Just remember, CIA has had a long, long history of having interest and techniques for exactly that type of situation. Maybe Diane held onto the letter until Ford had been "prepared" to testify?

http://memoryalteration.com/

That was posted a few days ago here:
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

This collusion with the Chinese, her holding on to what could be a fake letter from Ford, and the possibility of brainwashing or hypnosis planting fake memories in Ford's head, a Chinese specialty, seems all the more possible. this is what the Dems do to block candidates to be Justice, only this time on steroids from past attempts.

Feinstein and her husband have been bought by the Chinese for decades. The husband has made millions " lobbying " for Chinese interests .She had a Chinese spy as a personal assistant.
They are as dirty as it gets. Traitors abounded during the last administration, they never thought she would LOSE. Kavanaugh is not bought, he is a tremendous man , he knows the constitution provides for protection of the republic by allowing military tribunals. Those courts are to bring justice to those Americans who have been complicit in adding and abetting a foreign power against the USA. Kavanaugh confirmed that point while ask it by Lindsey Graham during the original hearings.

Scrubbed, but not before some of it got downloaded and saved, as in rush has it, Jesse Watters has it, enough information to show what that clan of spoiled brat were like.

Her high school year book has been scrubbed too!, from what I hear.

To make her seem more like a victim, people will buy anything - except reason! If she is on the up and up, why is the whole Internet scrubbed of her existence, including link to drug company testing abortion pill? Why has no one inquired about her high school self? This is a frame, and if it involves Feinstein, may involve Chinese.

A "planted memory" was something I thought as well.
She too!...has a "Go Fund Me" page...for what?

Signature redacted. But the Ford name was omitted form the typed name.
Another friend also suggested the performance at the hearing a show, maybe aided by drugs.
The house has to be PJ Smthi's or the mystery mand which she strangely has blocked from memory. Any others would be readily identifiable. Or, the whole thing is from a planted memory and it does not exist.

Probably.

BINGO! or a congress person....

What you’re talking about happens often when several people edit a paper or the original author is forced to correct or add something that he doesn’t really believe in. Not only the style, but continuity and even logic are often get screwed up. However, each segment, especially those written by the original author, is complete and logical. In this case, the style is consistent, clearly written by one person, but with inconsistent logic and poor grammar. Some errors, like small case “i,” is typical for a young blogger to make than a 50-year old educated person. Again, I agree with the assessment that the style is indicative of a fairly young blogger with moderate education - a congressional staffer.

I have read technical expositions in which the subject was left out or adjectives or direct objects. Especially in technical papers, it makes the entire piece unintelligble.

That depends on the issue. Poor grammar may be expected of an IT person, yet you would question that person’s competence if the letter showed poor logic skills. In the fields of psychology and sociology, research papers are the most important product; one would not expect grammar, logic, and general sentence structure errors there. Especially in an important correspondence and errors in such abundance. To me, this is a smoking gun.

I recognized some of the mistakes that I make myself!...that was a wake up call.
I still have a way to go before I can assume to be a decent writer myself...but I don't have a masters or Doctorate degree either.

Grammar is not a criteria upon which to judge the letter. I know many well educated people who couldn't write a coherent note, let alone a letter. Some of whom contribute to this forum. In any case, it's the subject that is important. It would be an important subject if it was written by Mr. Ed.

Why you cottonpickin nitpicker!...laughing.

That's one of the things the article "Picks" out.

I know I am a nitpicking person, but in her letter the use of the word inadvertently puzzled me. If I felt someone was trying to kill me there would be nothing 'inadvertently' about it!

I'm 71 and I can well remember wrongs done against me by people I hardly knew all the way back to the first grade.
Fortunately for me, none of those were of a sexual nature.
What I can forgive I still don't forget.

Did you hear that two men came forward and admitted they thought that it was "Her" that they did that to.
The few democraps that were told, "complained":...oh Now, at the 12 hour!...you have proof BK didn't do it.

Blaming others for something that they had done themselves by "Holding" information until last min.

Amen! How about when it occurred 61 years ago and it was someone you trusted. You don't forget anything!

I find "me" of limited use, unless of course it is accompanied by a # and Too.

Modern day liberal is enough for me...

Let's just say this: I watched Ford's testimony today, followed by Judge Kavanaugh.

If someone was traumatized by events "recalled" by Ford, she would have had a different attitude than what she displayed. She did not seem like having an effect at all, rather a matter of fact piece that may or my never occurred.