Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, departs after speaking to reporters on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2018, in Washington. Christine Blasey Ford wants the FBI to investigate her allegation that she was sexually assaulted by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh before she testifies at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing next week. (AP Photo/Andrew Harnik)
The inquiry into the allegation made by Christine Ford that she was groped by Brett Kavanaugh at least 35 years ago is becoming a farce and increasingly it is looking like the Dianne Feinstein is acting in bad faith and knows she is acting in bad faith.
While there is no forensic evidence, or much of any kind of evidence, in this case, the best way, and perhaps the only way, to resolve the issue is for everyone who was claimed to be involved to give testimony under oath.
By way of background, this is the state of play in terms of the story. At an unspecified place on an unspecified date at an unspecified time, Christine Ford was at a “party” at a private home somewhere in Montgomery County, MD. The “partiers” were four boys (Ford names Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, and “PJ,” she doesn’t remember the fourth boy or the name of the only other girl). Allegedly, Kavanaugh pushed her onto a bed and groped her. She was able to escape when Judge jumped onto both her and Kavanaugh and she was able to extricate herself and hide in a bathroom until she escaped. No attempt was made, at least in the current telling, by anyone to either pursue her, winkle her out of the bathroom, or keep her from leaving the house.
As it stands right now, three of the alleged participants have testified under oath. This is from Mike Davis who is Senator Chuck Grassley’s chief counsel for nominations (his tweets are suddenly protected…I imagine he got a dose of Twitter hate over this)
So Kavanaugh’s story is pretty much locked in legal concrete.
Mark Judge does not want to testify, per a letter from his attorney pic.twitter.com/mHMBNS9wyi
— Leigh Ann Caldwell (@LACaldwellDC) September 18, 2018
“Under oath” is sort of nebulous and calls up images of swearing on a Bible, etc. This letter from Judge is an under oath statement. If he lied in it, he’s just as vulnerable to perjury charges as if he were present before a Senate panel. So Mark Judge’s story is locked in.
“I understand that I have been identified by Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as ‘PJ’ who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post. … I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question, nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.
“Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh toward women. To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the committee may have.”
And if this is PJ, this letter from his lawyer to the Senate Judiciary Committee locks in his story.
Wait…who’s missing?
Am I correct in saying that it is now the case that the only person who hasn’t given any form of under-oath statement (yes, letters to the Judiciary Committee count) is the accuser? https://t.co/N5bemDJ9Ev
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) September 20, 2018
Yes, that would be correct.
Not only has Ford not agreed to be questioned by committee members or staff,
JUST IN: Chairman Grassley in letter to Dr. Ford's attorneys: "You have stated repeatedly that Dr. Ford wants to tell her story. I sincerely hope that Dr. Ford will accept my invitation to do so, either privately or publicly, on Monday." pic.twitter.com/OZ7Fo4JpKy
— NBC News (@NBCNews) September 19, 2018
her account is not even on the record:
Committee Majority has yet to see original, unredacted letter from Dr. Blasey Ford to Sen. Feinstein https://t.co/c7S1Nk5WSZ pic.twitter.com/2mJ23XL35Y
— Senate Judiciary (@senjudiciary) September 19, 2018
Even if we buy the story that the events are too painful to recount in public, her refusal to agree to a private interview or even to submit a written statement are inexplicable if her story is true. The sad thing here is that this can never be cleared up to the satisfaction of Christine Ford’s cheering section, and Judge Kavanaugh is going to carry this stigma forever, but Ford’s refusal to go on the record with her complaint and rely on statements by her lawyer to the media to slime Brett Kavanaugh hints that she knows her story is very shaky if not outright false.
No, Mazie Hirono, I Won’t Shut Up but This Is What You Can Do
Too Clever By Half. Democrat Intransigence Is Bringing Vichy Republicans Back Into the Fold
Dianne Feinstein Is Not Sure Christine Ford Is Telling the Truth, So Why Is She Doing This?
The Allegations Against Brett Kavanaugh Add Up to a Deliberate Political Smear
Brett Kavanaugh Produces More Character Witnesses Which Just Proves He’s Like a Serial Killer
Kamala Harris Doesn’t Sound All That Confident About Monday’s Hearing
=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.
Follow @streiffredstate
I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========
Join the conversation as a VIP Member