Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kavanaugh’s accuser recovered her memory at the time Dems were panicked Romney would win
americanthinker.com ^ | 9/17/18 | Thomas Lifson

Posted on 09/17/2018 4:25:45 AM PDT by cotton1706

Bookworm has noticed a very odd coincidence: after telling no one her story about the alleged incident for decades, she suddenly remembered and spoke about it in couples’ therapy in 2012, when leftists perceived the possibility that Mitt Romney, ahead in the polls, would win the presidency and appoint Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. She writes:

In 2012, Romney ran against Obama. Up until his 47% gaffe, Romney was doing well. He actually had a shot of winning.

For the Democrats, as has been the case since Bork, having a Republican in the White House, especially with the ever-aging but never retiring Ruth Bader Ginsburg a perpetual risk, raised the specter of a conservative judge getting appointed to the Supreme Court. With that in mind, one Twitter user, who must have an amazing memory, remembered something interesting he’d read back in 2012:

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: accuser; chrissyford; christineford; dems; dncstrategy; elections; fraud; kavanaugh; kavanaughaccuser; kvanaugh; liars; libel; memory; recovered; smear
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last
To: mewzilla

I’m afraid the American people are no longer moved by the term “under oath.” They have seen it violated so often on police shows. The real problem we face is the American people themselves.


21 posted on 09/17/2018 4:53:33 AM PDT by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.

If that were the case the uniparty would have won the last election and we wouldn’t have Trump.

We have Trump because the rule of law, among other issues, bloody well does matter.


22 posted on 09/17/2018 4:56:28 AM PDT by mewzilla (Has the FBI been spying on members of Congress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Political Junkie Too

Have most young men fumbled around grabbing a young girl in their youth? Yup.

Have they done it with another guy in the room? Nope.

Do I believe something happened? Maybe about 30%. Do I believe her story? 0%. And that is giving her the benefit of the doubt. A Boy Scout like Kavanaugh would have stopped the second she pushed back in the slightest.


23 posted on 09/17/2018 5:00:21 AM PDT by Vermont Lt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: odawg
I keep hearing people grant the woman credibility in saying that she wanted to maintain anonymity.

My suspicion is that anonymity only lasted until the check cleared.

24 posted on 09/17/2018 5:05:57 AM PDT by Fresh Wind (Trump: "I am Batman!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

So we don’t know what day but it was summer. We don’t know where it was, but it was at a house. We do know Kavanaugh was very drunk and laughing maniacally and she was in the house wearing a swimsuit. And we do know Mark Judge was there.

But Mark says he wasn’t and never saw anything like this. So this is not a he says she says. There is a witness. And the witness says it never happened.


25 posted on 09/17/2018 5:11:14 AM PDT by poinq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Is this judge a Romney guy?


26 posted on 09/17/2018 5:16:56 AM PDT by Democrats hate too much
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

I sent this to Drudge tipline. If any Trump subscribers could send to his private email or both.


27 posted on 09/17/2018 5:20:38 AM PDT by PghBaldy (12/14 - 930am -rampage begins... 12/15 - 1030am - Obama's advance team scouts photo-op locations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

And the Kavanaugh’s were certainly on Ford’s radar. Brett Kavanaugh’s mom was the Maryland judge who foreclosed on Ford’s parents’ home in 1996.

CHRISTINE BLASEY-FORD MOTIVE: REVENGE – KAVANAUGH’S MOTHER JUDGE AGAINST PARENTS IN FORECLOSURE CASE 1996
The mother of Brett Kavanaugh was a MD district judge in 1996, was the judge in a foreclosure case in which Ford’s parents were the defendants.

https://archive.fo/69gvf#selection-511.0-511.714

Martha G. Kavanaugh, the mother of Brett Kavanaugh was a Maryland district judge in 1996. In an amazing coincidence, Martha Kavanaugh was the judge in a foreclosure case in which Christine Blasey-Ford’s parents were the defendants. Now it all becomes clear. Blasey-Ford is going after Brett Kavanaugh, not because of what he did in high school. Instead, Christine Blasey-Ford is going after Brett Kavanaugh out of spite and revenge for a case rulled on by Brett Kavanaugh mother. Martha Kavanaugh, Brett’s mother was Montgomery County Circuit Court judge from 1993 until she retired in 2001. During a 1996 foreclosure case, Martha Kavanaugh ruled against the parents of Christine Blasey-Ford in a foreclosure case.

The foreclosure case against Paula K. Blasey and Ralph G. Blasey was opened on August 8, 1996. The case number is 156006V.

Isn’t it kind of amazing that all the media reports today didn’t mention this little conflict of interest for Blasey-Ford?


28 posted on 09/17/2018 5:22:35 AM PDT by Travis McGee (EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: justlittleoleme

How clever.......a hat for the highly educated pu$$y. So does one have to have a masters to be able to wear this or just a hyphenated name?


29 posted on 09/17/2018 5:22:52 AM PDT by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Facebook censors must be working overtime. This transparently fake Kavanaugh issue may be just the spark to bring conservatives to the polls in droves this November. I say use it against them.


30 posted on 09/17/2018 5:23:04 AM PDT by Real Cynic No More
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

At this stage there is no upside to having public testimony under oath. Consider BJC lies under oath and not under oath did not stopped his fanatics from believing him and denouncing anyone opposed to him. With less intensity, the same could be said for Anita Hill... people still believe her, make a movie about her, despite the fact that her testimony could not be verified.

It should be process over substance now. DiFi is to blame if there is no hearing. She had ample opportunity but failed to raise this issue in a timely fashion. That was her decision, and with all the hearings, materials, background checks, etc, it is an abuse of process to obstruct the due process that is also owed to the nominee. To allow the allegation at this hour is very suspicious, in fact a dirty political trick by a veteran Senator who knows better. To reward such behavior makes any future GOP nominee very uncertain process and may actually chill getting qualified people to serve. The Dems need to be held to the BJC Standard that they set during his impeachment, including failing to address the claims of Juanita Broaderick.

The modern day Salem Witch Trials must end. I hope the GOP Senators are strong enough to stand up to this institutional corruption.


31 posted on 09/17/2018 5:25:44 AM PDT by Susquehanna Patriot (Evolution is the long term solution to Global Warming. So let's party while we can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt
In practical terms, how do you remove a one-piece swimming suit UNDER clothes worn OVER the one-piece swimming suit? If Kavanaugh could do THAT, he's a frickin' swordsmith genius and would be a big-man-on-campus!

In the best Hillary voice: "Was it a horny little freshman girl or a junior boy out for a good time that evening?!?! What difference, at this point, does it make???"

32 posted on 09/17/2018 5:28:08 AM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Susquehanna Patriot
An easy upside: the alleged vic refuses to testify under oath.

I think there's a decent chance she refuses.

But if she does go under oath, then lards her statement with believes and feels...

You know what, just subpoena her. Swear her in, and let the chips fall where they may.

And then prosecute.the living 💩 out of anyone committing perjury. Do that, and we'll have a lot less of this cr@p.

33 posted on 09/17/2018 5:32:45 AM PDT by mewzilla (Has the FBI been spying on members of Congress?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: IrishBrigade
‘I get so steamed reading about the cake accusations,’

yeah, it all sounds like a recipe for disaster...

LOL! That was a good one!

34 posted on 09/17/2018 5:35:56 AM PDT by txlurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

“A Boy Scout like Kavanaugh would have stopped the second she pushed back in the slightest.”

How can a guy know unless he tries? That’s the game. A simple no thank you and a gentleman ceases and desists.


35 posted on 09/17/2018 6:00:14 AM PDT by Bonemaker (invictus maneo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla

Why?
She’ll just lie like a rug.
And any attempt to actually get the truth out of her will be portrayed as nasty misogynistic right-wing men attacking a helpless woman.


36 posted on 09/17/2018 6:03:43 AM PDT by Little Ray (Freedom Before Security!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All

Her brother Ralph III worked for Baker Hostetler for 15 years. Baker Hostetler was/is Fusion GPS’ law firm. She’s affiliated with “Indivisible” in Silicon Valley. Pre-scrubbed her FB and LinkedIn, then lawyered up with a lefty DC feminist lawyer before flipping the switch.

https://mobile.twitter.com/jolievieille/status/1041568593677361152


37 posted on 09/17/2018 6:14:45 AM PDT by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Little Ray

And several Republicans on the committee will to a-scared to challenge her statement


38 posted on 09/17/2018 6:17:23 AM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: cotton1706

Still not sure why 47% was a gaffe. Truth is truth.

Gotta stop accepting their premises which are lies.


39 posted on 09/17/2018 6:18:14 AM PDT by Dr.Deth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
(giving her) the benefit of the doubt

I've learned a lot over the years and none is more important than to never give the benefit of the doubt to a leftist, political operative. They are trying to destroy our nation and heritage and they must be exposed and destroyed.

40 posted on 09/17/2018 6:28:18 AM PDT by JonPreston
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-47 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson