I believe.

I had thought that I wouldn’t be on this subject after my last post 2 days ago, but then the two words “I believe” started to get bandied about by both sides of the aisle with regards to Dr. Ford’s testimony. Both are wrong on some level for reasons that should be obvious, were it not for the glaring blind spots each side has.

I’ll start with the liberal side. To them “I believe” is as good as a guilty conviction, except that there were no charges involved in yesterday’s spectacle. As so many were quick to remind us yesterday, it was not a trial in a court of law. Belief is a good starting point during an investigation, but it’s not a substitute for facts and evidence. That is the basis of our entire justice system, at least when it’s applied correctly, and we would do well to remember that.

As for the conservatives, “I believe” is no more than lip service. To say that they believe Dr. Ford, but then turn around and say that they also believe it’s all just a case of mistaken identity is in fact the opposite of belief. The only part of Dr. Ford’s testimony that she claimed to recall with 100% accuracy was the identity of the offender, Brett Kavanaugh. One cannot rightly say that they believe her story if they selectively choose not to believe the most crucial aspect of it.

Then there were the beliefs espoused by the nominee himself, which should be the truly disqualifying testimony in my mind. He sat there and made unsubstantiated claims of his own, accusing the Democrats of conspiring to maliciously ruin his reputation. He not only chose a political side with those charges, he made it quite clear that he is absolutely biased and cannot be trusted to sit on the bench of the Supreme Court.

The Republican strategy is all rather transparent. While they say they empathize and believe Dr. Ford, they certainly aren’t going to let that deter them from their mission to install another far right conservative on the court before the midterm elections potentially denies them of that chance. Even though they speak so eloquently about truth, honor, and integrity, the real truth is they don’t give a shit about any of those things. In Brett Kavanaugh, Republicans see nothing more than the culmination of a decades long effort to radically shift the Supreme Court ideologically in their favor, period.

As for the Democrats, of course they are going to do whatever they can to tank this nominee. That is what they should be doing, and if the shoe were on the other foot you can bet that the Republicans wouldn’t hesitate to use the same tactics to prevent a far left nominee from ascending to the bench. All the Republican bellyaching and lecturing to the Democrats was hypocritical at best. Were the Democrat’s tactics dirty and underhanded? You bet, but that’s politics motherfuckers. If you don’t like it, step aside and let someone else make a run for your seat in Congress.

Boys will be boys.

No matter which side of the aisle you lean on, it’s suspicious timing for the Democrats to drop 11th hour sexual assault allegations like this. That being said, I’d like to point out that Senator McConnell is now very much reaping what he has sown. Merrick Garland wasn’t even given so much as a meeting for 10 months. If they had been in as much of a hurry to fill a Supreme Court vacancy back then, we wouldn’t be watching this trainwreck unfolding before our eyes.

I remember the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings back in 1991, and I can tell you that little has changed since then. Now I know what you’re thinking dear non-existent reader, “but Jaime Christ, we didn’t have a Me Too movement back then”. While that is true, I’d argue that such a point is moot. Considering that Judge Kavanaugh is still likely to be confirmed this Friday, and old white guys still appear to have the same mindset as they did 27 years ago… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯.

Would you fuck me? I’d fuck me.

Okay, that’s not exactly honest. There is one difference that I would like to point out. His defenders it seems, rather than accuse Kavanaugh’s accusers of lying, or just going the easier route of claiming not to believe their stories, have chosen an even more heinous defense. I’ll dub it the “If True” defense. Basically, it is an attempt to minimize the alleged attacks, and it goes something along these lines: If these allegations are true, it still doesn’t fucking matter.

But rather than launch into a lengthy explanation, let’s go straight to the source. This is Kevin Cramer, Republican Rep. from N.D., who’s comments encapsulate the “If True” defense quite perfectly:

“These are teenagers who evidently were drunk, according to her own statement. They were drunk. Nothing evidently happened in it all, even by her own accusation. Again, it was supposedly an attempt or something that never went anywhere”

First, he’s making the defense that all involved were drunk teenagers, (even though Blasey claims to have had only 1 beer that evening), and we all know that teenagers can’t hold their liquor and therefore cannot be held responsible for their actions while under the influence. As if that wasn’t enough, he also attempts to minimize the attack by calling it an attempt that never went anywhere. He’s actually stating a position that since they were drunk minors, and no penile penetration occurred in any of the victim’s orifices, that none of it really matters and we should all just move along and let Kavanaugh ascend to the highest court in the land, posthaste.

Then there was our illustrious Commander in Chief, with his patently thoughtless and ill informed opinions, when he assured the American people that if it were a real assault someone would have called the police already. Never mind that an estimated 80% of all rapes go unreported. Even more entertaining was Brett’s buddy Ed Whelan who spun a wild yarn on twitter. He used Google Maps and Zillow of all things to push a crazy theory that the actual offender was a Brett Kavanaugh look-alike. He then proceeded to post the name of the aforementioned look-alike along with his photo, and publicly accused a private citizen of rape.

The best defense though was Kavanaugh’s own when he gave an interview on Fox News, seated next to his supportive and loving wife, and commenced to deny, deny, deny! During those denials, he made the not so dubious claim that he was a virgin during his high school career, and remained a virgin for some number of years thereafter. It’s an admission that none of us were even remotely curious about to be sure, however it would not have precluded him from making any, eh-hem… failed attempts at rape. Having never succeeded at doing the deed during that period of time, by force or otherwise, is not a valid defense.

All of this is to say that despite the Me Too movement, despite the precipitous fall from grace of the once mighty Kevin Spacey’s and Harvey Weinstein’s of the world, and despite seeing the man formerly known as America’s Father get carted off to jail in cuffs this week, history will almost assuredly repeat itself.

No means no.

Does anyone out there really think this is cool?

Where’s that pussy? I know it’s around here somewhere?

I mean this is absolutely creepy, and I’m not talking about creepy as in mildly awkward or cringeworthy. I’m talking about showing up to meet your mother’s new boyfriend and finding out it’s Ron Jeremy kind of creepy. I’m talking about going to a private meeting at Harvey Weinstein’s hotel room kind of creepy. I’m talking about Brock Turner taking advantage of an unconscious girl behind a dumpster kind of creepy. I’m talking about a father who is totally down with referring to his own daughter as a “piece of ass” kind of creepy. Congress should make a law abolishing such treatment of the flag, especially since the flag is incapable of saying no to those tiny, lecherous hands violating it’s stars and stripes.

Attorney-client privilege is very much alive.

Wait, what? Attorney-client privilege isn’t an anonymity shield? Doh!

Let’s just start off with a stark fact; Cohen isn’t really a practicing lawyer and the services he offers to his ultra-rich clients aren’t legal services. When Michael Cohen’s lawyers were forced to out Hannity as Cohen’s “mystery client”, Hannity had this to say about the matter:

I never gave him a retainer. Never paid any fees. I may have handed him $10 once. I requested attorney-client privilege with him, and assumed our conversations would be confidential, but they have never involved any matter with him and any third party.

Cohen must be the most magnanimous lawyer in the history of lawyering. Not only does the guy take on a second mortgage to pay Stormy Daniels $130,000 out of his own pocket, but he offers Hannity legal advice and attorney-client privilege for a mere $10? If you’re gullible enough to swallow this horseshit, then I’ve got a bridge I want to sell you. However, I do take Hannity at his word when he says he never gave Cohen a retainer. That would imply that Hannity actually hired him for legal representation, and we all know that legal services aren’t really what Cohen is offering to his clients.

Take note that Hannity specifically mentions attorney-client privilege, as if that was a separate service on offer. The part that he, and Trump for that matter, are just not getting through their thick skulls is the “client” part of attorney-client privilege. It only covers communications for those who are, or seek to become a client. Merely speaking to a lawyer or having one present in the room does not automatically confer attorney-client privilege. He also seems to conflate it with the mere fact that he’s a “client”, as if it affords him the right to remain anonymous. It doesn’t. It’s also worth mentioning that attorney-client privilege has exceptions, chief among them being when the conversation is held for the purpose of engaging in a crime.

Knowing what we do about Fox News and their history of shielding habitual womanizers by paying off their accusers, I think it’s safe to say that Hannity is long overdue for a similar reckoning. Would it really be that surprising to find out that he’s just like his hero Bill O’Reilly? He’s certainly been quick to come to the defense of such men, and he absolutely idolizes Womanizer in Chief, Donald Trump.

I’m really looking forward to seeing how this all shakes out in the end. It may be that nothing more comes of it unless more women start coming forward. Given his need for Cohen’s less than legal services for rich dudes who can’t keep it in their pants, I’d bet a sizable sum of money that there is at least one woman out there who got paid to sign a non-disclosure agreement for Hannity.