Sorry Not Sorry: Alyssa Milano’s Bonkers New Book

By Mark Judge Published on November 3, 2021

Sorry Not Sorry, the new book by actress and political activists Alyssa Milano, is just what you’d expect. That is to say, it’s a Woke liberal sermon. Leftism is holy writ to the pretty and pugnacious Hollywood star. If the DNC said it, she believes it, and that settles it.

I’d like to address one specific episode Milano describes in her book. Because she got all of her facts wrong. I should know. I was there.

They Keep Pulling Me Back in!

As many readers of The Stream know, for over the past year I have been writing a series of articles about my experience during the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation battle of 2018. Stream readers have been patient and supportive as I have revealed what a vicious hit the entire attack was. I’m going to be moving on to write about other topics, but every time I pull away, someone like Milano publishes something so erroneous that I feel compelled to correct the record.

Here’s a quick preamble for anyone who hasn’t heard my story. In fall 2018, the political left and the media tried to destroy Brett Kavanaugh, a high school friend of mine. They used opposition research, extortion threats and an attempted honey trap. A woman named Christine Blasey Ford accused Brett of sexually assaulting her in 1982 when we were all in high school. Ford claimed that I was in the room when it happened. When I was called by Ronan Farrow in September 2018, Farrow accused me of “sexual misconduct” without telling me who the victim was, where it had allegedly happened, or where. The Stasi media told the public that I’d presided over ten gang rapes and bought and sold cocaine. They used as sources people I’ve never met. Oppo research garbage was fed directly to the media, who passed it on without scrutiny.

The story told about us was so bogus that there were actually liberals and progressives who did not believe Christine Blasey Ford. It’s true, Alyssa: There were people on the left who knew Blasey Ford’s story was garbage, and were reluctant to destroy Kavanaugh over it. It will all be described in a book coming out next year.

Milano Reads from the DNC’s Script

Milano’s account of the Kavanaugh hit is predictable. “I was on set when I first heard the name Brett Kavanaugh,” she writes. (Where was she when she first heard my name, I wonder? With Alec Baldwin?). Her hatred for Brett was instant. Kavanaugh was “insanely anti-choice,” and “yet another rich white man who attended private school and was going to be deciding what I could do with my body. I hated it. I vowed to fight against his nomination with everything had.” It was “time to gear up for war.” Never mind that no one knows if Brett is “insanely anti-choice” (I certainly don’t) or that his family did not have wealth until after we graduated from high school.

Here is Milano on Christine Blasey Ford:

Never, never in the world would I condone fabricating false accusations against a man for political gain. Not once. If Christine Blasey Ford’s story did not have so much corroborating evidence and so much consistency, I would not have supported bringing her accusations into the Senate hearings until such evidence came forth. But it was there from the start. She told the same story consistently over the years. She told it to a therapist who had notes verifying it. She told it to her husband. She spoke about the attack to friends over the years. The details remained consistent. She took and passed a polygraph. She did not set out to talk to the press or make her story public, she sent a letter to her senator.”

Milano concludes: “[Ford] did not have a political agenda — she had a patriotic agenda … . This process played out in the very definition of due process — an official hearing.”

Every syllable of Milano’s analysis is wrong.

Playing Coy, Working the System

In his book We’ve Got People, Ryan Grim, who broke the first story about Ford’s letter, notes that Blasey Ford took repeated steps to come forward. She was only asking for confidentiality until she and Senator Dianne Feinstein spoke. Grim:

[Ford’s] letter included a request: ‘As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this confidentiality until we have further opportunity to speak.’ That line would end up being used repeatedly by Feinstein as she claimed that, in fact, Blasey Ford never wanted to come forward, and was only forced out by the media. But that argument ignored that Blasey Ford had already taken repeated steps to come forward, had already told friends she planned to do so, had already come forward to two congressional offices and reached out to the press, and was only asking for confidentiality until she and Feinstein spoke.

No Prosecutor Would Touch This Bag of Garbage

As far as Ford’s story remaining consistent, it helps to turn to Rachel Mitchell, the sex crime prosecutor who was hired by the Republicans to question Ford. From her report:

Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened.

In a July 6 text to the Washington Post, she said it happened in the ‘mid 1980s.’

In her July 30 letter to Senator Feinstein, she said it happened in the ‘early 80s.’

Her August 7 statement to the polygrapher said that it happened one ‘high school summer in early 80’s,’ but she crossed out the word ‘early’ for reasons she did not explain.

A September 16 Washington Post article reported that Dr. Ford said it happened in the ‘summer of 1982.’

Similarly, the September 16 article reported that notes from an individual therapy session in 2013 show her describing the assault as occurring in her ‘late teens.’ But she told the Post and the Committee that she was 15 when the assault allegedly occurred. She has not turned over her therapy records for the Committee to review.

While it is common for victims to be uncertain about dates, Dr. Ford failed to explain how she was suddenly able to narrow the timeframe to a particular season and particular year.

The report goes on to note:

Dr. Ford has struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name.

No name was given in her 2012 marriage therapy notes.

No name was given in her 2013 individual therapy notes.

Dr. Ford’s husband claims to recall that she identified Judge Kavanaugh by name in 2012. At that point, Judge Kavanaugh’s name was widely reported in the press as a potential Supreme Court nominee if Governor Romney won the presidential election.

In any event, it took Dr. Ford over thirty years to name her assailant. Delayed disclosure of abuse is common so this is not dispositive.

Please Support The Stream: Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.

Then there’s this absurdity: Mitchell notes that Ford

does not remember who invited her to the party or how she heard about it. She does not remember how she got to the party. She does not remember in what house the assault allegedly took place or where that house was located with any specificity. Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.

Repeating Stasi Agitprop Is No Second Act, Alyssa

The entire Christine Blasey Ford fiasco was a hit, Alyssa. It was an oppo-research nuclear bomb dropped by the DNC. This was not “the very definition of due process,” it was The Lives of Others and Darkness at Noon. As someone who has written movingly about trauma and pain, you need to do better. As Brett said at the hearing while addressing the senators, your “words have meaning.”

God help us, millions of people listen to you.


Mark Judge is a writer and filmmaker in Washington, D.C.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Like the article? Share it with your friends! And use our social media pages to join or start the conversation! Find us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, MeWe and Gab.

The Habit of Nearness
Robert J. Morgan
More from The Stream
Connect with Us