The truth comes out – Friend of Kavanaugh accuser Blasey-Ford says she was threatened if she didn’t go along with sexual assault LIE

https://www.sgtreport.com/2019/09/the-truth-comes-out-friend-of-kavanaugh-accuser-blasey-ford-says-she-was-threatened-if-she-didnt-go-along-with-sexual-assault-lie/


The truth comes out – Friend of Kavanaugh accuser Blasey-Ford says she was threatened if she didn’t go along with sexual assault LIE

September 19, 2019



by JD Heyes, Natural News:

The accusations of serial sexual abuse and sexual assault made against now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey-Ford last year never did make any sense because the then-nominee had been vetted at least a half-dozen times by the FBI for various White House and federal court posts.
And let’s face it: No matter what we think about the FBI now, post-Obama and post-Spygate, the bureau would have delivered previous presidents the bad news about Kavanaugh’s past had it been true. No president wants to appoint a White House legal eagle or a federal judge with a documentable reputation for being nasty with the ladies.

And in due time, Blasey-Ford’s accusations fell apart. They couldn’t be substantiated, and in fact, other female ‘witnesses’ who lined up to make similar false claims were even referred to the Justice Department for criminal prosecution once upon a time (and what happened to those referrals, by the way?).
Now we learn that the Democrat scheme to smear Kavanaugh and sabotage the nomination of a supremely qualified jurist went deeper than just the first line of fake witnesses.
As Breitbart News reports, a friend of Blasey-Ford’s says she was threatened with a smear campaign as well if she refused to sign onto the lie even though the alleged assault claim “didn’t make any sense” to her.
During various interviews and testimony, Blasey-Ford claimed that her high school friend, Leland Keyser, was at a party in 1982 where she claims Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her.
But, Fox News notes further, in a forthcoming book, by New York Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly titled, “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation,” Keyser was quoted as saying, “I don’t have any confidence in the story. Those facts together I don’t recollect, and it just didn’t make any sense.”
In short: Keyser doesn’t believe it. (Related: Bombshell report: Brett Kavanaugh completely exonerated by sex crimes investigator Rachel Mitchell.)
“It would be impossible for me to be the only girl at a get-together with three guys, have her leave, and then not figure out how she’s getting home,” Keyser recalled. “I just really didn’t have confidence in the story.”

Kavanaugh should consider suing all of these liars for slander

Then, on Monday, CBS News’ Jan Crawford reported further that Keyser says “Ford’s allies pressured her” to lend credence to the sex allegations against Kavanaugh and that she’d face a “smear campaign” if she didn’t.

Quote :

Jan Crawford

:heavy_check_mark:@JanCBS





[ltr]We report tonight the real bombshell: Christine Ford’s close HS friend (who Ford says was at the party when Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her) said Ford’s story is not believable and told the FBI Ford’s allies pressured her, threatened her with a smear campaign to say otherwise https://twitter.com/cbseveningnews/status/1173729651199549446 …[/ltr]

CBS Evening News

:heavy_check_mark:@CBSEveningNews

A new sexual misconduct allegation against SCOTUS Justice Brett Kavanaugh fueled impeachment calls from Democratic presidential candidates; former Yale classmates claim he exposed himself to a woman at a college party, @nytimes reports.

Here's @JanCBS https://cbsn.ws/2lVfUjK 











23.7K
7:11 PM - Sep 16, 2019 · Washington, DC
Twitter Ads info and privacy

[size][ltr]



13.7K people are talking about this




[/ltr]


But none of that matters — at least to a half-dozen 2020 Democratic presidential contenders, all of whom believed what turned out to be a bogus Times story from the same reporters making the sexual assault claims anew. The latest Times story contained allegations that Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at a female student during a party in college (those claims have also since fallen apart). 
One of them was Sen. Kamala Harris of California. “I sat through those hearings. Brett Kavanaugh lied to the U.S. Senate and most importantly to the American people,” she wrote on Twitter. “He was put on the Court through a sham process and his place on the Court is an insult to the pursuit of truth and justice. He must be impeached.”
Wrong, and wrong. First, we all sat through the hearings; they were televised. Secondly, Democrats were responsible for staging a “sham process” that involved phony allegations against a well-qualified candidate for the Supreme Court simply because they didn’t want Trump to ‘stack’ it with constitutionalists. 
Read More @ NaturalNews.com[/size]

https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/ben-shapiro/ben-shapiro-alternative-history-united-states


Ben Shapiro: The Alternative History of the United States

Listen to the Article!







By Ben Shapiro | September 19, 2019 | 9:09 AM EDT





Last week, Democrats held their first true presidential debate. With the field winnowed down to 10 candidates — three of them actual contenders for the nomination — only one moment truly stood out. That moment came not from Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders but from a candidate desperate for attention: Beto O'Rourke.
O'Rourke ran in 2018 for a Senate seat in Texas and lost in shockingly narrow fashion to incumbent Republican Sen. Ted Cruz. But his persona at the time was more Biden than Bernie: He ran as a unifying quasi-moderate, an Obama-esque figure determined to bring Americans together. In the early going of the presidential race, Beto was figured to be a prime contender: An April poll showed him in a solid third place. But he's faded dramatically; now the once-media darling is polling below 3 percent.



So O'Rourke has refashioned himself into a woke warrior. He's declared that he wants to forcibly remove guns from law-abiding Americans ("Hell, yes, we're going to take your AR-15"), that President Trump is a "white supremacist" posing a "mortal threat to people of color" and that the time has come for race reparations. Most dramatically, O'Rourke has refashioned his vision of American history. In this debate, he laid out his retelling of the American story, saying: "Racism in America is endemic. It is foundational. We can mark the creation of this country not at the Fourth of July, 1776, but Aug. 20, 1619, when the first kidnapped African was brought to this country against his will and in bondage, and as a slave built the greatness and the success and the wealth that neither he nor his descendants would ever be able to fully participate in and enjoy."
This version of history is cribbed from "The 1619 Project" by The New York Times, a retelling of American history as a story rooted in white supremacy — not colored by or affected by white supremacy but rooted in it. Capitalism, criminal justice, lack of universal health care, traffic patterns, Donald Trump's election — all of it, according to "The 1619 Project," is fundamentally based on America's legacy of slavery and racial discrimination.
That perspective on American history, in turn, is merely warmed over Howard Zinn. Zinn, the Marxist author of "A People's History of the United States," sought to recast America's story as a story of hideous ugliness covered with the hypocritical facade of goodness. Never mind that "A People's History" is, in fact, rotten history — factually inaccurate, wildly disjoined from a more comprehensive examination of time and place, near plagiarized from the work of better leftist historians. Zinn's history has now infused the teaching of American history in high schools and colleges across the country.



But that historical retelling is at odds with the better, truer story of America: the story of a nation founded on eternally good and true principles, principles only fully realized for many Americans at the cost of blood and sweat and death. Ex-slave Frederick Douglass's take on American history remains the most honest, as well as the most visionary. While acknowledging that to the American slave, Independence Day represents "more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim," Douglass recognized that the Constitution is a "glorious liberty document," the Declaration of Independence a charter of "saving principles."
American history is our common history. O'Rourke's pathetic rewriting of American history is designed not to unify us as a nation but to divide us — to call us away from the unifying principles that lie at the foundation of America, in favor of divisive principles of tribal partisanship. We must recognize the evils of American history — that is part of our common story. In fact, our quest to rid ourselves of those evils is our common story. But if we wish to survive as a nation, we must also recognize that the story of America lies in the constant purification of our actions to align with our founding principles, not oppose them.
Ben Shapiro, 35, is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, host of "The Ben Shapiro Show" and editor-in-chief of DailyWire.com. He is the author of the No. 1 New York Times bestseller "The Right Side Of History." He lives with his wife and two children in Los Angeles.