Feinstein: “Evidence” Submitted by Two Kavanaugh Accusers

BUT WHERE IS IT?

by Sharon Rondeau

(Oct. 5, 2018) — While speaking on the Senate floor prior to the cloture vote on U.S. Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh Friday morning, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) stated that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez both presented “evidence” to support their decades-old claims of sexual assault and sexual misconduct, respectively, made against Kavanaugh last month.

Feinstein, who is ranking member on the Senate Judiciary Committee, received a letter from Ford dated July 30, 2018 in which Ford alleged that while she and Kavanaugh were in high school, he sexually assaulted her in the upstairs of a home in the Washington, DC area. In her letter Ford requested anonymity, and without informing committee Republicans, Feinstein held the communication privately until she announced on September 12, after Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings were over, that she had provided it to “federal investigators.”

Just as the committee was poised to vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination, The Washington Post issued an article in which Ford identified herself as Kavanaugh’s accuser.  In its article, The Post referred to, but did not display, notes from what Ford reportedly told them was a 2012 session with a therapist in which she allegedly discussed the assault for the first time.  Kavanaugh’s name was not mentioned in the “portions of notes” the newspaper said it obtained from Ford.

Delaying a committee vote on the nominee twice, Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley made arrangements for Ford to testify publicly on September 27, something Ford said she wanted through her team of attorneys.   During her testimony, Ford presented no evidence or corroborating witnesses other than those she identified previously whose sworn affidavits contradicted that claim.

On Thursday evening, Grassley sent a third letter to Ford’s attorneys requesting “evidence” they allegedly hold supportive of Ford’s claim but have not released to the committee. In the letter, Grassley stated that the documentation is crucial to the committee’s “constitutional obligation to investigate and evaluate independently the President’s nominees.”

Grassley took issue with the fact that Ford’s legal team responded to his earlier requests by stating that the evidence would be provided to the FBI contingent upon Ford’s being interviewed by the agency.  On that day, the committee took a scheduled vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination, approving it narrowly along party lines but with the caveat that the FBI conduct an additional background check focusing on the claims made by Ford and Ramirez, a former Yale College contemporary of Kavanaugh’s. The parameters of the investigation, set by the committee, were that it would last no longer than a week and that the allegations made by Ford and Ramirez would be its focus.

Outrageous claims made by a third accuser, Julie Swetnick, were not included in the probe and have since been changed by Swetnick herself.

The FBI concluded its work on Tuesday, prepared its report Wednesday and on Thursday, Senate Judiciary Committee members were the first to view it in a private room on Capitol Hill in which no telephones or other electronic devices are permitted.

Ford’s attorneys, as with Democrat senators, have expressed dissatisfaction that Ford and Kavanaugh were not interviewed by the FBI.  Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) has since termed the probe a “whitewash” and “a cover-up.”

The Judiciary Committee was able to provide a summary for public consumption of the FBI’s findings, after which its Republican members unanimously stated that no corroboration of either Ford or Ramirez’s claims was presented among ten interviews of alleged witnesses, including two Ramirez identified.

According to Ford during her testimony, it was Feinstein’s office who referred her to the law office of Katz, Marshall & Banks, LLP, one of whose partners, Debra Katz, is a “Resistance” protester and prominent Democrat donor.  Since Ford’s revelation was made, Judiciary Committee member Lindsay Graham has called for an investigation concerning the ethics of the alleged action on Feinstein’s part.

Further to the evidence the law firm claims to have, Grassley concluded Thursday’s letter with a request for any communications which might have been exchanged between Ford (“or her representatives”) and the offices of any U.S. senators; with her three alleged witnesses; and between or among Ford, Ramirez and Swetnick.

2 Responses to "Feinstein: “Evidence” Submitted by Two Kavanaugh Accusers"

  1. Gary Wilmott   Sunday, October 7, 2018 at 5:28 AM

    Spartacus Booker and Kamala “I’m the female Obama” Harris (so much so that like Obama she too is not an NBC and thus not constitutionally qualified to be POTUS) – the embarassing doofus presidential wannabes – were willing to ruin a man’s life and reputation based on the following “CREDIBLE” presentation by Blasey-Ford:

    She refused to hand over the results of her polygraph

    She refused to hand over her 2012 therapist’s notes

    She said she was afraid to fly, but has flown dozens of times.

    Since she did in fact fly, she offered no other reason for the delay

    She said she wanted anonymity but contacted [the Washington Post] multiple times

    Said she got advice from “beach friends” but didn’t mention that the primary one was a former FBI lawyer, Monica McLean, who worked for Preet Bharara, a man Trump fired. She also failed to mention, when talking of her Beach friends at the hearing, that Monica was sitting right behind her.

    She had a perfect memory of 1982 but couldn’t remember basic things from the previous 10 weeks

    She’d been drinking.

    She changed the year of the alleged attack

    She named 4 people, but had no backers

    She couldn’t remember how she got home even though her story had her escaping the house far from home, pre-cell phone.

    She gave no location or any details that could be researched for verification.

    She never told anyone and never claimed PTSD prior to Kavanaugh’s name circulating 30 years later.

    She said that she put the 2nd door on her house because of PTSD, but evidence shows it was to get around zoning laws to create a rentable apartment.

    She said she didn’t know that Grassley offered to come to her, even though it was broadcast nationally.

    She feigned no knowledge of polygraphs even though her ex’s sworn statement said she’d coached Monica McLean how to beat it in the 1990s, and in any case her profession should have at least well acquainted her with it.

    She co-authored a paper on repressed memory creation years before she claimed to have one

    Nothing is known of her pharmacology, but given her past alcoholism, her visits to a therapist and her general presentation, odds are high that it’s extensive.

    She scrubbed her social media. We know from a pussy hat photo that she was rabidly anti-Trump.

    She had zero family or friends with her, not from the 80s nor from today. She was surrounded only by Democrat Party handlers.

    Constant cries of bravery & “nothing to gain” vs a $700,000 GoFundMe and a career boosted a la Anita Hill

    Literally all there is her word vs all of the above. Not a shred of evidence.

    The above list courtesy of American Thinker article:
    https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/seedpods_from_the_garden_of_stupid.html

  2. Tom Arnold   Friday, October 5, 2018 at 6:16 PM

    Can you say “WHITEWASH?” Is the FBI incapable of THOROUGHLY doing its job? Personally, I can tell you that the OIG DOJ sent UNSIGNED letters to me two times in 2015 in response to my accusations, including references to real evidence, against usurper “Barack Hussein Obama.” These UNSIGNED letters of the OIG DOJ stated, and I quote “This office considers the matters raised in your most recent letter and in previous correspondence to be closed, and we do not intend to exchange further correspondence with you…and consider the matter closed.” Now, whenever I email this website, OIG.hotline@usdoj.gov, allegedly for the reporting of crimes, they do NOT respond, and instead the following rather astonishing statement is sent back to me, which I quote “Your message couldn’t be delivered to the recipient because YOU DON’T HAVE PERMISSION TO SEND IT!” Say what? Ever hear of the 1st Amendment? WHERE ARE YOU, THE PEOPLES’ U.S. SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES? Why wouldn’t this be a matter worthy of your committees’ investigative efforts? I say leave the FBI out of it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.