“Christine Blasey Ford Quote Painted at Yale Law School https://a.msn.com/r/2/BBOJLPL?m=en-ca&referrerID=InAppShare”
You’d think most of the alumni, students and faculty of Yale Law School would understand the difference between fact and opinion as well as the difference between a Senate hearing and a trial in a court of law.
You should also be aware by now of some stunning exceptions to understanding of these differences which have dominated recent headlines in the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation process.
First, consider the alumni, which would include members of the American Bar Association and visitors attending Alumni weekend at Yale Law School. According to the article linked above, on Monday morning following the conclusion of Alumni weekend a graffiti painting quoted the words of Christine Blasey Ford outside the school’s door.
Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter.
According to the article, this quote, extracted from Ford’s testimony at a Senate Committee hearing during the confirmation process for Brett Kavanaugh as Justice of the Supreme Court, was given in testimony against Kavanaugh. Omitted is the fact that this “testimony” was given at a Senate hearing which is not a court of law. Also omitted is the relevance of testimony that applied to a near forty-year old event that was certainly not criminal and would never be admissible in any rational court of law.
I agree that there is some evidence that the events described in Ford’s testimony may well have occurred, though I doubt they would have been exactly as described. But the evidence is weak to begin with and as both Ford and Kavanaugh were teenagers at the time, four decades prior to reaching the heights of their subsequent professional careers, it should never have been subjected to the corrupt process of a “trial” by media and political opinion. There was no reason such sensitive matters could not be considered in private conference with committee members.
The media would of course never consider the sensitivity of the protagonists and so it is not surprising that although Kavanaugh has been confirmed on the basis of his professional record, which is the only relevant evidence here, the media and other political activists choose to keep the “trial” running until it yields some result acceptable to them.
Consider this statement from the article.
Despite protests, calls to senators and pushes to deem him unfit for a lifetime on the court Kavanaugh was confirmed.
If there’s a mention of Kavanaugh’s ability and sterling performance as a judge anywhere, express or implied, I must have missed it. “Protests, calls to senators and pushes” to the contrary, his judicial record thankfully prevailed. His career unfortunately is forever smeared by the corruption of the confirmation process. The perpetrators, primarily the media and Senate Committee members who dragged the vague recollections of middle-aged adults as teenagers through the process as an indictment, will never be accountable except in their own moral ineptness.
The article reports on other protests from Yale Law School, by students as well as faculty and even the Dean, which were raised prior to Kavanaugh’s confirmation.
The Dean of Yale’s law school called for an investigation into the allegations from Ford. “I join the American Bar Association in calling for an additional investigation into allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh. Proceeding with the confirmation process without further investigation is not in the best interest of the Court or our profession,” said the statement from Dean Heather Gerken.
Observe that even the American Bar Association had thrown its hat into the ring to call for “additional investigations,” according to Dean Gerken’s quoted statement. That nonsense is even less relevant now that Kavanaugh has been confirmed.
Let’s fervently hope the anarchist inspired efforts of this process fade away into merely a smear on the record of the confirmation process for Justices of the Supreme Court.