A Breaking News Bombshell

You heard it here first, folks. The Curmudgeon is in possession of independently verified, incontrovertible video evidence of the alleged incident that took place with Prof. Christine Ford back when she attended high school with Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

Yes, that's right: this ultra-high-def cell phone video clearly shows what happened - and Kavanaugh was not in the room.

No, the young man in question was one Herbie Steinfeld, a classmate of Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh. Further, the Curmudgeon has received a notarized statement from Mr. Steinfeld, who is now a deli owner and polka musician in Hoboken, confessing to the despicable act, along with the sworn statements of 11 witnesses to the event. Mr. Steinfeld has even taken a polygraph, which proves beyond a shadow of a doubt his guilt, and Kavanaugh's innocence.

I will release this bombshell at high noon on Friday, September 21, to CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, the major networks, local TV, political bloggers, and YouTube. I will also post it here, on my blog, and share it on Facebook. I'd even share it on Instagram and Twitter if I had accounts.

Wait, you say - high-def video didn't exist when Ford and Kavanaugh were in high school, nor did cell phones. And there was no classmate of theirs named Herbie Steinfeld.

So what? I reply.

In this social media-fueled age where reporters, bloggers, politicians and private citizens make up shit, pass it off as fact for political gain with the most convenient timing, then refuse to provide support for their claims, why can't the Curmudgeon take the field of play?

Let's examine what we know of Dr. Ford. She's a far-left college professor who joined one of the Women's Marches protesting the election of Donald Trump. She's rumored to have received reviews from students claiming that she would come after them if they crossed her, though left-wing media outlets claim those rumors confuse her with another college professor of the same name.

Judge Kavanaugh's mother, also a judge, ruled in a bankruptcy case involving Dr. Ford's parents. Again, left-wing media outlets claim that the elder Judge Kavanaugh dismissed the case, allowing the Fords to settle with their bank and keep their home. (However, one might surmise that the family would still be pissed off at the bank, the prosecuting attorney - and yes, even the judge, for not hearing the case and ruling in the Fords' favor so that they might have been able to keep the house without having to pay the bank a settlement at all.)

We do know two things for certain: one, she didn't come out with her accusations at the time of the alleged incident, nor after, when she was reportedly a regular on the Dewey Beach, MD party scene. (She now says she doesn't like to be in public places as a result of the incident; that apparently didn't keep her from partying at a number of Dewey Beach bars back in the day.) Nor did she level her accusations when Kavanaugh was nominated and confirmed to the Federal bench, nor when President Trump nominated him to the Supreme Court, nor when his confirmation hearings commenced.

(Now, her purported letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein was supposedly sent weeks ago, so one could argue that she did in fact come forward with her allegations prior to the hearings. More on that later. Suffice it to say that if it's true, Dr. Ford did not contact or pressure Sen. Feinstein to release the information prior to the hearings. Why?)

And two, Dr. Ford scrubbed her social media account prior to this story coming out. Again, why? What anti-Trump, anti-Kavanaugh, anti-Republican posts were on there? What photos of her being out in the very public she now claims to be afraid of as the result of her trauma were deleted? What pictures of her wearing her pink hat at an anti-Trump rally were erased?

Next question: why did Feinstein keep this letter under wraps until after the hearings were over - after all the theatrics manufactured by the left to forestall the hearings, from the obviously staged and utterly ridiculous protests, to Sen. Kamala Harris' mysterious nothing-burger questions regarding nonexistent conversations about the Mueller investigation with employees of a former Trump law firm, to Sen. Cory Booker's laughable Spartacus Moment?

The answer is obvious to anyone with half a brain, and if it isn't obvious to you ... well, that's telling you something. Own it.

Now, nearly everyone on the right - and more than a few on the left - are none too happy with Sen. Feinstein about sitting on the letter until the 11th hour, when she trumped it out (pun intended) in an effort to throw a hail Mary in the anti-Kavanaugh Super Bowl.

The Curmudgeon is not among those upset, however. Why, you may ask?

Simple. I don't believe the letter to Feinstein existed prior to the hearings.

Think about it: would the Dems have tried such pathetic means to derail the hearings as the protests, the Harris ploy, or the Spartacus Moment if they'd had a real, legitimate smoking gun in hand? We're talking logic here, people; work with me.

So why doesn't Feinstein release the letter now, as her GOP colleagues are demanding?

Again, simple: either it doesn't exist, or it's dated as of the day she first spoke of its existence.

It wouldn't surprise me in the least - in fact, I'd bet a substantial sum on it - that this is how it went down:

1. Trump nominates Kavanaugh.
2. The Dems start digging for dirt, and can't find any. The guy has been vetted by the Fibbies six times, and he's a choir boy.
3. The GOP schedules hearings.
4. The Dems seek any means possible, no matter how far-fetched, to delay the hearings until after the mid-terms, when they hope to have control of the Judiciary Committee or at least be able to block confirmation of a Trump nominee to the high Court. (Be careful what you wish for; how did that work out with the Merrick Garland gamble?)
5. The hearings commence.
6. The Dems trump out (again, pun intended) the protesters, Harris, Booker, and any other absurd attempt they can to derail the hearings.
7. Kavanaugh performs splendidly under fire. He'd make the Navy SEALs proud.
8. The confirmation vote looms. And then:
9. Feinstein, under pressure from Democrat voters and legislators who desperately seek to block Kavanaugh's appointment to the Supreme Court, orders her underlings to scour her constituent base for anyone who ever knew Brett Kavanaugh, at any point in his life. Someone who leans far right. Someone who opposes Kavanaugh's appointment to the bench. Someone who can be bought.
10. Feinstein's staffers believe they've struck gold when they find a high school classmate who's a liberal Palo Alto professor - lo and behold, a Californian, from whence Feinstein hails - who is anti-Trump to the point of owning a pink pussy hat, who has probably made numerous inflammatory uber-left social media posts (and is then instructed to wipe her social media presence - assisted in the task, in fact, by those staffers, who learned how to delete records during the Hillary Clinton era).
11. Said staffers draft a letter for the professor, who signs off on it after being assured that the Democrat establishment will run cover for her, and she'll never have to testify under oath.
12. Feinstein uses the letter in an attempt to postpone the confirmation vote until after the mid-terms, weighing careful political calculus that the GOP will have to take the allegations seriously or risk alienating female voters, gambling that Trump will tweet that Dr. Ford is a "dog," as he did about Omarosa, and seal the deal for the Dems in the mid-terms - all of this hinging on Feinstein's claim that the allegations were not made at the 11th hour, but were in fact made in a letter dated prior to the commencement of confirmation hearings.

(Conspiracy theory, you say? No more incredible than Dr. Ford's 11th hour claims of an incident that happened decades ago - in the current climate, far less incredible, in fact.)

Alas, two things happened: first, Trump's handlers have done a masterful job of keeping the Tweeter-In-Chief away from his phone. Maybe they've hid it, or deleted his Twitter account. And second?

The GOP called Feinstein's bluff, and demanded she produce the letter.

Which resulted in an oh-shit moment in the Senator's office on Capitol Hill - do I produce the letter, and have it come out that the letter was dated much later than I claimed? Or do I stonewall the GOP and refuse to produce it, thereby calling into question its veracity and further confirming that this is nothing more than a Democrat ploy as lame as those deployed during the confirmation hearings, if not more so?

Sen. Feinstein wisely chose the alternative with the best risk-reward profile, and stonewalled. And the stench began to waft.

Adding to that malodorous drift, we have Dr. Ford and her attorneys. (Sidebar: who's paying for those attorneys, anyway? A female professor at Palo Alto University earned an average $146,502 in 2016, so accounting for wage gains since then - thanks, President Trump, for those - Dr. Ford might be making about $155,000 now. Her husband is an engineer in Silicon Valley. But Palo Alto is a damned expensive place to live - I know, I have clients in the area. Could the Democrat Party be paying those lawyers? Hmmm.)

Dr. Ford initially agreed to testify before the Senate Judicial Committee. She subjected herself (reportedly) to a polygraph, and passed. (For the uninformed, polygraphs are not lie detector tests, are not infallible, are only as good as the person administering them - which we don't know in this case, if she did in fact submit to one and pass - and are not admissible as evidence in all jurisdictions.)

Then, the Committee said, "Okay, come testify, and Judge Kavanaugh can testify too." After all, in the American court system, the accused has the right to face the accuser.

Again, bluff called. Again, an oh-shit moment. Dr. Ford and her lawyers wanted none of that. Why? So what did they do? Demand the FBI investigate first.

Folks, we as private citizens do not get to demand what the FBI investigates and when they investigate it. If we did, the Curmudgeon would be a busy fellow, because he'd be demanding FBI investigations - real investigations, not politically scrubbed ones -  of Hillary Clinton, James Comey, Peter Strzok, et al.

The FBI demurred. Why? Once again, simple: the FBI, or any other law enforcement agency, right down to your local gendarmerie, only investigates matters based on credible evidence. They don't have the resources to go chasing after every rabbit that some lunatic sends down a hole.

Another oh-shit moment came when, after the FBI's reluctance to pursue a foolhardy and unbased investigation, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Grassley stated that the Committee would proceed to a vote. Then, Ford's lawyers said, "Okay, we'll testify, but we want to delay the testimony, and we want the testimony done on our terms, and in a manner ensuring the safety of our client."

See, poor Dr. Ford has apparently been subject to death threats since this debacle unfolded. News flash: Judge Kavanaugh and his wife have also received death threats. As has Dianne Feinstein. As has Donald Trump, including from such credible threats as, say, Madonna. Rep. Scalise was shot by a far-left nutbag. Trump administration officials have been accosted at restaurants by angry mobsters.

Much as is the case with an FBI investigation, if the Senate calls you to testify, you don't get to dictate the terms or the timing. You go, you testify, or they subpoena you. (Question: why hasn't the Senate simply issued a subpoena to Dr. Ford, Sen. Feinstein, and anyone else involved? Answer: the swamp isn't drained yet.)

My bold prediction is that the hearing won't happen. The Dems will gamble that having a hearing with testimony from Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh will only make Kavanaugh look better, and Ford worse. (And shame on Dianne Feinstein for dragging this woman through the mud, even if she herself is complicit.) The Committee will proceed to a vote. It will be close - closer than it should be for a jurist of Kavanaugh's impeccable credentials and character. And Dr. Christine Ford will be relegated to the Wikipedia footnote she is.

In the end, Brett Kavanaugh will be a Supreme Court Justice, just as Clarence Thomas is, despite the eerily similar Anita Hill debacle. (If that had happened in the age of social media and 24/7 cable news, Justice Thomas might have never been confirmed.)

This is what we've come to. And to those on the left who think this is all legit, I say one of two things: shame on you; or damn, are you really that flipping stupid? We should all vote against every incumbent, because this thing stinks to highest heaven, on both sides of the aisle.

Meanwhile, Brett Kavanaugh's name has been unnecessarily and tragically dragged through the mud. His family has been affected. His wife has been threatened. His daughters have to listen to allegations that Daddy is a rapist.

Once the dust settles, I can only hope that Dr. Ford receives the prison sentence she deserves for lying to the Senate (which she won't, if she continues to refuse to testify; maybe her lawyers' demands for ensuring her safety have more to do with safety from prosecution, and less to do with the death threats she's received). Sen. Feinstein deserves a prison term too, for doing the same thing. No one is above the law, right?

And I hope that Judge Kavanaugh's family will sue the Fords to high heaven and back for slander and libel and defamation of character, and take them for every penny the Democrats have given them.

But he likely won't. The Brett Kavanaugh we've seen throughout his career, the Brett Kavanaugh the FBI has investigated six times, the Brett Kavanaugh who shined through a week of Washington theatrics, is above that.