DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Kavanaugh Hearings Cont....

Committee contacts Ford's friend about party; 'she has no recollection' of it, lawyer says

By Ariane de Vogue,

CNN Supreme Court Reporter

September 22, 2018


Washington (CNN)As the Senate Judiciary Committee staff negotiates with attorneys for Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of a past sexual assault, over a potential hearing on Thursday, Republican staffers are working to interview those who may have information about the alleged incident.

CNN has learned that the committee has reached out to a longtime friend of Ford named Leland Ingham Keyser.

"I understand that you have been identified as an individual who was in attendance at a party that occurred circa 1982 described in a recent Washington Post article," a committee staffer wrote Keyser earlier this week.

On Saturday night, her lawyer, Howard Walsh, released a statement to CNN and the Senate Judiciary Committee.



"Simply put," Walsh said, "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 lawyer acknowledged to CNN that Keyser is a lifelong friend of Ford's.
Ford's lawyer Debra Katz said in response to Keyser's attorney's statement that it makes sense that Keyser wouldn't remember, because Ford has said she did not share her allegations "publicly or with anyone for years."

"It's not surprising that Ms Keyser has no recollection of the evening as they did not discuss it," Katz said in a statement. "It's also unremarkable that Ms. Keyser does not remember attending a specific gathering 30 years ago at which nothing of consequence happened to her. Dr. Ford of course will never forget this gathering because of what happened to her there."

Keyser is the latest person alleged to be at the party to say she has no recollection of it.

White House spokesperson Kerri Kupec said of those who allegedly attended the party, "One week ago, Dr. Christine Ford claimed she was assaulted at a house party attended by four others. Since then, all four of these individuals have provided statements to the Senate Judiciary Committee denying any knowledge of the incident or even having attended such a party."

The Washington Post reported late Saturday that it had talked to Keyser, who told the paper she believed Ford's allegation.
Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the allegations, telling sources he was "flabbergasted" when he learned of them.

"This is a completely and totally false allegation," he said after Ford came forward. "I have never done anything like what the accuser describes — to her or to anyone."
In addition, two others have issued statements.

"I have no memory of this alleged incident," said Mark Judge in a September 18 letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee. He said he did not recall the party and never saw Brett Kavanaugh act in the matter Ford describes.

In addition, Patrick J. Smyth issued a statement. "I understand that I have been identified by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford as the person she remembers as 'PJ' who supposedly was present at the party she described in her statements to the Washington Post," Smyth said in his statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee. "I am issuing this statement today to make it clear to all involved that I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh."

"Personally speaking, I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh towards women. To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the Committee may have."

CNN's Clare Foran contributed to this report.

This whole thing is just a convenient, last ditch effort at disallowing the appointment.

I'm glad she'll testify - Ford - she'll have her day, and then she can tell Feinstein " I did my best".


I don't think she had any clue the mess she was getting into when she penned that letter to ..........whoever it was.


I think it would be awesome if the fbi investigated her bank accounts though.

so, did you also advocate for this when the GOP stonewalled obama's SC pick for a whole year? or does this only apply to your team?

cause you've made it perfectly clear the GOP is your team.

No, I probably didn't.


What kind of money was there to make? No false accusations.

We'll find out, won't we?

You want an investigation? Have at it. I hope they dig deep.

This woman is also Bob Beckel's wife, and Beckel is about as partisan a Democrat as there is in the country.

If there were some "there there", I think she would have said so.

Hmmm.............that's interesting.

im sure the was plenty of money to make stonewalling Obama's pick.

Sorry, ex-wife. She is currently the executive producer of Beckel's podcast.

Swish admitted it, this is about revenge.

hey man, dems learned from the best. the GOP.

I'd have taken this much more seriously if it was revealed soon after the letter was received. The fact that they waited until now casts major doubt on it from where I sit.

Brett Kavanaugh's mother is judge who dismissed a foreclosure action against accuser Ford's parents

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/...ents/ar-BBNv9uh

Republicans still haven't gotten the unredacted letter from Dems.

That's oddly nice of her...

I thought you didn't like .....Whatabought?

New Yorker just published that Kavanaugh exposed himself to a girl at a dorm party in college and made her touch his penis.


https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk...deborah-ramirez

Fox News Poll: Record number of voters oppose Kavanaugh nomination

Voter support for Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court is down in the wake of Christine Ford’s assault allegations, as more believe her than him.

Currently, 40 percent of voters would confirm Kavanaugh, while 50 percent oppose him, according to a Fox News poll. Last month, views split 45-46 percent (August 19-21).

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/...nomination.html

I’ve already answered my overall thoughts on this topic.

No sexual predators on the Supreme Court

Second woman accuses Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault in New Yorker report

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli...rez/1406607002/

A woman who attended Yale University with Brett Kavanaugh has alleged that he sexually assaulted her when they were both freshmen at the Ivy League school, according to a New Yorker report, which says Senate Democrats are investigating the allegations.

The woman, identified as Deborah Ramirez, is accusing Kavanaugh of exposing himself at a dormitory party and "thrusting his penis" in her face, according to the story, which also says that this incident happened during the 1983-84 academic year. She acknowledges she had been drinking that night and has gaps in her memory.

Ramirez, 53, is the second woman to accuse the Supreme Court nominee of sexual assault decades ago.

Also Sunday, Attorney Michael Avenatti, who represents Stormy Daniels in her hush-money case against President Donald Trump, tweeted that he is representing a third woman with "information" on Kavanaugh. He sent a second tweet specifying that this woman is not Ramirez.


Michael Avenatti
✔
@MichaelAvenatti
I represent a woman with credible information regarding Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge. We will be demanding the opportunity to present testimony to the committee and will likewise be demanding that Judge and others be subpoenaed to testify. The nomination must be withdrawn.

7:33 PM - Sep 23, 2018
69.6K
36.6K people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
In Ramirez' case, she claims she encountered him at a party a year after Christine Blasey Ford has said that he held her down, covered her mouth with his hand and tried to remove her clothes after he and a friend locked her in a bedroom at a party in 1982, when they were all in high school in the suburbs of Washington, D.C.

Given Ramirez' allegation and Avenatti's client, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California and a member of the Judiciary Committee, called Sunday for a delay in Kavanaugh's nomination.

“I also ask that the newest allegations of sexual misconduct be referred to the FBI for investigation, and that you join our request for the White House to direct the FBI to investigate the allegations of Christine Blasey Ford as well as these new claims," she wrote in a letter to Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.


Kavanaugh, who has repeatedly denied the allegations by Ford, also denied this new accusation.

“This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen," Kavanaugh said in a statement released by the White House. "The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name – and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building – against these last-minute allegations.”

More: Sen. Graham doubts Ford's story

More: Kavanaugh accuser tentatively agrees to testify Thursday

Ford has agreed to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee at 10 a.m. Thursday and The New Yorker reports that Ramirez is asking for an FBI investigation of her allegations against Kavanaugh.

Ramirez told The New Yorker that the incident took place after she was invited to a party where she and friends played a drinking game. She said she was repeatedly picked to take a drink and quickly became drunk.

At some point, Ramirez said, a male student exposed himself to her. She remembers Kavanaugh standing nearby and pulling up his pants while he laughed.

"I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants," she told The New Yorker.

Ramirez said she does have gaps in her memories of the evening and knows she will be questioned about why she took so long to come forward with the allegations.

Facebook
Twitter
Google+
LinkedIn
Supreme Court nomination hearing for Brett Kavanaugh
Fullscreen
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh organizes his desk before testifying to the Senate Judiciary Committee on the third day of his confirmation hearing on Sept. 6, 2018, in Washington. Chip Somodevilla, Getty Images
The White House responded Sunday by saying it "stands firmly" behind Kavanaugh.

“This 35-year-old, uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the Democrats designed to tear down a good man," the statement reads. "This claim is denied by all who were said to be present and is wholly inconsistent with what many women and men who knew Judge Kavanaugh at the time in college say."

George Hartmann, a Grassley spokesman, said “senior Republican staffers” who learned of the allegation last week referred to in The New Yorker article were not from Grassley’s office.

“Committee staff learned of the allegations like everyone else did in tonight’s New Yorker report," he said. "Neither Ms. Ramirez or any legal representative of hers have contacted the chairman’s office. It seems once again that Senate Democrats are actively withholding information from the rest of the committee.”

A committee staffer emailed Avenatti “shortly after” he announced on Twitter he represented “a woman with credible information regarding Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge.”

Avenatti posted his response on Twitter: "We are aware of significant evidence of multiple house parties in the Washington, D.C. area during the early 1980s during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge and others would participate in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a "train" of men to subsequently gang rape them. There are multiple witnesses that will corroborate these facts and each of them must be called to testify publicly. ”

Hartmann said the committee would begin “looking into the allegations” but would not commit to calling in additional witnesses for the hearing.

David Popp, a spokesman for Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, said he had not talked to McConnell on Sunday night but that he was unaware of the allegations before they became public.

“The Democrats did not give me a heads up on the story. Neither did (The New Yorker reporters),” he said.

The response to the latest allegation against Kavanaugh prompted renewed calls for him to withdraw or be eliminated from consideration.

Brian Fallon, executive director of Demand Justice, issued a short but pointed statement: "Enough is enough. Brett Kavanaugh needs to withdraw immediately."

Women’s March COO Rachel O’Leary Carmona said her organization is planning a "week of action" leading into the Ford testimony on Thursday and called for Kavanaugh to be removed from consideration.

"His nomination was an affront to women from the start, and any continuation of these hearings will be seen by women as a war on survivors of sexual assault," Carmona said.

Citing 10 quotes and excerpts from The New Yorker that "cast doubt" on Ramirez' claim, Carrie Severino, chief counsel and policy director for the Judicial Crisis Network, said Senate Republicans "must not allow unsubstantiated and discredited allegations from over three decades ago to destroy the life and reputation of a good man."

"(Senate Minority Leader) Chuck Schumer vowed to oppose Kavanaugh with everything he's got, and apparently that took the form of character assassination. This has all of the ingredients of a smear campaign on steroids," Severino said. "Senate Republicans should stand up to these unsubstantiated and discredited allegations and move forward with a vote to confirm Kavanaugh."

excerpt:

Senior Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week and, in conversations with The New Yorker, expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote.

So now we know why the DIRTY GOP wanted to rush the Ford hearing... Drip Drip Drip, more egg on the Trumpian GOP's face.

lmfao

Bad enough that the White House leaked Ford's name out, before she came forward.

Fox is already printing the 'Creepy Porn Lawyer and dirty dems behind this' scrolls for tomorrow's primetime coverage.

Hey, boys will be boys and he just needed the wasted coed to see his pee pee... smh

Drip...by....drip...by...drip. The GOP deplorables continue to take the spotlight. True colors are revealed. November is around the corner as panic starts to set in. Enjoy!

There is a difference between using procedure and politics to delay a vote, than trying to ruin a man and his family over allegations of criminal activity of this nature. JMO

except the end result is the same. stonewalling the nominee as long as possible.

eh, if that's where you lie, that says all I need to know.

I don't know if this lady is telling the truth or not, nor do you. But any accuser that does lie about these things, should be held to the same type of punishment the alleged would have been held too if found guilty. JMO

i agree with that.

as i've stated before, my issue isn't with the accuser(s), but with how the dems turned this crap into a circus. i think the dems are acting completely unprofessional in this whole situation.

but i'm not gonna slam accusers, especially with sexual assault allegations.

It could be seen as a smear to ruin his family... It could be seen as the outing of a despicable person. Either way, he should not be confirmed.

Me either, I will not say one way or another as I haven't heard her story for myself. All I have is what I have seen written, which hasn't been to compelling to make a case either way yet.

Next Pirro will be warming up her "demon rats" line again. lmao

What have the Dems done other than bring the accusations to light and demand an investigation? The dems didn't do these things, Kavanaugh is accused of doing them. The dems didn't make the accusations.

Feinstein sat on this letter for months. the professional thing to do is this:

"hey Trump, i just received a letter from a woman accusing your nominee of sexual assault. i want to give you a heads up about this, so you can do more vetting or find another nominee. but just to give you professional courtesy, if you continue on with this nominee, then i will have to bring up the allegations at the hearing".

that is how PROFESSIONALS act. that is how we need to demand our politicians act.

but to wait til the 3rd day of the hearing to bring this up? its absolutely disgusting.

its pathetic in every sense of the word. the dems effectively WEAPONIZED the #metoo movement. we're talking about a something that goes underreported because women have been marginalized and victim-blamed for decades over this issue.

to politicize it demonstrates to a lot of people that the dems aren't actually serious in taking sexual allegations seriously. because if they were, they wouldve brought it up WHEN THEY GOT THE LETTER.

they politicized this, and while short term it might be a "win" for the dems (i hate using that term with regards to sexual assault), long term the people aren't gonna forget this, ESPECIALLY if nothing comes of it, and Kavanaugh is confirm as a SC judge anyway.

again, the issue is NOT with the accuser. the issue falls squarely on the democrats conduct during this whole situation.

I'm not really sure about that Swish. I'm actually not sure how to feel about it one way or the other.

My first question would be did the accuser even open up the possibility of making it public before it was made public? I mean to me tht's the elephant in the room here.

What I do know it that even when Feinstein released the letter she couldn't release the accusers name. It seemed to me that Feinstein was honoring the wishes of the accuser. It could be that the accuser didn't even want the letter to be released before it was. I have no idea but do consider it a possibility.

Feinstein sent the letter to the FBI. They did not act or were ordered not to act by POTUS. Ford asked that this be kept confidential, Feinstein honored that until leaks forced her hand. Even then she did not reveal Ford's name.

I think you are buying into the conservative talking points bro.

right, the accuser didn't want this public.

which is why i stated that feinstein should've let the president know about this. if she did, we probably wouldn't even hear about this, and maybe kavanaugh gets swapped out with another nominee.

and it doesn't change that she waited until the 3rd day of the hearing to bring it up.

why not day 1 when all the crap was flying at the hearing anyway? remember, feinstein was the first dem to have opening statements. and she didn't say one word about it then.

read my reply to pit.

again, the accuser? i support.

the dems behavior on this? i do not.