October 5, 2018

USA: Now That Senator Grassley Released The FBI Investigation Report, Ford Team Member Says: "No, The Alleged Attack On Ford Didn’t Happen At The July 1, 1982 Party." Can You See The Pattern Here?

Hotair.com
written by allahpundit
October 5, 2018

Glad they waited until the eve of the cloture vote to make this clear, after a week of theorizing by chumps like me and days spent by the FBI interviewing people named on Kavanaugh’s calendar on that date. 👇
Christine Blasey Ford would have ruled out a key date that both Republicans and Democrats have examined in evaluating her sexual assault claim against Brett Kavanaugh, had the FBI contacted her for its inquiry, according to a member of her team…

But a member of Ford’s team said the California-based professor — who was not interviewed by the FBI for its inquiry — “would have told them that she never considered July 1 as a possible date, because of some of the people listed on his calendar who she knew well and would have remembered.”

“She would have also told the FBI that it was just a regular summer night for everyone else who was there,” the member of Ford’s team added. “There would have been no reason for them to remember it.”
That’s exactly the point skeptics like me of the July 1 theory made in criticizing it. It was an intriguing possibility because two of the people whom Ford remembers as being present, Mark Judge and Patrick Smyth, were also listed on Kavanaugh’s calendar as attending the drink-up at Tim Gaudette’s home on July 1. Problem: Chris “Squi” Garrett was also listed, and Garrett is the boy whom Ford went out with for a spell. It’s almost impossible to believe she would have remembered a rando like Smyth being there but not someone like Garrett, whom she knew well.

Which raises anew the mystery of how Ford and Kavanaugh supposedly ended up at a party together, and not a big house party with dozens and dozens of people there either. Garrett was the link between Ford and Kavanaugh’s circle of friends. It’d be logical to assume that if she and Kavanaugh really did cross paths at a small party, it would have been because she accompanied Garrett there. If Ford herself is now saying that there’s no chance Garrett was present and therefore it couldn’t have happened on July 1, how did she and Leland Keyser end up at the party? Rachel Mitchell was interested during the hearing in trying to figure out how 15-year-old Ford got to and from the party, which was a good question, but a related one is what friends she and Kavanaugh had in common besides Garrett that might have brought them to the same place at the same time. Were there any? Remember, Keyser doesn’t recall ever even meeting Kavanaugh.

Exit question via Seth Mandel:
Does the answer depend on whether Deborah Ramirez also accused Kavanaugh of misconduct in this alternate universe? You can imagine him being outraged at multiple last-minute accusations, which reeks of a smear campaign; being boorishly outraged if it was just Ford, after she’d testified compellingly right before him, would have been harder to pull off. If he had been emotional in that scenario, it would have come off as disproportionate to what he’d been accused of. The entrance of Avenatti and Julie Swetnick’s outlandish accusations into this fiasco turned it into a circus and made Kavanaugh’s anger much more understandable. (Thanks, Avenatti!)

Mandel thinks the nomination would have been withdrawn if Kavanaugh had testified meekly, in a low-key way, after Ford. I highly doubt it: Trump never would have backed down and Kavanaugh himself would have justified hanging in there based on the fact that there’s zero corroborating evidence for Ford’s account. I do think the Senate would have voted him down, though. As it is, as I write this at 11 a.m. ET, it looks like he’s going to squeak through. In America 2018 anger is almost always your best political option.

Update: I tweaked the headline to clarify that this came from a “member of Ford’s team,” which I assume means one of her lawyers. (Who else would be on her “team”?) But since it’s not certain, I’ll use the vaguer term.
Fox News
written by Greg Re
Friday October 5, 2018

Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans released an executive summary of the FBI's confidential supplemental background investigation into Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh late Thursday, which key swing-vote senators vowed they would continue to review Friday ahead of a major vote on his confirmation.

According to the summary of the report, FBI agents interviewed 10 people and reached out to 11. They focused exclusively on witnesses with potential first-hand knowledge of alleged sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh.

"The FBI provided to the Senate 12 detailed FD-302 reports summarizing their interviews with the witnesses as well as supporting materials cited by the witnesses during their interviews," the summary reads. Only senators and top aides are being allowed to review the full report in a secure facility on Capitol Hill.

Notably absent from the witness list were any individuals directly related to the allegations of Julie Swetnick, who claimed in a sworn statement that she had witnessed Kavanaugh participating in systemic gang rapes decades ago.

Swetnick's credibility has taken a beating in recent days, with one ex-boyfriend telling Fox News she "exaggerated everything" and had threatened to kill his unborn child. Another ex-boyfriend similarly cast doubt on her credibility, as reports surfaced that she had previously been sued for allegedly concocting false sexual harassment claims. Swetnick is represented by anti-Trump lawyer Michael Avenatti.

Among those questioned were Mark Judge, PJ Smyth, and Leland Keyser, the three individuals Christine Blasey Ford claimed were present in the house when Kavanaugh allegedly threw her on a bed and sexually assaulted her sometime in the 1980s (Ford has variously claimed the episode occurred in the mid-1980s and early 1980s, before testifying that it occurred in 1982).

All three of those individuals had already provided statements to the Judiciary Committee under penalty of felony denying any knowledge of the alleged assault. Keyser, Ford's lifelong best friend, denied ever knowing Kavanaugh. When questioned about Keyser's statement at last Thursday's hearing, Ford suggested Keyser was having serious medical issues and had apologized for her denial.

In a twist, Keyser told FBI investigators that she felt pressured to clarify her original statement saying she was unaware of any incident involving Kavanaugh and Ford, according to a Wall Street Journal report. Keyser, who later said she believed Ford even though she could not corroborate her story, told the investigators that she was urged to clarify her statement by Monica McLean, a former FBI agent and friend of Ford’s. (Ford's ex-boyfriend told the Judiciary Committee that Ford had helped McLean prepare for a polygraph, directly contradicting Ford's sworn testimony last Thursday).

Judge was also questioned "extensively" about other allegations besides Ford's, according to the Judiciary Committee. Democrats had called for Senate Republicans to subpoena Judge, a longtime friend of Kavanaugh's, so that they could question him about the nominee's drinking habits and high school yearbook references.

Additionally, the FBI interviewed two individuals named in Kavanaugh's July 1, 1982 calendar entry, which some observers said could have described the gathering where Ford was purportedly attacked. Those individuals were his longtime friend Christopher Garrett and Timothy Gaudette, whose house Kavanaugh visited for beers on July 1, according to his calendar. An attorney for one of those witnesses was also interviewed.

Finally, the FBI interviewed Deborah Ramirez, the woman who claimed in an explosive New Yorker piece that Kavanaugh had exposed himself to her at a Yale party. The FBI also interviewed two alleged eyewitnesses identified by Ramirez, and tried to interview a third, but that individual refused to cooperate. Agents also interviewed one of Ramirez's close friends from college.

"The Supplemental Background Investigation confirms what the Senate Judiciary Committee concluded after its investigation: there is no corroboration of the allegations made by Dr. Ford or Ms. Ramirez," the Judiciary Committee Republicans wrote.

Ramirez had previously acknowledged to The New Yorker that, as recently as last month, she was not sure Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself to her. She then changed her mind after speaking to an attorney for less than a week, according to the magazine. Kavanaugh testified last Thursday that he had heard Ramirez was asking former classmates at Yale about the alleged episode during the summer, apparently trying to "refresh" their memories in a manner he implied was inappropriate.

One of Ramirez's lawyers complained on Twitter this week that the FBI did not appear to be conducting a "serious" investigation because, he claimed, the agency failed to reach out to some of the dozens of witnesses he had suggested.

Nevertheless, for several hours on Thursday, senators from both parties filed in and out of the Capitol Building's Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF), where they pored over the FBI's full report in a private, secured setting. Senators were not allowed to take the report out of the SCIF.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, considered a key potential swing vote on Kavanaugh, said Thursday that the bureau’s supplemental background probe “appears to be a very thorough investigation.” On Thursday afternoon, however, she remained in the SCIF for more than an hour and a half, causing some consternation among Republicans.

“All of that time, she still doesn’t know?” one source asked Fox News.

And Arizona Republican Sen. Flake, who originally requested the FBI re-open its investigation into the sexual assault claims leveled against Kavanaugh by Ford, agreed with Collins' assessment.

“No new corroborative information came out of it,” Flake said. “Thus far, we’ve seen no new credible corroboration — no new corroboration at all.”

However, Flake continued to keep the public guessing, returning to view the report again and saying he has "more reading" to do. He pulled a surprise last week when he publicly backed Kavanaugh, then demanded the FBI probe before a final vote.

Top Democrats, though, minced no words about the FBI's report, saying the bureau's inquiry should not have been restricted to one week. President Trump has said the FBI had the authority to interview "whoever" they wanted, but Democrats also alleged that the administration had meddled in the investigation.

"Well, that report -- if that's an investigation, it's a bull---- investigation," Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., told a man as he walked through the Capitol complex on Thursday. "The reality is, that was not a full and thorough investigation."

Late Thursday, Grassley ripped into Ford's attorneys for their request, and suggested in an exasperated letter that they simply wanted to stall Kavanaugh's confirmation at any cost.

"Your response on behalf of your client is a non-sequitur," Grassley wrote in the letter. "It’s not even clear to me what purpose turning over these materials to the FBI would accomplish. The FBI would simply turn over that evidence to the Senate. That is precisely the outcome I seek with this request."

Furthermore, Grassley added, "The U.S. Senate doesn’t control the FBI. If you have an objection to how the FBI conducts its investigations, take it up with [FBI] Director [Christopher] Wray."

Grassley concluded by implying that Ford's attorneys weren't disclosing her therapist notes because they did not, in fact, back up her claims.

A final vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation is expected Saturday. A key procedural vote to end debate on his nomination is set for Friday morning.
I'm sharing this again because of what the member of the Ford team wrote above. She's now claiming that had the FBI interviewed Ford, they would have found out that SHE HAS CHANGED HER STORY AGAIN because SHE LIED. There was NO NEED for FBI to interview Ford because she had ALREADY TESTIFIED UNDER OATH and PENALTY OF PERJURY. It would have been redundant. Ford changed her story because the only possible link to Kavanaugh FBI interviewed and WAS NOT TRUE. Basically SHE LIED.  No Grand Jury of her peers in court would take her case and her attorney's know it. (emphasis mine)

CBS Denver published on MONDAY Oct 1, 2018: FBI Interviews Brett Kavanaugh Accuser Deborah Ramirez. Deborah Ramirez alleges that Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a party while both were students at Yale.

I'm sharing the video above to show you how in bed our media is with the Marxist party. There was no need for the FBI to interview Judge Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford because BOTH OF THEM testified UNDER OATH on Capitol Hill at a Senate Hearing regarding Ford's accusations against Judge Kavanaugh for something she claimed he did to her 36 YEARS AGO. ALL of Christine Blasey Ford's friends that she used for witnesses SAID UNDER OATH that IT NEVER HAPPENED. The FBI didn't need to interview the other Kavanaugh accusers because ALL OF THEM RETRACTED their accusations or REFUSED to make accusation under penalty of perjury around September 25th. That CBS report was made on October 1st and they're still reporting that the FBI didn't interview other accusers. Why should they, unless they want to secure prison time. Two of them did make false accusations under oath and I pray they get charged accordingly. I share information about other accusers in tweets below.

Let's be clear, the Marxist 'Democrats' are not going to support any of President Trump's Supreme Court Nominee's, even if that SCOTUS nominee was a woman. They're the #resistance movement, remember? Okay. Are we clear? So, all of this insanity by the Marxist resistance mob, not protestors, they are violent uncivilized organized mobs. Most of them are astroturf, grassroots for hire. (emphasis mine)

No comments: