Leftists: Why Do You Believe Dr. Christine Blasey Ford?

Go ahead, we are all listening. . .

For the past week, our nation has obsessed over the events which are alleged to have taken place at a high school party at a house somewhere in Virginia on a night in 1982, 1983, or 1984.

That night, according to Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, a California college professor, then-teenage Brett Kavanaugh tried to rape her.

According to Dr. Ford, there were 5 people at this party. Herself, Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, Patrick J. Smyth, and Leland Keyser (who remains lifelong friends with Ford).

Since Dr. Ford's allegation became public a week ago, Brett Kavanaugh, along with all three of the other people supposedly in attendance at this party have vehemently denied that the party ever even happened. Dr. Ford's friend Ms. Keyser not only denied being at any party, but stated that she does not even know Kavanaugh.

Dr. Ford admittedly does not remember how she got to the party, or where she went after the party. The only details she claims to remember are those of the alleged assault, and of the names of the other attendees.

In the days following Dr. Ford's accusations, crowds of activists have swarmed the Capitol, the airwaves, and social media chanting battle cries of "Believe Survivors," "We Believe Dr. Christine Blasey Ford," and of course, the most original, "Stop Kavanaugh."

As a former prosecutor, I'm all about believing survivors of sexual assault. The silencing of victims is a very real, very sad, and very scary problem, and we as a People must do more to empower victims of every crime, but especially of sex crimes.

But my question here is, what gives anyone, Right or Left, man or woman, robot or human any single reason at all to believe that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford is one of those survivors?

If there is one shred of evidence that anyone can point to, I would sincerely love to hear it.

Not one fact claimed by Dr. Ford has been corroborated by any piece of testimony or evidence. Literally all we have, is her word against his--and his--and his--and hers. It's 4-1.

So for all those chanting "We Believe Dr. Christine Blasey Ford" over and over ad nauseam, I have one question: Why?

I'm being serious here. Why? Why do you believe her?

Don't give me the red herring fallacy of "because sexual assault is a problem in America," or "because victims are silenced every day," because, while I agree with you on those issues, they are not reasons for serious people with serious minds to believe every allegation, no matter how outlandish or impossible it may be. We as a nation are supposedly seeking the truth in this one single incident, the ills of society are not relevant to what happened or did not happen that one, single night.

I would say to all of those black-shirted protestors who are marching today and this week, that If you don't have an answer--If you don't have an objective, logical, non-politically motivated reason to believe that Brett Kavanaugh tried to rape Dr. Christine Blasey Ford--you should be ashamed of yourselves.

You are not only smearing the reputation of someone who by all-accounts, is a good and decent man, but you are cheapening the very real, and very horrific experiences of true survivors of sexual abuse.

Not only are you cheapening and demeaning these true survivors, but you are contributing to their oppression by muddying the waters of public opinion and forever infecting both future investigations and juries with this nationally-televised witch hunt. The news cycle is short, but people's memories of stories like this are long. This circus will ultimately make society even less likely to believe the stories of true survivors in the future.

Comments
No. 1-8
ashland1
ashland1

I really hope that someday soon a women accuses you of rape. I hope you go to prison. I want you to think about “the message” that you want to get across to people which is, every man is guilty because a woman says so!! I also hope that if you have any sons that they go with you 😜

Truthservant
Truthservant

Since the Constitution is still the basis for the Law of this Land a Man is to be considered INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT! there are too many Holes in the stories of those who Accuse Judge Kavanaugh. Furthermore I also believe it should be a CLASS B FELONY TO KNOWINGLY MAKE OR AID IN THE MAKING OF A FALSE ACCUSATION of this Nature! Quick Question If all accusers are to be Believed, WHY ISN'T WILLIAM JEFFERSON CLINTON ROTTING IN SOME PRISON RIGHT NOW?

LogicalLibertarian
LogicalLibertarian

Unless I am on a jury, I will believe any woman who claims to have been sexually assaulted. Why? Because victim shaming and silencing is a real problem in America. You can claim all you want that it’s a single case and has no bearing on the broader aspects of society, but in a high profile case like this it absolutely does. This sends a message to borg current and future victims. If the person who attacked you had a high enough profile, here is what will happen to you too. While presumption of innocence is all well and good, it does not apply outside of a court of law. Why? Because it is impossible to be logically consistent. If you have to assume, absent any evidence, that a party accused is innocent of wrongdoing (and you consider lying to destroy an individual wrong) then your presumption of innocence means that when the accuser is accused of lying their innocent. It’s why we have ‘not guilty’ and every person doesn’t get tried for perjury.

Overal, I’d rather be played the fool than cause harm in the form of fear or doubt in victims of sexual assault. As a male who hasn’t been assaulted I cannot even begin to fathom what they have gone through and I will not give anyone cause to think that I might doubt them. Is it perfectly logical? No. But it is an issue that I stand with a very strong opinion.

aprilmoon
aprilmoon

I think Senator Hirono represents the viewpoint of those chanting "we believe Ford". They are fine with upending western traditions of justice, for whatever short term gains they see, which are to me, delaying the vote on Kavanaugh until after November 6th. If we had a 60 vote threshold none of this would be happening. The winner take all, ram it through, is what is wrong with both the House and the Senate. And no one wants to be the first to let go of this destructive behavior.

cynicalnerd
cynicalnerd

@Robert Moore Doesn't matter what party the accused is a member of, if there isn't collaborating evidence*, then it's not worth the time of day.

  • Hearsay doesn't qualify, eyewitness testimony is scarcely better. Direct physical evidence isn't necessarily required, evidence of skeezy(if not criminal) behavior by the accused related to the initial crimes will suffice. (Ie. With Swinestein, you had a history of payoffs, extortion, blackmail et_al.)

As far Trump goes, the major media gave 2 billion in free coverage and the GOP establishment attempted to steer the primary when those they could tolerate left the race (with the exclusion of Kasich who they knew was essentially a spoiler and not a serious candidate) which part of the equation of why Cruz got boatraced, leaving Trump carrying the nomination. This left a choice between an eccentric, obnoxious rake vs a falsely-pious harridan who has played fast and loose vital intelligence information to sidestep Congressional demands and FOIA requests. Tough choice.

This leaves GOP congresscritters in a tight crack-- suddenly the President is now of their party and the agenda he campaigned and won on is what they have been promising since 2010, promising with each new election cycle that if we gave them more power, they'd put a straightjacket on the Obama agenda... only to continue to let the Democrats rule the roost almost unchallenged. 2014 was a warning sign, when the sitting Majority Leader of the House, Eric Cantor got curb-stomped in the primary despite outspending his political neophyte opponent 40-to-1. The Trump Train is heading in the opposite direction to where the Obama agenda went, they can either get onboard, get left in the dust, or attempt to stand in the way and get run over like Corker and Flake. As far Mueller's investigation goes, Dan Bongino's coverage of it is far more credible than the Resistance's shrill defense of Mueller's team and his allies.