Christine Blasey Ford and her attorney, Debra Katz, should be investigated.
In a recently surfaced video, Katz, who represented Blasey Ford during Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s contentious Supreme Court confirmation hearings, made the following comments during an event at the University of Baltimore’s 11th Feminist Legal Theory Conference:
“In the aftermath of these hearings, I believe that Christine’s testimony brought about more good than the harm misogynist Republicans caused by allowing Kavanaugh on the court. … He will always have an asterisk next to his name. When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him. … It’s important that we know, and that’s part of what motivated Christine.”
Christine Ford's lawyer Debra Katz says putting "an asterisk" next to Kavanaugh's name in case Kavanaugh attacked Roe v. Wade "is part of what motivated Christine." pic.twitter.com/zoFr2T8Aec
— Mary Margaret Olohan (@MaryMargOlohan) September 4, 2019
Katz’s comments raise some serious questions about Blasey Ford’s testimony. Specifically, the comments raise the possibility that Blasey Ford’s allegations and testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee were motivated by Kavanaugh’s apparent position relative to Roe v. Wade.
While there is no definitive proof to support this conclusion, there is reason to investigate. After all, before Kavanaugh was even confirmed, he underwent FBI investigations, sat through more than 30 hours of testimony, met with various senators, and underwent a shameful public hearing involving Blasey Ford, during which he had to defend himself against uncorroborated and unsubstantiated allegations. No evidence was discovered to support Blasey Ford’s testimony or claims.
Moreover, as reported in the National Review, “During the weeks-long confirmation fight that followed, Blasey Ford and her counsel maintained that she was motivated by nothing more than a sense of civic duty, and specifically denounced the suggestion that she was politically motivated.”
Why, then, would Katz now bring up that Blasey Ford was motivated by Kavanaugh’s possible attitude toward Roe v. Wade? This appears to contradict the previous assertion that politics didn’t drive Blasey Ford to testify.
The absence of any corroborating evidence against Kavanaugh to date is compelling. This, together with Katz’s recent comments, raises the possibility that Blasey Ford’s statements weren’t true or that she was motivated to testify for political reasons, which would seriously undermine her credibility. Interestingly, while not directly relevant to Blasey Ford’s case, some of the other accusers admitted to fabricating their stories.
While Kavanaugh has already been confirmed to the highest court for life, this shouldn’t preclude the appropriate agency from further investigating Blasey Ford. If Blasey Ford lied under oath or committed perjury, she should face the appropriate legal consequences.
In light of Katz’s recent comments, there are three possible interpretations that can be derived.
First, Blasey Ford really did go through a traumatic event and was motivated to testify against Kavanaugh because she didn’t feel that he was worthy of sitting on the Supreme Court. However, given the absence of any corroborating evidence and Katz’s recent statements, this doesn’t appear likely at this time.
Second, Blasey Ford may have gone through a traumatic event, but was motivated to testify against Kavanaugh due to his apparent position on abortion.
The third, and worst-case interpretation, is that Blasey Ford simply made the entire story up to keep Kavanaugh from taking his rightful place on the Supreme Court.
Katz’s recent comments seriously hurt Blasey Ford’s credibility. Before Katz’s recent statements, many already viewed Blasey Ford’s story with skepticism because of the lack of corroborating evidence. Now, because of her lawyer’s comments, it’s also possible that Blasey Ford had an ulterior motive to testify against Kavanaugh that was unrelated to any alleged assault.
No corroborating evidence against Kavanaugh and a possible ulterior motive to testify?
An investigation must be opened.
Elad Hakim is a writer, commentator, and attorney. His articles have been published in The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, The Algemeiner, The Western Journal, American Thinker, and other online publications.
Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.