In the continuing attempt to undermine Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a bizarre new tactic has taken hold: victims of sexual assault are coming forward to express their belief that Christine Blasey Ford is telling the truth. The logic seems to be that because something bad happened to them – because they were victimized by a person who is not Brett Kavanaugh – they are therefore entitled to declare Brett Kavanaugh guilty of sexually assaulting a woman who is not they.
Take, for example, Connie Chung’s latest column at The Washington Post. Chung, a longtime TV veteran, says that because she was sexually assaulted when she was 20 by her doctor, Brett Kavanaugh is guilty of assaulting Christine Blasey Ford when he was 17. That’s not an exaggeration. The title of the piece: “Dear Christine Blasey Ford: I, too, was sexually assaulted – and it’s seared into my memory forever.”
Her story is indeed awful, and she describes her experience in graphic detail. She concludes:
Christine, I know the truth, as you do. ... I wish I could forget this truthful event, but I cannot because it is the truth. I am writing to you because I know that exact dates, exact years are insignificant. We remember exactly what happened to us and who did it to us. We remember the truth forever. Bravo, Christine, for telling the truth.
Such pieces have become common across social media – indeed, there are protesters walking around the Senate this minute claiming that failure to sink Kavanaugh based on uncorroborated allegations amounts to sandbagging all victims. That’s nonsense, and it’s purely illogical nonsense at that.
Then there’s Abigail Disney, who writes today at USA Today to explain that “Brett Kavanaugh reminds me of my father: Enraged by threats to power and entitlement.” She argues that because her father was mean, and Kavanaugh seems mean, he shouldn’t sit on the court. Again, no exaggeration:
But something more was driving my reaction to Kavanaugh. For all my partisan emotion, he was resonating on a level that went well past the political. What was resonating in the pit of my stomach was his rage. It was the same as my father's rage…. It was Kavanaugh’s rage that set me and so many others off. And it was his rage that was disqualifying.
This is absurd. Brett Kavanaugh isn’t her father. End of story.
But personalizing cases that aren’t yours is a way of avoiding the necessities of evidence. If your emotional response matters more than the actual details of a story, you’re doing it wrong. The Left is doing it wrong. And they’re doing it wrong purposefully, and with malice.