The lynching of Justice Kavanaugh

The Democrats are at it again


History repeats itself and those who do not learn from history continue down a path that has become well-worn over the years by stupid and ignorant politicians who continue to do the same bone-headed moves and allow for the same injustices to the citizens of our country. And no politician is as good at replicating the past as today’s radical liberal progressive Democrats and their accomplices in the media.

This is not just about the attempted destruction of a well-qualified Supreme Court Justice in Brett Kavanaugh through the use of unsubstantiated innuendoes, lies, deceit and possibly a profit motive of a sexual assault claimant.

It is the Democrat Party’s obvious determination to utterly destroy Justice Kavanaugh, his wife, family, and children, in scorched-earth fashion with complete disregard for our legal system’s “assumption of innocent until proven guilty by a preponderance of evidence”.

The policy of personal destruction has been an accepted standard for the Democrat Party since it opted to join the Marxist movement to take over America.

We have been witnessing a circus of clowns in the Senate hearings, and I hate to use that analogy because it shines a bad light on clowns, who through all their grandstanding to please their Hate-Trump base, are holding a lynching party in historic and true Democrat fashion that takes us back to the days of the Ku Klux Klan.

There is no other entity which has a more stellar record of terror by lynching than the Democrat Party.

Since the media has come right out and declared their anti-Trump position and support for the Deep State coup d’etat, the media is even more complicit in these events than they were in the historic terror which ravaged Black America following the Civil War up to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1960.

There is no such thing as unbiased or fair news coverage any longer from either the press or the TV networks, who will say and do anything to further the cause to overthrow the Trump Administration and any of his programs (including judges) to Make America Great Again.

So to understand the anger on the part of fair-minded Americans (probably only conservative Americans these days), I present you with the following facts. Challenge them if you wish, but come only with fact’s not your feelings.

The mainstream newspapers have so overwhelming come out in support of the accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, that they haven’t the cajones themselves to question the veracity of her allegations against the judge.

Her recall of details which one would normally expect a person raising such issues to remember, are a “no show” at the hearings. But the Democrats overlook this as well as all the rest of her pathetic case she pleads.

Ms. Ford is not some pale little maiden with little knowledge of worldly matters. She knew enough to wipe out her social media bias rhetoric and any trace of her radical social views, and then tried to scrub her support for the radical “pussy hat brigade”. These are just for starters as she lined herself up to reap hundreds of thousands of dollars from a Go Fund Me account.

When making such allegations one would think the accuser would be forthright and truthful. BUT . . . Thanks to the Gateway Pundit we find that during testimony last Thursday in front of Senate Judiciary Committee, Christine Ford identified herself as a “Research Psychologist” at the Stanford School of Medicine.

Following a search of the Department of Consumer Affairs License Bureau, Gateway Pundit was not able to produce any results for Christine Ford or deviations of her name.

In an attempt to come to Ms. Ford rescue, NPR explained why they don’t call Christine Ford a doctor because they reserve the title of “Dr.” for an individual who holds a doctor of dental surgery, medicine, optometry, osteopathic medicine, podiatric medicine or veterinary medicine, etc. Fact is, she isn’t a doctor of anything!

She may have a PHD but she in not allowed to use the title of doctor in a professional position by California law.

NPR must have attempted to hide this misrepresentation because there are no state records that show Ford is a licensed psychologist. This is  direct hit on Ford’s credibility.

Christine Blasey Ford’s bio page on the Stanford website was altered earlier this month in an attempt to cover up this little discrepancy after the fact, but not until after the truth had already been disclosed by Gateway Pundit. Here’s the original bio page before her Senate Judiciary Committee testimony.

But let’s get right to the heart of the matter. Many on the left, particularly the Never-Trump crowd get their news from the mainstream media – New York Times, Washington Post, CNN, ABC, MSNBC, and NBC, so before I present a few of the facts at hand, I need to address how Mainstream Media is “covering this story” from Ford’s corner of the ring:

The Washington Post and its so-called “Right of Center” Op-ed writer, Jennifer Rubin, lambasted the Phoenix based prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, saying she was no more than a mouthpiece for the committee’s Republican members, and that Mitchell concluded that Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh were not prosecutable for a number of substantial reasons.

But most important was the over-bloated and self importance BS which was the crux of what the Washington Post and Jennifer Rubin had the gall to say:

“A reasonable prosecutor (Rachel Mitchell) — and a fair one — knows she must pursue every lead before deciding whether to bring a criminal case . . . As anyone with eyes and a modicum of good sense knows, Republicans’ gutless format and silence demonstrated that they have nothing in their bag of tricks other than innuendo, smears and blind partisanship. It turns out that’s just not good enough when one faces a thoroughly honest and sympathetic victim. They are playing a political game. She is relating a searing life experience.”

Where were these”journalists” when we Americans wanted a reasonable prosecutor with eyes and a modicum of good sense to pursue every lead before deciding whether to bring a criminal case against the felonious actions of Hillary Clinton and those involved in the overthrow of the Trump Administration! Such utter hypocrisy. This devil speaks out of both sides of her mouth!

Additionally, for anyone in the press, to call the Republicans’ format a gutless and silent demonstration and that “they have nothing in their bag of tricks other than innuendo, smears and blind partisanship”, is over-the-wall stupidity.

What the heck does she think the Democrats and their pals in the media have done to Judge Kavanaugh and every conservative who has come down the pike!

And to show the height of hypocrisy and in utter disbelief we have an unbelievable verbal assault on Judge Kavanaugh in a statement by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Connecticut. With a history of lying about his military service in Vietnam he had the guts to announce “falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus” translated into English means, “false in one thing, false in everything.” I believe this to be true about Ms. Ford, not Judge Kavanaugh.

Now, let’s address the Washington Post’s contention about Ford’s testimony and allegations. Is Ms. Ford really fair and thoroughly honest? You be the judge.

Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened, where it happened, or the details need to be believable. She struggled to initially identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name, however her husband claims he recalls she identified Judge Kavanaugh by name in 2012.

At that point, Judge Kavanaugh’s name was widely reported in the press as a potential Supreme Court nominee if Governor Romney had won the presidential election against Obama.

Dr. Ford, when speaking with her husband, changed her description of what happened on that night. She testified she told her husband about a “sexual assault” before they were married, referring to this incident, but then told the Washington Post that she informed her husband that she was the victim of “physical abuse” at the beginning of their marriage. There is a big difference in such terminology.

Furthermore, Dr. Ford testified she couldn’t remember key details of the night in question which are details which might help add credibility to her story. While she named three supposed eye witnesses to the event, along with a friend name Leland Keyser, all have submitted swore statements to the Senate Committee denying any memory of the party whatsoever.

I think even more relevant is that her good friend Ms. Keyser in her first statement to the Committee through her attorney, stated that, “she does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.” Ms. Keyser in further statements through her attorney claims, “the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate Dr. Ford’s allegations because she has no recollection of the incident in question.”

What makes this whole affair stink to high heaven is that Dr. Ford testified that her friend, the only other girl at the party, did not follow up with her afterwards to ask why she had suddenly disappeared.

Either this is some friend, or a phantom dream out of nowhere. If the event happened, if it were my friend, I would not have forgotten about it, and like any one considered a friend, I would have asked about it at least the next day

The Arizona prosecutor, Rachel Mitchell who questioned Ford’s version of events, made note of the shifting timeline of when the attack occurred,  and of Ford’s inability to remember how she got home, the ambiguity of her willingness to remain anonymous, and the failure of a single witness to back up her story. She might have coughed up four potential witnesses, but none would or could validate anything she said.

Now, while she maintains that she suffers from anxiety, claustrophobia, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) today, it doesn’t look like she presents symptoms of such disorders, particularly PTSD which I am very familiar with in dealing with Vietnam Veterans.

Even more strange is that Ms. Ford claims that her symptoms prevent her from flying. If so, then how could she honestly testify that she flies “fairly frequently for her hobbies and work.” Furthermore, she told the Committee that she flies to the mid-Atlantic at least once a year to visit her family and has flown to Hawaii, French Polynesia, and Costa Rica. She also flew to Washington, D.C. for the hearing.

She alleges that she struggled academically in college, but she has never made any similar claim about her last two years of high school. Even so Ms. Ford used the word “contributed” when she described the psychological impact has had when interviewed by the Washington Post.

Everyone should be curious about Ford’s use of the word “contributed” rather than “caused” as this suggests that other life events have contributed to her symptoms; anyway why hasn’t anyone called these other events into question? In passing, all Ms. Ford had to say about other contributory events . . . “nothing as striking as the alleged assault”.

So when Rachel Mitchell, the Arizona sex crimes prosecutor hired by majority members as to be the inquisitor for the Senate Committee, and issued a report labeling the accusations “even weaker” than a case of “he said, she said”,  Ms. Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post cries “foul”.

Wait a minute here . . .  Ms. Ford isn’t the only victim is this affair. The Democrats and the Media have taken it upon themselves to, without any misconceptions, launched an assault to destroy a Supreme Court nominee after already being investigated by the FBI for previous judgeships, on six previous occasions over the last 30+ years.  This is a miscarriage in the extreme, and an abuse of the Democrats’ Senatorial powers.

There has not been enough evidence to even present to a Grand Jury, let alone to seek a warrant from any court in the country. This prejudged persecution flies in the face of everything our country stands for. The U.S. Constitution spells it out very clearly and should be understood by all Americas . . . The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, states:

“Everyone charged with a penal offense has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense.”

Do you agree with conspiracy theorists that Boofing is a Democrat construct designed to derail Judge Kavanaugh from his rightful seat on the bench?


We See The World From All Sides and Want YOU To Be Fully Informed
In fact, intentional disinformation is a disgraceful scourge in media today. So to assuage any possible errant incorrect information posted herein, we strongly encourage you to seek corroboration from other non-VT sources before forming an educated opinion.

About VT - Policies & Disclosures - Comment Policy
Due to the nature of uncensored content posted by VT's fully independent international writers, VT cannot guarantee absolute validity. All content is owned by the author exclusively. Expressed opinions are NOT necessarily the views of VT, other authors, affiliates, advertisers, sponsors, partners, or technicians. Some content may be satirical in nature. All images are the full responsibility of the article author and NOT VT.


  1. It’s not even remotely surprising that men who are trained to claw their way to the top by trampling other men see women as objects to be used and discarded. The elite private schools they are sent to train them to be this way to take their inherited positions in the hierarchy.

    Ultimately it does not matter what this man did or did not do when he was seventeen.

    Nor, since he is not on a trial of any kind does a “presumption of innocence” apply. Usually, when just accusations of sexual abuse and alcoholism come up in a job interview, you’re done.

    Rather we should look at his track record as an adult, in particular his appalling endorsement as White House counsel of torture, detention without trial, ignoring the Geneva Conventions, abolishing habeas corpus. We might also consider his work on Starr’s staff in the politically motivated attempted impeachment of President Clinton.

    It is his long track record of discarding the rule of law laid down by the Founders that disqualifies Kavanaugh from a position on the highest court. His performance at the hearing also revealed the childish temperament of a member of the class that makes the rules that keep the rest of us in our place but to which he expects he will never be held accountable himself.

Comments are closed.