Franklin Graham Wades Gracelessly Into the Brett Kavanaugh Controversy

Franklin Graham Wades Gracelessly Into the Brett Kavanaugh Controversy September 20, 2018

I’ve remained silent on the controversy surrounding Supreme Court Justice nominee, Brett Kavanaugh, thus far.

Rather than a cut-and-dried confirmation process, Kavanaugh finds himself the subject of weaponized, #MeToo-styled accusations.

For those who haven’t been keeping up, Brett Kavanaugh was on his way to an easy confirmation process, when Senator Dianne Feinstein decided to make a grandstand play, revealing a letter she’d allegedly been sitting on since July.

The letter was from a California college professor by the name of Christine Blasey Ford.

Professor Ford claimed in the letter that she had been assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh in the 80s, when they were both in high school.

The story has gone from being locked in a room by Kavanaugh and a buddy, to being groped and fearing he was going to kill her.

Of course, Feinstein’s stunt (and please, let’s not pretend that this was anything other than a political move) had the desired effect of calling Judge Kavanaugh’s character and accomplishments in question.

In fact, all anyone is talking about now is if Kavanaugh is a sexual abuser.

I’m not prepared to jump on that bandwagon. I dare say, that for everyone over 30 years of age – myself included – there are some obnoxious, boneheaded things we did as teens that we would not do or condone as adults.

Kavanaugh said it never happened.

Ford says a lot – most of it through her lawyer – as she makes the rounds on TV news talk segments.

So who do we believe, and if Kavanaugh is forever branded by his actions as a child (YES – 17 years old is a child), assuming it actually happened, then are we all to be held accountable? Is there no redemption? Is there no allowances for growing, maturing, and becoming better people than we were as kids?

Ford has been given an opportunity to face the man she says ruined her youth, and to tell her side where it matters, but for some reason, she’s not about that. She prefers to go to a sympathetic media.

She wants the FBI to check out a decades old case of teenaged shenanigans, before she’ll speak before the Senate that will decide on confirmation of Kavanaugh.

Pure politics.

Now, that being said, I’m not prepared to say it didn’t happen and she hasn’t been damaged in her spirit because of it.

I can absolutely point to things from my childhood that haunt me to this day. What I don’t do is dwell on them. I can’t. They’re over and done with, and I need to live my life.

Ford says she first told a therapist about the encounter while going through marriage counseling. If true, that would suggest she sees that as a crucial moment in her life development, so much so that it’s affecting her relationships today.

I’m not going to slam Professor Ford. Even though I find this all very distasteful, and even suspiciously timed.

I think grace requires we allow room for both sides to be heard.

We don’t label Kavanaugh a sexual menace for something he may have done as a testosterone-driven young man. What has he done to redeem his character, since maturing?

We don’t call Professor Ford a liar. We don’t tell her to suck it up and move on. We don’t say her pain is “irrelevant.”

Which brings me to Franklin Graham, who, once again, disappoints with his response.

“It’s just a shame that a person like Judge Kavanaugh who has a stellar record — that somebody can bring something up that he did when he was a teenager close to 40 years ago,” Franklin Graham said in an interview Tuesday with the Christian Broadcasting Network. “That’s not relevant.”

It’s apparently relevant to Ford.

Graham went on to say this was an attempt by Democrats to derail Kavanaugh’s nomination, and he’s not wrong, there.

Democrats couldn’t care less about Christine Blasey Ford. She’s simply convenient to them, now.

“They couldn’t find anything else in his record and so this is just an attempt to smear him and to smear his name and put a black dot on it,” Graham told CBN News’ Heather Sells.

When Sells questioned him about the message his views send to sexual abuse victims, he said, “Well, there wasn’t a crime that was committed.”

Graham then betrayed a lack of knowledge about Blasey’s allegation ― suggesting that even if the encounter did happen, “she said no and he respected it and walked away.”

That’s not what she’s claiming happened. She’s saying someone interrupted.

Reverend Graham wasn’t completely off. He also feels there’s a point where you have to acknowledge that kids do dumb things.

“There’s a lot of things that I’ve done when I was a teenager that I certainly am ashamed of and not proud of,” he said. “People are up in arms over this like ‘oh, this is such a disaster.’ You’re talking about two teenagers 40 years ago. That has nothing to do with what we’re talking about today about this man being a judge on the Supreme court.”

“And they call it sexual assault?” he added. “No, I don’t believe it.”

If it happened in the way she last described it, then yes, it is an assault.

The problem with Graham wading into it, defending Kavanaugh with such vigor, is that he has shown no grace to Ford.

As a pastor of some repute, you would expect to see him speak more reasoned and softly, when dealing with such a sensitive topic. The problem is, he can’t go back, now that he’s thrown himself in fully behind a man like President Trump.

Trump was a grown man when he boasted of sexually assaulting women, feeling his wealth and celebrity gave him a pass to do so.

The Trump that over a dozen women have accused of taking advantage of them was an adult, and Graham has defended him.

The damage being done to the Christian witness of evangelicals in this country may be irreparable, and it is the “leaders” who are leading us all to perdition.


"I cannot help but feel that in economics and politics there is a demographic shift ..."

Rex Tillerson Suggests Trump Would Ask ..."
"I fully believe Kelly WAS the main reason Trump has lasted so long AND he's ..."

Another One Bites the Dust: White ..."
"Excellent, I hope that's the case and that they have a long, fruitful series of ..."

Another One Bites the Dust: White ..."
"If, if, if, if, if. So essentially the scenario you're depicting is that anybody who, ..."

Another One Bites the Dust: White ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Marcion

    So who do we believe, and if Kavanaugh is forever branded by his actions as a child (YES – 17 years old is a child), assuming it actually happened, then are we all to be held accountable? Is there no redemption? Is there no allowances for growing, maturing, and becoming better people than we were as kids?

    If Kavanaugh committed this assault (and I believe it did), he’s lying about it by denying it. There can be no redemption without an admission of guilt. A lying, unrepentant scumbag like him has no place on any court.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I agree that Kavanaugh’s latest problems seem to be political. But then so was his nomination and the deal between Kennedy and Trump that resulted in the hand-picked selection of Kavanaugh by Kennedy for nomination by Trump stinks to high heaven.

    It’s no wonder that Trump is trying to defend “his man” Kavanaugh that Trump is trying to put on the bench of the USSC. Is Kavanaugh corrupt ? Maybe. Not necessarily. Has Trump ever appointed a nominee without some expectation that that person would at some point act to demonstrate their fealty to Trump-the-man over their fealty to their Oath-of-Office or the Constitution or the People ? Sessions was expected to be Trump’s legal shield and attack-dog as the AG. The Sec State is expected by Trump to bow and carry out Trump’s every emotional tweet, but when found to be smoothing feathers with allies Trump is insulting, Rex Tillerson found himself out of a job. Steve Bannon & Reince Priebus have already outlived their usefulness to Trump. John Kelly is supposedly on his way out of the WH (Through choice ? To avoid being fired ? – Who can say for sure ?). Now we hear that Jim Mattis will likely be replaced after the election (along with Jeff Sessions). Admiral Robby Jackson was appointed as head of the VA despite drinking on the job and unethical medical practices shortly after pronouncing Trump fit for duty and in full control of his mental faculties. Admiral Jackson failed to pass confirmation when word of his unethical practices got out but before word of Trump’s 3 cronies in Mar-A-Logo that apparently now control hiring & firing within the VA was published.

    Trump appointed Mitch McConnell’s wife to a Cabinet Secretary position – and I don’t think it was because of merit – but because it was a bribe to buy McConnell’s loyalty. It appears to have worked. Trump’s appointment of his Son-in-Law with diplomatic authority superseding that of his Sec State is just one more indication that Trump makes political appointments for purposes of insuring loyalty – not for the good of the country.

    My questions are:

    What benefit does Trump expect to obtain by having the personal loyalty of a USSC judge ? Is Trump counting on Kavanaugh’s personal loyalty to sway USSC votes in the future when Trump’s policies are challenged on Constitutional grounds ? Is Trump counting on Kavanaugh to reverse previous decisions stating the courts have jurisdiction to review and block Trump’s Executive Orders ? Will Kavanaugh give Trump that level of loyalty ?

    What exactly were the terms of the deal between Trump and Kennedy ?

    Knowing (as it was reported in the media) that there WAS a deal struck between Trump and Kennedy where Trump appoint’s Kennedy’s hand-picked successor in exchange for Kennedy’s retirement, who among us is naive enough to think that was the ENTIRE deal ?

    It’s therefore no no secret why Trump would pretend loyalty to Kavanaugh. It is no secret why Trump’s fawning Senators would ignore any red flags or indications of corruption in Kavanaugh’s past in their rush to nominate him.

    It’s likewise no secret why Democrats would attack the legitimacy of any GOP-nomination to the USSC as they want to move the USSC more liberal than it already is and they simply have a partisan hatred of Trump and the GOP. That includes the Democrat-biased media. We know that sexual malfeasance (especially in the meToo age) has become a staple of the Democrat election process – usually timed for an October surprise when there’s no time to actually investigate the charges (as the charges against Kavanaugh are claimed by the GOP to be).

    With neither side being truthful, trustworthy, or honest – with both parties (sides) willing to lie, cheat and obstruct justice in their mutual quests to put the acquisition of political power over party and party over country, there’s really no way to know who’s telling the trouth (if anyone is) in this Kavanaugh “debate”.

    What I DO know is that if Kavanaugh is not confirmed, the GOP and cult45 will be forever howling about how “a good man” was “denied justice”, but if Kavanaugh IS confirmed, we may well find that Trump has succeeded in putting a corrupt, unworthy man on the USSC because he was able to intimidate and steamroll those that objected based on true principles.

    In my opinion, this is quickly escalating into a Constitutional Crisis and the only safe approach is to NOT confirm Kavanaugh because his nomination and the partisan bickering around whether or not to allow Ford to testify / get an FBI investigation has irrevocably tarnished his reputation. No more than 1/2 the country will trust or accept any decision Kavanaugh may write as the deciding vote on future 5-4 USSC decisions where he is in the majority. Trump will have succeeded in permanently tarnishing the reputation of the USSC, making ALL their future decisions of dubious quality because of the question of whether or not Kavanaugh’s confirmation was based on merit or on political partisanship.

    In my opinion, Trump has so tarnished the GOP and the institutions of government with his insults and baseless twitter attacks on the courts, the media, the intelligence community, Law-and-Order through attacks on his own AG & DOJ and on Congress that I’m becoming convinced Trump will make a play for abolishing Congress and the Judiciary Branch as well as installing government media censors before his term is over. I’m beginning to think Trump may actually refuse to move out of the WH if he loses the election in 2020 or may call off the election altogether, proclaiming that he’s “so popular” that an election would be a waste of time and money….

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Any person recommended by Trump is likely to be as corrupt as Trump himself. Kavanaugh is no exception since he was reportedly hand-picked by Kennedy in a back-room deal with Trump. Since Trump does nothing without benefit to himself, what is Trump getting out of this ?

    I agree Kavanaugh should not be confirmed – but because I don’t trust the nomination selection process nor the GOP majority that is ramming this through Congress, refusing to listen to potentially disqualifying testimony.

    Trump’s pre-nomination vetting process should have detected this episode. That it did not is believable given Trump’s previous nominations (VA, Sec State, Chief-of-Staff, etc) that have been forced out of their jobs for corruption.

    If Kavanaugh is actually innocent, we’ll never know, but it’s better to be cautious and NOT confirm than to be reckless and to confirm a corrupt or unethical individual because the GOP would prefer to intimidate the witnesses into silence.

  • anonymous

    I’m not at all dismissing what possibly occurred, but I had high school friends who got so drunk 40 years ago that they don’t remember much of either high school or college. That doesn’t justify it, but Kavenaugh may not really remember. I think the bigger issue is-has he been able to overcome this area of behavior, or is it still active? It appears not to be active anymore, and I think that’s what is important. It would be a much bigger issue to me if it happened in the last decade. If the incident was so important to Blasie Ford, she should have brought it up at the beginning of the confirmation process, not at the last minute (by the way, I’m female and have no tolerance for sexual abuse anywhere, particularly in the church).

  • anonymous

    Trump’s aberrant behavior is both yesterday and today (and probably tomorrow). It sounds like Kavanaugh did something stupid in high school, which is typical for many young people. If something like this hasn’t happened in decades, then he has changed, and for the better. Trump appears to have a team he listens to when it comes to Supreme Court nominations, and he doesn’t appear to be very involved until the actual nomination is announced. It would be nice if he administered more often this way, instead of chasing squirrels and tweeting about them. ( I didn’t vote for Trump by the way…I find most of what he does absolutely appalling).

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    But what if he didnt?
    You say you believe he did – Why? Why do you believe it?
    Be honest about it.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    To be honest, I’ve heard that the back room ‘deal’ between Kennedy and Trump never happened.

  • Marcion

    I believe Kavanaugh’s accuser for the same reason I believe Donald Trump, Bill Clinton, and Al Franken’s accusers: The American ruling class is made up of depraved scumbags. The system that produces America’s leaders either creates or enables predators to reach its highest levels, and Kavanaugh is as much a product of that system as Trump, Clinton and Franken.

  • Polarbearpapa

    1 As dead flies give perfume a bad smell,

    so a little folly outweighs wisdom and honor.

    Ecclesiastes 10

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Exactly right about Trump’s “aberrant behavior”. It is these very “aberrations” that makes everything he does suspect because Trump has done NOTHING in office that did not ultimately turn out to be for his own private benefit – and often at the cost of the reputations or other people, agencies, or branches of government.

    Trump has attended no summit where he brought honor to the Office of the President. He has attended no summit where he has not embarrassed, ridiculed or created a laughing stock of the US and US institutions or policies.

    Trump’s nominations should be considered in light of the man’s lack of ethics, morals, and altruism. They should be considered as coming from the petty, vindictive man that Trump has proven to be and subjected to extreme scrutiny and doubt. Failure to do this risks filling our judiciary with corrupt judges willing to sell out law-and-order as well as justice for the sake of their own pocketbooks.

    If Trump is willing to extort GOP Congresscritters by threatening to primary them if they don’t “get with the program” (as he has done on numerous occasions), how can we know that Trump is not “loading the bench” with judges that are as corrupt as he is.

    For those that would say that Trump does not select the judges, but selects from a list made up by “conservatives”, I say that Kavanaugh came off no such list but was the result of a “deal” made between Justice Kennedy and Trump personally. With Kavanaugh being such an exception to the vetting and to the inputs of other opinions than Trump’s own “bigly brain”, there’s no real way (other than extreme Congressional vetting that is now being skipped “in deference to Trump”) to determine what (if anything) the GOP is trying to cover up about Kavanaugh in their rush to get him seated before the mid-terms.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I saw the deal printed in the Washington Examiner. It was immediately (of course) denied by Trump and the WH.

    Given the level of denials from Trump and the WH about his contacts with Russia during the 2016 election and the clear lies and exaggerations from Trump himself that get amplified by his WH press wing, I now automatically reject anything source from Trump or the WH that has not been investigated and independently confirmed by others. The only ones I’ve heard deny the deal are Trump and Sarah her “official capacity” as “presidential liar”.

  • Marcion

    Kavanaugh doesn’t say that he was drunk so he doesn’t remember. Here’s what he says:

    I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.

    He’s pretty clear that this wasn’t a situation where he was drunk and doesn’t remember. But even if he’s lying about that and he really got so drunk he tried to sexually assault someone and then forgot, that’s just as much of a black mark on his character. Either way, he’s totally unrepentant.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    I’m more concerned about the possibility that he was NOT drunk, DOES remember the assault and is lying about it.

    I’m more concerned that someone will find out and and use that as leverage to control his vote OR that he is unrepentant (witness his denials) and has the poor character and/or poor moral character that we’ve all come to associate with Trump and Trump appointees.

  • Donalbain

    Is there no redemption? Is there no allowances for growing, maturing, and becoming better people than we were as kids?

    Yes. Redemption comes when you see the faults in yourself. When you make reparations. When you ask for forgiveness.

  • JASmius

    There is no comparison between all the “powerful men” the #MeToo crowd brought down a year ago (most especially Roy Moore) and Brett Kavanaugh today. In the former, there were multiple, independent accusers whose accounts of being sexually assaulted or coerced or harassed were corroborated and consistent with each other. There were patterns of such behavior. And the “powerful men’s” denials were inconsistent and mealy-mouthed and thoroughly unconvincing. None of those conditions are present in the current instance. There’s one accuser, Christine Ford, who can remember virtually no details of the episode she’s attempting to tout, except that somehow she’s positive that Judge Kavanaugh was the perp. She has no corroborating witnesses beyond a single woman who was at the party and heard a rumor about the alleged attack after the fact but saw nothing on the night in question. Whereas Judge Kavanaugh has vehemently and categorically denied it in no uncertain terms, has two witnesses who were present who say they never saw or anything that she describes, and has dozens of people who have testified to his unimpeachable character over the length and breadth of his entire career.

    In short, the accusations against Harvey Weinstein, Al Franken, Roy Moore, etc. were compelling. The accusation (singular) against Brett Kavanaugh is not. It’s maximally telling that Dr. Ford isn’t willing to testify under oath and is demanding an FBI investigation that the Bureau hasn’t the jurisdiction to conduct. Almost as if she’s thrown out the charge and wants the FBI to fill in the salacious details. I don’t know what, if anything, happened to her when she was in high school. Nobody does, including Dr. Ford, evidently, in many respects. It isn’t that she’s necessarily lying, or is making it up. Just that her accusation is not remotely convincing enough to deny Brett Kavanaugh a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court, and looks very much like an Anita Hill circa 1990 remake intended as the Hail Mary it so clearly is.

  • 2jm1


  • 2jm1

    Redemption should contain asking for forgiveness from the victim, not humiliating them and swearing it did not happen! One does not ask for redemption by lying.

  • 2jm1

    Than take a lie detector test and/or have Kavanaughs friend Mr. Judge swear under oath. The GOP is hiding something, it should require more investigation in order to find the truth.

  • 2jm1

    Something stupid that scared a young woman for life. At least he should own up and apologize instead he victimizes her again.

  • 2jm1


  • heidi jo bean

    Do you want to know why Feinstein delayed? Because the victim was scared to come forward and expose herself.
    Do you want to know why she was scared to come forward and expose herself?
    Because now she’s had to move from her home, because she’s getting DEATH THREATS from your camp!

    It’s so obvious, men will believe other men when they come forward and expose their sexual abuse by Priests
    30 years later, but let a woman come forward 30 years later, and her honesty and her memory are suspect!
    When will fathers teach the sons to control their anger? To protect women and children?

  • dstiver

    Yes, these are serious questions for a Supreme Court nominee with a lifetime appointment. There’s a higher standard and plenty of other qualified people. I think it’s appropriate to bring a higher standard here; he can still keep his other job and go on. We don’t need judges with this kind of question hanging over them when determining cases when there are other alternatives. If it can be resolved ahead of time, then fine. She sounds very credible. Even if it was a youthful act, this is a Supreme Court nominee. If he confesses it and deals with it, even that is another issue, but if she’s at all on target, now we have a Supreme Court nominee lying. We can do better.

  • steveiam

    Once again, the attention grabbing whore, (15 minutes of fame), Graham, weighs in with typically vapid, banal ‘thoughts’
    to pontificate without knowing. He should stick to being an apologist for Trump.

  • Jacob

    lol…Susan Wright…looks like nobody is buying what you are selling….Since Ford was on the record long before this nomination was ever brought up…your premise is laughable …you hypocrisy is the perfect example of why i left the church and the Republican party several years ago…

  • Angela G

    Franklin Graham is an insensitive asshole in my book. He keeps wading in on things he knows nothing about. He was not in that room with Kavannaugh and his accuser and has no idea what happened! And contrary to what Mr. Graham seems to think, he is not god and therefore does not know anyone’s heart!

  • Pennybird

    “Of course, Feinstein’s stunt (and please, let’s not pretend that this was anything other than a political move)…” – Susan Wright

    “Cry me a river” – Merrick Garland

    Sometimes it’s best to think of the paybacks before making a power play in the first place.

  • Pennybird

    She has far more to lose with this allegation than he has. This is not a criminal case and his only consequence if she is believed is the same one Merrick Garland received for the crime of being nominated by a Democrat. He will have the same, high paying, high prestige job he has now. Dr. Ford, on the other hand, has had death threats, had to move, and has squirreled her children away for their safety.

    This is why women don’t report rape, and this damn sure why Republicans are working so hard to install him. They want us to know without a doubt that we have no business impugning the character of our rapists, especially when they are fine, upstanding criminals men.

  • Pennybird

    She is willing to testify under oath. So far, Kavanaugh isn’t. Who has something to hide again?
    And she’s very convincing.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    We can do better.

    … and we should.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    “Susan’s camp” is sending no death threats. Perhaps you’re thinking of the red-cappers (otherwise known as #cult45) ? I have no doubt the red-cappers send death-threats at the drop of a hat….

    Susan is a principled Christian conservative and proud of it. Most of us posting here are proud of her for speaking up and saying what we all are thinking (except tor the obvious trolls from the #cult45 camp that is). Even when we disagree with her conclusions, we are proud of her for speaking up and speaking out and remaining true to her beliefs in the face of the tremendous pressure that all bloggers are under if they don’t worship at the alter of Trump.

    I read [pronounced as “reed”] this article – not as a defense of Kavanaugh, but as Susan’s opinion as to which side she found more believable. It is not her fault that I and others here disagree with her in this instance. Others posting here do agree with her while some likely remain truly undecided.

    I disagree primarily with Susan’s reasoning and her belief that Kavanaugh is innocent, honest and worthy of trust despite the manner of his nomination and the actions of the man that nominated him. I believe the manner of his selection was tainted and corrupt and that Trump nominated him for corrupt and self-serving reasons, thereby making his entire nomination questionable in my mind until I see further evidence that Kavanaugh is truly as good a man as Trump is trying desperately to convince the country he is.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    Some fathers do. Some do not, unfortunately.
    As for ‘my camp,’ you’ll have to explain what camp that is. It really sounds like you’re assuming a lot.

  • Larry Dawson

    Graham’s ,ental and moral waddle remain worthless. He is a complete idiot.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    So your stance is that he’s absolutely guilty, based solely on the fact that he’s male?
    I believe in supporting victims, but I’m not real big on punishing men for the chance of birth that made them male.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    You’re assuming he’s at fault, based simply on her word and nothing else.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    Explain why you believe he did [and please, if your only reason is ‘He’s male’ then I suggest you seek a qualified therapist, STAT].

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    You only repent if you’re guilty. Otherwise, that act of repentance is meaningless.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    So because he’s male?

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    You understand that Franklin Graham has more than eclipsed a mere ’15 minutes of fame,’ right?

  • guy

    I can certainly understand thet concern of calling him into account for actions while he was a child. Nonetheless, if these allegations are true and he was charged at age 17, he would’ve been subject to crimuncr charges. Such a record would certainly have kept him off of the list of SCOTUS .nominees. I struggle to see where unconvicted crime is any less relevant than convicted crime.

  • guy

    No assumption of fault , just refusal to write off the accusations based on age at time of offense or time since alleged offense.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Now, now. You should realize that it is quite appropriate to assume the man is always guilty if your politics lean leftward – that’s why the left invented and pushes transgenderism – so the innocent men can prove their innocence by becoming women….

  • Marcion

    No, because he’s powerful.

  • Pete

    Franklin Graham is a lying piece of shit just like Trump.

  • RebeccaSusanWright

    That doesnt sound sane.
    It sounds like you’ve been watching too many ‘Dynasty’ reruns.

  • Widuran

    Sorry is this a crime from 40 years ago?

  • Widuran

    Inocent until proven guilty

  • heidi jo bean

    By your camp, I’m speaking of those who don’t believe Dr. Ford…
    those who excuse Kavanaugh’s actions (should they prove to be true) by saying he was a “child.” The age of consent in Maryland is 16, he was 17, and she was 15…
    those who victimize the victim, and call an attempted sexual assault “teenaged shenanigans”…
    those who condone misogyny by defending the actions of a “testosterone-driven young man”…
    those who have yet to realize he was in a Frat (secret society) whose slogan was “No Means Yes” “Yes mean Anal” and whose motto was “tit and clit” and who waved a flag made of women’s underwear.
    To quote Madeleine K. Albright,
    “There is a special place in hell for women who don’t help other women.”

  • steveiam

    “Inocent (sic) until proven guilty.” Funny, the ‘great’ leader has already adjudged Kavanaugh completely innocent. This, in his
    typical manner of not allowing due diligence. Clearly, the Trump Nebbish will have Women’s Rights (and those of LGBTQ Individuals,
    immigrants and minorities) set back to biblical standards given the opportunity.

  • steveiam

    Yes, it is and Rape/abuse of Women is relevant in any timeframe…as is, predatory behavior toward children.

  • Widuran

    As I said. People are innocent until proven guilty. My only mistake was the spelling.

  • clanhamilton

    Kavanaugh says it never happened.
    So why are his supporters saying, “It doesn’t count because he was so young.”?
    If it never happened, why offer up a mulligan?

  • Unfortunately for America, this wild accusation is serving to distract conservatives from the real issue(s) concerning Kavanaugh. From prior Senate confirmation hearings to even his most recent for the Supreme Court, Kavanaugh (like the Republican Party and Neil Gorsuch) hides behind erroneous court precedent which continues to enable the blatant usurpation known as Roe v. Wade. Hardly the position of an Originialist to which they are sold to us as.

    According to the supreme Law of the Land, the Judicial Branch cannot legislate nor can they invent rights. And as stated in Article VI: all laws must be made in pursuance of the Constitution. Alexander Hamilton explains this unequivocally in Federalist Paper #78.

    “There is no position which depends on clearer principles, than that every act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this, would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”

    Yet not only did the SCOTUS violate the Constitution, they invented a right which contradicts a higher law and the most fundamental right of them all, the Natural Right to Life. After that feat, inventing licentious rights like same-sex marriage are a cinch…

  • TomMars

    As a domestic law attorney I deal with the changing, faking,and fading memories of witnesses almost daily. How can we ever know if the allegations are true based on the evidence provided so far? There needs to be a lot better
    evidence to ruin a reputation and career, at least for objective people. We will see if there is any.

    First point, a lot of people make false or exaggerated allegations for all kinds of reasons–anger, jelousy, self-justification, to please someone else, attention, money, power, substance use, mental health
    reasons, etc. Anybody who believes otherwise has lived a sheltered life or is delusional. I could give hundreds of examples from cases I have done. However, a personal example is that for years I was harassed by a woman who would call in the middle of the night and go on and on about how I had cost her hundreds of thousands of dollars on a personal injury case because of a conspiracy I was in with George W. Bush. I had never met the woman, didn’t do personal injury cases, and had never met George W. Bush. Didn’t matter. Allegation after allegation came in complex stories of my super-villain conspiracy life. My information was in the public realm. The police were
    amused. I could seek a restraining order if I thought she was violent. But pretty soon I started feeling sorry for her.
    I would start to worry when I didn’t hear from her with some outlandish accusation of evil-doing that W and I had been up to. It has been several years now, but I found I was worrying about if she was okay just the other day. Good thing I will never be nominated for the Supreme Court.

    Second point, people who believe they are being honest often perceive or remember events differently. All kinds of personal biases, world views, ideologies, health issues, stressors, and self-interests can shape memory, especially over time. Two people with different stories can believe they are being honest, and both can actually be wrong (or even right because each may only remember a few facts of many relevant facts).

    Last point, assault of a sexual nature is very serious at any age, BUT. I was assaulted when I was 20 on a bus by an 18 year old girl I knew who I was sitting next to—just sitting next to on a city bus going some place. Yup, she had been drinking (I was a straight arrow who didn’t drink, party, fornicate, etc.). She was all over me and I was trying to pull one hand after another off, and remove her lips, without seriously injuring her, and just be able to breathe—I was strong but she was surprisingly strong. I couldn’t get free. The person I has actually with just sat in the next seat looking straight ahead trying hard to pretend he couldn’t hear me gasping for some help. He didn’t know what to do. I eventually managed to peel the girl off and get free and get off the bus. Of course, as a male people could care less. Must have been my fault for having a Y chromosome. I was extremely angry. Kind of still am. Well, that girl went on to give up drinking and became a good non-fornicating Christian last I knew. That was over 30 years ago. Would I want her life defined by that moment? No way. She was 18 and stupid and intoxicated. It was over 30 years ago. I wouldn’t want to be defined by some of the stupid things I did as a teen. I hope she has gone on to greatness. She was certainly aggressive enough to succeed.

  • Jennifer

    Normal teenage boys do NOT attempt to rape girls. This is not some stupid child’s play or hormone-driven behavior and I’m sick of people responding to possible sexual assault like it’s just something that happened “back in the day” and “oh, just boy stuff”. That is absolute BS and a sickening message to send young adults.

    I appreciate your take on how neither Graham or the Democrats care at all for Ford. It’s ludicrous how people are gleefully assuming Kavannaugh must be guilty because Trump picked him. This is political and numerous assault survivors have said her claims do not sound legit.

  • guadalupelavaca

    It is part of our system of justice that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The 2 other boys have denied it happened. One accuser. 3 denials.

  • guadalupelavaca

    Rape? She never accused him of rape. Where did you get that from?

  • Markus R

    Sigh. As a Christian I cringe when Christian leaders or notable figures speak to work within politics. The Church should certainly speak out when the kingdom of man tries to dictate dogma to the church and individual Christians are free to apply their morals in voting. We cross the line when a Christian leader uses their position and access to the media to sway the public sentiment for politics. Graham is sadly out of line in making what can only be seen as a moral judgement based on the perceived authority of his position. Pray, Mr. Graham. Vote. Trust God.

  • Jennifer

    Yes, she doesn’t sound credible at all having such blanks.

  • Jennifer

    True, but Steve said rape AND abuse.

  • godlessveteran

    No, he has not changed for the better, he is simply more cautious. His court opinions reveal a continued misogyny.

  • Brian Orion

    It seems to me Jesus spent 10% of his energies attacking the governmental powers of his day, and 90% attacking religious phonies and hypocrites. Paul would call the likes of Franklin Graham and Robert Jeffress “whitewashed walls”. One wonders if they are even saved.

  • steveiam

    Learn to READ…I cited ‘Rape/abuse.’ I DID NOT state that Kavanaugh Raped her. Clear problem withthe Trumpanzee apologists, they are undereduated and not given to nuance.

  • steveiam

    Do you REALLY think anyone involved will declare knowledge of the event?
    That would open a pandoras box. Oooops, look the latter up, it does not refer to a sexual term…just letting you understand.

  • guadalupelavaca

    Did you read that Ford identified a female friend who was there? And that female friend said it DIDNT happen.

  • steveiam

    ANYONE with knowledge should step forward. The problem is that the ‘no-nothings’ simply make Kavanaugh look guilty.

  • guadalupelavaca

    Ford’s own friend denies it happened. Ford cant even remember when and where this happened. I’d say that EVIDENCE points to his innocence. I can see why the boys might have a motive to lie, but not her own friend.

  • gimpi1

    If that’s true, and if this was a situation I was facing, I hope I would be honorable enough to say something like, “I made the mistake of drinking too much as a teenager. That was a gravr mistake, and one reason I stress self-control and accountabilty today. While I don’t remember doing what Dr. Ford described, perhaps because I was drinking, I can’t say for certain what happened. If I caused her pain or fear, I’m genuinely sorry. We can all use this discussion to treat each other better, to learn from our mistakes and to both ask for and offer forgiveness.”

    There’s a great deal to be said for honesty. Unfortunately, it’s not often rewarded.

    All that said, I have a great deal of difficulty with the entire Republican party and the way they dealt with the Court. Refusing to even consider Mr. Obama’s nomination, stating that if Ms.Clinton won, the Republican congress simply wouldn’t allow a vote on any Court nominee, that is frankly claiming that, constitution be damned, they weren’t going to allow any governance except their own… Senator Feinstein’s grandstanding, after that, seems pretty minor to me.

    Does anyone else have a problem with this?

  • anonymous

    I am beginning to wonder what both sides are trying to hide. If Dr. Ford has a story straight, why is she taking so long to testify? If the Republicans have so much power, why don’t they just go ahead with the nomination? And, no, I am not happy with the Republican party at all right now. Once Trump won the nomination, I quit the party after 30 years. I just could not believe who had been nominated, and I’m equally appalled that Trump receives so much blind evangelical support. I find it embarrassing.

  • gimpi1

    You didn’t ask me, bur I’ll answer, if I may:

    I’ve never talked seriously with a group of women and not had most of us have an incident like this in her past. I have. My mother did. My cousin. My best friend. My aunt. My mother-in-law. It’s endemic. It’s so much more common than we were ever willing to face. And, in the past, women were mostly blamed. In many cases, we still are. Also, many of the women I’ve talked to describe similar memory blanks, and similar trauma reactions – phobias, relationship problems, school and career issues – so Dr. Ford’s actions and history seem believable to me. Remember, she sought therapy for these issues years ago.

    Since my experience is that assault is far too common and that Dr. Ford’s behavior is common for assault survivors, it seems to me the most likely scenario is that what she described happened.

  • The Antagonizer

    Says it all, really.
    (((They))) survive by dividing gentiles against each other.

  • The Antagonizer

    But THREE Leftist Jews on the SP are okay? WTF?

  • heidi jo bean
  • Widuran

    Frank Graham is a man of God.

  • The Antagonizer

    Hi, anti-White Communist. Piss off.

  • steveiam

    Actually, ‘Rebecca…’ there have been a number of allegations. Funny, the Trumpanzees were more than willing to ‘hang’ Al Franken, for allegations,
    which he did not deny, but explained them as Entertainment Industry activity,
    yet resigned. Shameless pandering by the no-nothings to rightwingnut, bible humper morality.

  • heidi jo bean

    Anti-White? LMAO.
    Hi, Nazi Snowflake.

  • GotMyLoveGlassesOn

    You have lost your mind.
    I dont allow breathing Pepe memes on my work.
    Welcome to your ban.

  • GotMyLoveGlassesOn

    The Nazi has been IP banned.

  • GotMyLoveGlassesOn

    And the new ones out of the woodwork are more pathetically baseless than Ford.

  • Because if he was drinking too, he might not remember it ever happening.

    Luckily, he’s got a different problem. He’s an obsessive compulsive organizer who has kept documentation of everything he’s done for well over 36 years, and apparently he’s got his high school date planner to prove how boring he really was.

    That and the other four people supposedly at this party tell the same story he does- the party never happened.

  • swbarnes2

    Yes! And I’m sure that you are sincerely proud that Pastor “holding a woman down, and stifling her screams is not a crime” is a worthy representative of your God!

  • Jeremiah

    17 years old is a child? I was arrested for drug possession as a Junior in High School at 17 years old, and then expelled. My name and mugshot were published in the local newspaper. The prosecutors were considering trying me as an adult and I was told that I’d have to participate in dangerous sting operations until my lawyer got involved. BUT RAPE AT SEVENTEEN IS THE ACTION OF A CHILD!? F*** YOU

  • gimpi1

    In my opinion, Dr. Ford’s difficulty is due to the stress of reliving a trauma under what could be a hostile situation. As for the Republicans on the committee, they’re in a double-bind; treat Dr. For badly and recreate the frustration and anger of the Hill hearings, don’t push hard for Judge Kavanagh and they alienate their base. They’re trying to wade through the middle, and not doing it well.

    I don’t blame you for being embarrassed. I’m embarrassed every time I think that the rest of the world assumes that the best our country has to offer is a profane, insecure, immature, incurious, lying, cheat. Oh, well. This too will pass…