Connect with us

Possible New Reason For Ford’s Weird 2nd Door On Home Revealed – Not For Protection From Kav As She Stated

Published

on

Unlike so many others out there, I did not find Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony this last week compelling or even remotely credible. And it’s the little details that keep tripping her up. Everything from the date it happened, to where it happened and who was present has been vague, shifting and not in the least verifiable.

Ford testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee that she began having memories related to being abused years ago when she and her husband put a second front door on her house. What a strange trigger she’s claiming was the cause for the resurfacing of sexual assault memories. Just bizarre.

Not only that, but her timeline is not correct on when the door was installed. She claimed it was in 2012, but pictures show it was on the house in 2011 and possibly much earlier. It was not there in 2007. This again gives rise to many questions on her claims that just don’t add up time-wise or evidence-wise. I’ve said from the beginning that her credibility is Swiss cheese.

Gateway Pundit has some compelling photos on the second door that I am sharing here.

From the Washington Post:

“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.”

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

This doesn’t pass the smell test and her testimony here, in my opinion, cannot possibly be true given the timeline of the door being installed. This claim was the basis for her entire story that she gave to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee under oath. The door was installed sometime after 2008. Her story does not hold water. Not even close. Why is everyone just buying this?

The door was not installed because of Kavanaugh’s alleged groping as she claims. If I had to guess, I would agree with the Gateway Pundit, that it is much more likely the door was installed for renters or as a means for clientele to visit a business set-up in the house. Perhaps the FBI should look into that.

Coincidentally, according to information found on the Internet, a business was located at the exact same address as the Ford house. The Couples Research Center was located at the exact same location as Ford’s home. Frankly, I don’t believe in coincidence and this whole charade is just falling apart more and more here.

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

To be fair, we’ll cover another side of the story regarding the timeline of when the door was installed. Palo Alto news site, PA Daily Post, contends that a building permit backs up Ford’s testimony.

“Despite an online rumor to the contrary, a building permit from the city of Palo Alto does not contradict Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony regarding a second front door she had installed on her house.

As the Post reported on Tuesday (Sept. 25), a 2008 building permit for the 753-square-foot expansion on Ford’s L-shaped, Eichler-style home includes plans for a new door on the master bedroom.

The story mistakenly referred to the new bedroom door as a backdoor. Conservative pundit Paul Sperry tweeted about the second door on Thursday (Sept. 27), claiming the 2008 date of the permit “raises questions” about Ford’s testimony that the first time she told her husband that U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her in high school was during a May 2012 conversation about their home remodel.

According to the building permit, the Fords removed a home office attached to the garage, expanded the garage and added a master bedroom onto the front, with its own front door. The new bedroom’s front door opens onto the street, perpendicular to an adjacent front door on the great room.

They now rent out the master bedroom with a private door to Google interns, Ford testified.
The floor plan is dated Nov. 29, 2007, and received a plan check approval from the city on Jan. 28, 2008. Other documents were submitted for the renovation on Feb. 4, 2008.

The Fords didn’t file any other building permits with the city until June 14, 2013, when they added a solar hot water system to their home.”

What I want to know is why no one is looking deeper into Ford, her accounts and her dealings here. All of this smacks of a planned set-up by the left. The timing was too perfect and too convenient, just as the charges are. It reeks of underhandedness.

Also from Gateway Pundit:

“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 [a] new pathway in front of the new door area.”

All of this still begs an answer for how Ford’s notes were released from her therapist in the first place… unless of course, she gave her permission. I have not believed this woman from the beginning. I think she is either delusional or criminal. Maybe both. But if the FBI is going to look into Kavanaugh, they should also look into Ford. What’s good for the goose here is good for the gander.

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


Clinton IT aide created Gmail address to forward Hillary’s emails: report

Published

on

...

* By

Continue Reading

New York Times Editor: We’re Switching From Russia Collusion To ‘Trump Is Racist’

Published

on

The New York Times and others have repeatedly tried to take down President Trump with libelous statements on the Russian collusion front and have failed spectacularly every single time. Now, New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet has accidentally admitted that for two years his far-left newspaper was “built” around spreading a hoax. Oops. But it’s never too late to shift propaganda in this political war.

He was secretly recorded saying just that and it got out. Baquet also admitted the Times’ staff is loaded with left-wingers “who cheer us when we take on Donald Trump, but they jeer at us when we take on Joe Biden.” Do tell. I’m shocked I tell you. Simply shocked.

What is actually shocking is this recording comes by way of the leftist rag, Slate. They got their mitts on the recording of a company-wide meeting Baquet held with his staffers and it is an illuminating look at how leftist media utilizes and manipulates propaganda for political effect. Why Slate would let that out is puzzling, to say the least.

Baquet has now admitted that for two long years his leftist newspaper was “built” around the Russia Collusion Hoax: “It got trickier after [inaudible] … went from being a story about whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia and obstruction of justice to being a more head-on story about the president’s character. We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well.”

Truly well? Do you mean by lying and falsifying facts? They did that very well. There was not a shred of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia yet the NYT reported on it as fact for two years and in actuality, made stuff up to fit that narrative.

But the New York Times has seen the light, so to speak. The Russia collusion hoax hasn’t worked so now they are switching tactics… Trump is now a racist and everything will revolve around that lie: “Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story. I’d love your help with that. As Audra Burch said when I talked to her this weekend, this one is a story about what it means to be an American in 2019. It is a story that requires deep investigation into people who peddle hatred[.]”

The truth is that if Trump were actually a racist it would have come out decades ago. This is a last-ditch effort to besmirch a sitting president so a communist can take his place in the next election. It’s subversion and in my book… a form of treason.

You can still taste the salty leftist tears from being disappointed that Mueller did not take down Trump: “The day Bob Mueller walked off that witness stand, two things happened. Our readers who want Donald Trump to go away suddenly thought, “Holy shit, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.” And Donald Trump got a little emboldened politically, I think. Because, you know, for obvious reasons. And I think that the story changed. A lot of the stuff we’re talking about started to emerge like six or seven weeks ago. We’re a little tiny bit flat-footed. I mean, that’s what happens when a story looks a certain way for two years. Right?”

So, while the NYT, WaPo, and other lefty rags spewed lies and propaganda, outlets such as Breitbart, The Daily Wire, and The Daily Caller among others did real reporting and told the truth. For their efforts, a number of them have been banned on social media.

From Breitbart:

“Baquet pretty much spends the rest of the 90 minutes meeting fielding questions from individuals who are supposed to be professionals but who only want to know how they can call Trump and his supporters racists even more often.

“You see, according to the Times’ staff, everything is racist because everything really is racist.

“You probably think that whole “everything is racist” thing is me being sarcastic. Here’s a direct quote from a staffer [emphasis added]:

Hello, I have another question about racism. I’m wondering to what extent you think that the fact of racism and white supremacy being sort of the foundation of this country should play into our reporting. Just because it feels to me like it should be a starting point, you know? Like these conversations about what is racist, what isn’t racist. I just feel like racism is in everything. It should be considered in our science reporting, in our culture reporting, in our national reporting. And so, to me, it’s less about the individual instances of racism, and sort of how we’re thinking about racism and white supremacy as the foundation of all of the systems in the country.

“Good grief. What a dispiriting and not-at-all surprising look at the ignorant whack jobs in charge of our media — and in the case of the New York Times, not just the media, but what is considered the elite of the media elite. What are they obsessed with? What do these conspiracy-loons see everywhere in 2019 America…?

“Raaaaaaacism.

“Here we sit in the most tolerant, diverse country in the world just a few years after having twice elected a black president with the middle name “Hussein,” and the people in charge of the media are breaking down into pools of self-pity because they want to scream racist at us even more than they already have.

“And again, let’s not forget that the only way they can try to pretend America is racist is by way of massive hoaxes: the Very Fine People Hoax, the Covington Hoax, the George Zimmerman Is White Hoax, the Hands Up Don’t Shoot Hoax, the Jussie Smollett Hoax, and the countless hoax hate crimes they spread over and over and over again without scrutiny.”

Good grief is an understatement. The NYT does not cover real news anymore like the rising tide of anti-Semitism in this country. They are too busy protecting terrorists and radicals, while smearing the president and conservatives, to do their actual jobs.

The New York Times openly admits that anti-Jewish hate crimes don’t interest the Times because white supremacists are not behind them: “If anti-Semitism bypasses consideration as a serious problem in New York, it is to some extent because it refuses to conform to an easy narrative with a single ideological enemy. During the past 22 months, not one person caught or identified as the aggressor in an anti-Semitic hate crime has been associated with a far right-wing group, Mark Molinari, commanding officer of the police department’s Hate Crimes Task Force, told me.”

But young white males are domestic terrorists according to these people. Geez. Not communist Antifa or Black Lives Matter or the Nation of Islam or the Black Panthers… white boys are the ticket, y’all.

Since the media is out of Russian ammo and they detest Trump, they have to have another way of smearing him and throwing the race card is their final desperate move in this political dance. Nothing else has stuck to Teflon-Don. Look for them to cry ‘racism’ non-stop for the next two years in their latest contrived hoax against the president. But you won’t hear them cover actual racism because it does not fit their political narrative. It has to be Trump, Trump, Trump! or it’s not news.

The NYT is a peddler of hate. No wonder they had to stop publishing political cartoons because the editorial staff can’t recognize blatant anti-Semitism. These aren’t journalists anymore… they are Brown Shirts. They feel they’ll get away with calling Trump a racist. After all, they got away with the Russian crap for two years.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Latest Articles

[ifform list="4174" submit="Subscribe"]

Send this to a friend