NYT Reveals FBI Also Refused to Interview 25 Potential Witnesses in Previously Reported Allegation of Sexual Assault

The New York Times published a bombshell story Saturday night, reporting that a man had contacted the FBI during the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of Brett Kavanaugh. He alleged, according to the Times, that Kavanaugh was at a drunken dorm party with his pants pulled down, and “friends pushed [Kavanaugh’s] penis into the hand of a female student.”

The witness “notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate.”

The Times also took a deep dive into the public allegations made by Deborah Ramirez during the Kavanaugh hearings.

“She and some classmates had been drinking heavily when, she says, a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at her, prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it,” which had been previously reported.

“During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been ‘the talk of campus.’ Our reporting suggests that it was,” the Times reveals.

“At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time.”

The Times reports the FBI did not investigate, despite the Kavanaugh hearings having been put on hold, supposedly to investigate allegations of sexual misconduct, including alleged sexual violence.

“Ms. Ramirez’s legal team gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the bureau — in its supplemental background investigation — interviewed none of them, though we learned many of these potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I. on their own,” the Times continues.

Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.” But the Republican-controlled Senate had imposed strict limits on the investigation. “‘We have to wait to get authorization to do anything else,’” Bill Pittard, one of Ms. Ramirez’s lawyers, recalled the agents saying. “It was almost a little apologetic.”

The Times chose to hide this reporting in its opinion pages as “news analysis.”

This bombshell reporting comes on the heels of another bombshell: Attorney General Bill Barr is giving a prestigious Dept. of Justice award, generally reserved for agents whose investigations uncover, say, attempted terrorism. This year the recipients will be those FBI agents who, as the Times reported separately, worked “to support the nomination” of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh was confirmed by a 50-48 vote in the Senate.

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

In a stunning move iAttorney General Bill Barr’s Dept of Justice late Friday afternoon filed a 40-page brief with a federal court, declaring the House Judiciary Committee’s impeachment inquiry is not an impeachment inquiry, in an attempt to block release of files related to the Mueller probe.

It appears to be an unprecedented act, in which the top law enforcement agency is attempting to block Congress from carrying out its constitutional duties.

The DOJ is attempting to block the release of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s grand jury files, according to Politico. House Democrats have frequently said they cannot make an impeachment decision without the underlying materials from Mueller’s exhaustive investigation.

Politico’s Kyle Cheney and Andrew Desiderio broke the story, heralding the developments via Twitter:

BREAKING: DOJ has filed a 40-page brief arguing that the Judiciary Committee’s “impeachment investigation” really isn’t one. Cites Pelosi and Hoyer’s statements form *yesterday* as evidence.

Story w/ @AndrewDesiderio TK pic.twitter.com/4nPA246NV4

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 13, 2019

This is really bad for House Dems. DOJ has already seized on their inconsistent and head-spinning messaging on impeachment to argue that they should not be granted access to Mueller’s grand-jury files—bc the cornerstone of their argument is that they’re in an impeachment probe. https://t.co/QZEs4zlaw9

— Andrew Desiderio (@AndrewDesiderio) September 13, 2019

UPDATE:

They also note that Nadler himself insisted as recently as late July that his committee was not conducting an impeahcment inquiry because of the various possible outcomes. pic.twitter.com/oRrDDq3SvU

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 13, 2019

DOJ goes even further to say that Nixon-era precedents don't suggest Congress has a right to grand jury material under a "judicial proceeding" exemption.

Even House Republicans have argued that the Senate removal trial is a judicial proceeding — so this goes way beyond that. pic.twitter.com/yjqVuA9qtG

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) September 13, 2019

Developing…

This is a breaking news and developing story. Details may change. This story will be updated, and NCRM will likely publish follow-up stories on this news. Stay tuned and refresh for updates.

Attorneys for former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe are urging federal prosecutors to drop the case against him, saying it is “clear” the grand jury refused to indict him. McCabe has been a target of President Donald Trump and some believe the attempt to prosecute him is political, or an effort to go after the president’s political enemies.

Noting that both The New York Times and the Washington Post “published stories suggesting that the grand jury may have declined to vote in favor of charges,” McCabe’s attorney writes “the only fair and just result is for you to accept the grand jury’s decision and end these proceedings.”

They also warn that if the grand jury declined to indict, “the justice manual compels you not to resubmit the case to the same or a different grand jury.”

The Washington Post adds that McCabe’s legal team “has asked federal prosecutors in D.C. whether a grand jury had rejected their bid to indict the FBI’s former acting director on charges of lying to investigators, pointing to media inquiries and news accounts detailing a series of unusual events in the case.”

The letter was posted to Twitter by Politico national security correspondent Natasha Bertrand, who is also an MSNBC contributor.

Just in: Andrew McCabe’s legal team says in a new letter to Jesse Liu that based on their conversations with the US Attorney’s office in DC yesterday, “it is clear that no indictment has been returned” against McCabe by the grand jury. pic.twitter.com/XtMTelYqEv

— Natasha Bertrand (@NatashaBertrand) September 13, 2019