Courts

6-to-1 Chance GOP Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell Is Actually Merrick Garland In Disguise

Mitch McConnell called Mitchell a 'female assistant,' but she might as well be a double agent, for all she is helping the Republicans.

By Elie Mystal on September 27, 2018 1:42 pm

Rachel Mitchell (Photo By Tom Williams-Pool/Getty Images)

The second round of questions to Dr. Christine Blasey Ford in her testimony in the Brett Kavanaugh hearings have just begun, and charitably, the first round was a disaster for the Republicans. Dr. Ford has come off as credible and composed. Chuck Grassley has come off as a cranky old man who doesn’t respect women.

For lawyers, the focus has fallen on Rachel Mitchell. Mitchell is an Arizona sex crimes prosecutor the Senate Republicans have brought on to impeach the testimony of Dr. Ford. The Senate Republicans were worried about the “optics” of 11 white men questioning a potential survivor of sexual assault. So they outsourced their questions, ceding their time, to Mitchell to do their hatchet work for them.

It has not gone well.

Mitchell is trying to attack Ford like a prosecutor would. She’s putting her under cross-examination. We can debate (and be outraged over) the fact that Dr. Ford is being put under cross-examination at all, but that’s where we are.

The problem is that Mitchell’s cross has been… bad. She’s approaching it like a “regular” cross-examination, slowly building a set of facts that she can later use to impeach testimony by pointing out inconsistencies.

Unfortunately for Mitchell, this is far from a regular process. The Senate Republicans decided to limit questions to five minutes for each Senator. The Republicans are ceding their time to Mitchell, but the Democrats are taking their time. That means that Mitchell has five minutes at a clip to question Ford, before having to stop. The Democrats are using their time to support Ford, elicit emotional testimony, and make speeches in her defense. This all gives Dr. Ford a break, a mental break, from Mitchell’s questioning. It prevents Mitchell from establishing any kind of rhythm or rapport with the witness. It prevents Mitchell from “wearing her down.” You add into the fact that Ford’s own lawyers are objecting when necessary, and Mitchell’s cross has no flow.

Then there’s the problem that Mitchell doesn’t really know the facts. We don’t know exactly when the Republicans started talking to Mitchell, but she couldn’t have had more than a few days to prepare. Mitchell doesn’t know all the facts. Many of her questions are fishing.

All of that might be overcome if the facts that Mitchell did have were relevant towards impeaching Ford’s testimony. So far, the biggest “point” from Mitchell has been to question Dr. Ford’s fear of flying.

Yeah, you heard me right. This is a hearing on whether Brett Kavanaugh tried to rape somebody, and the thing that has jumped from Mitchell’s questioning is whether Christine Blasey Ford likes to fly. Apparently, she has a fear of flying, and was reluctant to fly to D.C. for testimony. But Mitchell was also able to elicit testimony that Ford is willing to get on a plane to… go on vacation.

Republicans apparently think this is important. Listen to your friend, Don Trump Jr.

I guess the implication is that if Ford is lying about being afraid to fly (she does not appear to be lying about being afraid to fly), then she’s lying about… almost being raped? I don’t know. I don’t speak Republican, and I certainly don’t speak Trump Children.

The other point from Mitchell has been to try to impeach Dr. Ford’s polygraph. Which is weird. Most knowledgeable people know polygraphs are trash. So, establishing that Ford’s polygraph might have been trash doesn’t seem like that big of a deal. But, focusing on the polygraph kind of brings up the problem that BRETT KAVANAUGH HAS NOT TAKEN ONE! I mean, maybe he has and he just won’t tell us till his testimony? Like, that’s got to be why Mitchell is spending so much time on it, because the otherwise the whole line of questioning isn’t just stupid but actively unproductive.

Look, Rachel Mitchell is in a tough spot. She’s being asked to prosecute somebody, without sounding like she’s prosecuting somebody, without, you know, AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE FACTS.

But, you still have to ask: what kind of person would put themselves in that position? What kind of lawyer would take the impossible job Mitchell has taken on?

Things are bad for Rachel Mitchell right now.

We’ll see if things get better for Mitchell once she has an opportunity to throw softball questions at Brett Kavanaugh.

Elie Mystal is the Executive Editor of Above the Law and the Legal Editor for More Perfect. He can be reached @ElieNYC on Twitter, or at [email protected]. He will resist.