Inconsistencies Abound: Rachel Mitchell Deconstructs Ford’s Claims
Its genuinely essentially impossible for any American to ignore and/or avoid the Christine Ford Firestorm of controversy currently plaguing the national conscious. But while the political typhoon surrounding the already infamous Kavanaugh hearings continues to draw the worst out of America’s partisan squabbling, we may have just received the most empirical and objective take on the hearings we’ll get (at the least on Ford’s testimony). The source? Veteran sex crimes prosecutor and now familiar face to America, Rachel Mitchell.
The Arizona Prosecutor, who Republicans shipped in as an independent counselor for the hearing held the national spotlight for as long as Ford or Kavanaugh; as the job of evaluating and questioning Ford and her story fell to her when all Republican committee members elected to give their respective 5 minutes of airtime to her. This was a bold move by Republicans, with their competition across the aisle taking full advantage of the national airtime to virtue signal, campaign, and generally trash conservatives as all but sex offenders themselves.
However, despite the lamentations by conservative commentators over Mitchell’s apparent lack of tenacity in homing in on Ford’s shakier pieces (‘going for the throat’ as it were) especially in the wake of such attacks, her substitution for the Republican committee members was nothing short of brilliant. Instead of a dozen old white men interrogating a purported assault victim, Americans were treated to a rational and professionally impressive reprieve between every 5 minutes of Feinstein and co.’s nauseating self-aggrandizement.
Unlike Democrat Senators who merely ‘talk the talk’ in regard to helping victims of sex crimes, Mitchell has ‘walked the walk’ several times over throughout a meritorious career prosecuting accused sex offenders and putting them behind bars for 25 years; in other words, Rachel Mitchell was the perfect neutral party for the Republicans to call upon. If anything, her career locking up rapists and sex offenders would have biased her towards empathy with Ford’s tearful story.
Undebatable, however, is the fact that Ms. Mitchell was far and away the most qualified person in that chamber, both in terms of professional experience as well as empathy for the involved parties. For all their boasts of righteousness none of the Democrat committee members, nor the Republicans for that matter, can hold a candle to her expertise.
As such Americans should lend extreme credence to Mitchell’s own personal evaluation of Ford’s testimony; painstakingly crafted with something this fiasco has until now, been utterly bereft of, *detail*. So, what does she say?
While I had considered, and initially crafted, a classic PBP ‘breakdown’ of the evaluation, frankly I believe Americans at large (including you dearest readers) are sick and tired of having information selected and parceled out for them at this point, even if the greatest care is taken to be empirical and objective. With that being said here’s merely a brief summarization (if you’re short on time) coupled with total access to the documents themselves for you to, finally, make a well-informed personal decision of your own volition. Considering Mitchell’s invigorating attention to timelines and details in her deconstruction, you’re guaranteed to enjoy the utter rarity.
1. Mitchell composed her evaluation without any outside input and it was released with no Senators being able to read it prior. This is the real deal by a real deal sex crimes prosecutor.
2. Ford has been demonstrably inconsistent on the date and time and has struggled to identify Kavanaugh by name even in private therapy and with her husband who she deliberately was nonspecific with
3. Ford demonstrably has no recollection of key details surrounding the night to corroborate her story despite remembering small specific details irrelevant to the assault (Mitchell points them out).
4. No Witness has corroborated her allegations and her own accounts are not consistent as Mitchell displays.
5. Ford’s recent memory has proven lacking and her purported effects of trauma (like fear of flying) raise questions in the wake of facts.
6. The timeline of events (that Mitchell beautifully lays out by the way) suggest troubling interference and ethical malpractice on the part of Democrat lawmakers.
7. Mitchell did not find evidence even marginally near sufficient to bring the case against Kavanaugh and would not do so in her own jurisdiction.
Author’s Perspective: Rachel Mitchell is for me personally the only bright spot of this entire debacle. Her professionalism in the wake of one of the most hyper-partisan squabbles of American history is one of the few reassuring themes of the hearings, and frankly its inspiring to know a woman and professional of her caliber is, and has been, bringing *real* sex offenders to justice for 25 years.
This is the most credible evaluation I’ve yet to see on the topic; it’s unlikely it will be bested by either side. Anyone who contends her retainment by Republicans implies her own bias is blatantly disrespecting the professionalism of a true hero of the American justice system who has done more good for victims than they, or any of us, likely ever will be able to. When it comes to Rachel Mitchell, leave your partisan bickering at the gate; she’s got the facts whether America wants them or not. And you’ll find my own banner firmly with her.