Mitchell did an excellent job demonstrating that Ford’s story is changing for strategic reasons.
As she testified several times, Ford is trying to be “helpful.”
Here is an excellent analysis by Margot Cleveland: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1046408449918218240.html
What the leftist are saying is she is a “paid mouthpiece” for the “good ol’ boys network.” I kid you not.
Even when it’s pointed out that she has over 25 years experience with sex crimes. It’s maddening.
Employment Lawyears are prosecutors? Who knew?
I reached all the same conclusions as Ms. Mitchell while watching the hearing. It’s listening and common sense, and then picking up on all the inconsistencies in Ford’s testimony. Lots of others did as well — I read the comments here, for example. It’s not rocket science and it doesn’t take an “expert” to see it.
“Survivors are going to see this and say, ‘I wouldn’t be able to be consistent in my recollections either, remember specific dates either.’ ”
If that’s the case then they have no business bringing accusations against potentially innocent men.
Of course Stalinists have never cared about such things. An accusation against a conservative white male by a progressive woman requires no proof or corroboration.
The one of that three that actually has sex crimes prosecutor experience did not actually refute her on any of her claims, just complained that she called herself “independent”.
Believe all women, or something like that.
You could not expect anything better from the Washington Post. It is one of the worst newspapers in the country for truth.