Those of us who watched Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony last Thursday (um, that would be all of us) were frustrated to no end by the dispassionate, methodical and seemingly confined manner of questioning used by Rachel Mitchell, who heads the Special Victims Division of the Maricopa County attorney’s office. But while her questioning set off no fireworks in the room, she did come up with some conclusions that validate many of our conclusions.
In a memo to Senate Republicans on Sunday, she wrote, “A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that.”
She offered nine points to support her conclusion. We’ve already discussed most of them here. But I’d like to call attention to the last two on her list.
8. Dr. Ford’s description of the psychological impact of the event raises questions.
9. The activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford’s attorney’s likely affected Dr. Ford’s account.
These two factors are the ones that seem most affected by the political context of Dr. Ford’s accusation. That would especially apply to #9, which is why Sen. Lindsay Graham has called for an investigation of those suspicious activities. Dr. Ford was obviously used by the Democrats and forced by their deception into a three-ring circus when it was thought her last-minute testimony would bring down Judge Kavanaugh. Let’s hope enough people can see through this tactic, as Ms. Mitchell apparently has, to discredit the whole shameful episode.
Ms. Mitchell was speaking from a legal standpoint about what it would take to bring a case, finding Ms. Ford’s case lacking. Democrats will say (once again) that this wasn’t a trial, it was a job interview. But let me ask the men: How many job interviews have you sat for in which you were put under oath and asked if, as a teenager, you’d ever tried to rape someone?