WSJ: Questions Multiply About Blasey-Ford's Memory, and Motives

A couple of good points here:

The woman accusing Brett Kavanaugh of a drunken assault when both were teenagers has now come forward publicly, and on Monday it caused Republicans to delay a confirmation vote and schedule another public hearing. Yet there is no way to confirm her story after 36 years, and to let it stop Mr. Kavanaugh's confirmation would ratify what has all the earmarks of a calculated political ambush.

...

Ms. Ford concedes she told no one about it--not even a high school girl friend or family member--until 2012 when she told the story as part of couples therapy with her husband.

...

The Post reports that the therapist's notes from 2012 say there were four male assailants, but Ms. Ford says that was a mistake. Ms. Ford also can't recall in whose home the alleged assault took place, how she got there, or how she got home that evening.

...

The Post says Ms. Ford contacted the paper via a tip line in July but wanted to remain anonymous. She then brought her story to a Democratic official while still hoping to stay anonymous.

Yet she also then retained a lawyer, Debra Katz, who has a history of Democratic activism and spoke in public defense of Bill Clinton against the accusations by Paula Jones. Ms. Katz urged Ms. Ford to take a polygraph test. The Post says she passed the polygraph, though a polygraph merely shows that she believes the story she is telling.

The more relevant question is why go to such lengths if Ms. Ford really wanted her name to stay a secret? Even this weekend she could have chosen to remain anonymous. These are the actions of someone who was prepared to go public from the beginning if she had to.

...

It would also be a serious injustice to a man who has by all accounts other than Ms. Ford's led a life of respect for women and the law. Every #MeToo miscreant is a repeat offender. The accusation against Mr. Kavanaugh is behavior manifested nowhere else in his life.

The WSJ's editors suggest this is all just a failure of memory, trying to avoid the inevitable claim that "you're smearing a victim."

But that's the very question that needs to be resolved first --whether she is in fact a victim. If she's not a victim, you can't just say "You're smearing a victim." That's begging the question, using the very claim that is in need of proving to help prove itself.

Meanwhile, Dianne Feinstein offers a ringing endorsement of Blasey-Ford's shaky powers of recollection, saying she cannot attest that everything Ford says is truthful:

Well I'm sold.

posted by Ace of Spades at 06:34 PM

| Access Comments