WHO IS CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD? BARREL & PORK.

PORK, it is my conclusion that Christine Blasey Ford is a consummate liar and that her story is a calculated, fabricated effort to take down Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a man with an unblemished record.

Post re Mrs. Ford: http://www.potuswars.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=160&action=edit

Why do I say that?

1. After 36 years, did she “remember” and claim that she drank only “one beer?” Yes. Could she remember the day of her alleged polygraph even though it was a couple of weeks earlier on her grandmother’s birthday? No.
2. After 36 years, did she “remember” music was playing in the room where allegedly she was assaulted? Yes.
3. Can she show us the house on a map? No.
4. Can she tell us how many people were there at the house? No.
5. Can she tell us how old she was? No. She said 17. Then she said 15.
6. Can she tell us how she got home? No.
7. Can she tell us the address where the alleged assault took place? No.
8. Can she tell us the date of the alleged party? No.
9. Can she tell us the month the alleged party happened? No.
10. Can she tell us the place? No.
11. Can she tell us the year the alleged assault took place? No.
12. Can she tell us who drove her home? No.
13. Can she tell us who drove her to the alleged party? No.
14. Can she tell us who owned the house the alleged party was in? No. Can she drive us to the house? No. Can she tell us the color of the house or the landscaping? No.
15. Can she tell us how many persons were in the room where she was allegedly assaulted? No. First it was 4 and then 2.
16. Did she leave who her parents and brothers are off from her Wikipedia site? Yes.
17. Did she admit that she was drinking at the alleged party? Yes.
18. Did she explain why she is alleged in yearbooks and internet sites to have been a serious alcohol drinker during high school? No. Did she address whether she is currently an alcoholic? No.
19. Did she explain to us why she is a liberal activist? No.
20. Did she explain to us why she is anti-Trump? No.
21. Did she explain to us why she is alleged to have written the words “Scalia-types must be banned from law” on her Facebook page in 2016? No.
22. Did she explain to us why she is alleged to be portrayed in Holton Arms yearbooks as a binge drinker and a promiscuous wild party girl with multiple partners, as many as 54, during high school to college? No.
23. Did she explain why it is alleged that she asked that the letter not be disclosed and then personally disclosed the letter? No.
24. Did she explain why it is alleged that she colluded with Senator Feinstein and or her staff to create and leak the letter? No.
25. Did she explain why it is alleged that her father Ralph Blasey II worked and still works for the CIA? No.
26. Did she explain why it is alleged that her father Ralph Blasey II was vice president for the National Savings and Trust “black budget bank” known for funding CIA deep state operations? No.
27. Did she explain why it is alleged that her grandfather was a key figure in the CIA? No.
28. Did she explain why it is alleged that she heads up the CIA undergraduate internship program at Stanford University? No.
29. Did she explain why she has now raised $750,000 off her story when her attorneys are allegedly working pro bono and travel at most costs a few thousand dollars? No. And did she explain that she is or soon will be a millionaire because she “came forward” like Anita Hill who became a millionaire writing books for Doubleday? No. And did she explain why her attorneys are now being investigated? No.
30. Did she explain why there are at least 14 serious errors in the letter she claims to have written, errors no PhD would make, errors that would be made by an inexperienced writer, perhaps an inexperienced writer from another country, or an old person of another generation like Senator Feinstein? No.
31. Did she state that she left the alleged party without telling anyone there were two rapists in the building? Yes.
32. Did she lie about being afraid to fly? Yes.
33. Did she fly long distances for vacations yet use the excuse of fear of flying to put off the hearing and buy the democrats added time? Yes.
34. Did she or her accomplices diligently try to scrub the internet of anything incriminating about her binge drinking and promiscuity as a teen? Yes.
35. Did she reveal her alleged harm to democrats only? Yes. Did she explain why she did not go to the police at any point? No.
36. Did she reveal herself to the anti-Trump Washington Post? Yes.
37. Did she state that she came forward because she saw Judge Kavanaugh’s name on POTUS Trump’s list? Yes.
38. Was Judge Kavanaugh’s name on POTUS Trump’s list at the time she alleges? No. It was added later so she would not have seen it and thus lied about it.
39. So did she lie about the reason she came forward? Yes.
40. Did she tell anyone at the time of the alleged incident? No.
41. Did she tell anyone there were two “rapists” in the house? No.
42. Did she tell her brothers? She says not
43. Did she tell her father? She says not.
44. Did she tell her mother? She says not.
45. Did she tell us why it is alleged that her brother Ralph Blasey III worked for the International Law Firm of … Baker Hostetler; the firm that created FusionGPS, the company that wrote the infamous “Russia Dossier”? No.
46. Did she tell us who her brothers are and what they do for a living and what they did when she was in high school? No. Did she tell us how many times her brothers drove her to parties or other places? No. Did she tell us her brothers’ involvement in such parties? No.
47. Did she tell us who her father is? No.
48. Did she tell us who her mother is? No.
49. Did she turn over her therapist notes to the Senate Judiciary Committee? No.
50. Did she withhold essential details about the alleged polygraph? Yes.
51. Does any person she lists as being at the alleged party confirm her story? No.
52. Does any witness from anywhere in the world corroborate any element of her story? No.
53. Does her life-friend support or deny her story? Denies.
54. Is her “little girl voice” demeanor during her testimony credible? No.
55. Is her lack of emotion during her testimony credible? No.
56. Is her polygraph uncorroborated and as such is it worthless? Yes. Does she tell us who ordered her polygraph? No.
57. Is her Safeway reference credible? No.
58. Is her slight show of emotion during her testimony credible? No.
59. Is her tucking of the head demeanor and tongue pushing during her testimony indicative that she was and is not credible? Yes.
60. Is she specific after 36 years that she locked herself in the bathroom? Yes. Has she explained why the two “rapists” did not follow her? No.
61. Is she an accomplice and shill of the far left? Yes.
62. Was she raped? No. Was she assaulted? May have been but it wasn’t by Brett Kavanaugh.
63. If she was Holton Arms High School promiscuous during her teenage years as alleged in immense detail in “her” school yearbooks, does this negate her alleged assault and attempted rape story completely? Yes. Has she explained the “erotic” details about Holton Arms High School girls alcohol binges to blackout and multiple sex partners and break beach parties/black out orgies even involving older men? No. Has she explained why two other men have come forward to say they assaulted her? No.
64. If she is tied to the CIA and the law firm that created the infamous “dossier” and the Clintons in multiple ways as alleged (Judge Kavanaugh called out the Clintons), if she colluded with the democrats as is apparent from the Kavanaugh Ford hearing, if she colluded with Senator Feinstein (who went out of her way to set herself apart with plausible denability,  yet Senator Feinstein duplicitously withheld the alleged Ford letter from Senator Grassley and the committee, thereby obstructing justice, and if she colluded with Senator Feinstein’s staff, does even a fraction of such conduct negate her story that she was assaulted, that two men attempted to rape her? Yes.
65. Did she collude with others including Senator Feinstein, whose attempt at plausible deniability was blatant and whose intent and conduct was to obstruct justice, and did Mrs. Ford collude with Senator Feinstein’s staff, and others she refers to as friends in California? Yes.
66. Did she fabricate her story about Judge Kavanaugh? Yes.
67. Is she responsible for the trauma caused to Judge Kavanaugh and his family including daughters and wife and others? Yes.
68. What happens now? Wait and see what the FBI reports and applaud Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation by the Senate in the next few days. Although Mrs. Ford may have been assaulted sometime in the past, there is no corroborating evidence whatsoever that Christine Ford was assaulted by Judge Kavanaugh.