Christine Blasey Ford No Longer Deserves Benefit of Doubt

It is increasingly apparent that Cristine Blasey Ford's testimony is riddled not with false memories, but outright lies.

That's quite the accusation, so let's present the evidence as told by Ford's boyfriend who says:

  1. Ford had no fear of flying, even in a prop plane in Hawaii
  2. Ford coached her girlfriend on how to take polygraphs
  3. Ford had no fear of tight places or claustrophobia
  4. Ford made no mention of sexual assault to him in six years

Let's give Ford the benefit of the doubt on point four. Let's assume she was that traumatized by the event.

What do you have? A pack of lies.

Yes, I believe Ford's accuser.


  • Unlike Ford, her accuser genuinely has nothing to gain.
  • He cites specific instances that are likely verifiable including an apartment where Ford lived that was 500 sq. ft.
  • He accuses her of credit card fraud. This should be easy enough to verify.
  • Ford's testimony about installing a second door on an apartment as an escape hatch has already been blown to smithereens. It turns out that the second door was likely put in to accommodate tenants that Ford leased a portion of her home to.

Redacted Letter

There is of course no guarantee that is true. However, one can drive a truck through the holes in Ford's memory.

There's more.

Proof? There Is None

None of this "proves" anything. Allegations never prove anything.

But if one is to believe Ford on the flimsiest of evidence, then we may as well believe evidence that is far more believable to start with.

That aside, I would rather the FBI investigation go on further.

If the FBI can prove Ford flew in prop planes, attempted to cheat her former boyfriend on credit cards, put in a door to provide a private entrance for tenants, or gave polygraph advice to friends, then we can properly discard her entire slimy testimony.

My Current Position: Ford Told Outright Lies

I am willing to take a position that Ford is indeed a liar, perhaps coaxed by or intentionally setup by Senator Dianne Feinstein.

That is my take, but I could be wrong.

Bear in mind, it's still possible, that even if her former boyfriend's allegations can be proven, that Ford really believes she was attacked.

I still give her the benefit of the doubt on that point.

Approve Kavanaugh?

If Ford told outright lies, does that mean the Senate should approve Kavanaugh?

I don't know.


It seems likely, even to me, that Kavanaugh was not 100% truthful in his responses either.

But wasn't that what it was all about in the first place?

There was never any intent (by either side actually), to uncover the facts. If the facts do come out, it may be by accident, more than anything else.

Vote Now? Why?

There is new evidence to consider, and most of it suggests Ford is an outright liar.

Let's check out Ford's former boyfriend's story. Maybe its a lie. Maybe the FBI can verify at least parts of it.

If so, that is the best for Kavanaugh. If not, that is the best for Ford.

I stated my beliefs, but I am willing to change my mind. Most aren't.

Meanwhile, I would rather let the FBI finish its job.

What I Suggest

  1. Declare the Allegation Period Over. Everyone has had a chance to speak. If they failed to do so, it's their own fault. We need to do this or the alleged search for the truth can last a decade.
  2. Investigate all the substantial claims.
  3. That 100 people believe Ford or 100 people believe Kavanaugh is not a substantial claim.

That is the best process to vindicate Kavanaugh or vindicate Ford without risking the process drag on forever.

Kavanaugh Concerns

At the same time, there are legitimate concerns that Kavanaugh was not entirely truthful.

Yet, I wonder if you would be, I would be, or anyone else would be under Senate interrogation of what we did or said in high school or college.

We are now discussing the meaning of "boofed" and "Devil's Triangle".

I had to look those terms up. I never heard of either term, nor did anyone I asked.

Did Kavanaugh answer truthfully? How the hell would I know?

Did he drink more than he stated? I will go out on a limb here and say "probably".

Did he "black out"? I never saw anyone black out from drinking so I suspect not. But how the hell would I know?

Ugliness in Eyes of Beholder

More importantly, is any of this really relevant NOW? Ugliness is in the eye of the beholder.

It never should have come to this.

But it did. On purpose. By Senator Dianne Feinstein.

Mike "Mish" Shedlock

No. 1-25

She got her undergrad degree IN PSYCHOLOGY in 1988 and then PhD in 1996 ... but didn't get any personal therapy for her supposed trauma until 2012 or 2013?! This makes no sense at all.


“If Ford told outright lies, does that mean the Senate should approve Kavanaugh?”

It should mean that Ford faces perjury charges, if this sham of a legal system is to hold the respect of the public.


As a woman who experienced an unsuccessful sexual assault when I was 14 that was nearly identical to the assault described by Ford, I agree with Mish's conclusions but have a couple more complaints about Ford's testimony that might not occur to others who had not shared such an experience.

(1) I was astounded that Ford left her best friend alone with drunk would-be rapists. Once I had escaped the initial situation, my first thoughts were how to protect the other people in the house from the would-be rapist. Perhaps I am more resilient than Ford and I certainly put the incident in perspective once the immediate threat was eliminated, but her lack of concern for other women at the get-together strikes me as being self-absorbed to the point of immorality.

(2) I think we should ask why Ford did not raise her concerns during Kavanaugh's previous confirmation hearing when his contentious nomination resulted in 3 years of newspaper coverage from 2003-2006 until he was confirmed as a judge to the "second highest" court in the land, the Washington DC Court of Appeals. She asserts that she had a clear memory of the events of that night in that time frame and those Kavanaugh hearings were well covered in the news media.

Sexual assaults certainly exist and they are, in my experience, quite common but that should not move us to accept any allegations without objective proof. Democrats appear to want us to return to McCarthyite smears, Salem Witch Trials (those young girls surely believed that the old men and women they accused were actually witches!), or mob lynchings of young black men for trivial uppity-ness in the Jim Crow south. We should all resist.


Has anyone asked Ford the most obvious question of all. That question would be 'how many parties did you attend over the course of the rest of high school after this incident'. The answer here (esp since her attending or not attending more parties would be easily verifiable) is pertinent since she claims huge emotional scarring from the attempted Rape. I have a male friend who was bitten by a medium size dog as a child. It traumatized him enough that he hated and avoided dogs (and dog people) until he was in his early 30s because he genuinely feared them. It was visibly noticeable when dogs were close by that he was uncomfortable. It was only after meeting his future wife and getting a puppy that he got past it. So it would stand to reason that if she 'feared for her life' that she would actively avoid getting into the same situations (parties with drinking, being around guys who are drinking etc) for a very long time. Most women who are attacked definitely avoid those situations.

Mike Mish Shedlock
Mike Mish Shedlock


I did not even know what "blackout" meant. We were a pretty innocent class in high school. The class ahead of us and two behind us had all kinds of issues. I do not know of one person in our class of 88 who smoked pot.