Kavanaugh at the Tip of the Smear
Appearing before the U.S. Senate, Brett Kavanaugh was supposed to be a judge — not a defendant. Now, after three of the worst weeks of his life, he and his family are finding out that the path to a Supreme Court appointment is a costly one.
Appearing before the U.S. Senate, Brett Kavanaugh was supposed to be a judge — not a defendant. Now, after three of the worst weeks of his life, he and his family are finding out that the path to a Supreme Court appointment is a costly one. And while it may be the pinnacle of his profession, getting there exacts a price no American should have to pay.
In his opening statement Judge Kavanaugh said “the confirmation process has become a national disgrace.” Beyond the destruction and pain it’s caused his family, he lamented the impact that this vicious attempt to block his nomination would have on the entire nation. “You sowed the wind. For decades to come, I fear that the whole country will reap the whirlwind.”
He concluded his lengthy remarks with “My family and I intend no ill will toward Dr. Ford or her family, but I swear today under oath before the Senate and the nation, before my family and God, I am innocent of this charge.”
It was difficult not to be moved by the earlier testimony of Dr. Ford, which was shaky at times and halted by tears. No one could deny just how emotional she seemed during her testimony. But most conservatives are not suggesting that she was never assaulted. There are just too many inconsistencies in the story — and in the Democrats’ handling of it — to suggest that Kavanaugh was the one responsible. As Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) pointed out, yesterday’s testimony only “repeat[ed] what we already knew, which is she believes something happened. She believes it was Brett Kavanaugh but everybody she claims was in the house denies having any knowledge of it. There is no corroboration.” He’s right. None of the boys at the party remember it happening. Even Dr. Ford’s friend, Leland Ingham, denies it. In the 36 years since that night, this is the first time anyone (apart from Dr. Ford’s therapist) has even heard of it.
That doesn’t mean Dr. Ford wasn’t attacked. Republicans just talked to a man this week “who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of [the] complaint.” And while Christine insists that with complete certainty that Kavanaugh was responsible, even cognitive scientists have learned that “people can be 100 percent certain of their memories… and 100 percent wrong.”
The crime of sexual abuse is real and life-altering, but it does beg the question: how far back and in how much detail do we look at any nominee? Because, as former Assistant United States Attorney Sidney Powell reminded everyone on last night’s “Washington Watch,” “there but for the grace of God goes one of us. I mean, who has not made a mistake at some point in their lives? … I don’t think we should judge people by erroneous acts in high school and college. That’s why we prosecute people as juveniles and seal the record. Their brains aren’t even fully formed.”
Obviously, no one is excusing this kind of behavior, but it’s a legitimate point. How far back do we go? Junior high? Elementary school? Daycare? At what point do we realize that people grow up, make mistakes, and move forward? As far as Brett Kavanaugh is concerned, there’s been nothing to suggest in his past confirmation hearings that he’s ever mistreated women. And that’s after six FBI background checks. As Sidney explains,
“They literally go back to the area in which you were born and canvass neighbors. I’ve been through FBI background checks when I was a federal prosecutors for 10 years… I mean, the neighbors in my home and elementary neighborhoods were asked about me and my character. So it’s absolutely astonishing that not a peep of any of this came up until right now.”
“On top of that, Dianne Feinstein has done a gross disservice to absolutely everybody involved, including her fellow citizens and Dr. Ford, by sitting on this until the last minute. Because if they really wanted an investigation and this were really about getting to the truth, they would’ve raised it from the get-go and had it investigated quietly before anyone’s name was dragged through the mud — including Dr. Ford’s.”
As Andrew McCarthy points out, it isn’t the Senate’s job to solve crimes. It’s not to psychoanalyze witnesses. It’s to advise and consent on the president’s nomination. And if it were a trial, he pretends? The case is so weak, it would be “thrown out of court.”
What we do know without a shadow of a doubt is this: the Left must have the court in order to advance their agenda in America. Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) admitted it. They couldn’t get Congress or state legislatures to redefine marriage or impose abortion on demand. They had to go to the courts. They can’t get open borders in this country. They have to go to the courts. That’s what this entire smear campaign is about. This is not — and never has been — about Brett Kavanaugh. It’s about the shift that will begin to take place when a committed constitutionalist replaces Kennedy.
Originally published here.
Giving Credit Where Babies Are Due
While the world’s eyes were on Brett Kavanaugh, the U.S. House did something worth celebrating! After watching a year of trying, Republicans managed to do something no other Congress has done: they recognized the humanity of the unborn child in the U.S. tax code.
Some of you might remember this debate from last year, when Republicans finally managed to pass the first round of tax cuts. As part of that bill, pro-lifers had worked to write this same provision into the language on 529 education savings accounts (ESAs). We were disappointed when Senator Steve Daines’s (R-Mt.) idea to give unborn children a tax credit never materialized, along with the House’s push to give expectant parents the opportunity to start planning for their future kids their ESAs. But unfortunately, those were the natural casualties of the reconciliation process. Unlike the House, which has a lot more freedom to think creatively, Senator Mitch McConnell’s (R-Ky.) party had to work within the tight confines of the budget rules. And when it came to this tax credit, Republicans would’ve had to prove to the parliamentarian that the concepts weren’t overly policy-driven. In the end, it proved too much of a struggle, and they dropped it.
That shouldn’t be a problem this time around, thanks to Rep. Mike Kelly’s (R-Pa.) Family Savings Account Act — part of the GOP’s second basket of tax cuts that are working their way to President Trump’s desk. This afternoon, the House passed the bill on to the Senate, giving parents, grandparents, or other relatives the unprecedented opportunity to open a 529 plan for an unborn child and begin to save for that child’s education.
But the good news didn’t stop there. The proposal also took a major pro-adoption step by letting people withdraw money from their retirement funds — without penalty — if it’s specifically used to pay for the costs associated with raising a child. Then, rescuing another part of last year’s tax bill that ended up on the cutting room floor, conservatives finally leveled the playing field for homeschool families, who weren’t allowed to participate in 529 education savings accounts — even though parents who enroll kids in private and religious schools could. This bill put an end to that discrimination and removes an obstacle for millions of moms and dads in exercising their right to educate their kids the way they see fit.
The House did its job. Now it’s time for senators to do theirs. Help us move the Family Savings Account Act to President Trump’s desk by contacting your senators. When families thrive, everyone benefits!
Originally published here.
A World on Fire in Myanmar
They had just gotten married two years ago, Abul says. Although they weren’t rich, he had a small business and made enough money selling betel leaves to provide for them and his family. But their peaceful life came to a horrifying halt when a group of Burmese military men ambushed their village.
“When they came,” he says, “I ran to a nearby hill.” He watched, crying, as they took his wife from the house and raped her. “I watched them do whatever they wanted to her.” Afterword, he saw her and 20 other women forced into a home and burned alive. “The world went dark for me,” he tells people. “I was so inconsolable that other people from my village had to carry me to Bangladesh. I don’t even remember the journey.”
Their faces, haunted by things they’ve seen and heard, all tell the same stories. There are thousands of them, mothers who will never get the image out of their heads of the charred remains of their children — or the wives, whose husbands were chased into the woods by gunfire and never came back. Even in Bangladesh, the only nearby refuge, there is no food. One woman talks about having to walk over dead bodies just to reach the border. Entire families are huddling under small sheets of plastic, most fighting sickness.
It’s no wonder that people all around the world are sounding the alarm for the Rohingya. For the last several months, the massacres have almost become too much to bear. Entire villages are gone – along with everything and everyone in them. “And what was once a close-knit community, with generations of history in Myanmar, is now scattered across the world’s largest refugee camp in Bangladesh.” Here in Washington, D.C., leaders on both sides of the aisle are desperate to do something about it. In Wednesday’s House Foreign Affairs Committee, Chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.) and ranking Democrat Eliot Engel (N.Y.) urged the Trump administration to take one final step and call the killings what they are: genocide.
“I want to commend the administration for speaking out against these atrocities,” Rep. Royce said. “But I encourage the administration to go further — this is more than just a ‘textbook example of ethnic cleansing,’” he continued. “To all who have met with Rohingya refugees, who have heard these accounts, it is clear that these crimes amount to genocide.” By labeling it as such, America would be able to “rally a strong international commitment to fully fund the latest appeal for humanitarian assistance,” Rep. Engel points out.
Of course, the State Department has been monitoring the situation closely for months. Just this week, Secretary Mike Pompeo’s agency released a new report condemning the attacks against the Rohingya. “Based on interviews with more than 1,000 of those refugees, State Department investigators found that ‘a vast majority’ of them ‘experienced or directly witnessed extreme violence,’ including rampant killings and systemic rapes. The Burmese military was behind the attacks ‘in most cases,’ the report found, and they ‘targeted civilians indiscriminately and often with extreme brutality.’”
The U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), where I now serve as a member, has strongly condemned the attacks on civilians by security forces in Burma. Calling it a “staggering humanitarian disaster,” we have urged world leaders to act and hold the Burmese militants responsible. Just this past April, we listed Burma in our 2018 annual report as Country of Particular Concern. The U.S. has — and should — continue to do its part in holding these radicals accountable.
Originally published here.
This is a publication of the Family Research Council. Mr. Perkins is president of FRC.
