Christine Blasey Ford’s Husband’s Sworn Affidavit Examined, Shows Glaring Discrepancy / Omission That Was Previously Missed

While many liberals have defended Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Senate, claiming that it was credible, there are far too many inconsistencies for her story to be taken as the truth.

She can’t remember when the alleged incident took place, where it took place, or who was there. These are pertinent details to a 36-year-old sexual assault charge. Her credibility took an immediate hit when she couldn’t recall any of these details.

People are beginning to notice that something very important was missing from the sworn affidavit that came from none other than the accuser’s own husband, and it has to do with the second door that was added on to Ford’s house. She originally claimed that the door was added on due to the trauma she suffered after the alleged attack.

From The Gateway Pundit:

What is interesting is what Russell Ford did not include in his testimony under penalty of perjury.

Russell does not include the story about the two front doors.

Dr. Christina 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 their home.

This is a major piece of information to leave out of the story.

Real Clear Politics reports that Blasey Ford testified that she hadn’t told anyone about the alleged sexual assault until 2012. She claims that it came out during couples therapy with her husband. Ford stated that the memories of the assault came up while the two were talking about a prior argument regarding her wanting to install a “second front door” on their Palo Alto, California house.

She never did say exactly when the house was renovated, but she gave the impression that their couple therapy session had taken place around that timeframe.

Documents prove that the door was added onto the house before 2012, when an addition was constructed on the property. The second door allows part of the home to act as a business, where renters have lived.

“The door was not an escape route but an entrance route,” stated a lawyer familiar with the congressional investigation. “It appears the real plan for the second front door was to rent out a separate room.”

Real Clear Politics writes, “The discrepancy raises fresh doubts about Ford’s candor and credibility amid other inconsistencies, congressional and other knowledgeable sources say, including her purported “fear of flying.” Ford initially refused to submit to an interview with the committee because of an alleged airplane phobia, but investigators established that she had taken a number of flights back East this summer, and had previously flown to Hawaii, Costa Rica, French Polynesia and other South Pacific islands.”

Leave a Reply

Notify of