then i think that s going to call into question who told the fbi not to meet with her. so your client, to be clear, julie swetnick, is claiming that she attended parties during the 1980s when she was a high school student that included boys from georgetown prep, including mark judge and brett kavanaugh, according to julie swetnick, there were girls that were being inebriated with alcohol, rendered unconscious and then essentially run trains on, to use the colloquial term, gang raped. she said this happened to her. she s not saying michael avenatti did it she s not saying that brett kavanaugh did it. but michael, you have said that she s got corroborating witnesses, that these included boys that were high school and college boys. do you have names of those witnesses that you are now submitting to the fbi? well, we have names of a number of the witnesses, and i ve spoken to a number of the witnesses and we are anxious to submit those names to the fbi. joy, i want to be clear. i urg
devil s triangle. at the hearing on thursday, judge kavanaugh denied that those had anything to do with sex. what the fbi will do is to go to his prep schoolmates and if he s exposed if judge kavanaugh is exposed to have been lying on thursday when he said it wasn t about sex, that s just not about his credibility, it s about whether he committed perjury in front of the senate. there s an open-ended question that the fbi always asks at the end of these investigations. is there anything else you think we should know about this person s character and fitness? when judge kavanaugh s yale and georgetown prep classmates answer that question, i don t think those answers are going to be helpful to his appointment. to go back to you on this, greg, if they re going to go back now and test the things that were said under oath by brett kavanaugh, the thing he kept saying was that his calendars, these calendars that he kept are the key to
friends of his. but back to the swetnick allegation for you, paul, if, for instance, this fbi investigation and her interviews and interviews with her kra corroborators, who michael avenatti says he wants to make available to the fbi, let s just say that uncovered what appeared to be crimes. could the maryland district attorney say i see crimes here and prosecute them? yeah, so the statute of limitations in maryland for rape is nonexistent. those cases can be brought at any time. for other crimes, say misdemeanor sexual assault, the statute would have expired. i was nodding earlier, joy, because you re right, other things always come out during these investigations. for example, judge kavanaugh s yearbook contains what appears to be crude misogynist references. things like renatte alumnus, fff
investigation as ken starr s hatchet man, certainly unethically leaking back then. we saw him lying about drinking. we saw him lying about sex. we saw him lying about the folks who were at the party where he insisted they refuted charges when they just said they couldn t recollect them. he has a huge credibility problem coming out of this. i do think he rallied troops to his side. there s no question about that. there s also a possibility, if this thing ends up getting derailed that it won t matter. it will be an oppressive effect on the vote for this loss. carrie, i ll come back, david knows brett kavanaugh personally. he came up with him through the sort of partisan world of operatives and media people. they were part of the same crew. he knows him. he says the angry political operative we saw, that is who brett kavanaugh is. do you take david brock s knowledge of him personally to
and file a criminal complaint and that s true. if these events happened in maryland, which they did obviously in this case, obviously that is an option open to them. i think this is critically important to distinguish between what the senate judiciary committee is supposed to be doing. part of what s been so problematic about the hearing process is that and this also goes directly to mr. avenatti s point. the question is how credible is he and is there reason to be concerned, not whether there s evidence that would convict him of a crime, because it is about whether to seat him in a supreme court seat. so the fact that this declaration that there s a witness who says actually the conduct and behavior that he is denying is actually conduct and behavior that i myself witnessed is relevant, and i think mr. avenatti is absolutely right to draw attention to that point. the question i have because it s problematic to me that the committee has been treating it this way is it s almost like i