Posted on 09/30/2018 12:39:06 PM PDT by Kaslin
WASHINGTON -- Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her in 1982 when they were high school students, came across as genuine and believable as she testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday.
Maybe Ford was telling the truth, but she offered no substantial corroboration for her charge against Kavanaugh.
Ford cannot say when the alleged incident occurred or where. She named three people whom she put at the house party where the misconduct allegedly occurred. All three have denied knowing anything about the incident under penalty of felony. (Ford also testified under penalty of felony.)
Ford has accused Mark Judge, Kavanaugh's friend, of participating in the incident, so she suggested it's no surprise if Judge denied her charge. But the other two, P.J. Smyth and Leland Ingham Keyser, issued statements denying any knowledge as well.
Through her attorney, Keyser, a long-time friend of Ford's from high school, also stated that she does not know Kavanaugh.
Ford has a therapist's notes from a marriage counseling session in 2012 in which she discussed the alleged event without naming Kavanaugh and she passed a polygraph test. But that's not enough to meet the burden of proof.
The media narrative about this story is that women who accuse men decades after alleged abuse should be believed because victims frequently don't report offenses. That takes the burden off the accuser and dumps it on the accused.
By her own account, Ford did not tell a soul about the incident until she got married in 2002. There is no contemporary corroboration.
Asked about Keyser's statement, Ford could only shrug, "Leland has significant health challenges and I'm happy that she's focusing on herself."
"She let me know that she needed her lawyer to take care of this for her, and she texted me right afterward with an apology," Ford added.
Ford also said that she would have preferred to be interviewed by committee staff in California -- somehow unaware that Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, had publicly offered to arrange just that.
At one point, Rachel Mitchell, the Arizona prosecutor brought in to question both Ford and Kavanaugh -- although she disappeared during Kavanaugh's testimony -- asked Ford how she got to Washington.
"In an airplane," Ford replied -- an answer that contradicted her lawyers' contention that she could not testify earlier because of her fear of flying. Ford's answer suggested that her lawyers were working in concert with Democrats to delay a vote on Kavanaugh's nomination in the hopes that they take back the Senate in the upcoming midterm elections.
There's nothing wrong with Democrats trying to delay a confirmation vote, but there is something foul in the character assassination techniques they've used to jam the works.
In their attempts to delay a vote, some Democrats have jumped from demanding an FBI investigation not only on the Ford charge, but also on flimsy stories such as a New Yorker piece about a former Yale classmate who accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself at a booze-filled dormitory party. The New York Times also reported on the accusation while noting it could not corroborate the charge.
A third woman accused Kavanaugh of being at parties at which girls were gang raped -- something it is impossible to believe the FBI would have missed during its six background checks of Kavanaugh.
The very notion that it is acceptable to use someone's high school behavior -- worse, alleged high school behavior -- offends all sense of fairness, as critics judge a man not by the life he has built and the friends he holds closely, but by the cable news tornado that began as an anonymous accusation.
Last year, Justice Neil Gorsuch, President Donald Trump's first Supreme Court selection, did not face charges of sexual misconduct. Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., asked Kavanaugh why Gorsuch didn't face similar allegations if this was merely partisan mischief.
In 2017, the Democrats were stunned. In 2018, after a year of sparring with Trump, they're looking for payback, and they're not exactly particular about how they get it.
Believable?
Yeah, right.
And you journalist clowns believe Bubba the raper too.
What a bunch of lying maroons.
Believable?
Debra Saunders should never be allowed to sit on a jury.
Good grief. All of this “believable, credible” nonsense is just silly. ANY half decent actress, given the script, would be believable!! And credible, which means believable!!! It would be far more unlikely that they’d put out someone unbelievable. How stupid we are!
Did he write this before or after she testified?
A better description:
the whores of soros ....
there is no little irony in regard to the ultra leftist feminists who accused brett kavanaugh of sexual perfidies alleged to have occurred 35 years or so ago, only in form, function and fact to have emerged from the whole fracas as nothing more than whores doing service for and at the behest of george soros. their testimony and averments bought and paid for by soros, and at the behest of their democratic handlers.
several of them soros activists, christine ford photographed arm in arm w/ soros. another, her debts having disappeared. all connected to an activist attorney linked to soros money and causes.
feminist women. bought and paid for. by a man. by one of the richest men in the entire world. services rendered as specified, money and “prestige” the currency of the exchange. it seems that nothing really changes all that much, no matter how gussified. (a) whore(s) (is a) are whores.
i take a certain humor in all that.
john jay @ 09.29.2018
http://wintersoldier2008.typepad.com/summer_patriot_winter_sol/2018/09/the-whores-of-soros-.html
If she talked to an officer like she has talked to the public, she’d have been locked up as intoxicated.
Ah mam, when did this take place? I don’t know...
Where was it? I don’t know...
Who was there? Those people. Those people say they weren’t there...
Lady, step out of the car...
Walk that white line...
What white line?
Put your hands behind your head...
The Miracle of Ms.Ford. She can be on August the 7th, be
1# In the “Mid-Atlantic”: per her letter to Feinstein
2# Be attending her Grandmother’s funeral-—Somewhere
3# Having a Polygraph in Maryland
4# Be at home in California.
Thee attributed miracles, and she can be Sainted.
Changing story in past and present events and obscurred her socialist networking history
I do not find her believable.
Believable? By the standards of idiocy and lunacy.
Actually it was a terrible performance. Anyone with half a brain could she she was lying. Her 8 year old personality act was so over the top. Her victim presentation was contradicted by the way she laughed about lying about flying.
I wish people would stop apologizing for her and for what happened to her. Nothing happened to her. This is Duke LaCrosse on steroids.
It doesn’t matter if she is “believable”, since Kavanaugh is also “believable”.
Believability is subjective.
This is why crimes have statutes of limitations. This matter can be investigated without resolution for the next 40 years.
It never should have been allowed to be heard by Grassley in the first place, for exactly the above reasons.
Any lie is believable if told well.
What makes it the truth IS solid evidence and corroboration.
Being believable means nothing to me. Every year people are bilked out of millions of dollars by con men that are believable!
Ford watched a ton of Teen movies to get her Testimony
These are the same people that believe the Truth Fairy aka B Wacky InsaneO
Anybody who believes that half-baked story is thinking with their uterus.
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.