The questions of this prosecutor are totally not relevant. Waste of time.
I’m not impressed with her.
ABSOLUTELY! Don’t see where the direction of these questions are going? Sounds more like two women having a Starbucks talking about what happened this weekend? Just crap!
Furthermore—Are PhD’s just given out to anyone? Because this chick is not in the calibur of people of who I know have PhD’s
See my response above. I see what is happening here. They have something. If they don’t, you are right, but everything points to:
1. Information related to how she got home.
2. Information related to who else was at the party.
3. Information related to her state of intoxication.
4. Information that could ONLY be known by someone actually present because of the dates they covered in the letters.
5. Information that was NOT shared with the senators, polygraph administrator, etc, and could have only been known to someone present.
It’s coming. Her lawyers have to be SWEATING right now - it’s clear as day.
I completely disagree. You are simply looking for a gotcha. She is instead building up data, likely a few of these questions are from the Senators, but she is being methodlogical. Heck, did you just catch a few points: (1) polygraph on day of grandmother funeral, (2) at hotel, not office, (3) doesn’t know who picked polygrapher, (4) doesn’t know who paid for him, and more...
Agree. Rachel Mitchell is not good. All I do is picture Janine Pirro doing that job — and getting some actual information.
“The questions of this prosecutor are totally not relevant. Waste of time.”
If you think about the “Rumors” that are out there about Ford then the prosecutors questions make a lot of sense. They are the kind of questions that could later prove that Ford is lying. The big problem I see is that Ford does not seem to have a simple and definite answer to anything. Why anyone would believe someone who doesn’t know anything is beyond me. She does not even remember simple things about what she supposedly did in very recent time.