Kavanaugh's accuser recovered her memory at the time Dems were panicked Romney would win and nominate him to SCOTUS

[Jayhawker]

By Thomas Lifson September 17, 2018

Bookworm has noticed an odd coincidence: after telling no one her story about the alleged incident for decades, she suddenly remembered and spoke about it in couples' therapy in 2012, when leftists perceived the possibility that Mitt Romney, ahead in the polls, would win the presidency and appoint Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. She writes:

In 2012, Romney ran against Obama. Up until his 47% gaffe, Romney was doing well. He actually had a shot of winning.

For the Democrats, as has been the case since Bork, having a Republican in the White House, especially with the ever-aging but never retiring Ruth Bader Ginsburg a perpetual risk, raised the specter of a conservative judge getting appointed to the Supreme Court. With that in mind, one Twitter user, who must have an amazing memory, remembered something interesting he'd read back in 2012:

https://t.co/hxaYqQfPI0 March 2012, the left was preparing for a possible Romney win. They assessed that Kavanaugh would be his Supreme Court pick and this accusation was ready to go. Then Obama won so the story died. Now its reemerged. Read last few lines of this 2012 article

— Stonewall Jackson (@1776Stonewall) September 16, 2018

I'll save you a click to The New Yorker website. The article, which The New Yorker published in 2012, is a Jeffrey Toobin analysis about Bret [sic] Kavanaugh and the threat he would pose should he get on the Supreme Court. According to Toobin, Kavanaugh was a scary conservative who, if he got on the Court, might overturn Obamacare[.] ...

Just pay attention to that last paragraph:

If a Republican, any Republican, wins in November, his most likely first nominee to the Supreme Court will be Brett Kavanaugh. (Emphasis mine.)

In 2012, Romney might have won the election. In 2012, Toobin stoked Democrat fears that Kavanaugh, a conservative, might get on the Supreme Court and overturn Obamacare. And in 2012, Ford…suddenly can't stop talking about her hitherto undisclosed claim that Kavanaugh was a bad boy almost 30 years before.

It certainly is an odd coincidence.


https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/kavanaughs_accuser_recovered_her_memory_at_the_time_dems_were_panicked_romney_would_win_and_nominate_him_to_scotus.html

 

[Jayhawker]

Professor accusing Kavanaugh is radical SJW with some damning student reviews
By Selwyn Duke September 17, 2018



It's true that Bill Clinton's liberal '90s apologists justified his sexual misconduct with the claim "character doesn't matter." It nonetheless does, and since Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation hopes are being influenced by accusations that may speak to his character, it's only fair to examine the character of his accuser. This woman, Palo Alto University psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford, is a radical social justice warrior with some damning student reviews – including one from a person who wrote, "I am honestly scared of her."

Ford's accusation goes back to her high school days, in approximately 1982, when she would have been 15 and Kavanaugh 17. She claims that Kavanaugh lay on top of her and groped her while heavily intoxicated and that the incident ended when a friend of his, Mark Judge, jumped on both of them, sending them all tumbling (you can read a more thorough account here).

Whatever the truth of the matter, however, certainly true is that Ford is a radical leftist who'd be inclined to zealously oppose a Kavanaugh nomination. For example, Breitbart reports that she not only has attended anti-Trump events, but actually donned a pink "brain p‑‑‑‑ hat" for a 2017 anti-Trump march.

Just as telling may be her student reviews. Consider the following screen grab of one of her reviews (now scrubbed) from the popular site Rate My Professors:

Given that many people enter psychology to, at least in part, remedy their own problems, that there could be "something wrong with her" wouldn't make Ford unusual.

Some bad reviews were posted just Sunday, after Ford's identity was revealed. They generally have no detail, and it's safe to assume they were posted for political reasons (and Rate My Professors has been removing them), but then there's also the 2014 review below:

There are a couple of other older "Awful" reviews, as well as two students rating Ford "Average" and a pair labeling her "Awesome." Yet even one of the latter – after saying that while the professor is not that "personable," he'd "enjoy taking her for another course in the future" – warns, "Stay on her good side though..." Why would this be necessary? An ethical teacher doesn't let personal animus influence the way students are treated.

But perhaps what a woman named Rebecca Diserio posted to Twitter Sunday explains the problem. She wrote, "Both of my sons had her [Ford] at CSF....my son who just became a Deputy Sheriff (LA County) said 'She's crazy.' Harped & attacked kids who argued for conservative values...both my sons withdrew from her class after two weeks...her bias was way worse than most SJW professors."

So has Kavanaugh gotten on Ford's bad side by expressing conservative ideas? Probably. And even if her allegations are true, I very much doubt she'd have come forward had Kavanaugh stayed on her good side by being a leftist reprobate in the mold of Slick Willie or Chappaquiddick Ted Kennedy. For a good example of such situational sexual mores, note that liberal reporter Nina Burleigh actually said in 1998 about B. Clinton, "I'd be happy to give him [oral sex] just to thank him for keeping abortion legal."

As for Kavanaugh, unless it's shown that he's like Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy and has exhibited a pattern of sexual wrongdoing, there's nothing to see here. Ford claims that the 36-year-old alleged incident of sexual misconduct took place in a room with only her and the two boys present. So while 65 women who knew Kavanaugh in high school have come forward to vouch for his character as a gentleman, Ford's lone word is the only claim against him. Heck, there are more testimonials as to Ford's alleged insanity than there are regarding Kavanaugh's alleged impropriety.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/professor_accusing_kavanaugh_is_radical_sjw_with_some_damning_student_reviews.html

 

[Jayhawker]

What is Christine Blasey Ford trying to hide?
By Monica Showalter September 17, 2018



After Democrats all but lose the prospect of derailing the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, suddenly a new accuser with a 35-year-old charge of groping abuse comes out of the woodwork. Problem is, she doesn't want to tell us everything.

Christine Blasey Ford's accusation started with a letter – an anonymous accusatory letter of bad behavior dating from high school. A letter we were supposed to believe, a guy's career we were supposed to ruin, yet we were to take only on faith that there was any merit to it.

Well, that fell apart, so the accuser came forward. She had psychologist's notes dating from 2012. She says she passed a polygraph. And the picture she painted was imaginable, as witness stories are – there were holes in the story (she had no idea where she was or how she got home, she didn't want to say anything to anyone so as to avoid getting in trouble), and her charges – groping, clothes grabbed at, but no rape – were not over the top. All of that made her look rather believable, because, well, I am about the same age as her and know what it was like to be 17. Seventeen-year-old girls often are groped by certain kinds of boys.

But her case rapidly fell apart when it wasn't just a problem from her long ago.

Turns out her present politics has a lot to do with what we are seeing. She's a fanatic Bay Area far-left activist. She donated cash to ShareBlue, a generic Democratic front for cash-raising of the Obama-hipster variety. On Twitter, there was some talk (unverified) that she gave $5,000 to Hillary Clinton, and a more reliable report from reporter Ryan Saavedra that she gave money to Bernie Sanders, the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. She also made pink pussy hats and participated in the anti-Trump women's marches. And her 2012 trip to the therapist took place right when Kavanaugh's name came up in the news as a possible Mitt Romney Supreme Court nominee, though interestingly, Kavanaugh's name was not used in her own claims in the report. There could have been abuse, but frankly, it could have been anyone. Memories fade.

Most tellingly, before she came out as the accuser, she spent what must have been days scrubbing her social media accounts of all the lefty activities and statements she must have been involved in. That's the detail that stands out to me.

Why did she do that?

Just because someone is a lefty does not mean he can't be a victim of a high school groper. Left-wingers would be the very first to point this out. Why did she scrub it?

Obviously, because it was to conceal her political agenda and make her case stronger as that of a random objective woman telling the truth, not a lefty activist desperate to make a difference for the Democrats.

To draw on my own experience, dating from early college at the Jesuit Catholic University of San Francisco in the early 1980s, I remember the gropers and attackers, too. They were never the Catholic schoolboys. The Catholic schoolboys from the West Coast were all fine young men and all good marrying material. They often came from the wine country of the Central Valley and Napa Valley, or down the central coast, and often were of Italian and French and Portuguese descent, similar to Rep. Devin Nunes. The East Coast Catholic schoolboys were more sociable, party-hearty types, great drinkers, and a great addition, even if they hated President Reagan, which, of course, the rest of us didn't. They didn't grope or act like jerks; they were just good with jokes, drinks, and having fun.

There were the gropers and attackers, however – and they were the non-Catholic schoolboys. Most commonly, they were foreign exchange students from other cultures that had no tradition of respecting women. I remember a Sudanese guy who tried to force himself on me, and some awful Libyans and Lebanese Muslims, although the Lebanese Catholic students were exactly the same as the U.S. Catholic schoolboys. Specifically, the bad kids were from Islamic cultures, and we Catholic university girls knew early on about the cultural problems of those societies, decades before 9/11. I still really wonder why the Catholic university exposed us to those dirtbags. Perhaps they did not know.

Ford's portrayal of Catholic schoolboys gone wild doesn't stack up to my experience at all – nor does it stack up to the experience of the 65 women who say Kavanaugh never acted like that. Those women I find believable.

This leaves the question open as I think of how Ford scrubbed her social media: what is she trying to hide here?

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/what_is_christine_braley_ford_trying_to_hide.html

 

[Jayhawker]

Are there any witnesses? Is there any other evidence that can be used against Kavanaugh? Anyone can make an accusation. Anyone can lie. Why are we assuming that his woman is telling the truth? Has she never lied before? She took a polygraph test that said she was telling the truth, but polygraph results are unreliable, risky as evidence and therefore not admissible in court for a reason. No witnesses (other than Kavanaugh’s friend, Mark Judge) , no proof, and she admits she was underage (15) and drunk at a pool party. She has no recollection of the date (including year in High School) or location. What woman wouldn’t remember that? Said it was Kavanaugh and another guy, now it’s become 4 guys. Believes she would have been raped if he had not been very drunk and possibly inadvertently murdered by him. Interestingly, she has some of her therapist’s notes. Hmmmm



Sixty-five women who knew Kavanagh in high school defended him in a separate letter, circulated by Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans, as someone who "always treated women with decency and respect."



"I am willing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee in any way the Committee deems appropriate to refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity," Kavanaugh said.


Katz, her attorney, said her client was willing to tell her story in public to the Judiciary panel, although no lawmakers or their aides had yet contacted her. Katz also denied that Ford, a Democrat, is politically motivated. Oh, sure. At the 11th hour, all this from Diane Feinstein. The timing is highly suspect. Ford may be telling the truth, but too much makes it incredibly doubtful. Looks like a last ditch effort by the Democrats to delay his nomination until after the election when they expect to win the House, if not the Senate, too, and start impeachment proceedings against Trump. Let Ford testify.



This is a repeat of the borking of Clarence Thomas.

 

[Sheila]

I found that highly suspicious that Ford recovered her memory in 2012 when Romney set forth Kavanaugh name for his choice. She is a left wing zealot on abortion.

Also, Kavanaugh’s mother was judge involved in legal case when parents Maryland home foreclosed. Ford conveniently scrubbed her social media internet sites before letter was released.
Circumstances of letter being kep 3 months then leaked is suspicious. Taking lie detector test in August, why? We need to hear from Ford under oath. She has til friday to decide whether she speaks out on Monday. GOP bending over backward to accommodate her.

Her original letter still has not been sent to Grassley. He has a condensed, redacted version.
If she does not testify and Grassley holds vote, will Kavanaugh be tainted, a cloud over his head? The crazies out there will paint him guilty - you know that. They are destroying his reputation and credibility to be a Justice in SCOTUS.