Christine Ford Misled Senate About That Second Front Door
Since Christine Blasey Ford came forward with her allegations against Brett Kavanaugh, her defenders have said that her story is credible even though she failed to tell anyone about the assault for more than 30 years. They draw much of this credibility from the fact that she mentioned the assault to her marriage counselor in 2012, long before Kavanaugh was a nominee to the Supreme Court. And no, she didn’t apparently name Kavanaugh at the time, but the fact that she mentioned the assault itself lends her story at least some additional weight. How much or how little is up to the beholder.
Unfortunately for Ford, this additional credibility may be coming unraveled. In her testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week, she said that the reason the assault came up in the first place was that she was having a disagreement with her husband over wanting a second front door put on their California home. He didn’t understand the need for such a bizarre addition, and that was when Ford related to him the assault, which had left her with a lifetime of “claustrophobia,” “panic attacks,” and other nervous-system maladies.
“Is that the reason for the second door – claustrophobia?” asked Sen. Dianne Feinstein at the hearing.
“Correct,” Ford said.
In other words, she wanted the door installed so that she would have an additional escape from the home in case of an invasion – a story and reason that would line up perfectly with the story of her attempted rape from high school.
But as RealClearInvestigations learned, not only was the door installed years before Ford attended her therapy session with her husband, it was put there to give renters and businesses an additional entrance – not as any form of escape route.
From the report:
Palo Alto city records show that a building permit for an additional room and exterior door was issued to Ford and her husband on Feb. 4, 2008 — more than four years before the May 2012 therapy session where, she says, she first identified Kavanaugh as her attacker.
All the remodeling, including a new bathroom, was completed by February 2010. The only additional permits issued to Ford at her Palo Alto address are for “solar panels” on the roof, a “solar hot water system” in the garage, and an “electric vehicle charge station” for the driveway — all of which were issued after 2012.
Other documents, including health care-provider registration records, reveal that a marriage counselor listed Ford’s home address as her place of employment, ostensibly using the extra room and door for her clinical practice. That marriage therapist, Sylvia Adkins Randall, sold the home to the Fords in 2007, but continued to maintain the address for her business.
If the mainstream media were even vaguely interested in questioning Dr. Ford’s veracity and honesty, this story would have been on the front page of the New York Times the day after her testimony. Unfortunately, in the Believe Women era, it is uncouth, impolite, and politically incorrect to even mention the possibility that she might have lied about a few things in front of the U.S. Senate. While left-wing publications are heralding Dr. Ford as an “American hero” (seriously), we have objective investigators tracking down the truth of her tale. So far, it has been found wanting.