In our last episode, the Senate Judiciary Committee was holding a hearing to explore the claim of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford that, 36 years ago, give or take (she can’t remember exactly when), somewhere in Maryland (she can’t remember exactly where), on an unspecified day, in an unspecified month, at a party attended by either four boys and several girls, or only two boys, she was in a room with Brett Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge, when Kavanaugh pushed her onto a bed, groped her, and covered her mouth to prevent her from calling out.  She claims Judge jumped onto the bed, and she got away.  Now, she was at least six miles from home, and was 15, so she didn’t drive, but she knows not how she got to wherever it was or how she got home from there.  None of the people she claims were present, including her close friend, remember any such party or the assault she alleges.  Each has so sworn under penalty of felony.  About the only thing she is sure of is that it was Kavanaugh.  Senate Democrats had this claim in July, but told no Republican on the Committee, so that an investigation could be conducted before the confirmation hearings.  Democrats, always quick to hold Republicans to a standard of conduct they don’t see any need for their own Party members to meet, were shocked, shocked and appalled.  To illustrate, Democrats say that a 36 year old grope by a supposedly drunken teenager (not conduct that I endorse, mind you), cannot be overcome by a brilliant career of legal scholarship, selfless service to to the less fortunate, and a spotless record of decent treatment and support of women, in and out of the legal profession.  The Democrats, who would disqualify Kavanaugh for a dubious 36 year old indiscretion, are unconcerned that the Deputy Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, now a candidate for Attorney General of Minnesota, is clearly guilty of domestic violence against his girlfriend not so very long  ago.  I guess elected perverts are acceptable.  Now, Kavanaugh vehemently denies the accusation, and even presented the Committee with meticulous calendars for the time in question (whatever it is) which strongly suggest no such meeting with Ford ever happened.  Dr. Ford’s testimony was compelling.  Her pain clearly is real, and she likely was victimized some time in the distant past.  She’s just got the wrong guy.  Democrats don’t care.  They say an accusation from a woman is all that’s necessary.  They wanted Kavanaugh to defend himself before any testimony from Ford.  That’s reminiscent of Franz Kafka’s The Trial, where a man is hauled into court and ordered to prove himself innocent, but they won’t tell him the specifics of the crime.  No presumption of innocence for Kavanaugh, they say.   Criminals must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  Other legal standards are clear and convincing evidence, and a preponderance, where the wrong is proven to have occurred more likely than not.  But Democrats have applied a new standard of proof for Kavanaugh, proof nearly approaching an idle rumor.  No need to presume innocence, they say, because this is not a trial.  The presumption of innocence dates back to the Code of Justinian, some 1,500 years ago.   The presumption of innocence is the principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty.  It was traditionally expressed by the Latin maxim ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”).  The presumption was an important part of Magna Carta, dating to 1215.  It is an integral component of English and American common law.  The presumption of innocence, and due process of law, the notion that an accused must be afforded sufficient notice of the charge he is called upon to defend, are integral protections afforded to all Americans by our constitution, you know, that document that all Senators are sworn to uphold.  Even Iran recognizes the presumption of innocence.  But not for Brett Kavanaugh.  That  noted legal scholar, Hawaii Senator Maisie Hirono, has explained the difference, “Look, we are not in a court of law, we are in a court of credibility at this point.”  Uh huh.  As this is written, the Senate Committee has voted the Kavanaugh nomination out to the full Senate, but with this proviso, outgoing Arizona Senator Jeff Flake (aptly named), after being confronted with two mindless protestors in an elevator, is holding the Senate hostage, along with erstwhile impediments, Senators Murkowski of Alaska and Collins of Maine, demanding an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh before a full vote of the Senate.  This is a pure delay tactic of the Democrats.  Whatever the FBI says, they will never vote for Kavanaugh.  If it gets Kavanaugh on the Court, I guess it’s worth it.  It’s all a Democrat game.  Kavanaugh embarrassed the Senate.  He challenged them by telling the truth, the Senate has devolved into a circus, which will destroy him or anyone to maintain its ability to wield political power.  As this is written, the Dems are now claiming that a one week investigation isn’t enough.  Former Hillary press secretary Brian Fallon is demanding that the FBI also “get to the bottom” of the term “boffing,” which Kavanaugh says referred to flatulence.  One would think that the “get to the bottom” language sufficiently explains the source of flatulence, but then again, having worked for Hillary, perhaps Fallon knows that Democrat flatulence often is expelled from from a source other than the anal orifice.  They also demand an investigation into whether Kavanaugh threw an ice cube at someone in a bar in the 1980’s.  Reportedly, the FBI hasn’t found any corroboration for the Ford claim, or the even more outlandish claims being espoused by the other two women who are trying to turn Brett Kavanaugh from the straight-shooting Boy Scout he clearly is into a notorious drunken serial rapist.  It goes to show to what lengths Democrats are willing to go to in the throws of their Trump Derangement.  It’s sick, it’s twisted and it’s sad.  Kavanaugh’s righteous indignation at having been falsely accused is being spun as injudicious conduct.  They have no shame.