Investigations That Don’t

My liberal friends, and yes, thankfully, I have some, keep saying to me, “Why didn’t Kavanaugh call for an investigation? If he was innocent that’s what he’d do”. Let me show why he didn’t, and why you wouldn’t either.

I just got back from my high school reunion, where we shared stories of what happened long ago. Of course, our take on what happened back then varied. Memories are like that.

Now, suppose one of my female high school friends surfaced today and said “Willis sexually attacked me yesterday evening between 8:00 and 9:00 PM at a party at a house at 123 Fourth Street, and three other friends were at the party.”

Would I call for an investigation?

Damn right I would. There are a lot of ways that such an investigation could clear me. The investigation could show that I was not even in the state yesterday. It could show that at that time I was having dinner with my wife. It could show that she was at another party entirely. It could show that she was captured on video in Walmart at the time she says that I attacked her.

So yes, in that case I’d be the first one calling for an investigation.

Now, lets change up the scenario a bit. Suppose one of my female high school friends surfaced today and said “I was in psychotherapy when a recovered memory suddenly surfaced. Willis attacked me thirty-five years ago at a party. However, I can’t remember where or when, but three other friends were at the party.” I deny it completely, and the three friends she named, including a woman who is her best friend, come forward and say they have no memory of any party like that. Her best friend that she claims was at the party says she’s never even met me.

Bad enough to be falsely accused, right? Now lets make it worse. Let’s say it gains nationwide attention and my wife and my daughter are getting death threats. Let’s also say that my whole life has already been investigated six times by the FBI, full background checks, and nothing even remotely similar to that was found.

Would I call for yet another investigation, knowing that I was innocent?

I would not, for a simple reason.

There’s no conceivable way that the investigation could prove my innocence, and it would only prolong the agony for my wife and daughter.

You see, the investigation can’t show that I wasn’t in the place she claims the attack took place, because unfortunately, she can’t remember the place. And the investigation can’t show I was having dinner at the time, because she can’t remember when it happened. The investigation can’t show that she wasn’t at that party, because she doesn’t know where the party was. And the investigation can’t show that she was shopping at Walmart at the time, because again, unfortunately, she doesn’t know when it happened.

Finally, the investigation can’t show that I’m innocent by investigating the only people she claims were witnesses, because they’ve already said under penalty of perjury that they have no memory at all of any event like that.

In short, the investigation cannot possibly prove my innocence. All it can do is prolong the pain and suffering and death threats and vile emails.

So when Kavanaugh was asked if he would call for an investigation, he said he would support whatever the Committee wanted. However, he did not call for an investigation.

And why should he? There is no possible way it can show that he’s innocent. It can only expose him to more death threats.

Finally, let me recap:

We have an accusation with:

• No date

• No location

• No time

• Not one scrap of actual evidence

• No contemporaneous outcry to family or friends

• All claimed witnesses have no memory of the event

• A variety of different stories that have changed over time

• All of this brought forward on the basis of one woman’s claim of a “recovered memory” which surfaced in psychoanalysis thirty years after the fact.

Please be clear. My own mother was raped, and I have great compassion for victims of sexual assault. It is certainly possible that Dr. Ford actually was attacked by someone, somewhere, sometime. And if so she has my support and sympathy.

But we have zero evidence that Judge Kavanaugh was involved in any way, and the three people she says were witnesses say they have no memory of the claimed occurrence.Have we really fallen so low that we will allow this fact-free accusation to ruin a man’s life? Is this the standard that we want to be applied to our sons, brothers, and fathers—no “innocent until proven guilty”, no evidence required, testimony of witnesses means nothing? Just a vague memory is enough now to justify death threats, denial of employment, and a full proctological FBI investigation that cannot clear anyone’s name?

And then when the man doesn’t call for an investigation which cannot possibly clear him, but can only lead to more death threats for his daughters, people say that shows he must be guilty?

Really? Have we sunk to that depth?

That’s the problem—how do you “investigate” a vague memory?

Sadly,

w.

PS—Much is made of the fact that when a bunch of bloodthirsty Senators accused Kavanaugh on nationwide TV of being a serial gang rapist, he got angry. Well duh … any honorable man whose blood is at more than room temperature would get angry if that happened.

Now that the accusations against him have evaporated because there never was anything there to start with, his political opponents have shifted to saying he obviously doesn’t have a “judicial temperament”.

Say what?

I for one do NOT want a robot for a Supreme Court Justice. I want an honorable man or woman, someone who will indeed get angry if they are subject to unsubstantiated, uncorroborated, very public false and discredited accusations of vile wrongdoing.

Me, I thought he was a model of restraint in that situation. I was falsely accused of a crime once by a mistaken eyewitness, and I can assure you, I didn’t display “judicial temperament”—I was raging, boiling mad. I can’t imagine how I’d have been if it had happened on nationwide TV. I can only hope that it never happens to any of you, and I can assure you, it angrifies the blood mightily

However, if you truly think that this isolated unique incident shows that his temperament is not suitable to be a judge, I invite you to point to one incident in his entire decade-plus time on the Circuit Court that backs up that claim.

You see, once again, we’re in the evidence-free zone. As far as I know, there is exactly zero evidence that he has displayed any such behavior on the bench. So before accusing him of not having a “judicial temperament” that will affect his behavior on the bench, how about you come up with some actual evidence to support that unlikely claim?