Image 01 Image 03

Senate Judiciary Final Report: “no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh”

Senate Judiciary Final Report: “no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh”

“Committee investigators found no witness who could provide any verifiable evidence to support any of the allegations”

The Senate Judiciary Committee has released its Final Report (pdf.)(full embed at bottom of post) detailing the extensive investigation conducted into allegations of sexual misconduct lodged against Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation proceedings.

The report completely clears Kavanaugh. Here is a portion of the Summary (emphasis added):

“In addition to conducting interviews, Committee investigators continuously monitored social media and news reports. They also reviewed all documentary evidence submitted by Justice Kavanaugh, his accusers, and other witnesses. Finally, the Committee conducted a supplemental daylong hearing and asked the White House to direct the FBI to reopen its investigation of Justice Kavanaugh to explore potential credible allegations pending against the nominee. The Committee received that supplemental FBI background investigation report on October 4. All senators and a limited number of appropriately cleared Committee staff had the  pportunity to review it in a secure facility on October 5 and 6.

After an extensive investigation that included the thorough review of all potentially credible evidence submitted and interviews of more than 40 individuals with information relating to the allegations, including classmates and friends of all those involved, Committee investigators found no witness who could provide any verifiable evidence to support any of the allegations brought against Justice Kavanaugh. In other words, following the separate and extensive investigations by both the Committee and the FBI, there was no evidence to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault made against Justice Kavanaugh. The details of the Committee’s investigation, broken down by claim, are provided below.”

The Report then goes on to examine each of the allegations against Kavanaugh by accuser. A lot of the information previously was known, but the Report adds many details and documents the extensive witness interviews and documents. There are hundreds of pages of supporting documents. The names or personally identifying witnesses is blacked out.

The Ford Allegations


“Committee investigators found no verifiable evidence that supported Dr. Ford’s allegations against Justice Kavanaugh. The witnesses that Dr. Ford identified as individuals who could corroborate her allegations failed to do so, and in fact, contradicted her.”

Some interesting details:

“In addition to conducting the hearing, the Committee contacted seventeen individuals with information relevant to Dr. Ford’s allegations. Investigators began with the three individuals Dr. Ford identified as attending the 1982 gathering: Mark Judge, Patrick J. (P.J.) Smyth, and Leland Keyser. On September 18, P.J. Smyth and Mark Judge submitted statements denying that they attended any such gathering. Mr. Judge also attested that he has no memory of the alleged incident and never saw Justice Kavanaugh act in the manner Dr. Ford alleged. On September 22, Leland Keyser, a close friend of Dr. Ford, submitted a statement saying that she did not know Justice Kavanaugh and had no memory of the alleged gathering. In a September 28 e-mail to Committee staff, Ms. Keyser’s attorney reiterated that Ms. Keyser does not know Justice Kavanaugh, has no recollection of being at a gathering with him, and cannot corroborate Dr. Ford’s account because she “has no recollection of the incident in question.” Other individuals contacted by Committee investigators included and , two men who separately and independently had contacted the Committee claiming that they believed they had an encounter with Dr. Ford around the time of the alleged incident. Although each individual described details that in some respects seemed to fit Dr. Ford’s allegations against Justice Kavanaugh, both men described consensual encounters. The Committee also contacted fourteen former classmates of Justice Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford. None of them had any knowledge of the conduct alleged against Justice Kavanaugh by Dr. Ford or of the gathering at which she claimed to have been assaulted. The Committee also reviewed a letter submitted by 65 women who have known Justice Kavanaugh since high school stating that he has a reputation for treating women with decency and respect.”

* * *

 XXXXXXXX (Sept. 24, Sept. 25): XXXXXXXX stated that after graduating from high school in Hampton, Virginia in 1982, he made several trips to D.C. that summer. During one of the trips, he attended a house party where he kissed and made out with a woman he met who he believes could have been Dr. Ford. XXXXXXXX said that based on old photographs of Justice Kavanaugh he has seen on the news, he believes the two of them share a similar appearance.
 XXXXXXXX (Sept. 26): XXXXXXXX stated that when he was a 19 year-old college student, he visited D.C. over spring break and kissed a girl he believes was Dr. Ford. He said that the kiss happened in the bedroom of a house which was about a 15-to20 minute walk from the Van Ness Metro, that Dr. Ford was wearing a swimsuit under her clothing, and that the kissing ended when a friend jumped on them as a joke. XXXXXXXX said that the woman initiated the kissing and that he did not force himself on her.
 XXXXXXXX (Sept. 25): XXXXXXXX said that she attended UNC with Dr. Ford who along with her friend XXXXXXXX, used to purchase drugs from XXXXXXXX and regularly attended parties with members of his fraternity. XXXXXXXX said that she was present at XXXXXXXX apartment one night in April 1987 when Dr. Ford and XXXXXXXX arrived to consume drugs. XXXXXXXX said that the Dr. Ford she knew had an active and robust social life in college.

* * *

 Statement of William Rand (dated Oct. 5): Rand went to the University of North Carolina with Dr. Ford from 1984 to 1986. In his statement, he attested that Dr. Ford had a very robust and active social life which contradicts Dr. Ford’s narrative that she had a limited social life due to the alleged sexual assault. He also stated that Dr. Ford did not seem to be afraid to be in rooms or apartments with only one entrance, which contradicts her claim to the Committee that she had to build a second front door to her house due to the trauma of the alleged assault.34

* * *

“Several media outlets have reported that the FBI’s supplemental report indicated that Leland Keyser, a friend of Dr. Ford, felt pressure from Dr. Ford’s allies to revisit her initial statement to the Committee that she did not know Justice Kavanaugh or have any knowledge of the alleged incident.78 According to the news articles, Keyser reported that former FBI employee Monica McLean, whom Dr. Ford allegedly coached in a polygraph exam years earlier, and others contacted her to suggest she “clarify” her account. Committee investigators continue to pursue this lead to determine whether McLean or others tampered with a critical witness.”

The Ramirez Allegations


“Committee investigators found no verifiable evidence to support Ramirez’s allegations.”

Some interesting details:

“Despite the refusal of Ramirez’s legal team to assist the Committee in its investigation, Committee investigators attempted to investigate her claims to the greatest extent possible, and interviewed seven witnesses regarding the allegation. They included Justice Kavanaugh’s former roommate at Yale, James Roche, several of his college classmates, and classmates and friends associated with Ramirez. Committee investigators also reviewed documents submitted by several former Yale classmates. The Committee also reviewed public statements from three other Yale classmates but found them immaterial because the speakers had no knowledge of the event. Finally, Committee investigators interviewed Justice Kavanaugh in a transcribed phone call on
September 25. He unequivocally denied that the alleged incident ever took place.”

* * *

 XXXXXXXX (Oct. 1): XXXXXXXX graduated from Yale in 1988, a year after Justice Kavanaugh and Deborah Ramirez. XXXXXXXX said a different classmate named XXXXXXXX was a member of the same fraternity (DKE) as Justice Kavanaugh and allegedly had a reputation for exposing himself publicly. Indeed, XXXXXXXX provided a yearbook photo that shows XXXXXXXX exposing himself. XXXXXXXX said that he had personally witnessed XXXXXXXX expose himself at a party. XXXXXXXX said that XXXXXXXX was in the same residential college as Ramirez (Pierson) and he feels that if a student other than XXXXXXXX engaged in similar lewd behavior, it would have been widely known and discussed around campus.

The Swetnick Allegations


“The Committee found no verifiable evidence to support Swetnick’s allegations. Indeed, the evidence appears to support the position that Julie Swetnick and Mr. Avenatti criminally conspired to make materially false statements to the Committee and obstruct the Committee’s investigation. Accordingly, the Committee referred both to the Department of Justice and FBI for investigation and potential violations of 18 U.S.C. § 371, § 1001, and § 1505 on October 25, 2018. In addition, on October 26, 2018, the Committee made a second criminal referral against Michael Avenatti to the Justice Department and FBI for investigation of potential violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 (knowingly providing materially false statements) and 1505 (obstruction of a congressional investigation), based upon the NBC story that evidenced that Mr. Avenatti may have fabricated allegations by a second declarant.68”

Other Allegations

The Report goes over the Rhode Island, Colorado and California accusations and finds no evidence so support the allegations, some of which have been recanted.

My Conclusion

I think Prof. Margot Cleveland summed it up best:

“Final Point: On Tuesday, remember what Dems did to Kavanaugh.”


Senate Judiciary Final Kavanaugh Report 11-02-2018 by Legal Insurrection on Scribd


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Evidence? Since when do Democrats need evidence to accuse Republicans. They have mobs with no jobs.

Of course there was no evidence. If there had been, Democrats would have insisted on an investigation early on. Lacking any evidence whatsoever, they waited until the last minute hoping that bare allegations alone would be enough.

Bucky Barkingham | November 4, 2018 at 10:05 am

Of course the Dem’s on the committee with graciously accept the conclusions in this report, won’t they?

“Evidence? We don’t need no stinking evidence!”

Sounds like the rumors floating around during the hearings about Ms. Ford being quite the party girl were not without merit.

    alaskabob in reply to murkyv. | November 4, 2018 at 10:28 am

    For one thing, UNC-Chapel Hill is a professional partying school. Decades ago, Playboy ranked colleges for their partying. Number one had an asterisk by it and Playboy noted all the schools listed were amateur level compared to UNC. As to Ford’s “robust” social calender, while FemDems will argue that it matters little….It does blunt the story of mental anguish Ford said she developed from THAT party…The one nobody remembers, unknown for time and place. “So many men so little….”

      I was a grad student at UNC-CH. While it was certainly a top tier party school, it paled in comparison to UT Austin, Ohio State, Alabama, etc.

        MajorWood in reply to MTED. | November 4, 2018 at 1:55 pm

        I heard that Chapel Hill was selected as a first choice for “Animal House” but that some state regulation prevented it being filmed there, so they went to Eugene instead.

        There was one frat house near Cameron and Columbia, which resembled delta house, that burned with the loss of several lives. It put a chill in the air for awhile since it was pretty much a disaster waiting to happen.

        alaskabob in reply to MTED. | November 5, 2018 at 4:58 pm

        Well (“back in the day)… Playboy considered it professional. The old adage was that when one transferred from NC State to Chapel Hill, one traded in their study lamp for a BeautyRest mattress.

        Go Wolfpack!

      Joe-dallas in reply to alaskabob. | November 4, 2018 at 3:17 pm

      Just about every school is vying to be the number one party school.

      Barry in reply to alaskabob. | November 4, 2018 at 9:44 pm

      Don’t believe everything you read in playboy. UNC is not much different with respect to party’s as any other major university.

      #1 major at UNC, Biology.

Still & again, I don’t care if teenaged Brett Kavanaugh was an alleged drunken mastermind for a mob of high school boys who perpetrated gang rapes at house parties 36 years ago. I just don’t care.

Why? Kavanaugh is not a ‘scalia justice,’ but he does fit the mold as a smaller, more limited govt. guy who’s expertise is pruning the entrenched administrative state, and – like Trump – he suits my purpose.

So call him a rapist, or a racist, or a bigot, hater, misogynist, homophobe, xenophobe, whatever. I just don’t care. Kavanaugh suits my purpose of smaller, more limited government.

Sukk it Leftists. I look forward to these lying women being convicted of their crimes.

    I understand you position. It is counter productive in this case. To concede the point that stuff like this happens all the time, it to concede that Justice Kavanaugh has done things like this, but cant be proven.


    Justice Kavanaugh NEVER treated a single women with disrespect. That is the only way to shut down these liars of the left.

      Agreed. We need to stop giving away key terrain, no matter how small. And while virtue is it’s own reward, it’s wrong that someone who has endured temptation and done the right thing, usual at some entertainment or opportunity cost, should be lumped in with all the Alpha Jerks anyway.

      I groan whenever a conservative grants that Hillary “won” the popular vote. We need to contest even the little lies today, if for no other reason than to exercise those muscles to fight the bigger lies tomorrow. If we allow them to atrophy we will fall back into Failure Theater and Not This Hill again.

        Milhouse in reply to Fen. | November 4, 2018 at 12:37 pm

        But you’re giving away the opposite ground, that were the allegations true he’d be disqualified. Whichever position one takes can appear to cede ground, because the truth is that the allegations are both false and irrelevant.

      iowan2, You misunderstand. I don’t concede or excuse anything in this matter. Mine is total apathy to any accusation. As long as the nominee or candidate suits my purpose, and as long as there’s not a criminal conviction for a capital crime against that person, I just don’t care about any accusation – particularly when it’s 30-40 years ago.

Should the Dems win the House, they will make history’s kangaroo courts look amateurish. They will summon the modern day Witch of Endor to channel the spirits of Beria and the like into the Dem committees.

    Milhouse in reply to alaskabob. | November 4, 2018 at 12:39 pm

    The woman of En-Dor actually did summon Samuel, though it seems her success surprised and frightened her, much more than it did Saul, who was, after all, expecting it.

      alaskabob in reply to Milhouse. | November 5, 2018 at 5:06 pm

      Yes she did and Saul didn’t fare well for it.

      (Remember the Twilight Zone episode where the huckster is paid to raise the town’s dead and then instills fear in the people and they pay to have him reverse the spell… only to leave the town later not knowing his last incantation did raise the dead.)

This report will have little effect, as it presumes Kavanaugh’s detractors were interested in discovery of the truth:

“The Left doesn’t really believe in the things they lecture the rest of us about”

What they DID believe in was
1) somehow delaying the Kavanaugh vote until after the midterms, gambling they might gain the Senate majority needed to block his confirmation, and
2) failing that, generate outrage among their base to increase turnout for the midterm elections.

They may have been successful enough with option 2 to give them the margin to takeover tha House. We’ll see.

I’m frustrated that it appears the Democrats will suffer no significant consequence for their actions. Ford, her attorneys, and the women who were referred to DOJ for false statements will be let off the hook or be given the Eric Clanton Wrist Slap.

Democrats will not be shamed by this report into dropping their bumper sticker slogans about Justice Gang Rape (see. Bush Lied Troops Died, Hands Up Dont Shoot, etc)

The only silver lining I see is the Dems telegraphed their best strategy for defeating Ginsburg’s replacement. We’ll be ready for them.

    Milhouse in reply to Fen. | November 4, 2018 at 12:44 pm

    This report will have little effect, as it presumes Kavanaugh’s detractors were interested in discovery of the truth:

    It’s not aimed at them, it’s aimed at the vast bulk of their supporters, who sincerely believed their bullsh*t.

“the Dr. Ford she knew had an active and robust social life in college.”

When I say I had an “active and robost social life” in college, I mean that I slept with as many women as possible.

Or do they mean she was president of the local chess club? Because I slept with all the girls in my chest club too.

What gets lost in this whole affair, is the role of the Senate Judiciary Committee investigators. The full time investigators have the power to compel testimony from potential witnesses. A power the FBI lacks, because the FBI is not conducting a criminal investigate, rather a background check.
The Senate Investigators, split between the majority leader, and the ranking leader, have always in the past worked in equal teams, to provide a non-partisan report of the facts.
Senator Feinstein shredded that norm. She refused to allow the investigators under her control to team up with the investigators sent by Chairman Grassely, to interview potential witnesses. Feinsteins motive was to preserve the ability of Democrats to question the conclusions found in this final report.
Feinstien should be shunned by all Republicans as a liar that refuses to work together with Republicans on committee work, and whose word in the Senate in no longer taken seriously.

    Is there any process to censure and remove her from the committee? Because that’s the least that should happen.

      iowan2 in reply to Fen. | November 4, 2018 at 11:46 am

      Sure. But the Senate with its rules of decorum, that only tie the hands of Republicans, requires Democrats to go along. The media won’t help in shaming the Dems, so I don’t see the proper steps being taken. If the dems had any shame, they would be investigating the “truth about Kavanaugh. They all claimed it was out there, just didn’t have enough time to dig it up. Hell Feinstein could still be directing her investigators to find the evidence. Even the Dems knew it was all for show. But again, the media is not going to hold them accountable for their actions, and a handful of Republicans will be shamed by the media for not letting go and moving forward, despite their support for the OLD non collusion investigation.

      Milhouse in reply to Fen. | November 4, 2018 at 12:46 pm

      Censure her, yes. But only Schumer can remove her from the committee.

Conclusion: Nothing that conservatives didn’t know and nothing that Democrats will believe. They’ll be whispering, shouting and screaming the same allegations every time Kavanaugh’s name comes up until they die.

The most important word in the report is the title that keeps appearing in front of Kavanaugh’s name.

“But he may have colluded with the Russians.” Adam Schiff

“Final Point: On Tuesday, remember what Dems did to Kavanaugh.”


R E M E M B E R T H E K A V A N O!!!

Oops, let’s try that again:

R E M E M B E R   T H E   K A V A N O ! ! !

Timely public drop for the report. Glad to see them playing the full 60 minutes.

I read the 28-page report and found it thoroughly fascinating. I am looking forward to reading the dem’s report. Please post it, Professor, once the dems release it.

DouglasJBender | November 4, 2018 at 2:12 pm

I thought allegations — if sufficiently serious, and made by liberal women against conservatives — were enough to count as evidence proving guilt. Or maybe I have misunderstood Democrats and liberals.

regulus arcturus | November 4, 2018 at 4:35 pm

Time for prosecutions for the false accusers and their lawyers.

Ms. Harris and Mr (?) Booker need to spend some quality time in prison too.

One thing that really hit me, in a good way, is that they are investigating Mclean for witness tampering. The Republicans need to hit this hard, once one of these who were involved in trying to influence the vote of Kavanaugh falls, the others will begin to be lined up. Mclean is not going down by herself. This could mean her pension as well as jail time. Seeing they are looking further into this give me the warm fuzzies.

The testimony of that one man who was kissing Ford, well first, man don’t you have any decency???, and from the sounds of it Ford took an event which was true and conflated the whole thing into something far darker.

Ford is a SJW, she was at the right place at the right time, and was used as a weapon. Feinstein even expressed some doubt … till she didn’t. That was DF’s last hurrah in being honest. She was hedging a little because she knew it was a set up, and it all will land in her lap.

Those who lied about all the allegations need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent possible. Nail these buggers and others might not be so willing to be DNC pawns the next time.

After this they should investigate those allegations against Moore. While I don’t think he would have been great, any R is far better than and D of today’s persuasion.

    Barry in reply to oldgoat36. | November 4, 2018 at 9:50 pm

    “After this they should investigate those allegations against Moore.”

    Agreed. It will happen on a cold day in hell.

The timing tells the tale. If the accusations had merit, then they could have raised the Ford allegations at the “right” time — when they were received, or at least when the hearings started — and it would have accomplished their goal of delaying the confirmation vote and putting pressure on the president to withdraw the nomination.

But instead, the allegations were so empty that the whole investigation would have been over in plenty of time for the confirmation vote.

By waiting until the hearings were over, they implicitly admitted there was no real substance to the accusations, and that they were desperate for something to delay the vote.

Where are those who were screaming “Believe the Woman” now that Swetnick, McLean, Ramirez, and Munro-Leighton have been exposed? Munro-Leighton admitted that her accusation was a “tactic.” Do we believe her?
The silence is deafening.