What Sorcery is This? Kavanaugh -- and Justice -- Receive Support from Women

The media would have you believe that gargantuan hordes of women are crying or raging (or both?) over the notion that a sexual deviant awaits confirmation to the highest court in the land.

On television and social media, we’re bombarded with photos and video of ladies wailing over the travesty of Kavanaugh’s sheer existence.

But is that remotely reflective of reality? Not to Concerned Women for America.

On Thursday, a group of women came together on Capitol Hill to make their voices heard — not on behalf of unverified accuser Christine Blasey Ford but, rather, in support of Brett Kavanaugh…or just rational thought (which we desperately need — see here).

Many of the ladies — who ran the gamut in terms of race, age, and origin — wore shirts or pins announcing, “Confirm Brett Kavanaugh” or “I Stand with Brett.”

Where were the media? Why wasn’t these women’s activism immediately welcomed into MSNBC’s spotlight? Where was Anderson Cooper?

Speaking to The Daily Signal, the ladies explained their reasons for giving Kavanaugh a fair shake.

Here’s a look at some of the women on the other side of the biased media attack on a conservative man and his family:

Sonia Casey, a 55-year-old real estate investor, is a survivor of sexual assault. Nevertheless, she believes in — wait for it — proof.

“We’ve seen unjust accusations all day. … I’m a woman, so I’ll support women, but we’ve seen how accusations can destroy people’s lives.”

Gail Weiss, a Jewish conservative, said she’s “a big fan of the Constitution.” Kavanaugh “seems to be protecting it,” she explained, “so that’s why [she] would like to see him on the Supreme Court.”

“I am here because the fascists who oppose the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh on the mere basis of totally unsubstantiated allegations are leading us down [the wrong path].”

WHAT???? Pointing out that the allegations are unsubstantiated? No wonder Anderson stayed home. The world could use more Gail Weisses (please see my lament of the lack of them here).

“It’s not what I think, it’s what proof has been shown so far. If they show proof, I will believe proof. So far, there has not been any proof. … If there is no proof, then it is utterly antithetical to a democratic republic to convict someone even in the court of public opinion, to convict someone solely on an allegation. That was what the Salem witch trials did.”

Good one, Gail.

Juanita Broaddrick, the now-75-year-old who accused Bill Clinton of rape, laid it out:

“[Democrats] wanted nothing to do with [my charges against Clinton]. And now they’re here with sketchy and vague allegations against Brett Kavanaugh? This is a travesty, this is not right. … I’m sure the #MeToo [movement] has helped people, but it never helped the victims of Bill Clinton. It wanted nothing to do with us.”

Ingrid Mendez, a 55-year-old urban planner, is waiting for evidence which hasn’t been provided, as she watches the #MeToo movement embarrass itself:

“I didn’t believe [Ford] because of her lack of clarity. … Unfortunately, it does not reflect well on the #MeToo movement, and it shouldn’t. I back the #MeToo movement because they seem to have legitimate claims, and this woman’s claims are laughable.”

How about a teenager? Satya Ath is 18-years-old (What??) and from California (WHAT????) and a conservative who prefers fairness and truth to emotional hysteria:

“I feel it’s wrong that [Ford’s] voice is heard and Kavanaugh isn’t. … I do not find any of his accusers credible, especially because…Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony — in her polygraph test — doesn’t match the letter she gave Dianne Feinstein. … In a lot of public schools and college campuses, many girls do not understand that the #MeToo movement is just a sham for people denying truth.”

Sixty-seven year old Margaret McCampbell, of Baltimore, characterizes herself as liberal-leaning; however, she also leans toward rational consideration:

“I just want to hear what everyone has to say, because I think we need to listen to what everyone has to say. … We should respect the humanity in those people before we go making judgment.”

Forty-ish Debbie Martin espoused the justice of presumed innocence and due process:

“I think that if we don’t move forward with a vote, that it is setting a really dangerous precedent for this country that you can ruin someone’s life and career with one accusation. I don’t believe in that. I believe in [the principle of] innocent until proven guilty, and I just don’t like this. … I just think that this whole thing is a desperate act. I think that the Democrats don’t really care whether he’s guilty or innocent, I think they only care about keeping him off the Supreme Court at all costs.”

Last and best, twenty-two-year-old Clare Ath rattled out a statement that would surely make Alyssa Milano shake in her boots. The Chicago native — and campus outreach coordinator for the National Review Institute — melted left-wing brains everywhere with this beauty: