in the vicinity
Kavanaugh and Deborah Ramirez allegations: What you need to know
The New Yorker published new allegations against Supreme court nominee judge Brett Kavanaugh by his Yale classmate Deborah Ramirez. Here’s what you need to know.
The second woman to accuse Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, engaged in a standoff with the Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans, even as a panel with two other groups of allegations.
Deborah Ramirez, claims, Kavanaugh, sat down next to her at a party in the 1980s at Yale University, has indicated through her lawyer she’s ready information to the Committee, but requested an FBI probe, first.
But the two sides are fighting for votes, on the conditions, even for a first conversation. This, as the Committee prepares to hear Thursday of the first Prosecutor Christine Ford, says Kavanaugh tried to force themselves on her at a high school party, and the vets in the late-breaking allegation by a woman represented by lawyer Michael Avenatti, Kavanaugh was involved in the gang rape during this time.
Kavanaugh has denied all allegations.
Republican staff on the Senate judiciary Committee for the first time learned that Ramirez claims from an article published by The New Yorker on Sunday evening.
Fox News on you will receive an E-Mail chain between Committee Republicans and Ramirez’s legal team in terms of how the Committee is the verification of their claims.
Michael Davis, the Committee’s chief counsel on nominations, the first handle to lawyers Ramirez on Sunday evening, after the publication of the article.
“Please let us know if Ms. Ramirez is available for an interview with Senate Judiciary Committee investigators,” Davis wrote in the E-Mail. “We are determined to Ms. Ramirez, the the statement and more to investigate, as necessary and as quickly as possible.”
Ramirez’s attorney responded, and thanked him for the E-Mail and said he would “consult” with Ramirez and to be in contact. Monday afternoon, Ramirez’s attorney, John Clune ‘ replied Davis.
“I am answering your E-Mail on September 23 in relation to the information, Deborah Ramirez, in relation to events at Yale University during your first year, 1983-84. Our customer has exactly what you reminiscent of New York but, as she says in the article, you would welcome an investigation by the FBI in this information and would wrote to the cooperation with so” Clune ‘. Would be “reasonable terms and conditions, you also agree to be interviewed, in person.”
Davis replied, when asked if Ramirez was “other evidence, including other statements, in addition to those in the article in the New Yorker.”
“Mrs. Ramirez is ready to be your evidence, including your testimony to Committee investigators?” Davis asked.
A democratic staffer for the Committee-ranking member Dianne Feinstein weighed in, what do they discuss the possibility of Ramirez talks “directly with the members, not the staff level.”
Clune and Feinstein staff member appeared to agree to, to make a call, but Davis weighed in again questions, the Ramirez’s counsel’s answers to his questions, before the discussion, “next steps.”
“There are sure to be more witnesses than in the article,” Clune ‘ replied. “That would be the advantage of an actual investigation by the FBI. We do not see how you can get to the root of the thing, without that.”
Davis then asked for “proof in the form of a letter or E-Mail to the Chairman and Ranking member a letter or an E-Mail from an Advisor to the Chairman and Ranking member, or a statement to the Committee investigators.”
In a later E-Mail, Davis wrote that “before a call or other next steps, again, we need the following information,” once again, it is noted that GOP-employee needs an answer, whether Ramirez had no other evidence in addition to the article, and whether you would be willing, or the testimony of the word.
The Democratic staffer, weighed and again, did not hit Davis for “[rejection]” to the conversation with Ramirez’s Council, noting that the Committee “in General discussion instead of the conditions on getting on the phone to the next steps.”
Davis reached out, via E-Mail, information seven times since Sunday.
Staff for the Committee Democrats held a call with Clune and Ramirez other lawyers on Tuesday evening, Davis was invited. He’s not on the call.
“The difficulty is, every time we try to make a call, the majority party either changes the rules of the phone call or you want additional information, such as a state, with a phone call to us,” Clune told CNN’s Anderson Cooper on Tuesday. “Finally, we had a call scheduled for 7 p.m. Eastern this evening, we have on the phone, and only the minority party. … Feels like there are a lot of game-play, which is now on the right side of the majority of the party.”
Clune ‘ proposed that his client is willing to provide information to the Senate, which started when a “meaningful” FBI probe.
A spokesman for the Committee Republicans, told Fox News on Wednesday that she wanted to legally Ramirez-team a statement, or further evidence, so that you could have a “productive phone call.”
“We asked your advice for the statement or evidence for the claim, and it’s just not done,” the GOP Committee aide told Fox News on Wednesday.
The article in the New Yorker published Sunday revealed fresh allegations of misconduct against Kavanaugh, who claims that he exposed his genitals in Ramirez’s face during a drinking game at a Dorm room party in the early 1980s.
Kavanaugh has vehemently denied the accusation and the claim is first brought against him by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who said that he pinned her down and tried them on to their clothing at a high school party. Ford considered the incident “attempted rape,” her lawyer said.
But Wednesday afternoon, Kavanaugh faced a new allegation brought forth by Michael Avenatti. His client, Julie Swetnick, claiming that Kavanaugh and his friend Mark judge drug of the “punch”, the parties, and took advantage of the women. She accused Kavanaugh and judge, who were raped in the “gang” and claimed that she was the victim of a rape, where Kavanaugh and judge were present.
Avenatti serves as a lawyer for adult film star Stormy Daniels, who was paid $130,000 in the weeks leading up to the presidential elections in exchange for her silence about an alleged one-time sexual encounter with President Trump.
Trump blasted Avenatti as a “third-rate lawyer who is good at false accusations,” standing by his Supreme court pick.
Avenatti is a third-rate lawyer who is good at false accusations, as he is to me and the way he is now, judge Brett Kavanaugh do. He is just looking for attention and don’t want to see the people, as his past record and relationships – a total low-life!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 26, 2018
Kavanaugh also the new allegations blew up, as wrong.
“This is ridiculous, and out of the Twilight Zone. I don’t know who he is, and that never happened,” Kavanaugh said in a statement Wednesday.
At this point, it is unclear whether Ford will appear for your scheduled hearing on Thursday. It also remains unclear whether Ramirez will appear before the Committee in any capacity.
Clune ‘does not respond to Fox News’ request for comment.
Republicans on the Committee are currently in the process of the Swetnick allegations.
Brooke Singman is a political Reporter for Fox News. You can follow her on Twitter at @Brooke FoxNews.