Investigative counsel Rachel Mitchell, cross-examining Christine Blasey Ford at the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, demolished her claim that she could not testify on Monday because she was afraid of flying.
Ford and her attorneys refused a Monday hearing, arguing that she was afraid to fly. One of her friends even claimed that her fear of flying was a result of the alleged assault by Judge Brett Kavanaugh over 35 years ago.
Watch the exchange:
As Politico reported:
The GOP has been told that Ford does not want to fly from her California home to Washington, according to the Republican senator, which means she may need to drive across the country. Ford has reportedly told friends she is uncomfortable in confined spaces, indicating a physical difficulty in making the trip by plane.
Committee chair Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) then offered to travel to California to interview Ford, relieving her of the need to fly. She declined. There was talk of having Ford drive across the country to make the hearing.
Yet under questioning by Mitchell, Ford admitted that she had, in fact, flown across the country to make the hearing. She had also flown to the east coast for a vacation with family in August. She also admitted flying frequently for her work and for her hobbies, including surfing vacations in Hawaii, Costa Rica, and French Polynesia. Ford, laughing nervously, said that it was easier to fly for vacations.
Critics had speculated that the sole reason Democrats, and Ford, were refusing a Monday hearing — or even a compromise Wednesday hearing — was because a Thursday hearing would make it almost impossible for the Senate to hold a confirmation vote on Judge Kavanaugh before the Supreme Court begins its new session on October 1.
https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/27/rachel-mitchell-demolishes-christine-blasey-fords-claim-she-fears-flying/
Everything about Ford was a clever deception—beginning with her demeanor. Describing herself as “terrified,” she kept her voice low, quiet, breaking; she avoided eye contact, hunched her shoulders, and repeatedly bowed her head as if she were unaccustomed to speaking into a microphone. This middle aged woman, a Stanford graduate and widely published university professor who lectures large audiences on a regular basis adopted the tone and manner of a young victim of rape, forced to reveal shattering truths on a witness stand. There were no actual tears, no struggle to keep the nose from running (as we saw in the case of Kavanaugh), yet—predictably—Ford’s counselors and various committee members worried and fretted over her mental health, offering libations, breaks, condolences, outbursts of praise for her heroism—-falling all over one another in their eagerness to show themselves defenders of female voters everywhere against the satanic male beast who had violated this poor woman’s body and continued to violate her mind for 36 years! (Or was it 35?)
In this KGB world where an accusation by a favored Party member is more than enough to convict one who is not, Kavanaugh was already toast. Neverthess, the gentle prosecutor went about interrogating the “survivor.” As interrogations go, this was nothing but a snowflake stroll down a series of paths that never went anywhere of note. When Ford avoided answering questions by adopting the voice and mannerisms of the confused and forgetful victim, the prosecutor almost never pressed the matter— nor did she pursue the glaring inconsistencies in Ford’s statements about her supposed fear of flying or in her assertions about how many males and/or females were at the party. I’d like to have known why no alleged attendees named by Ford would admit to being there. I was also curious about when and where Ford met Kavanaugh for the first time and how often after that they’d met, but such questions were never asked. The prosecutor did embark on an interesting line of inquiry about the (carefully coached) account of the music which, conveniently, covered the sound of thumping, grinding, and tumbling in a heap to the floor then lowered in volume when it came time for Ford to hear talking and laughing below. But the prosecutor never asked Ford how she could remember the volume of the music but not how she got to the party. For that matter, the prosecutor never asked how it is that Ford can’t to this day recall the location of the house, how she managed to get home, or even the date of the assault—yet she is absolutely, positively “100%” certain that it was Kavanaugh who assaulted her?
I wonder. If she isn’t a liar, could Ford have been too drunk to remember whether she was ever actually at a party where Kavanaugh or anyone else assaulted her? Too bad the prosecutor didn’t get a copy of Ford’s yearbook before it was hastily removed from the internet.