Trump no help, but Ford’s case continues to erode

At a rally in Mississippi on Tuesday, President Trump ridiculed Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony last week to the Senate Judiciary Committee. “‘I had one beer,’” Trump said. “‘How did you get home?’ ‘I don’t remember.’ ‘How’d you get there?’ ‘I don’t remember.’ ‘Where is the place?’ ‘I don’t remember.’ ‘How many years ago was it?’ ‘I don’t know.’ ... ‘What neighborhood was it in?’ ‘I don’t know.’ ‘Where’s the house?’ ‘I don’t know.’ The crowd roared its approval.

How on earth does Trump think this is helping? None of those cheering will have a say as to whether Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed to the Supreme Court. Only a handful of people will determine Kavanaugh’s fate. They include Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz. They were all justifiably appalled by Trump’s performance.

The last thing Kavanaugh needs right now is for a man who admitted that when he sees beautiful women, “I just start kissing them” — and worse — to inject himself into the debate.

But just as Kavanaugh should not be held accountable for Trump’s behavior, he should not be held responsible for all of our society’s ills. There is no doubt that many women have been sexually assaulted and that much of it has gone unreported. Just because Kavanaugh is a privileged white male does not make him guilty of sexual assault.

There is no doubt that Ford was a sympathetic witness. But being sympathetic is not the same as being truthful or credible. And Ford’s case against Kavanaugh is looking less credible by the day. First, Arizona sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell exposed serious inconsistencies in Ford’s testimony.

And now a report this week from Real Clear Investigations has undermined another key claim that Ford made before the committee. Ford testified under oath that the reason she finally told a therapist in 2012 about the alleged assault three decades after she says it happened was because, during a renovation of her Palo Alto, Calif., home, she “insisted on a second front door,” and her husband disagreed. So, during marriage counseling, she testified, “in explaining why I wanted a second front door, I began to describe the assault in detail.” She confirmed to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., that the reason for the second door was “claustrophobia.” She also never said when the renovation took place, leaving the impression that it coincided with the counseling.

But RealClear Investigations uncovered real estate records and other documents that contradict Ford’s sworn testimony. Those records “reveal the door was installed years before as part of an addition, and has been used by renters and even a marriage counseling business.” RealClear quotes an attorney familiar with the investigation who said, “It appears the real plan for the second front door was to rent out a separate room.”

Taken together with questions about her claims about her ability to fly to Washington to testify, about her familiarity with polygraph tests and about the therapist notes’ whereabouts, this revelation further calls into question Ford’s credibility.

Perhaps, in the end, facts will prevail over feelings, due process will be honored and the principle that one is innocent until proven guilty will stand.