Last Minute Accusations to Wrench Judicial Nomination Vote

The technique of wrenching Supreme Court Judicial appointment votes with last second accusations about high school sexual misconduct is a fairly fool-proof tool for Democrats to use to force things their way. Judge Kavinaugh left high school decades ago and delving into those years with murky memories providing virtually zero chance of accurate confirmation works fairly well.

Opposition parties to judicial nominations should not be free to keep a spare accusation in their back pocket to trot out at the last minute when their prospects for getting a no vote don’t look good. A regular process to input all objections to the nominee should be established such that the objection evidence is all brought to the public hearing attention in a timely way with a cut off date for the introduction of new evidence, except for explicit objective evidence of a very high quality.  Unscrupulous politicians may otherwise choose to subvert honest proceedings simply for temporal control of the court to keep it as it is presently for as long as possible if they believe the court membership is disposed to supporting opposition political viewpoints regarding decisions.

It is unfortunate that Prof Christine Ford; a psychologist, choose to wait until the last minute to  trash Judge Kavanaugh’s character. Yet it may produce a positive result eventually in predisposing the Judge to hold a little bias against psychologist working conflationary activities to conjoin the law and psyschiatry to the detriment of human liberty.

Law should stiff-arm psychology in evidentiary and culpability to prevent social totalitarians from making it illegal to think, and correcting those who do. No one has even troubled to ask if the young Mr. Kavanaugh broke any laws, and to what extent he should be disqualified from being a Judge on the Supreme Court if he did actually grope the future psychologist.

sychology is a field for atheists these days, preponderantly, with associative mind contents they can dismiss as phenomenal and meaningless. They may even be capable of dissimulation equal to that of politicians. Yet Judge Kavanaugh, if he has been of good character and conduct since allegedly groping, Christine Ford 35 years ago approx, might still be able to perform the duties of being a High Court Justice.

It may be the Christine Ford views the incident differently than the Judge-especially if it did not occur.

How Senator Murkowski of Alaska views the matter may be dependent upon how the Alaska Federation of Natives regard it, for she is basically owned by them for supporting her in her first run as a Senator against the Republican Party candidate Joe Miller. If she sabotages the somewhat conservative nominee Republicans of Alaska may remember that in her next re-election campaign, in addition to her support for Obamacare. Fundamentally she is a mercenary independent for hire.

If the alleged incident of groping a peer-girl while drunk at a party actually happened, getting people to testify to the event that supposedly ended with two boys running downstairs in drunken revelry, would be challenging. Some people  might remember the party perhaps, a somewhat typical adolescent socializing event with girls and boys playing together rather awkwardly in a post-pubescent (mostly) event, yet with no report at the time of the incident made apparently, there wouldn’t be a good chance of putting the Judge on trial, or waterboarding him to determine if he actually did or did not cop a feel of sumptuous boobs without permission, under the influence of alcohol.

A trial for an adult incident would require months to prepare and would set back the vote obviously. Yet with the incident introduced at the last minute simply to stop the proceedings being made from Sen. Feinstein’s California constituency by a professional psychologist well able to fabricate false memories and so forth, the entire affair does have the aura of bogusness about it. In the future there perhaps should be some sort of rule made that does not allow the introduction of last-minute accusations in to derail a vote. That is, there should be some reasonable time requirements to introduce evidence that won’t allow flimsy accusations to disrupt normal legal affairs. Supreme Court appointments don’t just slip through when no one is looking; it would be reasonable to set a time period following the public nomination of a Judge of a month or two for the introduction of hostile accusations.