When Donald Trump selected mainstream conservative Brett Kavanaugh as his Supreme Court nominee, those truly anxious to “drain the swamp” were disappointed once again. Even CNBC acknowledged that he was an “establishment favorite.” Kavanaugh has never been anyone’s kind of maverick. He has long been tied to former President George W. Bush.
The most troubling thing about Kavanaugh, to those of us who have bothered to investigate such things, is Kavanaugh’s role in covering up the death of Clinton White House counsel Vince Foster. Kavanaugh, as White House counsel under Bush, also sought to limit compensation under the 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund.
With the anti-Trump fervor now at a fever pitch for half the country, it was inevitable that his nominee would be criticized. Predictably, none of the criticism leveled at Kavanaugh is based on his neocon fueled legal career. Instead, an alleged incident from thirty six years ago has now taken over all mainstream public discourse.
Christine Blasey Ford, a mainstream liberal professor with a background suitable for a political opponent of Donald Trump, has claimed that Kavanaugh attempted to sexually assault her while both were in high school. Not only are these allegations decades old, Ford evidently can’t remember anything specific about the incident; not the house, its location, how she arrived there, who was giving the party, etc. Only in our thoroughly divided country could such vague accusations from so long ago be taken seriously by anyone.
But this isn’t all. Ford has the most logical motive in the world to lodge a false accusation against Kavanaugh. In 1996, her parents were involved in foreclosure litigation, and Kavanaugh’s mother just happened to be the judge in the case, who ruled against them. An honest legal system would call that a conflict of interest. A mitigating factor. But as should be obvious to all living Americans at this point, we don’t have an honest legal system.
For those biased in favor of what I call the Evil Party, or the Democrats, Ford, like Anita Hill and anyone accusing Donald Trump of anything, has all the credibility in the world. They didn’t feel the same way about Juanita Broderick, Paula Jones, or any of the countless women who accused Bill Clinton of harassing and even raping them. The Stupid Party, or the Republicans, found them entirely credible, or course. This is the nature of our two-party system. Pick a side, and stick with them always. Contradictions and hypocrisy be damned. Our side is better!
In reality, of course, the political “debate” in this country is ludicrously restricted, and those participating must adhere to laughably narrow guidelines. Battle over gay marriage and transgender bathrooms all you want. But don’t talk about the perpetual wars, bombings and occupations, or the top secret intelligence agency budgets. And never, ever mention anything about the Federal Reserve, or the counterfeit nature of our fractional banking system.
So this “debate” is perfect for America 2.0. Screams, profanities, and threats of violence over a claim alleged thirty six years after it happened. And even if it is true, why wasn’t the underage Kavanaugh (who was seventeen at the time) a “victim” here, too? I’ve never understood how a minor, who is not legally able to consent to sex, can be charged with forcing someone else who cannot legally consent. But it’s impossible for anyone perceived to be associated with Trump to be considered a victim of anything, under any circumstances. As the establishment “liberals” love to say now: “punch a Nazi in the face” and all that.
I thought the selection of Brett Kavanaugh was stupid, much like all of Trump’s appointments have been stupid. It was clearly yet another capitulation on his part to a conservative, neocon establishment that opposed his candidacy and continues to oppose any real reforms he may attempt. But the phony debate taking center stage now is beyond stupid; it is state-sponsored theater for the dumbed-down masses. It’s hard to imagine a more fitting example of “bread and circuses.”
If a guy whose political mentor was George W. Bush can’t get approved to the Supreme Court, just who could Trump nominate that would be approved? John McCainiac’s daughter? Lindsay Graham’s child, if he had any? Barack Obama? Now that would be a nominee to make those with Trump Derangement Syndrome’s heads explode. Their ultimate object of scorn selecting their ultimate object of worship.
Those opposing Kavanaugh with all the fury they’ve opposed Trump simply have no idea why they oppose him. Sure, the usual fear mongering about overturning Roe vs. Wade has been trotted out there, but nothing else really associated with any issue. It’s just that Kavanaugh is Trump’s choice, and anyone Trump chooses has to be bad. It’s the triumph of personality over politics, and it’s Trump’s personality they hate, because his politics, at least thus far, has been little different than Dubya’s.
I’ve tried to divert the Kavanaugh-haters’ attention away from this foaming at the mouth, this unclear pussy hat rage, into productive areas. Like the fact he led the Starr “investigation” into the death of Vince Foster, and concluded against all logic and all the evidence that he killed himself in Fort Marcy Park. You have to be quite a “judge” to support these kinds of impossible official narratives. By anyone’s standards, Kavanaugh proved his establishment mantle in that “investigation” alone.
The majority of still asleep Americans will be glued to their television sets, breathlessly awaiting the showdown between the dastardly attempted teen rapist Kavanaugh, and his honorable accusers like Charles Schumer. Those of us who are awake will try to change the subject, or get them to actually think, but that’s never been an easy thing for people to do. Poet E.E. Cummings reacted to Ezra Pound’s Cantos by exclaiming, “You bastard! You’re trying to get them to think.”
Whether Brett Kavanaugh is approved or not will matter little to the average citizen. Good Supreme Court decisions are about as rare as obese Victoria’s Secret models. The last decent Supreme Court justice, in my view, was William O. Douglas, and I’m not entirely certain about him.
Instead of fretting over whether the Court will go “conservative” as opposed to “liberal,” Americans should worry about the impact they can have on our civil liberties, and the kind of world our children and grandchildren will live in. Regardless of their alleged political persuasions, Supreme Court justices, like judges at every level of the system, have prove utterly unworthy of such power.