Liberals Rewrite History to Justify Their #MeToo Hypocrisy
By David Harsanyi
May 5, 2020 8:08 PM
It’s absurd to suggest that Christine Blasey Ford is more credible than Tara Reade.
You can believe whomever you choose in the alleged sexual-misconduct cases of Joe Biden and Brett Kavanaugh, but you can’t revise history to erase your partisan double standards.
One of the most egregious examples of revisionism can be found in a column by the New York Times’ Michelle Goldberg, who employs nearly every attack Americans were warned never to use against alleged sexual-assault victims during the Kavanaugh hearings — questioning their motivations, asking why they didn’t file charges, attacking them for not remembering specifics, etc. And yet, even if we adopt Goldberg’s new standards, Tara Reade still emerges as a more credible accuser than Christine Blasey Ford.
For starters, Ford was unable to offer a time or place or a single contemporaneous corroborating witness. Ford offered no evidence that she even knew Kavanaugh. Reade worked for Joe Biden. Reade has offered a specific time and place for the attack.
Goldberg contends that Ford’s case against Kavanaugh was bolstered by “four sworn affidavits†from witnesses whom she’d told that she’d been assaulted.
more
https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/tara-reade-christine-blasey-ford-liberals-rewrite-history-to-justify-their-metoo-hypocrisy/
