Right on the eve the highly anticipated Senate Judiciary Committee hearing examining the stories of Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh and his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, two men have reportedly confessed that they, not Judge Brett Kavanaugh, were the ones who had that encounter in question with Blasey Ford.
“For people asking for more info,” Burgess added in a second tweet, “this is from a long investigation summary from Judiciary Republicans distributed tonight. These interviews happened this week, according to the committee.”
Judiciary is also talking to someone who thinks he forced himself on Dr. Ford not Judge Kavanaugh pic.twitter.com/NJGRyMiW47
— Burgess Everett (@burgessev) September 27, 2018
Elana Schor posted on Twitter:
Senate Judiciary Rs release a Kavanaugh investigative summary that includes:
-an anonymous claim of rape fwded by Harris’ office
-two intvs & a written statement from a man “who believes he, not” Kav, assaulted Ford in 1982
-phone intvu w/a 2nd man who believes same as above
Senate Judiciary Rs release a Kavanaugh investigative summary that includes:
— Elana Schor (@eschor) September 27, 2018
-an anonymous claim of rape fwded by Harris’ office
-two intvus & a written statement from a man “who believes he, not” Kav, assaulted Ford in 1982
-phone intvu w/a 2nd man who believes same as above
If true, The man in question could be in for some serious legal jeopardy as there is no statute of limitations for rape in Maryland, where the alleged attack occurred.
David Martosko of the Daily Mail tweeted screenshots from the Senate Judiciary Committee report.
Whoa. Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans say they have spoken to two men who think they, not Kavanaugh, had the 1982 encounter that formed the basis for her sexual abuse claim. (These tables are from a timeline the committee majority published 15 minutes ago.) pic.twitter.com/tjz3CSQUUL
— David Martosko (@dmartosko) September 27, 2018
In what looks to be the log of the committee’s investigation and proceedings, an entry dated from Monday, September 24, says committee staff held a “first interview” with a man saying that it was him, not Brett Kavanaugh, who “had the encounter with Christine Blasey Ford.” The man also had submitted a written statement to the committee earlier in the day.
In an entry from Tuesday, Sept. 25, the committee reported that staff had 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.”
The next day the entry reads, “Committee staff receives a more in-depth written statement from the man interviewed twice previously” who claims to have had the encounter with Ford. The committee staff also “spoke via phone with another man who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of her allegation.” The man “explained his recollection of the details of the encounter.”
Martosko added:
It’s not at all clear if these two men each thought, “Hey, it might have been me!” — or if the second one believes he played the hypothetical Mark Judge role in an actual assault perpetrated by the first. https://t.co/zoI1bibZw5
— David Martosko (@dmartosko) September 27, 2018
And of course, the left is having a meltdown over the release of this news just hours before the hearing is set to begin.
And, naturally, the committee chose to disclose all of this at 10 PM-ish on the night before she testifies. https://t.co/8ZQChefM3M
— Matt Ford (@fordm) September 27, 2018
Which is, of course, exactly what Feinstein and co. did after Kavanaugh had testified before the committee — just as the Senate was preparing to vote on his nomination. But it’s different when they do it because shut up, as my colleague Stephen Green would say.
Could the two men be either mentally disturbed or seeking attention? or both?. Who knows.
But one thing is for sure their “confessions” highlight the uncertainty that accompanies claims that cannot be substantiated with any evidence, which makes them all — including those of Brett Kavanaugh’s accusers — very suspect.
SEE ALSO:
