Senators take turns reviewing FBI Kavanaugh report
McConnell files motion to end dispute on Kavanaugh and start procedure for verification vote. Kirstin Fisher reports from Capitol Hill.Unless some hit
revelation based upon proven and persuading proof comes out of the reopened FBI background investigation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh that was completed Wednesday, there is inadequate proof for the Senate to decline to seat him on the Supreme Court.Professor Christine Blasey Ford– who informed the Senate Judiciary Committee last week that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her some 36 years earlier when both were in high school– was a compelling and understanding witness. So was Kavanaugh, whose great name has been dragged through the mud by Democrats willing to say just about anything to keep him off the high court. Let’s be clear about one thing: we can all agree that sexual assault is a serious criminal offense and needs to be punished.
That doesn’t suggest every accusation of sexual attack should immediately be thought without supporting evidence.Refusing to accept as precise an allegation of sexual assault that is not supported by other proof does not suggest our legal system doesn’t think about sexual attack a terrible crime. We require proof in addition to an allegation to prove all crimes. However the Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee who questioned Kavanaugh recently mentioned consistently that his confirmation hearing was not a legal case
. They stated it was a task interview. Because of this, the Democrats suggested that the problem should be on Kavanaugh to show that he did not attempt unsuccessfully to take off Ford’s clothing at a party while he was drunk, and
did not cover her mouth with his hand to stop her from screaming, as she testified.However, the Democrats are inaccurate. Kavanaugh’s Senate confirmation hearing was far more than a job interview. The Democrats themselves appeared to acknowledge this by their actions, if not their words, by requiring an investigation by the FBI in addition
to the committee’s own examination. In reality, the verification hearing amounted to a public trial of Kavanaugh’s credibility that was viewed by countless individuals around the globe. When was the last time you worked interview like that? In our system of law, accusations should be shown by those making them.
We do not require the allegations to be disproved by the accused.There are numerous excellent factors for this, not the least of which is that justice demands an individual be presumed innocent up until proven guilty. Unsupported accusations are inadequate
evidence of guilt.There is no corroborating evidence to support Ford’s claims that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. There is supporting proof that she has
thought for a long time that she was assaulted– namely the declarations she made to her therapist and to her hubby. And there is no corroborating proof that the party where Ford claimed she was attacked actually occurred.
Others who were allegedly at the party say they can’t keep in mind any such gathering.In addition, the timing of Ford’s claims to the Judiciary Committee seriously undermined their credibility. Theproblem is not that Ford waited 36 years to reveal her allegations against Kavanaugh publicly. Rather, the problem is that
she waited up until public discussion of the possible nomination of Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court had started prior to stepping forward with her allegations.Moreover, the conduct of Sen. Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., who declined to reveal these allegations after Ford contacted her in July, resembles partisan politics at its worst. Plainly, Feinstein was not encouraged by a desire to identify the truth of the claims, however by a desire to trigger optimal delay in the verification procedure in hopes of receiving a political advantage.Finally, specific conduct by Ford calls her trustworthiness into concern. Particularly, her refusal to meet the committee prior to
recently’s hearing seems to suggest she might have a motive beyond merely civic task and informing her story to look for justice. As one reason for refusing to come to Washington to satisfy in complete confidence with the committee Ford mentioned that she had a fear of flying. The details exposed recently suggested that she has a fear of flying just when she discovers the trip to be inconvenient or undesirable.Not just did Ford refuse to meet the committee in Washington– she also declined to meet with the committee in her home state of California. The committee had offered to go to there to accommodate Ford’s supposed worry of flying. Instead, Ford hired a legal representative recommended by Feinstein to help her get ready for a hearing that had actually not even been set up at the time. All of this appears to recommend that Ford might have a political motivation in addition to civic task and receiving justice that encouraged her to level allegations versus Kavanaugh.As of now, there is inadequate supporting evidence that has been openly exposed to
support Ford’s allegations and as an outcome Judge Kavanaugh need to be dealt with as innocent of these allegations. Unless the findings of the FBI investigation change that, the Senate should confirm him quickly.