So Brett Kavanaugh is the ninth and newest member of the Supreme Court of the United States. Confirmed and official.

The Capitol Police may still be prying the protesting pink hat gargoyles off of the statues today, for all I know. The Capitol Administrative offices may be directing custodians and painters to begin sanding down and repairing the scratches on the doors of the Supreme Court building, after the desperate clowns besieged our federal government last Saturday in an embarrassing display of emotions designed to disrupt the outcome of the Senate's vote.

Women holding "Believe Women" signs were chasing down Senator Susan Collins (who voted "yes" for Kavanaugh) and calling her a liar. The irony seemed lost on each of them.

I'm going to say it: I think the protesters should not be allowed to protest. They were too emotional and should not be given the job (insert sarcasm here). Wasn't that their last argument against Kavanaugh?

Reasons to deny him went from legitimate observations by the likes of Corey Booker, who said he was concerned with Kavanaugh's writings about what Booker saw as excessive executive powers. I think that is a legit concern and one worthy of making a legitimate objection to the appointment.

Corbis via Getty Images

It didn't resonate, and other senators countered with other Kavanaugh writings, showing a more balanced look by the judge as he described the founder's intended balance within the federal government. After the judiciary hearings, Democrats realized that they did not make their case to stop the appointment of the conservative to the Supreme Court.

In what is becoming a pattern, the Democrats unleashed what appears to be "an insurance policy," much like the one FBI agent Peter Strzok wrote of in his letter to his FBI lover, Lisa Page. He spoke of having "an insurance policy in case Trump wins." Many believe that is the Russian collusion accusation that Trump faced, and still faces today.

In Kavanaugh's case, a woman was dragged, apparently against her will, into the spotlight when her name was leaked to the press. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford made allegations on July 18 to Senator Dianne Feinstein. She accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault.

The accusation provided little ability for the accused judge to definitively defend himself. In a court of law, this accusation would have been dismissed and the defendant would not even have to be present. Not many prosecutors would have been interested in taking on the case.

But the objective was not to imprison Judge Kavanaugh, it was to stop his nomination from being confirmed.

Ford alleges that Kavanaugh and his friend were "visibly drunk" one night and pulled her into a bedroom, where Kavanaugh allegedly dove on top of her, pressing his erection against her and aggressively trying to get his hands under her clothing. When she screamed, she said Kavanaugh covered her mouth with his hand. She claims that she feared she would suffocate as a result of what she said was a rape attempt.

She stated that Kavanagh's friend Mark Judge jumped on the pair twice, knocking Kavanaugh off of the bed the second time when the pair began to wrestle and laugh, as she walked out of the room and out of the home.

Dr. Ford's allegation points toward a time of which she is not certain, but says is in the area of 36 years ago in the summer of 1982.

Dr. Ford is not able to say where the incident happened, except that it happened between her home and the Columbia Country Club in her hometown of Chevy Chase, Maryland. She believes it was around six to eight miles from her home.

She said that she cannot recall how she got to the home. She stated that she cannot recall how she got back to her home. She named three witnesses who could corroborate her story.

All three of the witnesses that she brought forward have said under oath--multiple times--that they have no idea what she is talking about. One of the witnesses named is Leland Keyser. Ford described Keyser as her best friend, and a lifelong friend. Keyser has said under penalty of felony perjury that she had never attended a party or get-together with Brett Kavanaugh, with or without Dr. Ford.

Dr. Ford was reminded of Keyser's sworn statement, and then impugned the mental health of her friend.

Ford qualified her accusation by presenting evidence that she made it in the past. Under oath, she said that she and her husband were having great difficulties and argued severely enough to seek therapy in 2012. The argument, according to her, was about installing a second front door as a means to escape. She was concerned that a man in her past was possibly going to be on the Supreme Court one day.

She did not name the assailant in her therapy session. She provided a single page of her therapist's notes to prove she brought it up in the past.

She also impeached the therapist's notes as being wrong when the page offered showed four attackers in the bedroom where she was assaulted, not two.

Under questioning from Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Ford described an agonizing after-effect of the alleged Kavanaugh attack that caused her to demand that second door.

“Anxiety, phobia and PTSD-like symptoms are the types of things that I’ve been coping with,” Ford said. “More specially, claustrophobia, panic and that type of thing.”

"Is that the reason for the second front door? Claustrophobia?," asked Feinstein.

"Correct," Ford replied.

Real Clear Politics has done some research on Dr. Ford's home with the two front doors, and seems to find big problems with her chronology of the history of the second entrance. The Fords bought the house on June 20, 2007. And the “very extensive, very long remodel,” including the second front door, were completed under a building permit granted in 2008.

Her husband's sworn testimony on September 25 comes with no such mention of therapy and the need for a second door.

Dr. Ford failed to mention that she wrote the specifics of the allegations from the Rehobeth Beach, Delaware home of retired FBI agent and spokeswoman Monica McClean, who worked with President Obama's appointed U.S. District Attorney Preet Bharara, an outspoken critic of Obama and a former employee of Senator Chuck Schumer (D-New York).

Schumer is on record promising to “oppose Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination with everything I have.” Increasing evidence points to this being a promise he intended to keep.

Getty Images

So, the Democrats are saying that if the House of Representatives is re-captured this November, they will impeach Justice Kavanaugh and re-open a full investigation.

This whole blitz to "Get Brett" has failed. The longer it went, the more the intense the attack, but the more flimsy the weapons. It just didn't work.

They were down to "he threw ice on a dude in college" as the time ran out. This was about as pathetic a moment for the Democratic Party in my life's memory.

Lets have a full investigation. If I were in charge, I would want access to all emails, hard drives and cell phone records of: the plaintiffs and their attorneys; all members of the Judiciary Committee, as well as Senator Schumer; and those of Agent Monica McLean. I would also want to see the full notes from 2012 of Dr. Ford's therapist, all financial and mental health records of the plaintiffs, and all monies their attorneys may be holding for them--and if so, an accurate account of why.

If we want the whole truth, then we want the whole truth, not partial, am I right? I suspect a call to move forward with the investigation evaporates the second these things are demanded.

Ken Pittman is the host of The Ken Pittman Show on 1420 WBSM New Bedford. He can be heard Saturdays from 9 a.m. to noon. Contact him at talkerkenpittman@gmail.com and follow him on Twitter @RadioKenPittman. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.