Rachel Mitchell memo to Senate Judiciary Committee, Ford case weaker than “he said, she said” case, “Democrats and Dr. Ford’s attorneys likely affected Dr. Ford’s account”
“Democrat mantra: The end justifies the means.”…Citizen Wells
“And if all others accepted the lie which the Party imposed
–if all records told the same tale–then the lie passed into
history and became truth. “Who controls the past,” ran the
Party slogan, “controls the future: who controls the present
controls the past.”…George Orwell, “1984″
“We are being lied to on a scale unimaginable by George Orwell.”…Citizen Wells
Rachel Mitchell Memo:
Memorandum TO: All Republican Senators FROM: Rachel Mitchell, Nominations Investigative Counsel United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary DATE: September 30, 2018 RE: Analysis of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s Allegations Please permit me this opportunity to present my independent assessment of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Before I do this, I want to emphasize two important points: 1. This memorandum contains my own independent assessment of Dr. Ford’s allegations, based upon my independent review of the evidence and my nearly 25 years of experience as a career prosecutor of sex-related and other crimes in Arizona. This memorandum does not necessarily reflect the views of the Chairman, any committee member, or any other senator. No senator reviewed or approved this memorandum before its release, and I was not pressured in any way to write this memorandum or to write any words in this memorandum with which I do not fully agree. The words written in this memorandum are mine, and I fully stand by all of them. While I am a registered Republican, I am not a political or partisan person. 2. A Senate confirmation hearing is not a trial, especially not a prosecution. The Chairman made the following statement on September 25, 2018, after he hired me: As I have said, I’m committed to providing a forum to both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh on Thursday that is safe, comfortable and dignified. The majority members have followed the bipartisan recommendation to hire as staff counsel for the committee an experienced career sex-crimes prosecutor to question the witnesses at Thursday’s hearing. The goal is to de-politicize the process and get to the truth, instead of grandstanding and giving senators an opportunity to launch their presidential campaigns. I’m very appreciative that Rachel Mitchell has stepped forward to serve in this important and serious role. Ms. Mitchell has been recognized in the legal community for her experience and objectivity. I’ve worked to give Dr. Ford an opportunity to share serious allegations with committee members in any format she’d like after learning of the allegations. I promised Dr. Ford that I would do everything in my power to avoid a repeat of the ‘circus’ atmosphere in the hearing room that we saw the week of September 4. I’ve taken this additional step to have questions asked by expert staff counsel to establish the most fair and respectful treatment of the witnesses possible. That is how I approached my job. There is no clear standard of proof for allegations made during the Senate’s confirmation process. But the world in which I work is the legal world, not the political world. Thus, I can only provide my assessment of Dr. Ford’s allegations in that legal context. 1 In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A “he said, she said” case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard. Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened. • In a July 6 text to the Washington Post, she said it happened in the “mid 1980s.” • In her July 30 letter to Senator Feinstein, she said it happened in the “early 80s.” • Her August 7 statement to the polygrapher said that it happened one “high school summer in early 80’s,” but she crossed out the word “early” for reasons she did not explain. • A September 16 Washington Post article reported that Dr. Ford said it happened in the “summer of 1982.” • Similarly, the September 16 article reported that notes from an individual therapy session in 2013 show her describing the assault as occurring in her “late teens.” But she told the Post and the Committee that she was 15 when the assault allegedly occurred. She has not turned over her therapy records for the Committee to review. • While it is common for victims to be uncertain about dates, Dr. Ford failed to explain how she was suddenly able to narrow the timeframe to a particular season and particular year. Dr. Ford has struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name. • No name was given in her 2012 marriage therapy notes. • No name was given in her 2013 individual therapy notes. • Dr. Ford’s husband claims to recall that she identified Judge Kavanaugh by name in 2012. At that point, Judge Kavanaugh’s name was widely reported in the press as a potential Supreme Court nominee if Governor Romney won the presidential election. • In any event, it took Dr. Ford over thirty years to name her assailant. Delayed disclosure of abuse is common so this is not dispositive. When speaking with her husband, Dr. Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific. • Dr. Ford testified that she told her husband about a “sexual assault” before they were married. • But she told the Washington Post that she informed her husband that she was the victim of “physical abuse” at the beginning of their marriage. • She testified that, both times, she was referring to the same incident. Dr. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question—details that could help corroborate her account. • She does not remember who invited her to the party or how she heard about it. • She does not remember how she got to the party. 2 • She does not remember in what house the assault allegedly took place or where that house was located with any specificity. • Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house. o Her inability to remember this detail raises significant questions. o She told the Washington Post that the party took place near the Columbia Country Club. The Club is more than 7 miles from her childhood home as the crow flies, and she testified that it was a roughly 20-minute drive from her childhood home. o She also agreed for the first time in her testimony that she was driven somewhere that night, either to the party or from the party or both. o Dr. Ford was able to describe hiding in the bathroom, locking the door, and subsequently exiting the house. She also described wanting to make sure that she did not look like she had been attacked. o But she has no memory of who drove her or when. Nor has anyone come forward to identify him or herself as the driver. o Given that this all took place before cell phones, arranging a ride home would not have been easy. Indeed, she stated that she ran out of the house after coming downstairs and did not state that she made a phone call from the house before she did, or that she called anyone else thereafter. • She does, however, remember small, distinct details from the party unrelated to the assault. For example, she testified that she had exactly one beer at the party and was taking no medication at the time of the alleged assault. Dr. Ford’s account of the alleged assault has not been corroborated by anyone she identified as having attended—including her lifelong friend. • Dr. Ford has named three people other than Judge Kavanaugh who attended the party— Mark Judge, Patrick “PJ” Smyth, and her lifelong friend Leland Keyser (née Ingham). Dr. Ford testified to the Committee that another boy attended the party, but that she could not remember his name. No others have come forward. • All three named eyewitnesses have submitted statements to the Committee denying any memory of the party whatsoever. Most relevantly, in her first statement to the Committee, Ms. Keyser stated through counsel that, “[s]imply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.” In a subsequent statement to the Committee through counsel, Ms. Keyser said that “the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate [Dr. Ford’s allegations] because she has no recollection of the incident in question.” o Moreover, Dr. 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. Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of the alleged assault. • According to her letter to Senator Feinstein, Dr. Ford heard Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge talking to other partygoers downstairs while she was hiding in the bathroom after the alleged assault. But according to her testimony, she could not hear them talking to anyone. 3 o In her letter, she stated, “I locked the door behind me. Both loudly stumbled down the stairwell, at which point other persons at the house were talking with them.” o She testified that Judge Kavanaugh or Mark Judge turned up the music in the bedroom so that the people downstairs could not hear her scream. She testified that, after the incident, she ran into the bathroom, locked the door, and heard them going downstairs. But she maintained that she could not hear their conversation with others when they got downstairs. Instead, she testified that she “assum[ed]” a conversation took place. • Her account of who was at the party has been inconsistent. o According to the Washington Post’s account of her therapy notes, there were four boys in the bedroom in which she was assaulted. o She told the Washington Post that the notes were erroneous because there were four boys at the party, but only two in the bedroom. o In her letter to Senator Feinstein, she said “me and 4 others” were present at the party. o In her testimony, she said there were four boys in addition to Leland Keyser and herself. She could not remember the name of the fourth boy, and no one has come forward. o Dr. Ford listed Patrick “PJ” Smyth as a “bystander” in her statement to the polygrapher and in her July 6 text to the Washington Post, although she testified that it was inaccurate to call him a bystander. 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. Dr. Ford has struggled to recall important recent events relating to her allegations, and her testimony regarding recent events raises further questions about her memory. • Dr. Ford struggled to remember her interactions with the Washington Post. o Dr. Ford could not remember if she showed a full or partial set of therapy notes to the Washington Post reporter. She does not remember whether she showed the Post reporter the therapist’s notes or her own summary of those notes. The Washington Post article said that “portions” of her “therapist’s notes” were “provided by Ford and reviewed by” the Post. But in her testimony, Dr. Ford could not recall whether she summarized the notes for the reporter or showed her the actual records. o She does not remember if she actually had a copy of the notes when she texted the Washington Post WhatsApp account on July 6. Dr. Ford said in her first WhatsApp message to the Post that she “ha[d] therapy notes talking about” the incident when she contacted the Post’s tipline. She testified that she had reviewed her therapy notes before contacting the Post to determine whether the mentioned anything about the alleged incident, but could not remember if she had a copy of those notes, as she said in her WhatsApp message, or merely reviewed them in her therapist’s office. • Dr. Ford refused to provide any of her therapy notes to the Committee. 4 • Dr. Ford’s explanation of why she disclosed her allegations the way she did raises questions. o She claimed originally that she wished for her story to remain confidential, but the person operating the tipline at the Washington Post was the first person other than her therapist or husband to whom she disclosed the identity of her alleged attacker. She testified that she had a “sense of urgency to relay the information to the Senate and the president.” She did not contact the Senate, however, because she claims she “did not know how to do that.” She does not explain why she knew how to contact her Congresswoman but not her Senator. • Dr. Ford could not remember if she was being audio- or video-recorded when she took the polygraph. And she could not remember whether the polygraph occurred the same day as her grandmother’s funeral or the day after her grandmother’s funeral. o It would also have been inappropriate to administer a polygraph to someone who was grieving. Dr. Ford’s description of the psychological impact of the event raises questions. • She maintains that she suffers from anxiety, claustrophobia, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). o The date of the hearing was delayed because the Committee was informed that her symptoms prevent her from flying. But she agreed during her testimony that she flies “fairly frequently for [her] hobbies and … work.” She flies to the mid- Atlantic at least once a year to visit her family. She has flown to Hawaii, French Polynesia, and Costa Rica. She also flew to Washington, D.C. for the hearing. o Note too that her attorneys refused a private hearing or interview. Dr. Ford testified that she was not “clear” on whether investigators were willing to travel to California to interview her. It therefore is not clear that her attorneys ever communicated Chairman Grassley’s offer to send investigators to meet her in California or wherever she wanted to meet to conduct the interview. • She alleges that she struggled academically in college, but she has never made any similar claim about her last two years of high school. • It is significant that she used the word “contributed” when she described the psychological impact of the incident to the Washington Post. Use of the word “contributed” rather than “caused” suggests that other life events may have contributed to her symptoms. And when questioned on that point, said that she could think of “nothing as striking as” the alleged assault. The activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford’s attorneys likely affected Dr. Ford’s account.
“I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this
case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.”
I am so thrilled she makes mention of Romney and the Year 2012
How come she doesn’t mention that the ‘built the second door’ story was a lie. That’s perjury.
How come she doesn’t mention that the use of fake credentials. There’s a crime in there somewhere.
How come she doesn’t mention the fake science on memory.
Did you ask Barry any questions about smoking crack in a limo with Larry Sinclair and Sinclair going down on him? Ask him any questions about his time at Columbia University and the fact that no on remembers him? Barry’s whole life is a fraud.
Probably just another crime she committed that will be ignored while they search for something, anything, on kavanaugh.
Christine Ford’s Criminal Record Scrubbed Clean on Database Three Weeks Before Her Letter to Feinstein
HUGE! Christine Ford Published 2008 Article on Self-Hypnosis Used to Retrieve and “Create Artificial Situations”–thegatewaypundit.com
Navy SEAL who killed bin Laden: ‘We believe the survivors. Unless they fought in Benghazi’
The woman lied over and over and over in her testimony
….and the msm says over and over and over how ‘credible’ her story is.
They are the enemy of the American people.
Pleeeese, Liawatha, run for POTUS!
Mr. Trump could have REAL representatives of the Cherokee Nation with him at the debates. I think they should have the right to question ‘one of their own’ after all, she wants to be the Primo Chief.
I’d sell tickets to that one…
Deeply true. Two most unreliable, but often believed, forms of testimony: 1) confessions; 2) eye witness recollections.
Pro Tip 2: Every discussion of Kavanaugh and Ford that doesn’t mention the unreliability of eye witness accounts, and memory in general, is either ignorant or a con job.
1:13 PM – Sep 28, 2018
153 people are talking about this
Let the people say amen!
Website that archived Blasey Ford’s
high school yearbook disappears
from Google-owned Blogspot
American Thinker, by Thomas Lifson Original Article
Posted By: magnante- 10/2/2018 7:59:25 AM Post Reply
Now that the high school days of Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford are the most important issue facing Americans (according to the media, anyway) it is certainly odd that evidence of student norms at Blasey Ford’s own alma mater is being “disappeared” from the web. First, the yearbook of Holton-Arms high school the all-girls private academy she attended was scrubbed from the web on September 17, 2018. (snip) Now, most curiously. The Cult of the 1st Amendment [that archived the pages] has disappeared from its host, Blogspot, which happens to be owned by Google.
Cultofthe1stamendment is where i first got the story with all the pics about the high school days. Google has now erased them from the web. (story above)
fhl, et al:
I updated the picnic photo article recently with the following:
*** Update 9/29/2018 4:15 PM ***
This was posted with a question mark with the hope that someone could verify or dismiss the photo as real. One commenter stated that thongs were not used then. That is incorrect.
Snopes responded (In what appears to be a lame response):
” it’s much too modern in appearance and detail to be a snapshot from the late 1980s (when Christine Blasey was a young woman). Moreover, rather than “being supplied by a female classmate,” this photograph was also already online with a caption identifying it as something found on a Spanish-language humor and entertainment website, until someone plucked it and recaptioned it with Christine Blasey’s name”
Based on the lack of corroboration, I am dismissing the photo as real. Wells
For the real bombshell news on Ms. Ford:
This and other photos are interesting but not critical to exposing Ford’s deception & past.
……..if the photograph of allegedly Mzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Ford passed out lying on a picnic table with beer cans and bottles lying scattered about is too modern I would say to the person making the statement that ALL of the things in the picture did exist long before the 1980s…….in fact I have had my hands on every one of the items in the picture in the 1960s except Mzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Ford, and I find her so repulsive that it would be a very cold day in hell when this 86 year old ex sailor would knowingly get within a mile of her. When I was stationed aboard ship at Long Beach whenever we went ashore everywhere we looked we saw likenesses of Mzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.Ford. Even in the 1950s we navigated around such morons. They were easy to spot even at long range!!!
…………..I hasten to add that I am doubtful that Mzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Ford was yet on Earth prior to 1960………..BUT I WAS ON EARTH………I was then 28 years of age. “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and you can fool all of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME. ( Abraham Lincoln)
……….PSYCHOTIC FANTASYLAND…..ELGRANDE!!!!! DOUBLE FEATURE TODAY AT THE SAN FRANCISCO BOOBY HATCH!!!!
I DON’T KNOW……….
………..if the defacing, and destruction of Kavanaugh’s home is accurate or not but people who do this need to be dealt with severely………lengthy prison sentences without parole. People who do this sort of thing are absolutely the worst filth of humanity. They are YELLOW COWARDLY SLIME!!!!
I don’t know if that meme about the defacing of Kavanaugh’s home was real or not either. I just saw it and passed it along.
But i did just see at thegatewaypundit that a bunch of protestors forced open the door to a maryland republican congressman’s office on capital hill and assaulted him this afternoon.
As long as these people get away with crap like this, and people like Ford get to lie under oath to congress and nothing happens to them, they’ll just keep on doing it and probably ratchet it up.
HAS ANY ONE HEARD ABOUT THIS?????
Just found this… Hoping you share it, as I am!
And what about motive for Ford lying:
Copied from another post:
Kat Castle Thank you. I too am trying to educate people that both Christine Blasey Ford and her husband (who is a director of another pharmaceutical company) have financial interests in Brett Kavanaugh not being confirmed to the Supreme Court. What you might not know is that there is a fortune to be made in the off label prescribing of mifepristone for diabetes (other than that associated with Cushing’s Syndrome) and depression. Mifepristone is being marketed in Third World countries for uses for which it has not been approved in the United States and Europe. Pair this with the transdermal delivery system developed by Blasey Ford’s husband, and there is a potential for enormous profits. What these companies do with generic drugs–They tweak a molecule, change the mode of delivery, give it a catchy name, and file for a patent. Why is Kavanaugh a threat? The pharmaceutical companies are afraid that the Supreme Court will rule that taxpayer funds cannot be used for abortions. It has nothing to do with the right to have an abortion, or a woman’s right to choose. The pharmaceutical companies are afraid of losing the federal funds they’ve been diverting into developing this drug for off label use. Julie Swetnick also had past ties to two pharmaceutical companies, one involved with marketing diabetes medication. Here is who they should investigate.
…………you only need to look into the faces of people like Christine Fair. Her facial countenance tells the whole story about her. !!! You don’t need a Phd to see through her. She is psychologically TWISTED………the face always tells on people.
Senator Dianne Feinstein = publicly acknowledged DYKE. Likes all FLAVORS!!!!!
Not good news about Kavanaugh, but this story is about Kavanaugh’s role in the Vince Foster case, and i sure find the whole story interesting. If you still have an interest in Vince Foster, this is a good story to read.
If anyone has followed Jack Cashill writing extensively on the Clinton coverup of the downed jet over New York, this all fits like a glove. The Clinton’s have spent a career abusing the FBI to do their dirty work.
I’ve known all along that Kavanaugh will probably vote the way we want him to on some of the hot social issues and that’s why i’ve supported him, but i’ve read before and there’s not much question in my mind that Kavanaugh is a big gov’t guy and he goes along to get along with the powers that be in the deep state. He’s a rubber stamp on whatever they want done.
Never been completely comfortable with what i’ve read about him and his predilection to go along with what’s asked of him by the powerful forces.
WITH GREAT SADNESS…….
……….I have come to believe that we are watching the beginning of the end of America as we once knew it. Everywhere we look or go we see people behaving in irrational ways. Some raving about things that they imagine to be true……..some acting out deviant sex fantasies,……..some doing all sorts of drugs, …….some have become pathological liars, …..some gorge themselves with food and are now 10 times their natural weight, …..some have become politicians and now lie continuously to low IQ people……….some have become educators, and teach FANTASY instead of FACT. IRRATIONAL MENTAL FUNCTION is spreading fast in America. Every year we are seeing lower, and lower SAT scores. and greater behavioral problems with our young people. More and more America’s young people are entering their respective FANTASY worlds, and then try to ram their fantasies down the throats of others with their alleged protests. I believe that it won’t be much longer until people will be murdered just because they do not look or think like the people living their fantasies. Now we are seeing insane reasoning on the part of elected political leaders. I believe the outcome is not going to be pretty. ARMAGEDDON !!!!
It appears she’s been caught in yet another lie.
Christine Blasey Ford’s
Senate Judiciary He
Witnessed Her Coach A
Friend On Polygraphs
The Federalist, by Sean Davis Original Article
Posted By: Stallion_Cornell- 10/2/2018 11:17:54 PM Post Reply
In a sworn statement provided to the Senate Judiciary Committee, a man who claims to be an ex-boyfriend of Christine Blasey Ford says that he personally witnessed Ford coach a friend on how to take a polygraph exam. If true, it would mean Ford provided false testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee last week when she claimed she had never had any discussions with anyone about how to take a polygraph.
Bob, thanks for the vids; there’s nothing like a little Boston and Rush in the morning.
I’ve sporadically followed ‘Q’ and finally figured out what 53-47 means.
Praying he/she is right!