Rachel Mitchell expertly eviscerates the case against Kavanaugh

[Leroy N. Soetoro]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/rachel-mitchell-expertly-
eviscerates-the-case-against-kavanaugh/2018/10/02/ec1ff7c4-c66d-11e8-9b1c-
a90f1daae309_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.c4e0455e5d62

The decision by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley to
have Arizona sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell question Christine
Blasey Ford may well be remembered as a brilliant — and quite possibly
pivotal — choice.

No doubt, allowing Mitchell to ask questions instead of Republican
senators served a defensive purpose, avoiding the spectacle of a bunch of
old, white men publicly questioning a woman who says she was a victim of
sexual abuse. But Mitchell’s methodical, genial approach left many
supporters of Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh deeply frustrated,
with some complaining that Mitchell was “not laying a glove” on Ford.

That view is wrong. First, the audience for Mitchell’s questions was not
the media or even the general public. It was the three Republican senators
who will determine Judge Kavanaugh’s fate: Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa
Murkowski of Alaska and Jeff Flake of Arizona. And it turns out that
Mitchell’s orderly questioning actually elicited a lot of information that
undermined Ford’s case against Kavanaugh. This was not obvious during the
hearing, because Mitchell was not able to deliver a summation. But she was
able to do so later, first during a closed-door meeting of Republican
senators and then in a memorandum, in which she explains why, based on her
quarter-century of experience prosecuting sex crimes, no “reasonable
prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the
Committee.”

To begin with, Mitchell lays out how Ford had “not offered a consistent
account of when the alleged assault happened” or her age when it happened,
and how “her account of who was at the party has been inconsistent.” For
example, Mitchell points out that Ford listed Patrick “PJ” Smyth to the
polygrapher and in her July 6 text to a Post reporter, but “she did not
list Leland Keyser even though they are good friends. Leland Keyser’s
presence should have been more memorable than PJ Smyth’s.”

[The attempted ruin of Kavanaugh is about more than Ford’s allegations]

Ford has “no memory of key details of the night in question — details that
could help corroborate her account,” Mitchell writes. Ford does not
remember who invited her to the gathering, how she heard about it, how she
got there, or where that house was located with any specificity. “Most
importantly,” Mitchell writes, “she does not remember how she got from the
party back to her house. Her inability to remember this detail raises
significant questions. .?.?. Given that this all took place before cell
phones, arranging a ride home would not have been easy.” Furthermore,
Mitchell notes, Ford “testified that her friend Leland, apparently the
only other girl at the party, did not follow up with Dr. Ford after the
party to ask why she had suddenly disappeared.” This seems highly
unlikely.

And, Mitchell demonstrates, Ford’s inconsistencies are not limited to
events three decades ago. For example, Ford delayed the hearing because
she said her symptoms prevented her from flying from California to
Washington, but then acknowledged under questioning that she flies to the
East Coast “at least once a year to visit her family,” and has flown to
Hawaii, French Polynesia and Costa Rica for hobbies and vacations.

Moreover, Mitchell points out, Ford also testified that she was not
“clear” that Grassley (R-Iowa) had offered to send committee investigators
to interview her in California. Either this statement under oath was
untrue or her attorneys failed to share Grassley’s offer with her — which
is a serious violation of the American Bar Association’s rules of
professional conduct.

[New York Times stands by news story on Kavanaugh by opinionated writer]

Mitchell also shows that “Dr. Ford struggled to remember her interactions”
with The Post, which wrote that she provided “portions” of her therapist’s
notes to a reporter. But in her testimony, Ford could not recall if she
showed The Post full or partial therapist notes or her own summary of
those notes.

She could not remember whether she took a polygraph the day of her
grandmother’s funeral or the day after. She was unsure whether she was
videotaped or recorded during the polygraph. She did not explain how she
knew to call the receptionist at her congresswoman’s office but could not
figure out how to contact her senator, Dianne Feinstein, the ranking
Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Ford’s supporters say it is unfair to pick apart her testimony, because
victims of sexual assault often have trouble remembering key details. Fair
enough. But if her memory is the only evidence against Kavanaugh, then
inconsistencies matter. And without any corroboration, senators cannot
rely her imperfect memories alone — no matter how sympathetic a witness
she was.



--
Donald J. Trump, 304 electoral votes to 227, defeated compulsive liar in
denial Hillary Rodham Clinton on December 19th, 2016. The clown car
parade of the democrat party ran out of gas and got run over by a Trump
truck.

Congratulations President Trump. Thank you for cleaning up the disaster
of the Obama presidency.

Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp.

ObamaCare is a total 100% failure and no lie that can be put forth by its
supporters can dispute that.

Obama jobs, the result of ObamaCare. 12-15 working hours a week at minimum
wage, no benefits and the primary revenue stream for ObamaCare. It can't
be funded with money people don't have, yet liberals lie about how great
it is.

Obama increased total debt from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the eight
years he was in office, and sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood queer
liberal democrat donors.