The appointment process of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court has resulted in the public’s favorite part of political motions: the tea.

A rapid race to the Chair turned to a gradual disaster when, in early September 2018, various women brought forth accusations of previous sexual assaults on the part of Kavanaugh in the 1980’s, when he was a high school student.

The allegations have compromised his formerly certain advancement unto the superior court of the United States. Ongoing claims have become the focal point of profound press and propaganda, and created a social controversy, launching substantial protesting and numerous threats on the appointee’s life.

All charges have been denied by Kavanaugh, who theorizes that such insinuations were fabricated to deter his entrance to the Court.

The political media is reaching for an elementary solution in which everyone’s a winner, however Republicans cannot envision a proceeding in which the convicted is appointed without presenting as insensitive to the victim.

However, insensitivity is all that radiates from Kavanaugh in his long-winded, blathering opening statement, ranging from sobbing hysterics to outcries of rage.

He clings to the justification that his accuser’s story “lacks corroboration.” Such is simply not the case. When skeptics step back and evaluate as a judge and jury would, a precise, consistent, greatly corroborated account becomes apparent.

In any customary circumstances, in a courtroom, guilt has a quantitative threshold. Criminal proceedings are judged at the standard of guilt “beyond reasonable doubt.” Yet, nothing is standard about the political responses, as all the screeches of “due process” and “presumption of innocence” are ignorant to the matter that those principles are nonexistent in a hearing for a position Kavanaugh doesn’t hold.

In the confirmation course, legislators could dismiss him if they didn’t care for the tie he was wearing, or his self-righteous demeanor.

As it goes with all breaking news, it all comes back to Trump. For him, Kavanaugh was an opportunity to construct an illusion of competence with an immediate nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court,  and personally handpicked Kavanaugh.

Among the abundant “red flags” presented within the trials, one of the more deviant events was Kavanaugh’s immediate counteractions to the victims’ claims.

Without delay, the nominee broadcasted a report penned by 65 women who resided in his hometown, Washington, D.C. at the time the alleged crimes would have taken place. The letter details what the women believe to be an accurate examination of his character, and defend their “childhood friend” against any wrongdoing.

As a civilized being, I must say, no one free of blame has a ready catalog of 65 women they have not assaulted in line for when a woman with pleas of assault makes an appearance unto the public. Guiltless individuals do not have to pre-plot their own exoneration.