Thread by @KimStrassel: "1) More big breaking news, which further undercuts the Ford accusation

Thread Reader ^ | 09/22/2018 | Kimberley Strassel

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

I like Kim Strassel's reporting

[thoughtomator]

It was an obvious hoax from the get-go and everyone knows it.

[rainee]

Agree & she’s got some heavy hitter sources.

[CaptainK]

Strassel is amazing. Her thread has important observations about the Washington Post's duplicity.

[Bullish]

...But if so, why did WaPo never correct that narrative?

Uh... Er... Gee Kim, don't you realize they're communists yet?

[davandbar]

At whose house did this “incident” supposedly take place?

I know Ms. Ford doesn’t remember, but it stands to reason that it didn’t take place at the homes of any of the four witnesses, right?

I’m wondering if we are missing a piece of her story. I mean, she’s not claiming that they were at a home where none of the owners/occupants were present, is she?

The Scalia clerk’s story makes the most sense—even if he did backpeddle. The owner was present—not Kavanaugh.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

Please read!

[GSWarrior]

Nobody on the other side cares about any of this.

[TBP]

Excellent.

[CaptainK]

I’m wondering if we are missing a piece of her story. I mean, she’s not claiming that they were at a home where none of the owners/occupants were present, is she?

Interesting point. I'm guessing she's going to say she doesn't know whose house it was because she had been invited to a stranger's houseparty but went with several people she knew.

[pepsi_junkie]

"Before her name became public, Ford told The Post she did not think Keyser would remember the party because nothing remarkable had happened there, as far as Keyser was aware."

This is a good one. She says she was attacked and traumatized for life but she says there was a female friend of hers there (which has been unreported) and Ford has downplayed that because this friend wouldn't have noticed a supposedly traumatized friend fleeing a room as something notable?

Just doesn't work out. First, she's pre-emptively explaining why the only witness on the scene will not know anything happened. Which is fishy. And second, it doesn't even make sense that her demeanor after the event (if it went as she claimed) would be nonchalant enough that a friend would notice nothing amiss.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

[CaptainK]

Ford probably thought her friend would lie for her, take one for the cause, so to speak.

[Alberta's Child]

The Scalia clerk is Ed Whelan. He didn’t backpedal at all. He simply apolpgized for bringing Garrett’s name into the story. I think that was all deliberate — and Garrett is cooperating with Whelan.

[Robwin]

The whole thing, from Feinstein’s secreting the letter to Ford’s inconsistencies, argues that this was all a set up. Unbelievable that anyone of even a modicum of intelligence would buy into any of this.

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

And don’t be surprised if twitter nukes all of this!

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

even if he did backpeddle.

Whelan didn't backpeddle. The apology was for the people he mentioned in his threads, that he didn't mean to make their names public.

But his theory stands.

[Reno89519]

And a small world that Kelser is Bob Beckel’s ex-wife.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Anyone read Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse tweets on this? I would love for his @ss to eat crow. He was tweeting about how brave Ford was and stuff.

For some reason, the snip tool doesn't work or I'd post the tweets here. I'd have to do some more digging.

[FreeReign]

Uh... Er... Gee Kim, don't you realize they're communists yet?

Golly gee, perhaps her question was rhetorical.