The Brett Kavanaugh Dilemma

Brett Michael Kavanaugh was born on 12/2/1965. He is an American attorney and jurist and is currently a nominee to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, nominated by President Donald Trump on 9/7/2018 to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. [1]

Brett Kavanaugh

But, after Trump nominated Kavanaugh, a woman called Christine Blasey Ford came forward, claiming that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a party in Bethesda, Maryland when they were in High School. According to what she said, a 17-year-old drunk Kavanaugh pinned her down, put his hand over her mouth, and tried to take her clothes off while a friend of Kavanaugh’s watched.

Christine Blasey Ford

The Post said it corroborated Ford’s account with an interview with her husband, a lie-detector test from her lawyer, and notes from therapy sessions that included mentions of a “rape attempt” by students from an “elitist boys’ school” who would become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.”


Ford has identified Mark Judge, now a conservative writer, as the friend that was watching Kavanaugh assaulting her.

Though, there is one slight hitch: Judge has stated that he doesn’t remember any such incident or any such party. He also says he has never seen Kavanaugh act in the manner Ford stated. [2]  [3]

Kavanaugh has also stated that he does not remember it and has never sexually assaulted anyone.

Kavanaugh has also stated some evidence that he is innocent:

The event described by Dr. Ford presumably happened on a weekend as I believe everyone worked and had jobs in the Summers, and in any event, a drunken early evening event of the kind she describes presumably happened on a weekend. If it was a weekend, my calendars show that I was out of town almost every weekend night before football training camp started in late August. The only weekend night that I was in D.C. Were Friday, June 4 when I was with my dad at a pro golf tournament.

Kavanaugh continued, “If the party described by Dr. Ford happened in the summer of 1982 on a weekend night, my calendar shows all but definitively that I was not there.” Later, however, Kavanaugh admitted, “The calendars are obviously not dispositive on their own, but they’re another piece of evidence in the mix for you to consider.” [4]

Here’s the calendar:


Then there is the location of the party that Ford claimed they went to. Dr. Ford said that it happened at a house near Columbia Country Club which is at the corner of Connecticut avenue and Chevy Chase. In her letter to senator Feinstein, Ford stated that “there were four other people at the house” but Kavanaugh has stated that none of those people and himself lived near Columbia Country Club. [5]

Also, as someone pointed out: Her testimony before Congress was “wrought with emotion”, but low on facts. There are a few facts that indicate that Dr. Ford is making this up: 1) the witnesses that were meant to have witnessed Kavanaugh attempting to rape her say this never happened and do not “recall the gathering”, according to what they said when interviewed by the FBI. [6] [7]

There is also quite a few inconsistencies with Ford’s testimony – she keeps changing. This article looks at the changes Dr. Ford keeps making and you have to admit – she doesn’t look legit. Here is the article copied down here:

When Christine Blasey Ford testified last week before the Judiciary Committee, America witnessed a haunted woman recounting a devastating trauma. But putting aside Ford’s emotional performance and focusing instead on the professor’s testimony reveals numerous inconsistencies in her narrative that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her.

As a sex-crimes prosecutor, Republican questioner Rachel Mitchell is well-positioned to “know it when she sees it.” But rather than see Ford as a victim of sexual abuse by Kavanaugh, Mitchell saw her as a witness lacking in credibility. And this conclusion comes from an expert who knows that there are many reasons victims delay reporting sexual abuse. Mitchell also recognized that victims may legitimately not remember certain details related to an attack. 

But the problem for Ford is not that she doesn’t remember everything: It is that everything she remembers changes at her convenience. 

First, Ford’s testimony that the assault occurred in the summer of 1982, when just 15, conflicted with both her therapist’s notes and the text message Ford sent to the Washington Post. According to reporter Emma Brown, Ford claimed she had been assaulted in the mid-1980s; and the therapist’s notes stated Ford had been the victim of an attempted rape in her late teens. But by that time, Kavanaugh was attending Yale, so Ford’s recasting of the attack to the summer of 1982 is suspect. 

Ford’s story changed in key ways

Ford’s retelling of the alleged sexual assault also included several conflicting accounts of the number of individuals at the gathering. The therapist’s notes stated that four boys had attempted to rape Ford. (Ford claims her therapist confused the total number of boys at the party with the number of boys who had attacked her.) 

Later, in her July letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Ford again placed the number of individuals at the party at five, stating the gathering included her and four other individuals. But Ford then identified the four by name, and that group included three boys and one girl. And finally, during her Senate testimony, Ford unequivocally stated that “there were four boys I remember specifically being there,” in addition to her friend Leland Keyser.

Another significant change in the scenario came when Ford testified about the location of the party. She had originally told the Washington Post that the attack took place at a house not far from the country club. Yet, when Mitchell revealed a map of the relevant locations and reminded Ford that she had described the attack as having occurred near the country club, Ford backtracked: “I would describe [the house] as it’s somewhere between my house and the country club in that vicinity that’s shown in your picture.”  Ford added that the country club was a 20-minute drive from her home. 

Finally, Ford altered her description of the interior layout of the home and the details of the party and her escape.  A “short” stairwell turned into a “narrow” one. The gathering moved from a small family room where the kids drank beer (and which Ford distinguished from the living room through which she fled the house) when she spoke to the Washington Post, to a home described in her actual testimony as having a “small living room/family room-type area.” And in an obvious tell to the change, Ford suggested that she could draw a floor plan of the house.

These four points are significant. First, because Ford had waited 30-plus years to report the purported attack, a therapist’s notes from Ford’s sessions with her husband countered claims that Ford had invented the assault to derail Kavanaugh’s confirmation. But the notes did not name Ford’s attacker. And the timing of the assault summarized by her therapist, whom Ford saw individually the following year, conflicted with Ford’s current claims against Kavanaugh.

The final three contradictions are even more significant because in each circumstance Ford altered her story only after Kavanaugh and Senate investigators had obtained evidence to disprove her original tale. For instance, investigators had obtained statements from Kavanaugh and the two men and one female lifelong friend of Ford’s, and they all denied any recollection of the gathering. 

These contradictions mean Ford’s not credible

Investigators also spoke with former classmates of Kavanaugh, including two men who showed staffers the “party houses” near the country club during the relevant time period. And the detailed description of the home interior Ford originally provided allowed investigators to compare her story to the layout of the homes of the individuals Ford identified. But then Ford changed her description of the house’s floor plan. 

Since media leaks of Ford’s charges first broke, Kavanaugh and his supporters have stressed the impossibility of proving the negative: Kavanaugh could not prove he did not attack Ford. But Kavanaugh could prove that Ford’s story could not possibly have happened by showing that none of the individuals at the supposed party lived in a house near the country club, and that none of their houses matched that described by Ford.  Kavanaugh and investigators were poised to do so when Ford changed her story.

Open-minded Americans of all stripes should see that — emotions aside — Ford’s testimony is completely devoid of credibility: so much so, that Mitchell told the Senate this week that Ford’s allegations do not even meet the preponderance of evidence standard. That standard, which governs in civil litigation, asks whether it is more likely than not that an event occurred. 

Yes, victims must be believed. But Ford is not a victim — at least not of Kavanaugh.


Ford’s written statement is riddled with parts crossed out and corrections, though whether they were made before or after the polygraph report was taken, is uncertain.

This video shows things that are wrong with Dr. Ford’s allegations, which also indicate that she is making it up about Kavanaugh.

By the looks of all that, I would say that Dr. Ford is making it up about Kavanaugh. It is interesting to note that one of the Democrats – Keith Ellison – has been accused of domestic abuse by his ex-girlfriend, but that seems to have as much evidence that Ellison is guilty as there is for Kavanaugh being guilty. And, the Ellison case is getting far less attention than the Kavanaugh/Ford case, interestingly enough.

Also, other allegations against Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct in high school and college have come forward after Dr. Ford – a Deborah Ramirez, a Julie Swetnick and there is another anonymous allegation. Kavanaugh has denied both.

In response to a question from Democratic Sen. Mazie Hirono during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month whether he had ever “committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature” as a legal adult, Kavanaugh said under oath that he hadn’t.

On Monday afternoon, Kavanaugh sent a letter to Sen. Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the committee, and Feinstein, its ranking Democrat, calling the allegations “smears” that “debase our public discourse.”

“They are also a threat to any man or woman who wishes to serve our country,” Kavanaugh wrote. “Such grotesque and obvious character assassination – if allowed to succeed – will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from service.”

Kavanaugh and his wife, Ashley Kavanaugh, also gave an interview to Fox News, where he denied each of the allegations. He added that he didn’t necessarily doubt that Ford was a victim of sexual assault – but that he was not the perpetrator.

“The truth is I’ve never sexually assaulted anyone, in high school or otherwise,” Kavanaugh said. “I am not questioning and have not questioned that perhaps Dr. Ford at some point in her life was sexually assaulted by someone at some place, but what I know is I’ve never sexually assaulted anyone.”


I believe that Kavanaugh is innocent and that these women are making it up about him to stop him getting into the Supreme Court.

I most certainly hope that this mess clears up soon and that Kavanaugh still gets into the Supreme Court!

15 thoughts on “The Brett Kavanaugh Dilemma

  1. If Ford is disproven, #metoo will lose its legs. That is what the left is afraid of presently. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, abortion supporters are afraid of Roe v. Wade being re-litigated. They don’t want the truth to come out about abortions. They don’t want the proof to be all over every single television in America or the world. It all boils down to abortion and furthering #metoo. That is how weak their argument is.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. I try not to discuss politics with emotion or pre-conceived notions, as I’ve seen it prevents people from listening and they refuse to even consider anything else, and I don’t want to be like that.

      Liked by 2 people

  2. After his testimony I called his chambers and spoke with his receptionist. I was outraged and told her I believed Judge Kavanaugh would be confirmed. I am very glad he is now Justice Kavanaugh. Thanks for this excellent article.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s