Did we mention things just seem to be getting worse and worse for Ford because WHOA NELLY, do they ever.

So, about that letter …

Wait, let’s try that again.

THAT letter.

You know, the one Feinstein keeps refusing to hand over to Republicans without it first being censored? The one where Ford made her accusations against Kavanaugh?

Turns out she sent the letter to Rep. Anna G. Eshoo, NOT Feinstein.

Now, why oh why would Ford have done that?

In the coming days, Ford's decision to send a letter to Rep. Anna G. Eshoo, a House member with zero jurisdiction over or authority to investigate presidential nominations, rather than Sen. Dianne Feinstein, who has explicit jurisdiction, is going to get a lot more scrutiny. pic.twitter.com/oLG0IndQTL — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) September 23, 2018

As it should.

Why wouldn’t she send the letter directly to Feinstein, who absolutely had jurisdiction?

A plain reading of 18 USC 1001 suggests that in the matter of a specific presidential nomination pending before the U.S. Senate, statements made to a House member on that matter may not be covered by the statute's prohibition on false statements. pic.twitter.com/gla8uiBqUE — Sean Davis (@seanmdav) September 23, 2018

Well well well, whaddya know?

Sounds like she may have been trying to avoid getting busted if her allegations were proven false.

that she made the statement in a way that would avoid 18USC 1001 liability… and that somehow she knew that this would be the case. Unlikely for a statistics professor. unless someone told her. — JasonAten (@JasonAten) September 23, 2018

*adjusts tinfoil hat*

Is that why Feinstein has not handed the letter over to the Grassley? — Cathy Buffaloe (@cathybuffaloe) September 23, 2018

Could be.

What average citizen would know this? Even after your explanation, post, I had to read tweets to get a feel for it. — LowQualitySupporter❌ (@AmericaRising17) September 23, 2018

Fair, this editor had to read it about a dozen times to really GET IT (why does legalese read like stereo instructions written in Japanese?).

So who told her? And why?

"We will stop this nomination by any means necessary" ~ Chuck Schumer

Lock them all up! Now it's time to involve the FBI! — 🇺🇸Laurie 🇺🇸 (@Jeaf79Lynn) September 23, 2018

That would explain why it hasn’t been given to the Judiciary Committee yet Almost as if this was all thought out — Larry Hawk (@szeminska61) September 23, 2018

Almost like it was a political smear campaign from the get-go.

So, it was ALL contrived? Senate Judicial Committee staff took statements from those named by Ford. All 4 say event didn’t happen, in writing from their own personal attorney under penalty of felony. It’s over. Nothing else to investigate. Confirm BK. Ford doesn’t need testify. — Conservative Texan (@ConservaTex) September 23, 2018

Just vote.

Related:

GAME OVER! Kimberley Strassel shares WaPo reporter’s email further DISCREDITING Ford (and the media!)

Aren’t they supposed to #BelieveWomen? New development could be BAD (like REAL bad) for Keith Ellison

Biggest self-own EVER?! Michael Cohen sends very MOVING and inspiring tweet … about himself (Lanny Davis to the rescue!)