Quantcast
Skip to main content
NOW OPEN: The Insider Shop



This site works best in IE9 and up and in other modern web browsers

Complaint Filed Against Christine Blasey Ford’s Lawyers

While the name “Christine Blasey Ford” has quickly disappeared from the Left’s vernacular now that she no longer serves a political purpose, that name is going to cause her lawyer’s a headache for months or years to come. If you thought Ford’s lawyers helped orchestrate a political circus, a new complaint filed by Judicial Watch concurs with that assessment.

The complaint filed against Blasey Ford’s lawyers by Judicial Watch

According to Judicial Watch’s press release, they just filed a complaint with the Board of Professional Responsibility of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals against Ford’s lawyers Debrah Katz, Lisa Banks, and Michael Bromwich. The complaint alleges that the three violated the rules of professional responsibility in how they represented Ford.

As you may remember from her testimony, Ford was unaware that she could’ve been interviewed at her own home instead of before the Senate, and this was because her lawyers withheld that information from her. Ford told Chuck Grassley, “I wasn’t clear on what the offer was. 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.” In other words, their actions make sense if they were using her as a political pawn, rather than treating her as a valid client.

Because of that withheld information, Judicial Watch alleges:

“Katz, Banks, and Bromwich violated the following District of Columbia Rules of Professional Conduct: Rule l.4(a) – A lawyer shall keep a client reasonably informed about the status of a matter and promptly comply with reasonable requests for information. And Rule 1.4(b) – A lawyer shall explain a matter to the extent reasonably necessary to permit the client to make informed decisions regarding the representation.”

Ford should be held accountable, too

While its Katz, Banks, and Bromwich coming under legal fire, its a tragedy that their client isn’t as well. There were seemingly more lies and inconsistencies in Ford’s testimony for one person to keep track of – but fortunately, we at The Political Insider tracked them.

  • She said she couldn’t come to testify before the Senate because of a fear of flying – only to admit that she flies all the time.
  • She claimed to be dumbfounded by the process of how a polygraph works – but according to an ex-boyfriend, she coached a friend on how to game one ahead of a job interview with the FBI.
  • A week before her testimony she told the Washington Post she feared a Kavanaugh nomination back in 2016 when she was describing him as a ‘federal judge’ to friends. Why? “Because Kavanaugh was among those mentioned as a possible replacement for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.” Only one problem: Kavanaugh was not among those mentioned as a possible replacement for Scalia.

As for the specifics of the narrative she presented (all sourced from Rachel Mitchell’s report):

When Was the Party?

  • In a text to The Washington Post, Ford claimed the assault happened in the “mid 1980s”
  • Ford told Dianne Feinstein in her July letter that the assault happened in the “early 1980s”
  • By September 16th, Ford narrowed down her timeframe to the “summer of 1982”

Who Heard Who?

  • In her letter to Feinstein, Ford says she heard Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge talking to other party-goers after the assault, as she hid in the bathroom. In her Senate testimony, she says she couldn’t hear them downstairs.

How Many Party-goers?

  • Ford’s claim under oath that there were “4 boys and a couple of girls” at the party contradicts prior accounts from Ford and her lawyers. In her letter to Feinstein, Ford claimed that there were “four others” present. She also told The Washington Post that there were “four boys at the party.

Who Attended the Party with Ford?

  • Ford says she attended the party with friend Leland Keyser, who Ford apparently left alone in the house she was assaulted in. Keyser has no recollection of the party or any assault. We’re also supposed to believe that Keyser didn’t follow up with Ford as to why she suddenly disappeared from the party, and that the alleged attempted assault was never mentioned to Keyser.
  • Ford blamed Keyser’s refutation of her claims by stating that “she [Keyser] has health problems and needs to be taken care of.” Something tells me we wouldn’t be hearing about Keyser’s supposed health problems if she corroborated Ford’s account.

Her inconsistent claims contradict claims made under oath, and for that reason, it’s really no surprise that Democrats don’t want her story examined any more than it already has been. It’s as if Democrats attempted to carry out a drive-by shooting on Kavanaugh’s character, and are fleeing the scene before their credibility can be examined.

Advertisement