On his radio show Friday, Rush Limbaugh addressed the “absolutely despicable turn” the Brett Kavanaugh story has taken with the Democrats’ eleventh hour revelation of an unsubstantiated accusation about Kavanaugh allegedly trying to force himself on a girl in high school.
“The Kavanaugh circumstance has taken an absolutely despicable turn,” said Limbaugh. “Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer of the New Yorker and Clarence Thomas fame are now claiming that this story is attempted rape, that Judge Kavanaugh, Brett Kavanaugh attempted to rape the girl when they were both 17 back in high school. This is the girl supposedly locked in the room that didn’t want any of this to come out.”
Limbaugh then read Farrow’s tweeted summary of the allegation he details in his article:
“Okay,” said Limbaugh. “So now this has gone from being Anita Hill redux to Roy Moore redux. Anita Hill came forward and claimed that Clarence Thomas sexually harassed her — while she followed him to every job and career change he made — and the evidence was a pubic hair on a Coke can. Clarence Thomas had had enough of it at some point and gave a great speech on the whole idea of a high-tech lynching. I heard it again yesterday. I’d forgotten how powerful it was when he was speaking to the entire committee about this whole Anita Hill coming out of nowhere at the very end on the verge of confirmation. Well, now the same thing has happened with Kavanaugh.”
Limbaugh then raised some questions that many others are asking about the suspiciously timed accusation: “Now, if this is true, why wouldn’t this girl have come forward sometime before now? Kavanaugh has been in the news I don’t know how many times in recent years. He has undergone similar congressional hearings, confirmation hearings before the Senate Judiciary Committee for his previous posts. He has worked in the Bush administration. He’s been involved in government lawyering for many, many years. Why now? Why all of a sudden now, when every effort to stop him seems to have been exhausted?”
Other issues, he suggested, include why Feinstein sat on the letter for months, and why she was given the letter in the first place: “We’re told that Dianne Feinstein had this letter for months and she’s been sitting on it, that whoever sent it to her asked her to not do anything with it, which is really odd when you think about it. Why send the letter to a United States senator if you’re then gonna ask, ‘Don’t do anything with this and keep my name out of it’? Why send it? When I heard that yesterday, it’s like so much of what goes on: It doesn’t make any sense. If you don’t want to be caught up in this, then don’t send that letter! You obviously want to be caught up in it if you’re gonna send a United States senator a letter. You don’t detail what happened, and then Dianne Feinstein finally decides to release it, turns it over to the FBI. The FBI says, ‘We’re not gonna investigate this.'”
And that wasn’t the only questions Rush had for Feinstein: “And if it’s true, why hasn’t Kavanaugh told anybody about this as a warning? And why didn’t Feinstein tell other Judiciary Committee members about this? Why did she hold this close to the vest and not say anything to anybody? And why didn’t she asked Kavanaugh about it when they met in private or even when she questioned him in public?”
Limbaugh eventually tied the discussion back to Clarence Thomas by presenting his comments from a recent appearance at a Federalist Society event in which he brought up the issue of “honor” among public officials:
THOMAS: I was asking a friend this week, “What happened to the word ‘honor’?” Think about it. How many people can you use — in leadership positions today — the word that I used: “honorable”? “Honorable.” Not “the honorable.” “Honorable.” If we could use that word about more people who are in public life — people who actually ask the questions at confirmation hearings instead of Spartacus.