Kavanaugh hearing confirms the existence of the Deep State


Bob Livingston writes an editorial type piece drawing various associations displaying the existence of a Deep State in American government all related to the public view of the Blasey-Ford/Kavanaugh hearings.

 

Livingston pulls no punches. Livingston goes further in some credible speculation showing a GOP Establishment involvement in this clandestine Deep State that even implicates now Associate Justice Kavanaugh due to some past questionable extra-legal actions. Actions that by the way raised eyebrows in a minority of Conservative pundits questioning Kavanaugh’s Originalist credentials. Privately I pray those pundits are wrong pertaining to the level of Kavanaugh’s Originalism. Only time will reveal the accuracy of Conservative suspicions.

 

Read the Livingston piece and draw your own conclusions.

 

JRH 10/9/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

*********************

Kavanaugh hearing confirms the existence of the Deep State

 

By Bob Livingston – Editor, The Bob Livingston Letter™ 

October 8, 2018 

Personal Liberty

 

KAVANAUGH-HEARINGS-Swearing In

 

The Kabuki act that was the confirmation process of Brett Kavanaugh revealed something far more important than that underaged children of privilege growing up in the shadows of the District of Criminals were undisciplined and regularly engaged in parent-endorsed, if not parent-encouraged, debauchery. Unfortunately, not one in a million have grasped it, focusing instead on the licentious details Democrat senators directed them toward and whether one story was more credible than the other.

 

I have told you before that there are two governments in America; the one you see and the one you don’t. The one you see is the politicians and the courts. They are actors who give the illusion that you have a constitutional republic based on the rule of law and that you have some input in governmental processes.

 

The other government is unseen. It has many names and many elements that work against the best interests of the people. It is incestuous. Among its names are shadow government, powers that be and the simple term “they.” I call it the Deep State.

 

It is made up of faceless bureaucrats, crony corporations, the power elite, behind-the-scenes political operatives and lawyers, the banksters, the vast U.S. intelligence apparatus, the military-industrial complex (as revealed by President Eisenhower) and the globalists found in think tanks, the Council on Foreign Relations and Trilateral Commission.

 

The cover was pulled off a few of them these last days and weeks. They’ve been circling around the Christine Blasey Ford narrative like flies around a carcass. And, she, in fact, may even be one of them.

 

Despite hours of investigation by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the FBI, none of Ford’s accusations could be corroborated. The witnesses named by Ford – and by the second Kavanaugh accuser, Deborah Ramirez – denied knowledge of the activities the two women described, according to released or leak portions of the FBI investigation.

 

One of Ford’s witnesses is Leland Keyser, the sole female “witness” Ford named. Ford described Keyser as her best friend in their high school days at Holton-Arms preparatory school. Keyser is a former professional golfer who is now in poor health. Her health was the excuse Ford used to explain away Keyser’s refusal to corroborate Ford’s claims.

 

Keyser’s friends told The Daily Mail that Keyser was “blindsided” by Ford’s pulling her into the case. Ford friend Keyser was married to Bob Beckel for 10 years until they divorced in 2002. [Blog Editor: That’s the same Bob Beckel fired from Fox News for being too free with Left Wing curmudgeon profanity on The Five.]

 

Beckel worked for the State Department under Jimmy Carter, managed Walter Mondale’s president campaign, managed other Democrat politico campaigns and worked as a lobbyist for many years.  He now works as a political pundit on Fox News.

 

Ford’s friend Monica McClean is one of the “beach friends” with whom she discussed the possibility of coming forward with her accusations against Kavanaugh. She’s also the woman Ford coached on how to take a polygraph, according to a former Ford boyfriend.

 

McClean worked at the FBI for 24 years, retiring in 2016. She was a FBI field rep in the office of former U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara. Prior to becoming U.S. Attorney, Bharara was chief counsel to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (Communist-NY), and played an important role on the Senate Judiciary Committee.

 

Keyser told investigators this week that McClean had been pressuring her to change her story and admit that she knew about Kavanaugh’s attempt to assault Ford 35 years ago. Her former partner in New York is Jim Margolin. Margolin is still with the FBI and is part of the Robert Mueller investigation into former Donald Trump fixer Michael Cohen. [Blog Editor: An example the FBI “rank-n-file” may not be as politically neutral in their investigations that even many Conservatives try to paint a picture.]

 

Ford’s lawyer, Debra Katz, is a longtime leftist political operative and fundraiser for SHillary Clinton. She is also vice chair of the George Soros-funded Project on Government Oversight. Soros money has gone to protestors interrupting the Kavanaugh nomination, and those women who cowed Senator Jeff Flake (Coward-Arizona) in an elevator last week were Soros operatives.

 

Ford’s brother, Ralph Blasey III, was formerly a lawyer with the leftist law firm Baker, Hostetler, which created Fusion GPS, the Democrat opposition research organization that employs or employed the wife of FBI agent Bruce Ohr and which created the phony Trump-Russia dossier. Blasey left Baker, Hostetler in 2004. The building in which the offices of Baker, Hostetler reside include CIA front companies Red Coats, Inc., Admiral Security Services and Datawatch. The building is owned by Ford’s father, Ralph Blasey II.

 

But Kavanaugh himself is a Deep State swamp creature. As told by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the international business editor of The Daily Telegraph and long-time reporter on American government, while Kavanaugh worked for Ken Starr on the Bill Clinton Whitewater investigation, Kavanaugh actively worked to discredit a witness in the Vince Foster death case. The witness, Patrick Knowlton, was the first person at the scene of Foster’s death at Fort Marcy Park.

 

Knowlton later sued FBI agents he claimed were working for Kavanaugh, alleging witness tampering and conspiracy to violate his civil rights. Kavanaugh later wrote the Starr Report on Foster’s death, covering up the fact that Foster was murdered and his body was dumped in the park.

 

Kavanaugh, while working as legal counsel in the White House of George Bush the lesser, also helped push the PATRIOT Act, which destroyed due process and 4th and 5th Amendments.

 

Kavanaugh’s lawyer for his Senate Judiciary process is Beth Wilkinson, a longtime Democrat lawyer who represented several top aides to Hillary Clinton during the FBI investigation into Clinton’s homebrew server. She is married to David Gregory of CNN. Wilkinson was also on the prosecution team that convicted Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.

 

That implicates her in the coverup of this false flag operation, protecting the FBI and then-U.S. Attorney Eric Holder, who provided the explosives for McVeigh and his partner, Terry Nichols.

 

That there exists a nebulous group or groups actively working against the wishes of the American people is a difficult concept for a people as conditioned as Americans are to grasp. But anyone telling you there is no Deep State is either blind and ignorant or is lying to you.

______________________

Bob Livingston founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

 

© 2018 Personal Liberty ®

 

Me Thinks Blasey Ford is a Liar


OR Manipulated OR Both

 

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

Posted October 4, 2018

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.

Please Support NCCR

************************

Ex-Boyfriend of Ford Raises Speculation That She Gave False Statements To Senate

 

By Sara Carter
October 03, 2018 3:15 PM EDT

SaraCarter.com

 

WASHINGTON, DC – SEPTEMBER 27: Christine Blasey Ford at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill September 27, 2018 in Washington, DC. A professor at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine, Ford has accused Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her during a party in 1982 when they were high school students in suburban Maryland. (Photo by Melina Mara-Pool/Getty Images)

Christine Blasey Ford

 

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.

 

By David Horowitz

October 3, 2018

FrontPageMag.com

 

Christine Blasey Ford

 

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.

 

By Samantha Chang

 October 3, 2018 

BizPacReview

 

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.

 

Blasey Ford-Perjury-Jail. BPR photo

 

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.

 

Declaration Redacted Ford F… by on Scribd

 

 

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.”

 

10.02.18 CEG to Ford Attorn… by on Scribd

 

 

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

The Gateway Pundit

 

Christine Blasey Ford & Michael Bromwich

 

Christine Ford has not turned over her therapist’s notes to the Senate regarding her suppressed memories about Judge Kavanaugh abusing her decades earlier.

 

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.”

 

Via Professor Margot Cleveland:

 

 

+++++++++++++++

Ford Co-Authored Paper Pushing Hypnosis, Using To Enhance Memory; By LISA PAYNE-NAEGER; Conservative Tribune by WJ; 10/1/18 3:42PM

 

TGP Finds Christine Ford Lie; By JRH; SlantRight 2.0; 9/30/18

 

Dr. Ford Passionate Assertions Don’t Match What Can be Proved; By JRH; SlantRight 2.0; 9/28/18

 

Liar Exposed: Christine Blasey-Ford In Polygraph Perjury Trap; By John O’Sullivan; Principia Scientific International; 10/3/18

 

__________________

Ex-Boyfriend of Ford Raises Speculation That She Gave False Statements To Senate

 

© 2018 Sara A. Carter | All Rights Reserved.

_________________

SORRY FOR BLURTING IT OUT, BUT CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD IS A LIAR

 

© COPYRIGHT 2018, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

________________________

Christine Ford’s ex-boyfriend submits sworn detailed letter refuting her testimony: She lied. Repeatedly.

 

Copyright © 2018. All Rights Reserved. BizPacReview

_______________________

HUGE! Christine Ford Published 2008 Article on Self-Hypnosis Used to Retrieve and “Create Artificial Situations

 

© 2018 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

 

TGP Finds Christine Ford Lie


John R. Houk

© September 30, 2018

 

A couple of days ago I brought up the issue of both the Dems and GOP allowing deference to the testimony of Christine Blasey Ford rape allegations against Judge Kavanaugh: The Dems hammered Kavanaugh on his teenage antics based on his High School Yearbook while ignoring any relation to Ford’s character based on the data from her Yearbook. I pointed they were both frisky teenagers that grew with respected characters.

 

YET THE DEMS decided to correlate Kavanaugh’s truthfulness as flawed because portrayals in his Yearbook, presuming Ford’s antics in her Yearbook must be ignored and her testimony to be the absolute truth. WHAT A BUNCH OF BLATANT DEM HYPOCRISY! AND what an epic failure by the GOP to NOT call-out the Dems on this blatant hypocrisy!

 

Now thanks to a little digital math and some leg-work by The Gateway Pundit, the therapy incident that was supposed to trigger Ford’s repressed memory are found to be inconsistent with her sworn testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday 9/27/18. Here’s a short quote from The Gateway Pundit on what that blog discovered:

 

Dr. Ford’s testimony does not add up for many reasons.

 

This falsehood in her testimony about the timing of the remodeling projects on her home is not accurate.

 

This is a national disgrace thanks to the eager Democrats and their conflicted witness Christine Ford.

 

Hat tip Christina

 

UPDATE: Christine Ford spoke about the second front door at least three times in her testimony.

 

So in a new clip, she talks about it again here. She says the incident in the 1980’s is in her medical records twice: “The first time is in 2012 with my husband in couples therapy with the quibbling over the remodel”. Very much present tense, as in remodel happening at same time as couples therapy.

 

The link in the last paragraph is to a C-Span video of Ford testimony. Here is that embed for this blog:

 

C-Span VIDEO: Blasey Ford Describes Quibbling about Remodel in Therapy

http://www.c-span.org/video/standalone/?c4752473/blasey-ford-quibbling-therapy

 [This embed won’t work on WordPress formats.]

 

And continued from The Gateway Pundit:

 

Again, this is from her opening statements:

 

“I had never told the details to anyone, the specific details, until May 2012, during a couples counseling session. The reason this came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed a very extensive, very long remodel of our home, and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand. In explaining why I wanted a second front door, I began to describe the assault in detail.”

 

 

This implied that currently, today, it does not look pleasing. But you can’t even see the 2nd front door anymore. Back in the November 2011 google map shot, they already had started putting up posts of the wooden wall, and the walkway and new flowerbeds are already in.

 

DiFi asks “And do you have that second front door” – totally implying that she wants to know how the “quibble” with her husband turned out.

 

The March 2011 picture shows the new door, and you can see that the remodel (new space) was in the back of the house; by comparing with 2007 photo, you can see the new roofline in the back. The November 2011 image shows the wood wall posts and new pathway in front of the new door area.

 

The pictures with time stamps must be looked at on The Gateway Pundit.

 

The point being: Her rape that occurred when she was 15 inspired the home remodel WAY EARLIER than her claimed repressed memory inspiration that took place in 2012.

 

Her therapist’s remarkable ability to enhance (or fabricate) a repressed memory could not be the reason she wanted to build the 2nd front door in 2012 because the 2nd front door was built in 2011.

 

I smell another blatant Dem lie!

 

Here’s some irony: Here are some quotes from Left oriented sources who either quote from Ford’s opening Senate testimony or earlier sworn affidavits related to the reason for building a second front door and what inspired the completion of said door claimed completion in 2012:

 

“…  I had never told the details to anyone until May 2012, during a couples counseling session. The reason this came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed an extensive remodel of our home, and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand. In explaining why I wanted to have a second front door, I described the assault in detail.” (Read Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh’s Opening Remarks for Thursday’s Hearing; By MADISON FELLER; Elle; 9/27/18)

+++

In all three otherwise everyday scenes, Christine Blasey Ford described to others about being sexually assaulted many years earlier by a future federal judge, according to sworn affidavits her lawyers said Wednesday they submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee. A fourth from her husband says that during a 2012 couples therapy session, Ford named her attacker as Brett Kavanaugh. President Donald Trump nominated Kavanaugh July 9 to the Supreme Court. (Bold text Blog Editor’s – Here’s what the 4 affidavits supporting Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford say; By Laurie Kellman, Associated Press; PBS; 9/26/18 11:31 AM EDT)

+++

Today, as Dr. Christine Blasey Ford testified against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, giving her recollections in heartbreaking detail of how he sexually assaulted her as a teenager, she relayed a detail that spoke to the lasting impact of her trauma: as an adult, while renovating the house she shared with her husband, Dr. Ford insisted on installing a second front door, wanting a second escape route in the event of an emergency.

 

In a conversation with the Cut, Dr. Tracey Shors, a professor of neuroscience and psychology at Rutgers University who specializes in the study of stress, memory, and the lasting impact of teenage sexual assault, explained the evolutionary logic behind that second door, and other measures women take to assert some sense of control in the wake of trauma. (The Meaning of Christine Blasey Ford’s Second Front Door; By Katie Heaney; The Cut; 9/27/18)

 

+++

 

Her “proof” that this story is true is that she had to have two front doors installed in her home.

 

That, in turn, is what led to her attending marital counseling. A marital spat over a home remodel led to emergence of the alleged attack in “recollected memories.” But then, a little later in her testimony, Ford changed her story and claimed that her second door is actually there for “sponsored interns from Google and students” to use. Really?

 

Seems like the purpose of the door is not exactly as Ms. Ford would ask us to believe. It was not installed as a second escape route for a person suffering from claustrophobia as a result of an attack. It was installed to give the interns and students they sponsored a private door to enter their area of the house.

 

How convenient that no one caught that little omission of fact.

 

To date, there is no one willing to stand up and confirm her story. In fact, those she has identified as witnesses have all – to a person – denied being present or seeing Brett Kavanaugh ever act in the manner in which she describes. (The quavering voice of Blasey Ford and the railroading of Brett Kavanaugh; By Jacquie Kubin; Communities Digital News; 9/27/18)

 

And now, The Gateway Pundit cross post.

 

JRH 9/30/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

************************

BREAKING: Christine Ford Caught in MAJOR LIE – Photos Prove House Updates Occurred Much Earlier Than Claims in Senate Testimony

 

Posted by Jim Hoft

By Joe Hoft

September 29, 2018

The Gateway Pundit

 

Supporters of Christine Ford protested outside her home in Palo Alto, California two weeks ago. CBS Local included a photo of Ford’s home in their coverage.

 

The address has been widely reported online and the home was pictured in the local news.

 

Dr. Christine Ford’s last minute accusations against squeaky-clean Judge Brett Kavanaugh stunned the political world.

 

But Ford’s accusations were questioned when she provided no date, no location and all of the alleged witnesses, including her friend, denied the allegations.

 

We now have information that shows Christine Ford lied about the entire story.

 

In her testimony on Thursday, Dr. Ford stated that she put a second door on her house in 2012:

 

Over the years, I told very, very few friends that I had this traumatic experience. I told my husband before we were married that I had experienced a sexual assault. I had never told the details to anyone — the specific details — until May 2012, during a couples counseling session.

 

The reason this came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed a very extensive, very long remodel of our home and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand.

 

In explaining why I wanted a second front door, I began to describe the assault in detail. I recall saying that the boy who assaulted me could someday be on the U.S. Supreme Court, and spoke a bit about his background at an elitist all-boys school in Bethesda, Maryland. My husband recalls that I named my attacker as Brett Kavanaugh.

 

We now have proof that this was a lie — a major lie.

 

This was the basis for the entire story she told the US Senate Judiciary Committee under oath — And this is a lie.

 

Christine Ford perjured herself.

 

The problem with Ford’s testimony is that the the second front door was built on their home long before that date. 

 

According to online queries and pictures of the property from as early as 2007, the house in question had two doors in the front since at least 2011 and probably earlier.

 

Thanks to time stamps available on the Internet, we can determine roughly when the 2nd door was put in Dr. Ford’s house.

 

A simple query of Palo Alto, CA  building inspections of properties related to Dr. Ford and her husband result in an inspection in 2007.  When you link on the same address on Zillow, you see that this house was last remodeled  in 2008.

 

Ford’s house in 2007 – there was only one door pictured.

 

Ford’s house in March 2011 – This clearly shows the second front door is already there.

 

Ford’s house in November 2011 – The second front door is there.

 

Here is the same address in 2015 — the same home where the protests took place last week.

 

Dr. Ford’s testimony does not add up for many reasons.

 

This falsehood in her testimony about the timing of the remodeling projects on her home is not accurate.

 

This is a national disgrace thanks to the eager Democrats and their conflicted witness Christine Ford.

 

Hat tip Christina

 

UPDATE: Christine Ford spoke about the second front door at least three times in her testimony.

 

So in a new clip, she talks about it again here. She says the incident in the 1980’s is in her medical records twice: “The first time is in 2012 with my husband in couples therapy with the quibbling over the remodel”. Very much present tense, as in remodel happening at same time as couples therapy.

 

Again, this is from her opening statements:

 

“I had never told the details to anyone, the specific details, until May 2012, during a couples counseling session. The reason this came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed a very extensive, very long remodel of our home, and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand. In explaining why I wanted a second front door, I began to describe the assault in detail.”

 

And then this clip with Dianne Feinstein during her testimony.

 

“Our house does not look aesthetically pleasing from the curb.”

 

This implied that currently, today, it does not look pleasing. But you can’t even see the 2nd front door anymore. Back in the November 2011 google map shot, they already had started putting up posts of the wooden wall, and the walkway and new flowerbeds are already in.

 

DiFi asks “And do you have that second front door” – totally implying that she wants to know how the “quibble” with her husband turned out.

 

The March 2011 picture shows the new door, and you can see that the remodel (new space) was in the back of the house; by comparing with 2007 photo, you can see the new roofline in the back. The November 2011 image shows the wood wall posts and new pathway in front of the new door area.

_______________________

TGP Finds Christine Ford Lie

John R. Houk

© September 30, 2018

____________________

BREAKING: Christine Ford Caught in MAJOR LIE – Photos Prove House Updates Occurred Much Earlier Than Claims in Senate Testimony

 

© 2018 The Gateway Pundit – All Rights Reserved.

 

Dr. Ford Passionate Assertions Don’t Match What Can be Proved


John R. Houk

© September 28, 2018

Christine Blasey Ford, left, and Brett Kavanaugh during testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday, Sept. 27, 2018 on Capitol Hill. (Left: Melina Mara/Pool/The Washington Post; right: Gabriella Demczuk/The New York Times via AP, Pool)

If you watched the Dems inquisition of Brett Kavanaugh yesterday you should have noticed the Dems trying to get Kavanaugh to call for an FBI investigation to prove his innocence. Senator Grassley had to remind the Dems – over and over and over again – that the FBI does not draw conclusions in background investigations. The FBI merely finds facts and allows the government agency to decide if there are any red flags to prevent trust.

 

Kavanaugh was actually investigated by the FBI SIX TIMES with ZERO red flags EACH TIME. Obviously the Dem interview of Kavanaugh was merely to entice Kavanaugh to slip up. To the Dem frustration, Kavanaugh NEVER FELL FOR DEM BAITING!

 

One of the things that bothered me was the Dem aim to vilify Kavanaugh because of his High School portrayal of a rascally social life. Surprise – Surprise. Kavanaugh and buddies participated in juvenile antics that included – GASP – beer drinking.

 

Today, I am a committed Conservative Christian upholding the moral values of the Bible. HOWEVER, if my High School Yearbooks revealed the amount of keggers I participated in – especially as a Senior – and revealed it to my Church and expected the Church leadership to treat me accordingly in the present, I would be ostracized or given the left-foot of fellowship.

 

Vilifying the Kavanaugh of today – who has had a stellar law career for decades (unlike say porn lawyer Avenatti) – based on the antics of a popular teenage boy-Kavanaugh, was simply idiotic!

 

But what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Real Clear Investigations has dug up some facts of teenage girl-Christine Blasey Ford based on her mysteriously internet-scrubbed High School Yearbook. And shock of all shocks! The teenage Christine Blasey ALSO participated in adolescent antics on an equal level (if not even higher hijinks) to Kavanaugh’s teen days. AND TODAY, I get the impression the adult Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has also developed a stellar and respected career in her field.

 

It bugs the tar out of my that the Dems outrageously tried to equate Kavanaugh’s teen past to his accomplished adult present while absolutely ignoring the same scenario for Dr. Ford. And it really bugs me that the GOP side of yesterday’s hearing let Dr. Ford’s Yearbook antics go totally unexamined as a comparison.

 

[Click to enlarge] Scribe Yearbook from Natural News

 

After watching Dr. Ford’s treated with kid gloves testimony, it was my opinion she came across as quite believable. For a moment my opinion that was a liar changed to she was mistaken. You can’t call Kavanaugh a liar because he has witnesses that he was never at such a party as described by Ford. Ford’s best friend has sworn Ford’s account never took place which was given under oath with the penalty of perjury if lied.

 

Dr. Ford has NO sworn backing for her account of being sexually assaulted. So, if it happened, she is mistaken about whom she accuses as perpetrator. BUT if you examine her High School antics, I find it possible she was coached into making a fabrication merely to prevent an Originalist Justice to serve on the Supreme Court. AND if that’s the case, Dr. Ford is a WICKED EVIL partisan Democrat.

 

Interestingly the blog CULT OF THE 1ST AMENDMENT – a source of cached Yearbook photos – was removed from Blogger. The Free Republic has a cross post of the removed blog less the photos.

 

 

 

 

 

JRH 9/28/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Suppressed Blasey Ford Yearbooks Reveal Fast Times at Holton-Arms

 

By Paul Sperry

September 27, 2018

Real Clear Investigations

 

Democrats plan at Thursday’s Senate Judiciary Committee hearing to use the high school yearbooks of embattled Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, which they say imply he and his prep school pals regularly got drunk and boasted of sexual conquests, to discredit what they call his “choir boy defense” against sex-assault charges leveled by Christine Blasey Ford.

 

But Ford, whose story suffers from significant gaps in her memory, wasn’t exactly a choir girl. In fact, congressional sources say her own yearbooks, among other things, present a potential issue for her and her character, and Republicans are prepared to cite them in questioning her story through the female sex-crimes expert they’ve hired.

 

A committee staffer told RealClearInvestigations, “We have her yearbooks,” which had been mysteriously scrubbed from the Web prior to Ford coming out with her allegations. “She will not make a good witness.”

 

The source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, noted that the annual class books feature a photo of an underage Ford attending at least one party, alongside a caption boasting of girls passing out from binge drinking. Her yearbooks also openly reference sexually promiscuous behavior by the girls, including targeting boys at Kavanaugh’s alma mater, Georgetown Prep, an all-boys school in the affluent Maryland suburbs of Washington, D.C. Ford attended neighboring Holton-Arms School, an all-girls academy.

 

While congressional sources say Ford’s yearbooks could be an exhibit at the hearing, longtime Capitol Hill watchers caution that going after her reputation could backfire on Republicans.

 

“That’s a minefield, especially given the #MeToo movement,” one said.

 

A spokesman for Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley’s office declined to comment.

 

Other evidence indicates Ford, a popular cheerleader at the time, was immersed in an alcohol-fueled party culture and no stranger to “keg parties” in the D.C. area — or the “bar scene” along the Maryland and Delaware coast. In fact, Ford was known as a “party girl” on the Delaware shore during summer breaks, another source with direct knowledge of the congressional investigation said.

 

One report, moreover, recounts how Ford once got caught in “a romantic triangle” at Dewey Beach that ended with the two men getting into a fistfight over her.

 

At Holton-Arms, the source added, she was known by classmates, and even some parents, by a sexually derogatory nickname playing off her maiden name Blasey, suggesting she was promiscuous.

 

“She was not the wholesome Catholic girl they’re trying to portray her as,” the source said, making her claims of victimization at the hands of Kavanaugh “harder to believe.”

 

Ford and her attorney did not respond to requests for comment. But they have cast a much different narrative, suggesting Kavanaugh and other boys from Georgetown Prep aggressively targeted Ford and other reluctant girls from her school while plying them with alcohol. Specifically, Ford alleges Kavanaugh and another older boy took advantage of her at a house party somewhere in the Chevy Chase or Bethesda area of Maryland in the early 1980s.

 

She says she has suffered post-traumatic stress disorder from the alleged attack, which she says involved an inebriated Kavanaugh forcefully groping her on a bed over her clothes while clapping his hand over her mouth to keep her from screaming for help. She added that she has had to seek therapy and other medical treatment to deal with “panic attacks” and “anxiety” from the incident, which she did not report to authorities.

 

Ford cannot remember key details from that night, including the location of the house or the date of the party, while claiming to have consumed just “one beer” there. She says she told no one about the “assault” at the time, not even her close girlfriend, who she says was with her at the party, or her mother.

 

Ford claims the reason she didn’t tell her parents about almost being “raped” is that she didn’t want to get “in trouble” for drinking at a party.

 

“I did not want to tell my parents that I, at age 15, was in a house without any parents present, drinking beer with boys,” she said.

 

But classmates said the former cheerleader, who was known as “Chrissy,” was part of the underage drinking tradition that was no secret among Maryland prep schools in the early 1980s, when the drinking age was 18.

 

Her own school yearbooks (in which parents took out paid ads) celebrated “boys [and] beer” and pictured beer bottles and beer cans and scenes of boys and girls drinking at parties. One published a photo of Ford and other girls at a Halloween party alongside a caption boasting of “pass[ing] out” after playing “Quarters” and other binge-drinking games. Her father, Ralph Blasey, was president of the local country club.

 

Neither her parents nor her two siblings have come out to voice support for Ford, and they did not sign a family letter of support for her and her claims circulated by her husband.

 

The Holton-Arms yearbooks in question, which cover her sophomore, junior and senior years, are titled “Scribe ’82,” “Scribe ’83” and “Scribe ’84.”

 

Among other things, the annual books objectified men and even talked about hiring male strippers, including one in a “gold G-string,” for sweet 16 parties. They also featured the young Holton coeds dressed as Playboy bunnies and posing seductively atop desks, school-uniform skirts hiked up.

 

One section, “While the Parents Were Out,” talked about partying with boys at area house parties where kids got so drunk they “ruined” their parents’ “heirloom Persian rugs” with vomit.

“The tenth grade taught us how to party,” the girls bragged in another section. And, “Loss of consciousness is often an integral part of the party scene.”

 

A caption on another page talked about girls having “their choice of men” at the neighboring boys schools, including Georgetown Prep: “No longer confining ourselves to the walls of Landon and Prep, we plunged into the waters of St. John and Gonzaga with much success.”

 

Jay Martin, who went to school in the area at the time, asserted that Holton-Arms girls back in the 1980s were hardly innocent “victims” of Georgetown Prep boys.

 

“I am her age,” he said of Ford. “I went to high school next to Prep and knew lots of Holton-Arms girls. This is pure false memory syndrome.”

 

Added Martin: “One of my best women friends had Kavanaugh ask her out [and] she said he was ‘one of the nice ones.’ His mom was a judge. I mean, seriously?”

______________________

Dr. Ford Passionate Assertions Don’t Match What Can be Proved

John R. Houk

© September 28, 2018

______________________

Suppressed Blasey Ford Yearbooks Reveal Fast Times at Holton-Arms

 

© 2016 RealClearInvestigations.com. All Rights Reserved.

 

This and all other original articles created by RealClearInvestigations may be republished for free with attribution. (These terms do not apply to outside articles linked on the site.)

 

We provide our stories for free but they are expensive to produce. Help us continue to publish distinctive journalism by making a contribution today to RealClearInvestigations.

 

Ramirez: I Think it was Kavanaugh Who Waved His Penis in My Face


John R. Houk

© September 24, 2018

It is very apparent that Christine Blasey Ford will not be able to substantiate her accusation of rape by Judge Brett Kavanaugh when he was 17 and she was 15. So what do the desperate Dems do? They find another woman with an even sketchier memory than Ford’s who claims sexual assault by waving his penis in front of her face when Freshmen at Yale.

 

So says the memory of a then drunken Deborah Ramirez at a drunken dorm party.

I haven’t had the chance to digest all the facts on the Ramirez accusation yet, ergo below are a couple of posts from relatively Conservative sources (because I don’t trust lame-stream media sources and because I know Dems lie).

 

JRH 9/24/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

*******************

JUDGE SEX CLAIMS 

Who is Deborah Ramirez? Brett Kavanaugh’s Yale University classmate who accused him of sexual misconduct

 

By Nicola Stow

September 24, 2018 3:57 pm

The Sun

 

Who is Deborah Ramirez?

 

Deborah Ramirez, 53, was raised a “devout catholic” in Connecticut, according to the New Yorker.

 

She and Kavanaugh were classmates at Yale, where she studied sociology and psychology. the pair graduated in 1987.

 

According to NBC News, Deborah is a board member and volunteer at Safehouse Progressive Alliance for Nonviolence, an organisation that helps domestic abuse victims.

 

She currently lives in Boulder, Colorado. READ THE REST

+++++++++++++

Yes, Let’s See The Emails That Led To Deborah Ramirez’s Accusation Against Kavanaugh

 

By ALLAHPUNDIT

Posted at 1:31 pm on September 24, 2018

Hot Air

 

Stop Kavanaugh Protestor

 

Here’s how the New Yorker described Deborah Ramirez’s journey towards speaking up:

 

She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away…

 

Mark Krasberg, an assistant professor of neurosurgery at the University of New Mexico who was also a member of Kavanaugh and Ramirez’s class at Yale, said Kavanaugh’s college behavior had become a topic of discussion among former Yale students soon after Kavanaugh’s nomination. In one e-mail that Krasberg received in September, the classmate who recalled hearing about the incident with Ramirez alluded to the allegation and wrote that it “would qualify as a sexual assault,” he speculated, “if it’s true.”

 

Emails? Tell us more about these emails, Jane Mayer:

 

 

Read the excerpt above again. After 35 years of uncertainty, within the span of six days, Ramirez somehow recovered her memories sufficiently to accuse a Supreme Court nominee of having sexually assaulted her. And coincidentally, this memory recovery appeared to happen only after her classmates had begun emailing about Kavanaugh’s time at Yale following his nomination this summer. At some point, by Ronan Farrow’s own admission, Senate Democrats got involved in the process.

 

Robert VerBruggen raises a very obvious possibility: “These emails would appear to be important evidence regarding how this ball got rolling. They also may bear on the question of whether Ramirez’s memory closely matches the anonymous source’s simply because they’re both the account that was circulating while Ramirez was putting her memories together and contacting her former classmates. Let’s see them.” Yeah, let’s. Let’s see if it was Ramirez or someone else who first identified Kavanaugh as the person who assaulted her. Let’s see just how many gaps in Ramirez’s memory required filling in by others, seemingly not one of whom actually witnessed the incident. Let’s find out how many second-hand or even third-hand “witnesses” were needed to help the victim herself “remember.”

 

The New York Times spent a lot of time looking for first-hand witnesses over the past week. No dice:

 

The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge. Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.

 

This sure sounds like a case of someone’s hazy memory being reshaped after the fact through the power of suggestion. Ramirez may have remembered that someone did something lewd to her once at a Yale party along the lines of what she described to the New Yorker and then gradually became convinced that it was Kavanaugh after classmates told her “I heard from a friend of a friend at the time that it was Kavanaugh.” Or maybe it was less innocent than that: One person who spoke to the New Yorker told them that they thought Ramirez’s accusation “may have been politically motivated,” albeit without hard evidence. Imagine how much suggestive power a plea from someone attached to Senate Democrats in a high-stakes confirmation battle might have had on the memory of a person who’s inclined for ideological reasons to support Democrats anyway.

 

Ramirez isn’t the only person connected to the New Yorker piece whose credibility is shaky. I can’t imagine what Ronan Farrow was thinking attaching his name to such a journalistic sh*tpile, lacking not only even one first-hand witness to the incident but saddled with a victim whose memory he has every reason to believe is unreliable. He and Jane Mayer seem fully aware that the story is garbage too, per their careful framing of Ramirez’s accusation. It’s not that it’s true or even probably true, you see, it’s that Democrats are interested in it:

 

What a shrewd way to launder a smear into “news.” Investigate it privately, leak to the New Yorker that you’re investigating it, then cite their report that you’re investigating it privately as evidence of its seriousness, worthy of yet another delay in the confirmation vote. If you asked me yesterday to name five big-name non-Fox mainstream reporters who are broadly respected on the right, I would have told you “Jake Tapper, Ronan Farrow, and uhhh…” That’s a testament to how compelling Farrow’s #MeToo reporting over the past year has been: Even credentials like a stint on MSNBC and time spent working for the Obama administration weren’t enough to spoil all the credibility he earned among right-wingers from his reporting on Weinstein, Eric Schneiderman, and Les Moonves. The scariest words any Republican heard over the last week were “Ronan Farrow is looking into this” because you know what that usually means — he has the goods. Multiple accusers, in all likelihood, and even if not, at least multiple examples of contemporaneous corroboration from a single accuser. Instead he produced Deborah “I think it happened, but maybe not” Ramirez. The New York Times wouldn’t publish her claim, so thin was it. But Farrow would.

 

I don’t think his motive here was primarily partisan, although he obviously leans left. Weinstein and Schneiderman were both Democratic power players and he had no qualms about nuking them from orbit. More likely he and the New Yorker decided to lower their standards because the hunt for a second Kavanaugh accuser is the hottest story in America right now. Ramirez was under some form of pressure (intentional or not) from her classmates, it seems, to confirm that Kavanaugh was the man who assaulted her. But Farrow was under pressure too. He owns this beat. He’s the reporter everyone is looking to for the smoking gun that Kavanaugh really is a sleaze. And the clock is ticking. It’s possible that the Judiciary Committee will vote to confirm Kavanaugh this week, which wouldn’t close any window on accusations against him but might very well close the window on public interest in the matter. Under normal circumstances, Farrow and Mayer would have kept the story in a drawer and spent the next few weeks talking to sources while they tried to substantiate Ramirez’s claim. Instead the two of them and the New Yorker threw what they had at the wall, replete with some ass-covering “to be sure” qualifiers. Maybe Kavanaugh did something to Ramirez, but maybe not — but maybe! Ask yourself: What possible reason could there have been to rush this half-baked story into print apart from either (a) trying to monetize intense public interest in a topic with whatever you have available, or (b) derailing Kavanaugh’s nomination? Are either of those reasons conducive to good, responsible journalism?

 

Here he is this morning defending the report. He has enough home runs already as a reporter that one strikeout in a big spot won’t damage his general reputation but Republicans will probably never look at him the same way.

 

 

++++++++++++++++

KAVANAUGH AND LAST-MINUTE ACCUSATIONS

Democrats pull out all the stops.

 

By Joseph Klein

September 24, 2018

FrontPageMag.com

Brett Kavanaugh

 

Democrats are pulling out all the stops and enabling salacious last-minute accusations against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh in order to sink his candidacy. Now that Christine Blasey Ford has finally agreed to testify this Thursday at an open hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding her charge that Judge Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a long-ago high school party, these new charges have suddenly emerged from left field.

 

On Sunday, a former classmate from Judge Kavanaugh’s time at Yale accused the Supreme Court nominee of exposing himself to her at a party. The New Yorker has just published an article written by Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer, based on information that was reportedly sent to at least four Democratic senators. The article recounted a claim by Deborah Ramirez, a Yale classmate of Brett Kavanaugh’s, concerning “a dormitory party gone awry.” As the article acknowledged, however, “her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident.” The article goes on to say that in her initial conversations with The New Yorker, Ms. Ramirez was “reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty.” It was only after “six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney” that Ms. Ramirez was suddenly able to pinpoint Judge Kavanaugh as having committed an unsavory act, even though she admitted being “foggy” at the time. The New Yorker article also noted that the magazine “has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party.”

 

Meanwhile, the ever-present Michael Avenatti, attorney of porn star Stormy Daniels, tweeted that he had information from anonymous sources that Judge Kavanaugh and his friend had “targeted” women with drugs and alcohol at parties to facilitate “gang rape.”

 

Haters of Judge Kavanaugh are turning the process of Senate confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee into something worse than a travesty. His opponents in the Senate have transformed their “advise and consent” function into a campaign of no-holds barred character assassination.

While Judge Kavanaugh weathers these latest accusations, which he adamantly denies, his real test will be on Thursday, assuming that Christine Blasey Ford will follow through on her agreement to testify at an open hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Her attorneys stalled for a week before making the announcement that Ms. Ford would testify despite certain “unresolved” issues. Among the issues Ms. Ford’s attorneys have raised was the refusal of the committee to subpoena one of the purported witnesses, Mark Judge, who Ms. Ford reportedly claims was involved in the alleged incident, as well as “who on the Majority side will be asking the questions, whether senators or staff attorneys.”

 

A week has already gone by since Ms. Ford went public with her story in an interview with the Washington Post while Ms. Ford and her attorneys stalled for time. They raised one procedural issue after another while claiming that the committee majority was “bullying” Ms. Ford. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley (R-I) has bent over backwards to accommodate Ms. Ford’s preferred scheduling for her appearance. He extended the deadline several times for her to come to a decision on whether to testify at all. He had offered various options for her to testify publicly or privately or to be interviewed by committee staff in her home state of California, whichever setting would make her more comfortable. However, in Senator Grassley’s e-mail thanking Ms. Ford for finally agreeing to a time certain for her testimony, Senator Grassley correctly reminded her attorneys that “the committee determines which witnesses to call, how many witnesses to call, and what order to call them and who will question them. These are nonnegotiable.”

 

While the negotiations with Ms. Ford’s attorneys for her testimony were underway, Democrats were sitting on the latest allegations, ready to pounce as soon as Ms. Ford’s accusation was about to be heard. Some Democrats are already using the Ramirez episode to push anew for a fresh FBI investigation and to postpone Thursday’s scheduled hearing.

 

Ideally, if the Democrats cannot apply enough pressure to force a withdrawal of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination through their relentless campaign of character assassination, they want to push any Senate votes until after the midterm elections at the earliest. Then they will claim that the newly elected senators should be involved in the confirmation decision. In the meantime, Judge Kavanaugh’s adversaries in the Senate, the mainstream media and progressive circles continue to bludgeon Judge Kavanaugh in the court of public opinion. All of their stratagems are an obvious attempt to buy time in order to persuade any wavering senators that Judge Kavanaugh is too tainted by sexual assault charges – whether proven or not – to sit on the Supreme Court.

 

Proof does not matter to those wanting to bring Judge Kavanaugh down at any cost. Regarding Ms. Ford’s accusation, they know that the proof so far is non-existent, aside from Ms. Ford’s own assertions contained in her confidential letter given to Senator Dianne Feinstein, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, last July, and in her Washington Post interview. While a redacted version of Ms. Ford’s letter has been published, Senator Feinstein has refused to date to give even Senator Grassley a copy of the completely unredacted version. The FBI has already conducted 6 background checks, no federal crime is alleged, and there is no forensic evidence to investigate after 30 years at a site that Ms. Ford cannot even identify.

 

What we do know so far tends to undercut the credibility of Ms. Ford’s accusation. Ms. Ford cannot corroborate her decades-old charge of sexual assault against Judge Kavanaugh. Whatever corroboration Ms. Ford was hoping for from “witnesses” she claimed were at the alleged party is non-existent. The individuals she reportedly named in her unredacted confidential letter given to Senator Feinstein have either denied being at such a party or do not recollect what Ms. Ford has alleged. Moreover, by her own admission to the Washington Post, Ms. Ford “said she does not remember some key details of the incident.” She does not remember, for example, where it happened, how the party came together in the first place, or how she got home after the alleged incident. She believes the alleged incident occurred during the summer of 1982, but reportedly could not be more precise on the day or even the month of the party.

 

Afraid that Ms. Ford’s sexual assault allegation could be readily challenged and anxious to establish some sort of pattern of sexual misconduct beyond this single alleged incident, the Kavanaugh haters have latched onto Ms. Ramirez’s story.

 

The New York Times published an op-ed column last week by a psychiatrist, Richard A. Friedman, who cited neurological science to conclude that Ms. Ford’s claim that she has “a vivid memory of an attack that took place when she was 15” is “credible.” The reason, he wrote, is that “memories formed under the influence of intense emotion — such as the feelings that accompany a sexual assault — are indelible in the way that memories of a routine day are not.” The only problem with Dr. Friedman’s thesis is that Ms. Ford has apparently forgotten such key details surrounding the alleged sexual assault as when and where it happened and how she got home. Moreover, when Ms. Ford finally told someone about the incident in any detail some 30 years later in 2012, during a couples therapy session with her husband, she did not name Judge Kavanaugh specifically, according to the therapist’s notes that Ms. Ford had provided to the Washington Post in connection with her interview. The Washington Post reported that the therapist’s notes it reviewed “do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students ‘from an elitist boys’ school’ who went on to become ‘highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.’”

 

Ms. Ramirez’s story is even less credible. It took an attorney and six days of very belated reflection to help revive her memory of an incident she claimed happened while she herself was very drunk.

 

Senator Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), one of Judge Kavanaugh’s fiercest critics who told men to “shut up” regarding Ms. Ford’s allegations, said she doubts Judge Kavanaugh’s credibility because of “how he approaches his cases.” Aside from mischaracterizing the constitutional textualist reasoning underlying Judge Kavanaugh’s opinions, she is saying that she does not believe Judge Kavanaugh’s denial of the sexual misconduct allegations lodged against him because of the opinions he wrote that she does not like. Such circular “reasoning” would be amusing if it were not so emblematic of what one writer called “Kavanaugh Derangement Syndrome. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) is also suffering from the same syndrome. She said Thursday regarding Ms. Ford: “I believe her because she is telling the truth and you know it by her story.”

 

Ms. Ford’s supporters are exploiting the “Me Too” movement to declare Judge Kavanaugh guilty simply because Ms. Ford is a woman who has made what they call, without any corroborating evidence to date, a “credible” charge. The same would presumably be the case for Ms. Ramirez. They argue that since the Senate Judiciary Committee is not a criminal judicial trial, but rather a legislative hearing for confirmation of a Supreme Court nominee, the normal burden of proof shouldered by the accuser should not apply. Judge Kavanaugh should have to prove that he is not guilty, they are in effect insisting. This is another case of Kavanaugh Derangement Syndrome.

 

Let’s assume for the sake of argument that the normal burden on the prosecution in a criminal case – to prove the accused’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt – is not applicable regarding the charge against Judge Kavanaugh since he is not a defendant in a criminal trial. However, that should not flip the burden of proof onto Judge Kavanaugh altogether. Judge Kavanaugh is being subjected to charges of a criminal nature that could not only deprive him of a seat on the Supreme Court for which he is otherwise eminently qualified. Ms. Ford’s unsubstantiated accusation can completely destroy Judge Kavanaugh’s life by causing irreparable damage to his reputation for integrity and good character and to his career, which he has built up during decades of public service. His family’s lives have been completely upended. Placing the burden on Judge Kavanaugh to prove that he was not involved in an uncorroborated incident from years ago, about which even his accuser does not recall key details, turns the fundamental constitutional principle of due process upside down. Ms. Ford should have the burden to prove her accusations by at least a preponderance of all the evidence presented.

 

This charade must come to an end. No more extensions for Ms. Ford to come forward and testify. If Ms. Ford does not follow through with her agreement to testify in an open Senate Judiciary Committee hearing this Thursday and do so upon the conditions set by the committee, she should go home while the committee proceeds to an immediate vote on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination. If Ms. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh do testify, the senators deciding on whether to confirm Judge Kavanaugh as well as the American public following the testimony must remember one cardinal rule. In a nation guided by fairness and law, a person is innocent until proven guilty. Sadly, many of Judge Kavanaugh’s haters have thrown that rule aside.

 

If Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination is pulled as a result of the smears and character assassination, President Trump should immediately nominate someone on his short list such as Amy Coney Barrett and the Senate Republican majority should then push through the new nominee’s confirmation as soon as possible. Delay is not an option.

 

Joseph Klein is a Harvard-trained lawyer and the author of Global Deception: The UN’s Stealth Assault on America’s Freedom and Lethal Engagement: Barack Hussein Obama, the United Nations & Radical Islam.

++++++++++++++++++++

Critics condemn New Yorker over uncorroborated Kavanaugh story: ‘Lazy at best, slimy at worst’

 

By Brian Flood

September 24, 2018

Fox News

 

The New Yorker’s sketchy report that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh may have exposed himself to a college classmate decades ago has media critics asking if the prestigious magazine cares more about getting a story or getting it right.

 

The article, headlined “Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years,” was co-bylined by Pulitzer Prize winner Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer. It details a claim by Debbie Ramirez, who said Kavanaugh sexually harassed her during a Yale University party.

 

Yet, beneath the story’s explosive thesis lie substantive seeds of doubt and a complete lack of corroboration that prompted howling from a chorus of media critics.

 

 

 

 

 

“It’s worth noting that Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer could not confirm ‘with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party.’ It’s also worth noting that this disclaimer was buried to the ‘10th paragraph’ of the Deborah Ramirez report. Lazy at best, slimy at worst,” Mediaite columnist Joseph Wulfsohn wrote.

 

National Review editor Charles C.W. Cooke penned a column calling the piece “grossly irresponsible,” which slams The New Yorker for publishing the story.

 

“I am struggling to remember reading a less responsible piece of ‘journalism’ in a major outlet,” Cooke wrote. “There is no scaffolding beneath this story.”

 

Jedediah Bila wrote that she is typically a fan of Farrow but his latest report is “not good journalism.”

 

“New Yorker piece doesn’t even confirm that Kavanaugh was at the party, contains an admission of memory gaps by Ramirez due to intoxication, and has numerous people on the record disputing her claim. Once again, I’m awaiting facts: evidence, corroboration, possible testimony,” Bila wrote.

 

The story has been criticized for admitting a lawyer spent six days assessing Ramirez’s memory, failing to confirm Kavanaugh actually attended the party, burying the fact that the New Yorker couldn’t confirm the story with witnesses and relies on decades-old hearsay.

 

“Ronan Farrow, Jane Mayer and the New Yorker ran with a story where the accuser still, today, right now, can not say that the person she is accusing actually is the one who did what she is alleging. IS THAT NUTS,” New York Post columnist Karol Markowicz wrote in a series of tweets mocking the story.

 

“The New Yorker piece is a terrible piece of journalism and it really seems like Farrow and Mayer know it,” Markowicz wrote. “I can’t remember the last time I was this angry about something in politics. This is disgusting.”

 

“I have no words for how sickened I am by how the left and the establishment media are weaponizing non-credible sexual assault claims to destroy a human being,” Daily Caller media editor Amber Athey tweeted.

 

Syndicated radio host Dana Loesch questioned if Farrow — who helped launch the #MeToo movement with his reporting on disgraced Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein – was given a byline to add credibility to the report. Erick Erickson echoed Loesch, saying the piece doesn’t live up to Farrow’s pristine reputation.

 

“All of these New Yorker stories about Kavanaugh seem as if they’re Mayer stories that Farrow was added to for credibility. Because they’re not up to his standard sourcing. Hell, they’re not really even sourced,” Erickson wrote.

 

Washington Examiner chief political correspondent Byron York sarcastically noted that the latest allegation “has it all.”

 

“Accuser was drunk. ’Significant gaps’ in her memory, recovered recently with help of lawyer. Memories fuzzy all ’round. Some say never happened. Accuser ‘never described incident until Brett’s SCOTUS nomination,’” York wrote.

 

While many of the piece’s critics are conservative pundits, several mainstream media members have also questioned the report. “CBS This Morning” co-host Gayle King asked Mayer if she was ok knowing that Ramirez admitted that she had gaps in her memory from the night in question.

 

 

 

“The story is very transparent about what she does and doesn’t remember,” Mayer insisted.

 

The CBS morning show further pressed Mayer, and Fox News contributor Stephen Miller called the exchange “embarrassing” after co-host Norah O’Donnell tweeted a clip.

 

The New York Times wasn’t as comfortable as Mayer, Farrow and The New Yorker — admitting it couldn’t find anyone with firsthand knowledge of the claim.

 

“The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge,” the Times wrote in a story that followed the New Yorker report. “Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.”

 

“So it was too shaky for the New York Times, but The New Yorker went with it. Very telling,” Fox News’ Britt Hume wrote.

 

Pundit Steve Cortes wrote that the “sham” story “couldn’t even meet the low standards” of the Times.

 

Despite all the criticism the story has received, Farrow and Mayer spent Monday morning defending their work with a variety of media appearances.

_____________________

Ramirez: I Think it was Kavanaugh Who Waved His Penis in My Face

John R. Houk

© September 24, 2018

___________________

Yes, Let’s See The Emails That Led To Deborah Ramirez’s Accusation Against Kavanaugh

 

Copyright HotAir.com/Salem Media. All Rights Reserved.

___________________

KAVANAUGH AND LAST-MINUTE ACCUSATIONS

 

© COPYRIGHT 2018, FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

 ____________________

Critics condemn New Yorker over uncorroborated Kavanaugh story: ‘Lazy at best, slimy at worst’

 

This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. ©2018 FOX News Network, LLC. All rights reserved.

 

[Blog Editor: In full disclosure I did not seek permission from Fox. That portion of this post will be removed upon request.]

 

Dems Lie So I Believe Kavanaugh


John R. Houk

© September 17, 2018

 

 

Christine Blasey Ford – 1984 Yearbook Photo & More Recent

 

Christine Blasey Ford (Blasey 36 years ago – Ford after marriage) has been identified as Brett Kavanaugh’s rape victim accuser. In a letter she gives a detailed description of Kavanaugh’s alleged assault at the age of 17 while in High School. The letter was made public by CNN with “REDACTED” of an alleged accomplice to the alleged sexual assault. REDACTED has been identified as Mark Judge who was Kavanaugh’s High School buddy. Judge stipulates the described incident NEVER occurred.

 

Mark Judge

 

A Paul Sperry tweet claims Brett Kavanaugh told Senator Orin Hatch “he wasn’t even at the party in question” (Gateway Pundit).

 

So where does that leave Americans following this sordid drama of Dems determined to protect old Judicial Activism of a probable unconstitutional Roe v. Wade decision validating child murder of unborn babies because birth control wasn’t used when two people do the wild thing?

 

I’ll tell you where that leave us. Someone is blatantly lying! And I’ll also tell you how this will at least partially proceed. An already polarized America will weigh in on this She said/He said situation based on political ideological differences and not really happened or didn’t happen.

 

Since I am a Christian Conservative, I’m lining up with what He said unless some solid proof shows Kavanaugh perpetrated a teenage hormone filled sexual assault. And here is why.

 

Leftist oriented Dems have a huge documented history of lying to push a Leftist agenda or protect the image of Leftists. The number one Leftist method of protecting their own image is develop a twisted or down false image of a situation or person.

 

The paradigm should read simply Leftists/Dems lie and the Leftist cadres believe the lie because it suits the Leftist agenda more than the truth.

 

HENCE, I have no problem believing Brett Kavanaugh is the victim of a smear campaign.

 

Judge Brett Kavanaugh

 

Let’s look at some recent examples from the previous Presidential Administration (by no means an exhaustive list of lies and deception) courtesy FrontPageMag.com:

 

Solyndra Scandal – The Obama administration provided this failing solar company with a $535 million stimulus-funded loan, courtesy of the American taxpayer. Taxpayer money kept pouring in despite the fact that the Office of Management and Budget warned that Solyndra was not a profitable or viable company. But it gets worse. The family foundation of billionaire George Kaiser, an Obama fundraiser, was one of Solyndra’s main investors. Can you say quid pro quo?

 

Veterans Affairs Scandal – Over 40 veterans needlessly died while waiting to be seen by doctors at a Phoenix VA facility. Another 1,700 veterans were forced to wait for months before being seen by medical personnel. An audit of the VA confirmed that VA officials systematically altered records and appointment schedules in a deliberate and methodical VA scheme to manipulate data to meet fabricated goals.

 

Operation Chokepoint Scandal – The Obama DOJ utilized the power of big government to pressure banks to cease doing business with industries with which the administration had ideological differences. Gun manufacturers and gun stores were prime targets even though they had not violated any laws. Eventually, the FDIC admitted to misconduct, bowed to pressure and significantly curtailed the discriminatory regulations after affected businesses threatened legal action.

 

Gibson Guitar Scandal – Armed federal agents executed four search warrants on Gibson Guitar Corp. facilities in Nashville and Memphis, Tenn., seizing guitars, electronic files and other inventory including wood that was purchased in India and Madagascar. The DOJ alleged that Gibson’s had violated an obscure law known as the Lacey Act which made it a crime to violate the environmental laws of another country. Gibson produced an affidavit from government officials in Madagascar stating that Gibson had violated none of that nation’s laws. Gibson also alleged that the DOJ was misinterpreting Indian law. Gibson’s CEO was a major donor to the GOP but his competitors, who purchased the same materials and were not GOP donors, were untouched by Obama’s DOJ. As part of a settlement to drop criminal charges, Gibson was required to pay a $250,000 fine and was required to donate $50,000 to an environmental group. Gibson was eventually able to retrieve its inventory from the clutches of the DOJ.

 

Fast & Furious Scandal – A scheme concocted by the Obama administration that went horribly wrong. The administration lost track of some 1,400 guns that made their way into the stream of criminal enterprises including those of the Mexican drug cartels. Two of the guns were found at the scene of the shooting of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry. Attorney General Eric Holder was cited for contempt of Congress for failing to turn over documents relating to the scandal. It was the first time Congress had taken such an action against a sitting Cabinet official. Seventeen Democrats joined Republicans in voting in favor of the criminal contempt resolution.

 

DOJ-James Rosen Scandal – FOX News journalist, James Rosen became the target of Obama’s DOJ in yet another example of extreme government overreaching. Believing that Rosen was responsible for a leak concerning a policy decision on North Korea, AG Eric Holder sought a subpoena for Rosen’s emails claiming that Rosen had broken the law “at the very least, either as an aider, abettor and/or co-conspirator.” The government’s affidavit also accused Rosen of possibly violating the Espionage Act. It appeared that the DOJ was acting like the East German Stasi in chasing fictitious enemies of the state. In a rare instance of bipartisanship, Holder was roundly criticized from all sides of the political spectrum and Holder himself was later forced to acknowledge that he regretted the episode.

 

Gruber-Obamacare Scandal – To establish Obamacare’s validity, Obama hired economist and academic Jonathan Gruber to give the plan his seal of approval. Gruber was later caught on video and audio making several disparaging remarks about Americans, stating that Obamacare’s passage rested on the “stupidity of the American voter.” Democrats later tried to distance themselves from him and tried to minimize his role in formulating Obamacare but there was no debating that he was one of Obamacare’s chief architects and was paid nearly $400,000 for his services. Gruber confirmed what most of us already knew; that Obamacare passed as a result of a concerted effort by the administration to deceive the American people.

 

Skolkovo Scandal – While serving as secretary of state, Clinton oversaw a program meant to “reset” relations with Moscow and improve ties. The program centered around the Russian city of Skolkovo near Moscow with the stated aim of “identifying areas of cooperation and pursuing joint projects and actions that strengthen strategic stability, international security, economic well-being, and the development of ties between the American and Russian people.” The program transformed Skolkovo into a technology hub akin to a Silicon Valley. Sensitive American technology was transferred to the Russians, substantially enhancing their military and cyber capabilities. The US Army and the FBI concluded that Russia had exploited the program for military applications. The FBI warned American technology companies doing business in Skolkovo that the Skolkovo project was a means by which the Russians would acquire dual use technologies and apply them for military ends. According to investigative author Peter Schweizer, Russian and American companies and individuals involved in the Skolkovo fiasco “had major financial ties to the Clintons.” Moreover, during the Russian reset period, those entities provided the Clintons with “tens of millions of dollars” in the form of “contributions to the Clinton Foundation, paid for speeches by Bill Clinton, or investments in small start-up companies with deep Clinton ties.”

 

Benghazi Scandal – U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed during an attack on the American consulate office. The Obama administration initially denied that the attack was terror related and instead peddled the now false and discredited narrative that it was triggered by a reaction to an anti-Muslim film. However, emails later confirmed that administration officials were well aware that it was a well-orchestrated, premeditated attack planned by Islamist terrorists and had nothing to do with an internet film. In addition, a congressional committee found that the delay in deploying military assets to the theater, which it attributed to needless bureaucratic bungling, almost certainly cost those men their lives.

 

IRS Exemption Scandal – IRS officials, taking their cues from the White House delayed, ignored or rejected nonprofit status applications from groups deemed to be right-wing or pro-Israel. Eventually, Former IRS senior executive Lois Lerner, one of the key actors in the scandal was held to be in contempt of Congress, though Holder’s DOJ refused to prosecute.

 

Iran Ransom Scandal – In deal to secure the release of four Americans held hostage by Iran, the Obama administration gave the Iranian government $1.7 billion in unmarked, untraceable cash, stacked in pallets. The money promptly went to finance Iran’s terrorist activities. Attorney General Loretta Lynch was required to sign off on the ransom deal but no paper bearing her signature was ever produced despite congressional calls compelling her to do so.

 

Bergdahl-Guantanamo Scandal – Obama released 5 hardened Taliban terrorists for convicted deserter Bowe Bergdahl. The release of the terrorists was in violation of the National Defense Authorization Act. Obama was required to provide Congress with 30-days’ notice prior to releasing the Guantanamo detainees but he only provided notice on the actual day of the exchange. Consequently, the chief counsel for the Government Accountability Office determined that the Pentagon had illegally spent the money used to facilitate the prisoner exchange. In addition, like Benghazi, the administration tried to spin the story and portrayed Bergdahl as a soldier who “served with honor and distinction.” Lastly, at least 3 of the 5 detainees released for Bergdahl have reverted to their terrorist habits placing America and its allies at risk.

 

Dossier Scandal – Elements within the FBI and DOJ who were hostile to Trump and friendly to Clinton obtained a salacious and unverified dossier on Trump which was compiled by a British foreign agent from Russian sources. In addition to being unverified, unreliable and based exclusively on Russian sources, the dossier amounted to opposition research because it was obtained by agents and operatives working directly and indirectly for the Clinton campaign. Despite this knowledge, the FBI dressed up the dossier to appear as if it was a legitimate intelligence document and then used it to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on American citizens.

 

Clinton Email Server Scandal – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton used an unsecured bathroom server to send and receive classified information. It is a virtual certainty that many of Clinton’s emails were compromised by foreign, hostile governments. Over 33,000 emails belonging to the State Department were deleted and some of Clinton’s state department emails ended up on a registered sex offender’s laptop. Clinton was criminally exonerated by the FBI and Loretta Lynch’s DOJ blindly accepted the FBI’s findings and recommendations without conducting an examination of its own. FBI agent Peter Strzok, who maintained a visceral hatred toward Trump and was deeply involved in the email investigation, later changed the wording of a memo exonerating Clinton to “extremely careless” from “grossly negligent.” The change was significant because the latter language tracked the wording of the criminal statute. FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, who was also involved in investigating Clinton, failed to disclose that his wife had accepted $500,000 for her state senate campaign from long-time Clinton ally, Terry McAuliffe.

 

Uranium 1 Scandal – While serving as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton signed off on a deal that allowed Russia to acquire 20 percent of America’s uranium mining capacity. While other members of the Obama cabinet were also required to sign off for approval of the deal, Clinton was the only cabinet figure to obtain direct pecuniary benefit, to the tune of millions of dollars, from entities with vested interests in seeing the acquisition completed. She never disclosed this conflict of interest when giving her authorization. Once in Russian hands, some of the uranium, the foundational material for nuclear bombs, was exported abroad.

 

Loretta Lynch-Bill Clinton Tarmac Scandal – While Hillary Clinton was being criminally investigated by the FBI, Loretta Lynch, the nation’s top law enforcement official met with Bill Clinton for 30 minutes at a Phoenix tarmac where she says they discussed “grandchildren” and “golf.” Later, it was revealed that she instructed FBI Director James Comey to refer to the investigation as a “matter” rather than an investigation, tracking the Clinton campaign’s talking points. Finally, Comey testified in a closed session before the Intelligence Committee, that he confronted Lynch with a sensitive document in which it was suggested that Lynch was going to use her authority and power of her office to thwart prosecution of Clinton irrespective of the FBI’s findings. Lynch reportedly stared at the document and then “looked up with a steely silence that lasted for some time, then asked him if he had any other business with her and if not that he should leave her office.”

 

Project Cassandra Scandal – In an effort to curry favor with the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Obama administration delayed, obstructed and ultimately shut down a DEA initiative aimed at thwarting Hezbollah arms trafficking, drug trafficking and money laundering schemes. As a result, Hezbollah continued to import drugs into the United States, continued to supply anti-American insurgents with deadly Explosively Formed Projectiles and continued to engage in massive money laundering schemes. (THE OBAMA YEARS: A LEGACY OF SCANDAL AND DECEPTION; By Ari Lieberman; FrontPageMag.com; 12/27/17)

 

You must realize there are more lies and deception not mentioned by FrontPageMag.com. And I haven’t touched the pre-2008 Obama lies and deception, or the Bill and (Crooked) Hillary Clinton scandals. I’m telling you DEMS LIE!

 

AND GUESS WHAT?

 

Christine Blasey Ford is a dyed in the wool Dem dedicated to the Leftist agenda. What’s the paradigm? That’s right, Leftists lie.

 

To date though we are still left with She said/He said. The Kavanagh camp have signed endorsement of 65 female past High Schoolers attesting to Kavanaugh’s good character. Not to be out done, the Christine Blasey Ford camp has “alumnae of Holton-Arms School, and we are writing in support of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford”:

 

“The letter concludes by saying it has already been signed by “200+” Holton Arms alumnae stretching from 1968 through the present day.” (Hundreds of Women From Christine Blasey Ford’s High School Sign Letter Supporting Her; By Rafi Schwartz; Splinter News; 9/17/18 2:04pm)

 

Take note those vouching for Ford’s stretches “1968 through the present day.” This indicates the signatories did not necessarily know Christine Blasey Ford but are supportive of what they believe she stands for as a past graduate of Holton-Arms School. Whereas Kavanaugh’s 65 lady contemporaries from his High School years knew Kavanaugh’s character.

 

Since Dems have a propensity to lie or believe a lie for the sake of the agenda, I will assume Kavanaugh is telling the truth. Give me some kind of forensic evidence that proves otherwise or I’ll stick with paradigm – DEMS LIE!

 

Of possible interest:

 

GOP Weighs How to Proceed With Brett Kavanaugh Nomination; By Kristina Peterson and Peter Nicholas; Wall Street Journal; 9/17/18 3:29 p.m. ET

 

Kavanaugh’s Accuser is Discredited AGAIN – Classmate Comes Forward With Blistering Stat[e]ment; BY AMY MORENO; Truth Feed News;  9/17/18

 

Bad Blood: Judge Kavanaugh’s Mother Foreclosed on Far Left Accuser’s Parents’ Home; By Jim Hoft; The Gateway Pundit; 9/17/18

 

BREAKING: Writer of Confidential Kavanaugh Letter Speaks Out – She’s a Far-Left Activist! By Cristina Laila; The Gateway Pundit; 9/16/18

 

HAPPENING NOW: Kavanaugh Hits Back at His Accuser in This Powerful Statement; BY AMY MORENO; Truth Feed News; 9/17/18

 

JRH 9/17/18

In this current state of media censorship & defunding, consider chipping in a few bucks for enjoying (or even despising yet read) this Blog.

Please Support NCCR

**********************

VIDEO: REPORT: Court Records Reveal a Sinister Connection Between Christine Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh’s …

 

Posted by BreaKing News 24H

Published on Sep 17, 2018

 

REPORT: Court Records Reveal a Sinister Connection Between Christine Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh’s Family. The evidence is stacking up against the woman accusing patriotic and honorable Judge Kavanaugh. It’s…

 

https://truthfeednews.com/report-court-records-reveal-a-sinister-connection-between-christine-blasey-ford-and-kavanaughs-family/