SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Maricope County sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell's memo on Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's allegations against Brett Kavanaugh came to a conclusion regarding whether she would advise a criminal prosecution against the judge--not whether he deserved a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. (Photo: @NECN/Twitter)
Prosecutor's "Reprehensible" Memo Proves GOP Aimed to Put Accuser Dr. Ford on Trial, Not Brett Kavanaugh
"This is so irresponsible and plainly flawed. But this dishonest memo aside, the person Rachel Mitchell should be writing a memo about is Brett Kavanaugh. It's the veracity of his claims that count. He’s the person being considered for a lifetime appointment."
Oct 01, 2018
A memo from Maricopa County sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, who questioned Dr. Christine Blasey Ford during her testimony on allegations against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, revealed late Sunday that Mitchell would not advise a criminal prosecution for Kavanaugh--obscuring the reality of the consequences Kavanaugh currently faces if the FBI finds evidence that he has committed sexual assault or perjured himself in any way.
The memo claims a "reasonable prosecutor" would not pursue Ford's case, and includes five pages of Mitchell's observations about perceived holes in her story of the alleged sexual assault which took place in the early 1980s, when Kavanaugh and Ford were in high school.
But while Mitchell offered her thoughts on the believability of Ford's testimony, she included nothing about Kavanaugh's belligerent statement and refusal to answer direct questions from Senate Democrats during his appearance last Thursday--strongly suggesting that it was Ford, not Kavanaugh, who was on trial during the hearing.
\u201cRachel Mitchell\u2019s report confirms that as far as the GOP was concerned, Christine Ford was on trial. The memo contains not a single word on Kavanaugh\u2019s testimony and its vast array of inconsistencies and outright lies. This is reprehensible.\u201d— Jeff Yang (@Jeff Yang) 1538366117
The document's conclusion also flies in the face of what numerous political observers have pointed out in recent days--that the question of criminally prosecuting Kavanaugh is irrelevant, because a Senate hearing is not intended as a criminal trial. The purpose of Democrats in the Senate was not to build a case to bring charges against Kavanaugh, but only to help determine if he warrants a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court.
\u201c1. This is a hearing on Kavanaugh's qualifications & fitness, not a criminal prosecution\n2. Rachel Mitchell was rendered irrelevant once the men stopped yielding their time\n3. A fair & uninterrupted cross of #Kavanaugh would've explored his lies under oath\nhttps://t.co/iC0k3kkB9p\u201d— Kristen Clarke (@Kristen Clarke) 1538366625
\u201cThis is so irresponsible and plainly flawed. But this dishonest memo aside, the person Rachel Mitchell should be writing a memo about is Brett Kavanaugh. It\u2019s the veracity of his claims that count. He\u2019s the person being considered for a lifetime appointment.\u201d— Shaunna Thomas (@Shaunna Thomas) 1538364878
The memo was released as an FBI probe into Ford's claims and those of Deborah Ramirez, who alleges Kavanaugh assaulted her in college, got underway. The Senate Judiciary Committee was forced to call for an investigation on Friday after it became clear that the Republicans did not yet have enough votes to bring Kavanaugh's nomination to the Senate floor for a vote. However, according to reports, the White House has severely limited the scope of the investigation.
Last week, Mitchell questioned Ford on her allegations, but her participation in the hearing was cut short when Republican senators began questioning Kavanaugh--and defending him against the claims.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.
A memo from Maricopa County sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, who questioned Dr. Christine Blasey Ford during her testimony on allegations against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, revealed late Sunday that Mitchell would not advise a criminal prosecution for Kavanaugh--obscuring the reality of the consequences Kavanaugh currently faces if the FBI finds evidence that he has committed sexual assault or perjured himself in any way.
The memo claims a "reasonable prosecutor" would not pursue Ford's case, and includes five pages of Mitchell's observations about perceived holes in her story of the alleged sexual assault which took place in the early 1980s, when Kavanaugh and Ford were in high school.
But while Mitchell offered her thoughts on the believability of Ford's testimony, she included nothing about Kavanaugh's belligerent statement and refusal to answer direct questions from Senate Democrats during his appearance last Thursday--strongly suggesting that it was Ford, not Kavanaugh, who was on trial during the hearing.
\u201cRachel Mitchell\u2019s report confirms that as far as the GOP was concerned, Christine Ford was on trial. The memo contains not a single word on Kavanaugh\u2019s testimony and its vast array of inconsistencies and outright lies. This is reprehensible.\u201d— Jeff Yang (@Jeff Yang) 1538366117
The document's conclusion also flies in the face of what numerous political observers have pointed out in recent days--that the question of criminally prosecuting Kavanaugh is irrelevant, because a Senate hearing is not intended as a criminal trial. The purpose of Democrats in the Senate was not to build a case to bring charges against Kavanaugh, but only to help determine if he warrants a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court.
\u201c1. This is a hearing on Kavanaugh's qualifications & fitness, not a criminal prosecution\n2. Rachel Mitchell was rendered irrelevant once the men stopped yielding their time\n3. A fair & uninterrupted cross of #Kavanaugh would've explored his lies under oath\nhttps://t.co/iC0k3kkB9p\u201d— Kristen Clarke (@Kristen Clarke) 1538366625
\u201cThis is so irresponsible and plainly flawed. But this dishonest memo aside, the person Rachel Mitchell should be writing a memo about is Brett Kavanaugh. It\u2019s the veracity of his claims that count. He\u2019s the person being considered for a lifetime appointment.\u201d— Shaunna Thomas (@Shaunna Thomas) 1538364878
The memo was released as an FBI probe into Ford's claims and those of Deborah Ramirez, who alleges Kavanaugh assaulted her in college, got underway. The Senate Judiciary Committee was forced to call for an investigation on Friday after it became clear that the Republicans did not yet have enough votes to bring Kavanaugh's nomination to the Senate floor for a vote. However, according to reports, the White House has severely limited the scope of the investigation.
Last week, Mitchell questioned Ford on her allegations, but her participation in the hearing was cut short when Republican senators began questioning Kavanaugh--and defending him against the claims.
A memo from Maricopa County sex crimes prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, who questioned Dr. Christine Blasey Ford during her testimony on allegations against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, revealed late Sunday that Mitchell would not advise a criminal prosecution for Kavanaugh--obscuring the reality of the consequences Kavanaugh currently faces if the FBI finds evidence that he has committed sexual assault or perjured himself in any way.
The memo claims a "reasonable prosecutor" would not pursue Ford's case, and includes five pages of Mitchell's observations about perceived holes in her story of the alleged sexual assault which took place in the early 1980s, when Kavanaugh and Ford were in high school.
But while Mitchell offered her thoughts on the believability of Ford's testimony, she included nothing about Kavanaugh's belligerent statement and refusal to answer direct questions from Senate Democrats during his appearance last Thursday--strongly suggesting that it was Ford, not Kavanaugh, who was on trial during the hearing.
\u201cRachel Mitchell\u2019s report confirms that as far as the GOP was concerned, Christine Ford was on trial. The memo contains not a single word on Kavanaugh\u2019s testimony and its vast array of inconsistencies and outright lies. This is reprehensible.\u201d— Jeff Yang (@Jeff Yang) 1538366117
The document's conclusion also flies in the face of what numerous political observers have pointed out in recent days--that the question of criminally prosecuting Kavanaugh is irrelevant, because a Senate hearing is not intended as a criminal trial. The purpose of Democrats in the Senate was not to build a case to bring charges against Kavanaugh, but only to help determine if he warrants a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court.
\u201c1. This is a hearing on Kavanaugh's qualifications & fitness, not a criminal prosecution\n2. Rachel Mitchell was rendered irrelevant once the men stopped yielding their time\n3. A fair & uninterrupted cross of #Kavanaugh would've explored his lies under oath\nhttps://t.co/iC0k3kkB9p\u201d— Kristen Clarke (@Kristen Clarke) 1538366625
\u201cThis is so irresponsible and plainly flawed. But this dishonest memo aside, the person Rachel Mitchell should be writing a memo about is Brett Kavanaugh. It\u2019s the veracity of his claims that count. He\u2019s the person being considered for a lifetime appointment.\u201d— Shaunna Thomas (@Shaunna Thomas) 1538364878
The memo was released as an FBI probe into Ford's claims and those of Deborah Ramirez, who alleges Kavanaugh assaulted her in college, got underway. The Senate Judiciary Committee was forced to call for an investigation on Friday after it became clear that the Republicans did not yet have enough votes to bring Kavanaugh's nomination to the Senate floor for a vote. However, according to reports, the White House has severely limited the scope of the investigation.
Last week, Mitchell questioned Ford on her allegations, but her participation in the hearing was cut short when Republican senators began questioning Kavanaugh--and defending him against the claims.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.