Will Kavanaugh get Borked?

Third accuser Julie Swetnick alleges Kavanaugh attended 1982 party where she was gang-raped

 It took a period of 36 years for 3 women to come forward at nearly the same time. I just can't get the TIMING out of my mind. The odds of this is like winning the lottery 3 times in a month. As usual, this case is falling along partisan lines. No one knows for sure what happened and it'll never be proven one way or the other. To add a little additional political intrigue Feinstein sat on Ford's letter since July choosing to release the allegations just days before the vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation. I'm telling you this whole affair is starting to stink like the IRS scandal. You remember that... 7 simultaneous computer crashes erasing the emails so they couldn't cooperate with congressional investigations. 

Moving on to Swetnick. If you wanted to come across as credible would you allow Avenatti to represent you? Avenatti, aka the “Creepy Porn Lawyer” an avowed Democrat, a step down from Gloria Allred is a self-serving, Trump hating, attention seeking scumbag, who maintains he's running against Trump in the next election. Counsel from him, his credibility/believability, is about as legit as seeking advice from Ted Kennedy on how to drive over bridges. 

 One thing for sure. All three women admitted they were drinking at the time these alleged attacks took place. Right there alone raises red flags.

In the article below Swetnick says this about being gang-raped, “I was incapacitated without my consent and unable to fight off the boys raping me. I believe I was drugged using Quaaludes or something similar placed in what I was drinking.”

 She also states she was "present at more than 10 house parties". I'm interested in knowing when this sexual attack occurred. If I was on the Judiciary Committee I would have to ask...Miss Swetnick you stated you were present at more than 10 house parties is that correct? At which party did this take place... the second...the sixth...the tenth?

If Swetnick and others were repeatedly gang-raped at these 'sex' parties... why did they continue going to them? 

---------------------------- 

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was present at a 1982 house party where a Washington woman says she was gang-raped, according to an explosive statement that her lawyer released Wednesday.

The woman, Julie Swetnick, 55, did not accuse Kavanaugh of participating in the assault, which would have occurred at one of many parties that she said they both attended when Kavanaugh was in high school.

But she said she witnessed efforts by Kavanaugh, his friend Mark Judge and others to get girls “inebriated and disoriented so they could then be ‘gang-raped’ in a side room or bedroom by a ‘train’ of numerous boys.”

“I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their ‘turn’ with a girl inside the room,” she wrote in a declaration that her attorney, Michael Avenatti, posted Wednesday on Twitter. “These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.”

Kavanaugh and Judge denied the allegations, which The Times has not independently confirmed.

“This is ridiculous and from the Twilight Zone,” Kavanaugh, 53, said in a statement released by the White House. “I don’t know who this is and this never happened.”

Swetnick’s statement upended the already tumultuous Senate confirmation hearings of a nominee who could ensure a conservative tilt to the nation’s highest court for years to come. She is the third woman to accuse Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct when he was in high school or college.

At a news conference in New York, President Trump defended Kavanaugh and attacked Avenatti as a “low-life” lawyer.

“It’s a con job by the Democrats,” he said of the women’s allegations. “They know it.”

Swetnick’s allegations came on the eve of a high-stakes Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday. Christine Blasey Ford, a psychologist and professor at Palo Alto University, is scheduled to testify about what she has described as a sexual assault by Kavanaugh when he was 17 and she was 15.

Kavanaugh is now a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Avenatti sent Swetnick’s declaration to the Judiciary Committee. Lawyers for the Senate panel were reviewing it Wednesday, and Kavanaugh was going to be asked to respond under oath, according to Republican lawmakers.

Democratic senators and their allies quickly called for a postponement of Friday’s planned vote on Kavanaugh in the Judiciary Committee.

“Republicans need to immediately suspend the proceedings related to Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination, and the president must order the FBI to reopen the background check investigation,” said Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer of New York.

“There are now multiple, corroborated allegations against Judge Kavanaugh, made under the penalty of perjury, all of which deserve a thorough investigation.”

A Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, said Thursday’s hearing on Ford’s allegation should go forward as planned.

“These most recent allegations don’t have anything to do with Dr. Ford,” he said. “We’ve committed to hearing from her and that’s what we’ll be doing tomorrow.”

It’s unclear whether Senate Republicans will ultimately have enough votes to confirm Kavanaugh. At least two Republicans, Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, remain undecided.

Swetnick attended Gaithersburg High School in a Maryland suburb of Washington. From 1981 to 1983, she said in her declaration, Kavanaugh and Judge were present at more than 10 house parties that she attended in the Washington area.

When she was gang-raped, Swetnick said, “I was incapacitated without my consent and unable to fight off the boys raping me. I believe I was drugged using Quaaludes or something similar placed in what I was drinking.”

Will Kavanaugh get Borked?

Christine Blasey Ford and the Dems what an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh

But Now A Video of Joe Biden Surfaces from Clarence Thomas Hearings — He Thought FBI Reports Were Useless

Old Joe is quite adamant about FBI reports they “do not reach conclusions.”

 “FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case (Hill/Thomas), reach a conclusion. Period.” 

-----------------------

A video resurfaced of Sen. Joe Biden (D-D.E.) speaking during the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas in 1991, repeatedly saying that FBI reports “do not reach conclusions.”

This comes amid the current Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh being accused of sexual misconduct from decades ago and Democrats pushing to delay the confirmation vote while calling for FBI investigations.

“The next person that refers to an FBI report as being worth anything obviously doesn’t understand anything,” Biden said. “FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion. Period.”

“I said from the beginning, this is about whether or not sexual harassment occurred. And lastly, Judge, with me, from the beginning and at this moment, until the end, the presumption is with you. Now we are going to hear more witnesses. They are going to come in and corroborate your position and hers. And we will find out whether they are telling the truth or not, as best as we are capable of doing, just like you as a judge are when you look them in the eye and make a judgment.”

He continued later in his speech:

"And the last thing I will point out, the next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything, obviously doesn't understand anything. FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case reach a conclusion, period, period.

So, Judge, there is no reason why you should know this. The reason why we cannot rely on the FBI report, you would not like it if we did because it is inconclusive. They say he said, she said, and they said, period. So when people wave an FBI report before you, understand they do not, they do not reach conclusions. They do not make, as my friend points out more accurately, they do not make recommendations."

Watch the video below:

Video 430

The former vice president recently contradicted those statements when he said that the FBI should investigate the allegations made against Kavanaugh. So you see its all political. Including Feinstein sitting on Ford's letter since July choosing release the allegations just days before the key Judiciary Committee vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation.

Christine Blasey Ford and the Dems what an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh

Another ridiculous/asinine story from the Daily Mail

 

Christine Ford presents FOUR people's sworn testimony that she WAS sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh - including her husband and three friends

 If it's coming from the Daily Mail you KNOW it's not going to be supportive of Kavanaugh.

 Their sworn testimony is total bullshit. She told them about the attack, so then this event actually took place because that makes them witnesses??? 

 I love it. 

Her husband, who she had yet to meet in 1982, in effect is a fucking witness?

Ford's Theatre was part of our history. 

Wonder if Ford Theatrics will be also?

----------------------------

Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford has presented sworn statements from four individuals, including her husband, to back her claims that she was sexually assaulted by the Supreme Court nominee decades ago.

The affidavits sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee by Ford's lawyers include sworn declarations from her husband Russell and three friends who say she told them of the sex assault allegations well before Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination. 

All four sworn statements state that Ford either named Kavanaugh as her assailant or described the attacker as a 'federal judge'.

Ford's husband Russell stated in his signed affidavit that his wife had named Kavanaugh as her alleged attacker during a couple's therapy session back in 2012.

His statement comes a day before Ford is set to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee – and a day after Kavanaugh appeared side by side with his wife, Ashley, to publicly deny the allegations in a televised interview.

'I remember her saying that her attacker's name was Brett Kavanaugh, that he was a successful lawyer who had grown up in Christine's home town, and that he was well-known in the Washington D.C. community,' Russell Ford said in his statement.

Ford said his wife was 'afraid' Trump would nominate Kavanaugh, who sits on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, to the high court, and was 'very conflicted' about bringing her story forward. 

Husband's evidence: Russell Ford has submitted sworn evidence to back his wife Christine Blasey Ford's account of being sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh in high school

Russell stated that he first became aware that his wife had 'any experience with sexual assault' around the time the couple wed in 2002, but she provided no details at the time. 

He said it was during a 2012 couples therapy session that she revealed she had been 'trapped in a room and physically restrained by one boy who was molesting her while another boy watched' in high school. He said Ford named the attacker as Kavanaugh.

(Think there's more to the 'couples therapy session' then meets the eye)

The subject came up again when Trump was considering his first Supreme Court nominee, who ended up being Justice Neil Gorsuch. Before the selection, Ford had told her husband that she was afraid the president might nominate Kavanaugh. The matter came up again when Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement and Trump had a second seat to fill. 

The declarations, first reported by USA Today, also include signed documents from three friends that her lawyers sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

'However, in the end, she believed her civic duty required her to speak out,' Russell Ford said. 'In our 16 years of marriage, I have always known Christine to be a truthful person of great integrity. I am proud of her for her bravery and courage,' her husband said. 

The statement from Ford's husband follows a Monday Fox News interview where Kavanaugh was seated side-by-side with his wife, Ashley, who defended him.

'No. I know Brett I've known him for 17 years. And this is not at all character… It's really hard to believe. He's decent. He's kind. He's good. I know his heart. This is not consistent with Brett,' Ashley Kavanaugh said in response to allegations against her husband. 

The Judiciary panel is scheduled to hold a hearing on Thursday on the accusations, ahead of a vote Friday on Kavanaugh's nomination.

If his nomination clears the panel, it must win confirmation from the full Senate, which Republicans narrowly control 51-49. 

A vote in the full Senate could happen as early as next Tuesday, senior Senate Republicans have said.

The accusation, along with one from a second accuser, have imperiled Kavanaugh's lifetime appointment to the nation's highest court as Republicans work to shore up his Senate confirmation ahead of the Nov. 6 congressional vote. 

Those elections could shift the balance of power in Congress as Democrats seek to regain control from conservatives.

Accusation: Brett Kavanaugh and his wife Ashley spoke out this week in an attempt to fight back against the sex assault claims which have engulfed his nomination

Ford, a university professor in California, has accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her in 1982 when they were both high school students in Maryland. 

Another woman, Deborah Ramirez, has accused him of sexual misconduct when she and Kavanaugh were students at Yale University.

Kavanaugh, a conservative federal appeals court judge, has denied the allegations and took his defense public this week in the Fox News interview.

His attorney, Beth Wilkinson, in televised interviews on Wednesday, said Ford's declarations cited recent interactions, not discussions at the time of the alleged incident, and that it was difficult to corroborate an accusation 36 years later.

'He admits that he drank and did some things that he looks back on and says are embarrassing and make you cringe... But that's not what this is about. This is about a very serious allegation, a very serious crime,' Wilkinson told 'CBS This Morning'.

Senators will hear both sides at Thursday's hearing, keenly aware of the impact it could have on voters, particularly women, against a backdrop of the #MeToo movement fighting sexual harassment and assault.

Republican President Donald Trump, who has also been accused of sexual misconduct, escalated his rhetoric against both of Kavanaugh's accusers on Tuesday and called the allegations 'a con game being played by the Democrats.'

Trump also spoke out directly against the two accusers, suggesting their claims were invented.

The White House earlier this week said it would welcome testimony from the second accuser, Ramirez. Asked about her possible testimony, Trump on Tuesday said she 'had nothing.'

Ramirez's lawyer, John Clune, said in television interviews on NBC and CBS on Wednesday that she has not been invited to speak to senators.

The Republican-controlled committee, led by 11 men, on Tuesday, said it had hired a female lawyer to question Ford. The decision prompted an outcry from Democrats, whose 10-panel members include four women, given that senators typically do the questioning themselves.

Senate Republicans chose Rachel Mitchell, a sex crimes prosecutor from Arizona, to conduct the questioning.

Another ridiculous/asinine story from the Daily Mail

Bill Cosby's star on Hollywood Walk of Fame won't be removed

 Had this been anyone but Cosby they most certainly would have got more than 3 to 10. Clearly, he is guilty as hell and probably won't do 3 years. (Early release should kick in about 22 months citing 'failing health' reasons). Still, the star thing gets me.  If the Confederate flag had to come down,

Paterno's statue had to be removed,

and Pete Rose can't get in the Hall of Fame because of gambling,

surely Cosby's star should be removed. I just don't see the fairness.

-----------------------------

Disgraced comedian Bill Cosby's star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame won't be removed, even after he received a sentence of three to 10 years in prison for drugging and sexually assaulting a woman over a decade ago, becoming the first celebrity of the #MeToo era to be sent to prison. In a statement Tuesday to CBS Los Angeles, the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce said it "does not remove stars from the Walk of Fame" because they "are intended to be permanent."

"The stars only commemorate the recipient's professional accomplishments," the chamber wrote. The chamber acknowledged Cosby's tarnished reputation, saying, "It is regrettable when the personal lives of inductees do not measure up to public standards and expectations." 

On Monday, a petition was presented to the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce to remove Cosby's star. But the chamber has never pulled a star from the Walk of Fame. It turned down a 2015 request to remove Cosby's star as the sexual assault allegations against him first resulted in criminal charges. 

On Tuesday, Montgomery County Judge Steven O'Neill handed down the sentence after he ruled Cosby to be a "sexually violent predator" for the assault on Temple University women's basketball administrator Andrea Constand at the comedian's estate near Philadelphia in 2004. Cosby was convicted in April.

"It is time for justice. Mr. Cosby, this has all circled back to you. The time has come," O'Neill said. He quoted from Constand's own statement to the court, in which she said Cosby took her "beautiful, young spirit and crushed it." 

Bill Cosby's star on Hollywood Walk of Fame won't be removed

Eight big problems for Christine Blasey Ford’s story

Number 1 pretty much cemented it for me. A case in point. If Joe Jackson was charged with a murder that occurred 36 years ago and Christine Blasey Ford was the star eyewitness for the prosecution and gave the same type of highly questionable testimony about Jackson as she did Kavanaugh do you think he would get convicted? 

-------------------------

Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations against Brett Kavanaugh are serious. She is accusing him of violent attempted rape. “I thought he might inadvertently kill me. He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing,” she told The Washington Post, recounting the alleged incident at a high school party “one summer in the early 1980s.”

But her story is also growing less believable by the day. Here are eight reasons why it’s hardly “anti-woman” for senators to question her account at Thursday’s hearing:

1) For starters, Ford still can’t recall basic details of what she says was the most traumatic event in her life. Not where the “assault” took place — she’s not sure whose house it was, or even what street it was on. Nor when — she’s not even sure of the year, let alone the day and month.

Ford’s not certain how old she was or what grade she was in when she says an older student violently molested her. (But she doesn’t plead inebriation: She described having just “one beer” at the party.)

2) Ford concedes she told no one what happened to her at the time, not even her best friend or mother. That means she can rely on no contemporaneous witness to corroborate her story.

3) Worse, the four other people she identified as attending the party, including Kavanaugh, all deny knowledge of the gathering in question, including Leland Ingham Keyser, who she calls a “lifelong friend.”

Keyser’s lawyer told the Senate Judiciary Committee: “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.”

The other two potential witnesses — Mark Judge and Patrick “P.J.” Smyth — also deny any recollection of attending such a party. The committee took their sworn statements “under penalty of perjury.” “These witnesses directly contradict Professor Ford’s allegations against Judge Kavanaugh,” Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley advised Ford’s attorneys last week.

In her original letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Ford claimed that Kavanaugh talked to Keyser and Smyth right after he assaulted her. Yet neither shares her memory.

This is, to say the least, highly problematic for her case. No witness corroborates any part of her story.

4) Her own immediate family doesn’t appear to be backing her up, either. Her mother, father and two siblings are all conspicuously absent from a letter of support released by a dozen relatives, mostly on her husband’s side of the family.

The letter attests to her honesty and integrity. “Why didn’t her parents and brothers sign the letter?” a congressional source familiar with the investigation wondered.

5) This summer, Ford tried to reach out to old friends from high school and college to jog her memory. They couldn’t help her. “I’ve been trying to forget this all my life, and now I’m supposed to remember every little detail,” Ford complained to one friend in July, according to an account in The San Jose Mercury News.

6) Yet she still pushed forward with her bombshell charge, contacting The Washington Post tip line and Democratic lawmakers, while hiring a Democratic activist lawyer. Ford is also a Democrat, as well as an anti-Trump marcher, raising questions about the motive and timing of the allegations along with their veracity.

7) Ford contends that notes her therapist took in 2012 corroborate her account. But they don’t mention Kavanaugh.

They also point up inconsistencies in her story. For instance, her shrink noted that Ford told her there were “four boys” in the bedroom, not two as she now says. The notes also indicate Ford said she was in her “late teens” when she was assaulted. But Ford now says she may have been only 15.

8) In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.

On top of all that, Kavanaugh “unequivocally denied Dr. Ford’s allegations . . . under penalty of perjury” during a Sept. 17 interview with committee lawyers, Grassley said, adding he was “forthright and emphatic in his testimony” and “fully answered all questions.”

The sworn interview will no doubt be used to test the consistency and veracity of his public statements Thursday.

Yet Democrats have already tried and convicted Kavanaugh of sexual assault. Without hard evidence, without substantiation, some even go beyond Ford’s claims to call him an out-and-out “rapist,” “sexual predator,” even a “child predator.”

As a result, Kavanaugh and his family, “including his two young daughters, have faced serious death threats and vicious assaults,” Grassley said. “And they’re getting worse each day.”

Ford, who also has received threats, is by all accounts a respected scientific researcher in the field of psychology with an impressive pedigree. While that makes her credible, the same can’t be said for her story. Unless she can fill in the many holes, Kavanaugh still deserves the presumption of innocence.

Eight big problems for Christine Blasey Ford’s story