Something about the new claims made by Kavanagh accuser Julie Swetnik doesn’t add up.
Swetnik claims that Judge Brett Kavanaugh attended rape parties where teenage boys would get young girls drunk and victimize them by raping them. Swetnik claims to have attended the parties for a year before she herself became a victim of rape. Then she reportedly continued attending the parties into the next year.
In a declaration released by her attorney, Michael Avenatti, Swetnick alleged that Kavanaugh and a friend spiked girls’ drinks with alcohol during the parties in the early 1980s. She also suggested that the conservative judge was present during gang rapes, which allegedly took place in the suburbs of Washington, D.C.
Swetnick claims that Kavanaugh was at one party in 1982 where she was gang raped, though she does not accuse him of taking part in the attack.
Of particular note in Swetnick’s declaration, is the age difference between her and Kavanaugh. Swetnick says that the events described in her declaration occurred between 1981 and 1983, when she was between 18 and 21 years old. Kavanaugh would have been between 15 and 18 years old at the time.
She graduated from Gaithersburg High School in 1980,according to Swetnick’s resume. She was born in December 1962, according to publicly available records. Kavanaugh was born in February 1965 and graduated from Georgetown Prep School in 1983.
Swetnick’s allegations are vague on details and specifics, though she claims that other unnamed eyewitnesses will back up her claims.
She alleges that she attended more than 10 house parties with Kavanaugh and Judge. During the gatherings, Swetnick says she witnessed Kavanaugh “drink excessively and engage in highly inappropriate conduct, including being overly aggressive with girls and not taking ‘No’ for an answer.” She alleged that the conduct “included the fondling and grabbing of girls without their consent” and that Kavanaugh was “abusive and physically aggressive” towards girls.
She alleged that Kavanaugh and Judge, would spike drinks at parties in order to lower victims’ defenses.
“I also witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to cause girls to become 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. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.”
Swetnick further claimed that “in approximately 1982,” she was the victim of a gang rape at a party where Kavanaugh and Judge were present. Swetnick would have been 19 or 20 years old at the time, while Kavanaugh would have been 16 or 17.
The claims prompt numerous questions about whether or not Swetnik is culpable herself in failing to report rape. If she indeed attended rape parties throughout 1981 why did she never report any of the rapes to law enforcement, school officials, parents or anyone else? If she herself was victimized by rape in 1982 why did she never report it to law enforcement even after she knew this kind of illegal sexual activity was going on for well over a year before she was victimized?
And why did Swetnik continue going to such great parties in 1983 even after she was allegedly victimized? Moreover, why was a college-age student hanging out at high school parties where alcohol and sexual assault where repeatedly taking place?
These are the kinds of questions people on Twitter are asking after reviewing Swetnik’s allegations:
Is there any way to read this besides “I saw multiple girls get gang raped, kept associating with their rapists until I also got gang raped, and decided the proper amount of time to wait to talk about it was 35 years”
— Bernienomics (@Bernienomics) September 26, 2018
So Julie Swetnick says she was raped in “approximately” 1982-after seeing this in 81-83, BUT KEPT GOING to these parties?
She SAW girls being raped and didn’t stop it?
Who are HER witnesses that she claims to have?
Something is off….
— Nobody_really (@Type_ur_name) September 26, 2018
So according to Julie Swetnick’s accusation we’re supposed to believe that a gang of serial rapists were terrorizing young women at house parties and not only did no one ever report it but she KEPT GOING TO THE PARTIES? Oh and the FBI missed this on 6 background checks? Really?!
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) September 26, 2018
“Ms. Swetnick grew up in Montgomery County, Md., graduating from Gaithersburg High School in 1980 before attending college”
She was attending high-school parties where gang rapes occurred while a college student? https://t.co/7mSt80OR2Z
— John McCormack (@McCormackJohn) September 26, 2018
So she’s saying she was an adult going to druggy sex parties with 15 year olds.
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) September 26, 2018
Wilkinson questioned why Julie Swetnick, who is being represented by celebrity lawyer Michael Avenatti, never reported any of the supposed gang rapes she saw at multiple different parties and continued attending those parties.
“When you say you went to 10 parties like that and you kept going to those parties even though that was happening, and you saw that supposedly happening to other girls — that is a different thing not to report,” Wilkinson said. “I understand why women don’t report sexual assault. It’s very difficult, and no one should criticize them for that. But this is a whole different level.”
Wilkinson said she would have expected Avenatti to go to the police with the accusations, if they were valid.
“Really, you witnessed gang rapes and you never said anything? You’ve never come forward?” she asked.
“As a parent of a daughter and two sons, I cannot imagine not coming forward when this man was named if that’s what you witnessed,” Wilkinson asserted.
The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled a vote on Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation, which will take place at 9:30 a.m. on Friday. The vote comes one day after Kavanaugh accuser Christine Ford is slated to testify about her apparently bogus allegations that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her. Ford has no evidence, no proof, no audio or video recordings and no witnesses, as the four people she said witnessed the alleged sexual assault all say it never happened.
But the new allegations may complicate or delay that schedule.
Meanwhile, the second woman making sexual harassment allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh refuses to validate her story before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Deborah Ramirez made the unproven and unsubstantiated allegation that Kavanaugh, while in high school decades ago, flashed his penis at her. She made the allegation in the New Yorker after the NewYork Times refused to publish her allegations due to lack of evidence. The New Yorker publisher with a thinly-sourced article accusing Kavanaugh of conduct that no eyewitness can even corroborate.
Rather than bringing the matter to the attention of committee investigators, Democrats coordinated with members of the media to drop the story in the most dramatic and damaging way possible. This continues Senate Democrats’ pattern of playing hide the ball, after they spent six weeks sitting on a letter regarding alleged conduct while Kavanaugh was in high school before leaking it to the press.
As reported by the author of the New Yorker article, Ramirez came forward only because Senate Democrats “came looking.” And even then, the individual went on the record only after “six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney,” a former Democratic elected official.
The New York Times, which declined to publish the allegations when approached, reported that it had interviewed “several dozen people in an attempt to corroborate the story” and could find “no one with firsthand knowledge.” The Times further reported that the individual in the story had contacted former classmates herself in an effort to corroborate the story and had “told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself.”
Kavanaugh and his wife sat down with Fox News for an interview about the bogus sexual assault claims from two women, both of which have no evidence and no witnesses and have been refuted by those who know the Supreme Court nominee the best.
Kavanaugh, and his wife, Ashley, interviewed with Fox New Channel’s Martha MacCallum and Kavanaugh maintained his innocence and called for an opportunity to have his name and integrity cleared.
“I never sexually assaulted anyone, not in high school, not ever. I’ve always treated women with dignity and respect,” Kavanaugh told MacCallum. “Listen to the people who have known me best from my whole life: the women who have known me since high school, the 65 who overnighted a letter from high school saying I always treated them with dignity and respect.”
Kavanaugh has also called the allegations a “smear campaign.” Kavanaugh specifically addresses the allegations made by Christine Ford, which multiple witnesses now say never happened.
“All of the witnesses identified by Dr. Ford as being present at the party she describes are on the record to the Committee saying they have no recollection of any such party happening,” he said.
Maine Sen. Susan Collins is being watched closely as a key swing vote in U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation. She is unsure how she will vote as is Alaska Republican Lisa Murkowski.
The federal judge defended himself saying these accusations have turned into a “smear” campaign against him, and adding that they are totally false.
“This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen,” Kavanaugh wrote in a statement released to the press. “The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so.”
“This is a smear, plain and simple,” he continued. “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.”
Kavanaugh has denied any wrongdoing and plans to testify at a specially scheduled Senate committee hearing Thursday to consider the allegations.
A Trump administration official seconded Kavanaugh’s statement and said these latest accusations amount to nothing more than dubious character assassination.
“This 35-year-old, uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the Democrats designed to tear down a good man,” White House spokeswoman Kerri Kupec wrote. “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.”
But, like Christine Ford, Ramirez wants the FBI to investigate the alleged incident.
Since the first accusations were made public, Kavanaugh and his wife have received multiple death threats, and that the U.S. Marshals are now investigating.
Meanwhile, the sexual assault claim made by California psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh continues to unravel.
Ford made the allegations in a letter to pro-abortion Senator Diane Feinstein that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh supposedly sexually assaulted her, she said four people were allegedly at the party where it happened. Kavanaugh and alleged witness Mark Judge both said the sexual assault never took place. And now a third witness also says it never happened.
Also, a former classmate of Ford’s who initially supported the claim is recanting, and has admitted that she has “no idea” if the claim is true.
But more recent information has confirmed both the woman leveling the allegation that Ford and her attorney are Democratic Party activists. For and her attorney Debra Katz have not only donated to Democrats, but also recently signed on to a Physicians for Human Rights letter protesting the Trump administration’s immigration policy.
Few media outlets have confronted Katz on her own Democratic activism. In 2017, Katz labeled all senior Trump administration officials to be “miscreants.” Hypocritically, she also staunchly and repeatedly defended Bill Clinton against claims of sexual harassment made by Paula Jones in the 1990s.
After the allegations became public, news surfaced that calls into question the credibility of Ford’s story, which has apparently changed dramatically over the years. News reports indicate she can’t even remember the location or year of the alleged attack.
Additionally, Ford’s brother, Ralph Blasey III, once worked for the law firm of Baker & Hostetler LLP, but left that firm in 2004. The Daily Caller reported that Baker & Hostetler paid a company called Fusion GPS seven payments totaling more than a half million dollars in 2016. Fusion GPS was also the shadowy Democrat “dirty tricks” group hired by Planned Parenthood to produce the fake forensic analysis that supposedly “debunked” the Center for Medical Progress’ undercover videos.
And a peer and friend who knew Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh as a high school student is vouching for his character amid accusations from a woman that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were teens.
According to documents on file with the Maryland Court System, Ford’s parents, Ralph G. and Paula K. Blasey owned property that was in foreclosure. The judge who presided over that case was Brett Kavanaugh’s mother, Martha G. Kavanaugh.
In a statement after the allegations surfaced, Kavanaugh refuted the 11th-hour smear campaign made by Senate Democrats and abortion advocates who are desperately hoping to tarnish his image in advance of a Senate Judiciary Committee vote on his nomination. Kavanaugh said the claims are totally false and he offered to speak with the Senate Judiciary Committee about the claim made by Christine Blasey Ford.
“This is a completely false allegation. I have never done anything like what the accuser describes — to her or to anyone,” Kavanaugh said in a statement. “Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself yesterday.”
“I am willing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee in any way the committee deems appropriate to refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity,” he said in his statement.
Ford told the Washington Post in an interview published Sunday that Kavanaugh held her on a bed on her back during a party at a house in Maryland. Ford accused Kavanaugh of groping her over her clothes and said he tried to undress her. She was able to escape the bedroom when Kavanaugh’s classmate jumped on them, Ford said.
Kavanaugh unequivocally denied the allegation in a statement last week, though at that time, his accuser remained anonymous.
The New Yorker reported that the incident allegedly occurred in the early 1980s, when Kavanaugh was a student at Georgetown Preparatory School, an all-boys school in Bethesda, Md. The woman, meanwhile, went to a local high school.
The woman said in a letter sent to Democratic lawmakers this summer that during a party, Kavanaugh held her down and tried to force himself on her, according to The New Yorker.
Kavanaugh and his classmate, who were drinking, increased the volume of the music that was playing to hide her protests, the letter reportedly says. Kavanaugh allegedly used his hand to cover the woman’s mouth, before she was able to escape.
“I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation,” Kavanaugh said in a statement. “I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”
The classmate of Kavanaugh’s who was allegedly involved in the encounter said, “I have no recollection of that,” according to The New Yorker.
But other women who knew Judge Kavanaugh during that time period vouch for his character and high moral standard.
Shortly after the details of the letter were made public by The New Yorker, the Senate Judiciary Committee shared a letter it received Friday from 65 women who knew Kavanaugh during their high school years.
“Through the more than 35 years we have known him, Brett has stood out for his friendship, character, and integrity,” the women wrote. “In particular, he has always treated women with decency and respect. That was true when he was in high school, and it has remained true to this day.”
This allegations followed on the heels of Senate Democrats getting caught lying about Kavanaugh. Since Kavanaugh’s hearings, numerous fact checks and advice to “drop the whopper of a talking point” from one of the largest newspapers in America have not stopped pro-abortion politicians from repeating false claims about U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
The lies about Kavanaugh’s birth control beliefs began with U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris of California and continued with two-time failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. The Washington Post, Politifact and others refuted their claims that Kavanaugh called birth control “abortion-inducing drugs,” but the pro-abortion politicians continue to push the lie.
This week, Kavanaugh also responded to the claims by clarifying what he meant when he used the term “abortion-inducing drugs” last week during the U.S. Senate hearings.
Abortion activists fear Kavanaugh, who has served on the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for D.C. for more than a decade. He has an extensive record of protecting religious liberty, including in the Priests for Life case, and enforcing restrictions on abortion. Pro-life leaders believe he would do the same on the Supreme Court.
Over the past few months, NARAL, Planned Parenthood and other pro-abortion groups have been targeting her with phone calls, political ads, fundraising for a pro-abortion Democrat opponent and a coat hanger campaign; but these attempts to influence may have the opposite effect.
Collins told reporters this week that her office has received a number of threatening phone calls and other messages, including one caller who threatened to rape one of her female staffers.
Under questioning from pro-life Senator Lindsey Graham, Kavanaugh confirmed there is no “specific” right to abortion in the Constitution.
“Is there any phrase in the Constitution about abortion?” Graham asked Kavanaugh.
“The Supreme Court has found that under the liberty clause, but you’re right that specific words,” Kavanaugh said before stopping as Graham continued. Kavanaugh clearly was beginning to admit Graham’s point that abortion or a right to abortion is never specifically addressed in the Constitution — but was made up by the Supreme Court in 1973.
During his nomination hearings, Judge Kavanaugh was been careful to discuss abortion within the context of what the Supreme Court has decided in the precedent-setting cases of Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood without biasing the hearings with his own views in a way that would force him to recuse himself in future abortion cases before the court.
During the first day of questioning, Judge Brett Kavanaugh refused to say that there is a so-called right to abortion. He declined to take the bait from pro-abortion Senator Dianne Feinstein who wants to get him to commit to upholding Roe v Wade once he is confirmed to the Supreme Court.
Kavanaugh also refused a pro-abortion senator’s request to promise to never overturn Roe v Wade, the high court case allowing abortions up to birth.
Also during the hearings, a new document was released showing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is possibly open to overturning the infamous Roe v Wade decision that allows virtually unlimited abortions up to birth.