How Kavanaugh Exemplifies American Justice

Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA) who recently spoke with CBS stated her support of Supreme Court justice nominee Brett Kavanaugh at the peak of his sexual misconduct accusations showed women all over America that people are innocent until proven guilty.

Ernst added she will continue her support of Kavanaugh unless real proof is actually presented.

CBS’s John Dickerson asked, “What message does a vote of support for Judge Kavanaugh send to women in America?”

“What message that sends to women in America is that we are innocent until proven guilty in this great country,” Ernst responded. “And I have absolutely no doubt after reviewing Dr. Ford’s testimony that she has suffered from something very traumatic in her lifetime, but, simply, the corroboration wasn’t there with even the witnesses that she brought forward.”

  • Yeah, this thing…innocent until proven guilty didn’t work out too well for the Central Park 5 that Trump said should be executed…long before their trial and even after they were proven innocent. White Water…Republicans still say the Clintons are guilty even after proven innocent, along with the Vince Foster case…

    So why avoid the accusers and give a thorough FBI investigation instead of interviewing just one and three of Kavanaugh’s buddies. There has even been witnesses trying in vain to contact the FBI to be interviewed some even once were Kavanaugh friends, but the FBI refuses any contact with them…

    • Estell Newton

      I hate to tell you this but some agents have been known to tell you your entire background without you saying a thing. I know this because I met one of them in Phoenix.

      • …and Estell, your point…

        • Estell Newton


          • Is that so, then why do any vetting…

          • Estell Newton

            They have to. It’s their job.

          • Too easy a reply, Estell…redundancy at its best…

          • Estell Newton

            write the book yourself. I don’t write them

  • GetReal4U2

    poor liberals…go ahead and cry…boo…freakin’…hoo…

    oh…and que the utter meltdown…

    TRUMP 2020!

  • Patrick Feeney

    The Democrat Party has become a left wing hate group populated with anti-Christian bigots. They are unfit to serve! They should bed brought up on charges.

    • john vieira

      Next month make sure you carry that sentiment with you into the polling station!!!!

  • W. Coyote

    “….people are innocent until proven guilty.” , unless your last name is Clinton. Then the presumption of guilt is OK in the right wing echo chamber.

    • dana-w

      The evidence available to the public regarding Clinton emails, negligent handling of classified documents are way past the level of uncorroborated smears issued by Dems this last month. The Clinton scandal is that she was not prosecuted….but failure to prosecuted by the DOJ is not proof of her innocence.
      Ford’s inability to put forth viable witnesses, location, time, or other evidence makes it difficult to make any legal case against kavanaugh. It is not prosecutable….and hard to investigate after 3 decades..can you see the difference?.

      • W. Coyote

        dana- Good morning and thank you for your reply.. Could you please point me in the direction of “The evidence available to the public regarding Clinton emails”? I would really like to see what you are referring to. Since you express a concern about “negligent handling of classified” information, I’m sure you are also outraged about the time in May of 2017 when Trump shared highly classified intelligence with the Russian foreign minister and ambassador in the White House.
        This was not a “legal case against kavanaugh”. It was a hearing to determine if he has the legal background and character to sit on the Supreme Court. I agree that it is hard to investigate after 3 decades. But lost in the all the misplaced anger by the Republicans is the fact that Dr. Ford tried to alert her congresswoman and the Washington Post before Kavanaugh was nominated. When she saw his name on the “short list”, she reached out in the only way she knew how to prevent him from being selected. In other words, it was not a last minute hit job as claimed by the Republicans.
        In the “conservative” media, Hillary is known as “crooked” and a “liar”. Ok. What crime has she been convicted of? What lie has she told?
        In the “conservative” media Bill Clinton is called a “rapist”. Ok. When was he convicted of rape? Remember “innocent until proven guilty”?

        • JayKay4

          As I recall, Bill Clinton lied under oath and was fined and disbarred for it.

          • W. Coyote

            You are right about that. Of course that doesn’t explain why so many people commonly refer to Bill Clinton as a “rapist”. I’ll ask you- when was Clinton convicted of rape?

          • JayKay4

            Bill Clinton was accused of raping Juanita Broderick in 1978. She was afraid to press charges due to threats from both Bill and Hillery regarding the event, because she owned nursing homes that he could shut down as Arkansas attorney general. If she brought the charges to the police, there he was again as attorney general. Unlike Christine Blasey Ford, who could not come up with one iota of corroborating evidence, Juanta Broderick had plenty of corroborating evidence and told many of her friends and family about the rape immediately. There is little doubt that Bill Clinton is in fact a rapist and even many of his fellow democrats acknowledge this. At the time he was running for president and occupied the oval office, the media who did their best to protect him while ignoring Juanita Broderick gave cute little explanations about dragging a $10 bill through a trailer court and so on or that it should be ignored because it was “all about sex,.” implying that it was consensual. Contrast this with the Ford accusation, which was completely devoid of evidence, and everybody treating her with kid gloves for fear the poor snow flake might melt. Many of the necessary questions were not asked, because they might sound too challenging for the poor dear. Very little is said about her lying to congress in her response to the question about teaching someone how to defeat a lie detector test. So without any corroborating evidence, we are to accept without question that Brett Kavanaugh is guilty of sexual assault, because Ford says he is. That goes against everything this country stands for.

          • W. Coyote

            Jay- Good evening and thank you for providing more detail to back up your views. Just so you know, I am still pissed at Bill Clinton. If he had kept his pants zipped with Monica, then possibly, just possibly, we could have prevented 9/11, but that’s another story.
            I will agree with you to the extent that the Juanita Broderick story is very concerning. It could have happened. But, like Dr. Ford, there were no witnesses, nor was there any physical evidence. So what’s the difference? You believe Juanita, but not Christine. How come?
            Beyond that, there is also the real possibility that they had consensual sex, but Broderick came up with the rape story, because she didn’t want her boyfriend to know that she was cheating on him. It also is curious that she called the local newspaper when Gov. Clinton came to her nursing home to have pictures made.
            In any case. we are back to “innocent until proven guilty”. Of course, Sean Hannity doesn’t agree with that principle.
            What “necessary questions” are you suggesting were ignored with Dr. Ford?

          • JayKay4

            With Ford there was not a single corroborating witness that would say they were at the described party . Also, Ford didn’t tell a soul about what allegedly happened to her for twenty years. This is not likely if the event was as traumatic as she claims. She likely lied about some things during the hearings and/or in sworn statements. When asked if she had ever coached anyone on how to beat a lie detector test, she said, “No.” Her boyfriend provided a sworn statement that she had coached her FBI friend on how to beat a lie detector. She said she was afraid to fly and that she had a phobia with confined spaces. Her boyfriend said he had flown all over Hawaii with her in a small air plane and she never mentioned being afraid of flying or confined spaces. It appears that the only one who thinks there was a party and a molestation was Christine Ford. There was not one iota of corroborating evidence or a single person who would corroborate that such a party took place let along the event in question. If she was being truthful about what happened, why did she find it necessary to lie. Everyone who knows Judge Kavenaugh says that what Christine Ford claims is completely out of character for him.
            Now contrast this with Juanita Broderick’s case. Multiple witnesses put both her and Bill Clinton at the same place on the day in question. Witnesses saw her leave the coffee restaurant in the hotel to go with him up to her room for a meeting. Immediately following this supposed meeting, Juanita Broderick’s friend went up to her room to find out why she hadn’t returned and found her under severe distress with a swollen lip. Remember “You’d better put some ice on that.”? Juanita Broderick not only told her friend what had happened, she immediately told many others including family members what had happened. All of this corroborates her story. Physical evidence is the swollen lip that wasn’t there before she met with Bill Clinton but was there immediately following that meeting. Consequently, there is a lot of corroborating evidence and some physical evidence, but in the case of Christine Ford — nada.
            This is my last comment on this. People believe what they want to believe independent of the evidence, and I suspect you are one of those people.

          • W. Coyote

            Good morning Jay- “People believe what they want to believe independent of the evidence, and I suspect you are one of those people.” Are you saying you are not one of those people?
            There are a few facts that you a leaving out with your recounting of events. There are a lot of reasons that someone might not remember a particular party from 36 years ago. The incident in the bedroom took place out of sight of everyone else and was over very quickly. There is no reason that a roomful of people downstairs would know anything about it. However, none of that proves that Kavanaugh is guilty.
            Dr. Ford stated she didn’t tell her parents because she didn’t want to admit she was at a party where there was beer. That is convincing to me. In my professional life, I have worked with teenagers for many years. I have seen many cases of teenagers who have kept secrets inside rather than tell anyone immediately. Sometimes, the aftereffects don’t come out until months or years later. Of course none of that proves that Kavanaugh is guilty.
            However, it is very concerning that the FBI didn’t interview everyone who wanted to come forward. In order to fully exonerate him, don’t you agree the FBI should have followed all leads and talked to everyone who had information? I have seen some estimates that there were about 40 people who were willing to talk and were not even contacted by the FBI. To repeat: none of that proves that Kavanaugh is guilty.
            In terms of what is “out of character” for Kavanaugh, he stated at the time that he was a “loud obnoxious drunk” and there were people who can corroborate that. But none of his past behavior proves that he is guilty.

        • JayKay4

          There was a mountain of evidence regarding the mishandling of classified information against Hillary, but crooked James Comey operating outside of his legal authority decided not to bring charges against her. The authority to make this decision resides in the DOJ. Loretta Lynch, the attorney general at the time had a serious conflict of interest after her tarmac meeting with Bill Clinton the day before Comey’s announcement. Consequently, that decision should have been made by her deputy, but crooked Comey wasn’t about to risk that. Consequently, crooked Hillary walked. There is much more that could be said about the Clinton crime family.

          • W. Coyote

            JayKay4- Good morning and thank you for your comment. The theme of the above article is ” people are innocent until proven guilty.” I’m missing that from your accounting.
            The same applies to Trump who gave highly classified information to the Russians, which compromised Israeli intelligence. By the way in that meeting, no U.S. press was allowed in the room and came one day after Trump fired James Comey because of the Russia investigation. Good luck getting Jeff Sessions to investigate or pursue charges against Trump.

          • JayKay4

            I was responding to your comment requesting evidence regarding Clinton emails. All or most of that evidence was in the public domain. Hillary was without question given the benefit of innocent until proven guilty. The proof was there and she still was not prosecuted for her crimes. The fact that she was not tried for her crimes due to the corruption of leaders at the FBI and DOJ does not change what the evidence showed. Had she been tried, she would have been convicted in my opinion. Regarding the Trump giving classified information to the Russians, that was and is still debatable. Even if true, no law was broken, because the president of the U.S. can declassify whatever he wishes. Under today’s apparent standards, all that would be necessary is for someone to accuse him and he would be assumed to be guilty. Aooarently, this is what happened in your case.

          • W. Coyote

            Good morning Jay- After two years in office, Trump has his people in office at DOJ and FBI. You may have noticed that there still haven’t been any charges filed against Hillary. Since you expressed your opinion, I will share mine. Trump wasn’t the least bit interested in the situation with Hillary and her private email server. But he used that to rile up his fans at rallies.
            You are right, the president has the right to de-classify whatever he wishes. Can you please explain to me the wisdom behind sharing classified intelligence with Russians a few months after they attacked our election?



    • gardeauxandrew

      It’s the liberal unpatriotic democrats, rhinos and their tool the bought out biased medias propaganda way, that must be Stopped by all! The unpatriotic democrats and rhinos, and medias have damaged their name, meaning and cause for a very , very long time!~

  • Richard Nick


  • Jmanjo

    Kavanaugh should become a Supreme Court justice.. The Democrats should all be chaarged with crimes for their actions against the nation!

  • Estell Newton