OR Manipulated OR Both
John R. Houk, Blog Editor
After Christine Blasey Ford’s Senate passionate/heartfelt testimony,
I was convinced she was sexually assaulted. I even had a wait-n-see
moment to wait for Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony to decide if he was the
culprit. That is how undeniably believable Ford came across.
Then Kavanaugh testified and I went back to believing
someone assaulted Ford but NO WAY IN H-E DOUBLE HOCKEY STICKS was
it Judge Kavanaugh.
AND THEN the examination of details of her testimony
including Blasey Ford’s own past has convinced me she is either a FREAKING LIAR
or a manipulated tool of Dem Deep State OR perhaps even a bit of both.
Now below are a series of articles that show what I mean
including a few embedded article titles that I simply don’t have time or
patience to cross post.
JRH 10/4/18
In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping
in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.
************************
Ex-Boyfriend of Ford Raises Speculation That She Gave
False Statements To Senate
By Sara Carter
October 03, 2018 3:15 PM EDT
As the Senate
Judiciary members grapple with testimony provided by Christine Blasey Ford
last Thursday regarding accusations that she was attacked by Supreme Court nominee
Judge Brett Kavanaugh 36 years ago, a letter from a former long-time boyfriend
is beginning to raise serious doubt about her credibility and truthfulness to
the lawmakers about her past.
On Wednesday, Senate Judiciary Chairman Charles Grassley
(R-IA) told reporters that the FBI, which was tasked by the committee to
conduct an expanded investigation into the incident, is almost done with their
investigation. The FBI has already done six full background checks into
Kavanaugh (who is also facing allegations from two other women), none of which
ever discovered the allegations Ford. The expanded investigation also includes
allegations from Deborah Ramirez, who said Kavanaugh exposed himself during the
time they attended Yale University. The New York Times, however, could find no
one to corroborate her claims and discovered that Ramirez had been calling
former classmates saying she couldn’t remember if it was Kavanaugh or someone
else.
“I think it’s very close,” Grassley said. “I have not talked
to the FBI, and I don’t think I should talk to the FBI. People that seem to
know said it’s getting close, but when, I haven’t heard.”
The ex-boyfriend, whose name was removed from the letter at
his request for privacy, sent the letter to Grassley’s committee saying
“I do not want to become involved in this process or current investigation, but
wanted to be truthful about what I know.”
The former boyfriend established that he had a long-time
relationship with Ford from 1992-1998. He had been friends with Ford since the
early 90s and then dated Ford off and on from “approximately 1992 to 1988,”
according to his letter.
The boyfriend detailed Ford’s friendship with a woman named
Monica L. McLean, “who I understood to be her life-long best friend. During
that time, it was my understanding that McLean was interviewing for jobs with
the FBI and the US Attorney’s Office. I witnessed Dr. Ford help McLean prepare
for a potential polygraph exam. Dr. Ford explained in detail what to expect,
how polygraphs worked and helped McLean become familiar and less nervous about
the exam. Dr. Ford was able to help because of her background in psychology,”
the letter stated.
During last Thursday’s testimony to lawmakers and under
questioning by Republican-appointed Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell,
Ford said that she never spoke to her attorneys or anyone ever about “how to
take a polygraph” test. In fact, she was emphatic in telling Mitchell she
“never” participated in such a discussion.
Mitchell, a 25-year prosecutor from Arizona who served as
the Deputy County Attorney in Maricopa County Attorney’s Office in Arizona, has
already
released a memo to the Senate questioning the
contradictory answers and failed memory lapses given by Ford. Mitchell, who
went through a litany of what often appeared at times boring questions,
established a laundry list of 9 reasons why Ford’s testimony failed to meet any
standards to prosecute Kavanaugh if such a case were ever to be brought to
court.
Mitchell is an expert in the field of sex crimes. She is
also is the division chief of the Special Victims Division, which handles cases
of domestic violence, sex crimes, and auto theft and she took a leave of
absence to come to Washington last week for the questioning.
Mitchell stated in her memo to the Senate Judiciary
Committee, “A ‘he said, she said’ case is incredibly difficult to prove.
But this case is even weaker than that. Dr. Ford identified other witnesses to
the event, and those witnesses either refuted her allegations or failed to
corroborate them. For the reasons discussed below, I do not think that a
reasonable prosecutor would bring this case based on the evidence before the
Committee. Nor do I believe that this evidence is sufficient to satisfy the preponderance-of-the-evidence
standard.”
The ex-boyfriend also called into question some of the same
issues that Mitchell pointed out were inconsistent in Ford’s testimony.
Mitchell questioned Ford’s excuse “fear of flying” based on testimony she
provided to the committee.
In Mitchell’s memo, she noted that Ford “maintains that she
suffers from anxiety, claustrophobia, and post-traumatic stress disorder
(PTSD). The date of the hearing was delayed because the Committee was informed
that her symptoms prevent her from flying. But she agreed during her testimony
that she flies ‘fairly frequently for [her] hobbies and … work.’ She flies to
the mid-Atlantic at least once a year to visit her family. She has flown to
Hawaii, French Polynesia, and Costa Rica. She also flew to Washington, D.C. for
the hearing.”
The boyfriend noted that he and Ford kept a long distance
relationship after she moved to Hawaii ‘sometime around 1998.” He stated that
she had no apparent fear of flying and no fear of small spaces.
He said “while visiting Ford in Hawaii, we traveled around
the Hawaiian islands including one time on a propeller plane. Dr. Ford never
indicated a fear of flying. To the best of recollection, Dr. Ford never
indicated a fear of flying. To the best of my recollection, Dr. Ford never
expressed a fear of close quarters, tight spaces, or places with only one exit.
I assisted Dr. Ford with finding a place to live in (redacted) CA. She
ended up living in a very small, 500 sq. ft. house with one door.”
To this day, no-one has come forward to corroborate Ford’s
recollection of the night she alleges Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her at a
high school party, while his high school friend Mark Judge stood by. The
witnesses provided by Ford have all denied attending this party and have no
recollection of Ford’s account.
Ford’s close high school friend Leyland Keyser stated in a
letter through her representative, Howard Walsh that “simply put, Ms. Keyser
does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a
party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.” Keyser
also said she never met and doesn’t recall ever meeting Kavanaugh.
++++++++++++++
SORRY FOR BLURTING IT OUT, BUT CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD IS A
LIAR
And her story isn’t credible.
October 3, 2018
One thing I learned watching the witch trial of Brett
Kavanaugh on MSNBC, is that a prestigious university in New York has a Vice
President for Social Justice. (She is an MSNBC commentator). Her Orwellian
title is but one of many signs that our country is already on the threshold of
1984; the Judiciary Committee circus is another.
In her comments on the hearings, the Vice President for
Social Justice, Maya Wiley, was clearly out for blood, and had no interest in
evidence, due process, or the facts. She is also of course both a woman, a
woman “of color” and a lesbian. In other words, she occupies three of the top
rungs in the hierarchy of the oppressed - all bombs waiting to blow up in the
face of any straight white male who stumbles into their cross-hairs.
Any fair-minded observer of the Kavanaugh proceedings would
have noted that no one – Republican or Democrat - so much as laid a glove on
his female accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, even though she had come forward to
destroy the life of an exemplary individual and his family. No one, dared to
do so. Call this feminine or victim privilege. Kavanaugh’s high school
yearbooks with tales of drinking were fair game, but Ford’s – which openly talk
of the girls’ sexual promiscuity and boast of girls passing out at drinking
parties - were not. Nor were her extensive political connections to the
anti-Trump left, the pro-abortion movement, the Democratic Party and even the
law firm involved in the Steele dossier.
Yes, the sexual crime prosecutor established that Ford lied
to the committee when she said she couldn’t come to Washington for the hearings
because she was afraid of flying. In fact, as she admitted under questioning,
she has frequently flown all over the world for pleasure. But no one actually
confronted her about this. For example, no one asked her directly, “If you were
brazen enough to lie to a congressional committee about this, why should we
believe you in regard to anything else?"
Yes the same prosecutor gently asked Ford why she thought
her best friend Leland Keyser, whom she claimed was present at the party and
would corroborate her story, in fact refuted it, saying that she was never at
such a party, and the one in question never happened. Ford gave a transparently
evasive answer saying her friend had (unspecified) health issues, while never
explaining what they were or why that should cause her to contradict what Ford
had claimed.
Actually, all the alleged witnesses to the party where the
incident was supposed to have taken place have denied that they were there. The
one witness who was allegedly in the room where she claimed the incident took
place says he wasn’t there. But none of the senators had the temerity to
confront her directly with the obvious question: why should we believe your
inflammatory claims about Judge Kavanaugh given that no one you have named
supports any piece of your story? Moreover, no one asked her “How do you feel
about besmirching the reputation of a stellar individual, and bringing
incalculable pain to his family by advancing claims that no one corroborates?
How can you say that you are 100% sure an incident happened, when you can’t
remember anything else accurately about the evening? Did your lawyers instruct
you to say 100%? What actually did your lawyers prompt you to say in your
prepared statement?
No one said to her: you signed a letter attacking President
Trump’s border policies and were able to get the anti-Trump ACLU to publish it;
you contacted an anti-Trump paper, the Washington Post, to make
your charges; you turned first to Democrats who are sworn to “resist” –
actually sabotage –the Trump presidency and his judicial nominees; and you
accepted attorneys recommended by Democrats, who are activist Democrat,
anti-Trump lawyers. Can we conclude, therefore, that there might be a political
motive behind your decision to bring up these character-ruining accusations
about a rough-housing you allegedly received 37 years ago when you and
Kavanaugh were too young to even vote?
No one dared to ask these questions or to vigorously pursue
problematic areas of her testimony and behavior. Instead everyone expressed
sympathy for her and her pain in testifying, and said how credible she sounded
– even though, unlike Kavanaugh’s presentation, hers was vetted and coached by
lawyers, and even though it amounted to character assassination if her memory
was false.
At the bottom of these asymmetries lies the fact that
despite half a century of women’s “liberation” and “hear me roar” proclamations
the feminist attitude towards women is still Victorian. Women are fragile
violets who wilt before the raised voices and impassioned claims of male
innocence. But this image is a one way mirror. Let a moment go by and then,
when they or their defenders are on the counter-attack, hear them roar. Senator
Mazie Hirono put it mind-numbingly well: “Men should just shut up and stand up
(for their female accusers of course).”
This is the ideologically constructed atmosphere, which
makes a latter-day witch trial like the Judiciary hearings possible. Christine
Blasey Ford’s story is unbelievable on its face. She claims that after the
alleged incident at the alleged party, where three of her friends (who have
denied it) were allegedly present, she fled. Here are some questions that were
not asked:
How did she get past those
friends without them seeing her and her distress?
How could she not have warned
her best friend, Leland Keyser, that there were two potential rapists in the
house, if that’s what she thought?
How did she get home?
How did her best friend not ask
her the next day why she left without her, or what happened?
Why was this such a trauma she
could not tell her best friend? One can understand why she would want to
conceal from her parents that she had gone to a drinking party with boys, but
her friend who was allegedly there? She doesn’t even claim that she was raped,
only that she was frightened in an incident that could have happened at any of
the drunken parties she might have attended as described in her high school
yearbook.
On the face of it, Christine Blasey Ford’s story is not only
unsubstantiated. It isn’t credible. The destruction of Brett Kavanaugh’s
reputation is the equivalent of a modern-day lynching – the third that
Democrats have orchestrated in the last twenty-seven years. It’s despicable. At
least Republicans like Lindsey Graham have laid that charge at the door of the
Democratic culprits who worked so hard to accomplish it. But, as a nation, we
have obviously not reached the point where we can grant women true equality by
confronting their lies and their reckless accusations with the same candor and
frankness we would if they were coming out of the mouths of
men.
++++++++++++++++++
Christine Ford’s ex-boyfriend submits sworn
detailed letter refuting her testimony: She lied. Repeatedly.
October 3, 2018
Christine Blasey Ford — the liberal professor who leveled
decades-old, 11th hour groping accusations against Brett Kavanaugh — better
hope she doesn’t end up in jail for perjury after Kavanaugh inevitably gets
confirmed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
In a sworn declaration to the Senate Judiciary Committee,
Ford’s ex-boyfriend said she once coached her “lifelong best friend” on
how to pass a polygraph test when the friend was interviewing for jobs
with the FBI and DOJ.
This directly contradicts Ford’s sworn testimony at her
Senate hearing, when she claimed she never helped anyone prepare for a lie
detector test.
“During some of the time we were dating, Dr. Ford lived with
Monica L. McLean, who I understood to be be her life-long best friend,” Ford’s
ex-boyfriend wrote. “During that time, it was my understanding that McLean was
interviewing for jobs with the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s Office.”
The declaration continued: “I witnessed Dr. Ford help McLean
prepare for a potential polygraph exam. Dr. Ford explained in detail what to
expect, how polygraphs worked, and helped McLean become familiar and less
nervous about the exam.”
This is relevant because Democrats have repeatedly bragged
that Christine Blasey Ford is credible because she passed a polygraph test.
Polygraphs are inadmissible in court because they are unreliable, since even
the biggest liars can be coached to pass them.
In his sworn statement, Ford’s ex-boyfriend (whose name was
redacted) also said she never once mentioned Brett Kavanaugh or said she was a
victim of sexual misconduct during the six years they dated, from 1992 to 1998.
“During our time dating, Dr. Ford never brought up anything
regarding her experience as a victim of sexual assault, harassment, or
misconduct. Dr. Ford never mentioned Brett Kavanaugh,” the letter states.
Ford’s former boyfriend also shot down her bogus claims that
she had a pathological fear of flying and was claustrophobic.
Ford had insisted at her Senate Judiciary hearing that she
developed claustrophobia because Brett Kavanaugh had groped her in 1982,
when they were in high school.
Ford also delayed her Senate Judiciary hearing for a week,
claiming she was petrified of flying. But her ex-boyfriend said Ford had no
problem living in a “very small,” 500-square-foot apartment with one door. He
said she even gleefully boarded a tiny propeller plane when they went
island-hopping in Hawaii.
The ex-boyfriend said he dumped Ford after she cheated on
him, and said she admitted that she fraudulently used his credit card to make
purchases a year after they broke up.
Meanwhile, Democrats have laughably pinned their hopes of
derailing Kavanaugh’s SCOTUS nomination on an apparent lying, thieving grifter.
In a scathing letter that referenced the ex-boyfriend’s sworn
declaration, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley demanded that
Ford’s attorneys turn over her therapist notes (which she shared with the
Washington Post but not with the Senate).
Grassley noted: “These notes have been repeatedly cited as
corroboration even while written 30 years after the alleged event and in
apparent contradiction with testimony and other public statements regarding
several key details of the allegations…Please provide the requested materials
to the Senate Judiciary Committee immediately.”
Meanwhile, Fox News host Brit Hume said the Democrats have
shifted their line of attack from “Kavanaugh is a rapist” to “Kavanaugh drank
beer in college” to questioning his “judicial temperament” because the sham
allegations of Christine Ford and Julie Swetnick have imploded.
It appears that the Blasey Ford
allegations are receding. The Swetnick allegations appear to have almost totally collapsed. The nomination was
made, the Democrats came out almost unanimously against it, immediately before
any hearings.
Then, during the course of
the hearings, his record as a judge — what you would think would be the most
important thing — went almost unremarked upon. No questions about it, no
criticisms, none of it.”
“Then, after the hearings were over, these unverified
allegations leak out…You almost want to laugh at [how desperate and ridiculous
the Democrats are].”
Samantha Chang
is a politics/lifestyle writer and a financial editor. She is a law school
graduate and an alum of the University of Pennsylvania. You can find her on
Twitter at @Samantha_Chang.
++++++++++++++++++
HUGE! Christine Ford Published 2008 Article on
Self-Hypnosis Used to Retrieve and “Create Artificial Situations
By Jim Hoft
October 1, 2018
This may be because if the memories were revealed through
hypnosis they would be “absolutely inadmissible” in the court of law in many
states, including New York and Maryland.
There were also accusations that Christine Ford was under
a hypnotic trance during her testimony.
Now this…
One of Christine Blasey Ford’s research articles in 2008
included a study on self-hypnosis.
The practice of self-hypnosis is used to retrieve
important memories and “create artificial situations.”
+++++++++++++++
__________________
Ex-Boyfriend of Ford
Raises Speculation That She Gave False Statements To Senate
_________________
SORRY FOR BLURTING IT OUT,
BUT CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD IS A LIAR
________________________
Christine Ford’s
ex-boyfriend submits sworn detailed letter refuting her testimony: She lied.
Repeatedly.
_______________________
HUGE! Christine Ford
Published 2008 Article on Self-Hypnosis Used to Retrieve and “Create Artificial
Situations
