Judge Kavanaugh and the left's revenge

The first episode of Alfred Hitchcock's TV series was titled "Revenge."  The story opens with Carl and Elsa Spann, a recently married couple who move into a trailer by the sea.  Elsa has suffered a nervous breakdown, the seaside her therapy.

Carl heads out for his first day at work, and Elsa is baking a cake to surprise her husband.  But when Carl gets home, he finds a smoke-filled trailer; a burning cake; and his wife beaten and assaulted, in a catatonic state. The police have no leads on the assailant, and Carl's frustration and anger build.

The next day, Carl takes Elsa away.  They're driving through town when Elsa points to a man walking on the sidewalk.

"There he is!  That's him!"

Carl parks and follows the man to his room, where he bludgeons the stranger to death.  He goes back to the car and drives away.  Then Elsa points to another man: "There he is! That's him!"  The scene closes on Carl's shocked expression as he realizes what he's done.

How did this happen?  Well, Carl witnessed the results of the attack, saw proof of the crime.  And he had no reason to doubt his wife, not to believe her.

Sadly, in today's court of public opinion, there doesn't even have to be evidence of a crime.  And the crime need not be current.  Without proof, can a man still be held accountable for committing a crime?  You betcha.

The left demands that all female accusers be believed, a mandate antithetical to the Constitution.  Leftists claim that every accusation earns full credibility due to the "seriousness of the charge," regardless of proof or lack thereof.  So the Democrat media run with the accusation, parading politicians from both sides who gravely pronounce the accusation credible, serious.

Just like that, the left has found its political MOAB.

This brings us to Judge Kavanaugh, a man with a sterling reputation and impeccable credentials yet now under the #MeToo shadow.  Christine Blasey Ford claims that Kavanaugh assaulted her at a party in the 1980s, when they were in their teens.

Judge Kavanaugh holds a reputation for "treating women with particular courtesy and respect."  Yet we're told to believe that this gentle soul turned into a merciless sexual predator in private.  Not only that, but he only transformed that one time.  Sixty-five women who went to high school with Kavanaugh wrote a glowing testament to his character.

Plus, the other guy named in Ford's story, Mark Judge who purportedly broke up the Kavanaugh attack, told the Weekly Standard, "It's just absolutely nuts.  I never saw Brett act that way."

The left's response to Judge's denial is to attack him.  At the same time leftists are smearing the witness for Kavanaugh, media prop up the accuser, tell us we have to believe the woman in every instance, cannot smear the accuser.

Back to Carl and Elsa Spann.  Unlike in the #MeToo movement, there is undeniable evidence of the crime: Carl's battered wife left in a catatonic state.  The crime is fresh in Carl's mind; he knows beyond a doubt that the assault has happened.  So once Elsa positively identifies her assailant, Carl doesn't want to wait years for this guy to play the justice system or take a chance that this monster will get off.  He has to act.

Except he kills the wrong man.  Carl would have known that had he waited minutes until his wife accused the next man.  It would have definitely come out if there'd been a trial.  Whereas Carl didn't wait because he was sure the man was guilty, the left won't wait because it suspects that the man is innocent.

It's blatantly clear that this woman, Christine Blasey Ford, is the Democrats' "insurance policy" to keep Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court.  Senator Feinstein held this letter and kept the writer anonymous right up to the vote.  The only other "witness," Mark Judge, categorically denies that it ever happened.  And the woman can't even remember the exact date of this life-changing event.

Just as Carl acted out of revenge, so the Washington establishment has a score to settle.  Democrats want revenge for Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland.  Republicans, citing the Biden Rule, refused to hold confirmation hearings for Garland and waited for the election to consider a nominee.

Oh, and there's the matter of Trump winning the White House, defeating the Bush and Clinton dynasties and disrupting their coup.  They will never forgive, never forget.

So they'll keep trotting out victims from a nominee's or candidate's high school, grade school, kindergarten...whatever it takes.  The Washington establishment will keep straight faces as they sanctimoniously demand justice, insist that all women must be believed, that the charges are too "serious" to ignore.

Another conservative threat, another Elsa proxy to knowingly point to any man who dares to defy the left: "There he is!  That's him!"

The first episode of Alfred Hitchcock's TV series was titled "Revenge."  The story opens with Carl and Elsa Spann, a recently married couple who move into a trailer by the sea.  Elsa has suffered a nervous breakdown, the seaside her therapy.

Carl heads out for his first day at work, and Elsa is baking a cake to surprise her husband.  But when Carl gets home, he finds a smoke-filled trailer; a burning cake; and his wife beaten and assaulted, in a catatonic state. The police have no leads on the assailant, and Carl's frustration and anger build.

The next day, Carl takes Elsa away.  They're driving through town when Elsa points to a man walking on the sidewalk.

"There he is!  That's him!"

Carl parks and follows the man to his room, where he bludgeons the stranger to death.  He goes back to the car and drives away.  Then Elsa points to another man: "There he is! That's him!"  The scene closes on Carl's shocked expression as he realizes what he's done.

How did this happen?  Well, Carl witnessed the results of the attack, saw proof of the crime.  And he had no reason to doubt his wife, not to believe her.

Sadly, in today's court of public opinion, there doesn't even have to be evidence of a crime.  And the crime need not be current.  Without proof, can a man still be held accountable for committing a crime?  You betcha.

The left demands that all female accusers be believed, a mandate antithetical to the Constitution.  Leftists claim that every accusation earns full credibility due to the "seriousness of the charge," regardless of proof or lack thereof.  So the Democrat media run with the accusation, parading politicians from both sides who gravely pronounce the accusation credible, serious.

Just like that, the left has found its political MOAB.

This brings us to Judge Kavanaugh, a man with a sterling reputation and impeccable credentials yet now under the #MeToo shadow.  Christine Blasey Ford claims that Kavanaugh assaulted her at a party in the 1980s, when they were in their teens.

Judge Kavanaugh holds a reputation for "treating women with particular courtesy and respect."  Yet we're told to believe that this gentle soul turned into a merciless sexual predator in private.  Not only that, but he only transformed that one time.  Sixty-five women who went to high school with Kavanaugh wrote a glowing testament to his character.

Plus, the other guy named in Ford's story, Mark Judge who purportedly broke up the Kavanaugh attack, told the Weekly Standard, "It's just absolutely nuts.  I never saw Brett act that way."

The left's response to Judge's denial is to attack him.  At the same time leftists are smearing the witness for Kavanaugh, media prop up the accuser, tell us we have to believe the woman in every instance, cannot smear the accuser.

Back to Carl and Elsa Spann.  Unlike in the #MeToo movement, there is undeniable evidence of the crime: Carl's battered wife left in a catatonic state.  The crime is fresh in Carl's mind; he knows beyond a doubt that the assault has happened.  So once Elsa positively identifies her assailant, Carl doesn't want to wait years for this guy to play the justice system or take a chance that this monster will get off.  He has to act.

Except he kills the wrong man.  Carl would have known that had he waited minutes until his wife accused the next man.  It would have definitely come out if there'd been a trial.  Whereas Carl didn't wait because he was sure the man was guilty, the left won't wait because it suspects that the man is innocent.

It's blatantly clear that this woman, Christine Blasey Ford, is the Democrats' "insurance policy" to keep Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court.  Senator Feinstein held this letter and kept the writer anonymous right up to the vote.  The only other "witness," Mark Judge, categorically denies that it ever happened.  And the woman can't even remember the exact date of this life-changing event.

Just as Carl acted out of revenge, so the Washington establishment has a score to settle.  Democrats want revenge for Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland.  Republicans, citing the Biden Rule, refused to hold confirmation hearings for Garland and waited for the election to consider a nominee.

Oh, and there's the matter of Trump winning the White House, defeating the Bush and Clinton dynasties and disrupting their coup.  They will never forgive, never forget.

So they'll keep trotting out victims from a nominee's or candidate's high school, grade school, kindergarten...whatever it takes.  The Washington establishment will keep straight faces as they sanctimoniously demand justice, insist that all women must be believed, that the charges are too "serious" to ignore.

Another conservative threat, another Elsa proxy to knowingly point to any man who dares to defy the left: "There he is!  That's him!"