On Thursday, Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh declared that he will appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday to “clear his name.”
Someone with such a long and distinguished judicial career need not be told that justice is blind as the evidence presented by both sides is weighed. No one gets to place his thumb on the scale.
But that woman who accused him of sexually assaulting her decades ago when you both were teenagers is apparently much more anxious to lay bare the full truth of what had happened – or had not happened – between the two of you on that fateful evening.
What could be simpler: She appears before the Senate Judicial Committee and you do as well. If a majority believes you – or feels that she has not proven her case – they will recommend that the full Senate vote to install you on the Supreme Court.
What could be simpler and fairer? And best yet, Judge Kavanaugh has finally gotten to clear his name. Or has he?
OK, Judge Kavanaugh: May I be permitted a simple question? It relates to your accuser’s demand that the FBI conduct and complete an investigation of the events of that fateful evening before the hearing is held.
President Trump has refused to order such an investigation. So if you truly want to clear your good name, why don’t you join your accuser in demanding that FBI investigation be completed before either of you testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee?
Even preceding the outrageously biased Clarence Thomas – Anita Hill hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee seventeen years ago, the FBI did conduct an investigation.
As a legal scholar, you cannot help but be struck by the fairness of this proposal. Think about it! Would you prefer to be narrowly confirmed, and then be shadowed by questions about what actually happened at that party?
If you are indeed sincere about clearing you name, then why not grab this lifeline? Or, you can ignore it, and then go though the rest of your life wondering if even your family and friends can believe you.