Rachel Mitchell: ‘he said she said’ cases are tough to prove. ‘This case is even weaker than that’

Canada Free Press

Suddenly, the left is not so interested in screaming “women must be believed” at the top of their lungs. Mitchell is know nothing hack, a shill for the GOP, a liar, and a monster doing her master’s bidding.

Today, anyone who had a problem with her style is probably going to be pretty quiet.  Last night, she released a lengthy memo detailing her thoughts on the matter as a prosecutor.  …And this morning the left is freaking out.

It begins….

“In the legal context, here is my bottom line: A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove. But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard.”

Suddenly, the left is not so interested in screaming “women must be believed” at the top of their lungs. Mitchell is know nothing hack, a shill for the GOP, a liar, and a monster doing her master’s bidding. Democrats are desperately ignoring the facts contained in the memo and are instead attacking its author – because they know this looks really, really, bad for them.

Read Mitchell’s complete report at SCRIBD.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Government, News, Politics, The Culture, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Rachel Mitchell: ‘he said she said’ cases are tough to prove. ‘This case is even weaker than that’

  1. auscitizenmom says:

    Well……….there you have it. LOL The reason the Dems didn’t want a professional to do the questioning.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. hocuspocus13 says:

    I was surprised but of course extremely happy that Mitchell wrote about Mitt Romney and 2012

    Because people…

    That’s when the charade all began!

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Col(R) Ken says:

    The charade began with the Bork nomination. Then Clarance Thomas nomination, who GHBush wanted too drop. The Demrats pulled the Anita Hill out of the woodwork.

    Liked by 5 people

  4. Lucille says:

    Here’s one article I found today which brings up the important fact that Ford remembers the boys laughing. That was my contention the other day…that the laughter is possibly the key.

    Blasey Ford’s Redemptive Lie
    By Jonathan F. Keiler – October 1, 2018

    In the court of public opinion and the U.S. Senate, Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s problem is that Christine Blasey Ford has a narrative and he does not. He has only the forceful and angry denials of an innocent man. But a counter-narrative does exist, based upon Ford’s own words and actions, which goes to explain why and how she made these false accusations….

    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/blasey_fords_redemptive_lie.html

    Liked by 1 person

  5. Lucille says:

    Thread by @drawandstrike: “When they get in your faces & shriek “YOU MUST BELIEVE ALL WOMEN!” get right back in their faces and yell back: “WHY SHOULD I DO THAT?!
    https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1046855446462640128.html

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.