Me and the WSJ believe Kavanaugh

He came out with guns blazing, much like Clarence Thomas in 1991, and persuaded a lot of people who aren’t Dimocrats—including me and the Wall Street Journal editorial board.

“Judge Kavanaugh was right to call the confirmation process a ‘disgrace’ in his passionate self-defense, and whatever one thinks of Christine Blasey Ford’s assault accusation, she offered no corroboration or new supporting evidence.”

I thought she was a little spacey, as if she was on dope or something. Seemed to need propping up by the lawyers flanking her. Then exited all smiles, as if she’d won a puppy instead of having been discussing the trauma of her life.

What a weird woman.


One response to “Me and the WSJ believe Kavanaugh

  1. I believe Kavanaugh as well. I don’t know what Ford’s deal is. But it’s clear what the Democrats’ deal is. They want to delay the confirmation until after the elections when they can kill it. It’s strategy and it’s fair game play – up until they decide to destroy the life of a man and his family that I absolutely believe they (deep down) believe to be innocent. It’s despicable , highly immoral, and just plain evil. It saddens me to say this but it’s time to fight fire with fire and get down to their level. With only a few weeks left before the mid terms the Republicans should dedicate the remaining days to finding “credible” accusers who will come forward with claims of the most heinous acts imaginable allegedly committed by their opponents. And let them not worry about any burden of proof. The precedent has already been set that it’s up to the accused to prove, beyond any doubt, that he or she did not do it. And if they somehow manage to do that, then they should characterize it as an insensitive and cruel attack against a victim that they already traumatized at least once before. This is now how politics needs to be conducted.