Valuable read from @profmjcleveland on the challenges Senators face as they evaluate Dr. Ford’s changing story.
(Thread)
usatoday.com/story/opinion/…
(Thread)
usatoday.com/story/opinion/…
The first challenge comes with Dr. Ford’s recollection of when the incident happened.
Her initial account to WaPo suggested it had happened in her “late teens.” But Kavanaugh was at Yale then. Her testimony then changed to 1982, contradicting text messages and therapist notes.
Her initial account to WaPo suggested it had happened in her “late teens.” But Kavanaugh was at Yale then. Her testimony then changed to 1982, contradicting text messages and therapist notes.
The change with regard to when she first named Kavanaugh as her attacker is significant because her legal team has pointed to therapist notes as evidence to support her charges. But the therapist notes don’t name Kavanaugh and have still not been submitted to the Senate.
This point has also been examined exhaustively by Phil @Kerpen, particularly her adjustment from recalling "federal judge" to "Brett Kavanaugh," because he was on the President Trump's short list.
Except that he wasn't on the short list yet.
Except that he wasn't on the short list yet.
As @ProfMJCleveland notes, the changes in her story with regard to party attendees, home layout, and party location all changed after Senate Investigators began looking into them.
The greatest challenge those attempting to assess credibility here face, beyond a lack of witnesses or corroborating evidence, is that every detail Kavanaugh’s supporters could use to prove that Dr. Ford’s allegations could not have happened — has changed along the way.
