53percenter's Blog

In a statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the woman named in a fourth anonymous accusation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh vigorously denied that Kavanaugh behaved in the manner alleged, The Washington Times reported.

The allegations had been made by the mother of a witness to the incident in a letter to Colorado GOP Sen. Cory Gardner, according to the Denver Post. It dated back to 1998, during Kavanaugh’s time with the Ken Starr investigation in Washington, D.C.

“Her friend was dating him, and they left the bar under the influence of alcohol. They were all shocked when Brett Kavanaugh shoved her friend up against the wall very aggressively and sexually,” the letter read.

“There were at least four witnesses, including my daughter.”

The letter contained no name or return address when it arrived at Sen. Gardner’s office last Saturday.

TRENDING: Watch: Dem Rep. Slips Ford Attorney Small Packet, Checks the Room Instantly

“Upon receiving the anonymous letter, we immediately notified the Senate Judiciary Committee, which is handling the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh. The letter was shared with both Republican staff and Democrat staff,” Gardner’s office said in a Wednesday statement.

On Friday, however, the woman who was dating Kavanaugh at the time — Dabney Friedrich, currently a U.S. District Court judge in Washington D.C. — repudiated the contents of the letter.

“I write in response to a phone call I received this evening from Mike Davis, Chief Nominations Counsel for the Committee. In our phone call, Mr. Davis read an anonymous letter sent to Colorado Senator Cory Gardner dated September 22, 2018,” the statement to the Judiciary Committee read.

“Mr. Davis asked me (1) whether I dated Brett Kavanaugh in 1998 and (2) whether he ever shoved me against a wall. Mr. Davis also emailed me the attached letter and asked me to provide an immediate and written response to the Committee.

“As I informed Mr. Davis, I dated Brett Kavanaugh in 1998. To the extent the attached letter is referring to me as the ‘friend [who] was dating him,’ the allegations it makes are both offensive and absurd,” it continued.

“At no time did Brett ever shove me against a wall, including in an ‘aggressive and sexual’ manner. When we dated, Brett always treated me with the utmost respect, and we remain friends to this day. I have never observed (nor am I aware of) Brett acting in a physically inappropriate or aggressive manner toward anyone.”

The woman dating Kavanaugh in 1998, Dabney Friedrich, says Kavanaugh never attacked her and always treated her with respect. Here’s her letter to investigators: https://t.co/AtInjvcnuK

— Kevin Daley (@KevinDaleyDC) September 27, 2018

So, we have an anonymous letter to a senator with odd misspellings (including that her daughter was “wondering what to due about it”) versus the word of a federal court judge who dated him and was allegedly the target of this inappropriate behavior.

RELATED: Donnelly’s Mid-Term Opponent Stikes Back After Senator Votes ‘No’ on Kavanaugh

This again brings us back, realistically, to two accusations (unless you believe the strange tale that came out of Michael Avenatti, which — well, the mere name Avenatti is sort of the imprimatur of a farce, and his involvement in this is yet more proof). One accuser has testified, the other initially refused to but is now saying she might.

The key here seems to be throwing as many accusations as possible in Kavanaugh’s way. Eventually, the reasoning goes, he’ll have to withdraw his nomination.

Kavanaugh hasn’t withdrawn yet, and thus far, the Trump administration seems to be backing him up. Perhaps most ominously for the Democrats, this latest allegation makes their case look even shakier.

Whether this changes anything remains to be seen, but this can’t be seen as a positive augury for those looking to run out the clock on the Kavanaugh nomination.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

To do … what, exactly? After days of contentious back-and-forth between House Republican leadership and conservatives angry at Rod Rosenstein, Freedom Caucus leader Rep. Mark Meadows announced a deal earlier today to call the deputy Attorney General to answer for comments reported by the New York Times a week ago. If Rosenstein does not come to the House Judiciary and Oversight Committee willingly, Meadows says that committee chair Rep.Bob Goodlatte will subpoena him:

Leadership has agreed to call Rod Rosenstein before Congress, for a closed door hearing with our panel investigating, so he can explain his alleged comments on “wiring” POTUS–as well as other inconsistent statements.

If Mr. Rosenstein fails to show up, we will subpoena him.

— Mark Meadows (@RepMarkMeadows) September 28, 2018

Republican leadership has struck a deal with Rep. Mark Meadows and other House conservatives to call Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein before Congress to testify behind closed doors about his alleged proposal that the Justice Department secretly record President Donald Trump and invoke the 25th Amendment to oust him from the Oval Office.

Certainly, Judiciary and Oversight has a constitutional duty to ensure that the Department of Justice operates properly, but … it’s tough to see what this particular issue has to do with Congress other than in the most academic sense. The offended party here would be Rosenstein’s boss at the White House, who has all the authority he needs to deal with those comments, if in fact they’re accurate. Trump himself seemed less concerned with them this week, stating that he’d rather keep Rosenstein around and will be talking with him soon, but not immediately; the White House says the meeting will take place next week. It hardly seems as though Trump considers it a high priority.

When asked about that, Freedom Caucus member Rep. Jordan shrugged it off:

“That’s a White House decision on what his status is,” Jordan said of Rosenstein, who reportedly verbally offered White House Chief of Staff John F. Kelly his resignation earlier this week because he believed Trump was prepared to fire him.

“In my humble opinion, you can’t have the guy who’s running the Justice Department talking about recording the commander in chief, even if it’s done in a joking, sarcastic manner,” Jordan said. “If [Rosenstein did say such things] and the president is satisfied that it’s still OK, and keeps him, that’s fine — that’s the White House’s call. But we should be able to ask questions about what took place in that meeting.”

Clearly, they’re able to ask questions. But why bother, if it doesn’t bother Trump enough to fire Rosenstein over them? It’s tough to see what the point is, unless it’s to attempt to gain leverage over Rosenstein to push back against the special counsel investigation. However, they could do that directly, with the same oversight authority they’re invoking here.

That’s why Paul Ryan initially opposed the House from getting involved in this fight, saying on Wednesday that “we shouldn’t step in the way” of Trump. Perhaps Ryan just decided that it’s not worth the internal division to step in the way of a colossal waste of time, either.

And for comic relief on this profoundly dispiriting week in Washington D.C., we have Nancy Pelosi. Because even when all else seems lost in politics, we’ll always have the House minority leader’s hijinks to keep us entertained.

Before the hearing, Rep. Pelosi decided to share some thoughts on the process. And, of course, she did it in the inimitable stuttering, slurring style we’ve all come to know and love.

During the video, Pelosi claimed that Christine Blasey Ford had been “assaulted” by the GOP (apparently for even questioning her account) in addition to the assault that she automatically assumes Brett Kavanaugh inflicted on her and the assault of having her name released.

Here’s a video from the American Mirror. See if you can notice one thing about what Pelosi calls Kavanaugh.

TRENDING: Panicking NYT Deletes Source Name, Caught Hiding Game-Changing Facts on Kavanaugh

“The assault by the cowardice of the Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee to act in a manner in which they did, the process does not serve justice, does not serve seeing truth, does not serve the integrity of the Court, and does not serve the respect for women in our country,” Pelosi said.

“Three attacks. So let’s hope as we go forward that … Justice — Judge — not to be Justice, Judge Kavanaugh will not — that he will withdraw his name,” Pelosi added.

Good work there, Nancy.

As the Mirror pointed out, there was plenty of other brain freezing going on there; “stell” for “tell” or “rallegations” for “allegations.” In other words, it was mostly Scooby Doo talk.

“Justice,” however, may have been an accurate prediction, if one she didn’t intend to make.

Beyond the Kavanaugh case and its implications, which are indeed serious, I think we should probably take a minute and point out this isn’t the first such video of Rep. Pelosi that the American Mirror has managed to put together. In fact, you could pretty much do one for every other press conference she holds.

While Donald Trump’s verbal infelicity is often put into hyper-relief by the media, Pelosi’s diminishing rhetorical returns have been evident for quite a while now.

I understand the leadership position can be a tiring one, but it’s clearly taken more than a bit of a toll on Pelosi, whose performances in the Trump era have been deer-in-headlights-esque.

The slurring and stuttering wasn’t the most offensive part of this whole thing, though. The assumption that Kavanaugh assaulted Ford — even though he was never even charged with the act, much less accused of it until he was nominated to the Supreme Court — should be odious to anyone who has some respect for the concept of innocent until proven guilty.

RELATED: Rebel Democrats in Congress Banding Together Against Nancy Pelosi

Oh, and then there was the part about her being “victimized” by her name being leaked. Well, Rep. Pelosi, the letter in question was passed through two sets of hands: Rep. Anna Eshoo and Sen. Dianne Feinstein. Both are from your home state of California and both — more importantly — are Democrats. In other words, when it came to this being leaked, it was either a Democrat or one of their staff members, assumedly members of the same party.

If this really is an “assault,” Rep. Pelosi, it’s one perpetrated by members of your own party. But then, most of the proven assaults in this case have been perpetrated by the party of the left. Assault on the norms of the confirmation process? Check. Assault on the concept of innocent until proven guilty? Check. Assault on the accuser through leaking the letter? Check.

Not knowing the right words at the right time is one thing. Not knowing the basic facts is another.

Give her this much: She probably got “justice” right. It was definitely a mistake, likely out of her craven fear that Kavanaugh would win this showdown. He did.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.