Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford's lawyers are negotiating whether and under what conditions she will appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
She will not be able to make it on Monday and her conditions for testifying are interesting.
Fox reports her terms:
Among the terms: Only members of the committee — no lawyers — can question her; [Brett] Kavanaugh cannot be in the room at the time; and Kavanaugh should be questioned first, before he has the opportunity to hear Ford's testimony.
This is shrewd: it would ensure that Dr. Blasey Ford is questioned mostly by older white men–an optics win for the Democrats.
These conditions also would deprive Judge Kavanaugh of the chance to respond to his accuser.
It is customary for the accuser to go first, notes Paul Mirengoff.
Kavanaugh can’t be in the room? Say what? Ford is accusing Kavanaugh of a crime. Criminal defendants aren’t booted out of the courtroom when their accusers testify. As the accused, albeit not in a criminal proceeding, the interests of justice demand that Kavanaugh be confronted with the witness against him.
Dr. Ford should–and will–be treated respectfully if she testifies next week. But these terms are not designed to further the purpose of getting as close as possible to the truth after thirty-six years.
Daniel Henninger of the Wall Street Journal argues that for the Democrats, however, the truth is secondary:
Let us posit that the one thing not at issue here is the truth. As a matter of law and fact, Ms. Ford’s accusation can be neither proved nor disproved. This is as obvious now as it must have been when Dianne Feinstein and the other Democrats came into possession of this incident.
Surely someone pointed out that based on what was disclosed, this accusation could not be substantiated. To which the Democrats responded: So what? Its political value is that it cannot be disproved. They saw that six weeks before a crucial midterm election, the unresolvable case of Christine Blasey Ford would sit like a stalled hurricane over the entire Republican Party, drowning its candidates in a force they could not stop.
In #MeToo, which began in the predations of Harvey Weinstein, Democrats and progressives finally have found a weapon against which there seems to be no defense. It can be used to exterminate political enemies. If one unprovable accusation doesn’t suffice, why not produce a second, or third? It’s a limitless standard.
The Democrats’ broader strategy is: Delay the vote past the election; win the Senate by convincing suburban women that Republicans are implacably hostile to them; seize power; and—the point of it all—take down the Trump government.
This is the “resistance.” This is what Democrats have become. Resistance is a word and strategy normally found in a revolutionary context, which is precisely the argument made by the left to justify its actions against this presidency since the evening of Nov. 8, 2016. Anything goes. Whatever it takes. Brett Kavanaugh is not much more than a casualty of war.
Dr. Ford's lawyers were planning to host a fundraiser in their offices October 1 for Democratic Senator Tammy Baldwin, who is in a re-election campaign, but canceled the event when it became public.
Meanwhile, Axios has a lengthy piece outlining how the Democrats are planning a "massive campaign" for the midterms if Kavanaugh falls.