News

Kavanaugh Will Testify, Denies "Completely False" Claims As Accuser's Motives Questioned

Judge Brett Kavanaugh will talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee about 11th hour accusations levied by a woman who says he sexually assaulted her while they were teenagers in high school.

His accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, has a hazy recollection of the incident, admitting she doesn’t specifically remember the year it happened, where the incident occurred, whose house it was, how she got there, and whether Kavanaugh and a witness (who denies the account) were already upstairs when she went up, and how she got home that night. 

Blasey Ford’s account is also at odds with a therapist’s notes from 2012 (coincidentally the same year many thought Kavanaugh would be Romney’s pick for Supreme Court), which details that four men were in the room when she was allegedly assaulted, vs. just Kavanaugh and another teenager, Mark Judge. 

Kavanaugh denied the allegations in a Monday statement, saying: “I have never done anything like what the accuser describes — to her or to anyone. Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself yesterday.”

Meanwhile, Trump counselor Kellyanne Conway says that the President as well as members of the Senate Judiciary Committee say that Blasey Ford – who says she has passed a polygraph test, “will be heard.” 

“So, let me make very clear … I have spoken with the president. I have spoken with Senator Graham and others. This woman will be heard,” Conway told Fox and Friends

Possible motives to smear Kavanaugh?

Several theories have been floating around the internet regarding Blasey Ford’s motives – the foremost being that Blasey has an axe to grind because Kavanaugh’s mother, former Montgomery County Circuit Court judge Martha Kavanaugh, presided over foreclosure proceedings for Blasey’s parents. 

While some argue that any past connection between the Kavanaughs and the Blaseys muddies the waters, one commenter on Freerepublic.com did his homework, and while “not trying to defend this woman,” concludes “it means nothing.” 

I have researched this. There was no foreclosure. On 08/08/96 UMLIC-EIGHT CORP, the lender, filed a request for foreclosure of the Blaseys’ property at 17 Masters Court, Potomac. On 08/13/96 Judge Michael D. Mason granted that request. According to the Montgomery County Land Records, on December 17, 1996, the Blaseys refinanced the property with Chevy Chase Bank. On 01/27/97 Judge Martha Kavanaugh signed UMLIC’s motion to dismiss the foreclosure.

So the Blaseys refinanced the property, paid the foreclosing lender, and a foreclosure never occurred. Judge Kavanaugh’s only involvement was to sign the dismissal of the foreclosure action, which would hardly create any animosity towards her or Brett by the Blaseys. It is also important to understand that foreclosures in Maryland are largely administrative. They are not adversarial proceedings in which a judge ultimately picks a side. –FreeRepublic

Others have claimed there’s a connection between Ford’s brother and Fusion GPS, as he worked for law firm Baker & Hostetler, which hired Fusion to investigate wealthy investor Bill Browder.

That is a “non-angle” according to America Talks Live co-host John Cardillo, as Ford’s brother left the massive firm in 2004, and Fusion wasn’t founded until 2011. 

So with the two main “conflict of interest” theories reduced to tin-foil, it appears that we’re down to Kavanaugh and Ford facing off in a believe-a-thon, the likes of which haven’t been seen since Anita Hill’s accusation of USSC Justice Clarence Thomas at the 11th hour of his confirmation – after the FBI leaked an interview given by Hill. 

And at the end of the day, the Democrats’ decision to sit on this for six weeks before peddling the accusation days before the confirmation vote may do more to harm Blasey-Ford’s credibility than her own murky memories of what happened. 

As an aside, Blasey Ford’s lawyer, Debra Katz, told CBS Evening News in 1998 that Bill Clinton accuser Paula Jones’s claims would not hold up in court because, “Clearly a one-time incident that took place in 10 to 12 minutes, she was not forced to have sex, she left on her own volition, the courts increasingly are finding that that is not enough to create a sexually hostile work environment claim.”

So progressive… 

https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js
Source: zerohedge.com

Visited 6 times