05-14-2019 01:57:15 PM -0400
05-09-2019 05:01:30 PM -0400
05-09-2019 01:41:48 PM -0400
04-18-2019 10:46:35 AM -0400
04-18-2019 10:18:40 AM -0400
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.


Why Didn't Dianne Feinstein 'Believe Survivors?'

The Democrats and liberal organizations rallying protests against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh would have Americans believe they are on the side of #MeToo, believing alleged victims of sexual assault. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has vocally pushed this narrative. Feinstein, however, refused to act on Christine Blasey Ford's sexual assault allegations when she could have done so privately, suggesting that she did not believe the allegations, or at least preferred to use them as a political tool instead.

Ironically, after Christine Blasey Ford finally agreed to testify on Thursday, Feinstein demanded that the hearing be cancelled, due to the new allegation from Deborah Ramirez that broke Sunday evening.

"Thursday's hearing should be canceled in light of a disturbing new allegation of sexual misconduct against Brett Kavanaugh. The FBI must investigate ALL allegations," Feinstein wrote on Sunday night.

This declaration only underscores the idea that Feinstein and her Democratic colleagues are cynically weaponizing Ford's allegation — and now that of Ramirez as well — rather than seeking justice and comfort for the "survivors."

Feinstein received a letter from Christine Blasey Ford in July, before Kavanaugh's testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee. She did not ask Kavanaugh about the allegation during the hearing or during private meetings with him.

Feinstein claims she sat on the letter for six weeks in order to honor Ford's request for anonymity. The senator could have discussed the letter with Kavanaugh in a private meeting with him or at a closed-door discussion between Kavanaugh and the full committee. Her decision not to do so suggests either that she considered leaks inevitable or that Ford's allegation was not credible enough to merit investigating.

Shortly before the vote on Kavanaugh, the letter's existence was leaked to the Intercept, and Feinstein sent it to the FBI for investigation. The entire circus surrounding the sexual assault allegations could have been avoided, had Feinstein asked Kavanaugh about the letter in a private setting and if the committee had decided to investigate the matter privately.

Oddly, Feinstein has continued to keep the testimony secret from the committee led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

"Senator Grassley has been much more respectful of Dr. Ford than Senator Feinstein has, because rather than sitting on the claims for six weeks, he scheduled a hearing," Carrie Severino, chief counsel at the Judicial Crisis Network, told PJ Media in an interview on Sunday. "He actually has taken her at her word, rather than Feinstein who has treated her as a political football."

"Democrats spent almost all of last week chasing cameras, going on TV, holding rallies, shouting about the need for an investigation. Meanwhile, Senator Grassley and the committee were actually performing an investigation," Severino added.

As for the repeated demands for an FBI investigation, they are a clever dodge. As Grassley explained in a letter, the FBI conducts a background check as a courtesy to the Senate, but the duty of advising and consenting on a Supreme Court nomination belongs to the Senate, and to the Senate alone. Furthermore, the Democrats on the committee have decided not to get involved while the Republicans carry out the ongoing investigation, which the Democrats then attack as partisan!

Furthermore, when witnesses give testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, they do so under the penalty of felony if they lie.

"The Democrats could have participated and had the opportunity to question the witnesses," Severino pointed out. "Instead, they boycotted those in order to create a media spectacle surrounding the event — the height of a cynical ploy."

"They are not interested in an investigation," she argued. "They are interested in delaying and defeating this nomination by any means necessary."

If instead, Feinstein had submitted the letter "for investigation during the proper course of things, during the confidential sessions, that could have spared Dr. Ford, Judge Kavanaugh, and everyone involved, so much pain and suffering — and in many cases irreparable damage to their reputation."

Rather than follow the Senate protocol, Feinstein weaponized the letter so "it was purposely timed in a partisan manner for maximum impact as a last-minute smear campaign."

Many have noted — Grassley prominent among them — that Feinstein's actions set a dangerous precedent for sexual assault accusers who wish to come forward anonymously. This sorry episode teaches women in that precarious situation that their claims will not be taken seriously, but rather will be twisted into a political weapon.

Worse, this precedent is likely to damage the credibility of accusers, as sexual assault itself becomes tainted by these blatant political ploys.

What woman who wanted to remain anonymous would choose to tell her story if she knew that her testimony would be disregarded for six weeks, then pulled out at the last second as a political weapon?

If Dianne Feinstein is so adamant that the American people should "believe survivors" of sexual assault, why did she not believe Christine Blasey Ford? Why do she and her fellow Democrats remain silent on Karen Monahan's accusations against Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.)?

Make no mistake, the protests Monday were yet another political ploy to these Democrats.

Follow the author of this article on Twitter at @Tyler2ONeil.