Oct 012018
 

What kind of young girl would drink to the point of coma at a “party” with four boys and one other girl? OK, she got a hold of herself and finished her education and has two children but that’s now, not back then. 

Is she credible. Based on her unproven and unprovable accusations, No, of course not. She should have kept her mouth shut. As it stands, she’s further alienated Americans over what might have been just a prank.
Ford was drunk. By her own admission she was drunk. Drank too much. We give little credibility to drunks. Even less to those who appear 36 years after an incident in which they should not have been involved in the first place.
Two men appeared and said Christine mistook them for Kavanaugh. WHo’s lying now?
Christine better hope she never has to appear before Judge Kavanaugh or any of his colleagues. this is one mixed up accuser.

Oct 012018
 

By any standard of truth, justice, fairness, evidence, and facts, Dr. Ford is not only not credible, she is nothing close to credible. Her antics made sure President Trump’s selection is confirmed.

Let us count the incredible ways that Dr. Ford isn’t credible:
John Nolte from Brietbart wrote:

  • She has aligned herself with the extreme Get Trump far-left. . J. Edgar Hoover described “Ma” Barker as “the most vicious, dangerous and resourceful criminal brain of the last decade” Hoover must never have met Senator Diane Feingold whose behavior to destroy Brett Kavanaugh is clearly criminal. 

  • Christine Fors straight-up lied about being afraid to fly.

  • She said she wanted anonymity but continually reached out to the far-left Washington Post.

  • Her polygraph is a farce.

  • Her story has been carefully weaved into a Kafka-esque nightmare no man (even with detailed calendars) can ever escape from.

  • Every single one of her witnesses refutes her story — has no memory of the gathering in question or says it doesn’t happen, and this includes a lifelong friend.

  • Her team was so desperate to have The Woman Who Wants Anonymity to testify publicly, they turned down the opportunity to have her questioned in private at her home in California — and then lied about it.

  • Ford’s therapist’s notes from 2012 also refute here tale, even as the media and Democrats try to gaslight us into believing the opposite. Ford originally claimed four boys tried to rape her when she was in her late teens in the mid-eighties. Now she says it was one rapist and one bystander when she was 15 in the early eighties.

  • Ford refused to give her therapist’s notes to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

  • In the statement she wrote out in her farce of a polygraph test, Ford crossed out “early 80’s” so it would only read “80’s.”

  • Ford told the Committee the “primary impact” of the event occurred during the “four years after” it happened. She goes on to say, “I struggled academically. I struggled very much in Chapel Hill and in College. When I was 17 I went off to college, I had a very hard time.” Note how she skips over two whole years, her junior and senior years in high school; the two school years directly after the attack (unless it did indeed happen in her late teens).

  • To later confirm the event did in fact happen in 1982, Ford told the Committee she was able to pin it down to 1982 because she remembered she did not yet have her drivers’ license. But… she also says she doesn’t remember how she got to or from the house party, so how does she know she didn’t drive herself?

  • Ford also used Mark Judge’s Safeway job to confirm the 1982 timeline. She testified she saw him working there 6-8 weeks after the attack. She could not yet drive, so her mother drove her there, but for some bizarre reason Ford and her mother entered the Safeway using different doors. (And now mom can’t confirm this happened!)

  • Five times during her testimony she mentioned Safeway to verify the date. How could she know such a thing unless it really happened? Well, in his memoir (which began circulating online among Kavanaugh critics in the week before Ford’s testimony) Judge helpfully reveals he was working at the “local supermarket” during the “summer before senior year.”

  • In summation: On top of all four of her own witnesses refuting her allegations against Kavanaugh, so too do the notes taken by her own therapist. (Margot Cleveland’s tweet thread was indispensable for much of this — you will want to readit all.)

Dr. Ford’s allegations are not only not credible — they are ludicrous, a joke…

Even what she does remember is so full of holes you could bounce Brian Stelter through it:

  • She didn’t hear two very drunk and belligerent boys sneak up on her?

  • Why was music already on in a room no one was using?

  • Wouldn’t blasting music ensure someone came upstairs to see what was going on, especially whoever’s house it was? This is completely counter-intuitive to criminal behavior.

  • After she locked herself in the bathroom, her rapists didn’t try to get at her? Didn’t jiggle the doorknob? Didn’t try to claim they were kidding? All tuned up for a rape, they just gave up and went downstairs laughing like nothing happened?

  • She remember how many beers she had (only one), but has been wildly inconsistent on the number of people who attended this small gathering, the number of people who were  in the room where the assault allegedly happened, and by extension the number of boys who tried to rape her.

  • She left without telling her best friend?

  • She left without WARNING her best friend there were two rapists in the house?

  • No one asked why she was leaving or found it strange enough to ask her the following day why she just vanished from the party?

  • She can remember how many beers she had (one) but not whose house she was in, how she got home, the date, the place, how many people were there (sometimes it’s 4, or 5 or 6), or anything solid?

  • She will show the Washington Post her therapist’s note but not the Senate, which represents We the People?

No one who believes in truth can declare this nonsense credible. But beyond that, where is the instinct of human decency that makes it impossible to cruelly and publicly smear a man as having “credible” sexual assault allegation leveled against him when those allegations are the very definition of horse shit.