Kavanaugh Conundrum: I See a Satanic Signature

Stunning political theater is taking place in the United States this week.

Eminently qualified Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has been accused by a secular progressive professor of drunken traumatization at a party when she was 15 and he was 17.

The proposed #MeToo moment took place 37 years ago.

Judge Kavanaugh will speak to the allegations this week–and I hope his accuser will be forced to do the same. In this column, I will try to be fair in my analysis of this constitutional moment.

I will also give you a viewpoint that is rare in today’s news–a total view of the debacle, both seen and unseen.

I see a Satanic signature.

The fairest and most balanced perspective I’ve heard about the Kavanaugh debacle comes from Bill O-Reilly at billoreilly.com. If you’re not a premium member on the site, I encourage you to sign up today. Bill’s 30-minute daily recap of the news without commercials and corporate bosses looking over his shoulder is worth the $50 annual fee ($4 a month with discounts on books).

Yet, Bill also misses one point.

First, let’s lay out the facts in the case as we know them today:

• Christine Blasey Ford says that she was at a house party in the summer of 1982 when drunken 17-year old Brett Kavanaugh forced her onto a bed and tried to sexually assault her.
• The assault was aborted because another drunken student, Mark Judge, “piled onto” the bed and Blasey Ford escaped.
• Christine Ford never told her parents or police about the incident.
• Ford first mentioned the supposed assault during a couples therapy session in 2012–some 30 years later. Brett Kavanaugh’s name was not mentioned to the counselor who wrote in her notes that “four” guys were involved.
• Ms. Ford’s story today is that two were involved,
• Christine Ford sent her version of events to her California Representative Anna Eshoo this past spring when Kavanaugh was nominated. Eshoo sent them on to Sen Dianne Feinstein (who serves on the Judicial Oversight Committee) two months ago–who turned them over to the FBI.
• During the confirmation proceedings, Senator Feinstein failed to mention the alleged indiscretion. She finally leaked it this past week, just days before the committee vote.

Judge Kavanaugh vehemently denies the allegation saying, “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

Mark Judge says the same. Judge told The Weekly Standard, “I can recall a lot of rough-housing with guys. It was an all-boys school, we would rough-house with each other. I don’t remember any of that stuff going on with girls.” He strongly denied witnessing an attempted assault.

So, the accusation is a “he said/she said” atomic bomb dropped at the last moment before a crucial Supreme Court vote.

Our American orientation in law (Judeo-Christian) believes that Kavanaugh is innocent until proven guilty. It also ensures that Christine Blasey Ford deserves to be heard.

So who is Christine Ford?

• She’s a professor in the Social Work Department at California State University – Fullerton.
• Ford has a history of left-wing political activism. She signed a letter attacking Trump’s “zero tolerance” immigration policy asserting that it was “violating fundamental human rights.”
• Ford attended a women’s march event and wore a infamous “pussy hat” made to look like a brain.
• Records show that Ford donated to the Democratic National Committee, Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and Friends Of Bernie Sanders.
• Possibly to hide her motives, Ford scrubbed her social media presence before the allegations came to light.
• She scores very low as a professor at RateMy Professors.com, 2.3 out of 5 (a failing grade if the roles were reversed). The reviews cover 2010 – 2014, which rules out student tampering as part of the current Kavanaugh controversy.

The reviews point to questionable character:

“‘Christine Ford is the worst educator I have ever experienced,’ one student wrote. ‘Avoid taking her class and avoid any interaction with this person. I feel like she has something wrong with her and I am surprised no one has caught this. Also avoid Fullerton’s MSW program as long as she is there.'”

“Another student reported feeling afraid of her, noting she has a vengeful streak.”

“‘Prof. Ford is unprofessional, lacks appropriate filters, and I am honestly scared of her,’ he/she wrote in a 2014 review. The student reported receiving an A in her class despite his or her displeasure with the professor. ‘She’s made comments both in class and in e-mails, if you cross her, you will be on her bad side. . . Absolutely the worst teacher I ever had.'”

“Another student said her teaching style is the ‘opposite’ of empowering.”

“‘Do not take her class,’ a student warned in 2013. ‘She is unclear with directions. Hard grader and talks for 2hr 45min without giving a break. she is exact opposite of what she teaches. empowering??? not at all.'”

“Another student said in 2010 her teaching is so bad, students will find themselves reaching for antidepressants.”

More supportive students offered tempered praise.

“‘You know, she’s a tough cookie and may not be that personable, but I really like her as a professor and feel that I would enjoy taking her for another course in the future,’ a student wrote in 2013. ‘Stay on her good side though and participate.'”

“The most positive review she received conceded that ‘her personality is polarizing’ but said the class was still worthwhile. ”

Now to Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley’s (R-Iowa) office sent out a letter on Friday morning on behalf of 65 women who knew Kavanaugh when he was in high school asserting, “For the entire time we have known Brett Kavanaugh, he has behaved honorably and treated women with respect.”

At the time of this writing, 200 female fellow high-schoolers have signed on to the blanket endorsement of Kavanaugh’s character.

Grassley concluded:

“It’s disturbing that these uncorroborated allegations from more than 35 years ago, during high school, would surface on the eve of a committee vote after Democrats sat on them since July. If Ranking Member Feinstein and other Committee Democrats took this claim seriously, they should have brought it to the full Committee’s attention much earlier.”

Why didn’t they?

Because everything we have learned so far points to a political hatchet job by the Democrats similar the “high tech lynching” of Clarence Thomas in 1991.

And here’s what Bill O’Reilly missed.

In his analysis, Bill said that only three people know the truth about the alleged incident: Brett Kavanaugh, Christine Blasey Ford and Mark Judge. He opined, “They were the only ones there.”

Maybe not. The entire incident, which doesn’t include a specific date, time or place, could have been completely made up.

A blatant lie.

This brings us to the obvious Satanic signature.

Satan (and his demons) influence people on earth. You rarely hear that on the news. The tempter lied to our first parents and continues to do so.

Jesus Christ said of Satan:

“He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies” (John 10:44).

Satan is the originator of deception and falsehood.  Jesus also lamented that Satan’s mission is to “kill and destroy” (John 10:10).

One of the grave dangers we face in the West is the rise of secular values as typified by Christine Blasey Ford, Dianne Feinstein, and many of our Deep State establishment political leaders. Secularism denies such a thing as truth, and like jihadist Islam, condones lying as a means to an end.

In other words, it’s okay to deceive the public, lie about someone, and destroy their reputation falsely to promote your own agenda.

The biblical view, under which this nation was founded, says, “You shall not lie” (Exodus 20:16). Period. That’s why people raise their right hands in court rooms and declare they promise to “Tell the truth, the whole, truth, and nothing but the truth–so help me God.”

We must expose secular progressive tactics and the deceit that comes with them.

And we must reject the Satanic signature–in Jesus’ Name.