Should Professor Ford Be Applauded or Prosecuted?
Feminists have jumped on the Kavanaugh confirmation bandwagon in order to advocate the conviction of all men for the sexual assaults committed by a few men. Senators Feinstein, Harris, and Hirono "are saying because women have been assaulted, you can't vote for any man who has been accused," explains author and TV commentator Bill O'Reilly. "So therefore anybody can raise an accusation to disqualify anyone from an appointed position or even running for office." That is the very definition of a witch hunt.
Is it important whether accusations of men by women are truthful? It doesn't matter, says Sen. Mazie Hirono of Hawaii. "Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard," says Hirono, "but they need to be believed." Hirono expects all of the "enlightened men in our country" to rise up and say, "We cannot continue the victimization and the smearing of someone like Dr. Ford." Poor, poor Dr. Ford.
Poor, poor United States of America when due process and respect for the truth go flying out the window. We have always believed that a person is innocent until proven guilty. We have always believed that the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. The left wants to change all that when it is not convenient, as in the case of Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court. We can thank the Democrats for perverting our judicial system in support of their political objectives. The politically correct thing to do is (a) believe Ford by virtue of her sex and (b) place the burden on Kavanaugh to prove he didn't do it. Otherwise, say the Democrats, we could have a justice who might rule against progressive ideas like curtailing freedom of speech or replacing free markets with socialism.
Ford testified that her life has been ruined by the impact of a sexual assault. It took real courage for her to come forward, argue the Democrats, exposing herself to the further indignity of media scrutiny and death threats. So should we call Ford a "heroine" and "courageous" and a "very fine woman"? If we do, we ignore her iniquitous behavior – she made a deliberate unsubstantiated accusation of another human being. Ford's assault does not give her the right to destroy the life of an innocent person.
Attacking a man like Judge Kavanaugh without evidence constitutes a reprehensible act. Ford must assume responsibility for that. If you believe she was telling the truth, that is a subjective opinion and does not change the fact that there is no evidence other than her statement that "he did it." Our system of justice allows no substitute for evidence. The Democrats ask, what message are we sending to assault victims if we confirm Kavanaugh? What message are we sending about the justice system if we don't confirm him?
Prof. Ford may have been assaulted by someone, but without evidentiary proof that Judge Kavanaugh was that someone, the accusation should not have made it to the Senate committee. It should have been vetted and put to sleep for lack of evidence. Ford's allegation that "he did it" is not evidence. The accusation has been rebutted by the people she claims were there – including her own friend – and by Kavanaugh's diary. He swears he never attended the party where she was assaulted.
Was she lying? Was he lying? It doesn't matter. Did it happen to her or not? That doesn't matter, either. What matters is, can she corroborate her accusation against Kavanaugh? The question for the senators who will vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation, says Bill O'Reilly, is: "Was there anything you saw or heard that disqualifies Kavanaugh from serving on the Supreme Court?" The objective answer, O'Reilly insists, is no.
I watched Ford deliver her statement. She appears to be a disturbed woman – 52 years old and a psychology professor but sounds as though she were 12. Was her story an implanted memory created during her therapy sessions? She spoke from a prepared script that read like a novel. Was she coached on the content of the script? Was she coached to behave like a victim? Who paid for her lawyers? For the polygraph test? She doesn't know! My gut feeling, based on all of the above together with Kavanaugh's thorough testimony, is that I don't believe her. But, as I said, it doesn't matter.
What matters is that Ford is hiding behind her victimization in order to ruin Kavanaugh's life without a single piece of evidence that he is the one who assaulted her 36 years ago. She must be aware of this, unless she is not in her right mind. Call her a heroine? Put her on a pedestal? Not me. I'd sooner put her in prison for bearing false witness.
Ed Brodow is a political commentator, negotiation expert, and author of seven books including his latest, Tyranny of the Minority: How the Left is Destroying America.