The New York Times’ latest strategy in attacking Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh seems to be to keep telling lies in support of their broader anti-Trump, anti-Kavanaugh narrative.
The latest “bombshell” accusation about another supposed instance of alleged sexual misconduct by Justice Kavanaugh during college is so outrageous and unsubstantiated that during the confirmation process last year, even Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee refused to bring it up, and The Washington Post refused to report on it.
Those were the same Democrats who embraced Michael Avenatti client Julie Swetnick’s absurd story about a series of high school gang rape parties, allegations that Swetnick herself has since disclaimed.
The newest allegations did not even meet last year’s extremely low standard for plausibility. But last year’s smelly garbage accusations, still lingering at the bottom of the barrel, are suddenly deemed fit for human consumption by a desperate and ruthless far-left character assassination squad composed of politicians and their media allies.
How do Democrats justify continuing to smear Kavanaugh despite there being no substantiation for their Kavanaugh as sexual predator narrative? To them, the problem is not a lack of evidence, but a lack of sufficiently thorough investigation.
During the Kavanaugh confirmation process, Senate Judiciary had additional funding and staff to conduct investigations. The Republican staff followed every lead, interviewing any witness who would agree to be interviewed (many refused). Instead of using their ability to investigate the credibility of the allegations, the Democrats left that job to the FBI, likely in an effort to slow down the proceedings.
Their efforts to delay the confirmation process for additional FBI investigation were only partially successful, but they were successful in creating a convenient scapegoat: the FBI. Why is there no evidence to support any of the allegations against Kavanaugh? Because the FBI failed to investigate (even though in really it pursued any credible leads).
Now reports indicate there are seven witnesses for Deborah Ramirez’ allegation — about an event that even she is uncertain she remembers — and the liberal media is resurrecting complaints about a list of 20 witnesses whom Ramirez’ lawyers claim the FBI did not contact last year.
But these so-called witnesses are not actually witnesses who have the kind of knowledge and memory that would be admissible in court. They are people who heard second- or third-hand about the alleged incident or even about “something” vague that happened. Some of them heard years later. Almost all of them did not hear Kavanaugh’s name associated with the alleged incident when they heard about it.
The real witnesses — people whom the accusers claim were actually present at the time — to the alleged events either do not recall the events or repudiate the claims. The exception is Max Stier, the former Clinton lawyer who claims to remember the latest incident but has very carefully avoided either speaking on the record or under oath about it, for decades — including during the confirmation process when it would have been most fatal, if believed.
Does anyone really believe that if a credible eyewitness who saw Kavanaugh behave in an inappropriate way in high school or college existed, some intrepid reporter would not have found him or her by now and received endless praise the liberal press?
But of course, the lack of evidence or corroboration by actual witnesses does not matter. What matters is keeping the narrative alive: President Trump should not have won the 2016 election, therefore his Supreme Court appointments are illegitimate, therefore Democrats may tell any lies they like about them, without consequences.
This new groundless allegation is simply the latest effort in the broader campaign by the left to protect Roe v. Wade by undermining the judiciary, attempting to intimidate the Supreme Court, and politicizing the courts.
And the next conservative nominee to the court, regardless of the facts, can also expect to be the target of intimidation tactics like this, ultimately threatening the independence of our judiciary for decades to come. This must stop now, for the sake of the integrity of our federal courts.
Harmeet K. Dhillon (@Pnjaban) is the Republican National Committeewoman from California and vice president of communications for the Republican National Lawyers Association. She is a partner at the Dhillon Law Group.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of The Daily Caller.