Were Dr. Christine Ford's Lawers Honest With Her?

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
On Thursday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) corrected Christine Blasey Ford, who testified that it would be “unrealistic” for the committee to visit her in California to hear her accusations of sexual abuse against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Ford told the hearing that, due to her reluctance to fly, she had hoped the committee would come to her:

“I was hoping that they come to me. But, then, I realized that that was an unrealistic request.”

“So, that was certainly what I was hoping – was to avoid having to get on an airplane – but, I eventually was able to get up the gumption, with the help of some friends, and get on the plane.”

Evidently her lawyers had not told her of the offer made by Senator Grassley. Why? Because her lawyers were playing politics and wanted nothing less than to make Dr. Ford testify in public before the whole nation even though she had preferred a private interview. Later in the hearing, when Ford was asked if anyone, including her lawyers, had relayed to her the committee’s offer to visit her in California, Ford refused to answer when her lawyer objected:

Question: “Okay. Was it communicated to you by your counsel or someone else that the committee had asked to interview you, and that they offered to come out to California to do so?”

Counsel
: “I'm going to object, Mr. Chairman, to any call for privileged conversation between counsel and Dr. Ford.”

Question: “Could you validate that the offer was made, without her saying a word? Is it possible for that question to be answered without violating any counsel relationships?

Ford: “Can I say something to you? Do you mind if I say something to you directly? I just appreciate that you did offer that. I wasn't clear on what the offer was. If you were going to come out to see me, I would have happily hosted you and been happy to speak with you out there. I just did not -- it was not clear to me that that was the case.”​


Since there was an offer that she could be questioned at home or at any place of her choice in private then if she was told about that offer by her lawyers she would have grabbed it with both hands. The fact that it never happened proved one of two things--Dr. Ford actually wanted her testimony to be public or her lawyers didn't tell her about that offer.

Rachel Mitchell asked Dr. Ford: Were you even told that the Senate Judiciary Committee offered to fly out to your home to meet you?
Ford's attorney (who also represents Andrew McCabe): <grabs microphone> She doesn't have to answer that.

The attorneys for Dr. Ford were recommended by Dianne Feinstein!

What was going on is very transparent and either Dr. Ford was in on the ruse or her attorney's double-crossed her on the behalf of the Democrats. In either case the goal was to deceive the American people.

And it worked, as witnessed by all the people on this forum who continue to defend these people. Just continue to vote for the Democrats and you will continue to be deceived!

"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
On Thursday, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) corrected Christine Blasey Ford, who testified that it would be “unrealistic” for the committee to visit her in California to hear her accusations of sexual abuse against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.


"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

Oh dear. Are there really people on this forum who defend her? :shocked:

They've all been working together on this script for months. It's such a joke.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
I am beginning to think you are right!

You can hide a lot of garbage behind the little girl act.

I was impressed by the list the sex crimes prosecutor put out. Line upon line of lie after lie. It would be funny if it wasn't so damaging to the Judge and his family.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
Either it was an act or she never grew up. Both serve to explain her fidelity to the party of lawlessness, the Democrat party!

Did you happen to watch the body language expert who spoke on this while the video was playing? She explains the "cute" look, and then the "defiant" pose when she lifts her chin. There was the shifty eyes and the fear when she was caught in something and had to glance at the Dem. Senators. I need to find that again. I agreed totally with what the person said.
 
Top