The October Surprise is a political tactic that has been used in the past to convince the public that a candidate is unfit for office. It is done close enough to the election so that there is not adequate time to research the the accusation before the election. Sometimes it works; sometimes it doesn’t. Somehow the accusation and the accusers disappear after the election. Rarely does the accused get a chance to redeem his reputation. In the past the tactic has been used in presidential campaigns and Congressional campaigns. A form of it has also been used to attempt to block Supreme Court nominees. It worked on Robert Bork; it failed on Clarence Thomas. I have no idea what is going to happen with Judge Kavanaugh.<\/p>\n
There are a few things to consider in the attack on Judge Kavanaugh. Paul Mirengoff at Power Line<\/a> posted an article today that revealed the following:<\/p>\n It looks like Brett Kavanaugh\u2019s mother, Judge Martha Kavanaugh, ruled against the parents of Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who accuses Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault. Court documents<\/a> show the losing party in a foreclosure case Martha Kavanaugh heard to be Ralph and Paula Blasey of Potomac, Maryland. They appear to be Christine Blasey Ford\u2019s parents.<\/strong><\/p>\n The fact that Kavanaugh\u2019s mother ruled against Ford\u2019s parents doesn\u2019t prove Ford is lying about the conduct of the son. Her allegation, coming so many years after the fact and without a description of when or where the event supposedly occurred, is probably not susceptible to being ruled out conclusively. But there now seems to be a motive, beyond partisan politics, for Ford to make up or significantly embellish her story so long after the \u201cfact.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n In any event, the fact that Ford\u2019s story, having been presented so late and with little detail as to time and place, is probably not susceptible to being ruled out means that, if not \u201cruled in\u201d conclusively, the story should not preclude Kavanaugh\u2019s confirmation. We have statutes of limitations for a reason.<\/strong><\/p>\n Finally, unless we accept the view that Kavanaugh truly attempted to rape this girl, I don\u2019t believe his conduct provides a basis for rejecting his nomination. Kavanaugh was still a teenager. More than five dozen women who knew him at the time vouch for his behavior. His female law clerks consider him a gentleman and a mentor.<\/strong><\/p>\n The American Thinker<\/a> posted an article today detailing some of Ms. Ford’s student reviews. It is very obvious that Ms. Ford easily fits into the category of a radical liberal. The question is whether or not she has any foundational principles that would prevent her from making false accusations.<\/p>\n The article at The American Thinker concludes:<\/p>\n So has Kavanaugh gotten on Ford’s bad side by expressing conservative ideas? \u00a0Probably. \u00a0And even if her allegations are true, I very much doubt she’d have come forward had Kavanaugh stayed on her good side by being a leftist reprobate in the mold of Slick Willie or Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy. \u00a0For a good example of such situational sexual mores, note that liberal reporter Nina Burleigh actually\u00a0said<\/a>\u00a0in 1998 about B. Clinton, “I’d be happy to give him [oral sex] just to thank him for keeping abortion legal.”<\/strong><\/p>\n As for Kavanaugh, unless it’s shown that he’s like Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy and has exhibited a pattern of sexual wrongdoing, there’s nothing to see here. \u00a0Ford claims that the 36-year-old alleged incident of sexual misconduct took place in a room with only her and the two boys present. \u00a0So while 65 women who knew Kavanaugh in high school\u00a0have come forward<\/a>\u00a0to vouch for his character as a gentleman, Ford’s lone word is the only claim against him. \u00a0Heck, there are more testimonials as to Ford’s alleged insanity than there are regarding Kavanaugh’s alleged impropriety.<\/strong><\/p>\n This is foul play on the part of the anti-Trump crowd. The fact that Jeff Flake is using these accusations as an excuse not to vote Judge Kavanaugh out of committee and let the Senate vote is an indication of where things are. The fact that the Democrats are using this tactic to attempt to stall the nomination also illustrates their pettiness in trying to prevent the President from exercising his Constitutional right to select judges. The actions of Diane Feinstein and the other Democrats involved in this smear campaign are a disgrace to their party and to their country. These are the people who supported Bill Clinton as President when there was current evidence against him. Now they have discovered morality and can’t support a man with a questionable accusation from thirty years ago. That really does not pass the smell test.<\/p>\n \n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The October Surprise is a political tactic that has been used in the past to convince the public that a candidate is unfit for office. It is done close enough to the election so that there is not adequate time … Continue reading