Senator Feinstein faces an ‘investigation’ after the ‘betraying’ the confidentiality that Mrs. Ford requested.
In the midst of the nonstop drama that has surrounded the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation, the focus has remained almost entirely on the Christine Blasey Ford allegations. They’ve been the center of non-stop reports, editorials, opinion pieces, and more, all throughout the mainstream media, which has suggested that Kavanaugh is unfit due to these unsubstantiated claims.
However, few articles alighted on one very important concept concerning the allegation. Namely, that question is how, precisely, the letter, which Ford asked to be kept private, ended up in the hands of the media, or who, leaked it.
Senator Dianne Feinstein, according to her own statement, received the letter from a democrat Congresswoman from California.
Somehow, before the accuser ever came forward, the letter’s contents were being circulated around leftist media outlets, which ‘broke’ the story and essentially forced her out of anonymity to make her accusations.
The timing of the leak and subsequent news story just happened to be advantageous for democrats, as it introduced doubt as to Judge Kavanaugh’s character and background.
When he appeared on CBS’ “Face the Nation” to talk about Ford, Senator Cotton pointed out that “they” betrayed her, and that the accuser was “victimized” by leftists on a “search-and-destroy mission” for President Donald Trump’s second Supreme Court nominee.
Cotton, who has a law degree from Harvard Law School and who served in combat during the Global War on Terror, added that lawyers recommended to Dr. Ford by the democrats would also face an investigation from the bar in Washington D.C.
This investigation was triggered by the fact that, during her testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, she stated that her lawyers told her SJC staffers weren’t willing to travel to her home in California to interview her about her allegations. Yet, according to Grassley, that was incorrect.
Senator Lindsey Graham also announced on Sunday that he planned to demand a “full scale” investigation into how, precisely, the story leaked to the press.
He appeared on ABC News’ “This Week” to discuss the Thursday hearings, and seemed to still be of the opinions that he voiced during his opportunity to question Kavanaugh that day.
Graham said that there was going to be an investigation into what happened in the committee.
Specifically, he wanted to know who betrayed Dr. Ford’s trust and publicized her confidential letter, as well as who recommended Debra Katz to the accuser, and why she was never informed that the SJC offered to interview her in California.
He referenced several odd statements that she made during the hearing on Thursday, including the fact that she didn’t seem aware of the committee’s offer to come to her.
It seemed that, instead, her attorneys had told her that she had no choice but to go the nation’s capital and testify there, live, in front of cameras.
She also gave the impression that she did not know who did, but that she was certain it wasn’t someone in her staff because she had asked them.
However, Feinstein had a Chinese spy on her staff for years and didn’t know about that, so it’s not beyond the pale to suspect that, assuming she didn’t know about the leak, someone could have leaked it under her nose without her realization.
Furthermore, the timing of the leak seemed to be much too favorable to democrats for it to all be coincidence.
Before the allegations contained in a letter that Mrs. Ford had hoped would remain confidential (at least according to her) were leaked, Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a man who had gone through no less than six Federal Bureau of Investigation background checks, was due for a confirmation vote within days.
Many suggested that he would sail through to confirmation without any issue.
Someone, somewhere, leaked that ‘confidential’ document, against the wishes of the claimant, for political gain. For that, they should be held to account, and punished accordingly for abusing such a delicate matter for so nakedly partisan a purpose.