Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kavanaugh Accuser Has Axe to Grind Making Her Not Credible

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kavanaugh Accuser Has Axe to Grind Making Her Not Credible

    Anti-Trump Kavanaugh Accuser Has Axe to Grind Making Her Not Credible
    Washington, D.C. - Democrats are up to their old tricks again. They did it to Clarence Thomas. They did it to Judge Roy Moore. They have done it to President Donald Trump
    .
    Now, Sen. Diane Feinstein has trotted out the latest woman with claims of abuse, this time against Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
    Feinstein reportedly held a letter since July from accuser Christine Blasey Ford detailing an alleged attack on her by Kavanaugh when they were in high school three decades ago. Suspiciously, Feinstein remained silent through the confirmation process and hearings until just days before a scheduled vote on his nomination.
    Judge Kavanaugh categorically denies Ford's allegations.
    Now, news is surfacing that calls into question the credibility of Ford's story, which has apparently changed dramatically over the years. News reports indicate she can't even remember the location or year of the alleged attack. The only witness to the incident, Mark Judge, denies her account.
    But there is more to this than a "he-said, she-said."
    According to documents on file with the Maryland Court System, found by a Twitter user, Ford's parents, Ralph G. and Paula K. Blasey owned property that was in foreclosurehttps://twitter.com/RAMRANTS/status1041545925439545344. The judge who presided over that case was Brett Kavanaugh's mother, Martha G. Kavanaugh. https://twitter.com/RAMRANTS/status/...45925439545344

    "It seems Ms. Ford has an axe to grind with the Kavanaugh family over a property foreclosure. She is also a liberal Democrat who opposes Trump. There is not a shred of real evidence to back up her story. She is simply not believable," said Troy Newman, President of Operation Rescue. "It's shameful that Democrats would try to destroy yet another man's life and drag his family through the mud without cause. It's time for conservatives to stand up to the baseless allegations trotted out by Trump-hating politicians who have no other argument than slander and sexual smear tactics. Operation Rescue stands strong in our support of Judge Kavanaugh's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court."
    Ford, who is a clinical psychology professor at Palo Alto University in California, has a record of political donations to a Democrat fundraising organization called ActBlue and other Democratic causes.
    She even signed a letter in opposition to Trump's border policies. (View letter at Heavy.com.)
    "The allegations against Judge Kavanaugh are just another round of Democrat dirty tricks. We knew they would pull out every nasty tactic in their arsenal to block this man from serving on the nation's Highest Court because their pet issue, abortion, is at stake," said Newman. "We urge the Senate to not to allow the Democrats' gutter-level politics to delay scheduled votes on Kavanaugh's confirmation."

  • #2

    Comment


    • #3
      COMMENTARY

      https://freedomoutpost.com/christine-fords-school-yearbook-detailing-lewd-student-behavior-leaves-unanswered-questions-about-her-kavanaugh-claims/


      Christine Ford's School Yearbook Detailing Lewd Student Behavior Leaves Unanswered Questions About Her Kavanaugh Claims

      For every time one woman makes an unsubstantiated claim in a "she said/he said" incident, one man is falsely accused, and is tried, convicted and sentenced in the media, it detracts from those who have had crimes committed against them and the innocent who are presumed guilty compelled to prove innocence, instead of innocent until proven guilty.

      SUZANNE HAMNERSEPTEMBER 21, 2018






      Most readers of Freedom Outpost know how others and I view allegations of sexual assault and support the appropriate biblical punishment for such transgressions when the allegations have been proven using due process recognized and guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. This brings us to the allegations of sexual assault made by Christine Blasey Ford against Supreme Court Justice Nominee Brett Kavanaugh. As I have stated previously, anyone making an allegation of sexual assault against another deserves to be believed, until proven otherwise.

      So, let's examine what Ford has alleged against Kavanaugh. According to Ford, in a July letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), the incident occurred at a house in Maryland, which she cannot recall whose it was or where it was, when she was 15 and Kavanaugh was 17.
      Brett Kavanaugh physically and sexually assaulted me during high school in the early 1980's… The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others. Kavanaugh physically pushed me into a bedroom as I was headed for a bathroom up a short stairwell from the living room. They locked the door and played loud music precluding any successful attempt to yell for help. Kavanaugh was on top of me while laughing with [Mark Judge], who periodically jumped onto Kavanaugh. They both laughed as Kavanaugh tried to disrobe me in their highly inebriated state. With Kavanaugh's hand over my mouth I feared he may inadvertently kill me. From across the room a very drunken [Judge] said mixed words to Kavanaugh ranging from "go for it" to "stop."

      take our poll - story continues below
      • Should Brett Kavanaugh withdraw over sexual misconduct allegations?

      At one point when [Judge] jumped onto the bed the weight on me was substantial. The pile toppled, and the two scrapped with each other. After a few attempts to get away, I was able to take this opportune moment to get up and run across to a hallway bathroom. I locked the bathroom door behind me. Both loudly stumbled down the stair well at which point other persons at the house were talking with them. I exited the bathroom, ran outside of the house and went home…. I have received medical treatment regarding the assault.

      While Ford claimed there were four males at the alleged gathering, there were only two in the room – Kavanaugh and Mark Judge. When Ford relayed her story to The Washington Post, Ford named the two others, in addition to Kavanaugh and Judge, in attendance; however, the Post did not release those names, but attempted to contact the individuals without success. One of the other two individuals supposedly at the alleged party where the alleged incident occurred was Patrick J. Smyth. All outlets have reported that Ford did not tell anyone about the incident until 2012, when it surfaced during spousal counseling with a therapist.

      According to a report by CNSnews.com, Mark Judge was a former writer at CNS. Through his attorney, Judge issued a letter denying the claims made by Ford. Judge said in the letter, "I did not ask to be involved in this matter nor did anyone ask me to be involved. The only reason I am involved is because Dr. Christine Blasey Ford remembers me as the other person in the room during the alleged assault. In fact, I have no memory of this alleged incident. Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr. Ford's letter. More to the point, I never saw Brett act in the manner Ford describes."

      Smyth, understanding he was named by Ford as an attendee at the alleged party, issued a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee through his attorney. The pertinent statements follow.
      I understand that I have been identified by Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as ‘PJ’ who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post. … I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question, nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.

      “Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh toward women. To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the committee may have.

      Another key player in the alleged accusations levied against Kavanaugh is Ford's former classmate, Cristina King Miranda. In a now deleted Facebook post, Miranda claimed she had heard rumors in school about an incident with few details. She claimed she did not know Ford personally, but remembered her; then, she stated the incident did happen. And, she stated that Ford's "vivid recollection" should be more than adequate for anyone to believe her claim.

      Miranda, in an NPR interview, seemed less than certain of Ford's claim, stating, "That it happened or not, I have no idea. I can't say that it did or didn't." But, she maintains she heard about "an incident involving Kavanaugh at a party." The only individuals purportedly in the room when the alleged incident occurred were Ford, Kavanaugh and Judge. So, how did Miranda hear about this alleged incident at school when both Kavanaugh and Judge deny this happened, attended a different school than Ford, and Ford told no one until 2012?

      According to Maryland State Law, there is no statute of limitation for felony sexual assault and a statute of limitation of one year for "other misdemeanor sexual conduct." The question now is how does Maryland define "felony sexual offense or misdemeanor punished by imprisonment in a penitentiary?" Maryland State Law defining Rape and Sexual offenses can be found here.

      Back to Ford's account. First, her claim is roughly 36 years old – 30 years on first account to marriage counseling therapist. There was no indication she reported the incident to the police, her mother, a friend or other family member. She claimed to have received medical treatment for the alleged assault, but did not indicate whether at a hospital or doctor's office or when that treatment occurred. In most States, health care professionals are required to report incidences of sexual assault to the local law enforcement agency when victims seek medical treatment at an emergency facility, a private facility or physician's office. Ford's account reads as an "attempted" sexual assault and not "actual" sexual assault defined by Maryland law. By her accounts, there would not be any physical evidence to glean during an examination, but the attempt would still be reported.

      There are many questions that are unanswered; such as, was Ford the only female in attendance at the party? Six were presented by Ben Shapiro at The Daily Wire. The question of why Ford did not tell anyone until a therapist in 2012 could be answered by what is contained in the pages of her high school yearbooks in '83, '84, and '85. The yearbooks have since been scrubbed from the internet; however, this site, Cult of the First Amendment, reportedly saved them. While these pages are heavily redacted, there are some full names to be gleaned from them.

      There happened to be a "Mr. Tupper" who taught a class called "Modern European [page cutoff]." Surely, school records could tell us who Mr. Tupper is or was. The pages detail debaucherous, drunken parties, racism, and apparent faculty and parental consent seeing the yearbook almost chronicles the girls' escapades. Perhaps students Caroline Alnutt and Leslie Warren would have some input into the alleged party. Maybe, the one who got lost, Kathy Lamb, would be willing to speak regarding this alleged party at an unknown house in Maryland, on an unknown date, and unknown owner. One picture referenced "Cristina's kitchen." Could this be the Cristina King Miranda? The first names are spelled the same, which is a rather unusual spelling. There is also reference to a Dave Roberts and his friend Randolph. Is it possible these two can shed additional light on a vague alleged party? On another page, mention was made of a Lee Anne Elliott, who could have been part of the "party scene" consisting of Holton-Arms girls, including Christine Blasey Ford, and various boys' school attendees. Surely the women, who were girls then with their full faces exposed, would recognize themselves in the yearbook and come forward to provide additional information, if they possessed any.

      The Holton-Arms yearbook does not paint a pretty picture of this all-girls school where attendees engaged in heavy underage drinking, threw parties at homes where parents were out of town, picked up men on a local highway for entertainment, moved onto sophomore boys to "bring the vitality and freshness of innocent to a relationship." Although the yearbook describes these parties as "unforgettable, they are only a memory lapse for most, since loss of consciousness is often an integral part of the party scene."

      If all of this on the site is accurate, and that can be a big "if", and if these are actual yearbooks from Holton-Arms, the individuals, whose last names were not redacted, would be crucial in providing information, as well as determining who the "Cristina" is captured in the picture labeled "Cristina's kitchen." And, with the unflattering picture painted of students at Holton-Arms during the early 80s, if true, could that be the reason for Cristina King Miranda deleting her Facebook post after realizing she would have to disclose a lot more information than she was prepared to disclose.

      When any individual waits 30 – 36 years to disclose a sexual assault and it coincides with a prominent individual being considered for a high level government post, as a Supreme Court Justice is considered, the accuracy and validity of the claim has to be questioned, particularly, in light of the silence of the victim, failure to report to police, failure of medical personnel who allegedly treated the victim to report the assault to the police, and a long-standing member of the Senate Judiciary Committee "sitting" on a letter for almost 2 months. Moreover, an FBI investigation is now being requested without a crime scene, physical evidence or witnesses. The alleged witnesses named by the alleged victim have emphatically denied those claims.

      Another question pops to mind. How did Kavanaugh pass numerous background checks to attain many of his positions without the slightest hint of this incident being exposed? Did the checks go back that far? If not, did the agency conducting the checks believe high school years irrelevant?

      Why have no other women come forward to corroborate Ford's claims? When Donald Trump and Judge Roy Moore were accused by one woman, several crawled out of the woodwork in an attempt to substantiate the claim by providing their own story. So far, that has not happened with Kavanaugh. Why?

      When someone suffers a traumatic event, two things happen – block out the memory or remember every little detail, including date, time, place, clothing worn by both victim and assailant, smells, sounds, and actions and reactions during the incident. Ford's account lacks details, including the place, the date, and time, in some areas, while providing specifics in others. Unfortunately, there is no police report or medical treatment record to assist in ironing out some details, since medical treatment records are not kept indefinitely.

      There exist some doubts to Ford's credibility since the therapy notes and her account conflict. The behavior on the part of Holton-Arms students during the years in question, documented by those students in a yearbook, if the yearbook is factual and not manufactured, does not paint a demure picture of those teenage girls. Since the incident was disclosed in a therapy session during marriage counseling, could it be that Ford's husband was not aware of the behavior exhibited by the Holton-Arms students? Some spouses have no idea of each other's conduct before meeting and being married. Some individuals will go to great lengths to hide less than stellar behavior to a spouse, even if it means engaging in falsehoods.

      With the Democrats making a fuss about an alleged incident projecting unfavorably on a Supreme Court Justice nominee, why are Democrats not interested in pursuing factual claims, substantiated by a physician's report, against Keith Ellison, a Democratic congressman, a former deputy of the Democratic National Committee and candidate for Minnesota Attorney General? Ellison's victim indicated Democrats did not believe her and threatened to isolate her over the allegations?

      Then, there is victim Juanita Broaddrick, who stated that former Arkansas governor and former President William Jefferson Clinton raped her. Democrats have refused or failed to acknowledge, much less address, her claims. The same goes for the rest of Clinton's victims.

      In all of this political theater, there should not be a dual standard – one for Democrats and one for others. But, that is exactly what is happening here with Republicans going right along with the flow. If Republicans are going to do this, they should call for an investigation of the claims against Ellison and Clinton. No one should hold their breath for it to happen since the Clintons and anyone Muslim is off limits.

      But, the true victims, if this is allowed to go forward, are men falsely accused and women who make factual claims of sexual assault. For every time one woman makes an unsubstantiated claim in a "she said/he said" incident, one man is falsely accused, and is tried, convicted and sentenced in the media, it detracts from those who have had crimes committed against them and the innocent who are presumed guilty compelled to prove innocence, instead of innocent until proven guilty.

      Comment


      • #4
        Reports: Kavanaugh Has Found 1982 Calendar, Detailed Entries Help Clear His Name

        Zach Gibson / Getty ImagesSupreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh testifies during the second day of his Supreme Court confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill September 5, 2018 in Washington, DC. Kavanaugh was nominated by President Donald Trump to fill the vacancy on the court left by retiring Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy. (Zach Gibson / Getty Images)

        BY BENJAMIN ARIE
        SEPTEMBER 23, 2018 AT 5:26PM Share Tweet Email Print
        The last-minute attempt to derail Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation as the next Supreme Court justice has just hit a serious snag.

        Facing damaging but almost completely unsubstantiated claims that he acted improperly with a girl back when he was a teenager, the conservative nominee has dug into his personal archives to defend himself.

        Up until now, the vague accusations made by Christine Blasey Ford had only resulted in a “he said, she said” stalemate. Liberals insisted that Blasey Ford’s story of a bad encounter at a drunken party be believed, while conservatives have pointed out that the nearly 40-year-old claim is impossible to verify.


        Finally, Kavanaugh has presented tangible evidence that the accusation doesn’t hold up.

        On Sunday, The New York Times reported that the judge has found old calendars from the period when the unproven groping allegedly took place — and they appear to support his claim that the incident didn’t happen.

        TRENDING: Bombshell ‘Witness’ Demolishes Leftist Narrative over Kavanaugh Allegations

        “Kavanaugh has calendars from the summer of 1982 that he plans to hand over to the Senate Judiciary Committee that do not show a party consistent with the description of his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford,” explained The Times.

        “The calendar pages from June, July and August 1982, which were examined by The New York Times, show that Judge Kavanaugh was out of town much of the summer at the beach or away with his parents,” the newspaper continued.


        “When he was at home, the calendars list his basketball games, movie outings, football workouts and college interviews. A few parties are mentioned but include names of friends other than those identified by Dr. Blasey.”

        Here is perhaps the biggest nail in the coffin for Blasey Ford’s already-flimsy story: The calendar contains entries for parties, but none of the names included in those entries match the names Blasey Ford listed. Should the Senate confirm Kavanaugh as the next Supreme Court justice?

        Yes No

        Completing this poll entitles you to Conservative Tribune news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
        That any names were included in his calendar entries for parties shows Kavanaugh was remarkably thorough about recording his social schedule.

        That fact is yet another point in favor of Kavanaugh and against his accuser. The woman behind the claim has admitted that she can recall almost nothing specific about the incident, including its location, time, or other people involved.

        The few names brought up by Blasey Ford have refuted her story and indicated that they don’t remember a party with both her and Kavanaugh.


        “Mr. (Mike) Judge has told the Judiciary Committee that he remembered no such incident and had never seen Judge Kavanaugh behave in such a way,” explained The Times, referring to one alleged witness of the drunken party.

        “The only other two people identified as being in the house at the time, but not the bedroom, have also said in recent days that they did not recall the incident. Patrick J. Smyth said he did not remember such a party or see any improper conduct by Judge Kavanaugh.”

        RELATED: Desperate Dem on CNN: Witnesses Denying Ford’s Story Actually Support Her Story

        “Leland Keyser, a former classmate of Dr. Blasey’s at Holton-Arms, said she did not know Judge Kavanugh or remember being at a party with him,” stated the newspaper.

        Accusations of this type are of course serious, and conducting due diligence is part of the vetting process for anyone nominated for a powerful position.

        There comes a point, however, when weak and impossible to prove allegations need to be put to rest. Blasey Ford may genuinely believe that something like the incident she described did happen; she may be telling the truth about a teenage trauma affecting her for decades, too.

        The problem is that there is zero evidence it was Brett Kavanaugh who did what she claims, and no way short of a time machine to prove her accusations.

        By all accounts, Kavanaugh has been a responsible and thoughtful family man and legal scholar for the entirety of his adult life — and that record needs to stand far above one person’s increasingly shaky claim.

        Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly claimed that Judge Kavanaugh’s 1982 calendar does not contain any names identified in Christine Blasey Ford’s claim against Kavanaugh. The calendar does reference Mike Judge, a friend of Kavanaugh and, according to Blasey Ford, a witness to the alleged assault. Judge’s name, however, is not mentioned in reference to any parties, while other names are — none of which have been identified by Blasey Ford. We apologize for the mistake.

        Comment


        • #5
          Here is a testimony of a close friend of Kavanaugh's who went most places with him. He is in a position to know, AND not jealous of his success. Remember Kavanaugh was at the top of his class. How could he be a drunk and still at the top of his class ?
          Former NBA player Chris Dudley says he never saw Brett Kavanaugh 'blacked out' at Yale

          Yahoo Sports Cassandra Negley,Yahoo Sports 12 hours ago Chris Dudley attended Yale with Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and disputes claims of his party boy status.
          Former NBA player Chris Dudley refuted claims made by fellow classmates about Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh this week, saying he “never, ever saw him blacked out” while they were at parties during their Yale days.

          Kavanaugh’s character has come into question following his confirmation hearing and the initial report from Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually assaulted her during a drunken party in high school. Ford initially sent a letter to her senator in July. Two women have since accused him of sexual assault, including Debbie Ramirez. Ramirez said he exposed himself to her during a party their freshman year at Yale.

          Kavanaugh is set to appear Thursday in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

          Media outlets have pored over yearbooks and contacted friends and former classmates, including Dudley, about Kavanaugh’s time in high school and college. Dudley ran for Oregon governor on the Republican ticket in 2010.

          “That’s just not Brett,” Dudley told the New York Times regarding how the allegations don’t align with the Kavanaugh he knows. “That’s not in his character.” Dudley ‘never, ever saw him blacked out’

          Dudley and Kavanaugh attended Yale University as undergraduates between 1983 and 1987 and were close friends, according to Buzzfeed. Dudley went on to play 16 seasons in the NBA, beginning with the Cleveland Cavaliers and ending with the Portland Trail Blazers. Kavanaugh stayed at Yale for law school.

          Buzzfeed journalist Molly Hensley-Clancy talked to former college classmates of Kavanaugh, some of whom characterized the nominee as one who “drank a lot — he wasn’t falling asleep reading a book.” Dudley refuted claims he was a “notably heavy drinker” who often became “aggressive and belligerent.”

          “When he went out Friday nights, I was usually with him,” Dudley told Buzzfeed News. “I never, ever saw him blacked out, never… Brett would drink, but he’d also be the guy who never missed a class. There’s a reason he was top of his class.” Dudley says Kavanaugh is being ‘unfairly maligned’

          The Washington Post also contacted Dudley for its piece on how Kavanaugh’s “choir boy” image interview Monday night on Fox News didn’t sit well with Yale classmates.

          Dudley provided one of WaPo’s dissenting opinions and told the paper he feels his “great friend” is being unfairly maligned.

          “I went out with him all the time. He never blacked out. Never even close to blacked out,” Dudley said. “There was drinking, and there was alcohol. Brett drank, and I drank. Did he get inebriated sometimes? Yes. Did I? Yes. Just like every other college kid in America.”

          Comment


          • #6
            COMMENTARYVIDEOS The One Statement By Dr. Christine Ford That Makes Me Question All Of Her Claims

            This was the one thing that stood out as the most out of place statement in her entire testimony. In fact, she didn't seem to be able to recall the year that it occurred.

            TIM BROWNSEPTEMBER 28, 2018 Dr. Christine Blasey Ford Explains Why She is Testifying Before Congress





            Let me say up front that I am not in agreement that if Judge Brett Kavanaugh is not confirmed that everything goes down the tubes. I don't think he is an originalist or a Constitutionalist. One could question whether he is a historical conservative. I think there are plenty more constitutional and conservative judges that could have been put forward, and I believe the allegations, whether they are true or not, should not even be given any weight considering the amount of time it took for her to actually name the name of Judge Kavanaugh. However, in listening to her testimony today, I was struck by one statement that she made after saying how traumatized she was because of the incident, and that statement was how she responded to Mark Judge when she encountered him six to eight weeks after the alleged attack.

            Here's the exchange:Ford said that she was with her mother and as a teenager didn't necessarily want to be seen with her mother. So, she entered the Potomac Village Safeway grocery store in suburban Maryland through a different door than her mother.

            At that point, she encountered Mark Judge, whom she named as being with Kavanaugh during the alleged attack.

            She claimed, "Mark Judge looked like he was working there, arranging the shopping carts."

            The next thing she said, at least to me, seems to not be a part of how someone who had been victimized by another would behave.

            "I said hello to him and his face was white and very uncomfortable saying hello back," she said. "We had previously been friendly at the times we saw each other over the previous two years."

            "I wouldn't characterize him as not friendly, he was just nervous and not really wanting to speak with me," she added. "He looked a little bit ill."

            Heres' my question: Why was Ford so "friendly"? After all, this is one of her alleged assailants, right? Why would she not quickly divert away from him once she had recognized him? Why did she not respond out of anxiety or turn quickly to get away? Why say hello?

            To me, this was the one thing that stood out as the most out of place statement in her entire testimony. In fact, she didn't seem to be able to recall the year that it occurred.

            Dr. Ford is an American professor of psychology at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine. While some claim that she heads up Stanford's CIA Undergraduate Internship Program, I was unable to confirm any of that through the university because no one in that department would answer the phone nor return my calls. However, we do know that her father works in the Central Intelligence Agency.

            Why is that important? Because in all of this, the CIA is part of the Deep State and the issues of trauma and memory and other facets of Ford's story would be known to her in presenting her claims.

            Grace Panetta at Business Insider writes:
            Judge seemed to reference working at a grocery store in high school in an excerpt from his memoir "Wasted: Tales of a Gen X Drunk" in a paragraph where he discusses "suffering catastrophic hangovers...that make getting through the day an Olympic event."

            "This was never more evident to me than when, to raise money for football camp, I spent a few weeks working as a bag boy at the local supermarket," he wrote in the book.
            Ford said that Judge and Kavanaugh both laughed at her expense as Kavanaugh was on top of her on a bed attempting to remove her clothing.

            She says she made several attempts to get away, but was finally successful. However, I never really heard a reason for her success. Then she claimed to have heard Kavanaugh and Judge talking with others. Yet, when questioned by the Republican special counsel, it seems that her claims didn't quite line up, as she was still in the room at the time, then claimed to have quickly fled the house.

            Now, here's the thing: It strikes me as very odd that someone who had acted in the manner described would then be addressed by the victim in the manner she did. Doesn't it to you?

            It's been nearly 40 years. I have addressed the issue of claims like this before with biblical law and as far as I'm concerned, she has no way to prove any of this.

            I listened as Democrat senator after Democrat senator failed to ask any serious questions of her. Instead, they praised her for her bravery (35 years after the fact, no doubt) and chided the committee for not having the FBI investigate and no doing things a certain way.

            The reality is that in most of their claims, Senator Chuck Grassley pointed to the fact that they had tried to do the very things Democrats accused them of not doing, except the FBI investigation.

            The problem with the FBI doing an investigation though is a simple one: There is no federal crime alleged. There have been no charges brought. As Democrats continually reminded Ford, she was not on trial, the reality is that neither is Judge Kavanaugh. He is being interviewed for a job. That's all.

            The hypocrisy of Senator Mazie Hirono (D) to claim that "character matters" only matters when it's someone she is opposed to. You certainly don't hear her shouting that mantra about former President Bill Clinton or his wife Hillary, do you? You don't hear her making that statement in the context of Rep. Keith Ellison and the women accusing him of abusing them verbally and physically, do you? Nope, and you won't hear it.

            At the end of the day though, I agree with the statement by Hirono. Character does matter. It should matter, but sadly, people have been pulled into an argument about whether or not something took place 35 years ago in a "he said, she said" scenario.

            As far as I know, Kavanaugh doesn't stand accused of such behavior in the past 3 decades, which tells me that he probably has an OK character, at least when it comes to such allegations. However, while character is very important, when one is being confirmed to sit on the Supreme Court, the standard for being in that capacity must not only be one of character, but also be a question of whether or not they are constitutional in their approach to the law. In Kavanaugh's case, he is not. He believes things like Roe v. Wade is "settled law." It is not. It is a ruling and constitutionally, the only body authorized to make law is Congress, not the Judicial Branch. He believes heavily in precedence when it is completely against constitutional law. He is one that sacrifices the protections of the Fourth Amendment to advance the disastrous infringements of the rights of the American people via the War on Terror.

            So, I think that the Ford testimony is nothing more than political theater, and whether or not the incident actually took place or not, cannot be proved and this is nothing but an allegation. It should have been dumped the moment it was made, considering the amount of time that has passed.

            Comment


            • #7
              Ford’s Friend Who Was Allegedly at Party Issues Statement on FBI Investigation

              Melina Mara / AFP / Getty ImagesChristine Blasey Ford testifies Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington. (Melina Mara / AFP / Getty Images)

              By Savannah Pointer
              September 29, 2018 at 3:50pm
              A statement from the attorney representing a friend of Christine Blasey Ford’s indicated once again that she has no recollection of the event that Ford testified to in the Senate on Thursday.

              Ford claimed that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and attempted to rape her at a party 36 years ago. That accusation put Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote on hold until the FBI can further investigate her claims.

              Thus far, the only evidence that Ford has brought in the case is her own testimony. All of the individuals who she claimed attended the party with her and Kavanaugh deny any knowledge of the event taking place.


              One of those people is Ford’s close friend Leland Keyser. Last week, Keyser said in a statement from her attorney, on penalty of a felony, that she didn’t attend such a party and didn’t even know Kavanaugh.

              “Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford,” attorney Howard Walsh III said.


              Walsh spoke out again Saturday, saying that Keyser doesn’t have any helpful information.

              In a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, he said, “Ms. Keyser asked that I communicate to the committee her willingness to cooperate fully with the FBI’s supplemental investigation of Dr. Christine Ford’s allegation against Judge Brett Kavanaugh.”


              Walsh went on to stipulate that “as my client as already made clear, she does not know Judge Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”

              Keyser does, however, believe Ford, she said.

              “Notably Ms. Keyser does not refute Dr. Ford’s account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford’s account,” Walsh said.

              Her belief in her friend didn’t keep Keyser from conveying that “the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate it because she has no recollection of the incident in question.” View image on Twitter
              View image on Twitter

              Shannon Bream@ShannonBream
              BREAKING: letter to ⁦@senjudiciary⁩ Committee from atty for the female Dr. Ford says was at the 1982 party (Leland Keyser)
              9:50 AM - Sep 29, 2018
              Keyser’s statement came in response to the decision by the Senate, which was backed by President Donald Trump, to ask the FBI to further investigate the allegations against Kavanaugh.

              The president’s stamp of approval on the controversial supplemental investigation came with some limitations.


              “I’ve ordered the FBI to conduct a supplemental investigation to update Judge Kavanaugh’s file,” Trump said in a statement.

              “As the Senate has requested, this update must be limited in scope and completed in less than one week.”

              Sarah Sanders@PressSec
              Statement from President @realDonaldTrump:
              “I’ve ordered the FBI to conduct a supplemental investigation to update Judge Kavanaugh’s file. As the Senate has requested, this update must be limited in scope and completed in less than one week.”
              4:56 PM - Sep 28, 2018

              However, many Republicans view the way this accusation has been handled by Democrats to be little more than a stalling technique in hopes of postponing the vote until after the midterm elections.

              During Thursday’s questioning, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, one of the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, called out his colleagues for what he called the “charade” and for victimizing both Ford and Kavanaugh.

              Comment


              • #8

                COMMENTARY New Witness Against Christine Ford: She Was Not A Victim, She Was A Party Animal, Heavy Drinker & “Fast”

                Hard-core drinking and whoring. If Kavanaugh’s yearbook is fair game, so is Ford’s. Just sayin’.

                PAMELA GELLEROCTOBER 4, 2018 Former New Jersey assemblywoman reveals she was a victim of domestic abus






                Little attention has been paid to Ford’s high school yearbook (save for those who worked hard to scrub it from the web).
                [SCRIBE 84, pgs. 144-145, looking back on Blasey’s sophomore & junior years ]
                1982 was a particularly wild year, and Scribe 82 published multiple pictures of minors drinking heavily, beer cans stacked up, liquor repeatedly glorified, “boys, beer and ‘the “Zoo” atmosphere.’” The caption on the right side of the image mocks the faculty and parents, “Come on, you’re really too young to drink.”
                Hard-core drinking and whoring. If Kavanaugh’s yearbook is fair game, so is Ford’s. Just sayin’.
                New Witness Comes Forward Against Christine Ford | Says She Was Not A Victim, Just The Opposite

                The story seems to keep unraveling. The supposed victim of Judge Brett Kavanaugh is now having the tables turned on her. A college friend and conservative contributor for many publications like the Daily Wire, PJ Media and The Federalist have come forward to claim she was never traumatized at all by any kind of sexual assault.

                Christine Ford’s allegations are getting weaker by the day. We reported on Christine Ford’s yearbook pictures disappearing off the internet. Probably a good thing they have, but they all got snagged by some sleuthy trollers.

                DC McAllister, the writer of Catwoman is tweeting away accusations that Christine was quite the party animal in college and not an emotionally wounded victim by any standards. Ms. McAllister claims Dr. Ford would often “hook up” with the guys on Henderson Street and be “drinking at He’s Not Here”, a bar in Chapel Hill, NC.
                Christine Blasey Ford was a classmate of mine at UNC. We graduated in 1988. I want to ask Christine if she remembers partying at Trolls, drinking at He’s Not Here. Hooking up with guys at Henderson Street. Eating at Time Out. Remember those days, Christine? Tell us about them.

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 29, 2018


                It is apparent she is not shy about calling out Dr. Ford. She names places and events very vividly. She even mocks her in various tweets reminding her that she is not a victim.
                Republicans need to stop saying Ford was credible but Kavanaugh is innocent. She cannot be credible with zero evidence. A quivering voice doesn’t equal credibility. Allegation is not proof. Stop being manipulated by a woman’s emotions. You’d think men had learned this by now.

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 29, 2018
                Why do I ask Christine if she partied and slept around? Not to say she deserved to be assaulted because of her own behavior. No, I ask because when you have no evidence, character matters regarding truth. We’re examining Kavanaugh’s character. We need to examine her’s. Period.

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 29, 2018
                I’ve been saying this same thing. Even her emotions didn’t ring true. I don’t know why people don’t see it. But we do live in an age when people are unable to determine the difference between fantasy and reality. We’re entertaining ourselves into stupidity. https://t.co/zw9bJGOPTB

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 29, 2018
                I understand but to me, however the only sincere emotion I picked up on was nervousness about being there and fear over the backlash of her accusations which she never meant to go public with her name revealed. One thing I’m good at is intuition. I trust it. I read people well. https://t.co/OulZKNQdYD

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 29, 2018
                This is excellent: I love how the expert talks about Ford’s “pretty pose” and manipulation of being cute. Body Language - Brett Kavanaugh Hearing Accuser Dr Christine Blasey Ford https://t.co/hr18gvGbxR #*****ute

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 29, 2018
                She talks about flight and fight, cortisol and neurotransmitters about her response to the assault. This is not how a woman who has been attacked talks. They talk about anger, helplessness, fear, pain. They talk about their feelings. This is so bizarre, I can’t even... pic.twitter.com/hI1N0h1f8T

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 27, 2018
                “I didn’t understand why I would need a lawyer.” You’re claiming a crime was committed, lady. Instead you contacted a congressman. Wut??! pic.twitter.com/zb8wuhY7lh

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 27, 2018
                Chris Wallace says Ford’s testimony is credible because she’s emotional. What a fool he is. pic.twitter.com/nyHOBd2naG

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 27, 2018
                Ford’s memory crumbles when asked about what she told the Washington Post. Hm. pic.twitter.com/OYWc6xwvxh

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 27, 2018
                In other words Ford’s fear of flying is selective. pic.twitter.com/NM3xgrloPO

                — DC McAllister (@McAllisterDen) September 27, 2018


                Maybe it is time to have these witnesses testify or at least be interviewed by law enforcement.

                I will now wonder if all those people who gave money for Christine Ford’s expenses on a Go Fund Me page, will now want their money back.

                Comment

                Working...
                X