15 April—Yesterday’s disquisition concluded with this observation, which had nothing to do with the Titanic: “And all the sanctimonious politicians and others who have essentially forced Eric Swalwell’s downfall—deserved or otherwise—are nothing but goddamned hypocrites.”

Well, that brought to the mind of a sharp reader vacationing in Colorado this injunction, as chronicled in John 8:7, of Jesus to a lynch mob of Pharisees who wanted to execute an adulteress: “So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.” (There’s the conflict of Jewish law versus Roman law to consider, but that’s irrelevant in the circumstance.)

To refresh your memory, the Pharisees were a pious, self-righteous, sanctimonious, Jewish sect who claimed to strictly observe written and traditional religious law but in reality were a bunch of hypocrites—probably devout, but at the same time prideful, greedy, lustful, corrupt, and everything they publicly and prominently inveighed against.

That sounds a lot like Litchfield’s experience with Chabad Lubavitch, to be sure. But when you think about it, they’re not alone. In fact, Pharisaism—garden-variety hypocrisy—is more the rule than the exception among religions, sects, cults, and you name it.

So that takes us right back to Congressman Eric Swalwell. And Congressman Tony Gonzalez. And politicians and others who are accused and maybe even guilty of sexual misbehavior and other naughtiness and criminality. Suffice to say, Donald Trump and Willy Clinton have been silent on Swalwell’s and Gonzalez’s sexual antics.

And, frankly, the fact that Swalwell’s accusers have waited till now to come forward, let alone press criminal charges, is at the very least disturbing—regardless of their reasons, excuses, or defenses—and casts doubt on the accusations.

While on the subject, why couldn’t Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, have come forward right after, as she later claimed, he had sexually assaulted her when they were prep school pupils? And why did she wait until he had been nominated for the Supreme Court when she could have accused him when he was nominated for the federal appellate bench—or any time before that?

And to bring it home to Litchfield, Dave Driscoll’s accusers, who wouldn’t for whatever reasons testify against him in criminal trials right after the alleged abuse, have waited over three decades—right after his death—to sue the town—an alleged negligent third party—for money damages in civil court. That, when all is said and done, is what it’s all about . . .