Two Men Told Senate Staffers They Had "The Encounter" With Christine Blasey Ford Not Brett Kavanaugh
Source: BuzzFeed News
The Senate Judiciary Committee did not name the two men who told staff they believed they were involved in the "encounter" alleged by Christine Blasey Ford.
Zoe Tillman
BuzzFeed News Reporter
Reporting From Washington, DC
Posted on September 26, 2018, at 11:33 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON Senate Judiciary Committee staff interviewed two men who said they believed that they, and not US Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, had "the encounter" with the woman who accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her when they were teenagers, according to new information released Wednesday night by the committee.
The revelation which came on the eve of much-anticipated public testimony from Kavanaugh and the woman who has accused him of assault, Christine Blasey Ford included few details. The committee didn't identify the men, offer details about what they said, state whether committee staff found their accounts credible, or indicate whether there would be any further follow-up.
The committee released a timeline describing how committee Chair Chuck Grassley and his staff had responded to misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh, starting with Ford's account of being attacked at a party in the summer of 1982. On Sept. 24, the committee said that staff interviewed "a man who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of his complaint."
Committee staff interviewed the man again the next day, on Sept. 25, according to the timeline. "He described his recollection of their interaction in some detail," according to the committee.
Read more: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/zoetillman/two-men-told-senate-staffers-they-had-the-encounter-with
underpants
(182,868 posts)Operatives just like Kavanaugh. They'll take one for the team and in someway be richly rewarded
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Judi Lynn
(160,598 posts)to keep those votes from being recount, where they succeeded. Remember them?
Info:
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.jsp?entity=david_leahy_1
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)katmondoo
(6,457 posts)Anon-C
(3,430 posts)Sounds reasonable.
truthisfreedom
(23,152 posts)htuttle
(23,738 posts)If not, they aren't worth listening to. If they did, it seems the only way to get to the bottom of it is an FBI investigation. Somebody is committing perjury.
LastLiberal in PalmSprings
(12,590 posts)Seems peculiar they popped up just before the hearing. If I were the FBI, the first thing I'd look at is their bank accounts to see if there are any recent large deposits.
forgotmylogin
(7,530 posts)Let Ford be in the same room with them and say what they allege to her face.
moreland01
(740 posts)They came to the interview wearing MAGAt hats and t-shirts that said "Better Russian than Democrat."
Just guessing.
tanyev
(42,600 posts)watoos
(7,142 posts)cancel all of the hearings and scheduled votes and call in the FBI.
The article says that judicial committee staff did the interview which is pretty convenient keeping the judicial committee Senators out of it.
I live in Pa. and from here I can smell a big stinking rat. Karl Rove would be proud of these skull fuckers.
ScratchCat
(2,002 posts)so this ends it?
watoos
(7,142 posts)on these Republican Senators.
So will the complicit M$M run with this tale? I keep trying to explain how important the narrative is in everything. Avenatti had changed it in opposition to Kavanaugh, now this. I have to take a break here I'm swearing too much.
atreides1
(16,091 posts)My theory is that the Russians have been funneling money to Republicans since Obama's first term...of course this was done through shell companies and lobbying firms!
And now payment is due, and that means assisting in making the US a puppet of Putin and Russia!!!
bucolic_frolic
(43,257 posts)volunteering for sexual assault duty
This smacks of a disinformation campaign
watoos
(7,142 posts)Oh wait, they probably work for the GOP.
no_hypocrisy
(46,160 posts)JohnnyRingo
(18,640 posts)That's apt
knightmaar
(748 posts)What are we talking about here?
Are they taking the heat for him, a la, "I am rapist-Spartacus"?
Or is it just that so many frat boys were drunkenly raping women in 1982 that they all think they actually did it?
UpInArms
(51,284 posts)When will formal charges be filed? Should be a slam dunk, since they have pled guilty under oath, right?
watoos
(7,142 posts)UpInArms
(51,284 posts)For the rest of their lives
DeminPennswoods
(15,290 posts)for life.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,354 posts)until they reach conclusions. Plus these 2 need to appear in front of the committee, if they don't get charged (or if they only get charged with wasting police time, or attempting to pervert the course of justice).
watoos
(7,142 posts)YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)KY_EnviroGuy
(14,494 posts)we tend to believe the banker before we give credibility to bank robbers.
Except for Repugs.....they are the bank robbers......
Too much! Beside their fanatical deplorables and religious right, who in the world would fall for this kind of crap.
Oneironaut
(5,522 posts)Otherwise, someone could make a temporary claim to derail the hearings, and then recant then after the fact.
still_one
(92,371 posts)BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Rat Fucking...
muntrv
(14,505 posts)limitations for rape.
Nac Mac Feegle
(971 posts)Did anyone else's?
😬
PubliusEnigma
(1,583 posts)chowder66
(9,074 posts)advantage.
If this was actually true maybe these two guys are the ones mistaken about who their victim was.
RockRaven
(14,990 posts)sure. right.
woodsprite
(11,923 posts)area51
(11,919 posts)calling it an "encounter" and an "interaction" for attempted rape.
DeminPennswoods
(15,290 posts)register for life as sex offenders.