Why no hard questioning of Christine Blasey Ford?

It is time for someone to ask Mrs. Christine Blasey Ford the hard questions versus the hands-off softball questions to her to date. America needs answers and expansion on, for example: How long after your diving practice was it until you arrived at the party? Was the one-piece bathing suit under your clothes wet? If not, why not? You use the plural when referring to "parties." How many more did you attend before and after the event? Was it your normal routine to occasionally attend a party after diving? Was this the one and only beer you consumed that year? Did your parents know you went to parties? At age 15, why did you go to parties? In other words, what did you expect to find at these parties? Let's get all the facts on both sides! What is fair for the goose is fair for the gander!


Ford’s plausible testimony warranted FBI probe

Mona Charen’s column, “The truth ends up as a casualty in hearing” (Opinion, Sept. 30) makes no sense. Most of Mona’s column is filled with non-sequiturs and alleged facts that are not really germane to the issue at hand. The real question is, is it more likely than not that a drunken 17-year-old would do what Mrs. Ford alleges and then deny it many years later; or that a professional woman in her 50s would just make this up out of thin air and fortify her case by making statements years earlier to a therapist and others who would support her claim? Also, she has taken a polygraph test and is asking for an FBI investigation. This does not prove guilt, but considering this is a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, it certainly is sufficient grounds for a thorough FBI investigation.