During her testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford said she was not aware of the multiple offers Chairman Chuck Grassley made to sent Committee staff to California to interview her, something she would have preferred over a public hearing.
Here are the numerous instances Grassley offered to accommodate Ford:
Sept. 19:
A letter from Grassley to Ford's attorneys, Debra Katz and Lisa Banks, states, "...my staff would still welcome the opportunity to speak with Dr. Ford at a time and place convenient to her."
Sept. 21:
Committee staff sent an email to Katz that said, "[t]he Chairman has offered the ability for Dr. Ford to testify in an open session, a closed session, a public staff interview, and a private staff interview. The Chairman is even willing to fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Ford and you in California, or anywhere else, to obtain Dr. Ford’s testimony.”
Grassley also tweeted out the following message, saying she could go to the Committee or they would come to her.
Five times now we hv granted extension for Dr Ford to decide if she wants to proceed w her desire stated one wk ago that she wants to tell senate her story Dr Ford if u changed ur mind say so so we can move on I want to hear ur testimony. Come to us or we to u
— ChuckGrassley (@ChuckGrassley) September 22, 2018
Sept. 22:
Committee staff emailed Katz and Banks again to reiterate that “committee investigators are available to meet with Dr. Ford, anywhere and anytime, if she would prefer to provide her testimony outside of a hearing setting.”
Sept. 27
During her hearing with the Committee, Ford was asked if her attorneys reiterated that the Committee offered to meet her in California. Her lawyers objected but Ford answered anyways.
"I just appreciate that you did offer that. I wasn’t clear on what the offer was," Ford said. "If you were going to come out to see me, I would have happily hosted you and had you—had been happy to speak with you out there. I just did not—it wasn’t clear to me that that was the case.”
The Committee believes Ford's attorneys failed to do what was best for their client, something they say goes against the American Bar Association's (ABA) professional conduct rules.
"Clearly, Dr. Ford’s attorneys did not tell her that we could protect her privacy and speak to her in California. The ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct require a lawyer to consult with his or her client about the means to be used to accomplish the client’s objectives—including informing the client of settlement offers," the Committee said in a statement. "It is deeply unfortunate that Dr. Ford’s Democratic-activist lawyers appear to have used Dr. Ford in order to advance their own political agenda. A lot of pain and hardship could have been avoided had Dr. Ford’s attorneys informed her of the committee’s offer to meet her in California to receive her testimony."
Dr. Ford's attorney's could have spared her the pain and agony of not testifying in front of the nation. The fact that they didn't tell her about these options makes you wonder, what is their ulterior motive? Are they simply using Dr. Ford as a pawn to push their political agenda and keep Judge Kavanaugh from being confirmed?