Match Exact Phrase    

Please Visit Whatfinger News - Conservative Frontpage founded by veterans.

"The Best Mix Of Hard-Hitting REAL News & Cutting-Edge Alternative News On The Web"

Share This


September 23, 2018

End This Freak Show Right Now - Fourth And Final  'Witness' And 'Longtime Friend' Of Kavanaugh Accuser, Denies Attending Party Where She Claims She Was Attacked


By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine

The fourth and final "witness" named by Christine Blasey Ford that supposedly attended the get together 35 or 36 years ago, where Ford claims that Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh attempted to sexually assault her, has now issued a statement, through her lawyer, to the Senate Judiciary committee, denying attending a party where Kavanaugh was present.

Via Politico:
"Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," said Howard Walsh, who said he has been "engaged in the limited capacity" of corresponding with the committee on behalf of Keyser.

The woman, Leland Ingham Keyser, has been described as a "longtime friend," of Ford, and the only other woman that Ford claims was at the party in question. Mark Judge, Patrick J. Smyth (PJ), and Brett Kavanaugh were also named by Ford, and all three of them have also denied knowledge of the party in question, with statements to the Senate Judiciary committee. 

Smyth: "I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh." Smyth added: "Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh towards women. To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the Committee may have."

Judge: "I have no memory of this alleged incident. Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr. Ford's letter. More to the point, I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes." In a follow up statement given to the Weekly Standard, Judge called the accusation "Absolutely nuts."

Kavanaugh has consistently maintained that he never attempted to assault Ford, or any woman, and immediately volunteered to testify in front of the Judiciary committee in order to clear his name.

As Charles Cooke over at NRO points out, "Under 18 U.S.C § 1001, letters to the Judiciary Committee are subject to criminal penalty if false."



I see liberal hashtags in support of Ford, Hollywood celebrities claiming they "believe" her, despite her admitting she doesn't remember how she got to the party, how she got home, where the party was held or even what year the incident occurred. Some of the same people that claim to "believe" her, have never met her and insist there be an "investigation," into her allegations, and most have been very vocal in their opposition to Kavanaugh being confirmed to the Supreme Court.

Okay, lets run with that "investigation."

The first thing any investigator would do is get the details of the alleged incident, where it happened, when it happened and who was present.

According to the only account by Ford, at the Washington Post the "when" is described as "one summer in the early 1980s,"  and the "where" was "at a house in Montgomery County." Later in the article, it states that Ford does not remember some key details, and believes the alleged incident occurred "in the summer of 1982." The article also states "She also doesn’t recall who owned the house or how she got there."

Then there are the discrepancies in the original Wapo article:

Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.

Ford claims the therapists notes were incorrect in stating that four boys were involved, but then maintains that there were "four boys at the party," yet now we find out that she only named three, Kavanaugh, Judge and Smyth and other person she claims attended the party was her "longtime friend," Leland Ingham Keyser.

At first I assumed the Wapo writers must have mistakenly thought "Leland" was another boy, but Kimberly Strassel from Wall Street Journal says she has obtained an email that the Wapo writer Emma Brown sent on September 16, 2018, the same day the article on Ford was published.

Via Strassel's Twitter thread:

1) More big breaking news, which further undercuts the Ford accusation, as well as media handling of it. A source has given me the email that WaPo reporter Emma Brown sent to Mark Judge, one person Ford claims was at the party. This email is dated Sunday, Sept. 16, 2018

2) The email wants a comment from him. The subsequent story would reveal Christine Ford’s name, and give details of the supposed “assault.”

3) One part of the email to Judge reads: “In addition to Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge, whom she called acquaintances she knew from past socializing, she recalls that her friend Leland (last name then was Ingham, now Keyser) was at the house and a friend of the boys named PJ.”

4) This matters for two big reasons–Ford’s credibility and WaPo’s. The subsequent WaPo story would go on to cite Ford’s name and details, and also list notes from a therapist that Ford told this to in 2012. Read carefully what WaPo reports, the same day it emails Judge:

5) “The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.”

6) Wait, say what? WaPo reports publicly that Ford says it was “four boys,”even after WaPo reporter tells Judge that Ford had told her it was three boys and a girl.

7) So first, huge problem: This was just a week ago, and we have Ford giving two different accounts of who was present. Four boys. No, three boys, one girl. Either way, therapist notes from 2012 definitively say four boys, which Ford didn’t dispute. But now… a girl!

So Ford's story keeps changing. The Wapo writer deliberately put false information into the original and only account of the story. Ford is not sure of the exact year but thinks it might have been 1982. She doesn't remember how she got there, or home. Every person she named as being present at this alleged party, denies attending it.

No agency, nor investigator, can investigate an incident with no key details, at a party or get together that included only five people, with four of those people having no memory of the get together at all involving those individuals.

Investigation over!


No wonder Democrat Diane Feinstein held onto the letter Ford sent since July and only mentioned it when all other obstruction tactics on the part of liberals and Democrat Senators failed to stop the Kavanaugh hearings, and the committee was preparing to schedule a vote to recommend Kavanaugh's confirmation to the full senate to vote on.

It is also no wonder why Ford's lawyers have done nothing but stall, make unreasonable demands like "he should testify first," before she even makes an official statement. How can the accused rebut an accusation that hasn't been formally made????

Tentatively the accuser, Ford, is expected to testify on Thursday, after the Judiciary committee chairman Charles Grassley bent over backwards, consistently, to accommodate Ford's lawyers requests, while rejecting unreasonable ones, though some still doubt whether she will actually testify, especially now that the fourth supposed "witness" Ford has named has denied attending any get together where Kavanaugh was present.

Judge Kavanaugh has consistently stated, and wrote to the Judiciary committee his desire and eagerness to testify any day they schedule to clear his name.

Senator Grassley has said the panel will vote to confirm Kavanaugh Monday without an agreement between Ford's lawyers and the Senate Judiciary Committee, which indicates that while Ford's lawyers claim she will testify on Thursday, there really isn't any formal agreement.

Grassley should end this freak show now. He has four alleged witnesses denying the party or get together even occurred where Kavanaugh, Judge, Smyth, Keyser and Ford were present together.

Below, Judge Jeanine Pirro breaks down this whole circus show in an outstanding and concise manner. Apparently she is as infuriated and frustrated as many of us that have been observing this spectacle play out.

NOTE TO READERSANP Needs Your Help. With digital media revenue spiraling downward, especially hitting those in Independent Media, it has become apparent that traditional advertising simply isn't going to fully cover the costs and expenses for many smaller independent websites.

Any extra readers may be able to spare for donations is greatly appreciated.

One time donations or monthly, via Paypal or Credit Card:



Donate monthly from $1 up by becoming an ANP Patron.



Website design by Innovative Solutions Group - Helena, MT
comments powered by Disqus

Web Design by Innovative Solutions Group