Oh Yes Colorado, They Blew Off Deborah Ramirez

Judge Brett Kavanaugh (R-apey).

Colorado Public Radio’s Nathaniel Minor confirms what attorneys for Boulder domestic violence counselor Deborah Ramirez have been warning for days, that the FBI investigation into Ramirez’s allegations against U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was very far from thorough:

An attorney for Deborah Ramirez, a Boulder woman who accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct while they attended Yale more than three decades ago, says the Federal Bureau of Investigation did not allow its agents to fully investigate her claims.

William Pittard, a Washington D.C.-based lawyer representing Ramirez, wrote a scathing three-page letter to FBI director Chris Ray Thursday. In it, Pittard write that agents interviewed Ramirez last Sunday in Boulder. She answered a “host of detailed questions,” them provided agents with a list of more than 20 additional witnesses that could have corroborated her claims.

But the FBI never permitted its agents to contact those witnesses, Pittard wrote.

“We are deeply disappointed by this failure,” he wrote. “We can only conclude that the FBI—or those controlling its investigation—did not want to learn the truth behind Ms. Ramirez’s allegations.” [Pols emphasis]

The apparent lack of due diligence by the FBI in following up with witnesses identified by Ramirez is similar to complaints from attorneys representing Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who accused Kavanaugh of attempted forcible sexual assault. Because Dr. Ford testified last week before the Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI reportedly hasn’t even followed up with either her or with Judge Kavanaugh. In Ramirez’s case, we have numerous corroborating witnesses who were never contacted at all. And yet:

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said Thursday there’s no corroboration of sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in a supplementary FBI report submitted to the Senate.

This seems like a ridiculously obvious question, but how can anyone assert there is “no corroboration” when the witnesses the alleged victim identified who can corroborate the accusation weren’t even contacted? How can anyone with basic critical thinking skills accept this as a satisfactory answer? This is the same Charles Grassley who dismissed compelling evidence that emerged this week indicating Kavanaugh lied under oath about his foreknowledge of the allegations from Deborah Ramirez.

With all of this in mind, it does appear that this investigation, though carried out by career law enforcement whose motives are above reproach, was designed to fail. You don’t demand corroboration, then prevent investigators from obtaining that corroboration, unless you never wanted it to begin with.

84 Shares

17 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. bullshit!bullshit! says:

    Incredibly, the Rs have convinced themselves this will help them because of how pissed off white men are that Kavanaugh's getting called out for youthful rapeyness. I think they're getting high on their own supply.

    • gertie97 says:

      Unfortunately for Republicans, their target demo of pissed-off white men has topped out. But white women, particularly independents, are growing more pissed off by the day, courtesy of GOP office-holders and candidates saying increasingly stupid things.

       

  2. JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

    Well, here's one more take on the overall process

    “The process has been bad but at the end of the day you have to make a decision and I have made that decision,” Heitkamp told WDAY radio in Fargo, North Dakota. “I will be voting no on Judge Kavanaugh.”

    Now down to Manchin among Democrats, Flake, Collins and Murkowski on Republicans … and will need 3 of 4 to block the nomination.

    • RepealAndReplace says:

      WOW, I am impressed. She is principled.

      My Machiavellian mind would have told her to keep your powder dry, pass during the initial roll call vote, see how Manchin and Murkowski vote, and only when you know it won't be an exercise in futility, vote to kill the nomination.

      If he is going to be confirmed by all three undecided Republicans voting "aye," or  two undecided Republicans plus Manchin voting "aye," why fall on your sword for pure symbolism.

      By the way, I bet Manchin votes "No" as well. He is safely ahead in the polls to weather the Category Five Trump Stink that will be unleashed on West Virginia.

      • DavieDavie says:

        Looks like Kavanaugh has at least 50 votes, because neither Collins nor Flake will cross McConnell, even as they doth protest too much.

        The two Republicans, Senators Jeff Flake of Arizona and Susan Collins of Maine, did not say that they will vote for Judge Kavanaugh, President Trump’s second Supreme Court nominee. But after a closed-door briefing in which Republicans were told that no witnesses corroborated the accounts of Judge Kavanaugh’s main accusers, both made positive remarks.

        “It appears to be a very thorough investigation, but I am going back later today to personally read the interviews,” Ms. Collins said. “That’s really all I have to say right now.”

        I hope Murkowski is still skeptical of Kavanaugh's character and truthfulness, although when (not if) Flake, well, flakes, it won’t really matter.

        • RepealAndReplace says:

          And Murkowski has successfully stood up to the RWNJs in the GOP when she ran as a write-in candidate against Tea Bagger Joe Miller.

          Collins fears a primary in 2020. I get that. But why would Flake give a rat’s ass about incurring the wrath of Yertle?

          • MichaelBowmanMichaelBowman says:

            Murkowski has all the cover she needs to vote no. 

          • Duke CoxDuke Cox says:

            Never telegraph your punches…

            Heitkampf has started a narrative that can provide impetus for others. Now is a good time to move. Kavanaugh has disappeared….he has not spoken to the FBI. They cannot count on him to not perjure himself to the FBI…a federal crime.

            He is not suited to serve on the high court.

          • DavieDavie says:

            R&R — it's not that Flake is afraid of McConnell, it's just his modus operandi to make a dramatic objection, then fall in line with the party.  He made his dramatic gesture, and now that that box has been checked, his conscience is clear to vote Yes.

            Flake said Thursday morning that he agreed with Collins' pronouncement that the investigation was thorough.

            When asked by CNN if he was more inclined to support Kavanaugh after leaving the staff briefing on the report, Flake responded, "we've seen no additional corroborating information" to the claims against Kavanaugh, and added he needs to finish reviewing the material.

            Flake pushed for the FBI probe last Friday following a day full of highly-charged testimony from Kavanaugh and the woman who accused him of sexual assault, Christine Blasey Ford. Flake agreed to vote Kavanaugh's nomination out of committee with a favorable recommendation on the condition that the FBI further investigate the allegations against Kavanaugh, a push that Collins and Murkowski publicly supported.

            • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

              Of course, early in the week, he was saying that ANY lying would disqualify Kavanaugh.

              On the good side, some on Daily Kos are reporting that Flake wants to talk with Coons again.

              Vote tomorrow may be complicated … Sen Daines apparently thinks his daughter's wedding, long planned for this weekend, is more important than a Senate vote. It sounds like he's out of DC now, won't be back until Sunday morning …

  3. Because she hears the voice of an assault survivor in CBF and thinks it's the right move.also because her opponent has been very "boys will be boys" about the whole thing and this provides moral daylight to her campaign.

  4. RepealAndReplace says:

    Brian Williams is claiming on MSNBC that Cory Gardner's vote may be in play. Has Williams stayed at the "Ski Party" a little too long?

    • JohnInDenverJohnInDenver says:

      Denver Post was reporting the same thing.

      It could be Cory has an itch based on the FBI not even talking to one of his constituents …. or he may be hesitating to see if he can get a promise for something he wants.

       

      • notaskinnycooknotaskinnycook says:

        I think you've got it, JiD. He's looking to make a deal about something; maybe even close to home. I wonder if he's angling for Bennet's support on some Republican wish list item in exchange for his "no" on the judge. 

        • DavieDavie says:

          Gardner is definitely playing the tease, providing conflicting indications last night

          Later on Thursday, Politico reporter Burgess Everett tweeted that Gardner was sticking with Kavanaugh: “New statement: ‘Senator Gardner has been supportive of Judge Kavanaugh throughout the nomination. He had the opportunity to review the FBI report tonight. Nothing in the report changed his mind and he remains supportive of Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination.’ ”

          Interestingly though, was this note:

          Before going to read the report Thursday evening, Gardner spent about 40 minutes meeting with 16 women from Colorado — the majority of whom are survivors of sexual violence.

          I guess we'll find out what he said to them later, after he votes for Kavanaugh.

          • mamajama55mamajama55 says:

            I already know what Cory said to the survivors:

            "Look, I feel your pain. I'm listening. I'm nodding sympathetically. I'm smiling, but not too widely.  I practiced this morning for a half an hour, so I shouldn't be showing too many teeth right now.

            Sexual assault is bad. Really awful. Nobody should have to go through that. But Judge Kavanaugh deserves due process. Believe me, (grin) I will review all of the evidence that the FBI could investigate by talking to three people in three days. At the end of the day, I will do what's best for the American people. But I'm listening to you. Please remember in 2020 that I listened to you women, and I smiled and nodded and agreed that rape is a really awful thing."

  5. RepealAndReplace says:

    I cannot and will not believe that Gardner is even remotely capable of being one of the only Republicans, if not the only Republican, to vote again this guy. Ain't gonna happen. (Although wouldn't it be a treat to watch Fluffy try to spin that one!)

    We all know that Gardner is tool who will do what he was designed to do. Tow the party line, Senator. Some day they will thank you.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.