The circus surrounding allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh took a bizarre turn Thursday after accuser Christine Blasey Ford essentially admitted to the Senate that she has been less than honest over the past few weeks.

Ford, a left-leaning university professor in California, had previously claimed that she couldn’t get to Washington, D.C. to testify in front of Congress in a timely manner because she was deathly afraid of flying.

It was obvious from the start that this was likely a delaying tactic by Democrats who wanted to “run out the clock” on Kavanaugh’s confirmation, but Ford stuck by her claim that getting on an airplane to Washington was a major obstacle.

“The GOP has been told that Ford does not want to fly from her California home to Washington … which means she may need to drive across the country,” Politico reported last week.

“Ford has reportedly told friends she is uncomfortable in confined spaces, indicating a physical difficulty in making the trip by plane,” the news magazine continued.

TRENDING: Avenatti Falls Apart on Air When Even the Hosts of ‘The View’ Question His Story

But is it true? As it turns out, no.

After finally showing up to testify in front of the Senate after several delays, Ford was forced to admit that she lied or at least hugely exaggerated her crippling fear of flying. It was a delaying tactic all along.

Dr. Ford’s testimony was delayed because of her fear of flying.

Rachel Mitchell: How did you get to Washington?
Dr. Ford: Airplane

M: When were here in August, how did you get here?
F: Airplane

M: You’ve been to Hawaii & Tahiti?
F: Yes

M: How’d you get there?
Ford: Airplane pic.twitter.com/AtkuQ9arL2

— Ryan Saavedra 🇺🇸 (@RealSaavedra) September 27, 2018

While facing prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, Ford was asked directly to explain this “fear of flying” and how it prevented her from giving her testimony earlier.

“May I ask, Dr. Ford, how did you get to Washington?” Mitchell asked.

“In an airplane,” Ford answered sheepishly.

“OK, I ask that because it’s been reported by the press that you would not submit to an interview with the committee because of your fear of flying,” Mitchell followed up. “Is that true?”

Ford seemed to squirm as she struggled to answer.

“Well, I was hoping that they would come to me,” the accuser responded.

“When you were here back in August, end of July, August, how did you get here?” Mitchell asked.

RELATED: New Accuser Got Settlement for Past Sex Claim, Used Ford Attorney’s Firm To Get It

“Also by airplane,” Ford answered.

“I also saw on your — you talked about Hawaii, Costa Rica, South Pacific Islands, and French Polynesia,” Mitchell continued. “Have you been to all of those places? By airplane?”

“Yes,” Ford confirmed.

So let’s get this straight. Ford believed that her vague and unproven claim from nearly 40 years ago was so important that she had to tell her story to stop Kavanaugh.

But, she couldn’t be bothered to actually get on an airplane and talk to senators because she said she was terrified of flying.

Yet the exact same woman just admitted on camera that she had absolutely no problem flying to some of the most exotic locations in the world, some of which require far longer trips in cramped airplanes than a routine flight to Washington.

She lied. She made up a convenient excuse in order to help Democrats by delaying the process.

Here’s the big question: If she had no problem lying about this, what else is she being dishonest about?

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

As Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh has been fighting allegations of improper sexual conduct during his days in high school and college, it’s been clear from the beginning — the Democrats have pulled out all the stops to oppose his nomination.

In a series of tweets, the Heritage Foundation lays out exactly why the Democrats have been so focused on defeating this nominee.

The organization starts off by citing Senator Schumer’s response to President Trump’s initial announcement.

On July 9, within minutes of President Trump’s announcement of Judge Brett Kavanaugh as his Supreme Court nominee, @SenSchumer vowed to “oppose Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination with everything I have.”

When he said everything, he meant it.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

Of course, it didn’t take long for other Democrats to hop on board.

TRENDING: Look: Cartoon Perfectly Skewers Both Anti-Kavanaugh Crowd and Abortion Activists

Other Senate liberals, such as Kamala Harris (D., Calif.) and Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii) actually announced their opposition nearly two weeks earlier—without even knowing who the nominee would be.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

They then point out the true reason behind this opposition in one word: Trump.

Nothing that the confirmation process had to offer was relevant to these senators because they already had the one piece of information, the one word, that really mattered: Trump.

They would oppose the nominee because he or she would be Trump’s nominee. Period.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

It was more than strange that senators who long before had made up their minds against Kavanaugh would complain that they needed more time to review more information about him.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

The Heritage Foundation wasn’t finished though.

Senator Richard Blumenthal said he had thoroughly reviewed Kavanaugh’s record when he announced his opposition in early July yet tried to postpone the hearing so he could . . . review Kavanaugh’s record.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

In 2009, Schumer said that a judicial record is the “best way to evaluate a nominee” and even more important than the confirmation hearing.

Senator Patrick Leahy agreed.

Neither one of them is interested in Kavanaugh’s judicial record today.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

In fact, Democrats did not even try to debate the most important thing about a judicial nominee, namely, the kind of judge he or she will be.

They made no attempt to explain why they oppose the kind of judge that Kavanaugh has been or the kind of justice he will be.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

Schumer & Leahy have said that the ABA’s rating is the “gold standard” for evaluating nominees. The ABA rated Kavanaugh well qualified which means he meets “the very highest standards of integrity, professional competence and judicial temperament.”

That no longer matters either

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

RELATED: Respected Conservative: Left Used Every Trick With Kavanaugh, Next Time Violence Is All They’ll Have

This isn’t the first time the Democrats have tried this tactic, however. The Heritage Foundation points out that the Democrats tried this back in 2001.

Within days of President George W. Bush taking office in 2001, Democratic Leader Tom Daschle vowed to use “whatever means necessary” to defeat his judicial nominees.

That’s what Democrats are doing today, by any means necessary.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

So what about the accusations of sexual misconduct? Well, the organization hit those too.

They automatically credit an accusation even though every person the accuser names denies any knowledge of it.

Democrats demand a new hearing for an accuser who cannot identify the time or the place of an alleged incident.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

They refuse to share with the rest of the judiciary committee what they claim is evidence.

And, when @NewYorker traffics in what it admits is an unsubstantiated rumor, the author says the accuser came forward because “Democrats came looking” for someone to say such things.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

The Heritage Foundation then summed it all up beautifully.

Partisan double standards, ignoring what really matters, smears, turning basic notions of fairness on their head — that is what it means to use “whatever means necessary.”

Schumer is keeping his promise of opposing Kavanaugh with everything he has.

It won’t be enough.

— Heritage Foundation (@Heritage) September 24, 2018

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Maybe you feel as I do and think that our culture has just gotten way too sexualized. Anything goes. There is little to no regard for personal boundaries. And maybe manners are not necessarily something everyone has when they make decisions on how to behave with the opposite sex.

Because we are a society where everything is now caught on camera, a New York City woman by the name of Chantal Castanon is about to make one man — who crossed the lines of decent behavior — very well known. More specifically, well known as someone in New York City who women might want to watch out for and stay away from.

Chantal Castanon is no victim. Maybe she didn’t even think she had it in her, but when this character groped her in the New York city subway, she let loose.

It’s safe to say from the looks of what was caught on surveillance video that he never expected the reaction he got from Castanon.

TRENDING: Look: Cartoon Perfectly Skewers Both Anti-Kavanaugh Crowd and Abortion Activists

What possess a man to walk up behind a woman and grab her? It’s the epitome of disgusting and disrespectful behavior. But that’s just what this guy did to Chantal Castanon on her way home from work on the afternoon of August 31.

She didn’t know him. She didn’t expect it. But her reaction was lightning fast.

With no thought about consequence, she took off after this guy, through the subway station at 42nd Street and Grand Central Terminal and hit him several times as reported by CBS2 New York. The sequence of events was captured on the subway station’s video surveillance.

Castanon told CBS2’s Valerie Castro, “It just happened so fast and when I saw it, I said wow, I can’t believe I actually did that, I didn’t even think about it.”

She said when the man grabbed her it made her furious and her first reaction was to fight back.

“I felt the rage coming from my stomach, I was like what did he just do to me? Did he really just touch me like that and he didn’t even care, just walked off like it was nothing,” Castanon said.

Apparently his cavalier attitude and violation of her person ignited something inside of her that in no way resembled a victim.

“I was just like you know what? You’re not touching me like that and getting away with it,” Castanon declared.

While the attacker eventually escaped her wrath, he repeatedly apologized as he was being chased according to Castanon. His apologies didn’t seem to mean much, though, to Castanon as she continued to chase the man.

RELATED: NYT Accidentally Torpedoes New Yorker’s Ramirez Hit Piece on Kavanaugh

Men of New York be warned. Chantal Castanon is no victim and if you mess with her, she will retaliate. And good for her.

Castanon told CBS2’s Castro that she hopes by speaking out that others in the city will recognize her attacker and turn him in.

“I just want him caught because you don’t know who he did it to or who he’ll potentially do it to and it has to be stopped.”

News 4 New York gave this description and phone number for you to call if you recognize the man in the video: “The suspect is about 20 to 30 years old, 5-foot-6 to 5-foot-8, about 225 pounds with eyeglasses. Anyone with information is asked to contact Crime Stoppers at 800-577-TIPS.”

Women like Castanon are an inspiration in my opinion. She didn’t fall apart and or become self absorbed in her misfortune.

She was her own voice in the matter and used her experience to help prevent another woman from being violated under the same circumstances. She should be proud.

As for the guy who so foolishly attacked her, well maybe he’ll think twice before he does it again.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

The bigger they are, the harder they fall. Perhaps this has never been more true than it is right now for film maker Michael Moore.

Moore must be feeling the pain after last weekend’s box office numbers didn’t draw the crowds for his latest  leftist motion picture hit piece against President Donald Trump, “Fahrenheit 11/9.”

It appears that Moore has hit an all time career low. Ten years ago, his film “Fahrenheit 9/11” made him more than $100 million dollars, according to American Thinker. But last weekend’s release is only expected to bring in one tenth of that amount.

Liberals are jumping off the Moore ship.

There was a day when audiences followed Moore’s lead and soaked up the dialog he was offering but Variety gave Moore a dismal review of his latest release and has declared that he has lost his audience.

TRENDING: Look: Cartoon Perfectly Skewers Both Anti-Kavanaugh Crowd and Abortion Activists

“The films of Michael Moore have been faltering at the box office for several years now. This weekend, though, the lackluster performance of his latest truth-to-power opus, “Fahrenheit 11/9,” was notably dramatic, if not downright stark.

“The movie is a sequel, of sorts, to ‘Fahrenheit 9/11,’ Moore’s scathing riff on the administration of George W. Bush. That movie, when it was released in 2004, made $119 million, becoming the highest-grossing documentary of all time.

“It was a special moment, of course. America was still grappling with the shock of 9/11, and Moore’s film became a lightning rod — a catharsis for liberals (or some of them, anyway) and a symbol, for conservatives, of everything that was wrong with liberalism.

“But one thing, perhaps, that everyone could agree on is that in ‘Fahrenheit 9/11,’ Michael Moore, for good or ill, had become instrumental in defining the national dialogue.”

Variety goes on to describe “Fahrenheit 11/9” as “his scathing riff on the administration of Donald J. Trump,” and calls it “more than just a staggering comedown” from his previous documentary successes.

Moore has failed to move out of the era of Bush, unlike his audience who has “drifted away” from the liberal dialogue he is trying to perpetuate to the present day.

According to Variety, liberals have seen through the Moore rhetoric and lies and he no longer has a fresh message to offer that will resonate with the progressive movement. They’ve heard it all before.

But Variety isn’t the only Hollywood media outlet to rain on Moore. The Hollywood Reporter took a few swipes at the film maker as well.

“Moore is part of the chorus these days, not the ringleader like he seemed to be back when Fahrenheit 9/11 dropped. Uncovering outlandish tweets and insane, alleged cover-ups is an everyday occurrence when it comes to Trump. Fahrenheit 11/9 felt outdated the day it dropped,” box-office analyst Jeff Bock of Exhibitor Relations told The Hollywood Reporter.

RELATED: Republicans Deserve Praise for Not Embracing Convenient but Reckless Theory

However, the pendulum always swings back in the other direction. Conservatives have picked up on pop culture’s messaging platforms and made a few great films of their own.

Dinesh D’Souza released “Death of a Nation” in August of this year, just two years after “Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party” in 2016.

And with the success of films like “American Sniper” and “13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi” it seems Americans are sending the film industry a message. People are just not buying the liberal message anymore.

America is tired of liberal hate mongering. I believe President Donald Trump’s “make America great again” campaign awakened American exceptionalism that is programed into our DNA. The irrational leftist arguments just don’t make sense anymore to a nation of people who believes we can do and be better.

D’Souza isn’t the only one with a pre-midterm movie out. Steve Bannon, former White House chief strategist, has released a great film that you should see before you go to the polls, and we have it here for you, for free.

This insiders’ look at what went on behind the scenes of the Trump campaign is far more insightful than anything coming from the left. “Trump @War” can be streamed by following this link.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Given the speed at which Trump-era news cycles move, I should stress that I’m writing this at 5:30 p.m. ET. By the time you read it, eight to 10 different major news stories might have broken that’ll affect the midterms dramatically one way or another. And 2018 being what it is, they’re apt to be off-the-wall crazy. Michael Avenatti might prove that Kavanaugh has spent the last 30 years secretly moonlighting as a pimp. Trump might fire Rod Rosenstein and then nominate him to the Supreme Court in lieu of Kavanaugh. Jeff Sessions might get caught smoking crack.

The only limit to the 2018 show is your imagination.

For the moment, though, some surprising and encouraging news for Team Red. My top three guesses for why views of the GOP are improving: 1. The economy. 2. The economy. 3. The economy.

Rarely does the right lead the left in overall favorability, as you can see. The last time it happened was in … late 2014, right before the red-wave midterms that year. Previously it happened in … late 2010, right before the red-wave midterms of *that* year. Second look at Trump’s “red wave” predictions?

RCP’s generic-ballot numbers are interesting today too. Democrats are on the cusp of their best numbers of the entire Trump presidency. Whereas Republicans have set their best numbers of the entire Trump presidency. Each party has either broken through its individual ceiling or is about to:

Until this past Saturday, the GOP had never touched 41 percent on the generic ballot. They’re at 41.3 percent now. Only once before, during Trump’s December doldrums of last year, had Democrats reached as high as 49 percent. They’re at 49.1 percent today, down a tenth of a point from their new high that was set over the weekend. What we’re probably seeing here is fencesitters beginning to take sides as the midterms approach. For months the two parties combined for 85 percent or so on the generic ballot; now, as undecideds start making up their minds, they’re over 90.

Which is not to say that those undecideds were all “true” undecideds. Read through the Gallup data and you’ll see that there’s been next to zero change in different groups’ support for Democrats over the past year but a notable rise in self-identified Republicans who view the GOP favorably. Last September just 67 percent of Republicans and leaners had a favorable view of the party. Now 85 percent do. A year ago, Democrats were viewed more favorably, 46/36, by middle-class voters (households with income between $30,000-$74,999). This year Republicans have come all the way back to take the lead, 49/45. There may have been a sizable minority of Republican-leaning voters last year who were fatigued by Trump’s antics and bummed at the failure of ObamaCare repeal. A year later, after 12 more months of excellent job reports and with tax cuts in the bank, they don’t care so much about the antics anymore.

Now all the party has to do is make up around eight points on the generic ballot and not let the Kavanaugh fiasco, which is already polling badly for them, turn into a total debacle. Piece of cake. The latest House model from YouGov, by the way: Democrats 224, Republicans 211.