DimWit Politics

Christina Blasey Ford is NOT Credible

 Breaking News

Christina Blasey Ford is NOT Credible

Christina Blasey Ford is NOT Credible
September 21
19:08 2018

More than 25 years ago, as part of my professional consulting business, I developed a credibility analysis. I have since lectured on the subject and even taught a course in credibility. Credibility is a personal asset that can be protected or destroyed.

In many ways, credibility is more important than truth in persuading people. If you have a theoretical 100 percent credibility, you can tell the most audacious lies – and everyone will believe you. If you have zero credibility, you can tell the gospel truth and no one will believe you.

You Might Like
Learn more about RevenueStripe...

The conflicting statements between Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh is a classic battle of credibility versus truth.

In this case, it appears that the truth will never be known. No investigation, no hearing, and no media inquiries are likely to produce a scintilla of hard evidence of what happened at that party. It is and shall be a she said/he said situation. The verdict will be in the minds of individuals who chose to believe Ford over Kavanaugh.

There is an important second level of credibility. It is the credibility of the ancillary witnesses. There is the credibility of the only claimed witness, Mark Judge, who says he is not aware of any such event and has never seen Kavanaugh behave in such a way There is the credibility of Ford’s husband in claiming he was previously aware of the incident. There is the credibility of the therapist who took notes during a session with Ford. And there is the credibility of the Democrats embracing Ford’s claim as fact and the Republicans who believe Kavanaugh. And even the credibility of those 599 of Ford’s fellow alumni who issued a statement at a press conference arranged by Democrat Senator Mazie Hinoro that they believe her.

The fact that all the so-called evidence and support testimony depends on credibility is the reason we see so many attacks on the various individual’s character and motivation.

To say that Ford in not credible – as the headline proclaims — is not to say she is not telling the truth. It just means that all the circumstantial issues surrounding the situation do not enhance her credibility. In fact, they bring it into doubt.

Let’s look at the easy stuff first – the women with the letter at the Hinoro press conference. It was nothing more than a politically motivated dog and pony show. Since the women were not involved or even know Ford, they credibility should be at zero, and by parading them in front of the cameras, Hinoro’s credibility on this issue is also zero.

Mark Judge is a lawyer’s worst nightmare. He was essentially called up to be a prosecution witness and winds up as a defense witness. If this were a criminal trial, that would probably be the end of it.

In prosecuting her case, Ford said that she had told a therapist of this incident a few years back. According to notes taken at the time, there were four boys in the room at the time – the perpetrator and three witnesses. While the physical notes add to her credibility that “something” may have occurred, the fact that she did not reveal the names of the parties significantly reduces the importance of the information. It does not connect the notes to Kavanaugh.

In her letter, Ford said there was only one witness to the alleged assault – and that her therapist had made a mistake. In saying that, Ford is now working defense by impugning the accuracy of her own witness. And if she did say “four” then and “two” now, the credibility of her own 35-year old recollections is questionable. Put this on top of her inability to recall the general time and place of the alleged attack, and she loses a bit more credibility.

The testimony of her husband is not highly credible for obvious reasons.

The pervasive attacks on the Republican members of the committee as all old men is an effort to damage their creditability before the hearing. It plays into certain social biases of the day.

Even the list of demands set forth for her to even appear before the Judiciary Committee undermine Ford’s credibility. Even though this is not a criminal or civil trial, there are standards of justice that should prevail. Ford does not want Kavanaugh in the room. There are good reasons why our laws require accusers to confront the accused face-to-face. The fact that Ford does not want the person she accuses to hear her accusations is a huge blow to her credibility.

She further requests that she testify after Kavanaugh. In other words, she wants Kavanaugh to give his response to her accusations before she officially makes them.

That is just wrong, and another blow to her credibility.

The fact that she wants to delay her testimony even by days seems to be based on the Democrats’ strategy of delay, delay, delay. While a defendant may need time to anticipate and consider possible questions, an accuser should not need to have to ponder what she claims happened.

Then there was her attempt – if real – to have her accusation be carried out in private. That is the stuff of inquisitions and vigilante justice.

Motivation becomes a very important credibility issue. Democrats say that she is telling the truth because she has no reason to lie. That is prima fascia nonsense.

The letter, itself, establishes the motive. She wanted to stop the Kavanaugh confirmation … period. In fact, her motivation is one of the most damaging issues in terms of her credibility.

All those politicians, political partisans and personal friends who say women should be believed based on her words only are proffering for absolute credibility without any evidence. To any fair American, that should be among the most incredible – and the scariest – notion of all.

It is almost inevitable that this hearing will become a crass political circus. Real facts tend to be non-controversial, but this is a fight over credibility in a political realm. That is a whole different matter. If this were held under the rule-of-law with its presumption of innocence until proven guilty, the case would not get past the first request for a dismissal. Unfortunately, it is in the court-of-public-opinion and political intrigue where justice is not the primary objective. This controversy is not about a questionable 35-year-old event. In the minds of Kavanaugh’s opponents, this is about Roe v. Wade, presidential powers and any number of cases that may rise to the Supreme Court. This is just another battle in the resistance movement hell-bent on overturning the 2016 election – and it is all about credibility.

About Author

Larry Horist

Larry Horist

Larry Horist is a conservative activist with an extensive background in economics, public policy and politics. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman, as well as the White House. He has testified as an expert witness before legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress, and lectured at major colleges and universities. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He can be reached at lph@thomasandjoyce.com.

Related Articles


  1. Voice of Reason
    Voice of Reason September 22, 17:25

    Wow! This is getting better than the movie “Pelican Brief” where 2 liberal Supreme Court Justices were assasinated so a millionaire could drill for oil in a protected area. He had the conservative President in his pocket so he would nominate conservative judges to the Supreme Court so they would approve his business agenda. As far as credibility who has MOTIVE to lie, Kavanaugh who is trying to get a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land or a woman who knew she would go through HELL if she spoke up! And, yes she is going through hell and it will only get worse. The conspiracy is being fueled by Ed Whelan and his “it must have been a lookalike” nonsense. Oh, and he is a good friend with Kavanaugh. There is only one other person who knows what happened, Mark Judge and he needs to testify under oath also understanding that if he lies he will spend years in jail. The truth needs to come out so we don’t end up with a horrible man on the Supreme Court!

    Reply to this comment
    • Spirit of America
      Spirit of America September 24, 16:46

      Clearly a Democrat “Voice of Reason” that does not want the Constitution applied to American life.

      Reply to this comment
      • jj
        jj September 24, 20:37

        Clearly a set up done by the Democrats. You have to wonder who is paying for all these people to come forth and more or less lie for this woman.

        Reply to this comment
    • Edu
      Edu September 24, 17:19

      “The truth needs to come out so we don’t end up with a horrible man on the Supreme Court!” THE PROBLEM with your “Voice of Reason” is your bigoted conclusion that this is a “horrible man”. One must wonder, could this also be a “miserable woman”? Nothing like a “prejudgement” and, as it is, there are no witnesses to the “horrible man” is equal to a “miserable woman”. Eauality and all that stuff…

      Reply to this comment
    • MicroDog
      MicroDog September 24, 17:29

      Voice of Reason? More like Voice of Prejudice! As far as your concerned, Cavanaugh is guilty, before you have even heard the testimony!
      Yours is not the Voice of Reason!

      Reply to this comment
    • Bert
      Bert September 24, 19:45

      Or Season 4 of MI5, shot in 2007. Watch it.

      Reply to this comment
    • Bert
      Bert September 24, 19:47

      She has every motive to lie. She is a Democratic activist/feminist and Kavanaugh’s mom was the judge that oversaw Ford’s parent’s foreclosure on their home. She has plenty of motive. Look who she has surrounded herself with….Andrew McCabe’s lawyer.

      Reply to this comment
    • Sick and tired
      Sick and tired September 24, 21:24

      Maybe the woman shouldn’t have waited 35 years and when her political party would gain from such such an accusation. She is SO not credible and like all Democrats, seems to have an issue in following the proper judicial process when it doesn’t suit their needs. She is a liar as well as all those supporting her. Get over the fact that a republican by the name of Trump is our president. Go sit in your crying rooms and get counseling !

      Reply to this comment
    • thorlo6
      thorlo6 September 24, 23:04

      Voice of Lies apparently you never heard of a certain little legal law called Statute of Limitations. The ONLY class of laws that it does not control is murder. This was not murder. This was a party where kids were doing things they were not supposed to be doing, but did them any way. Is any of this prosecutable? Not no but heck no. All this amounts to is whether he or she is creditable. She isn’t by a mile. Judge Kavanaugh is much more creditable than she is. As for all the garbage you spouted, you proved only one thing, you are about as creditable as a little boy with his hand in the cookie jar, chocolate all over his face, saying I didn’t do it, mommy!

      Reply to this comment
      • will
        will September 24, 23:13

        You are dead wrong.

        In Maryland, where the alleged attack took place, there is no statute of limitations on rape or attempted rape. Please consult the Maryland penal code.

        In any case, this is not about criminal liability; It is about Kavanugh’s lying under oath, which is a federal felony.

        Reply to this comment
        • Dee
          Dee September 28, 19:26

          What was the lie he told? His calendars of 35 years are diaries
          over the years of his activities.
          He is honorable, an exemplary record
          and outstanding decisions!

          Reply to this comment
        • jj
          jj September 29, 16:15

          I don’t really think Kavenaugh is lying. But she has been caught in a few. I truly think she was sexually abused but not by Kavenaugh. She is more likely trying to get even because his mother was the judge that put her parents out of their home. Nobody is mentioning that.

          Reply to this comment
        • Michael O'Connor
          Michael O'Connor January 02, 22:06

          We all know Kavanaugh didn’t lie. Maybe you shouldn’t be able to vote or reproduce.

          Reply to this comment
        • JO
          JO April 21, 20:14

          I did not hear a lie.
          What lie?
          Judge Kavanaugh could not have been more credible. Blassey Ford could not have been more guilty of a set up.
          A woman knows when another woman is a liar.

          Reply to this comment
    • Successful Loser
      Successful Loser September 24, 23:43

      They can use you as proof.

      Reply to this comment
    • Doug
      Doug September 25, 01:36

      Laff out loud. A loud advocate of the Gospel of Lies tries hard to find some wisp of fact with which to impugn the established record of Judge Kavanaugh and falls flatly on his misshapen face.

      I love how Christine Kwazy Ford can’t remember any relevant details of her supposed victimization, such as any idea where it occurred and which decade it occurred in, more or less, or anyone who was there (she’s mentioned a handful, and it turned out each one was a lie or figment of Kwazy Ford’s imagination).

      National traumas define a nation and those within it. Everyone remembers where they were and what they were doing when they heard of Pearl Harbor, FDR’s death, our World War II victory, JFK’s assassination, Nine Eleven and more.

      Such knowledge is foundational to memory. It also applies to personal trauma like rape, other sexual assault, near-death experiences, traumatic accidents, even discovery of a partner’s disloyalty or sudden, unanticipated career loss. People with PTSD are afflicted with the circumstances of trauma replaying constantly through their brains.

      If Krazy Ford had been assaulted against her will, she could answer all the relevant questions. But she’s obviously lying. Just as she’s been lying when she said there were four witnesses, the time she said there were two witnesses and the time, when confronted with questions, she changed four witnesses to three. She tries to blame a presumably experienced, licensed therapist for screwing up one of her three versions. Right: we should take her constantly changing oral word over the written testimony of a trained therapist — a therapist she claims is so inept or drunk that she can’t distinguish between two witnesses to a crime and four witnesses, LOL.

      Leftniks, thy name is Goebbelsians.

      Reply to this comment
    • Blulou
      Blulou September 25, 17:29

      Why would you taint your words by calling him a horrible man when all we have is an accusation? You are, along with many others who editorialize, all too willing to add a word here and a word there which slants the aura rather than demonstrating neutrality. That tells me you have a hidden agenda!

      Reply to this comment
    • Fredrick Rehders
      Fredrick Rehders October 09, 03:11

      Consider that Dr. Ford is a psychologist in academia. This exposure is a win-win for her, because if her allegation sticks or not, she enhances her resume, as a counselor to victimized women, as a lecturer on the subject of sexual attacks and remains unsullied, because she was able to escape. The legal fees and her expenses were either pro-bono or prepaid, by other “interested parties. We know her Go Fund Me, really started churning in $$$$, as soon as she went live on TV and who knows, there will probably be a book deal, college speaking circuit and perhaps a political career in store… Boo Hoo, my a$$.

      Reply to this comment
  2. B
    B September 24, 17:16

    It is turning out to be not “he said/she said”, but he said/THEY say as to whether Kavanagh’s behavior was bad in his school and college years. I think this changes things a bit—more than a bit if the additional accusers will speak under oath. There is no statute of limitations in MD for crimes of sexual intimidation or worse; so this could suddenly become a very serious matter.
    I am more focused on the present day, though, and not on whether Judge K was a pig in days past—I think we MUST focus on whether he perjured himself just last week (and since) when he denies it all. That would not be ancient history and would surely be disqualifying—perhaps incriminating.

    Reply to this comment
    • Cutegirl57
      Cutegirl57 September 25, 20:08

      What would make you think he perjured himself?
      He’s denied he had anything to do with her. How is she going to prove otherwise? The four others she’s named have I was also a virgin in HS but did like to have fun, you can do that without being promiscuous. Again you guys always think this is the one, but the problem is -It isn’t !!!
      Will she even show up??

      Reply to this comment
  3. Dennis K
    Dennis K September 24, 18:09

    The trouble with your “voice of reason” is the woman borrowed a page from the Hillary Clinton Democratic dirty tricks play book and spent months trying to sanitize her anti-Trump activism both in the streets and on line. I wasn’t at that underage drinking party Ms. Katz made a beeline for. I don’t know if she went up to that bedroom with those four, no two drunken boys to read the bible, and have no idea who she was fooling around with on that bed. I do find it rather suspicious a hardcore anti-Trump activist with stock in THE abortion pill company and whose home has it very own regression memory therapy office spent the last months attempting to sanitize her social medial accounts. That included wiping her high school yearbook, brags of wild drinking binges and even totals of boys slept with from when she was 11 to 15 years of age. Strange that someone who worked in Hawaii and gave speeches at conferences around the country is suddenly “afraid to fly”. Could it be she’s afraid to testify under oath? Last I read Judge Kavanaugh had successfully passed SIX FBI background checks for various career positions. I only had to undergo two during my government service and those neighbors, employers and friends who mentioned them to me were all surprised at the depth of the questions asked. I wonder how many of the people opining on these lists ever had the pleasure themselves or are they simply pulling their learned opinions out of that dark and smelly place where leftists dwell.

    Reply to this comment
    • Rockville Guy
      Rockville Guy September 24, 18:27

      I also think that events in Kavanaugh’s life since he was 17 (that’s 35 since that time) should be a good indications of what he is like as a man and a judge, and if anything, people grow and mature and become more responsible as he appears to have done. From what I’ve read, he is a good man and should be confirmed.

      Reply to this comment
    • will
      will September 24, 23:11

      “That included wiping her high school yearbook, brags of wild drinking binges and even totals of boys slept with from when she was 11 to 15 years of age. Strange that someone who worked in Hawaii and gave speeches at conferences around the country is suddenly “afraid to fly”. Could it be she’s afraid to testify under oath?”

      a) Ford has demanded to testify under oath.

      b) She is not “afraid to fly”. Like many others, she is claustrophobic, but she flies anyway.

      c) Where is your evidence that she “wiped her yearbook”, bragged of drinking binges and listed boys she slept with from age 11 to 15?

      Please cite references.

      Reply to this comment
  4. Bruce D.
    Bruce D. September 24, 19:03

    This is one big joke, if this did happen and it was so damn important to her to come forward why did she not years ago, it sounds to me she has a vindictive agenda due to he probably dump her for good reasons and she is showing her best side now to get back at him. Boy this country can really waist time chasing a mouse.

    Reply to this comment
  5. Bert
    Bert September 24, 19:44

    And let’s not forget the Dems attempt to bribe Susan Collins to vote no on Kavanaugh, with a $1.3 million campaign donation that they would give her if she votes no. She turned them in. The Democrats have no credibility and have diminshed any true victims’ circumstances by always playing the sexist, racist, homophobic, xenophobic,etc., cards.

    Reply to this comment
  6. Markku
    Markku September 24, 23:00

    We have seen this before. A woman strapping on a credibility suicide vest for a cause. She is willing to go down, taking Cavenaugh down with her. No police report, it never happened. Giving the left a bad name, and they surely don’t need any help there. It is total political BS. Without that police report, she should not even get a hearing.

    Reply to this comment
  7. Spider
    Spider September 25, 02:00

    Considering what she does for a living, i think (therefore i must be right :-)) this is somewhat of a game for her.

    Reply to this comment
  8. Matt
    Matt September 26, 15:33

    This is a total sham orchestrated by the lib democrats…..She was so traumatized by this she waited 36 years to report it, never filed anything with the police, and can’t remember any of the details. She ought to be thrown in jail for slander, making false statements, lying to authorities,

    Reply to this comment
  9. davidlaing
    davidlaing September 30, 13:01

    My wife and I used to be registered Democrats. Since we witnessed the irrational, reprehensible, and unconscionable behavior of many of our Democratic friends, we had no choice but to change our registrations to Republican and independent and to find new friends, painful though that process was. This latest, obvoiusly politically-motivated stunt of Ford’s against Kavanaugh, who appears to us to be a good, upstanding man and fully qualified for a SCOTUS appointment, only served to confirm us in our decision. We deeply regret the trauma that this “search and destroy” mission of the partisan Democrats has perpetrated on the Kavanaugh family, who certainly deserved better.

    Reply to this comment
  10. Texas Fred
    Texas Fred October 09, 03:21

    My previous comment was deleted and all I did was point out several and substantial benefits why Dr. Ford came forward with her unsubstantiated allegations and I never pointed out her father and brothers connections to “The Russian Dossier”. I did mention how it enhanced her resume as a psychologist in academia.

    Reply to this comment
  11. PW
    PW October 23, 13:48

    And yet – he was confirmed. Does anyone know where she is now?

    Reply to this comment
  12. Chicago Style Dog
    Chicago Style Dog November 09, 17:26

    When your friends call you names for voting for trump, and the voice of reason tells me what to do, I can’t help to think the trump derangement has set in big time for the voices of no reason

    Reply to this comment
  13. Dave
    Dave January 20, 02:43

    Unsubstanuated charges should have been thrown out and Ford should be charged with defimantion of character. True abuse must be documented and charges filed but lies must be stopped.

    Reply to this comment
  14. Phoenixphil
    Phoenixphil March 28, 19:25

    I’m so happy to read such a well-described version of the fiasco we watched. It was painful somewhat to see it all unfold. But this response is so true and responsible reporting, I appreciate the “final word” on the subject.

    Reply to this comment
  15. Brendan Sexton
    Brendan Sexton June 09, 22:20

    Mr. Cavanagh may be guilty of no crimes, and maybe a fine judge is some ways, but his behavior during his testimony was immature, petulant, whiny, and ill-tempered. Maybe none of that disqualifies him from a seat–presidential preference rules there–but it surely does not lead me to expect brilliant jurisprudence from him. Unless between now and his first several opinions he manages to grow up. Go back and look at the videos of his performance again. It has not improved with time. I hope he has….or will.

    Reply to this comment
  16. Wally
    Wally July 27, 23:06

    I think that the author should have said “prima facie” instead of “prima fascia”, which latter sounds more like a heretofore unknown medical condition than a principle in law relating to evidence! This is not to challenge his analysis of a strange and greatly extended lapse in memory.

    Reply to this comment
  17. ConservaDave
    ConservaDave September 18, 19:31

    Hasn’t Blasey-Ford perjured herself several times over? Why is it only Republicans who get charged for lying, sometimes unintensionally, sometimes for truped up interpretations of what they meant. She should get the same treatment that was given to Gen. Flynn.

    Reply to this comment

Write a Comment

Click here to cancel reply.

Special Offer

Latest Comments

He avoids the truth surrounding the Civil War. He goes into comedy mode when touchy...

Is it possible the Democratic Party/Mainstream Media establishment has realized the big mistake they have...

30% of Americans are brainwashed sheeple that would bleat agreement with anything Leftist Democrats say--including...

Take a Look!

Don’t Miss This!

12174 - DimWit Politics - Display - 300x250 B - [WEB].txt Displaying 12174 - DimWit Politics - Display - 300x250 B - [WEB].txt.