Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Judiciary Committee Counsel to Julie Swetnick lawyer Michael Avenatti: “Please stop emailing me”

Judiciary Committee Counsel to Julie Swetnick lawyer Michael Avenatti: “Please stop emailing me”

“We have already reviewed your client’s allegations. We focus on credible allegations. Please stop emailing me.”

https://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/watch/julie-swetnick-speaks-about-alleged-behavior-by-judge-kavanaugh-1334265923929?v=raila&

Julie Swetnick, the woman who accused Kavanaugh of handing out plastic solo cups at a high school party after she had already graduated, is represented by porn, fame-lusting lawyer, Michael Avanatti.

Avenatti has been in contact with the Senate Judiciary Committee, insisting that Swetnick’s allegations be taken seriously.

Tuesday, Mike Davis, Chief Counsel for Nominations for the Senate Judiciary Committee responded to Avenatti’s demands.

From: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 5:35 PM
To: ‘Michael J. Avenatti’
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: RE: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick

Mr. Avenatti:

We have already reviewed your client’s allegations. We focus on credible allegations. Please stop emailing me.

Thank you,

Mike Davis

Mike Davis, Chief Counsel for Nominations
United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Chairman
224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Avenatti responded thusly:

From: Michael J. Avenatti
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 4:59 PM
To: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: Re: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick

Mr. Davis:

Respond to my emails in substance. You may think you are above the law but you are not. You are paid by the taxpayers – not the Republican Party.

Michael

Michael J. Avenatti, Esq.

I guess Avenatti thinks this is a zinger? Maybe he’s just mad he won’t have more fodder for talk shows?

The entire email thread is beneath, but I’ve removed email addresses and direct contact information for obvious reasons:

From: Michael J. Avenatti
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 5:22 PM
To: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: RE: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick

Mr. Davis:

Stop playing games. If you are the Chief Counsel, then you need to do your job. Please respond to our requests.

Michael

_________________________________

From: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 2:11 PM
To: Michael J. Avenatti
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: RE: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick

Mr. Avenatti:

I noticed that you copied Jennifer Duck (staff director) and Heather Sawyer (general counsel) from Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein’s office. And Senator Feinstein is your home-state senator. So you should contact her office directly. Time is of the essence.

Jennifer or Heather, do you want me to give Mr. Avenatti your direct numbers?

Thank you,

Mike Davis

_________________________________

On Oct 2, 2018, at 4:57 PM, Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep) wrote:

Mr. Avenatti:

I would like to direct you (and your Twitter followers) to two press statements made by the Chairman’s office:

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/judiciary-committee-receives-statement-regarding-swetnick-allegations

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/judiciary-committee-refers-potential-false-statements-for-criminal-investigation

Thank you,

Mike Davis

_________________________________

From: Michael J. Avenatti
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 4:39 PM
To: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: RE: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick
Importance: High

Mr. Davis:

On repeated occasions, you have failed to respond to my correspondence relating to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh and the ability of my client Ms. Swetnick to sit down with the FBI and share facts and witnesses regarding what she witnessed. This is entirely unprofessional and demonstrates a complete lack of good faith on your part and those that you report to. I once again ask that you immediately respond and take all steps to arrange an FBI interview.

Further, attached please find another declaration from another witness who supports a number of allegations of Ms. Swetnick. She knows both Ms. Swetnick and Dr. Ford. The identify of this witness will be released to the FBI once they contact me to arrange an interview as she does not want her name publicly disclosed at this time.

Time is of the essence. Please respond.

Michael

_________________________________

From: Michael J. Avenatti
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 2:13 PM
To: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: RE: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick

Mr. Davis:

Please respond. Time is of the essence.

Regards,

Michael

_________________________________

From: Michael J. Avenatti
Sent: Friday, September 28, 2018 11:03 AM
To: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: RE: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick

Mr. Davis:

We are STILL awaiting a response to my email. It has now been over 30 hours and you have failed to respond. We have heard nothing from the Committee.

In light of Senator Flake’s comments moments ago, please let us know when we can meet with the FBI and provide the facts and evidence supporting my client’s sworn declaration. Time is of the essence.

Regards,

Michael

_________________________________

From: Michael J. Avenatti
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 3:05 PM
To: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: RE: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick

Mr. Davis:

I sent the below e-mail nine (9) hours ago and have yet to receive any response. As you know, time is of the essence.

As stated below, my client Julie Swetnick is prepared to come to Washington, D.C. to testify under oath before the Committee. I also believe that at least one, if not two, other witness(es) are likewise prepared to come to Washington, D.C. to testify as to the accuracy of the statements in my client’s declaration.

Please confirm that my client and the supporting witness(es) will be permitted to testify under oath before the Committee ASAP. Under no circumstances should a vote be taken on the nominee without first hearing from my client and the supporting witness(es).

Please get back to me as soon as possible.

Thank you.

Michael

_________________________________

From: Michael J. Avenatti
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2018 5:58 AM
To: Davis, Mike (Judiciary-Rep)
Cc: Duck, Jennifer (Judiciary-Dem); Sawyer, Heather (Judiciary-Dem)
Subject: Kavanaugh Nomination – Allegations of Julie Swetnick

Mr. Davis:

As you know, I represent Ms. Julie Swetnick, a woman that has provided a detailed declaration under penalty of perjury relating to the claimed abhorrent conduct of Brett Kavanaugh, including sexual assault.

You and the Committee leadership first learned of these allegations on Sunday and yet have done basically nothing to investigate them. In fact, after I emailed you in detail on Monday morning, you failed to even respond for days. Simply put, you blew us off all day Monday and Tuesday. It was not until yesterday that you finally responded and you only did so then because the press started contacting you for comment.

Your conduct does not evidence any desire to get to the truth or to fulfill your duties to the American people (who pay your salary). To the contrary, you and the leadership seem intent on confirming Brett Kavanaugh as quickly as possible so as to avoid any real investigation into the facts and circumstances surrounding the allegations made by my client and many other women.

To be clear, my client Ms. Swetnick demands the following:

FBI Investigation.The Committee and Senator Grassley must immediately refer this matter to the FBI for a complete and fair investigation. My client is prepared to meet with the FBI today to disclose how she was victimized and what she observed. She is also prepared to disclose multiple additional cooraborating witnesses with knowledge of the conduct of Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge, as well as additional evidence.

In my experience, women that are fabricating stories do not offer to immediately meet with FBI agents to discuss their allegations. The FBI is used to investigate the many of the most serious allegations and crimes in America every day (i.e. 9/11 and the Oklahoma City bombing). Why are you and Senator Grassley refusing to refer this matter to the FBI for investigation or request that they intervene?

Sworn Testimony Before the Committee. Ms. Swetnick demands the opportunity to present sworn testimony before the Committee as to what she witnessed and how she was victimized. She is prepared to be questioned as to her allegations for as long as it takes to get to the truth. Please confirm that she will be allowed to testify and contact me so that we may agree on the logistics.

Polygraph Examination. My client is prepared to undergo a polygraph examination in further substantiation of her claims provided that Mr. Kavanaugh likewise agrees to undergo an examination. As you know, while the results of such an examination are generally not admissible in a court of law, they are routinely used in the federal government for the granting of security clearances and the like at the highest levels, including at our intelligence agencies. There is no reason why they cannot be used in this circumstance. Please confirm that both polygraph examinations will proceed.

Mark Judge. I am still awaiting an answer as to if the Committee has requested that Mark Judge appear to testify and if not, why not. As detailed in my client’s sworn declaration, Mr. Judge has detailed knowledge of the conduct of Mr. Kavanaugh and witnessed it firsthand. This is likewise true as it relates to other allegations from other women. Thus, there is no excuse for the Committee refusing to make a demand that he testify. Indeed, seeing as Mr. Judge is one of Mr. Kavanaugh’s closest friends from the time period at issue, one would think that Mr. Kavanaugh would want him to testify unless he is hiding something. Please confirm that Mr. Judge is being asked to provide sworn testimony.

Knowledge by the Committee. Press reports have stated that certain members of the Committee were aware of allegations similar to those set forth in my client’s declaration well before Sunday. Is this accurate? If so, please provide the details of this knowledge and explain why it was not investigated sooner.

Please respond to the above as quickly as possible as time is of the essence. Once again, this process must be a search for the truth as opposed to a partisan attempt to ram a Supreme Court nominee through at all costs, including at the expense of women who claim to be victims of sexual assault.

Regards,

Michael

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Who published the thread?

I have to assume it was Avenatti.

He’s one of those curious Democrats that possess an arrogance only rivaled by his stupidity.

On a side note, I sometimes hate to be right.

Collins is already claiming they need the FBI to investigate this bullshit.

Stop pussy footing around and call the vote.

    Matt_SE in reply to Olinser. | October 2, 2018 at 10:20 pm

    Collins can say anything she wants while the investigation is ongoing. Once she has to put her name down on the roll call, things may change.

    I believe that even in squishy Maine, a vote against Kavanaugh by a Republican will be political suicide.

      fishstick in reply to Matt_SE. | October 3, 2018 at 5:28 am

      the problem that Collins and Murkowski have is while they are RINOs, they caucus with the Republicans and not Democrats

      their careers cannot advance in the changing Democrat party but they got elected due to playing the center aisle

      the truth is plain enough to see – Collins and Murkowski just desperately do not want to have the confirmation vote so they can politically posture around not having to make a decision

      that is just IT, period!

      anyone can see Swetnik’s flaky claims are entirely BS, as anyone could have seen during her NBC interview

    Collins, Flake and NeverTrumper friends are suddenly staring into the abyss. Something scary must be staring back at them.

How are these people going to react when Kavanaugh is sworn in by Clarence Thomas on Saturday afternoon? I hope it’s with riots. I like riots.

    amatuerwrangler in reply to cgray451. | October 2, 2018 at 9:56 pm

    Yes. Riots are good for the economy. All those cops and deputy sheriffs putting in tons of OT– time-and-a-half plus meal allowances — the cops and deputies have more money to spend and the G collects more taxes; what’s not to like.

    They are better than floods and earthquakes as people have a choice as to participation. The floods and earthquakes happen whether or not you want to participate.

    cucho in reply to cgray451. | October 2, 2018 at 9:59 pm

    Each riot creates 50,000 new Trump voters.

      The Friendly Grizzly in reply to cucho. | October 3, 2018 at 9:30 am

      And a hundred politicians pushing through ten new programs to lift money from the taxpayers and give it to “the community” so the revruns will call off another riot.

They clearly have bigger fish to fry.

From Andrea Mitchell:

We were just talking to Frank Figliuzzi, a former FBI officer, a top-ranking officer, and he says that his sources who are very good sources in the Bureau, tell him that they are still pretty much handcuffed. That, yes, more witnesses, follow-up witnesses can be interviewed, but the issues are only the initial allegations of Dr. Ford of the sexual attack, not lying, not drinking, not whether he was rude or showed belligerence to senators such as yourself. Is that the parameter of this follow-up investigation, and is that all that will be considered before you go to a vote?

    Wing in reply to Neo. | October 2, 2018 at 9:13 pm

    Yes, by all means we must have the FBI investigate whether he drank too much in high school and college and whether he was rude and belligerent to the senators.

      stevewhitemd in reply to Wing. | October 2, 2018 at 9:32 pm

      I’d dearly love an investigation of all 535 senators and representatives of their high school and college antics, all done to the level of specificity and goalpost-moving put forward by the Democrats lately.

      Edward in reply to Wing. | October 3, 2018 at 9:21 am

      I don’t recollect the part of Title 18 USC which covers a violation of being rude to elected politicians.

    Halcyon Daze in reply to Neo. | October 2, 2018 at 9:35 pm

    Andrea Mitchell is a credible source? Since when?

      Gotta wonder if Greenspan ever has to “service” that pitiful beast. I bet that Dan would do’er, if she had some credible documents from a Kinko’s shop… nah, only Dan can ever be “enough” for Dan.

    tom_swift in reply to Neo. | October 3, 2018 at 1:43 am

    From Andrea Mitchell:

    Thanks for the laugh.

    Just for a switch, it’s nice to see a joke which doesn’t involve popcorn.

    Andrea Mitchell should be thrown in a septic tank, along with the rest of the creeps at NBC.

    rdm in reply to Neo. | October 3, 2018 at 8:10 am

    You mean they aren’t to investigate irrelevant things in a blatant attempt to mine dirt for democrats? How horrible.

    Edward in reply to Neo. | October 3, 2018 at 9:25 am

    Were those three downvotes for the quote from Andrea Mitchell, NBC News,(perhaps mistaking the quote for Neo’s sentiments?) or Neo for posting a quote from Andrea Mitchell?

Oooops….my mistake. I thought her name was Slutnick.

I wonder how Avenatti shaves his head. Would you suppose that he shaves it every morning? FWIW, no one wants to know what else he shaves. Besides, a sifty freak, as he, probably gets into that hot wax thing.

You lie down with dogs, you wake up with fleas.

    RedEchos in reply to NotKennedy. | October 3, 2018 at 6:44 am

    Nair.

    The rumor was that it leeched into your brain making you into a deranged lunatic.

    Thanks to CPL no further testing is needed

Avenatti is desperate to push a story he knows if phony. It is his free chance to get on TV, he doesn’t give a crap about this BS, it is him pushing his run for President.

She isn’t believed. Neither is Ford, who is light years more credible, and Ford isn’t believed by a large part of the population.

Hold the vote. If they fail, nominate him again once the new red wave is seated. If they fail or win, I think the left over played their hand, and I dearly hope the people make them pay.

Avenatti is big on who pays Davis. Who pays Avenatti? The American people deserve to know!!

Comanche Voter | October 3, 2018 at 1:25 am

The appropriate response to both Avenatti and Andrea Mitchell is “sod off swampy”. And you can add to Avenatti–“Don’t e-mail me again you pathetic little putz.”

They should investigate – and then prosecute her for all of her lies.

Deter future slanderers from attacking innocent people.

Avenatti is actually getting pretty good mileage out of this, considering that he’s not only playing a weak hand, but really holds no cards at all.

But of course it’s long past time for the Committee to stop humoring him. He’s only as important as they pretend he is.

    The problem is that if they totally ignore him, they give him additional fodder for screaming “rigged investigation”, and the media will gladly give him a platform.

      Fen in reply to SDN. | October 3, 2018 at 12:27 pm

      Maybe that’s the plan. Creepy Porn Lawyer sure has a knack for imploding and immolatimg everyone around him.

      For a brief span, some of us were even wondering if he was a Trump mole inserted to make the whole thing ridiculous.

      We were half right.

    MajorWood in reply to tom_swift. | October 3, 2018 at 11:57 am

    But since it is the MSM sitting at the table, it is like playing poker in the Special Olympics.

HBO version at 1:40

“You’re a cheap hack. If you come after Leo I’m going to bust you like a pinata”

https://youtu.be/AtjP60hzZu8

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend