Posted on 10/01/2018 12:51:57 PM PDT by Freedom'sWorthIt
Despite an online rumor to the contrary, a building permit from the city of Palo Alto does not contradict Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony regarding a second front door she had installed on her house.
As the Post reported on Tuesday (Sept. 25), a 2008 building permit for the 753-square-foot expansion on Ford’s L-shaped, Eichler-style home includes plans for a new door on the master bedroom.
The story mistakenly referred to the new bedroom door as a backdoor. Conservative pundit Paul Sperry tweeted about the second door on Thursday (Sept. 27), claiming the 2008 date of the permit “raises questions” about Ford’s testimony that the first time she told her husband that U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her in high school was during a May 2012 conversation about their home remodel.
“BREAKING: Palo Alto bldg permit records raise questions about Ford’s testimony she completed an ‘extensive remodel’ of home in 2012 & that this was seminal event that led her down path to coming out against Kavanaugh b/c she needed to add an escape door. Permit was issued in 2008,” Sperry wrote in a tweet that was reposted 6,600 times.
Several conservative blogs have since posted about the 2008 building permit, citing Sperry’s tweet.
(Excerpt) Read more at padailypost.com ...
I found the article I need and have forwarded it to my liberal relative (sister)
from this thread:
Doesn’t Look Good- Biz Was Listed Operating Out of Christine Ford’s Home – Would Explain Second Door
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3692266/posts
THANKS to everyone who gave info.
If Kavanaugh is declined I sure hope he goes after this evil woman.
exactly
WOW—GREAT CATCH!....
It proves she is lying.
She claims those memories were repressed until drawn out by a therapist in 2012.
So ‘putting a second door to have an escape route due to the incident’ is pure BS. Since the building permit to do that work was pulled in 2008
I suppose that would depend on the interactions between the renters and the Fords.
She told me that a “lifelong conservative” had written a “lament over the Kavanaugh affair.”
But that article is so far left wing, it is laughable.
I refuted what she said with a list of the lies from Dr. Fraud’s testimony.
That’s when the door issue came up. I had listed it as a lie.
Exactly, let’s talk about that!
Does Ford have any kids? One of the photos of her house appears to show a kid’s portable basketball hoop in the driveway. If she had growing kids, she might have wanted to add a new bath and bedroom. But why a second front door?
Evidently she does have kids. I don’t know how many or what age and I can’t cite a reference. Just seems that I remember hearing about her “children” during the hearing.
You are correct, of course, insofar as the event pertains to her BS testimony.
On the other hand, there are many who would like to see Ford pay a meaningful price for her duplicity. At a minimum that would include not being able to enjoy her ill-gotten gains via GoFund due to fines and penalties by the IRS and local municipalities.
The claim of an “escape door” is BS.
Someone needs to seek if she had applied for a business license using her house or if there are records of a small rental unit (apartment/office).
I’ve read on here IIRC, that she wanted to run a marriage counseling practice out of her house, so the second front door would make sense if she had the front bedroom converted into an office.
Observation. This whole doors theme seems to run through the whole narrative. I. The alleged attack has the boys locking the br door then her locking the bathroom door, finally running out the front door. 2. Later at Safeway she goes in one door and her mother enters the store via a different door. 3. Finally the thing about her house doors. Why all this focus on doors I wonder? Her reactions are out of proportion to the events she describes which makes me think she was abused regularly during childhood and transferring the panic to this made up scenario which is more acceptable to her.
Only one thing. In the article, it says she needed a entry door off the bedroom because of her anxiety. If that is the case, why would she go through all the renovation to add a second door only to give up the room to Google interns?
Seems to me if she needed an exit path, she would have kept the bedroom for herself, not rent it out. Just asking?
A good possibility.
Good question.
If you are afraid of being attacked or PTSD, why are you taking in boarders? Or renting a piece of your home?
Logic doesn’t follow.
The second front door was the one painted green to match the house.
The original is the one with the covered entry and the door is painted red or orange.
Bingo - that would blow up the PTSD story.
She is not interested in the truth. She wants her way. Period.
You mean my sister is not interested in the truth?
Well, I am trying my best to GET her interested in the truth. I believe if I can get these nuggets of truth to her brain, she might be able to make a life-changing transformation.
But, then, I am an idealist.
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.