The anti-Trump propaganda machine that is the Washington Post has broken with decades
of precedent by inserting itself into the deranged war on Supreme Court nominee Brett
Kavanaugh and has called for the Senate to give a thumbs down when it votes over the
weekend.
It is the first time since the WAPO assisted Democrats with the sinking of President Ronald
Reagan's nominee to the high court when it similarly came out against Robert Bork,
another man with impeccable legal credentials and a keen respect for the U.S. Constitution.
In the call for the swamp to unify against Kavanaugh that was published late Thursday,
Pravda on the Potomac defended the allegations of professor Christine Blasey Ford which FBI
has found to be uncorroborated as well as pitched the other DNC talking point that the
nominee is a partisan whose defense of himself against a vile smear campaign is disqualifying.
Via The Hill, "Washington Post editorial board calls for 'no' vote on Supreme Court
nominee for first time in over 30 years":
The Washington Post editorial board called for the U.S. Senate to vote against Supreme
Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, a move it has not made since 1987.
"Enough has been learned about his partisan instincts that we believe senators must vote
'no,'" The Post editorial board wrote in a new piece published Thursday night.
"We do not say so lightly.
We have not opposed a Supreme Court nominee, liberal or conservative, since Robert H. Bork
in 1987."
The editorial board went on to state its issues with Kavanaugh as a nominee, adding that one
element of the saga over his potential confirmation has been forgotten among the sexual misconduct
allegations he faces.
The nearly unprecedented attack on Kavanaugh by one of the nation's most influential
newspapers only serves to confirm the suspicions of many that the nominee is only serving as
a proxy for President Trump who they have hammered away at for over three years without
being able to scratch Teflon Don.
If Mr. Kavanaugh truly is, or believes himself to be, a victim of mistaken identity, his
anger is understandable.
But he went further in last Thursday's hearing than expressing anger.
He gratuitously indulged in hyperpartisan rhetoric against "the left," describing
his stormy confirmation as "a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with
apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election" and "revenge on
behalf of the Clintons."
He provided neither evidence nor even a plausible explanation for this red-meat partisanship,
but he poisoned any sense that he could serve as an impartial judge.
Democrats or liberal activists would have no reason to trust in his good faith in any
cases involving politics.
Even beyond such cases, his judgment and temperament would be in doubt.
Such doubts feed into concerns about Mr. Kavanaugh's independence from Mr. Trump and his deference
to executive power, at a moment when fateful questions for the presidency may be winding
their way to the court.
Mr. Kavanaugh began his confirmation process by bowing obsequiously to Mr. Trump, claiming,
absurdly, that "no president has ever consulted more widely, or talked with more people from
more backgrounds, to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination."
Mr. Kavanaugh then declined to offer much reassurance about how he would handle cases
involving Mr. Trump.
Note the Post's reference to how Kavanaugh would handle cases involving Trump and some
may begin to get the idea that this confirmation is more about the inevitable Supreme Court
battle over special counsel Robert Meuller's inevitable subpoena to the president and the
Constitutional crisis that it would trigger than bogus decades-old accusations of sexual
assault, college drinking games or abortion.
It just seems like there is a much deeper and darker aspect to this vicious series of
attacks on Kavanaugh and the WAPO may have inadvertently let the cat out of the bag with
its op-ed.
Is there really any question as to why so many Americans have come to despise and distrust
the media?
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét