It’s Wednesday, October 3rd, 2018…but before we begin, along with John Fund writing at NRO., inquiring minds want to know not only…

…but more importantly, how did those two haranguing harpies get past security?!?  Think about it: you can’t even gain access to a federal facility, let alone the Russell Senate Office Building, without passing through security and having an appointment/specific permission to enter.  So, who sponsored these psychotic sociopaths?

And is there any question, were we to similarly accost/harass Dianne Feinstein in the Senate elevator, we’d have been face-down on the floor sporting handcuffs before we’d had time to self-sanctimoniously spout…

And though, while writing at his Morning Jolt, Jim Geraghty still seeks to give Flake the benefit of the doubt as to his intentions…

“I suspect Flake thought he was doing the right thing by giving Kavanaugh a way to dispel the accusations against him, and also by taking away the biggest argument from the Democrats, that “we need an FBI investigation.” But he assumed what few other Republicans did: that these objections from Democrats were made in good faith.“

…he then goes on to draw the correct conclusion:

“Jeff Flake is a sucker. (And probably, though only time will tell, a turncoat.) People acting in good faith don’t leak the name of a woman making sexual-assault accusations when she has asked to remain anonymous. People acting in good faith don’t withhold information about accusations as serious as this from their colleagues for two months. People acting in good faith don’t unveil the accusation after the confirmation hearings. People acting in good faith don’t tout the investigative abilities of the FBI for months and then turn around and express doubt that they’ll get the answers once they get that investigation.

…Senator Dianne Feinstein has done the opposite, calling for the FBI to investigate those farfetched claims…

…We will see what happens in a few days, when the FBI brings back its report.

There’s always the remote possibility that the FBI report comes back with some compelling new evidence of Kavanaugh breaking the law. But if it doesn’t, we already know what Democrats will say; most of us could guess it on Friday. The Democrats will always move the goalposts.

They will always point to new vague allegations, new “troubling rumors,” more long-forgotten acquaintances who just happened to remember some stunning new scandalous behavior and who are just coming forward now. Apparently, none of these terrible acts by Kavanaugh were serious enough to report to authorities at the time, somehow all of them managed to escape the attention of the six FBI background investigations over the years, and none of them were worth bringing up when he was nominated to be a federal judge in 2006.

Flake gave Democrats the FBI investigation they demanded; in exchange, they will give him nothing but another week of implausible accusations of horrific crimes by Kavanaugh, and more accusations that he himself as a senator is insufficiently opposed to sexual assault.“

In other words, assuming Flake isn’t playing for the other side, he cut the worst deal since Chamberlain’s capitulation to Hitler in Munich.  Note we didn’t mention The Obamao’s Iran deal…since we’ve no doubt whatsoever Barry WAS playing for the other side!

Now, here’s The Gouge!

First up, Jim Geraghty wonders…

Why Are Recent Events Difficult to Recall As Well?

Sexual-assault investigator Rachel Mitchell provided an analysis of Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony. Among her observations and conclusions:

• Ford said the alleged assault occurred in “the mid-1980s” in a July 6 text to the Washington Post; by September, she told the paper that it occurred in summer of 1982.
• Ford refused to provide any notes from her therapist to the committee.
• The notes of the therapist described in the Post article say that four boys were in the room when she was assaulted; Ford says the therapist made an error. In her letter to Feinstein, Ford said “me and four others” were at the party. Testifying before the committee, she said the party had herself, Leland Keyser, and four boys, but she can only remember three of their names.
• In the statement to the polygrapher, Ford described P.J. Smith as a “bystander.” In her statement to the polygrapher, she did not list Leland Keyser. While testifying to the committee, she said P.J. Smith was not in the room and did not witness the attack, and that it was inaccurate to describe him as a bystander.
• Perhaps most oddly, Ford said she could not recall if she showed the Washington Post reporter the full or partial set of therapy notes. Ford said she could not recall if she summarized the therapist’s notes for the reporter or whether she showed the notes to the reporter. These are events that occurred about three months ago, not years ago.
• She claimed she reached out to the Post because she “did not know how” to contact her senator.
• She could not remember the date of the polygraph or whether she was video or audio recorded.

In other words, the Titanic‘s starboard bow had fewer holes in it than Ford’s story.  And, the innumerable claims to her believability from both sides of the aisle notwithstanding, anyone viewing her testimony dispassionately…i.e., absent a political agenda…AND without concern over future employment opportunities, could only conclude she’s either crazy or lying…or perhaps both.

As Joel Goodman notes at Townhall.com:

“When Christine Blasey Ford opened her mouth at the Senate confirmation hearing, my mouth dropped. The voice that I heard was not anything like what I expected. Dr. Ford sounded like a child. Her whispered voice was several degrees less of a mature woman’s voice than the voice Marilyn Monroe used in her created screen persona generations ago.

Ford came off as an innocent pubescent child – like a 15-year-old teenager.  Like the one that was allegedly sexually assaulted. She couldn’t bring us facts. Instead, she brought us herself as the put upon child of 36 years ago. Ford’s act was exactly that – an act.  The proper word is disingenuous.

…Her story had no forensic evidence, no corroborating witnesses. The timing of the allegations themselves was more than suspect. Ford is no fool. She’s no one’s puppet. She’s an operative working for someone…”

Beyond any shadow of the remotest doubt.

Next up, courtesy of American Greatness, Victor Davis Hanson pens an…

Epitaph for a Dying Culture

“The Kavanaugh confirmation hearings and their endless sequelae have ended up as an epitaph for a spent culture for which its remedies are felt to be worse than its diseases. Think 338 B.C., A.D. 476, 1453, or 1939.

The coordinated effort to destroy Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court required the systematic refutation of the entire notion of Western jurisprudence by senators and much of the American legal establishment. And there was no hesitation in doing just that on the part of Senate Democrats, the #MeToo movement, and the press. And I write this at a moment in which conservatives and Republicans still control the majority of governorships, state legislatures, the U.S. Senate, the House of Representatives, the Supreme Court and the presidency—a reminder that culture so often is far more powerful than politics.

So, here we were to be left with a new legal and cultural standard in adjudicating future disagreements and disputes, an utterly anti-Western standard quite befitting for our new relativist age:

1. The veracity of accusations will hinge on the particular identity, emotions, and ideology of the accuser;
2. Evidence, or lack of it, will be tangential, given the supposed unimpeachable motives of the ideologically correct accuser;
3. The burden of proof and evidence will rest with the accused to disprove the preordained assumption of guilt;
4. Hearsay will be a valuable narrative and constitute legitimate evidence;
5. Truth is not universal, but individualized. Ford’s “truth” is as valid as the “Truth,” given that competing narratives are adjudicated only by access to power. Ford is a victim, therefore her truth trumps “their” truth based on evidence and testimony.
6. Questionable and inconsistent testimony are proof of trauma and therefore exactitude; recalling an accusation to someone is proof that the action in the accusation took place.
7. Statutes of limitations do not exist; any allegation of decades prior is as valid as any in the present. All of us are subject at any moment to unsubstantiated accusations from decades past that will destroy lives.
8. Assertion of an alleged crime is unimpeachable proof. Recall of where, when, why, and how it took place is irrelevant.
9. Individual accusations will always be subservient to cosmic causes; individuals are irrelevant if they do not serve ideological aims. All accusations fit universal stereotypes whose rules of finding guilt or innocence trump those of individual cases.
10. The accuser establishes the conditions under which charges are investigated; the accused nods assent.

Our cultural traditions are being insidiously rewritten in this new Dark Age…”

And The Left, once held up as the Progressive protectors of individual freedoms and civil rights…

…are the willing scriveners.

These truly are the times that try men’s souls…and we’ll shortly find out whether Jeff Flake’s stands with light or darkness.

Case in point, courtesy of subscriber Andy Meyers and one whacked-out professor at Georgetown University:

Georgetown professor says white GOP senators ‘deserve miserable deaths’ after Kavanaugh hearing

“…Dr. Carol Christine Fair, an associate professor in the Security Studies Program at Georgetown, said white Republican senators, specifically Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC, who defended Kavanaugh in a fiery speech, “deserve miserable deaths.” Fair went on to say in her Saturday message that the living should “castrate their corpses and feed them to swine.”…”

Any question, had she expressed similar sentiments about Barack Hussein Obama and/or Chuck Schumer, Dr. Fair would be seeking alternate employment?!?

Hate: it’s a characteristic of contemporary Progressives…so you wouldn’t understand!

Which brings us, appropriately enough, to The Lighter Side:

Finally, we’ll call it a day with the latest installment of our Why Not Just Outlaw Stupidity?!? segment, as…

Researchers recommend ‘no-selfie zones’ to prevent tourist accidents

“As an increasing number of people die due to selfie-related accidents, researchers are calling for “no-selfie zones” at tourist locations across the globe to prevent people from partaking in risky behavior for the sake of the perfect photo.

According to a new study in the Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, at least 259 people died from October 2011 to November 2017 while snapping selfies, with the highest number occurring amongst 20 to 29-year-olds — with 72.5 percent being male. The researchers note, “Selfies are themselves not harmful, but the human behavior that accompanies selfies is dangerous. Individuals need to be educated regarding certain risky behaviors and risky places where selfies should not be taken.”

In one such example of this risky behavior, a man’s attempt at a selfie in Maryland above the swollen Potomac River nearly turned deadly Sunday when he slipped into the raging waters and had to be rescued by bystanders.

Earlier this year, a 20-year-old student from India fell to his death while taking photos at a popular ocean cliff tourist attraction in Australia. The young man was posing for selfies when he slipped off the 131-foot precipice and was swept out to sea. This photo was taken right before the man’s fatal fall:

In England, tourists have been seen on numerous occasions posing atop a dangerous chalk cliff edge 200 feet above jagged rocks at Seaford Head in East Sussex. (shown under headline above.)

…Incidents such as these are why researchers deem it necessary to take action. “’No-selfie zones’ should be declared across tourist areas especially places such as water bodies, mountain peaks, and over tall buildings to decrease the incidence of selfie-related deaths,” the study concludes.“

Where would we be without researchers?!?  Yeah,…that’ll work!  As we’ve often said, why not just outlaw stupidity?!?

Magoo