Kavanaugh nomination hangs by thinnest of strings

It is difficult to comment on an unfolding news story, but this one demands it. It is hard to write about someone you know and like, especially concerning matters of character. But sometimes there is little choice.

In the case of Brett Kavanaugh vs. Christine Blasey Ford, the moral issues are not fuzzy or unclear. It is seriously wrong even for a teen to force himself on a woman in a drunken stupor — if it happened. It is seriously wrong for a Supreme Court nominee to lie about his past failures — if he did. It is seriously wrong to make false, inflammatory accusations — if she has.

The problem comes in interpreting the facts and applying an unavoidably political criteria of worthiness. American politics is not conducted in a courtroom. The standard is not “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Yet there must be some standard, or else accusation would always mean conviction. Under this circumstance, fewer men and women would take the risk of public service, knowing their credibility could be easily destroyed.

The proper standard for public judgment is credibility. Were the charges of creepy and disturbing sexual behavior against Senate candidate Roy Moore credible? I think so, based on the testimony of multiple, credible victims, who do not seem to have ulterior motives. The case against Moore was not certain, but I found his guilt likely.

Are the charges of sexual exploitation and assault true against Bill Clinton and Donald Trump? In both cases, there is a pattern of credible accusations.

The current state of the case against Kavanaugh does not yet match the credibility of these other accusations. So far, the charge against Kavanaugh is not corroborated by anyone at the party. The later notes from Ford’s therapist are ambiguous and do not include Kavanaugh’s name. And there are no other accusations that might indicate a pattern.

I would add that I worked closely with Kavanaugh for years at the White House. I can’t be a completely unbiased judge. But a columnist can’t recuse himself from the largest issue of the day. For what it is worth, the charge of sexual assault is inconsistent with everything I saw of Kavanaugh’s character and behavior toward women. To me, it is completely incredible to think of him as a predator.

And yet, I know that friends and coworkers of Ford might claim the same about her character and veracity. And all the testimonials for Kavanaugh might not shed light on the way he might have been as a drunken teen.

This charge needs to be fully examined by members of the Judiciary Committee, no matter how much additional time that takes.

The theoretical issue — should a terrible act done by a 17-year-old disqualify his 53-year-old self from a sensitive government job? — is an interesting one. How about a 17-year-old who kills someone while driving drunk? Or a 17-year-old who deals drugs? In most cases, if we were talking about a single incident in someone’s youth, we might be lenient. But we properly place sexual assault in a special category of cruelty because of the lasting damage it inflicts. And we properly expect higher standards from a judge than from others.

The Kavanaugh nomination now hangs by the thinnest of strings. If Ford’s accusation is supported by other credible witnesses at the party, or if additional, credible accusations emerge from his life, he should withdraw. If there is only a single, unsupported accusation, the Senate would be setting an unsustainable precedent by letting this determine the membership of the Supreme Court.

He writes for the Washington Post.