Previously unreported Kavanaugh accuser comes forward with new allegations

[junior chįmp]

Deborah Ramirez had the grades to go to Yale in 1983. But she wasn’t prepared for what she’d find there.

During the winter of her freshman year, a drunken dormitory party unsettled her deeply. She and some classmates had been drinking heavily when, she says, a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at her, prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it. Some of the onlookers, who had been passing around a fake penis earlier in the evening, laughed.

We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly. (We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier.)

Mr. Kavanaugh did not speak to us because we could not agree on terms for an interview. But he has denied Dr. Ford’s and Ms. Ramirez’s allegations, and declined to answer our questions about Mr. Stier’s account.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html

[Koharu]

She actually was previously known--Chuck Grassley dismissed her claims, as the article says.

Here's what I said in the other thread:

For those that don't believe Dr. Ford's testimony, another accusation has been found to be credible.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html

But while we found Dr. Ford’s allegations credible during a 10-month investigation, Ms. Ramirez’s story could be more fully corroborated. During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been “the talk of campus.” Our reporting suggests that it was.

At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time.

Ms. Ramirez’s legal team gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the bureau — in its supplemental background investigation — interviewed none of them, though we learned many of these potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I. on their own.

Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.” But the Republican-controlled Senate had imposed strict limits on the investigation. “‘We have to wait to get authorization to do anything else,’” Bill Pittard, one of Ms. Ramirez’s lawyers, recalled the agents saying. “It was almost a little apologetic.”

[Mister Mets]

Max Stier would be the previously unknown accuser. Although here we have a situation with an allegation of wrongdoing but limited corroboration and no named victim.

[Hollywood]

She actually was previously known--Chuck Grassley dismissed her claims, as the article says.

Here's what I said in the other thread:

For those that don't believe Dr. Ford's testimony, another accusation has been found to be credible.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html

But while we found Dr. Ford’s allegations credible during a 10-month investigation, Ms. Ramirez’s story could be more fully corroborated. During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been “the talk of campus.” Our reporting suggests that it was.

At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time.

Ms. Ramirez’s legal team gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the bureau — in its supplemental background investigation — interviewed none of them, though we learned many of these potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I. on their own.

Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.” But the Republican-controlled Senate had imposed strict limits on the investigation. “‘We have to wait to get authorization to do anything else,’” Bill Pittard, one of Ms. Ramirez’s lawyers, recalled the agents saying. “It was almost a little apologetic.”

And this was my response to the post. 

As the NY Times articles states, Ramirez doesn't even know if it was Kavanaugh.  No one has said it was Kavanaugh, but friends and family are stating that she told them that an event occurred.  Who done it?  They don't know.  Ramirez doesn't know.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/23/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-testify.html

"The Times had interviewed several dozen people over the past week in an attempt to corroborate her story, and could find no one with firsthand knowledge. Ms. Ramirez herself contacted former Yale classmates asking if they recalled the incident and "told some of them that she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself"

[DrScholl]

If he really didn't do it then he has nothing to worry about, right? He's got the seat on the court so he really shouldn't be worried about what people say.

[Hollywood]

If he really didn't do it then he has nothing to worry about, right? He's got the seat on the court so he really shouldn't be worried about what people say.

If you really aren't a child molestor, you shouldn't mind every newspaper in town writing articles about you being a child molestation.  I mean you didn't do it.  Right?  Why should you care whether your family, neighbors, and friends are informed about your molestation charges?  Who cares if you become a social pariah?  You know that you didn't do it.  That's enough.  Right?

[McNukes™ #NYCMMWasAHero]

If he really didn't do it then he has nothing to worry about, right? He's got the seat on the court so he really shouldn't be worried about what people say.

Reminds me of when a guy I know who was acquitted on sex crime charges was publicly listed in a list of pedophiles on a news site and his employer found out he got fired, lost his house, and went bankrupt.

[DrScholl]

If he really didn't do it then he has nothing to worry about, right? He's got the seat on the court so he really shouldn't be worried about what people say.

If you really aren't a child molestor, you shouldn't mind every newspaper in town writing articles about you being a child molestation.  I mean you didn't do it.  Right?  Why should you care whether your family, neighbors, and friends are informed about your molestation charges?  Who cares if you become a social pariah?  You know that you didn't do it.  That's enough.  Right?

I was actually being sarcastic. His violent reaction at the confirmation hearings pretty much confirmed his guilt. The devil rewarded him with a seat on the court, but the exchange is that his reputation is pretty sullied. It's the way of the universe.

[McNukes™ #NYCMMWasAHero]

His violent reaction at the confirmation hearings pretty much confirmed his guilt. The devil rewarded him with a seat on the court, but the exchange is that his reputation is pretty sullied. It's the way of the universe.

So if I told you that you were a rapist and basically publicly executed you in front of a global audience as one, despite the fact you waited until 40 to have sex, would you be angry? No, you'd be completely stoic. So stoic it would prove that you did it, just the same as anger.

[DrScholl]

Hypothetical scenarios and calling me stupid doesn't do anything to help Kavanaugh. I believe he's guilty, but some others don't. Leave it at that.

[Pandaguineapig]

Hypothetical scenarios and calling me stupid doesn't do anything to help Kavanaugh. I believe he's guilty, but some others don't. Leave it at that.

I don't need to "help" Kavanaugh, the facts are on his side. He will spend the next 30 years on the court no matter how much you cry and moan

[DrScholl]

Hypothetical scenarios and calling me stupid doesn't do anything to help Kavanaugh. I believe he's guilty, but some others don't. Leave it at that.

I don't need to "help" Kavanaugh, the facts are on his side. He will spend the next 30 years on the court no matter how much you cry and moan

I'm not crying and moaning. As I seem to recall he was the one crying and moaning just before he went into a violent rage. He might be on the court for 30 years if he can manage to not get drunk and attack anyone.

[Hollywood]

Hypothetical scenarios and calling me stupid doesn't do anything to help Kavanaugh. I believe he's guilty, but some others don't. Leave it at that.

Your rationale for deciding his guilt is atrocious.  Don't blame us for calling you out on it.  You basically said you  think he's guilty because he was grumpy while answering questions.  Really?  You might as well just say he's guilty because he has that look of a guilty person.  Some of us don't think he isn't guilty, because he has been proven guilty by any stretch of the imagination.  You think he's guilty for no good reason. It's pretty stupid.  So that's where I'm leaving it.

[Hollywood]

Nearly a year ago, I posted that the reason that so many people defended Kavanaugh was because many were rapists themselves. That post was deleted by mods.

My view is unchanged.

They were saving you from yourself.  Following your line of thinking, the defense attorney would be guilty of rape for defending an accused rapist in court. 

[Fuzzy Bear]

The truth that really hurts is that if Truth Hurts made a comment about me as she made here in real life, I'd sue her and enjoy depositing the money I received from her garnished paychecks. 

[Gass3268]

Gonna need a special House investigation to get to the bottom of this.

[Mister Mets]

If he really didn't do it then he has nothing to worry about, right? He's got the seat on the court so he really shouldn't be worried about what people say.

If you really aren't a child molestor, you shouldn't mind every newspaper in town writing articles about you being a child molestation.  I mean you didn't do it.  Right?  Why should you care whether your family, neighbors, and friends are informed about your molestation charges?  Who cares if you become a social pariah?  You know that you didn't do it.  That's enough.  Right?

I was actually being sarcastic. His violent reaction at the confirmation hearings pretty much confirmed his guilt. The devil rewarded him with a seat on the court, but the exchange is that his reputation is pretty sullied. It's the way of the universe.

Yes, if you get angry at accusations that you're the mastermind of a large gang-rape ring, you must be guilty. I understand that you are a massive hack and that guides all your thinking, but even you can't possibly be this stupid

It's a fine legal standard to establish.

Senators must be allowed to make the most vile attacks they can imagine against any judicial nominee they don't want to see on the bench, and that person shows a hint of emotion, they are disqualified. This will help get a better court.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Gonna need a special House investigation to get to the bottom of this.

Absolutely not.  If these matters cannot be rectified by law enforcement, the House of Representatives has no business in this.

[Mister Mets]

Gonna need a special House investigation to get to the bottom of this.

For what?

There isn't any kind of evidence that meets any kind of legal standard is quite limited.

There's nothing new about Blasey Ford. There are people who claim that they heard about what happened to Ms. Ramirez, but no one is identified as an actual witness (one of the problems with Ramirez's story is that she told people she was contacting that she wasn't even sure it was Kavanaugh.)

There's a classmate who claims to have seen lewd behavior by Kavanaugh but no one corroborates the story, including the woman who they claimed had been the victim.

The Times' review of the book makes it clear that there's no damning new evidence.

Pogrebin and Kelly spend significant time digging into Blasey Ford’s accusations and also those of Deborah Ramirez, a woman who says Kavanaugh put his penis in her face at a Yale college party. They track down any witnesses and friends willing to talk, comb through legal documents, do their best to find the house where Blasey Ford says the assault took place. They point out critical witnesses that the F.B.I., in its very limited investigation, did not have time to interview. In the end they turn up no smoking gun, no secret confession, no friend who comes forth to say Kavanaugh was lying all this time.

[Gass3268]

The FBI didn’t do its job. This must be investigated.

https://twitter.com/harrylitman/status/1172947670643593216?s=21

[roxas11]

The big thing for me is that something always seemed off about kavanaugh

I remember watching his testimony and thinking this guy is not as naive or as innocent as he is claiming to he


Now I will be the first to say that He may very well be an innocent man who is being unfairly accused

but his 2018 testimony did him no favors and I thought Ford came off being far more credible than he was at the time. To this day I still do not understand why A man who claimed he was innocent was so against having the FBI looking into the claims against him so that It would clear his name.

kavanaugh acted like a man who had something to hide and for that reason alone Im inclined to believe that there maybe some truth to the allegations against him

[McNukes™ #NYCMMWasAHero]

The FBI didn’t do its job. This must be investigated.

https://twitter.com/harrylitman/status/1172947670643593216?s=21

The FBI can't actually investigate an allegation that's so old it can't be prosecuted due to a statute of limitations. All they can do is obtain witness testimony and get them to sign documents acknowledging that they can go to prison if they lie. Needless to say, these allegations didn't work.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I don't know about everyone else, but I am shocked - shocked, I tell you - to discover that many of the blue avatars in this thread don't give a crap about holding sex predators accountable for their crimes.  I mean, it's not like these are people who already voted for a mentally unstable, misogynistic white supremacist who was recorded bragging about sexually assaulting numerous women and wanted to put an attempted rapist with the temperament of a rabid dog on the Supreme Court.  Oh wait...  

I mean, it's not surprising to see folks like Nuke and Hollywood defending sex predators and smearing their victims to own teh libs.  They're horrible people.  Although it'd be nice if they just admitted that they happily support sex predators instead of pretending to give a d*** about due process.

[Gass3268]

https://twitter.com/kamalaharris/status/1173250953103007745?s=21

[DrScholl]

The only way Kavanaugh is going to be investigated is if Trump is defeated and Democrats win the Senate. Conviction is not really likely since 67 votes is not going to be obtainable, but if the investigation makes Kavanaugh miserable enough maybe he'll resign. This isn't even really about court rulings or ideology, it's about the integrity of the court being corrupted.