The entire world has been witness to a disgraceful display during the hearings concerning Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. The outrageous protests during the actual hearings contributed to a circus of Leftist anger cloaked in ridiculous costumes.
By this juncture of the Trump presidency, most observers have grown used to such clownish behavior. The fact that it can and does escalate to violence from the Left is also growing disturbingly common.
However, the depths of disgrace to which the Left can sink was not yet plumbed. That was revealed after the hearings were over and a vote for Kavanaugh was likely.
False and salacious accusations of sexual assault were then sprung by a Democratic Senator and a delay in the vote was demanded. It was the beginning of elevating emotion over reason and evidence to destroy a good man and a nation in the process.
Comparing Left and Right
I commented on this fiasco of a process in response to one of my favorite bloggers’ posts about the Kavanaugh hearings. In the comment, I noted that this kind of thing was never the case when a Democratic nominee for SCOTUS is up for approval.
However, one person took strong objection to that observation. She brought up the case of Merrick Garland from the Obama era saying that the delay and refusal to hold hearings was comparable to this salacious circus with Kavanaugh.
There is no moral equivalency here. The immoral behavior is ensconced firmly on the Democratic left, as they have demonstrated aptly since the 2016 election.
Garland wasn’t subjected to sensationalized examination of his high school yearbook. There was never an accusation of sexual assault or gang rape leveled at him.
Garland didn’t have threats leveled at his family. He wasn’t cursed at and mocked by protesters, some of whom were violent.
In short, Merrick Garland was never the target of personal character assassination by the Republicans. Nor would that have happened were hearings conducted for Garland’s nomination.
Credibility Is Not by Emotion Alone
The delay was to accommodate the accuser who at first insisted upon anonymity but then agreed to testify and tell her side of this “new” story. Actually, not so new, as the Senator actually had the written accusations in hand last July, two months prior to the hearings.
In the first place, this casts doubt on the sincerity of Senator Diane Feinstein of California. It seems apparent she wasn’t interested in even bringing this forward at all unless it needed to be used to stop Kavanaugh from becoming confirmed.
It is also evident that Feinstein had virtually no concern for the welfare of the accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. If she did, I wouldn’t know her name and neither would anyone else.
Moreover, this terrible farce will not serve to help real victims of sexual crimes. Instead, it will make it harder for accounts to be believed even if the stories are credible. So much for the Democrats helping women.
The media coverage almost unanimously characterized the Senate testimony of both the accuser and accused as “credible.” That is incorrect.
According to Dictionary.com, a credible statement is “capable of being believed; believable.” What, then, determines whether or not a statement is believable?
Emotion alone cannot determine believability. Emotion can influence believability, but it cannot determine what a credible statement is.
Ms. Ford may have produced compelling testimony, but a lack of evidence voids its credibility. She could not recall the time or day or month the assault happened. She could only narrow it down to the summer of 1982, she thinks.
She wasn’t sure where the attack happened, just that it happened at a party at a house she can’t locate for anyone. She not sure who else was there, except perhaps one friend of Kavanaugh’s.
Before her testimony, Ms. Ford had never said she was absolutely sure she had been groped by Kavanaugh. During her testimony, she claimed a renewed surety that it was Kavanaugh.
Evidence Is Essential for Credibility
Kavanaugh’s denial is not simply emotional, it is supported by real substance. His testimony presented evidence to bolster believability.
He produced his meticulously kept daily calendar for the summer of 1982, during high school. He also has sworn statements from his acquaintances to both his character and his activities in high school.
This is evidence which can be easily verified. Credibility, in this case, belongs to Kavanaugh and not Ms. Ford.
Unfortunately, the Senate Democrats have already accomplished one of their primary goals. Kavanaugh was to be seated after confirmation this past Monday but didn’t happen.
The new goal is to delay until the midterm elections. The legitimizing of feeling over fact here has made that goal within reach, and it could be the beginning of rampant injustice.
If emotion is given the power to make any accusation credible then the evidence is useless. If evidence becomes useless to determine guilt or innocence, anyone the powerful dislike can be accused and punished without any evidence.
All that is required is a finger pointed angrily toward an enemy with the words, “I accuse you of …” You pick the crime. It may begin with sexual violations, but it won’t stop there.
That describes the system of justice employed by the worst despotic regimes in history. Emotion overruling evidence has sent people to the Soviet Gulag and the Nazi concentration camps.
When emotion rules the day, a mere accusation is enough to condemn innocent people. In fact, we don’t have to look at history in other lands to see the process in operation.
Truth Is Not Male or Female
The new mantra since the #MeToo movement came to fruition is ‘I believe women.’ It means that women should automatically be believed when making allegations of sexual assault.
Why is this the case? Because society has been assured that no woman would lie about such a terrible crime against their person.
However, most people know this is not reality. After all, there are famous cases of women making false accusations of sexual crimes in America, and men suffering unjustly as a consequence.
Take, for example, the infamous case of false rape allegations against the Duke Men’s Lacrosse team in 2006. This video from 2007 gives an accurate account of what really happened.
Both the media and the Duke professors quickly jumped to the accuser’s side and aided and abetted the public destruction of innocent men.
All of the accused players are involved with the Innocence Project, which uses DNA evidence to overturn wrongful convictions. Said Reade Seligmann, upon his exoneration:
“This entire experience has opened my eyes to a tragic world of injustice I never knew existed. If police officers and a district attorney can systematically railroad us with absolutely no evidence whatsoever, I can’t imagine what they’d do to people who do not have the resources to defend themselves.”
Lest we forget another case closer in time, there are the false rape allegations at the University of Virginia in 2014. What began as a Rolling Stone article about a gang rape on campus ended up with a lawsuit against the magazine by the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity.
The truth is that women lie and men lie about all kinds of things, including sexual assault. That is the reason facts, evidence, witnesses, and corroboration are required or injustice will pave the path to slavery.
Elevating Emotion Over Evidence is Extremely Dangerous
Disregarding evidence in favor of emotional testimony is an extremely dangerous practice. The setting doesn’t have to be in a courtroom to make it so hazardous.
The court of public opinion is perhaps worse than a legal venue. That is because the public arena has far fewer rules than a court of law.
The only regulation in a free and open society which prevents an injustice is self-regulation. Unless one exercises restraint, laws are just words on paper.
If emotion overwhelms self-restraint, any law can and will be broken. Moreover, anyone can be severely hurt and not just physically.
The destruction of a person’s reputation and livelihood can be even more damaging than physical attacks. As someone once asked, “Where do you go to get your reputation back?”
The potential of this public attitude is truly a cause for great alarm. If the people become convinced that the accused is not ‘innocent until proven guilty’ it will be because evidence has been jettisoned by emotion.
When that happens, individuals in power that oppose the Socialist Left will be targeted and accused of some egregious behavior in order to be rid of them. After that is successful a few times, groups of adversaries will also have accusations aimed at them.
Some of the targeted groups will have formerly favored the Left’s agenda of Socialism. However, they will be taken down also because of their lack of fervor for eliminating the opposition.
Eventually, the majority will adjust to a society of J’accuse. They will be properly primed to grant authority to someone who will remake America into a third-world nation.
Anyone who objects will have an accusatory finger pointed at them, and their family and friends. They will all be eliminated one way or another.
The fear of this will pervade the culture. The nation will be reduced to two groups. Those who go along with the government masters, and those who refuse.
Those who refuse will also consist of two groups. Those who run and hide or those who are punished.
Then, a nation that was once the wonder of the world and the flagship of freedom will fall. The Left’s march toward slavery will be complete.
That is why the power of the emotional accusation is so dangerous and goes far beyond the Kavanaugh hearings fiasco. Because if the Left can triumph here, they can and will attempt greater action to advance their evil.
Deu_19:15 A single witness shall not suffice against a person for any crime or for any wrong in connection with any offense that he has committed. Only on the evidence of two witnesses or of three witnesses shall a charge be established. Deuteronomy 19:15 [ESV]
Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Version, Crossway Bibles 2001
Top image courtesy of DonkeyHotey’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of Mobilus in Mobili’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Jacob Freeze’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of SalFalko’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of grace mcdunnough’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 5 courtesy of Fibonacci Blue’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 6 courtesy of Pablo Pecora’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
All other sources linked or cited in the text
Originally published in TILJournal online