September 26, 2018
Summary of Actions by Chairman Grassley and the Senate Judiciary Committee Related to Allegations Made and Disputed Regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh
A
38-year member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Chairman Grassley has worked
to secure a thorough, credible and effective committee process as the U.S.
Senate meets its constitutional duty of advice and consent in considering the
nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to serve on the U.S. Supreme Court.
Grassley reopened the hearing after four days and 32 hours of testimony from
the nominee during the week of September 4, including a closed session
available to all Judiciary Committee members to scrutinize any issues or
concerns about the nominee that involve confidentiality. Chairman Grassley has
planned a hearing day scheduled for September 27 to give a fair and
professional forum for Dr. Christine Blasey Ford to share allegations she made
about the nominee in a July 30 letter and subsequently in a September 16
newspaper story, and for the nominee to respond to questions and address those
allegations.
Additionally,
Chairman Grassley has conducted extensive review and investigation of the
allegations made by Dr. Ford and comments and statements made by others both in
news media reports and in messages to other senators that have been given to
the Judiciary Committee. A description of those efforts is provided here.
July
30
|
·
Dr. Ford drafts letter to Sen. Feinstein.
|
Thursday,
September
13
|
·
Sen. Feinstein transmits Dr. Ford’s letter to the
FBI.
·
Sen. Feinstein tells Sen. Grassley of the
existence of Dr. Ford’s letter after the Committee Executive Business Meeting
to hold over the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh to be Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court.
·
Contents of letter leak to media.
|
Friday,
September 14
|
·
New Yorker publishes substance of Dr. Ford’s
allegations, but does not identify her by name.
·
Mark Judge interviews with Weekly Standard
and denies Dr. Ford’s allegations.
|
Sunday,
September
16
|
·
Washington Post publishes article containing
Dr. Ford’s allegations and her identity. Dr. Ford names Judge Kavanaugh and
Mark Judge as perpetrators and identifies two other individuals at party who
are unnamed in Washington Post article. Washington Post
says that four boys and Dr. Ford attended the party.
·
Sen. Grassley learns Dr. Ford’s identity from Washington
Post report.
·
Sen. Grassley instructs staff to begin
investigation.
|
Monday,
September
17
|
·
Dr. Ford’s counsel appears on morning shows
saying her client wants public hearing to tell her story.
·
Sen. Grassley invites Sen. Feinstein’s staff to
join the staff interview of Judge Kavanaugh, Dr. Ford and other witnesses in
a member-level phone call. Sen. Feinstein declined to have her staff
participate in the routine follow-up calls when new information is provided
to the Committee from the FBI for the nominee’s background file.
·
CNN publishes redacted version of letter
originally sent by Dr. Ford to Ranking Member.
·
Committee notices hearing for following Monday,
September 24 and invites Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh to testify.
·
Committee investigative staff sent three emails
to Dr. Ford’s lawyers with no response.
·
Committee investigative staff requests interviews
with Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh with Republican and Democratic
investigators.
·
Judge Kavanaugh submits to interview with
Republican staff. Democratic staff refuses to participate in interview. Judge
Kavanaugh asks for a hearing as soon as possible.
·
Dr. Ford does not submit to interview.
|
Tuesday,
September
18
|
·
Committee investigative staff sent an additional
email and placed two additional phone calls to Dr. Ford’s lawyers with no
response.
·
Committee investigative staff contacts Mark Judge
and requests an interview.
·
Committee investigative staff learns identity of
two witnesses identified by Dr. Ford but not named in Washington Post
article—Patrick J. Smyth and Leland Ingham Keyser—and requests interviews.
·
Counsel for Mark Judge submits statement from
Mark Judge in which he denies knowledge of party described by Dr. Ford and
states he “never saw Brett act in the manner described by Dr. Ford.” He
further states he has no other information to offer the Committee and does
not wish to speak publicly regarding the allegations.
·
Counsel for Mr. Smyth submits statement from Mr.
Smyth in which he denies any knowledge of the party described by Dr. Ford or
of the allegations of improper conduct. He also states he “never witnessed
any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh towards women.” He asks that the
Committee accept the statement in response to any inquiry it has.
·
As far as we know, Democratic staff did not reach
out to these witnesses.
·
At 7:57 p.m. Sen. Grassley hears from Dr. Ford’s
attorney for the first time. Dr. Ford’s attorney submits letter to Sen.
Grassley asking for a delay in the hearing. She does not address Committee’s
request for interview with investigative staff.
·
Contemporaneously with the release of the letter,
Dr. Ford’s attorney appears on a cable news show asking for hearing to be
delayed.
|
Wednesday,
September
19
|
·
Sen. Grassley sends letter to Dr. Ford’s attorney
that offers Dr. Ford the opportunity for a public or private hearing.
·
Sen. Grassley reiterates request that Dr. Ford
agree to an interview with Committee investigative staff. Dr. Ford’s
attorneys do not respond to request.
|
Thursday,
September
20
|
·
Committee staff has phone call with Dr. Ford’s
attorneys regarding the conditions under which she would testify before the
Committee. Committee staff offers a public hearing, a private hearing,
a public staff interview, or a private staff interview.
·
Sen. Feinstein’s staff gives unredacted copy of
Dr. Ford’s letter to Sen. Grassley’s staff after Sen. Grassley requested
access and had yet to see unredacted version of the July 30 letter.
|
Friday,
September
21
|
·
Committee staff reiterates request that Dr. Ford
agree to an interview with Committee investigative staff. Committee staff
offers to fly to California to obtain testimony. Dr. Ford’s attorneys do not
respond to request.
·
Committee staff again reaches out to Ms. Keyser
requesting an opportunity to conduct an interview regarding Dr. Ford’s
allegations.
·
Dr. Ford’s attorneys asked on Thursday call with
staff that their 10 a.m. deadline for accepting the Judiciary Committee’s
invitation to testify at the September 24 hearing be extended. Sen. Grassley
accommodated their request and extends to Friday at 5 p.m.
·
Sen. Grassley again extends Dr. Ford’s invitation
to the hearing to 10 p.m. Friday.
·
Sen. Grassley responds to Dr. Ford’s attorney’s
“modest proposal” for an additional day and extends the deadline to accept
Dr. Ford’s invitation for the hearing by 2:30 p.m. on Saturday. This was the
third extension to accommodate Dr. Ford’s decision to appear before the
Committee.
|
Saturday,
September
22
|
·
Counsel for Ms. Keyser—the fourth witness named
by Dr. Ford and her “lifelong friend”—submits statement from Ms. Keyser in
which she denies any knowledge of the party described by Dr. Ford. She
further states she doesn’t know Judge Kavanaugh and doesn’t recall ever being
at a party with him.
·
Dr. Ford accepts invitation to appear before the
Committee, but pending further negotiations.
|
Sunday,
September
23
|
·
Dr. Ford’s attorneys agree that Dr. Ford will
appear at a public hearing on Thursday, September 27.
·
Committee staff sends to Dr. Ford’s and Judge
Kavanaugh’s lawyers requests for the submission of relevant evidence in
advance of the hearing.
·
Michael Avenatti tweets that he has a client with
allegations and evidence implicating Judge Kavanaugh.
·
Within minutes, Committee staff reaches out to
Mr. Avenatti to request client’s allegations and evidence. Mr. Avenatti
declines to provide any allegations or evidence.
·
New Yorker publishes article containing
allegations made by Deborah Ramirez that Judge Kavanaugh exposed himself to
her during a college party.
·
Committee staff reaches out to Ms. Ramirez’s
attorney within hours of the article’s publication and requests an interview
with Ms. Ramirez.
|
Monday,
September
24
|
·
Committee staff makes three more requests for any
statement, testimony, or evidence from Ms. Ramirez. Ms. Ramirez’s attorneys
decline to submit such materials.
·
Two Senate offices refer additional allegations
to Committee staff. The first is an anonymous allegation in a letter
given to the Chairman by Senator Gardner, posted from Denver. The
letter claims that Judge Kavanaugh once forcefully and “sexually” shoved a
woman he was dating into a wall at a bar in 1998. The second is an allegation
from a man (whose name Senator Whitehouse has demanded we keep from the
public) in Rhode Island relayed to Committee staff by Senator Whitehouse’s
staff. The Rhode Island man claims that two men named “Brett and Mark” raped
a woman on a boat in Newport in 1985, after which the man making the
allegation claims he and a friend beat up “Brett and Mark.”
·
Committee staff request an interview with Judge
Kavanaugh to question him regarding the allegations raised by Ms. Ramirez,
Mr. Avenatti, the anonymous Denver letter, and the Rhode Island
man.
·
Committee staff again requests Mr. Avenatti
shares his client’s allegations and evidence. Mr. Avenatti declines to
provide any allegations or evidence.
·
Committee staff have first interview with a man
who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982
that is the basis of his complaint. He submitted a written statement
earlier in the day.
|
Tuesday,
September
25
|
·
Committee investigative staff interview Judge
Kavanaugh for approximately 90 minutes regarding Ms. Ramirez’s allegations in
the New Yorker and the allegations received by two Senate offices. For
the first time, Democratic staff attended the call, but expressly declined to
ask Judge Kavanaugh any questions. Judge Kavanaugh denies each
allegation.
·
Committee staff makes three more requests for any
statement, testimony, or evidence from Ms. Ramirez. Ms. Ramirez’s attorneys
decline to submit such materials.
·
The Committee receives from Senator Harris an
anonymous letter, postmarked 9/19 and signed “Jane Doe, Oceanside CA,”
alleging that Judge Kavanaugh and others raped the author in the backseat of
a car. The letter does not identify place, date, or the identity of the
alleged accomplices.
·
Committee staff have a second interview with a
man who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in
the summer of 1982 that is the basis of her allegation. He described
his recollection of their interaction in some detail.
·
Committee staff interviewed a former Georgetown
Prep student who was familiar with “party houses” in the Columbia Country
Club area during the time in question and knew Judge Kavanaugh. He spoke in
support of Kavanaugh’s good character.
·
After that interview, Committee staff interviewed
that man again along with another person who knew Judge Kavanaugh in the 80s
and was familiar with the houses at which Georgetown Prep students partied
during the 1980s. Both spoke in favor of Kavanaugh and to his strength of
character. Committee staff requested to speak another person they suggested
contacting.
·
Committee staff received a statement from another
classmate of Kavanaugh at Georgetown Prep who provided information about the
captions in the yearbooks. Committee investigative staff also have received
additional information, including regarding the characters of Dr. Ford and
Judge Kavanaugh, have followed up on each one, and will continue to do
so.
|
Wednesday,
September 26
|
·
Committee staff receives statement from Julie
Swetnick, represented by Mr. Avenatti.
·
Committee staff responds asking that Ms. Swetnick
be made available for an interview with committee staff. Mr. Avenatti returns
an email, but does not respond to this request.
·
Committee staff follows up with Mr. Avenatti
twice more asking that Ms. Swetnick be made available for an interview.
·
Committee investigative staff questions Judge
Kavanaugh a third time this week on the allegations contained in the
statement provided by Mr. Avenatti, along with any anonymous allegations made
by a purported resident of San Diego.
·
Committee investigative staff spoke with a friend
of Ms. Swetnick about her allegations and any related information. The friend
indicated that Ms. Swetnick had never previously mentioned either Judge
Kavanaugh or this alleged incident.
·
Committee staff receives a more in-depth written
statement from the man interviewed twice previously who believes he, not
Judge Kavanuagh, had an encounter with Dr. Ford.
·
Committee investigative staff spoke via phone
with another man who believes he, not Judge Kavanuagh, had an encounter with
Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of her allegation. He explained his
recollection of the details of the encounter.
·
Committee investigative staff spoke via phone
with a former classmate who provided information about the captions in the
yearbooks, explaining they were innocuous but sometimes insensitive inside
jokes.
·
Committee staff interviewed Judge Kavanaugh via
phone for a third time about the allegations against him. He emphatically,
categorically and unequivocally denied each of them. Democratic staff was
present, but refused to ask questions.
|
|
**Committee
investigation is ongoing. This document details investigative action through
9:00 PM, September 26.
|
Witnesses
provided categorical, unequivocal statements denying any memory of events
matching Dr. Ford’s allegations. Lying in those statements is punishable
under the same federal law as lying in an interview with other federal
investigators. Given that the witnesses’ statements were categorical, an
interview or deposition was unlikely to reveal any new information. The
Democrats, of course, have not even joined the chairman’s requests for witness
interviews.
Background
of Secret Evidence
On
July 9, 2018, the President announced Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to serve on
the Supreme Court of the United States. Judge Kavanaugh has served on the most
important federal appellate court in the country for the last 12 years. Before
that, he held some of the most sensitive positions in the federal government.
The President added Judge Kavanaugh to his short list for the Supreme Court
more than 9 months ago – on November 17, 2017. As part of Judge Kavanaugh’s
nomination to the Supreme Court, the FBI conducted its 6th full-field
background investigation of Judge Kavanaugh since 1993 – 25 years ago. Nowhere
in any of these 6 FBI reports, which committee investigators have reviewed on a
bipartisan basis, was there ever a whiff of any issue – at all – related in any
way to inappropriate sexual behavior.
Dr.
Ford first raised her allegations in a secret letter to the Ranking Member
nearly two months ago in July. The Ranking Member took no action. The letter
wasn’t shared with the Chairman, his colleagues, or his staff. These
allegations could have been investigated in a way that maintained the
confidentiality Dr. Ford requested.
Before
his hearing, Judge Kavanaugh met privately with 65 senators, including the
Ranking Member. But the Ranking Member didn’t ask Judge Kavanaugh about the
allegations when she met with him privately in August. The Senate Judiciary
Committee held its 4-day public hearing from September 4 to September 7, 2018.
Judge Kavanaugh testified for more than 32 hours in public. The committee held
a closed session for members to ask sensitive questions on the last evening,
which the Ranking Member did not attend. Judge Kavanaugh answered nearly 1,300
written questions submitted by senators after the hearing – more than all prior
Supreme Court nominees combined. Throughout this period, the Chairman did not
know about the Ranking Member’s secret evidence.
Only
at the eleventh hour, on the eve of Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote, did
the Ranking Member refer the allegations to the FBI. And then the allegations
were leaked to the press. This is a shameful way to treat Dr. Ford, who
insisted on confidentiality, and Judge Kavanaugh, who has had to address these
allegations in the midst of a media circus.
When
the Chairman received Dr. Ford’s letter on September 13, he and his staff
recognized the seriousness of these allegations and immediately began the
Committee’s investigation, consistent with the way the Committee has handled
such allegations in the past. Every step of the way, the Democratic side
refused to participate in what should’ve been a bipartisan investigation.
After
Dr. Ford’s identity became public, the Chairman’s staff contacted all of the
individuals she said attended the 1982 party described in the Washington
Post article. Judge Kavanaugh immediately submitted to an interview under
penalty of felony for any knowingly false statements. He denied the allegations
categorically. Democratic staff was invited to participate—and could’ve asked
any questions—but they declined.
The
Chairman’s staff contacted the other individuals allegedly at the party—Mark
Judge, Patrick J. Smyth and Leland Ingham Keyser. All three submitted
statements to the Senate under penalty of felony denying any knowledge of the
events described by Dr. Ford. Dr. Ford’s lifelong friend, Ms. Keyser, stated
she doesn’t know Judge Kavanaugh and doesn’t recall ever attending a party with
him.
The
Chairman’s staff made repeated requests to interview Dr. Ford during the past
eleven days, even volunteering to fly to California to take her testimony. But
her attorneys refused to present her allegations to Congress. The Chairman
nevertheless honored her request for a public hearing, so Dr. Ford today has
the opportunity to present her allegations under oath.
Next Article Previous Article