(National Sentinel)Â Validation:Â Not that it will matter much to crazed Democrats hell-bent on destroying Judge Brett Kavanaugh, but the sex crimes prosecutor Senate Judiciary Republicans hired to question his principle sexual assault accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, has issued a report that completely exonerates the Supreme Court nominee.
The report from prosecutor Rachel Mitchell makes these salient points, as noted byÂ The Gateway Pundit:
- â€œDr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened.â€
- â€œDr. Ford struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name.â€
- â€œWhen speaking with her husband, Dr. Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific.â€
- â€œDr. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in questionâ€”details that could help corroborate her account.â€
- â€œShe does not remember in what house the alleged assault took place or where that house was located with any specificity.â€
- â€œPerhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.â€
Mitchell reaches the conclusion that â€œA â€˜he said, she saidâ€™ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that” — mostly because it’s really a “she said,Â they said” kind of scenario in that all four ‘witnesses’ Ford named have stated under penalty of felonious perjury that they never saw Kavanaugh do anything to her (or any other woman).
Perhaps the most damning indictment from Mitchell is this:Â â€œThe activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Fordâ€™s attorneyâ€™s likely affected her account.” She’s saying that the manner in which she was ‘debriefed’ and handled by Democrats (who are out to get Kavanaugh) had a huge influence on her ‘recollection’ of events.
They used her and used her badly, in other words.
Mitchell concludes:Â â€œI do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.â€
Really, this ought to be plenty of cover for reluctant Republicans who have one eye towards phony polling data and one eye towards doing the right thing (which would be confirming this great man to the Supreme Court, where he belongs).
Never miss a story! Sign up for our daily email newsletter â€”Â Click here!