Posted on 09/30/2018 7:11:58 AM PDT by McQ444
After Christine Blasey Ford gave an almost convincing testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, major plot holes have begun to surface in the statement she gave under oath.
(Excerpt) Read more at nnettle.com ...
She doesn’t speak that way.
If she isn’t on youTube, she still has lectured to plenty of students who would know (always assuming that she actually is a professor).
The Ford’s made their house into a duplex, That is what the second door is for.
She never says in her testimony WHEN the 2nd door was put in. This is all hyperventilating. She has a ton of inconsistencies to be sure. But to reach for this as though it’s some kind of smoking gun is just plain deranged. As deranged as any outrageous claims the left makes. It never shocks me how many narcissists both sides have. It’s clear this author wants some kind of recognition as having been “THE” one who kicked some sort of door down into a massive fraud, and we should all be grateful. Sheesh.
This is pure speculation on my part, but I am wondering if the person who took the polygraph wasn’t CBF.
I have been looking at the picture released from when the polygraph was taken.
The woman in the picture looks heavier than CBF, and her hair is much shorter and lighter than in any other available picture of CBF.
It would also explain some of the questions that wereposed to CBF about the polygraph during the hearing on Thursday.
No way she lectures in that tone of voice.
She’d need a megaphone, and even then no one would listen.
You aren’t going to command anyone’s attention with that pitiful squeak.
I call them her two front holes.
CA licensing does not allow you to call yourself a Psychologist without a license
Weak arguments. She wasn’t credible for many reasons. Credible isn’t “seemed upset on tv”. It’s an analysis of everything. Her story wasn’t credible including the doors because they really were for a different reason. And it was implausible. But not because of the year the work was done.
Biggest mistake in the world was republicans and Fox saying she was credible.
“She was obviously lying about everything, and that pitiful, little innocent mouse voice was the dead give away.”
It is a stock standard, off the shelf persona trotted out at numerous shaky prosecutions and plaintiff’s cases. Truly sickening but bathos is as ubiquitous as corn syrup in our infantile, current culture.
How dare you make a truthful statement on a conservative forum.
No way she surfs and lives a life on the beach in that tone of voice or demeanor. Total fraud.
I agree that photo doesn’t look like the woman who testified. She had 6 weeks to color the hair and lose weight.
Yes. All I could figure was they gave her a full makeover from makeup to hair coloring to extensions.
Back to my theory - it could explain why her family has been mum and are staying totally out of this. They don’t want to be asked anything. They’re hiding something big.
You’re right
That photo doesn’t look like her
Where are the photos/videos that Grassley requested??
It would also explain why every published picture of her has her wearing sunglasses.
Of course. The Stanford website was inaccurate too.
I was furious she insulted BK by referring to him as MR., yet she was always referred to as DR, yet no medical degree. Her attorneys told her to do that.
could you post link?
I have a much more simple theory.
She’s a pro abortion democrat woman.
She’s an evil liar.
They supposedly are going to interview Brian Merrick, her boyfriend of 8 years. Good looking guy who surfs and comes from long time , well established Malibu family since 1940s. Merrick’s father was a well regarded judge who attended mass daily.
Brian’s late sister, Shelly, was a very well known surfer. She never mentioned the attack to Brian.
Bleached blond hair that looks very damaged doesn’t cure itself in 6 weeks.
In fact, I think that when you go from platinum blond to a darker shade, it usually takes a couple of rounds of color to accomplish.
CBF’s hair is several inches longer than the woman in the polygraph picture. (It was curled so it actually looks shorter than it would otherwise)
I would guess that CBF’s hair is at least 3-4 inches longer than the woman in the polygraph picture. Hair just doesn’t grow that fast in 6-8 weeks..
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.