Posted on 09/30/2018 10:45:59 AM PDT by Kaslin
Conventional wisdom, as dictated by a preponderance of television pundits, says there were no new facts that came out during the testimony of Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh this week. Many also said Rachel Mitchell, the sex crimes prosecutor that questioned Ford, didn't achieve much. I disagree.
There was at least one revelation that was shocking and the repercussions from it could be quite substantial. During Dr. Ford's testimony, she said she didn't know the Judiciary Committee had offered many, many times for her to testify in private and in California. It was shocking that she didn't know this because it was widely reported. References to it appeared in numerous news reports. But this is what Ford said during her testimony:
Mitchell: Was it communicated to you by your counsel or someone else that the committee had asked to interview you, and that they offered to come out to California to do so?
Ford Attorney: I’m going to object, Mr. Chairman, to any call for privileged conversation between counsel and Dr. Ford.
Mitchell: Could you validate that the offer was made, without saying a word? Is it possible for that question to be answered without violating any counsel relationships?
Ford: Can I say something to you? Do you mind if I say something to you directly? I just appreciate that you did offer that. I wasn’t clear on what the offer was. If you were going to come out to see me, I would have happily hosted you and been happy to speak with you out there. I just did not – it was not clear to me that that was the case.
In his column, Greg Jarrett provided the above excerpt from the hearing transcript and quoted Grassley's Sept. 19 email to Ford's counsel. “My staff would still welcome the opportunity to speak with Dr. Ford at any time, at any place convenient to her. Come to us, or we to you. I’m willing to have my staff travel to California, or anywhere else, to obtain her testimony.”
Dr. Ford said she wasn’t clear about what the offer was. Could it be possible that she really didn't know she didn't have to come to DC and testify in public? At least that would explain something that never made sense to me in the week leading up to the hearing. I wondered why, if she didn't want to be in the public eye, would she not accept the offer to testify privately. Grassley said over and over in interviews that they would be happy to take her testimony any time, any place.
And at this same time, anti-Kavanaugh Democrats were going on every cable news show saying Republicans were "bullying" her into testifying. That was the mantra. Democrat Senators knew Grassley had made the offer for her to testify privately in California, and the media who were all running the clips of him making the offer knew about it. Yet they allowed anti-Kavanaugh public officials and pundits to make the bullying charge over and over again unchallenged.
For Ford's lawyers to keep the committee's offer from her, would not only require them to decide to withhold it, but to also keep her away from all news, and from anyone who watched or read the news. If the lawyers did withhold that offer from Ford, they not only committed malpractice, but they viciously duped her into reliving the moment she said had ruined her life. And duped her into reliving it in the most public way possible. And they told her it was the Republicans' fault.
If that happened, that is evil. And it would be proof that the Democrats on the Committee, or at the very least her Democrat lawyers, got what they wanted all along – a televised #MeToo moment that would not only destroy a Supreme Court nomination, but serve as a club to bludgeon Republicans with in the midterms. And they didn't mind using a woman who claims to be a sexual assault victim to do it.
If Dr. Ford wasn't telling the truth about not knowing about the offer, then it was also a very important piece of testimony. As Senator Richard "Stolen Valor" Blumenthal pontificated during the hearing, "False in one thing, false in everything."
It is all bs she was willingly manipulated by the Democrats.
Yes, this is one aspect of the case which is unbelievable.
It was all over the news that they offered to go to her home to interview her, and it could be done in public or in private.
So it strains believability that her attorneys would not have told her about it.
When the smoke clears, I hope there is a clear investigation of this entire SH**storm. Everything from how Christine Ford got a high powered Democrat connected attorney, to how her confidential communication was leaked to the media against her will, to how so many protesters managed to infiltrate the original hearings, should be looked at, in my opinion.
And all of the ways which the Democrats abused this entire confirmation process should be examined.
Apparently to honor the committee’s request to interview her in CA, it would have required her to fly back to CA ...
They also lied as to her location and fear of flying.
She lied she played dumb it’s obvious.
Thank you, Demonrats, for taking US back to your roots.
Nonsense. She was in on it to the point of receiving coaching on how to sound and act like a vulnerable little girl, then lower her head to achieve a voice tone mimicking being choked up, then miraculously back to a clear-voiced little girl.
Quite an acting job.
How can it have been clear as mud to me an ignorant deplorable and yet Mrs Ford one of the smartest women in America, Hillary style, didn’t understand ???
Eh ???
Leftists have a tendentious and contentious relationship with truth and honesty. They are likely the ones for whom the term “hair-splitting” was devised.
They take any fact, any truth, and split away from it just a degree - just a hair to suit their purposes (and I’ve sadly learned that leftists lean toward lies even when the truth would serve their needs). There’s often still a root of truth behind their concoction, but the whole truth has been savaged.
This is their stock in trade - their modus operandi. This is why I never regard a leftist as telling the truth unless it can be independently verified.
Literally spoke, a leftist could tell me the sun rises in the east and I would be compelled to validate their statement.
The “LEFT” needed to have her on TV shown as a victim. Couldn’t happen in a private interview in CA. A Barnum and Bailey circus for all the world to see was needed. It backfired. Tee Hee!
I was told by a judge once that the witnesses testimony was to be stricken, and anything he said was to ignored because he was caught lying directly in one of his answers.
This is the one thing that has bothered me more than anything else about Ford’s testimony, and that was her lying about fear of traveling. The woman flies all over the damn world, is a frequent flier, yet she said she couldn’t come to DC quickly because of her fear of it. To me this was an outright lie and a slap in everyone’s face right out of the chute.
The delay was also orchestrated to see what internet comment sections would reveal and determined how she should respond.
1. How, when, and where did grandma die?
I don’t know if you’ve seen this but it backs your statement neatly...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGxr1VQ2dPI
Reports are that she has been in Maryland since August...
She did not respond that this was the first she had heard of the offer. She just said she wasn’t sure about what the offer entailed, e.g. details.
Mountain out of a molehill.
The reason she didn’t want them to go to her house in CA is that she was in Maryland. Maybe she was afraid of flying home.
Her lawyers should be reported to the bar associations.
Her lawyers should be reported to the bar associations.
If that happened, that is evil. And it would be proof that the Democrats on the Committee, or at the very least her Democrat lawyers, got what they wanted all along – a televised #MeToo moment that would not only destroy a Supreme Court nomination, but serve as a club to bludgeon Republicans with in the midterms. And they didn't mind using a woman who claims to be a sexual assault victim to do it.
If Dr. Ford wasn't telling the truth about not knowing about the offer, then it was also a very important piece of testimony. As Senator Richard "Stolen Valor" Blumenthal pontificated during the hearing, "False in one thing, false in everything.""
_______________
Crimes here ...... by the Democrat criminals.
HELLO FBI/JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.
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.