It appears that the accuser of Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, is set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week. But days before she enters the Senate chambers, several Democratic leaders have already pronounced that they believe her, and Judge Kavanaugh should step aside at once. What is remarkable is not that they have ditched that old “innocent until proven guilty” thing, but the abject hypocrisy on clear display. Exhibit A – Juanita Broaddrick.
According to Senators Schumer, Feinstein. Whitehouse, Blumenthal, etc., Kavanaugh is guilty. As evidence for their conclusion, they have one unproven, unsubstantiated, uncollaborated claim from 36 years ago.
What we don’t know about that night in question is more than we do know. Dr. Ford, while naming Kavanaugh as an attempted rapist, does not remember the date (or even the year), the place, or anyone else at the alleged party. Speaking in Kavanaugh’s defense are the man Ford said was in the room (he says it never happened) and 60 women who have spoken with one voice in their unanimous praise of Kavanaugh’s character – then and now.
Of course, the lack of evidence does not mean Ford’s claims are untrue. When both she and the judge testify under oath, we will presumably know more. But when we think back to the Clarence Thomas hearings of 1991, we remember that sometimes, such testimony does not bring closure to these cases.
Democratic leaders are right to listen to Ford’s testimony. And Republicans are right to call for her to appear before their committee. But what is shocking – and sad – is that so many are willing to convict a man with a spotless record simply on the basis of an accusation. By this reasoning, if one woman makes an unsubstantiated similar claim against Chuck Schumer, for example, he should resign immediately – guilty or not.
But what is more shocking is the hypocrisy of the Democrats. And that takes us back to Exhibit A.
In 1999 Juanita Broaddrick asked to speak before the same Judiciary Committee, of which the same Senator Diane Feinstein was a member. Her claim? President Bill Clinton had raped her. But Feinstein would not even hear her case.
What was different about Broaddrick’s claim, compared to Ford’s?
1. Broaddrick claimed Clinton raped her; Ford is accusing Kavanaugh of attempted rape.
2. Clinton is accused of the crime while a sitting Governor, Kavanaugh as a 17-year-old boy.
3. Broaddrick had five witnesses; Ford apparently has none.
Still, while claiming to want to get all the facts, not a single Democrat on the current Judicial Committee would even show up to join their Republican colleagues in questioning Kavanaugh about the accusations last week. (Of course, the cameras weren’t on yet.)
Again, none of this is to say Ford’s accusations are less than accurate. At this point, we simply don’t know. What we do know is that Judge Kavanaugh is innocent until proven guilty.
Oh, we know one other thing. Democrats stand for women and for equal justice under the law. Unless that woman is Juanita Broaddrick and the man in question is a sitting Democratic President named Bill Clinton.