53 Year Old Accuser Deborah Ramirez Comes Forward With Allegations Against Kavanaugh … Was Drunk, 35 Years Ago, Cannot Really Remember & No One Can Corroberate Story
ANOTHER WOMAN COMES FORWARD WITH A 35 YEAR OLD STORY THAT NOT EVEN THE NEW YORK TIMES THOUGHT WAS FIT TO PRINT …
The New Yorker published a story on Sunday night of a second woman accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh of lewd behavior from some 35 years ago while in college. Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer have released a report in the New Yorker from Deborah Ramirez, accusing Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. The salacious story includes a dildo and penises. And once again, we have a completely drunk woman at a party, vague memories and not one person who supposedly atteneded the party could confirm Kavanaugh was at the party. The 53-year-old accuser Deborah Ramirez told the New Yorker that she was initially hesitant to speak out because she was drunk at the time and her memory had gaps. Then miraculously after 35 years she spent six days “carefully assessing her memories” and consulting with her attorney before going public. Just like that she could remember.
Shameful. Not even the New York Times would touch this story because they could not find anyone to corroborate the story. Neither did the New Yorker. In other words, journalism is now considered just printing the vague recollections of accusation and rumor. But this is what it has come to. Piling on and making stuff up at all cost by the Left and Democrats. This is truly sad.
The woman at the center of the story, Deborah Ramirez, who is fifty-three, attended Yale with Kavanaugh, where she studied sociology and psychology. Later, she spent years working for an organization that supports victims of domestic violence. The New Yorker contacted Ramirez after learning of her possible involvement in an incident involving Kavanaugh. The allegation was conveyed to Democratic senators by a civil-rights lawyer. For Ramirez, the sudden attention has been unwelcome, and prompted difficult choices. She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away. Ramirez is now calling for the F.B.I. to investigate Kavanaugh’s role in the incident. “I would think an F.B.I. investigation would be warranted,” she said.
After 35 years and drunk at the time, suddenly she had an epiphany after 6 days of being coached by her lawyer …
Ramirez acknowledged that there are significant gaps in her memories of the evening, and that, if she ever presents her story to the F.B.I. or members of the Senate, she will inevitably be pressed on her motivation for coming forward after so many years, and questioned about her memory, given her drinking at the party.
And yet, after several days of considering the matter carefully, she said, “I’m confident about the pants coming up, and I’m confident about Brett being there.”
For some reason, even though the New Yorker had not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party, they printed this story anyhow.
The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party. A classmate of Ramirez’s, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two. The classmate said that he is “one-hundred-per-cent sure” that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself. The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled that the party took place in a common room on the first floor in Entryway B of Lawrance Hall, during their freshman year. “I’ve known this all along,” he said. “It’s been on my mind all these years when his name came up. It was a big deal.” The story stayed with him, he said, because it was disturbing and seemed outside the bounds of typically acceptable behavior, even during heavy drinking at parties on campus. The classmate said that he had been shocked, but not necessarily surprised, because the social group to which Kavanaugh belonged often drank to excess. He recalled Kavanaugh as “relatively shy” until he drank, at which point he said that Kavanaugh could become “aggressive and even belligerent.”
In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved in the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and one other classmate, Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez’s account of events: “We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it—and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.”
Posted September 25, 2018 by Scared Monkeys Gutter Politics, Main, Media, Media Bias, New York Times, Partisan hack, Politics, Supreme Court, WTF | one comment |
Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers Kevin Hassett Educates the White House Press As To Who and What Is Responsible for Amazing Economy
WANT TO LEARN WHO REALLY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CURRENT THRIVING ECONOMY …
Watch the video below and you will see a masterful job by Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers Kevin Hassett educate the liberal White House press as to when and where and who and why the economy is doing so well today. Unemployment is at 3.8%, we have had record low unemployment for Africa-Americans and Hispanics. Millions of jobs being created including manufacturing ones who Obama said would never return. Business and consumer confidence is up. Last quarters GDP was 4.2%. The DOW hit yet another record high today of 26,743.50, up 86.52.
Kevin Hassett goes through chart after chart showing the trend lines that distinctly indicate during who’s presidency the amazing gains have been made. Please watch. What is rather ironic is Obama is taking credit for things in the economy that he claimed would never happen again. President Trump has reversed many of the economy killing regulations.
Hey Barack Obama, you didn’t build it!
Remember when Obama mocked Donald Trump prior to the 2016 elections, stating the jobs were not coming back and how could he make such claims come true. Remember when Obama stated, what does he have a magic wand? It would appear he did Barack. It just goes to show just how clueless Obama was in the economy and job creation.
Posted September 22, 2018 by Scared Monkeys Capitaism, Consumer Confidence, Donald Trump, Economy, GDP, Jobs, Main, Making America Great Again, Stock Market, Unemployment, You Tube - VIDEO | one comment |
Huffington Post Poll Shows Few Believe Kavanaugh’s Accuser Christine Blasey Ford Is Credible
HUFFPO POLL SHOWS FEW FIND KAVANAUGH ACCUSER CREDIBLE …
A funny thing happened on the way to the Brett Kavanaugh Democrat political fit job, according to Daily Caller, a recent Huffington Post poll shows that only 26% of individuals find Kavanaugh’s accuser Christine Blasey Ford as credible. Only 4% of Republicans find her credible and more importantly, only 19% of Independents find Christine Blasey Ford’s accusations toward judge Brett Kavanaugh as credible.
The American people know what has happened to Kavanaugh was an 11th hour political Hail Mary by Democrats to sabotage Kavanaugh’s vote to the SCOTUS.
The Huffington Post released new polling showing that the American public doesn’t generally believe Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser is credible. The same poll also showed that more men than women believe she is credible.
The study found that the sexual misconduct allegation against Kavanaugh has had “virtually no effect on public support for his nomination.” 35 percent of those polled that they’ve heard a lot about the accusations even after wall-to-wall coverage by national media over multiple days. “Fewer than a quarter of respondents to the latest HuffPost/YouGov survey say they’re following Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings very closely,” the study found.
The HuffPost/YouGov polling asked a statistically significant cross-section of the American public if the accusations made by Christine Blasey Ford were “credible. “Do you think that the allegation of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh generally is or is not credible?” The polling asked. The responses showed that 28% of males and 25% of females believe the allegations are credible.
Posted September 21, 2018 by Scared Monkeys Partisan hack, Politics, Polls, Supreme Court | no comments |
NY Times Reports Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein Suggested Secretly Recording Trump & Discussed 25th Amendment (Update: Rosenstein Denies)
THE FOX IN THE HEN HOUSE …
The New York Times is reporting that deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein suggested last year that he secretly record President Trump in the White House to expose the chaos consuming the administration, and he discussed recruiting cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump from office for being unfit. The information is reported to have come from memos written by Andrew McCabe, then the acting FBI director. McCabe declined to comment. According to a lawyer for Mr. McCabe, his clients memos have been turned over to the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, in the investigation into whether Trump associates conspired with Russia’s election interference. Interesting.
The deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, suggested last year that he secretly record President Trump in the White House to expose the chaos consuming the administration, and he discussed recruiting cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump from office for being unfit.
Mr. Rosenstein made these suggestions in the spring of 2017 when Mr. Trump’s firing of James B. Comey as F.B.I. director plunged the White House into turmoil. Over the ensuing days, the president divulged classified intelligence to Russians in the Oval Office, and revelations emerged that Mr. Trump had asked Mr. Comey to pledge loyalty and end an investigation into a senior aide.
Mr. Rosenstein was just two weeks into his job. He had begun overseeing the Russia investigation and played a key role in the president’s dismissal of Mr. Comey by writing a memo critical of his handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation. But Mr. Rosenstein was caught off guard when Mr. Trump cited the memo in the firing, and he began telling people that he feared he had been used.
Mr. Rosenstein made the remarks about secretly recording Mr. Trump and about the 25th Amendment in meetings and conversations with other Justice Department and F.B.I. officials. Several people described the episodes, insisting on anonymity to discuss internal deliberations. The people were briefed either on the events themselves or on memos written by F.B.I. officials, including Andrew G. McCabe, then the acting bureau director, that documented Mr. Rosenstein’s actions and comments.
If true, Rosenstein needs to be fired immediately. But is it true and one might want to consider the source of this leak. Was it McCabe or maybe the special counsel. Regardless, a special counsel needs to be put in place to investigate the deep state and all that they have done to thwart the Trump presidency and over throw a presidential election.
A question does arise as to why the New York Times would report such a story. I would ask why? Why now? The Times as been a part of the liberal media’s attack on Trump. Why would they report such a story now? Who thinks this is an attempt to rile up Trump so that he fires Rosenstein prior to the 2018 midterms. Isn’t this what was wanted all along? Then the NY Times and the rest of the liberal media gets to cry obstruction of justice. The deep state and the media are very slick and despicable. Do not think they will attempt anything to overthrow this president.
UPDATE I: From the Gateway Pundit, following the New York Times released its report, Andrew McCabe made a statement through his lawyer Michael Bromwich. Interesting, he did not deny The NY Times report.
“Andrew McCabe drafted memos to memorialize significant discussions he had with some high level officials and preserved them so he would have an accurate contemporaneous record of those discussions. When he was interviewed by the Special Counsel more than a year ago, he gave all of his memos — classified and unclassified — to the Special Counsel’s office,” Michael Bromwich said in an email.
UPDATE II: Rosenstein denies the report … The Story Is ‘Inaccurate and Factually Incorrect’.
Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein on Friday denied a New York Times report claiming that he suggested last year that he secretly record Donald Trump in the White House and discussed invoking the 25th Amendment to remove the president from office.
“The New York Times‘ story is inaccurate and factually incorrect. I will not further comment on a story based on anonymous sources who are obviously biased against the [Justice] Department and are advancing their own personal agenda,” Rosenstein said in a statement. “But let me be clear about this: based on my personal dealings with the president, there is no basis to invoke the 25th Amendment.”
Posted September 21, 2018 by Scared Monkeys Department of Justice (DOJ), DOJ - Dept of Justice, Drain the Swamp, Media, New York Times | no comments |
Democrats: We Already Know Know Brett Kavanaugh Is Guilty … So Much for the Presumtion of Innocense
SO MUCH FOR THE PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE … WELCOME TO THE BAIS & TAINTED DEMOCRAT JURY.
The actions of the LEFT and Democrats should be frightening to all. Their political bias and Trump resistance at all cost, including trashing the US. Constitution and the laws of the United States is chilling. The Democrats have deemed SCOTUS nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh as guilty of something he has not either been accused of in a court of law, nor substantiated. That is correct, guilty before being proven innocent. No one knows whether Kavanaugh or his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, is telling the truth or credible, until they present their case in front of the Senate Judiciary committee. But not for Democrats, they know he is guilty. They have a crystal ball.
I have two cases for you where all thought they were guilty also, Duke Lacrosse and the University of Virginia rape case brought to us by Rolling Stone. We both know now has both of those sexual assault and rape cases went , don’t we? Both were lies. Crystal Mangum and Jackie lied. No such accusations ever occurred. But of course these two huge miscarriages of justice and jumps to conclusions seem to mean nothing to Democrats.
Let’s take a look at the fact we know. A supposed accusation of sexual misconduct happened 36 years ago when Christine was 15 years old, but was never mentioned to anyone, including family, friend or the authorities. Not until 2012 in a doctors office and no names were referenced. Her therapist notes state that four people were present, 3 individuals have come forward to say they have no knowledge or recollection of the incident. Ford can’t remember the year the incident happened, she can’t remember how she got to the house party, or how she got home, or where the part was. She was a 15 year old girl consuming alcohol and has no memory of major facts of the case. The accused, Brett Kavanaugh has denied it ever happened. So tell me … if this was in a court of law in front of a jury, this would be the textbook definition of reasonable doubt. But not for Democrats, Kavanaugh Is Guilty, even though nothing has been presented in front of them. Talk about a tainted and bias jury.
JUST FOOD FOR THOUGHT, WHAT HAPPENS IF KAVANAUGH PROVIDES PROOF LIKE A PASSPORT OR PHOTO STAMPED PICS THAT HE WAS NO WHERE NEAR THIS SO-CALLED PARTY? WILL THERE BE DEMOCRAT APOLOGIES?
No matter.
Kavanaugh, many Democrats say, is clearly guilty.
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said Thursday: “I believe her because she is telling the truth and you know it by her story.” [You know it by her story? What story? Dr. Ford's story is 36 years old and lacking the basic who, what where, when and why of any story. The accusers story is vague at best. If anything, Ford's story is so lacking in every form of detail that is pertinent to the case, that it is the textbook definition of reasonable doubt.]
“Judge Kavanaugh has not asked to have the FBI review the claims,” Gillibrand added. “Is that the reaction of an innocent person? It is not.” [WTF you liberal fool, talk about your straw argument. Judge Kavanaugh does not have the right or standing to ask the FBI to do anything. The FBI is not his personal private detective. No Sen. Gillibrand, the mark of an innocent person is his obsolete denial of what he is being accused of and his want to show up on Monday and clear his name.]
When Sen. Duckworth (D-Ill.) was asked about Kavanaugh denying the accusation, the senator responded, “Well, I have heard, you know, many, many predators say and refute allegations against them.” [Actually Sen. Duckworth, many accusers actually know when and where the presumed assault took place.]
Former spokesman for Bernie Sanders and CNN contributor, Symone Sanders, said she didn’t even need to wait for more information: “For me there is no debate. I believe Professor Ford. Judge Kavanaugh has lied multiple times under oath.” [Wow, really Bernie. Kavanaugh lied under oath. When. I think Bill Clinton might be squirming with that position you took, hoping Juanita Broderick doesn't pursue her rape claims years later.]
And here are other select quotes from Democratic lawmakers:
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-HI) said: “I believe Dr. Ford as I refer to her because she makes a very credible case. It is really difficult for someone to come forward in this way. Why should she destroy her life? Already there are efforts to cast aspersions on her credibility, to look into her family, all of that. This is really very much like what happened with Anita Hill where she was vilified, she was called names. This cannot happen to Dr. Ford.” [Hmm, she came forward and the letter that was supposed to remain confidential was presented right before the Kavanaugh vote. It might be more credible that this is a political scam.]
Sen. Blumenthal (D-Conn.): “Let me just say right at the outset I believe. Dr Ford, I believe the survivor here, there’s every reason to believe her. She has come forward courageously and bravely knowing that she would face a nightmare of hostile and vicious scrutiny and challenge. And there are plenty of reasons to disbelieve Judge Kavanaugh after his evasive and seemingly misleading testimony before the Judiciary Committee.” [So here is a dude that strictly on the accusations of a woman, he is believable and Kavanaugh is guilty. You want want to see Duke Lacrosse rape case and UVA. Really? You better hope no woman ever accuses you of anything.]
Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.); “I hope that she does [testify], because I’m afraid that what the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee really want is they want her to go away. They don’t want the country to hear from her, and they certainly don’t want the country to hear from her live and on television. She’s absolutely right, the FBI should do a thorough vetting of these allegations. The Senate shouldn’t simply rely on hearing two conflicting accounts and decide, ‘Well, we’re OK with not knowing. We’re OK with the fact we might be putting a — someone who committed attempted rape on the Supreme Court of the United States.’ They should get to the bottom of this. And it wouldn’t take that long to do. This is the same crowd that waited a year to fill the last vacancy during the Obama administration on the Supreme Court, so why this rush? And I think they realize they have a very imperfect candidate, in fact they may have a candidate who has committed attempted rape.”
Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.): “Listen, it comes down to credibility to your point. It’s going to be about listening to what each party has to say, but I believe her. Listen, first of all, anybody who comes forward at this point to — to be prepared to testify in the United States Senate against someone who’s being nominated to one of the most powerful positions in the United States government, that takes an extraordinary amount of courage. And frankly, you know, I have personally prosecuted sexual assault cases, and my concern is— and she knows this — she is putting herself out there knowing that they’re going to try and excoriate her. She’s doing it, I believe, because she knows that this is an important matter. It’s a serious matter, who serves on that court. And she has the courage to come forward? She has nothing to gain. What does she have to gain?” [LOL, what does she have to gain? Seriously? She is a Democrat operative. I think we all know what she has to gain. Good grief, do not insult people's intelligence.]
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.): “Well I can tell you it really does have a ring of truth to it. The fact that she can refer to therapist notes so that she did bring it up before. I am skeptical of polygraphs, but those who believe them, she has passed a polygraph test.” [The notes that Durbin refer to in no where references names.]
Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.): “I believe Professor Ford. I think she’s credible and I think when the investigation is finished and when she testifies and Judge Kavanaugh testifies, I think a majority of senators will find her credible.”
Posted September 21, 2018 by Scared Monkeys Democrats, Double Standard, Guilty, Liberal Intolerance, Sexual Assault, Sexual Misconduct, WTF | one comment |