Text messages suggest Kavanaugh wanted to refute accuser's claim before it became public
A former classmate of the Supreme Court nominee has reached out to the FBI but hasn't received a response.
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
WASHINGTON — In the days leading up to a public allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to a college classmate, the judge and his team were communicating behind the scenes with friends to refute the claim, according to text messages obtained by NBC News.
The texts between Berchem and Karen Yarasavage, both friends of Kavanaugh, suggest that the nominee was personally talking with former classmates about Ramirez’s story in advance of the New Yorker article that made her allegation public. In one message, Yarasavage said Kavanaugh asked her to go on the record in his defense. Two other messages show communication between Kavanaugh's team and former classmates in advance of the story.
Tags
Who is online
487 visitors
So here's the kicker, this is what Kavanaugh said about Ramirez calling around to see if any of her friends remembered going to those parties:
It drips with hypocrisy.
Isn't this an interesting development.
E.A and what may I ask is that?
That a Person that wrote a letter in confidence That it be confidential, and asked that it be kept so, would like to have a mater investigated without going Public?
This is about the Ramirez allegations. Stay on topic.
E.A Ahjhhhh ok I am Bad..
So you have the Police Crime report, may we see it please!
Again, this isn't a criminal case, just reporting on unusual timing of some texts between Kavanaugh and other potential witnesses concerning one of the accusations made against Kavanaugh. It appears he was pre-empting the accusation by trying to get some of his friends to go on the record on his behalf. Now, there is no issue with trying to contact friends to vouch for you after an accusation is made. The problem here is that it appears he contacted them about this accusation before the accusation was made thus indicating he thought an accusation was coming which would be hard to predict if the incident never really happened.
E.A Interesting so that ALL those that Call the Judge Despicable names with NO evidence No Police Crime report are?
Is that the " Modern how to Choose a Judge " methodology?
On with what was said on a different seed about Paedophiles and Priest, if a Police Crime Report is not filed can one be charged with a " crime "?
Why? Witness tampering isn't an issue for you either?
E.A " Either "? So you have some historic Criminal activity from Me?
" Witness tempering " please explain to me how that is possible without a " Police Crime report " Inquisitive minds want to know?
Or is " Gossip " now a " Court appearance "?
This has nothing to do with you.
It's possible to tamper with witnesses who are submitting statements under penalty of perjury. The question is why you're unable to understand that.
Hmm at one point " Nothing to do with you " and then,, ok I stop here before we go to total Mire!!!
So you don't want to comment on Kavanaugh contacting his friends about the Ramirez allegations BEFORE the New Yorker article came out.
Again, read the seed and stay on topic. Last warning.
E.A Show me where I said that!
In every one of your comments including that one...
This is very interesting stuff from the article:
That he lied repeatedly under oath is disqualifying. His partisan attacks are disqualifying.
They certainly are. The GOP is blowing this big time.
[deleted]