Posted on 09/23/2018 8:45:46 AM PDT by bitt
Okay—so, the Brett Kavanaugh drama is heating up. Christine Blasey Ford has lobbed a grenade at Judge Brett Kavanaugh, accusing him of a drunken episode in which he attempted to sexually assault her at a party some 30-plus years ago. Kavanaugh was 17-years-old. It’s a serious charge—and it should be dissected before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Give Ms. Ford her day to detail this episode…if she can find the time. The committee and Ford’s lawyers, one of which, Debra Katz, is publicly anti-Trump (she’s and more of an operative) are still trying to hash out the details. Par for the course, right; it’s all about getting that delay. Delay for the midterms in an effort to run out the clock on this Supreme Court nomination. Democrats think they can increase their weak position on the Hill by weaponizing a possibly false charge to win more clout in D.C.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
The author is wrong about this charge being serious and worthy of being heard before the Senate of all places. If it were serious, she should have called the police. If it were serious, there would be witnesses and proof. If it were serious there wouldn’t be a huge conflict of interest on her part. The whole judicial system is in limbo because a political hack decided she was going to level a THIRTY year old charge at a Supreme Court nominee and she’s actually being taken seriously.
From an embedded tweet within the article:
Carrie Severino
Final witness in alleged Ford/Kavanaugh incident weighs in for Kavanaugh. So every single one of Ford’s supposed witnesses — all of them, including her female friend/classmate — conclusively refute her account. It doesn’t add up.
If this is, in fact, the "final witness," then we still haven't found out whose house the party was at. How do high school teen-agers have a party at a house that none of them are related to?
There is still one more person out there who has not been named. That person must be the teen who lived at the house.
-PJ
Kimberley Strassel's well-reasoned analysis might be compelling evidence that someone other than Christine Ford has been pretending to be Ford in these "interviews" with the Washington Post.
This struck me last night. Has anyone really seen this Dr. Ford person? Is all of this sham being done by a bunch of lefty lawyers and the Washington Post?
At this point I am wondering if the DNC is really holding this woman hostage somewhere and using her name in this fraud.
So how does the author or even Grassley possibly claim this is a serious charge?
Not with me, I'm sick of reading about this farce.
The more cray-cray her story gets, the more votes Kavanaugh gets.
People have turned off television and news programs. The stations spend 30 minutes telling what they are going to tell you later. It is an over and over
news cycle that has become damaging to ones psychological balance.
i know where to look online for my news, read what I want.
Question I have for Ms. Ford: Where was your accusation
regarding the teenage encounter involving Brett Kavanaugh when first appointed to the Court; after the first 100 Written Opinious of Judge Kavanaugh, after second 100 Written Opinions of Judge Kavanaugh and after the third 100 WO of Judge Kavanaugh? Just in the last six months you want to bring up a 36 year old incident that happened to you and you believe it involved the Judge so he is not worthy of the seat on the Supreme Court. Too little too late in my humble opinion, you should move on Ms. Dr. Ford.
Many no longer even watch the news on TV or anywhere...FOX News articles and videos are on social media but you don’t have to go to the main FOX page to read or see the video article. It is likely most did not know they had a poll. Another issue is my husband and I no longer participate in polls of any kind. After Trump was elected we decided polls were the same as fake news. I know many others have said they don’t do polls any more either or they lie to pollsters. I have read many posts here where people say they don’t do polls of any kind. The likelihood of a poll being accurate has to decrease when many refuse to take part in a poll.
It is TIME for an FBI investigation of the ACCUSER!
Here's an equally simple explanation for this confusion.
The WaPo had two motives to intentionally misreport the story, turning one boy into a girl.
1. The optics of four boys and one girl at a party is very bad for the girl, especially if she's going to make a claim of sexual assault. They needed to balance the attendance to three boys and two girls to make it "dates" and a friend.
2. The boy who was turned into a girl has to be the teen who lives at the house. He likely invited three friends over, and one of them brought a girl he just met. The girl that the WaPo placed at the party denies being at a party with Kavanaugh. She wasn't there because the WaPo replaced the boy resident with a girl who knew Ford.
It seems credible to me that the WaPo is covering up the one piece of information that would unravel this whole plot, namely the person who lived at the house. Naming that person puts a location to the event, which then opens up the rest to specific questions.
The WaPo turned the boy into a girl to protect the scheme against Kavanaugh from unraveling with the only investigable fact.
-PJ
I should have guessed as much. The intergenerational nature of the DS is so predictable.
But when I saw she ran the CIA undergrad program at Stanford that told me more than I needed to know.
Or . . . told dear ole dad or her boyfriend(s) and had them "counsel" the bad guy. That's how it would have been handled in my day - or if my sister had told me.
Her unfortunate death BEFORE testifying would serve as the Democrat's rallying call to all women during the midterm elections.
See above.
very interesting idea!
very interesting idea!
AGREED! AMEN!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.