Just How Many Potential Witnesses Did The FBI Agents Not Contact Regarding Judge Kavanaugh?

Image result for photos of senator flake at hearing

Dear GOP US Senate Judiciary Committee members and other GOP US senators, Why do you think that FBI agents have been leaking like sieves as to how they were hampered in conducting a credible background check into the US Supreme Court Nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh regarding Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations of having been sexually assaulted in her high school days by him and his friend Mark Judge.

The FBI officials are well aware that their work product will be scrutinized whenever democrats are in a position to do so.

Image result for photos of senators at kavanaugh hearing 9/27

Please be aware that there will eventually be a review about what information that at least some GOP lawmakers had been sitting on, as US Senate Judiciary Committee members, regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s misbehaving youthful excessive drinking binges and sexual misadventures before Dr. Ford’s story went public.

If what I suspect is true, what happened to Dr. Ford will be avenged in future history books. The question is, how will your actions be portrayed in those history books?

Here’s the rest of the story…

On October 4, 2018, Greg Sargant of the Washington Post penned the following report, “Here’s a list of people the FBI did NOT interview. Okay with this, Flake and Collins?”


“The White House and Republicans have announced that the FBI’s reopened background check investigation into new accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh has been delivered to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Individual senators will now be able to review summaries of the FBI’s interviews under weirdly restrictive conditions, and it remains unclear whether the findings will ever be publicly released.”

“You’ll be shocked to hear that the White House has already pronounced the FBI report entirely exonerating for Kavanaugh, claiming that it is now “fully confident” Kavanaugh will be confirmed.”

Did most witnesses have a vested interest to support Judge Kavanaugh’s version of facts?

“But a lot of new reporting has now emerged that starkly illustrates just how much about the new allegations was not investigated by the FBI. It’s important to note that this probably was not a failing on the FBI’s part but rather was the result of restrictions the White House placed on the probe, a process that itself remains shrouded in disingenuous rhetorical games.”

“The New York Times reports that as part of the inquiry, the FBI interviewed nine people, and The Post reports that it could confirm interviews with only six people. It appears clear that the FBI did interview Mark Judge, who was named by Christine Blasey Ford as an accomplice in the alleged sexual attack; Patrick Smyth and Leland Keyser, who may have been present downstairs; Chris Garrett, who may have dated Ford at one point; and Tim Gaudette, whose house was the site of a July 1982 gathering noted on Kavanaugh’s calendar.”

Image result for photos of yale protesters to kavanaugh

“Here’s a list of the people who we know have not been interviewed:”

  • “A suitemate of Kavanaugh’s has now told the New Yorker he remembers hearing at the time about the incident Deborah Ramirez has recounted. Ramirez, who has been interviewed, had claimed that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her during a dorm party at Yale. The suitemate, Kenneth G. Appold, now says he is “one-hundred-per-cent certain” that he was told the culprit was Kavanaugh. He does say he never discussed this with Ramirez, but he claims an eyewitness described the episode to him at the time. Appold has tried to share this story with the FBI, but there’s no indication the FBI is willing to hear from him.”
  • “A classmate of Kavanaugh’s at Georgetown Prep now strongly challenges one of Kavanaugh’s assertions under oath. The person told the New Yorker that he heard Kavanaugh talk repeatedly about Renate Dolphin as someone “that everyone passed around for sex” (the witness’ words), and even heard Kavanaugh singing a rhyme that included the words “you wanna get laid, you can make it with REE-NATE.” Kavanaugh (and many others) described themselves in their yearbook as a “Renate Alumnius,” but Kavanaugh has denied under oath that this was a sexual reference, claiming, ludicrously, that it was intended to show “affection.”
  • “This classmate is not named by the New Yorker. But he put his name on a statement to the FBI and Judiciary Committee that makes this claim, and he is prepared to talk to the FBI. There is no indication this happened.”
Image result for photos james roche yale grad
  • “James Roche, one of Kavanaugh’s roommates at Yale, has written a piece for Slate that claims Kavanaugh lied under oath about his use of slang and his drinking. Roche claims that Kavanaugh “regularly” blacked out. Roche has offered to talk to the FBI, but there’s no indication this happened.”
  • “Roche also pointedly added of Kavanaugh: “He said that ‘boofing’ was farting and the ‘Devil’s Triangle’ was a drinking game. ‘Boofing’ and ‘Devil’s Triangle’ are sexual references. I know this because I heard Brett and his friends using these terms on multiple occasions.” Roche concluded that Kavanaugh “has demonstrated a willingness to be untruthful under oath about easily verified information.”
  • “NBC News reports that the FBI has not contacted dozens of people who could potentially corroborate the allegations against Kavanaugh or testify to his behavior at the time. This includes many people who knew either Ford or Ramirez at the time, and people who actually approached the FBI offering information.”
Is there an architectural drawing of layout of Timmy’s house in 1982?
  • “The Post reports that Ramirez’s lawyers provided the FBI with a list of more than 20 people who might have relevant information, but “as of Wednesday, Ramirez’s team had no indication that the bureau had interviewed any of them.”
  • “Neither Ford nor Kavanaugh have been interviewed by the FBI. As the Brookings Institution’s Susan Hennessey points out: “It is inconceivable they could close a real investigation without re-interviewing Kavanaugh.”

“We’ll have to wait to hear from individual senators to learn what the FBI findings, such as they are, tell us about the sexual assault allegations. But whatever that is to be, are the undecided senators — Republicans Jeff Flake, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski, and Democrats Joe Manchin and Heidi Heitkamp — really going to brush off all these new claims, and the restrictions the White House placed on the FBI, lightly?”

Image result for photos of dr ford at hearing

“Kavanaugh’s bad-faith defenders have tried to frame the question about Kavanaugh’s drinking as: Are you really saying his youthful excesses are disqualifying? True, many of those excesses are trivial. But that’s not the right question. Rather, it’s whether Kavanaugh has shown a level of candor in the present about all this stuff (never mind the angry partisanship and openly displayed contempt for the critical role that opposition lawmakers play in this process) that we expect in a Supreme Court justice.”

“Kavanaugh defenders who have addressed that question point out that he admitted to drinking “too many beers” at times and to doing things that now leave him “cringing.” But this doesn’t get Kavanaugh off that particular hook: All of this new information, on top of other things we’ve already learned, credibly indicate that he blatantly falsified multiple aspects of his conduct in a highly specific way. An admission of general cringeworthiness doesn’t mitigate that. Undecided senators need to decide whether Kavanaugh has really demonstrated the integrity — and respect for the vetting process — that this position, with all the influence it wields over American life, and all the judiciousness and deliberative qualities we expect from those on the high court, demands.”

Image result for photos of yale protesters to kavanaugh

“Hundreds of law professors have now added their names to a letter arguing that he has not. And then there’s the process itself. When Flake courageously insisted on a reopened FBI inquiry, he stated that this was necessary to prevent the country from tearing itself apart. The threshold for Flake, then, is that treating these allegations with a seriousness of purpose commensurate with the gravity that millions of Americans across the country accord to sexual assault — many of them being survivors themselves — is the necessary precondition for healing the country, and thus for getting his vote.”

Link to entire report: Here’s a list of people the FBI did NOT interview. Okay with this, Flake


    • Dear Holly,

      But that is the million dollar question. Why are GOP lawmakers and others pushing so hard to place this judge on the US Supreme Court when there so many other more qualified conservative judges out there?

      This whole mess stinks to high Heaven. It looks there could be multiple impeachments in process, one for President Trump and for Judge Kavanaugh. The GOP find associating with the likes of President Trump and Judge Kavanaugh, a positive thing.

      Hugs, Gronda

      Liked by 2 people

      • I think the rush is to get K on the Supreme Court because of the “sovereign “ case that is soon to come before the SC, plus K has stated the president should not be subpoenaed investigated or indicted whil in office. Trump is drooling over that and the desire to draw more and more power to the executive branch. Already the senate has allowed itself to be a weak arm of The Trump Adm.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Dear Holly,

          I think its all of the above. I strongly suspect that the GOP Senators including those on the US Senate Judiciary Committee may have had access to data about Judge Kavanaugh’s youthful excessive drinking binges and his sexual misadventures before Dr. Ford ever went public.

          You are right about the GOP Grumpy Old Perverts drooling over Judge Kavanaugh’s likely confirmation to the US Supreme Court. He owes them and as a partisan conservative, they can count on him as the 5th conservative justice on the US Supreme Court to rule for just about anything they want.

          Hugs, Gronda

          Liked by 2 people

  1. Thanks for the information. We knew it was going to be a sham the minute the started talking about limiting the scope. I had no faith that it would change anything. It is a poor excuse for a government of the people.

    Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.