California professor Christine Blasey Ford came forward on Sunday to reveal that she was the Jane Doe accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault when they were both minors. Democrats are using the allegations to try to delay and ultimately stop Kavanaugh’s judicial appointment, but it’s exposing Democrats for having double standards.
There are multiple parts of Ford’s story that need to be heavily scrutinized — the fact that the only alleged witness to the event denies it, the lack of evidence except for a therapist’s note that doesn’t name Kavanaugh and isn’t evidence from the time of the alleged event. She doesn’t remember much of the day except for the attack — she can’t recall when it happened, but believes it was the summer of 1982, nor can she recall how she got to the party, how she got home, or whose house she was in. She also discredits part of the therapist’s note that says four boys were in the room during the attack and now claims it was only two, a key detail that she chalks up to an error on the part of the therapist. Her only other piece of evidence is lie detector test results, which is junk science and inadmissible in court.
[More: Christine Ford’s letter detailing sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh leaked to media]
In the Washington Post, Ford claimed that too many years had passed and she couldn’t remember the details, which is somewhat understandable. Yet it does still cast some level of doubt on her accusation as does her affiliation with left-wing political organizations and a letter from the American Civil Liberties Union she signed opposing Trump’s immigration policy.
The doubt in Ford’s story is especially strong given that it follows no pattern. Kavanaugh has never been accused of sexual misconduct in the past and has led an exemplary life both professionally and privately.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., also should be scrutinized for holding on to the records for weeks before revealing them and handing them over to the FBI. According to a report by the New Yorker, Feinstein’s staff believed the incident was “too long ago to merit a public discussion,” but may have changed their mind at a more politically opportune time.
Most of these questions are impossible to answer. Ford cannot give a date of the attack, so Kavanaugh cannot prove he wasn’t there. She can’t remember a location, and everyone else who attended the alleged party isn’t talking.
If the events of the night were true and Ford did not sit on them for more than three decades until she couldn’t remember most of it, had Kavanaugh had to go to juvenile court, and had suffered some punishment as a teen, would it still disqualify him?
Democrats don’t seem to have a problem forgiving Democratic Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke for driving drunk and attempting to flee the scene of an accident, even though he was an adult, not a teenager. While O’Rourke admitted for years that he was arrested for drunken driving when he was 26 years old, he was less than forthcoming about the accident and his attempt to flee until the Houston Chronicle broke the story in late August.
Nor are there calls for deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Keith Ellison, to step down from his position and end his bid for Minnesota attorney general despite accusations from his ex-girlfriend Karen Monahan and her adult son that Ellison was physically abusive towards her. And no prominent Democrats have demanded the resignation of Sens. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Tom Carper, D-Del. Brown’s ex-wife claims she was hit, while Carper admitted in the 1990s that he once hit his wife. Democrats were also silent on the many scandals of Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., including accusations that he regularly flew down to the Caribbean to have sex with underage hookers.
All three men remain in the Senate, and two are up for re-election this year with their party’s full backing.
Had Ford spoken out immediately after she claims the incident occurred so they could have been proven or disqualified by the legal process, Kavanaugh would have likely gone to juvenile court, his parents being attorneys would have provided him with great legal defense, and would have received a light sentence given that it was his first offense, he was a minor, and at the time society was not as evolved on sex crimes as they are now. He may have had to do some community service, if found guilty, but given his age his record would be sealed and most likely ultimately expunged. It most likely would not have stopped him from achieving the professional success that makes him qualified for the Supreme Court.
There’s much to call into question about the accusations raised by Ford, but also by the selective outrage by the Democrats. This isn’t an attempt to get justice on behalf of a victim, nor is it to call into question Kavanaugh’s moral compass. For Democrats, this is about politics, stopping Trump, and galvanizing their base right before the midterm elections.
Ryan Girdusky (@RyanGirdusky) is a contributor to the Washington Examiner’s Beltway Confidential blog. He is a writer based in New York.
