Author Topic: Sen. Jud. Committee on Kavanaugh - Press Releases (Read 295 times)

Maria Regina · « **on:** October 03, 2018, 12:19:41 AM »

October 02, 2018

Ford ‘Wasn’t Clear’ Committee Offered California Interview in lieu of Public Washington Hearing
Ford wanted to avoid “media circus” of public hearing, but was unaware of accommodations offered by the Committee to address her concerns

During the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Thursday, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford indicated that she had not been made aware of multiple offers made by Chairman Chuck Grassley to send staff to California to interview her, a format that she said she would have preferred. Those offers were made in public statements and in statements directly to Dr. Ford’s attorneys in the days leading up to her public testimony. Here’s a summary of those offers:

On three occasions, Grassley and Judiciary Committee staff told Dr. Ford’s lawyers that committee investigators were willing to come to her.

· On September 19, Chairman Grassley sent a letter to Dr. Ford’s attorney Debra Katz informing her that committee staff “would still welcome the opportunity to speak with Dr. Ford at a time and place convenient to her.”

· On September 21, committee staff sent an email to Ms. Katz saying that “[t]he Chairman has offered the ability for Dr. Ford to testify in an open session, a closed session, a public staff interview, and a private staff interview. The Chairman is even willing to fly female staff investigators to meet Dr. Ford and you in California, or anywhere else, to obtain Dr. Ford’s testimony.”

· On September 22, committee staff again wrote an email to Dr. Ford’s lawyers, reminding them that “committee investigators are available to meet with Dr. Ford, anywhere and anytime, if she would prefer to provide her testimony outside of a hearing setting.”

In a September 21 tweet, Grassley invited Dr. Ford to share her story, saying, “[c]ome to us or we to [you].”

However, despite those offers, at the September 27 hearing, Dr. Ford told the committee that she was not aware of the committee’s willingness to meet her anywhere to take her testimony.

· Dr. Ford said, “I was hoping that they would come to me, but then I realized that was an unrealistic request.”

· When Dr. Ford was asked if her attorneys had told her about the committee’s offer to meet her in California, her lawyers objected to her answering the question. She answered anyway, saying “I just appreciate that you did offer that. I wasn’t clear on what the offer was. If you were going to come out to see me, I would have happily hosted you and had you—had been happy to speak with you out there. I just did not—it wasn’t clear to me that that was the case.”

Clearly, Dr. Ford’s attorneys did not tell her that we could protect her privacy and speak to her in California. The ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct require a lawyer to consult with his or her client about the means to be used to accomplish the client’s objectives—including informing the client of settlement offers. It is deeply unfortunate that Dr. Ford’s Democratic-activist lawyers appear to have used Dr. Ford in order to advance their own political agenda. A lot of pain and hardship could have been avoided had Dr. Ford’s attorneys informed her of the committee’s offer to meet her in California to receive her testimony.

-30-

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/ford-wasnt-clear-committee-offered-california-interview-in-lieu-of-public-washington-hearing

Comment: Since Ford's attorneys objected to Ford answering that question, either Ford's attorneys are guilty of misrepresentation, or perhaps Ford is. Someone is not telling the truth. Could the DNC, HRC, or could Feinstein have told Ford's attorneys to delay Ford's testimony by any means possible? Debra Katz met with H. R. Clinton during this time. What did they discuss and plan?

Maria Regina · « **Reply #1 on:** October 03, 2018, 03:20:06 AM »

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/2018-10-02%20Grassley%20to%20SJC%20Democrats%20-%20Kavanaugh%20Investigations.pdf

This is a 12 page letter, of which only the first page is copied here. Please open this pdf docuмent to review the entire letter.

This letter deals with all the events and all the allegations which have been received by either the Democratic or
Reupblican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee concerning Judge Brett Kavanaugh's nomination.

This letter not only reveals inconsistencies in Ford's testimony, but also reveals inconsistencies in all the stories presented by Kavanaugh's accusers. It is worth the time spent reading this letter because it sheds light on the corruption that is present in our government at the highest levels, and the frustration that Senator Grassley must feel in trying to be fair.

Quote

October 2, 2018

The Honorable Dianne Feinstein, Ranking Member
The Honorable Patrick J. Leahy
The Honorable Richard J. Durbin
The Honorable Sheldon Whitehouse
The Honorable Amy Klobuchar
The Honorable Christopher A. Coons
The Honorable Richard Blumenthal
The Honorable Mazie K. Hirono
The Honorable Cory A. Booker
The Honorable Kamala D. hαɾɾιs
United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Colleagues:

Last Wednesday, September 26, I received a letter signed by all of you, the ten Democratic
members, of the Senate Judiciary Committee, calling for delay in consideration and/or the
withdrawal of Judge Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States,
based on the allegations of Ms. Julie Swetnick, who is represented by Michael Avenatti.

Yesterday, in an interview with Kate Snow of NBC News, Ms. Swetnick backtracked on some of
the claims she made in a sworn statement to Congress. The interview can be accessed here:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/kavanaugh-accuser-julie-swetnick-speaks-out-sɛҳuąƖ-abuse-allegations-n915641

I've enclosed a timeline of the activity I've driven as Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, which
reflects a serious approach to addressing concerns in good faith as we fulfill our duties as an
independent branch of government charged by the Constitution to give advice and consent on
judicial nominations made by the President. I've received blatantly frivolous referrals during the
past week. Out of respect for my colleagues, I've devoted committee investigative resources to
looking into those referrals, including one that was quickly recanted.

In addition, as it stands today, the FBI is conducting a supplemental background investigation of
current credible allegations against the nominee. The report is expected this week. This
supplemental investigation was requested by undecided member of both parties to help them
determine whether to support Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation. Am I to understand from your
request that all of you are reconsidering your opposition to Judge Kavanaugh depending on what
the FBI comes back with?

1

Author Topic: Sen. Jud. Committee on Kavanaugh - Press Releases (Read 295 times)

Maria Regina

Sen. Jud. Committee on Kavanaugh - Press Releases

Maria Regina

Re: Sen. Jud. Committee on Kavanaugh - letters