Calendars From 1982 Show Kavanaugh Was "Out Of Town" When Ford Assault Allegedly Took Place

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-24/calendars-1982-show-kavanaugh-was-out-town-when-ford-assault-allegedly-took-place


Calendars From 1982 Show Kavanaugh Was "Out Of Town" When Ford Assault Allegedly Took Place




[size=10][size=10]by Tyler Durden
Mon, 09/24/2018 - 08:21[/size]


Print


In his latest attempt to clear his name following allegations from Palo Alto University Professor Christine Blasey Ford claiming that he had had attempted to sexually assault her more than 35 years ago when they were seniors in high school, Judge Brett Kavanaugh will hand over calendars from the summer of 1982 which supposedly show that he was out of town when the party described by Ford allegedly took place.

According to the New York Times, the calendars do not disprove Ford’s allegations, as he could have attended a party that he did not list on his calendar. Instead, his team intends to argue that Kavanaugh's calendars don't confirm Ford's account of how an inebriated Kavanaugh allegedly pinned her to a bed and tried to remove her clothing. Ford has said she does not recall the specific date of the party.
[/size]

Quote :

The calendar pages from June, July and August 1982, which were examined by The New York Times, show that Judge Kavanaugh was out of town much of the summer at the beach or away with his parents. When he was at home, the calendars list his basketball games, movie outings, football workouts and college interviews. A few parties are mentioned but include names of friends other than those identified by Dr. Blasey.
The challenge for senators trying to confirm or refute the accusation against Judge Kavanaugh is that Dr. Blasey has said she does not recall the specific date or location of the house where the alleged incident occurred. She has said she believes it was during the summer of 1982, and she remembers wearing a bathing suit with other clothing on top of it, suggesting the party might have taken place after a swim outing at a local country club.

[size][size]
While three other people whom Ford said were also in attendance at the party have said they did not remember the incident, Ford's lawyer Debra Katz explained that this is hardly surprising.
[/size][/size]

Quote :

"It’s not surprising that Ms. Keyser has no recollection of the evening as they did not discuss it," Ms. Katz said. "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."

[size][size]
Kavanaugh doesn't intend to argue that Ford wasn't assaulted at the party; instead, his lawyers are expected to claim that the assailant wasn't Kavanaugh, but a friend of Kavanaugh's with whom he bore a striking resemblance. 
Meanwhile, Kavanaugh's calendars appeared to offer an unusually detailed accounting of his teenage life.
[/size][/size]

Quote :

The calendar pages are one-month pages with each day in a small box. Unusual for a teenager, Judge Kavanaugh seemed to keep track of his days even during summer vacation. The pages show typical teenage activities from the era, including "beach week" after the end of the school year and nights at the theater to see "Grease II," "Rocky III" and "Poltergeist" with friends.
Judge Kavanaugh was gone many weekends with his parents in St. Michaels, Md., and one weekend in Connecticut with his grandmother, according to the calendars. He listed an interview for Yale University, where he would eventually enroll, and the start of football camp in August, when he stayed in the dorms at Georgetown Prep. He also played summer league basketball.

[size][size]
Of course, given Sunday night's bombshell report that a second accuser is coming forward, Kavanaugh's defense team will need to come up with another strategy to defend against both of these accounts. But they were handed a reprieve Monday morning when reports surfaced that NBC, The New York Times and The Washington Post passed on Ronan Farrow's Kavanaugh accuser storybecause reporters felt uneasy about the facts.
The allegations were leveled by Kavanaugh's former Yale classmate Deborah Ramirez, who said Kavanaugh "pulled his penis out and tried to press it into her face" at a dorm-room party their freshman year. The stakes for this allegation are higher given that Kavanaugh was a legal adult at the time, and he swore during his previous testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee that he had never committed a sexual assault as an adult.[/size]
[/size]

http://allnewspipeline.com/Kavanaugh_Accuser_Wapo_Lies.php




Fourth And Final  'Witness' And 'Longtime Friend' Of Kavanaugh Accuser, Denies Attending Party Where She Claims She Was Attacked

By Susan Duclos - All News PipeLine

The fourth and final "witness" named by Christine Blasey Ford that supposedly attended the get together 35 or 36 years ago, where Ford claims that Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh attempted to sexually assault her, has now issued a statement, through her lawyer, to the Senate Judiciary committee, denying attending a party where Kavanaugh was present.

Via Politico:

Quote :

"Simply put, 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," said Howard Walsh, who said he has been "engaged in the limited capacity" of corresponding with the committee on behalf of Keyser.

The woman, Leland Ingham Keyser, has been described as a "longtime friend," of Ford, and the only other woman that Ford claims was at the party in question. Mark Judge, Patrick J. Smyth (PJ), and Brett Kavanaugh were also named by Ford, and all three of them have also denied knowledge of the party in question, with statements to the Senate Judiciary committee. 

Smyth: "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." Smyth added: "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."

Judge: "I have no memory of this alleged incident. Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr. Ford's letter. More to the point, I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes." In a follow up statement given to the Weekly Standard, Judge called the accusation "Absolutely nuts."

Kavanaugh has consistently maintained that he never attempted to assault Ford, or any woman, and immediately volunteered to testify in front of the Judiciary committee in order to clear his name.

As Charles Cooke over at NRO points out, "Under 18 U.S.C § 1001, letters to the Judiciary Committee are subject to criminal penalty if false."



WHAT IS THERE TO INVESTIGATE?

I see liberal hashtags in support of Ford, Hollywood celebrities claiming they "believe" her, despite her admitting she doesn't remember how she got to the party, how she got home, where the party was held or even what year the incident occurred. Some of the same people that claim to "believe" her, have never met her and insist there be an "investigation," into her allegations, and most have been very vocal in their opposition to Kavanaugh being confirmed to the Supreme Court.

Okay, lets run with that "investigation."

The first thing any investigator would do is get the details of the alleged incident, where it happened, when it happened and who was present.

According to the only account by Ford, at the Washington Postthe "when" is described as "one summer in the early 1980s,"  and the "where" was "at a house in Montgomery County." Later in the article, it states that Ford does not remember some key details, and believes the alleged incident occurred "in the summer of 1982." The article also states "She also doesn’t recall who owned the house or how she got there."

Then there are the discrepancies in the original Wapo article:

Quote :

Ford said she told no one of the incident in any detail until 2012, when she was in couples therapy with her husband. The therapist’s notes, portions of which were provided by Ford and reviewed by The Washington Post, do not mention Kavanaugh’s name but say she reported that she was attacked by students “from an elitist boys’ school” who went on to become “highly respected and high-ranking members of society in Washington.” The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.

Ford claims the therapists notes were incorrect in stating that four boys were involved, but then maintains that there were "four boys at the party," yet now we find out that she only named three, Kavanaugh, Judge and Smyth and other person she claims attended the party was her "longtime friend," Leland Ingham Keyser.

At first I assumed the Wapo writers must have mistakenly thought "Leland" was another boy, but Kimberly Strassel from Wall Street Journal says she has obtained an email that the Wapo writer Emma Brown sent on September 16, 2018, the same day the article on Ford was published.

Via Strassel's Twitter thread:

Quote :

1) More big breaking news, which further undercuts the Ford accusation, as well as media handling of it. A source has given me the email that WaPo reporter Emma Brown sent to Mark Judge, one person Ford claims was at the party. This email is dated Sunday, Sept. 16, 2018

2) The email wants a comment from him. The subsequent story would reveal Christine Ford’s name, and give details of the supposed “assault.”

3) One part of the email to Judge reads: “In addition to Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge, whom she called acquaintances she knew from past socializing, she recalls that her friend Leland (last name then was Ingham, now Keyser) was at the house and a friend of the boys named PJ.”

4) This matters for two big reasons–Ford’s credibility and WaPo’s. The subsequent WaPo story would go on to cite Ford’s name and details, and also list notes from a therapist that Ford told this to in 2012. Read carefully what WaPo reports, the same day it emails Judge:

5) “The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room.”

6) Wait, say what? WaPo reports publicly that Ford says it was “four boys,”even after WaPo reporter tells Judge that Ford had told her it was three boys and a girl.

7) So first, huge problem: This was just a week ago, and we have Ford giving two different accounts of who was present. Four boys. No, three boys, one girl. Either way, therapist notes from 2012 definitively say four boys, which Ford didn’t dispute. But now… a girl!

So Ford's story keeps changing. The Wapo writer deliberately put false information into the original and only account of the story. Ford is not sure of the exact year but thinks it might have been 1982. She doesn't remember how she got there, or home. Every person she named as being present at this alleged party, denies attending it.

No agency, nor investigator, can investigate an incident with no key details, at a party or get together that included only five people, with four of those people having no memory of the get together at all involving those individuals.

Investigation over!


BOTTOM LINE

No wonder Democrat Diane Feinstein held onto the letter Ford sent since July and only mentioned it when all other obstruction tactics on the part of liberals and Democrat Senators failed to stop the Kavanaugh hearings, and the committee was preparing to schedule a vote to recommend Kavanaugh's confirmation to the full senate to vote on.

It is also no wonder why Ford's lawyers have done nothing but stall, make unreasonable demands like "he should testify first," before she even makes an official statement. How can the accused rebut an accusation that hasn't been formally made????

Tentatively the accuser, Ford, is expected to testify on Thursday, after the Judiciary committee chairman Charles Grassley bent over backwards, consistently, to accommodate Ford's lawyers requests, while rejecting unreasonable ones, though some still doubt whether she will actually testify, especially now that the fourth supposed "witness" Ford has named has denied attending any get together where Kavanaugh was present.

Judge Kavanaugh has consistently stated, and wrote to the Judiciary committee his desire and eagerness to testify any day they schedule to clear his name.

Senator Grassley has said the panel will vote to confirm Kavanaugh Monday without an agreement between Ford's lawyers and the Senate Judiciary Committee, which indicates that while Ford's lawyers claim she will testify on Thursday, there really isn't any formal agreement.

Grassley should end this freak show now. He has four alleged witnesses denying the party or get together even occurred where Kavanaugh, Judge, Smyth, Keyser and Ford were present together.

Below, Judge Jeanine Pirro breaks down this whole circus show in an outstanding and concise manner. Apparently she is as infuriated and frustrated as many of us that have been observing this spectacle play out.
https://youtu.be/cTDOW28JhUU

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/5-people-alleged-party-only-1-accuser-has-not-spoken-judiciary-committee

Of the 5 People at the Alleged Party, Only 1, the Accuser, Has Not Spoken to Judiciary Committee

By Susan Jones | September 24, 2018 | 10:19 AM EDT




[size]
(CNSNews.com) - In an update released on Sunday, the Senate Judiciary Committee said it has been investigating Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh for the last week, and it has now learned the identities of the four other individuals Dr. Ford claimed were at the party where the alleged abuse took place.
"They were not, however, all boys, as Dr. Ford apparently told her therapist and the Washington Post,” the Committee said. “The four individuals Dr. Ford claimed attended the party were Judge Kavanaugh, Mr. (Mark) Judge, Mr. Patrick J. Smyth, and Ms. Leland Ingham Keyser. The Committee reached out to each person and asked for the opportunity to conduct a confidential interview."
According to the update: "Four of those allegedly present at the party have provided statements to the Committee -- Judge Kavanaugh, Mr. Judge, Mr. Smyth, and Ms. Keyser. Judge Kavanaugh has flatly denied the allegations, and Mr. Judge, Mr. Smyth, and Ms. Keyser deny having knowledge of any party matching Dr. Ford’s description."
The committee noted that "Dr. Ford is the only first-hand witness not to provide a statement to, or interview with, the Committee. The Committee expects to hear from Dr. Ford at a hearing on Thursday," the update said.



In her July 30 letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) – [url=https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-09-20 Feinstein to Grassley - July 30 Letter from Ford.pdf]an unredacted copy was released by committee Republicans on Sunday[/url] -- Ford wrote: "The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and 4 others."
But Ford also spoke to the Washington Post, which published her story on Sept. 16.
The Post, after seeing the notes taken by Ford's therapist, reported the following: "The notes say four boys were involved, a discrepancy Ford says was an error on the therapist’s part. Ford said there were four boys at the party but only two in the room" where the attack allegedly happened.
In its Sunday update, the Judiciary Committee said it tried to interview a fifth person, a former schoolmate of Ford's, who was not at the alleged party, but who claimed on social media that the "incident did happen."
That woman, Christina King Miranda, deleted her Facebook posts after the committee staff asked to speak with her, and she told National Public Radio that she really had "no idea" whether the alleged incident happened. "She stated further that she would not participate in an interview with the Committee."
In a [url=https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-09-23 Grassley to Ford's Attorneys - Evidence Request.pdf]Sept. 23 letter[/url] to Ford's attorneys, Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said he's "pleased" that Ford has accepted the invitation to testify in an open hearing on Thursday, and he promised to "do everything in my power to provide a safe, comfortable, and dignified forum for Dr. Ford to testify."
He also asked Ford's attorneys to provide the following documents:
-- Copies of any materials relating to the Kavanaugh allegations that either Ford or her attorneys have given to any lawmaker or reporter;
-- Copies of all materials upon which Dr. Ford intends to rely for her written or oral testimony before the Committee;
-- Copies of the results of the polygraph which Dr. Ford has stated was administered to her in early August 2018, as well as the list of questions asked during the administration of that polygraph.
"Please provide these materials to the Committee no later than Tuesday, September 25," Grassley wrote to Ford’s lawyers. "Committee rules also require that Dr. Ford submit her biography and written testimony by 10:00 a.m. on Wednesday, September 26."
Likewise, the Grassley sent a [url=https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-09-23 Grassley to Kavanaugh's Attorney - Evidence Request.pdf]similar request[/url] to Judge Kavanaugh on Sunday, requesting any materials relating to the allegations raised by Ford; and any materials upon which Kavanaugh intends to rely for his written or oral testimony before the Committee.
[/size]

this poor kid can never be a federal judge now

another promising political career down the drain