Forums - Politics Discussion - 'I was angry and I sent it': Another Justice Brett Kavanaugh accuser referred to FBI after recanting

"Woman Says She Made False Claims About Kavanaugh, Now She’s Been Referred to the FBI

 

by Chuck Ross

 

A woman who acknowledged falsely accusing Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh of rape is being referred to the FBI and Department of Justice for investigation, according to an official letter.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said in a letter sent Friday to FBI Director Christopher Wray and Attorney General Jeff Sessions that the woman, Judy Munro-Leighton, admitted Thursday that she falsely claimed in an email to committee staff on Oct. 3 that Kavanaugh and a friend had raped her.

In the email, Munro-Leighton claimed to be the author of an anonymous letter sent to California Democratic Sen. Kamala Harris on Sept. 19. In that letter, a person who signed the letter as “Jane Doe” claimed Kavanaugh and a friend raped her in the back of a car.

Grassley, an Iowa Republican, said investigators quickly discovered that Munro-Leighton was a “left-wing activist” who is decades older than Kavanaugh.

RELATED: Grassley Refers Avenatti, Swetnick To FBI For Investigation ]

But after reaching Munro-Leighton on Thursday, she admitted “that she had not been sexually assaulted by Judge Kavanaugh and was not the author of the original Jane Doe letter.”"

 

http://tennesseestar.com/2018/11/04/woman-says-she-made-false-claims-about-kavanaugh-now-shes-been-referred-to-the-fbi/

 

"Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley has referred attorney Michael Avenatti and his client, Julie Swetnick, to the Justice Department and FBI for investigation into their claims about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

“I am writing to refer Mr. Michael Avenatti and Ms. Julie Swetnick for investigation,” Grassley, an Iowa Republican, wrote in a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions and FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Grassley alleges that Avenatti and Swetnick engaged in a “potential conspiracy to provide materially false statements to Congress and obstruct a congressional committee investigation.”

Avenatti, a potential Democratic presidential candidate in 2020, came forward as the attorney for Swetnick just days before Kavanaugh testified before the Senate Judiciary panel about allegations from Christine Blasey Ford, a California psychologist who claimed that Kavanaugh attempted to sexually assault her when they were in high school in 1982."

 

https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/25/avenatti-swetnick-fbi-doj-grassley/

 

well i didn't see this coming, especially after all the claims being made that women have nothing to gain from doing this stuff. discuss.




Around the Network

Shocker.



I am currently sigless.

Democrats are disgusting, what else is new.



o_O.Q said:

[...]

[...]

You might want to get rid of the auto ad.



 
I WON A BET AGAINST AZUREN! WOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

:3

At least the FBI will probably question her. They didn't even bother questioning the woman who credibly (GOP members and Trump's own words) accused Kavanaugh after taking and passing the most accurate type of polygraph, while Kavanaugh refused to do the same and opposed an FBI investigation every time he was asked.

Wouldn't be surprising if the real author of the Jane Doe letter was sincere.
That said, people who make false accusations need to be properly punished by the law.

Last edited by Hiku - on 04 November 2018

Around the Network
Hiku said:

At least the FBI will probably question her. They didn't even bother questioning the woman who credibly (GOP members and Trump's own words) accused Kavanaugh after taking and passing the most accurate type of polygraph, while Kavanaugh refused to do the same and opposed an FBI investigation every time he was asked.

Wouldn't be surprising if the real author of the Jane Doe letter was sincere.
That said, people who make false accusations need to be properly punished by the law.

" They didn't even bother questioning the woman who credibly (GOP members and Trump's own words) accused Kavanaugh after taking and passing the most accurate type of polygraph"

apparently ford lied about coaching for polygraph tests

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/ex-boyfriend-christine-blasey-ford-polygraph.html

 

i thought they were all credible btw? what happened to #believewomen?

 

", while Kavanaugh refused to do the same and opposed an FBI investigation every time he was asked."

he was investigated by the fbi numerous times previously

Last edited by o_O.Q - on 04 November 2018

o_O.Q said:
Hiku said:

At least the FBI will probably question her. They didn't even bother questioning the woman who credibly (GOP members and Trump's own words) accused Kavanaugh after taking and passing the most accurate type of polygraph, while Kavanaugh refused to do the same and opposed an FBI investigation every time he was asked.

Wouldn't be surprising if the real author of the Jane Doe letter was sincere.
That said, people who make false accusations need to be properly punished by the law.

" They didn't even bother questioning the woman who credibly (GOP members and Trump's own words) accused Kavanaugh after taking and passing the most accurate type of polygraph"

apparently ford lied about coaching for polygraph tests

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/ex-boyfriend-christine-blasey-ford-polygraph.html

 

i thought they were all credible btw? what happened to #believewomen?

 

", while Kavanaugh refused to do the same and opposed an FBI investigation every time he was asked."

he was investigated by the fbi numerous times previously

First of all, are you capable of commenting without generalizing people under positions they've never once held in their life?
It would be nice if you and people like yourself would refrain from constantly doing that, as it does nothing but waste the time of people having to defend themselves from a position they never held in the first place.

If you ever saw me say say something specific, call me out on it. If not, don't do this BS where you're assuming that everyone you talk to is of the same cookiecutter mindset you've convinced yourself of. It's incredibly toxic.

I've never once said "women are all credible". And not only because that's an idiotic statement. I've said "accusers should be heard."
But thanks for assuming otherwise.

As for the accusation you link to, that's an alleged former boyfriend that someone told the New York Times is a man named Brian Merrick. Get back to me when a man with that name comes forward, testifies under oath, or passes a polygraph test, which is what she did about Kavanaugh. Because a statement from someone who may or may not be who NYT's source thinks he is, is not the equivalent of a polygraph test and a testimony under oath. Especially when his story is contested by the person she supposedly helped.

What's your criteria for believing this alleged boyfriend? Because my criteria was pretty simple. Those who take and pass the most accurate type of polygraph, and those who ask for an FBI investigation look much more credible than those who refuse to take a polygraph (even after speaking very highly of them previously) and oppose an FBI investigation every time they're asked.


^Kavanaugh's words.

Not to mention him obviously committing perjury by claiming Devil's Triangle is a drinking game, among other things. And he's a judge. Who seemingly thinks it's ok to lie under oath. But it's ok to have a supreme court justice who doesn't give two shits about the oath? And it's not the first time he seemingly lied under oath, which is a criminal offense. Two other occasions were discovered in the hundreds of thousand pages of documents that the GOP didn't want Democrats to read until 15 hours before the hearing. And a criminal investigation into this was initiated in Washington, but as you know the GOP were not interested in waiting for the outcome of it, but decided to push him through as soon as possible as their candidate regardless of that.
And it was several GOP members own words that Ford was credible overall.

And regardless of previous FBI investigations, once she stepped forward with this allegation, took a polygraph, and other former classmates of his started talking about how they remember another woman claiming he pressed his junk in her face at a party, which sparked another investigation and accusation, Kavanaugh would always refer to "whatever the committee wants to do" whenever he was asked if the FBI should investigate these charges. And as was well known, the committee made it perfectly clear that they saw no need for an FBI investigation. If I were innocent I would beg for an FBI investigation. He instead chose to make himself look infinitely more suspicious in front of millions of Americans and people overseas.
And when asked to take the polygraph that he previously explained serve law enforcement to deem not only the credibility of witnesses, but also who is suited for critical law enforcement positions, both of which are relevant in this case, he suddenly doesn't want to and says they are unreliable.

Yeah that's not a bad look when your accuser passes the polygraph and asks for an investigation, and you do the opposite. Remove all the politics, and everyone would think the same.

As for Ford, it's possible she may not have been truthful about some details. Just like Kavanaugh seemingly lied about things like the meaning of certain words to appear to be different than he actually was, I can understand the reasoning behind that. But she is not a fedaral judge lying under oath. And when it comes to the events she described, which is that Kavanaugh pulled her into a room, turned up the music and covered her mouth while trying to remove her clothes, she passed the most accurate type of polygraph, according to the former FBI agent who administered it. That, along with calling for an FBI investigation weighs a lot more than dodging polygraphs and opposing an investigation.

Last edited by Hiku - on 05 November 2018

So that means all the additional accusations after the first one are proven false, right? So ridiculous, and frankly sick. So glad they didn't get away with using something so serious as sexual assault to destroy an innocent man



Nothing to see here, move along

He still isn't fit for the supreme court. He was angry and shouting like crazy. I wouldn't want that for my supreme court justice. Just an outsider's perspective who's neither democrat not republican and as impartial as possible.



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

Hiku said:

They didn't even bother questioning the woman who credibly (GOP members and Trump's own words) accused Kavanaugh after taking and passing the most accurate type of polygraph.

Was there something more Ford wanted to tell the FBI that she couldn't tell the Senate?  What's the basis of this complaint?

Not to mention him obviously committing perjury by claiming Devil's Triangle is a drinking game, among other things. And he's a judge. Who seemingly thinks it's ok to lie under oath. But it's ok to have a supreme court justice who doesn't give two shits about the oath?

Several people have confirmed that Devil's Triangle was a drinking game both at Kavanaugh's school and also by people who say Kavanaugh taught him the game.

And if you think they're all lying, I'll remind you that the term was used several times in that yearbook.  And then I'll also remind you that this was the early-80s and we're talking about a bunch of boys at a prep school.  Now, do you think it's likely that there was a ton of guys at Kavanaugh's school that yelled out to the world that they liked to get naked with other dudes?

The devil's triangle perjury is wishful thinking.

And it's not the first time he seemingly lied under oath, which is a criminal offense. Two other occasions were discovered in the hundreds of thousand pages of documents that the GOP didn't want Democrats to read until 15 hours before the hearing. And a criminal investigation into this was initiated in Washington, but as you know the GOP were not interested in waiting for the outcome of it, but decided to push him through as soon as possible as their candidate regardless of that.

The two charges of perjury that Democrats had previously been making were specious at best and relied on reading individual sentences instead of the broader scope of the answers.  For example, in one Kavanaugh said he wasn't handling Pickering's nomination.  Democrats found an email where he talked about the Pickering nomination.

Aha right!?  Well, no.  Kavanaugh, in his original testimony went on to say that he was somewhat involved and may even have participated in a mock hearing with him.  "Handling" meant more that Pickering was his judge.

Aside, Pickering was falsely accused of racism by Democrats.  So smearing a person's good name for political reasons is an old game for Democrats.

Same thing with the other one involving Democrats having their emails leaked.  Democrats actually knew this back when Kavanaugh was first confirmed as a Circuit judge, but didn't even accuse him of perjury back then, not because they didn't have documents, but because it was a ridiculous charge as it didn't contradict his full statement.

BTW, those leaked Democrat emails?  Well, they showed Democrats getting together to deny a Latino a judgeship specifically because they were afraid that he'd become the first Hispanic Supreme Court justice.  The method they decided to use?  Well, they just kept demanding documents be released until the Bush administration had to exert executive privilege, and then Democrats made him (Miguel Estrada) the first nominee ever killed by a filibuster.

Yeah, Democrats have been playing the game of making unreasonable demands for documents and then using it as an excuse for killing a nominee as well.  It's a favorite strategy.

Eagle367 said:
He still isn't fit for the supreme court. He was angry and shouting like crazy. I wouldn't want that for my supreme court justice. Just an outsider's perspective who's neither democrat not republican and as impartial as possible.

His reputation and life will never be the same.  His life will be permanently in danger because of this.  He has lost a job over this.  His daughters will face consequences.  His wife will face consequences.  This will be the first thing mentioned when he dies.

There's a certain smugness in the whole notion that having basic human emotions in response to an injustice is itself disqualifying.  It's not just you, I know that the final argument made against him was, "Well, we can't prove this, but look, he didn't take his public humiliation with humility.  That proves he's not qualified."  However, it's a ridiculous standard to put someone up against.

Last edited by NightlyPoe - on 05 November 2018