Now that the woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault has come forward (something anyone who was not born yesterday knew was going to happen), stand by for a deluge of women making similar claims with the same amount of evidence – none.
This is Roy Moore 2.0 … And I will be uncouth enough to say “We told you so.”
Apparently, it’s become a source of great annoyance to some people – now aghast at what’s happening to Brett Kavanaugh – when it is pointed out to them that the decision to deny Roy Moore the presumption of innocence set a precedent that practically begged the Democrats and their media allies to try the same maneuver again.
Let’s be blunt; it only stings because the truth hurts.
Many who joined the mob and convicted Roy Moore in the court of public opinion, and are now struggling to differentiate his case from that of Kavanaugh, insisted that the definitive difference was that Moore’s accuser was not unknown, that she was willing to go on record.
Well, now we have a name – I repeat, whoever thought she was going to remain anonymous must be ludicrously naive. That she would “reluctantly” come forward to “confirm” her allegations was just as predictable as the fact that the Democrats would try the Roy Moore tactic again.
After all, if it worked in Ruby Red Alabama and they were able to get a critical mass of Republicans to join them, why not try it again? The stakes don’t get much higher than a Supreme Court nomination, after all.
Prediction; the Democrats will now rustle up a few more women (I’m sure Planned Parenthood, NARAL and NOW have a list handy) to make similarly unprovable allegations and schedule them for non-intrusive softball interviews on national television.
So we’ll now have multiple women making unprovable allegations of events that happened decades ago at exactly the most politically opportune time. The women would have no one ask them any challenging questions about the supposed events in question, and indeed any attempt to do so would be denounced as attacking “the victim.”
Be prepared to hear a lot of the question-begging phrase “credibly accused” and disingenuous (burden of proof reversing) demands for Kavanaugh to answer “what reason could she have to lie?”
Disingenuous because any attempt by Kavanaugh himself, his friends and supporters to defend him would be similarly deemed “insensitive” and out of bounds. Any attempt to point out the blatant political motive would also be denounced.
The Stupid Party – how apt.
Tell me again, how is this different from what happened to Roy Moore?