The Smear of Brett Kavanaugh

This page was last updated on December 11, 2018.

As I do from time to time, I let this topic fall off my radar screen.  I wrote the bulk of the reviews at the time of the hearing but updated them in a few places.  This resulted in some tense inconsistencies I didn’t want to spend time getting in sync.  Please accept my apology.

I’m not a public individual so I don’t have to treat Christine Blasey Ford (CBF) with kid gloves.  Two other reviews on this topic are here and here.

There are two politically-correct positions regarding CBF’s story.

The first PC position is we must believe CBF’s allegations even with zero corroboration.  When the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” comes up, CBF supporters say that’s not applicable.  Why?  According to Judiciary Committee Minority Leader Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), “This is not a trial of Dr. Ford, it’s a job interview for Judge Kavanaugh.”  Sure. 

The second, but barely, PC position is CBF’s allegations are all true except her attacker was someone other than a teenaged Brett Kavanaugh (BK).

During her five minutes interrogating BK, Sen. Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI) said, “And earlier, you agreed that this process of advice and consent is really a job interview, certainly not a criminal trial.  There’s certainly no entitlement for you to be confirmed to the Supreme Court.  Our credibility, character and candor of a nominee, things for us consider in your job interview?”  Here’s the only place BK was asked if he thought the process of advice and consent is really a job interview.

Sen. Graham: “But let me tell you, when it comes to this, you’re looking for a fair process?  You came to the wrong town at the wrong time, my friend.  Do you consider this a job interview?

“KAVANAUGH: If (ph) the advice and consent role is like a job interview.

[RWC] “(ph)” identifies text a transcriber didn’t hear clearly.  In this case, “if” is what the transcriber thought he/she heard.

“GRAHAM: Do you consider that you’ve been through a job interview?

“KAVANAUGH: I’ve been through a process of advice and consent under the Constitution, which…

“GRAHAM: Would you say you’ve been through hell?

“KAVANAUGH: I - I’ve been through hell and then some.

“GRAHAM: This is not a job interview.


As you can see, contrary to Sen. Hironi’s claim, BK did not agree “this process of advice and consent is really a job interview.”

Every member of this committee knows if an employer ever asked these questions of a potential employee, he would be charged with discrimination of one kind or another.  Heck, at one company I worked for, we couldn’t even ask a job applicant if he graduated from high school.

The second, but barely, PC position is CBF’s allegations are all true except her attacker was someone other than BK.

I believe she’s lying because the record shows neither she nor anyone she’s named can provide corroboration for any of her accusations.  By lying, I don’t mean CBF is simply mistaken.  I mean CBF knows her accusations are false.  As for CBF’s motivation, who knows?

Remember Steven Pagones (Dutchess County, NY, prosecutor), the Duke lacrosse team, the UVA fraternity, and so on?

During her introduction of Christine Blasey Ford (CBF) at the Senate hearing (9/27/2018), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said:

“I have to say, when I saw your C.V., I was extremely impressed.  You have a bachelor’s degree from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; two master’s degrees, one from Stanford and one from Pepperdine; and a Ph.D. from the University of Southern California, better known to Senator Harris and I as USC.

“You are a professor affiliated with both Stanford University and Palo Alto University.  You have published over 65 peer-reviewed articles and have received numerous awards for your work and research.”

I found it curious Mrs. Feinstein (DF) didn’t mention in what fields CBF received her degrees and in which fields she currently works.  With one exception, all of CBF’s degrees are in psychology and she works in that field.  It’s my opinion CBF used her psychology education and experience to guide the handling of her allegations.

From the very beginning, we’ve been told CBF never wanted exposure.  I’ve come to believe, however, CBF is not the innocent, reluctant accuser we’re supposed to believe she is.  Sometime in July, CBF contacted the Washington Post (WaPo) tip line to report her allegations.  Who goes to a newspaper if they want to remain anonymous, even if its tip line is allegedly confidential?  With CBF’s level of education, are we to believe she thought she could lob uncorroborated accusations at someone and remain anonymous?  Whenever CBF thought one of her willing targets would actually try to maintain her anonymity, she moved to the next level.  From the WaPo, to CBF’s U.S. representative, to her U.S. senator (DF), and back to the WaPo.  I wouldn’t be surprised to learn CBF “leaked” her allegations/letter herself.

In my opinion, CBF was determined to get herself in front of the judiciary committee come Hell or highwater, but on her terms.  It was not until I watched CBF’s testimony that it all came together.  After several minutes of watching, I observed CBF’s mannerisms and speech patterns appeared to be those of a child in an adult’s body.  As I watched my recording of her testimony, I noticed CBF bounced between the adult and child personae, and it started at the very beginning.  Before CBF read her statement, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) told her,

“And before you give your statement, I want to say that - to everybody that she has asked for - any time you ask for a break, you get a break.  Any time there’s something that you need you don’t have, just ask us. And you can have as much time for your opening statement as you want.

“And - and just generally let us know if there’s any issues.

“Proceed, please.”

CBF replied, “Thank you, Senator Grassley.  I think after I read my opening statement, I anticipate needing some caffeine, if that is available.”  After her statement, CBF said, “And at this point, I will do my best to answer your questions, and would request some caffeine.”  You need to see the video to see what I mean. 

© 2004-2018 Robert W. Cox, all rights reserved.