Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell has sent a summary report of her assessment of the accusations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.  She concludes that the charge would not meet the standard for prosecution, not even success in a civil court proceeding.  With 25 years of sex crimes prosecutorial experience, she is qualified to give her opinion.

This will not satisfy the opposition, but it may serve as protection for the wobbly Republican senators Flake, Collins, and Murkowski. 

Mitchell has provided nine reasons for doubting the Blasey Ford account:

1. Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened. 

2. Ford has struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name.

3. When speaking with her husband, Dr. Ford changed her description of the incident to become less specific.

4. Dr. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question – details that could help corroborate her account.

5. Dr. Ford's account of the alleged assault has not been corroborated by anyone she identified as having attended – including her lifelong friend.

6. Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of the alleged assault.

7. Dr. Ford has struggled to recall important recent events relating to her allegations, and her testimony regarding recent events raises further questions about her memory.

8. Dr. Ford's description of the psychological impact of the event raises questions.

9. The activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford's attorneys likely affected Dr. Ford's account.

Beyond these points are other inconsistencies, recently noted by J.R. Dunn.  Dr. Ford is not a licensed psychologist.  She was not honest about her reported fear of flying.  Further, she described her need for a second front door as initiating the disruption in her marriage that led to the counseling sessions that exposed this allegation of sexual assault against Judge Kavanaugh.  However, she made these changes to her house in 2008, four years prior to the therapy sessions.  Added together, this information makes Dr. Ford less believable.

Yet polling data show that the public is split on whether the accuser or the judge is more truthful.  In a Rasmussen Reports poll released Oct. 1, 39-38% believe Judge Kavanaugh over Dr. Ford.  Ten days earlier, the public favored Kavanaugh by 5 points.  This does not consider the veracity of her statements, which are not collaborated by the four people she has named.

With scant evidentiary support for the Ford allegations, her lawyer, Debra Katz, has friends seeking any dirt or information regarding the slang used in Kavanaugh's high school yearbook.  Andrea Caputo Rose urged people to "use their voice" to prevent Kavanaugh from sitting on the Supreme Court.  The curious thing for us is that Rose attended the Stone Ridge School of the Sacred Heart and claims to have socialized with and been a friend of Kavanaugh, who attended Georgetown Prep.   Ford attended Holton-Arms High School, which is nearby.  You can't make up this story.  Rose is also soliciting information that might support Julie Swetnick, who attended Gaithersburg High School and was a college student at the time of her alleged incidents.  Rose would also like information that would support Deborah Ramirez's accusations, which Ramirez claims occurred while attended Yale University with Kavanaugh.

The media have been irresponsible and published stories requiring modification.  For instance,  NBC News had to amend its article implying that Kavanaugh lied when he stated he first heard of the Ramirez claims in the New Yorker article.  NBC forgot to mention that he told the Senate investigators he had heard about her claims before the article appeared.  The New York Times reported that the judge threw ice at someone while a student at Yale.  Yet the byline includes a strongly anti-Kavanaugh activist, Emily Blazelon, a Yale Law School graduate.  You can't make this stuff up!

As the allegations by Ramirez appear to melt away, her lawyer, John Clune, has requested that the FBI question up to 20 potential witnesses to verify her claim that Kavanaugh exposed himself at a party while an undergraduate student.  So far, no one has come forward.  Even in the New Yorker article, there was no collaboration.  Again, you could not write this novel.

The most ludicrous story was presented by Julie Swetnick, who claimed that while she was a college student, she witnessed parties in which Kavanaugh and friend Mark Judge ran a gang-raping operation ("train").  In the NBC interview, she had to admit that she never witnessed Kavanaugh spike drinks or rape anyone.  But he was there!  How can these two men have managed this feat while high school students?  Chevy Chase, Md. is a close-knit community.  How does this happen without any other person being aware?  How did they get so many girls to show up?  Why would a college girl go to a high school party?  Michael Avenatti, her lawyer (of porn star fame), answered this question by saying she was doing research.  Her ex-boyfriend, Richard Vinneccey, challenges her claims and also says she threatened his child.

This time, the Democrats may have picked on the wrong person.  Even their supportive press enablers can't find enough serious defects in Brett Kavanaugh's life to ruin him.  They claim that his anger at the Thursday hearings must disqualify him, for lack of judicial temperament.  Even Senator Flake questioned this anger.  Wow, this is the new Democratic talking point on the Senate floor, given by Senator Schumer and others.

Real life is often the basis of many novels.  But how could anyone imagine that the man who carried the nuclear codes while serving as President George W. Bush's staff secretary could be such a raging liar, alcoholic, and sexual predator and pass several FBI investigations previously?  Only in the Twilight Zone.  Are you listening, Senators Flake, Collins, and Murkowski?