Then what,…

… how do you get back from there? Another woman has come forward to accuse the Supreme Court nominee of inappropriate sexual behavior. Now two have made allegations and the Judge denies the allegations. So just who are we to believe? Do we believe the one(s)making the allegations simply because they are women? Do we believe the one denying the accusations because he is an honorable Judge?

If I were to guess every democrat senator believes the accusations of both and nary a one believes the Judges denials. If any more surface they will believe them as well. Based on what? A letter that had been sat on for weeks if not months. The Senator was the second one to see the letter. She was also the last until it became apparent that the Judge was a shoo-in to become an Associate Justice on the Supreme Court. Why did not the existence of the letter come up during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, its existence was known of by at least two people? Neither said anything. Why was the letter not immediately forwarded to the FBI? Is it possible that the letter would have disappeared if the Judge was not such an apparent shoo-in?

In my opinion it was never about seeking justice for the accuser, it was about politics.

The democrats and some republicans are wanting a through investigation before any further vote on confirmation is taken. Is this just a delaying tactic until the November mid-terms?

Now what happens? Are we going to see another delay in the confirmation vote? Will there be an investigation in the allegations before a vote is taken on confirmation? Who will conduct the investigation? By all accounts he has already passed more than one background check. The democrats seem content to believe her over him. In their minds he is guilty, but because of what? Are we now seeing a presumption of guilt? What happened to presumed innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt?

What happens if the Judge is not confirmed to the Supreme Court? Will he get to keep his old job on the Court of Appeals? While he be forced to resign? If these allegation(s)are enough to keep him from being on the Supreme Court, are they not serious enough to remove from his current position? The democrats have suggested they would conduct an investigation if the republicans were to push his nomination through without an investigation and the democrats take control. The impeachment word was uttered. The democrat senators by most accounts have already determined the outcome, seems pretty biased to me.

What about the accuser having an old grudge to settle? Ruining the life of and livelihood of an individual, even if in the process they ruin their own lives. My guess is that none involved will ever have a normal life or even the hopes of one ever again. But there is probably a book deal in the works.

Is this the path we now take? When or where will this end? Will at some point an investigation be conducted into every member of Congress, every Judge, indeed every one in government and finally down to the civilian population because someone made an accusation? What happens if whoever is doing the investigation or conducting the hearing have a bias, political or personal? How could one hope for a fair and impartial investigation?

Will at some point a secret police be brought into existence? Something like the Stasi Police or a Secret Society. Kind of casts a new light on a text message exchange, does it not. No, no we will stop it.

Imagine if such an organization existed. Or even an organization within an organization. That secret organization would be able to determine just who is “fit” to serve in government.

Should we be on this path there is no way back.


If I were to guess

So many people are talking about the op-ed written by an anonymous source concerning the goings on in the White House in general and the President specifically. The unnamed individual claims to be a senior official in the administration. Many are throwing names out as to who the anonymous source is. Historically speaking people who engage in efforts of this kind are general one that have left an organization, mostly because their feelings got hurt and they seek revenge.

Perhaps this source was an official and perhaps not, I go with the not. The person who wrote this does exist and much effort will be expended in running that source down. I read yesterday that there were experts working on identifying the individual who wrote it. Some claim they can find the author based on his writing style and words or wording used.

Anyway my guess is this person has a working knowledge of psy-ops(psychological warfare). If so the sole objective would be to place distrust in and between the administration. It would divide the administration, which is a part of the old tactic divide and conquer. I also question the timing of the publishing of the op-ed, right after a trial and a plea along with other legal dealings and just before a book was to be released.

Back to the divide and conquer tactic, if an enemy is to strong to attack and defeat head on then one must divide the enemy making it possible to defeat him. One of the easiest ways to accomplish this is build distrust among the target. Another way to divide and conquer an enemy is to overwhelm them with small “brush fires” they must continually try to extinguish, in this one they divide themselves. It appears that both are being used.

There is an old quote attributed to President Lincoln whether he made it is not important, what is important is the wording. A house divided against itself can not stand. My question is does this apply to the White House. The left is still trying to oust the President, a duly and Constitutionally elected President. They will use any and all means available to them “the ends justify the means”.

On a side note watched some of the confirmation hearings. Embarrassment at some of those senators would be an understatement.

This CCR song, though from years ago pretty much sums up what comes from D.C. then and today. Listen to the words.