Connect with us

Politics

Blasey Ford’s Lawyer Confirms Her Client’s Agenda Was to Put ‘Asterisk’ by Kavanaugh’s Name

Christine Blasey Ford’s lawyer claims her client’s stunt was done in part to protect Roe v. Wade.

Published

on

Christine Blasey Ford became a feminist hero of the #metoo era when she told her victim story against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh last year, in a desperate attempt to railroad his nomination.

Although Kavanaugh was eventually confirmed, Blasey Ford has become a feminist icon, receiving awards for her supposed courage. However, a recent statement from Blasey Ford’s lawyer Debra Katz has revealed the political motivations behind her client’s actions against Kavanaugh.

“In the aftermath of these hearings, I believe that Christine’s testimony brought about more good than the harm misogynist Republicans caused by allowing Kavanaugh on the court,” Katz explained to an audience at the University of Baltimore.

Trending: WATCH: Fulton County Poll Manager Susan Voyles Recounts Election Improprieties in Georgia Recount

“We were going to have a conservative. Elections have consequences, but he will always have an asterisk next to his name. When he takes the scalpel through Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him, and that is important,” she added.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

This is when Katz dropped the bombshell that exposed Blasey Ford’s true intentions in making her unproven and invalidated accusations against Kavanaugh without evidence. The abortion zealot wanted to protect the ability for women to kill their babies in the womb.

“It is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine,” Katz said.

The entire clip can be seen here:

Previously, it was shown that Blasey Ford, who works as a psychology professor at Palo Alto University, had co-authored a paper that taught patients self-hypnosis so they could create artificial situations for individuals to supposedly unearth lost memories that had been forgotten or blacked out.

Here is more information about that paper:

The paper was titled “Meditation With Yoga, Group Therapy With Hypnosis, and Psychoeducation for Long-Term Depressed Mood: A Randomized Pilot Trial.” Ford is listed as an author using her maiden name, Blasey.

The study taught participants self-hypnosis for “relaxation and affect regulation.”

More pertinently, the paper surmised that hypnosis could be used to “assist in the retrieval of of important memories, and create artificial situations that would permit the client to express ego-dystonic emotions in a safe manner.”

Ego-dystonic emotions, in plain terms, are negative thoughts. The medical definition can be found here.

In sum, the same woman whose allegations against Kavanaugh from 36 years ago, which depend on retrieving old memories, authored an academic paper on how to do just that via hypnosis, which is a fringe science at best.

Blasey Ford’s credibility, which is already virtually non-existent in any circle not dominated by leftists, has taken another hit with her lawyer’s admission. No “asterisk” is by Kavanaugh’s name, as he continues what will likely be a long reign as a justice on the nation’s high court.

Congress

Democrat Black Farmers Bill Would Give Away $8 Billion of Land Yearly in Reparations Program

South Africa-style land redistribution?

Published

on

Democrat Senators are touting new legislation that would purchase national farmland and give it away to Black Americans for free.

Democrats Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Elizabeth Warren are sponsoring the the Justice for Black Farmers Act, which seems likely to be the most wide-ranging affirmative action program ever enacted if it’s signed into law. It’s not inaccurate to call the bill a reparations program.

take our poll - story continues below

Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense?

  • VOTE NOW: Did Kyle Rittenhouse act in self defense when he shot three BLM rioters? 

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Big League Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

The law establishes preferences for Black Americans within Department of Agriculture policy. Blacks would be granted free land purchased by the federal government, in total increments that appear to add up to $8 billion a year.

An undersecretary of a USDA “Equitable Land Access Service” would be entrusted with purchasing(using taxpayer funds) and redistributing land. The reparation bill appropriates for a massive 20,000 grants annually over ten years, adding up to a total redistribution package of $80 billion.

The under-secretary would be commissioned to “(1) purchase from willing sellers, at a price not greater than fair market value, available agricultural land in the United States; and (2) subject to section 205, convey grants of that land to eligible Black individuals at no cost to the eligible Black individuals.

If the bill redistributes 160 acres per grant, it would ultimately end up transferring 1.6% of the total land in the continental United States for free.

Democrats cite a decline in the numbers of black farmers since the 1920’s as an impetus for the bill, pointing out that there were 1 million black farmers in 1920 and 50,000 today. Such logic ignores that the number of American farmers broadly has declined sharply as the United States transitioned to an industrial economy, and that millions of Black Americans who worked under poor conditions as sharecroppers in the American South have long since moved to northern cities.

The bill is somewhat similar to South African racial land redistribution policies, which differ primarily in that they forcibly nationalized land owned by Afrikaner farmers and redistributed them to South African Blacks. South Africa’s land reforms in the name of “equity” have proven to generally be a failure, with novel farmers unable to utilize the land they’ve been gifted in a manner beneficial to society. South Africa has transitioned from a bountiful agricultural society known as the “bread basket of Africa” to a net food importer, with experts pointing to arbitrary land redistribution as a factor in doing so.

Continue Reading
It's time to name Antifa a terror org! Sign your petition now!


Trending