It seems the representatives of Christine Blasey Ford's have come to a proposal that would see her testify.
The Republican Chair of the Committee has responded with a counter proposal. The hearing would happen on Wednesday the 26th. The questioning would be done by an independent attorney, likely a woman, with experience in dealing with sexual assault cases. Ford would appear first and Kavanaugh would respond. No corroborating or character witnesses on either side would be examined. Kavanaugh would not be allowed in the committee room while Ford is being questioned.
It's not an unreasonable proposal, although it denies a fundamental right in jurisprudence. The right of the accused to face his accuser. It's a critical element in search for the truth because it demands the confidence and courage of a victim to present her case before her alleged victimizer. Real victims have found this process therapeutic and cathartic. The fact that she refuses is a real red flag that she lacks both. She and her handlers seem worried she won't be able to stick to script when facing a real individual (rather than an ideological personna) who is facing having his reputation defamed.
The excuse that she is so traumatized 36 years after what in relative terms was a minor attempt at sexual assault is a crock. As unfortunate and traumatizing as this event would be she had all the opportunities to get justice at the time through parents, school authorities, or police. It looks like this is an event, if it happened, that has been blown up under subsequent turbulence in her life into a seminal disordering event of her psychological suffering, which might have many causes.
It is as such something that in her mind is conformed to circumstances and perpertrator, informed by her academic and political culture, to a primal villain. It is subject to all the editing in transposition of characters and material events of all decades old memories. Which means this all might be a false memory, or it might involve other people, or it might be an outright lie.
The other thing her attorneys requested was that no independent prosecutor (and especially a woman) be allowed to question her. That would, of course, mean that this would be comprised of a fumbling group of old, conservative, white men lobbing softball questions at her. It's just the optics the Dems want; a caged, fragile and, persecuted victim in hands of white, male, persecutors. The last thing they want is a strong competent woman tearing her testimony to ribbons.
I think her lawyers are worried she will wither under intense cross examination from an aggressive and skilled woman prosecutor. Especially if her story is little more than a fabric of politically or emotionally motivated inventions or imaginations.
This story is turning out to be a tragicomedy of the stereotypes and prejudices of modern culture. Let her have her say. I'm still doubtful she won't find some excuse to get out of it. Or demand that it be all done in private away from public scrutiny.
Then its time for an up or down vote based on the merits of the entire record. My guess is Kavanaugh will be justifiably confirmed. And it will be because in the final analysis this was nothing but an opportunistic frameup driven by political expediency, delusion, or malice.
Or.. Chritine Blasey Ford might be just be flat out crazy.
The Republican Chair of the Committee has responded with a counter proposal. The hearing would happen on Wednesday the 26th. The questioning would be done by an independent attorney, likely a woman, with experience in dealing with sexual assault cases. Ford would appear first and Kavanaugh would respond. No corroborating or character witnesses on either side would be examined. Kavanaugh would not be allowed in the committee room while Ford is being questioned.
It's not an unreasonable proposal, although it denies a fundamental right in jurisprudence. The right of the accused to face his accuser. It's a critical element in search for the truth because it demands the confidence and courage of a victim to present her case before her alleged victimizer. Real victims have found this process therapeutic and cathartic. The fact that she refuses is a real red flag that she lacks both. She and her handlers seem worried she won't be able to stick to script when facing a real individual (rather than an ideological personna) who is facing having his reputation defamed.
The excuse that she is so traumatized 36 years after what in relative terms was a minor attempt at sexual assault is a crock. As unfortunate and traumatizing as this event would be she had all the opportunities to get justice at the time through parents, school authorities, or police. It looks like this is an event, if it happened, that has been blown up under subsequent turbulence in her life into a seminal disordering event of her psychological suffering, which might have many causes.
It is as such something that in her mind is conformed to circumstances and perpertrator, informed by her academic and political culture, to a primal villain. It is subject to all the editing in transposition of characters and material events of all decades old memories. Which means this all might be a false memory, or it might involve other people, or it might be an outright lie.
The other thing her attorneys requested was that no independent prosecutor (and especially a woman) be allowed to question her. That would, of course, mean that this would be comprised of a fumbling group of old, conservative, white men lobbing softball questions at her. It's just the optics the Dems want; a caged, fragile and, persecuted victim in hands of white, male, persecutors. The last thing they want is a strong competent woman tearing her testimony to ribbons.
I think her lawyers are worried she will wither under intense cross examination from an aggressive and skilled woman prosecutor. Especially if her story is little more than a fabric of politically or emotionally motivated inventions or imaginations.
This story is turning out to be a tragicomedy of the stereotypes and prejudices of modern culture. Let her have her say. I'm still doubtful she won't find some excuse to get out of it. Or demand that it be all done in private away from public scrutiny.
Then its time for an up or down vote based on the merits of the entire record. My guess is Kavanaugh will be justifiably confirmed. And it will be because in the final analysis this was nothing but an opportunistic frameup driven by political expediency, delusion, or malice.
Or.. Chritine Blasey Ford might be just be flat out crazy.
Last edited:
