The lawyer for porn star Stormy Daniels, Michael Avenatti, says he is representing a woman who claims Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh attended teen gang rape parties, including one where she was raped. But the claims Julie Swetnick makes in an affidavit are full of holes and, like those of Christine Ford and Deborah Ramierz, offer no proof, no evidence, no recordings, and not witnesses.
The allegations, from a woman identified as Julie Swetnick were made public by Avenatti on Thursday morning. Avenatti posted Swetnick’s three-page sworn declaration on Twitter.
Swetnick alleges that during the years 1981-1983 she was at several parties that Kavanaugh also attended. Swetnick writes that she observed Kavanaugh drink, pressing himself against girls without their consent and engaged in other such behavior. Swetnick claims that she was raped at one party that Kavanaugh attended.
Kavanaugh has denied all accusations of sexual misconduct.
“This is ridiculous and from the Twilight Zone,” he said in a statement released by the White House. “I don’t know who this is and this never happened.”
Judiciary Committee spokesman Taylor Foy said in a statement that the panel has received Swetnick’s statement and is looking into the allegations.
“This morning Michael Avenatti provided a declaration to the Judiciary committee,” Foy said. “Committee lawyers are in the process of reviewing it now.”
The committee today posted comments from Kavanaugh saying he did immature things when he was young but never participated in nor witnessed sexual assault.
“I drank beer with my friends, usually on weekends,” he wrote. “Sometimes I had too many. In retrospect, I said and did things in high school that make me cringe now. But that’s not why we are here today. What I’ve been accused of is far more serious than juvenile misbehavior.”
At Hot Air, conservative writer Ed Morrissey quickly took the allegations to task, pointing out the massive holes in the story:
Avenatti said on Monday that his client could testify that Kavanaugh was part of a “gang rape ring.” In her statement, Swetnick does make that claim, arguing that beginning in 1981, she witnessed Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, and other boys spiking the punch at parties to “cause girls to lose their inhibitions and their ability to say ‘No.’” This, Swetnick claims, caused her to avoid drinking punch at parties. Even so, she claims to have been victimized by this “train” rape conspiracy in 1982, although Swetnick only says that Kavanaugh was “present,” not that he participated in it.
This sounds damning on the surface, but a few things don’t add up. If she was aware of a gang-rape ring in 1981, why was she still attending parties with the same boys in 1982? Why didn’t Swetnick — or anyone else — alert parents or school authorities to what was happening? Furthermore, “in approximately 1982” with no where or when is even more vague than Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation. On top of that, Swetnick makes this sound like a regular feature of Georgetown Prep social events, which might surprise the dozens of men and women who knew Kavanaugh from that period and have already attested to his good character.
Apart from that, teenagers spiked the punch at parties all the time. I knew to stay away from the punch and drink out of cans or bottles at high-school parties — not because I feared getting victimized, but because I didn’t drink alcohol at that time. The motives for spiking the punch vary but all are pretty universal — to loosen up, to shed inhibitions, to act older than one is, and to get away with it. So yes, it’s not hard to imagine Georgetown Prep parties with spiked punch, even with the motive of getting everyone to “lose their inhibitions,” but that doesn’t mean that these teens had gang rape on their minds, either.
Swetnick also claims to have taken offense at Kavnaugh’s assertions during his Fox News interview of virginity as well as “innocence.” That comes ahead of the gang-rape reveal and the “train” conspiracy, which seems a bit … odd. It also suggests that Avenatti might have put this together not over the weekend, but yesterday in response to Kavanaugh’s TV interview. There’s quite a bit more about Kavanaugh’s drinking and attitude toward women in this affidavit than in specific allegations as to his actions in support of the gang-rape conspiracy. Other than a broad allegation against a group of boys in spiking the punch, she doesn’t actually make any specific claims against Kavanaugh of witnessing an actual and specific crime.
Swetnick says that she is “aware of other witnesses” who can back up her story. If this really happened, no doubt there would be dozens of such witnesses, if not hundreds. But if that’s the case, why didn’t the FBI find any of them when vetting Kavanaugh six times over the last quarter century? Background checks dig quite deeply into the past, including friends and acquaintances from high school and college, and the first of those would likely have been no more than 15 years after these events allegedly took place. And yet, none of this ever came up … until the man who wants to run against Donald Trump in 2020 decided that he wanted to kill off Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court.
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.