoulos and his partisan associates on all the networks. Whether these networks have a liberal or conservative slant, it is not their right to tell anything but the unvarnished truth and leave it up to the viewers to decide. We don’t need to be spoon-fed their slanted garbage.—R. Jeffrey Savlov, Florida
— Gary (@gds44) October 4, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: Thank you to Ken McIntyre for his commentary on NBC News and Julie Swetnick’s story (“I Was a Crime Reporter in Maryland in the Early ’80s. I Never Heard of Teen Gang-Rape Parties“). I’m writing this to extend a “warm fuzzy” to him for writing the piece.
In May 1969, Charlene Brandt and I were married. She had been editor of the college newspaper at Mills College in Oakland, Calif., and took a master’s degree in Journalism at Columbia University.
In Charlene’s graduating class were many who eventually rose to the top in journalism; she instead settled down with me, and we had five children together.
But she was a journalist and became a stringer for the local newspaper in southern Arizona, where we lived for 17 years. We spoke often about the descent of journalism in America from the high standards she was taught at Columbia.
She died of brain cancer (the same type that killed Sen. McCain) in July 2010, after 41-plus years together. I have watched with considerable alarm the continued descent of journalistic standards at network TV and chain newspapers in the time since.
My own career track was as an electrical engineer and applied mathematician. I retired in 2014 in Texas and moved in autumn 2016 to Virginia. Two of my five children live in the Washington D.C., metroplex.
For what it’s worth, I conjecture that Christine Blasey Ford’s recollection is the result of some self-hypnosis on her part, for it smacks of delusion. There’s little doubt that she believes that delusion as though it were reality.
That would make it very difficult to indict her, never mind convict her, for lying. The behavior of some Democratic Party leaders (senators primarily, in this instance) in this imbroglio is another matter. I’m repulsed.—Laird Taylor, Warrenton, Va.
I loved Ken McIntyre’s article about the alleged teen gang-rape parties, and thank him for writing it.
Why did Julie Swetnick keep going to these parties she describes? Boys in their mid-teens, in my opinion, aren’t as sexually “smart” as girls at that age.
Boys are thinking about sports and perhaps drinking. Girls, in my opinion (I had two daughters), are starting to notice the opposite sex, are physically developing, and so on. They can be very devious when it comes to boys.
Girls are hormonal. If you have raised girls, you will understand. In my opinion, Ms. Swetnick’s hormones and imagination were very confused and overactive. Just saying and wondering.—Irene Chavez Murphy, Arizona
I think that what the news media has done to Kavanaugh is a travesty. Newspapers are willing to print unsubstantiated gossip from anyone just for the publicity.
Kavanaugh should sue every one of his accusers for everything they have or will ever have. And then they should put out an apology through the newspapers.
Harvard has become such a liberal school that I believe they should lose their standing. Colleges should teach, not instill their professors’ political beliefs. They should teach both sides and let students reach their own conclusions.—Roman Mireles
— PamelaJane (@PamelaJaneVP) October 4, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: Penny Young Nance’s commentary is the best article that represents my thoughts to date on this charade (“Sen. Flake, I Was Assaulted by a Stranger. Here’s Why I Want Kavanaugh Confirmed“). Why would any woman activist want to support Christine Blasey Ford’s statement? It’s a disgrace to the natural order of authenticity and fact-checking.
So far, it’s a question of emotional response versus proof, evidence, and presumption of innocence. Regardless of whether Ford’s story eventually turns out to be 100 percent proven, this will have a negative outcome for the feminist movement.
The fact that Ford didn’t charge Kavanaugh through the legal system points out that she assumed a political position. She has no legal motives. By assuming such a position, and by delivering a hearing appearance that cries for emotional response from the public, it is blatantly obvious that she used her victim card to weigh into a political debate.
This is inexcusable and will discredit future victims of abuse who attempt to come forward with stories that may be hard to prove. I would assume this goes against all values of the feminist movement.—Phil Yelle
Penny Young Nance’s article is well written and shows the commonsense approach to the Kavanaugh issue. I agree with her that you must have more to go on than a person’s accusation.—Betty Weaver Woods
Sen. Jeff Flake has acted like a 9-year-old, being manipulated by left-wing extremists. They never had even close to a legitimate reason to reject Brett Kavanaugh, but said that they would do so, just 18 minutes after his nomination.
Ideology is not a legal parameter for rejecting a nominee because it is assumed that the president, from the opposition party, will pick someone you don’t like. It is supposed to be based solely on qualifications.
No one in history has better qualifications than Kavanaugh. The Democrats have corrupted the system. They have taken the dangerous position that if we can’t win, we will burn the place down.
Senators should face charges for withholding the Ford letter and making outrageous accusations against a sitting federal judge, with zero corroboration.—Anthony Alafero
These grandstanding Never-Trump Republicans are more focused on President Trump’s rally speech than on the facts that he is rightly criticizing. Trump is not the nominee.
Brett Kavanaugh has been incredibly respectful–unnecessarily so, imho–of these bogus accusations by activist feminazis funded by Soros. The Dem senators on the committee, especially Dianne Feinstein, deserved much harsher statements than he made.
Women everywhere are being irreparably damaged by this partisan, unconstitutional display of injustice, and I fear the very basic foundations of our government are being blown to bits before our eyes.
It’s no wonder the next generation has no respect or appreciation for just how wonderful and special our system is, when our elected officials thumb their nose at due process in the name of partisan expediency.—Donna Evans
Republicans, except Lindsey Graham, Mitch McConnell, Jon Kennedy and few others, have all behaved like yellowbellies throughout this entire Kavanaugh attack. No question about the hating Democrats: Every one of them are reprehensible.—Ginny Murrell, Rancho Murieta, Calif.
I feel embarrassed for Flake every time when he makes his left turn. His retirement has been past overdue. I watched the Trump rally in Tennessee; he was only speaking the facts.—Yasuko Kearney
After all the dust settled, Ford and her testimony was a complete fraud. When she said “100 percent, it was Brent Kavenaugh,” and everything else was almost 100 percent vague, I knew it was a bunch of hooey.
Contrast that with Penny Young Nance’s story: corroborating evidence, eyewitnesses, time and place, everything fits.—Dan Stewart
The crux of the leftist opposition to Judge Kavanaugh lies in his unwillingness to compromise constitutional principles of law to bring about a “consensus” decision. So many other federal judges determine cases not on issues of law but on issues of public outrage, as expressed by the left-wing media.
The argument that the Constitution does not relate directly to modern society is specious, since the Constitution does not contain laws per se, but principles of law on which our republic was based.
We are the longest surviving constitutionally based republic in history. It would be unwise of us to abandon the blueprint of that longevity for “the madness of crowds.” We are better served, regardless of one’s political leanings, by a strict constructionist on the highest court of the land.
No new social or legal experiments are needed on the Supreme Court. Leave those to public debate in the houses of Congress, hopefully responsive to the will of “We, the people.”—Stephen Kirtland
I was sexually assaulted once as a child, separately when 14, and then forcibly raped by a date when 21, and I stand with @PYNance;
Why this victim of attempted rape and physical assault supports Kavanaugh https://t.co/ey9XoJB5jW via @LRacheldG @DailySignal @iwv
— Heather R. Higgins (@TheHRH) October 2, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: Too many women are accusing men without any proof to back it up (“Why This Victim of Attempted Rape, Physical Assault Supports Kavanaugh”). Women lie to get their way, as do men. But as they say in the medical field, if it’s not written down somewhere it never happened.
And no one that I know, and there are many, has been that distraught over something that happened 36 years ago. I’m not saying they forget, but they go on with their lives and live normal lives. That’s why I don’t believe Ford.—Estell Newton
I watched the entire Judiciary Committee meeting and marveled that the Democrats had even wasted their time with Ford. Of course, Dianne Feinstein was desperate to keep Kavanaugh off the court. She obviously thinks that changing the abortion law would be the downfall of her party.—Rex Whitmer, Elfrida, Ark.
Before Trump named a nominee, the Democrats declared that they would vote no, no matter who was picked. Eighteen minutes after the president named Kavanaugh, the Dems declared a guaranteed “no” vote. Mitch McConnell should have stripped them of their voting power, based on abuse of the system.—Anthony Alafero
The #MeToo activists planned to corner Jeff Flake and they did.—Christina Paul
I can’t imagine the hell the judge and his family have gone through with these baseless accusations. I do think it’s time that our legal system holds the accuser accountable. Let them pay all legal costs themselves if in fact the case was false.
A teacher nearby was accused by a girl of sexual assault. What was a highly thought of family was decimated and eventually had to leave town. Reputation ruined. A short time later, the girl admitted that her dad put her up to it, looking for a quick dollar.
This seems to have become the national pastime. Charge thy neighbor. The legal system has a lot to do with this trend.—Edd Eaton
“The FBI would be able to look into pretty much whatever they deem relevant to the allegation and any corroborating information of either the accuser or Brett Kavanaugh,” says Cleta Mitchell, a veteran Washington lawyer.
— Tim Gradous (@tgradous) October 2, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: In his story “4 Big Questions About the FBI’s 7th Kavanaugh Probe,” Fred Lucas reports: “Unlike the Senate committee, the FBI can’t compel anyone to speak.”
So watch the Democrats decide that the FBI does not have enough clout. Or they will slam the investigators as not completing the job.—Karin Callaway, Florida
These anti-Kavanaugh protesters need to crawl back under the woodwork and stay there. Wonder how many are paid to protest? If we had no law, we would be like a nation of criminals. Oops, we already are.—Dusty Fae, West Virginia
Sens. Jeff Flake of Arizona and Chris Coons of Delaware conveniently profiled themselves Sept. 29 at the Global Citizen Festival in New York’s Central Park, with Flake’s famous words being: “Feel free to join me in an elevator at any time.”
These two hatched this elevator stunt last Friday so that Flake would be confronted by some screaming nut case railing against Brett Kavanaugh. At which time he, Flake, would change his mind relative to this woman’s passionate, but phony argumentative meeting, involving his Senate Judiciary Committee vote to report this Kavanaugh action out of committee onto the floor.
But of course, anyone possessed of the least semblance of common sense would realize this contrived stunt was done with the full knowledge of Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut (the Vietnam combat veteran), Sen. Cory “Spartacus” Booker of New Jersey (the high school groper), Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California (her chauffeur of 20 years being a Chinese agent), and the well-known belligerent loudmouth, Sen. Kamala Harris of California.
This woman at issue who confronted Flake at the elevator was in a high-security sector, an area devoted only to senators, their staff, and Capitol Hill cops. How then did she get into this area? Again, common sense: She was there because it was arranged that way in order to cook up this fake Flake confrontation while the contingent of Capitol Hill cops were mysteriously, but conveniently, MIA.
We all know the Democrats will stop at nothing short of murder, and maybe even that, to derail this Kavanaugh confirmation. But, what makes things egregiously sickening, is that apparently various Republicans’ hands are as well filthy-dirty.—Earl Beal, Terre Haute, Ind.
Seventh FBI investigation? Up until Ford’s allegation was released, Kavanaugh’s was a straightforward nomination. This last investigation is the only one to be started after Ford’s allegation.
If there had been six prior to Kavanaugh’s nomination becoming controversial, that begs the question of why he was so shady that he required six investigations, and whether the Senate Judiciary Committee had done its job of properly vetting a man with such a shady past.—Edward Buatois
Why is there not going to be an FBI background investigation into Ford and the other two women making accusations? Seems their behavior and lifestyles could be revealing too.—Carole Anderson
There is a legal precept that excessive publicity will substantially affect the outcome of a trial. The FBI was likely to find many people who have bought into the accusations against Kavanaugh.
Like the me-tooers coming out of the woodwork, these true believers in “the resistance” rationalize that the end (stopping Trump, protecting Roe v. Wade) justifies the means (lies and deceit).
The FBI, having engaged in a partisan investigation of the Trump campaign, is unlikely to devote a credible effort at finding and vetting people who will corroborate Kavanaugh’s denial.—Aloysius Van Dunk, Boston
— All American Girl (@AIIAmericanGirI) October 1, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: About Kelsey Harkness’ commentary, “Republicans Offered to Interview Ford in California. Why Didn’t She Know That?”: Christine Blasey Ford tells three different stories (for polygraph, to her shrink in 2012, and her letter to Feinstein). Then her testimony includes significant, factual discrepancies in her (scripted) address to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
As a district attorney, I honestly would never have attempted to bring charges, much less go to trial. Her attorneys know this perfectly well, as do all of the lawyers on the committee.
This whole farce is a contrived political circus with but one goal–bluntly stated within hours of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination by Chuck Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Bernie Sanders, et al: Stop Kavanaugh’s nomination “by any and all means necessary.”—Greg Miller
Ford wasn’t afraid to fly because she had flown all over the world for vacations and work.—Janet Brown
Her lawyers should be investigated and disbarred. Should be, but won’t be.—Randy Reeves
Feinstein and Ford’s attorneys wanted this to be like a “Jerry Springer Show” and it has been. Fortunately, for America, it has backfired on them.—Cheryl Detar
Ford is so undone because someone lay on top of her 36 years ago (even though she got away), that she flew coast to coast (even though she is afraid of flying) in order to interfere with the appointment to the Supreme Court of a man of honor, necessary to the preservation of constitutional government. This is not normal.
Ford was treated with a red carpet and kid gloves and given a forum that real victims never get, could never even dream of. Decency and equality under the law apply only to Democrats?
She said she didn’t know the Senate Judiciary Committee had offered to fly to her. Why not?
She took a polygraph test in a hotel near an airport that consisted of two yes or no questions. I have two thoughts: Either it was not a proper polygraph or she fits the personality profile of someone who can pass these tests whether truthful or not.
Polygraphs are not admissible in court for a reason: They are not reliable. People without a conscience do not have accelerated pulse, respiration, or sweating response to lying, and can pass polygraph tests. People who hallucinate are dead certain their hallucinations are 100 percent real.
There should be standards for testifying before Congress. Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s life has been put under an electron microscope, but there was no vetting of Ford, her character, her record of mental stability, or her veracity.—Elizabeth Nottrodt, Baltimore
Democrats would have attacked Kavanaugh no matter how he reacted to the accusations (“Media Misses: Left Outraged at Kavanaugh, Graham’s Show of Emotion”). If he had been cool and calm, they would have said he was obviously a cold, calculating liar. Since he emotionally defended himself, they now charge him with being overemotional.—Alan McIntire
— LisaMaret (@LisaMaret) October 2, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: Sen. Charles Grassley set it up so that a female outsider, Rachel Mitchell, would question Ford to assure that she was safe and comfortable (“7 Inconsistencies or Gaps Identified by Christine Blasey Ford’s Questioner”).
Grassley said the Republicans questioning Kavanaugh could, if they chose, question him themselves.—Ginny Murrell, Rancho Murieta, Calif.
When one looks at the target audience they hope to reach, one becomes aware that a better story is not needed. This will resonate with rank and file Democrats.—David Rumbaugh, South Carolina
When you are a lying liberal, there are always inconsistencies. It’s all a Democrat farce, another degenerate dog and pony show.—Ron Hussey, New Jersey
Is it just me, or did Dr. Ford look like a psychological car wreck? She seemed completely screwed up. She was reveling in all the attention and so thrilled to be seen as a hapless victim. I swear, she was having a blast.—Zeke Ferrante
One of them is clearly lying, the other one passed a polygraph.—Albertino Garcia
The progressives’ goal was to delay the confirmation of Kavanaugh. They have achieved that goal up to this point.
Ford has been used. She is their tool, a pawn in their game. The progressives are goal-oriented and the process is irrelevant, as long as the goal is achieved.—Francisco Machado
My theory: As a sensitive teenager, Christine Blasey Ford suffered a recurring and not uncommon nightmare of being raped in which she projected young Kavanaugh’s alpha-male face onto the rapist’s identity.
This terrifying, serial nightmare was engraved on her hippocampus as if it were a real event. (See “The Interpretation of Dreams” by Sigmund Freud.)
Characteristically, she never talked about her nightmare and it was ultimately buried in the ancient memory bog. And then, decades later, it was adventitiously exhumed for political purposes.—J. Ash
Sen. Lindsey Graham made an utter fool of himself. Do you really believe the Republicans do not have an agenda? Of course they do: Push Kavanaugh onto the SCOTUS bench, so he can protect Trump from impeachment. It’s so obvious.—Martin Schwarzer
I am not a Lindsey Graham fan. Not by any means. Having said that, he is correct in his identification of the agenda exposed by members of the Democratic Party. It shocked me when he made that outburst.—Rex Ford
— Vincent Price Dorset (@vincedorsett1) October 3, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: About Rachel del Guidice’s report, “Ex-Boyfriend’s Letter Raises Questions About Ford’s Answers on Polygraph”: Strange that Christine Blasey Ford’s old boyfriend remembered that Ford’s friend was seeking employment at two specific places, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and that polygraph tests would be involved.
Apparently Ford’s friend, who now denies the “coaching,” does admit to taking such tests.
I wonder what detailed specifics the former boyfriend might remember about the alleged “coaching” incident, since he stated he was present and observed.
I was also interested in various reports regarding the second door which was added to Ford’s residence and the renting out of the space behind it. Renting that space to a business or other entity would seem to make it difficult to use that door for exiting if some threat was perceived.
There seems to be a lot of questions here, and my curiosity is up.—James Harr
I watched much of the reprehensible actions of the Democrats during the Senate Judicial Committee hearings on Judge Brett Kavanaugh and, like most reasonable, moral people, I was disgusted and infuriated.
Those politically and morally corrupt Democrats were shameful and heartless in their attacks on the judge for the explicit purpose of destroying his credibility and thus his career, and shaming his family before the world. They were seemingly fighting for their political lives, and the right to keep taking the lives of the unborn, especially the black unborn.
The question of why Sen. Dianne Feinstein didn’t submit Christine Blasey Ford’s confidential letter sooner, so that an investigation could have already been done, has been asked repeatedly with no reply from liberals on the committee or in their media.
But I believe that the liberals may have investigated the claims after getting the letter over two months ago now. And I believe that they could find no corroboration or evidence. They knew, and schemed, that all they would have to do is to hold Ford’s letter till the last possible minute so that they and their media could demand a delay.
The accusation alone was all that was necessary to destroy this man, because the liberal media would put all its resources and “credibility” behind convicting him before the nation and the world.
Liberals knew and schemed that if Kavanaugh were seated on the Supreme Court, he would forever be tainted by their ever more outrageous claims.
And, if the public is uninformed and corrupted enough by that media bias, and actually gives these unworthy Democrat politicians a majority in either house of Congress, they can continue their assault on the nation and the judge and try to remove a sitting Supreme Court justice, throwing the nation deeper into the abyss that they have orchestrated.—Ken Pruitt, Lawrenceville, Ga.
Brett Kavanaugh and his family were the victims in this circus (“The Daily Signal Podcast: Kavanaugh Fight Shows Supreme Court Is Too Important“). But it certainly did open a window to our politicians’ childish behavior. And also the godly hearts still among them. Go, Brett.—Gail Green
— SonofRekhav (@Yonadav7) October 3, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: In today’s insanity, all it takes is the accusation; no proof wanted or needed (“FBI’s Previous Probes Would Have Looked Into Kavanaugh’s Drinking”). But I must admit whoever concocted and planned this plot was very smart and made great use of today’s sexual climate and liberals’ volatility.
The author of this planned the whole thing and found the perfect person to bring the accusation. Never claiming actual rape, never providing any details that could actually be investigated or that the accused could actually defend himself against. Yep, very clever.—Marilyn Griffin
So Brett Kavanaugh drank a lot in high school and college. Big deal. Most of us from that era did as well. It was the era of 3.2 percent beer, so you had to drink a bit to catch a buzz.
I drank like a fish from my late teens up into my 30s, but I can also tell you that it’s been close to 20 years since I’ve had any alcohol (other than a sip of wine at communion every week). I slowed down considerably when my children came along.
It’s more important to know if he’s still drinking like that, which I seriously doubt. It’s one thing to show up hungover to a college class, another if you’re showing up hungover to your daily job.—Chuck Cochran
This is past ridiculous.–Jeanne Ballard
Men and women who respond to their vocation to inspire the truth in men’s souls are magnificent.
Brett Kavanaugh is one of these persons who inspire truth in men’s souls. The depth of suffering placed upon Judge Kavanaugh, body and soul, is the depth to which he has delivered peace of mind and equality to men and women coming before him for judgment in our world.
The otherworldliness cannot be measured or counted out in this world, only in the world to come. For atheists, this is a tragedy. For people of faith, hope and charity, this is joy.
Obama promised us hope and change. We now take our hope in Brett Kavanaugh.—Mary DeVoe, Albany, N.Y.
Defending Kavanaugh isn’t an attack on women https://t.co/yreu4G8jBR via @davidharsanyi @DailySignal/ #CCOT – “Real Victims” Must Convince Girls/Women To Stop Fabricating/Lying About Attacks To Get Attention, Sympathy, Revenge or Payback, That Hurts Us ALL.
— Debbie Herschfeld (@FLNativeDeb) October 1, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: I am a woman. News flash: Women can lie, make up stories, be vindictive, or be political operatives.
As David Harsanyi suggests in his commentary, “Defending Kavanaugh Isn’t an Attack on Women,” a woman should be held to the same “believability” standard as a man; no more, no less.
Men are no more evil or sinful than women. That’s why our founders gave us equal protection under the law.—Abigail A.
If you are going to “believe women,” isn’t it something like 120 women who’ve known Kavanaugh over the years who stand with him against one with memories so foggy as to be uncontestable?—Bob Armstrong
How many of Christine Blasey Ford’s supporters knew her at the time of high school? Why didn’t Ford’s parents or siblings enter letters of character? Why weren’t they sitting by her during her testimony?—Mary Frances Doty
So Sen. Kamala Harris’ creed is “guilty until proven innocent.” That’s a pretty strange and corrupt point of view. Is this what her voters believe? I hope not, and seriously doubt that.
If, as a country, this is how we are starting to believe, then America has already lost its way.
I think America saw exactly who and what the progressive/liberal/left are, and that their only agenda is absolute power and to hell with anyone else’s opinion. Apparently the rest of us are guilty of having a different point of view and are already wrong.—Terry Hanson
The FBI takes a week to investigate this accusation, though Lord knows how. Then they come back to the Senate with no answers, cannot find proof that an assault happened, cannot find proof that an assault did not happen. What will the Democrats do then?–Marilyn Griffin
There are no credible witnesses to any of the alleged incidents, and the last was withdrawn totally. Everyone named as witnesses vouch for the accused. People are still innocent until proven guilty in this country, last time I checked.—Derek Dubasik
“Six times between 1993 and 2018, the FBI went talking to people about Kavanaugh. Six times, all after the incident that Ford alleges, the FBI never heard anyone even whisper a word about sexual misconduct.”
— Paul D. Gallagher (@paulgallagher) September 28, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: Well, Christine Blasey Ford did remember that she had one beer. Just not where the house was, or who owned the house.
As for Thomas Jipping’s commentary, “Why Another FBI Investigation of Kavanaugh Would Be Pointless,” the Democratic Party could get a thousand more women to come forward with fabrications, they just needed more time. The Pussyhat Brigade is deranged and willing.
Dems and their media enablers started fishing for “stories” from pawns as soon as Kavanaugh was named.—John Rocker
Every intelligent person can easily see through the charade. The weeklong FBI investigation will confirm what we already know: Dr. Ford’s allegation and performance are a true sham.
During her testimony, she needed to continuously look at the papers in front of her, and when she was unable to find the needed reference, her lawyer helped her. I will be pleased when this circus is over.—Lawrence Applebaum
How many more will come out of the woodwork though? That’s the plan. Just cast enough doubt.—Earl Laren
If liberals were really wanting the truth, they would have brought out all this in July and the truth would have already been released.—Jay Phillips
Maybe another FBI investigation would get her to admit she was lying and open herself up to charges of perjury.—Drew Page
I saw your idiotic commentary headline, “Democrats’ Mindless Opposition to Brett Kavanaugh,” and just had to laugh. The man has perjured himself, and the far right is refusing to release thousands of his documents (what is it that they don’t want people to know?) and making an insane argument about the woman who came forward as if it’s all just a political ploy.
Ford didn’t come forward earlier because she thought Congress might actually decide the guy was wrong for the job, and she didn’t want her name released for the very reason of not wanting the harassment and death threats she’s getting now from right-wing fanatics.
The man should be investigated at the very least. You should ask about “Republicans’ Mindless Support of Kavanaugh” instead. Please unsubscribe me from this right-wing hack job of a site.—Shirley Williams
Regarding Kim Holmes’ commentary, “Fight Over Kavanaugh Proves Supreme Court Has Become Too Powerful”: The Supreme Court is increasingly powerful solely because the other two branches of government, especially Congress, do not have the intestinal fortitude to do what’s right.
We need more people with character and integrity in Congress, definitely not the numerous self-serving members we now have.—Randy Leyendecker, Kerville, Texas
Exactly why Kavanaugh needs to be approved. He will stick with the Constitution, as written. That scares the lefties and RINOs to death.–Cheryl Detar
I DON’T SUFFER FOOLS WELL EITHER JUDGE!
— Karebear58 (@kirwin58) October 3, 2018
Dear Daily Signal: There is no level too low for these ugly, evil Democrat senators to sink, is my reaction to Chris Prudhome’s commentary, “Kavanaugh’s Anger Is Justified.”
What is additionally sickening to watch is Jeff Flake, posturing as being “deeply troubled” about the way Brett Kavanaugh sharply responded to the Democrat senators. To hear Flake tell it, he is “only interested in finding the truth.”
Well, it’s right there staring him in the face, yet Flake refuses to see it. The accuser’s charges have not been corroborated; she has a lack of memory on important questions; by her own admission she drank beer at the time; those she named as “witnesses” denied being there. These facts terribly weaken her charges and create far more than a reasonable doubt.
All this, and Flake is “troubled” by the fact that “Kavanaugh responded sharply” to the Democrat senators on the committee.
Of all the nerve, “responding sharply” to those accusing you on live national TV–in front of your wife, your children, your parents, and millions of viewers–of attempted rape, rape, gang rape, and indecent exposure.
How cheeky of Kavanaugh to be so “sharp” and “partisan” to those poor Democrat senators.—Drew Page
Neither Kavanaugh nor his family can ever forget this. And if he is the kind of man we think he is, he will make all rulings based on the Constitution, properly.—Marilyn Griffin
With his background being ground to mud, I would not blame Kavanaugh for being one-sided. But with the same background, I firmly believe he will follow the Constitution and will apply the law as it is necessary.
I hope Kavanaugh knows he has lots of backers. Has anyone else tried to tell him directly? I did when he was first named. I sent out a message of what he could expect, and hoped he would know that people would stand with him. I also sent a copy to the president and vice president, and my representative.
Being threatened and the maligning of the left is enough to make someone figure that this is just the beginning, and we will all be under scrutiny.—Karin Callaway, Florida
I was impressed by Michelle Malkin’s commentary and her good research (“Investigate the Senate Democrat Wrecking Machine“). I agree.
This conduct is increasing and has become so toxic, and yet so much is hidden. There needs to be a serious investigation so it is exposed to the public.
Brett Kavanaugh has a long history of high moral integrity and unquestionable honesty. His temperament, reputation, and work in the courts are above reproach.
So the only reason Democrats won’t vote for him is that he is a conservative Republican. Seems like a very poor reason to destroy a very good man.
The paid, organized protesters are terrible too. Are important decisions now being made in response to hysterical, misinformed, screaming protesters? Should protesters representing one view and one party dictate what we do?—Pat Ellis, Clinton, Miss.
Is Fox News switching with CNN? A few minutes ago, Fox displayed several ugly photos of Kavanaugh, who is right in complaining about the Democrats’ onslaught. Just think of all the money Fox makes displaying such photos. Why must they treat this beleaguered man like this?—Warren Pugh, Logan, Utah
The Democrats who have done this to Judge Kavanaugh should be taken to court or, much better, run out of the country. The SOBs don’t deserve to be called Americans and enjoy our free way of life.—Sam Lybrand, Edisto Island, S.C.
I feel a big shift in this country’s politics will take place with Kavanaugh’s confirmation, and we could take a huge hit should he fail. Is this as big an issue for our country as I think? Or am I, and many others, making too much of this?—Todd Robinson
Stay strong, have integrity. Kavanaugh will prevail the same way Joseph did. This is an old, bad story (Genesis 39).—Anita Gentry
I have subscribed to The Daily Signal’s Morning Bell for a while now. I am sorely disappointed that for weeks you have seemed to believe there is nothing else going on on this planet besides the Kavanaugh issue. Could you please expand your vision and talk about other issues? —René Schiltz, Tomball, Texas
Thanks for speaking out for Brett Kavanaugh. We need the opposition and the stupid Americans to hear this. Stupid in that they listen to lying news stations. Not that they don’t have degrees or money. They’ve just lost their way from brainwashing. We got the better detergent. Truth. God bless you.—Millie Kirschner, Philadelphia
Troy Worden helped to compile this column.
Source material can be found at this site.