Ahead of pivotal Senate hearing, witnesses surface to say Christine Ford may have mistaken them for Kavanaugh

As an extraordinary series of uncorroborated, lurid last-minute allegations threatens to derail his confirmation to the Supreme Court, nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Ford, the California professor accusing him of sexually assaulting her more than three decades ago, are set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday morning.
The proceedings may be upended by late-breaking developments: In a statement released Wednesday evening, Judiciary Committee Republicans revealed that on Monday, they conducted their "first interview with a man who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of his [sic] complaint." They conducted a second interview the next day.
On Wednesday, Republicans said in the statement, they received a "more in-depth written statement from the man interviewed twice previously who believes he, not Judge Kavanuagh, had the encounter in question with Dr. Ford." GOP investigators also spoke on the phone with another man making a similar claim.
Ford has previously said there is "zero chance" she would have confused Kavanaugh for anyone else.
In response, an aide to Democrats on the Judiciary Committee reportedly unloaded on Senate Republicans: "Republicans are flailing," the aide said, according to NBC News. "They are desperately trying to muddy the waters. ... Twelve hours before the hearing they suggest two anonymous men claimed to have assaulted her. Democrats were never informed of these assertions in interviews, in violation of Senate rules."
The aide, before again calling for an FBI probe into Ford's accusations, added, "This is shameful and the height of irresponsibility."
But Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, shot back on Twitter late Wednesday, writing, "Some might find it exceedingly difficult to imagine Judiciary Committee Democrats expressing this complaint with straight faces."
Ford first brought her allegations to the attention of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., in July, but Feinstein didn't disclose the allegations to her Senate colleagues or federal authorities until days before a crucial Judiciary Committee vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation earlier this month. Republicans have accused Feinstein's office of compromising Ford's anonymity by sitting on the allegations until she could deploy them for maximum political gain.
The stakes for Kavanaugh could not be higher: Key swing-vote senators have said Thursday's hearing, which will begin at 10:00 a.m. ET, presents a pivotal opportunity to assess Ford's credibility and determine whether to advance Kavanaugh to the nation's highest court.

The hearing, which for days had been in doubt, will be a chance for the public to see Ford, in person, explain in detail what she claims happened at the Maryland house party in 1982 where Kavanaugh allegedly jumped on top of her and tried to muffle her screams -- and why she didn't tell anyone about the episode until 2012.
The proceedings will commence with opening statements from Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and ranking committee member Feinstein. After taking an oath, Ford will deliver the prepared remarks she has already provided publicly, according to a schedule provided by the committee. Each senator on the committee will then be afforded a single five-minute round of questions, with the opportunity to ask questions alternating between Democrats and Republicans.

Republicans have retained Rachel Mitchell, an experienced sex-crimes prosecutor, to handle some of their questioning, saying it will help avoid an overtly political atmosphere. Grassley has hammered Democrats, including Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., for "grandstanding" during the confirmation hearings earlier this month.
WATCH: CORY BOOKER COMPARES HIMSELF TO GLADIATOR 'SPARTACUS,' CLAIMS HE'S RISKING EXPULSION BY RELEASING CONFIDENTIAL KAVANAUGH DOCS
Democrats have indicated they intend to ask their own questions. After Ford's testimony is completed, the process will repeat for Kavanaugh.

"It's bad -- it's doing damage to the Supreme Court."
- Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh

In her prepared remarks, which Ford's attorney's released in advance on Wednesday, Ford will tell senators that she "thought that Brett [Kavanaugh] was accidentally going to kill me," and "I believed he was going to rape me."
She will explain that she remembers "four boys" being at the party, including one "whose name I cannot recall." The people she did name -- Kavanaugh and his classmates Mark Judge and P.J. Smyth -- have denied under penalty of felony knowing anything about the alleged episode.
Ford will also describe one girl, "my friend Leland Ingham," as also in attendance. Ingham, in a previously released statement, has also denied knowing Kavanaugh or having information about the alleged assault.
POLYGRAPH REPORT REVEALS APPARENT INCONSISTENCIES IN FORD'S CLAIMS

Ford's letter to Feinstein in July, however, gave a different tally, saying that the gathering "included me and 4 others."
Additionally, in a handwritten statement she provided the former FBI agent who administered her polygraph exam in August, Ford wrote "there were 4 boys and a couple of girls" at the party -- again apparently contradicting her letter to Feinstein.
Republicans, through Mitchell, are expected to question Ford on the apparent discrepancies.
Ford is also expected to tell senators that she finally decided to disclose the alleged assault during a therapy session in 2012 because during a remodeling of her house that year, she insisted on installing a "second front door" -- leaving her husband and others wondering why.

Additionally, questions have surfaced concerning the credibility of some of Kavanaugh's other accusers, who will not be present Thursday because they have not responded to overtures from committee Republicans.
For example, Julie Swetnick, who emerged Wednesday to accuse Kavanaugh of participating in "gang rapes" and rape "trains" in the 1980s, had a restraining order filed against her by an ex-boyfriend, Politico reported.
KAVANAUGH FIGHTS BACK, TELLS INVESTIGATORS ALLEGATIONS ARE A 'DISGRACE' THAT WILL KEEP GOOD PEOPLE OUT OF PUBLIC SERVICE
“Right after I broke up with her, she was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time,” Richard Vinneccy told Politico. "I know a lot about her. ... She’s not credible at all. Not at all."
Swetnick is represented by anti-Trump lawyer Michael Avenatti, who has refused multiple requests by the Senate Judiciary Committee to interview her in the past week. On Wednesday afternoon, 60 men and women who attended Kavanaugh's high school or sister schools signed a letter saying they had never heard of Swetnick or anything like the overt, systemic gang raping that she described.
According to The Washington Post, both the state of Maryland and the federal government have filed since-resolved liens on her property in recent years for unpaid taxes totalling tens of thousands of dollars. It was not immediately clear exactly how Swetnick, who has held multiple security clearances relating to her work with the government, resolved both liens.
Republicans, including President Trump, have repeatedly pointed out that none of the sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh has first-hand corroboration. In The New Yorker on Sunday, former Kavanaugh classmate Deborah Ramirez claimed that Kavanaugh had exposed his penis to her at a party decades ago, even as her close college friend denied ever hearing about the episode and suggested she was making the claim for political reasons.
Ramirez, who also did not immediately respond to GOP Judiciary Committee inquiries, has acknowledged not being sure whether Kavanaugh had assaulted her until last week, after she spent days consulting with her attorney.
Several other allegations emerged this week. On Tuesday, a constituent told the office of Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., that in 1985, two "heavily inebriated men" referred to as "Brett and Mark" had sexually assaulted a "close friend" on a boat.
The constituent, whose name was redacted in a document release by the Judiciary Committee but uncovered through tweets cited by the committee, recanted the claim Wednesday night on Twitter -- but several media outlets continued to report the allegations for hours afterwards.
In Twitter posts, the person making the accusation had also evidently advocated removing President Trump from the White House by means of military coup. On Wednesday, a post on the accuser's Twitter account read, "Do everyone who is going crazy about what I had said I have recanted because I have made a mistake and apologize for such mistake."
In a separate case, Kavanaugh was asked by GOP investigators this week specifically about a new claim in a letter received by Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., from an anonymous individual apparently in Denver, alleging that Kavanaugh "shoved" someone up against a wall "very aggressively and sexually" during an outing in front of four witnesses. Gardner's office received the letter on Sept. 22."
"We're dealing with an anonymous letter about an anonymous person and an anonymous friend," Kavanaugh said. "It's ridiculous. Total Twilight Zone. And no, I've never done anything like that.
"It's bad -- it's doing damage to the Supreme Court," Kavanaugh added. "It's doing damage to the country. It's doing damage to this process. It's become a total feeding frenzy, you know? Every -- just unbelievable."

Gregg Re is an editor for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @gregg_re.

Don't Know When, How, or Why Cartoons

'We're not taking Nancy Pelosi's money,' Washington state Dem's campaign says

U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has became a favorite target of Republicans who hope to keep the party's majority ahead of the midterm elections.  (Associated Press)

A first-time Democratic candidate looking to flip a Washington state U.S. House seat appeared to distance herself from party leader Nancy Pelosi during a private fundraiser in the Seattle-area earlier this month.
A spokeswoman for Kim Schrier, who is running against Republican Dino Rossi for the 8th Congressional District seat of retiring U.S. Rep. Dave Reichert, R-Auburn, was recently asked if the candidate attended a fundraiser to support the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
The spokeswoman, Katie Rodihan, responded by pointing to U.S. Rep. Susan DelBene, the finance chair for the DCCC who also hosts a similar fundraiser each year, the Seattle Times reported.
“I believe Suzan DelBene had Nancy Pelosi here for a fundraiser,” Rodihan said. “We’re not taking Nancy Pelosi’s money. We were not hosting the event, not part of it.”

Democrat Kim Schrier is running against Republican Dino Rossi for the 8th Congressional District seat in Washington state.  (Facebook)

When a reporter pressed Rodihan on the question, she said Schrier did stop by and it had not been on her schedule until she was asked to make an appearance at the last minute by DelBene.
Schrier may not be taking Pelosi’s money, but the DCCC has spent around $1.5 million to help her in the form of negative TV ads against Rossi.
Pelosi, D-Calif., the House Minority Leader, has become a lightning rod for Republicans who seek to tie her to Democratic candidates much in the same way Democrats are doing with Republicans running for office and President Trump.
“Kim Schrier would support Nancy Pelosi and raise taxes on hardworking middle-class families,” said Michael Byerly, a spokesman for the Congressional Leadership Fund, a Republican political-action committee that spent more than $850,000 in support of Rossi. “Washington families deserve better than Kim Schrier.”
She’s also faced criticism within her own party.
Rodihan said Schrier didn’t want to be drawn into a debate about Pelosi until after the midterm elections but has said she is open to new leadership in the Democratic Party.
“I see the party changing a lot … I think that the leadership needs to reflect the new party and that probably means it’s not going to be Nancy Pelosi,” Schrier said in July. “I think that it would be nice to have a woman in some sort of leadership position. She’s the only woman in a leadership position, but I think that the leadership really needs to reflect this new, energized, forward-thinking party.”
Pelosi has said in past interviews that calls by some for her to relinquish her role in the party are due to sexism.
She still has defenders and has raised millions for the DCCC.
The fundraiser in Washington state drew 70 guests and raised $900,000, a Pelosi spokesman told the Times. 

Beto O'Rourke's denial he left DUI crash scene challenged by fact-checker

Texas Democratic Rep. Beto O'Rourke, who is leading an insurgent challenge against incumbent Ted Cruz, claimed during a debate on Friday that he never left the scene of a DWI crash near El Paso in 1998, but a leading Washington Post fact-checker challenged the claim, giving it "four Pinocchios."
On the evening of his 26th birthday, O'Rourke crashed into a truck traveling in "the same direction" at high speed in a 75 MPH zone before crossing the median into opposite lanes of traffic and coming to a stop, a witness told a police officer at the time.
O'Rourke had a blood alcohol content of 0.136, well above the legal limit of 0.10 at the time, as well the current limit of 0.08.
“The defendant/driver then attempted to leave the scene,” the police officer, Richard Carrera, said in a police report. The witness "then turned on his overhead lights to warn oncoming traffic and try to get the defendant to stop.”
According to the officer, O'Rourke had "glossy" eyes and was "unable to be understood due to slurred speech.”

"I did not try to leave the scene of the accident."
- Texas Senate candidate Beto O'Rourke

The incident report from the night also stated that "the driver attempted to leave the accident but was stopped by the reporter."
But on Friday, O'Rourke rejected that account -- the first time he has gone on record disputing that he tried to leave the scene of the DUI.
MORE ON THE DEBATE: CRUZ, O'ROURKE CLASH OVER TRUMP, IMMIGRATION
"I did not try to leave the scene of the accident, though driving drunk -- which I did -- is  a terrible mistake, for which there is no excuse of justification or defense," O'Rourke said, before talking about the importance of "second chances," white privilege and how he met his wife.
Cruz did not press the issue during the debate, saying he wanted to focus on issues.
On Tuesday, The Washington Post, citing additional police documents first obtained by The Houston Chronicle and The San Antonio Express-News, concluded that O'Rourke's denial was unfounded.
"Given his blood alcohol content at the time of the crash, O’Rourke’s memory 20 years after the fact is not nearly as credible as the police reports written just hours after the crash," The Post's Glenn Kessler wrote in his fact-check.
Kessler acknowledged that he had been unable to find the unnamed witness or the police officer for further comment, and that some minor details -- such as the color of O'Rourke's Volvo, and its direction of travel -- were inconsistent across the police documents.
"O’Rourke could have dodged the question during the debate or he could have said his memory of the night is not clear," Kessler wrote, after noting that contemporaneous witness accounts have more credibility than after-the-fact denials decades later. "Instead, he chose to dispute the factual record."
The Post's fact-checking scale lists "Four Pinocchios" as the most a claim can receive -- for "whoppers."
After he completed a court-ordered program, the charges against O'Rourke were dismissed, The Houston Chronicle reported. O'Rourke is the son of an El Paso County Judge, although there are no indication his political influence helped him obtain a lighter sentence.
O'Rourke's criminal record also includes a 1995 charge for allegedly burglarizing a building by attempting "forcible entry" at the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP), according to The El Paso Times.
"That happened while I was in college," O'Rourke said in 2005. "I along with some friends were horsing around, and we snuck under the fence at the UTEP physical plant and set off an alarm. We were arrested by UTEP police. ... UTEP decided not to press charges. We weren't intending to do any harm."
The charge was dropped.
The next debate between the candidates is scheduled for Sept. 30 at the University of Houston, with the final encounter set for Oct. 16.
Gregg Re is an editor for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @gregg_re.

Murkowski, key vote in Kavanaugh confirmation, signals support for accuser, FBI probe

Republican senator, Lisa Murkowski

Just days before Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee plan to hold a critical vote on whether to recommend Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the full Senate, a key swing vote Republican senator, Lisa Murkowski, seemed to suggest that her support for the nominee is wavering.
“We are now in a place where it’s not about whether or not Judge Kavanaugh is qualified,” Murkowski said in an interview on Monday night. “It is about whether or not a woman who has been a victim at some point in her life is to be believed.”
Asked Tuesday about whether an FBI inquiry into the decades-old allegations against Kavanaugh should occur -- a repeated demand by Democratic lawmakers -- Murkowski replied, “It would sure clear up all the questions, wouldn’t it?"
However, Murkowski later told Fox News that she expects Thursday's planned Judiciary Committee hearing, where both Kavanaugh and accuser Christine Blasey Ford are expected to testify, will clear up many of the questions currently surrounding his nomination.
Murkowski's comments seemingly put her at odds with her Republican colleagues in the Senate, including Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, who have said the Senate, not the FBI, has the constitutional duty to investigate the Kavanaugh claims.

“It would sure clear up all the questions, wouldn’t it?"
- Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski, on an FBI probe

The FBI would need explicit White House instruction to conduct a probe into the allegations against Kavanaugh, Fox News has learned, because they fall well outside any applicable statute of limitations for a federal crime.

"We are now in a place where it’s not about whether or not Judge Kavanaugh is qualified," Murkowski said.  (AP, File)

The agency already forwarded the allegations to the White House as part of its background check on Kavanaugh.
"It's totally inappropriate for someone to demand we use law enforcement resources to investigate a 35-year-old allegation when she won't go under oath and can't remember key details including when or where it happened," a federal law enforcement official told Fox News.
Murkowski's office did not immediately reply to a request for further clarification from Fox News on Tuesday.
FLASHBACK: BIDEN, IN 1991, SAYS ONLY PEOPLE WHO DON'T UNDERSTAND 'ANYTHING' WOULD CALL FOR FBI PROBE
Republicans hold a slender 51-49 majority in the Senate, with Vice President Mike Pence available to break any ties. That means if Republicans lose Murkowski's vote, they can't afford any additional defections.
Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, another pro-choice Republican moderate, has also vowed to withhold judgment pending a Thursday hearing into the allegations by Ford, the California professor who says Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were in high school.
Neither Collins nor Murkowski sits on the Judiciary Committee, which is now expecting to decide on Friday whether to recommend Kavanaugh's confirmation. The committee's approval is not required for Kavanaugh to advance to a vote of the full Senate and be confirmed; Clarence Thomas, who was accused of sexual harassment, did not secure the committee's approval in 1991.
TOP DEMOCRATIC SENATOR SAYS KAVANAUGH DOESN'T DESERVE DUE PROCESS BECAUSE HE'S A CONSERVATIVE
Despite Murkowski's apparent misgivings, the already-volatile political landscape surrounding Kavanaugh's confirmation could shift drastically again during Thursday's scheduled hearing.
Fox News expects the hearing to begin with opening statements from Grassley and Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the panel.
Ford will give an opening statement with no time limit. Then, a five-minute round of questions for each senator will follow. They can turn over questioning to other counsel, and Republicans are expected to allow Rachel Mitchell, an experienced sex-crimes prosecutor, to handle at least some of their inquiries.
WHO IS RACHEL MITCHELL, THE SEX CRIMES PROSECUTOR HEADLINING THURSDAY'S HEARING?
(As recently as Monday night, Ford's attorneys were suggesting that it is inappropriate for outside counsel to ask questions, and they requested the name of the prosecutor.)
Next up, a statement by Kavanaugh with no time limits will precede a five-minute round of questioning for each senator, Fox News expects. Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied all allegations against him.
PURPORTED WITNESS WHO HAD BACKED FORD DELETES ONLINE ACCOUNT, ADMITS 'NO IDEA' IF ATTACK OCCURRED
Ford's legal team has requested that Mark Judge, a Kavanaugh friend Ford says was in the room when he allegedly assaulted her, be subpoenaed to testify. But Republicans have rejected that request, saying he has already provided a statement under penalty of a felony charge, denying any knowledge of the episode.
Feinstein, who received Ford's allegations in July but did not disclose them to her fellow senators or federal authorities until earlier this month, has called for the hearing to be delayed, citing a new allegation made against Kavanaugh on Sunday in The New Yorker.
The magazine published claims by Deborah Ramirez, a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh who says he exposed himself to her while drunk at a college party in the 1980s. Kavanaugh has denied that allegation, as well as Ford's.
Republicans have accused Feinstein of compromising Ford's desire for anonymity by sitting on the allegations and then leaking them at the last minute for political gain, and have suggested that the lawmaker simply wants to stall a vote on the nomination.
Grassley responded to Feinstein in a letter on Tuesday: "I am not going to silence Dr. Ford after I promised and assured her that I would provide her a safe, comfortable and dignified opportunity to testify. ... There is no reason to delay the hearing any further."
On Tuesday, Feinstein admitted to Fox News that she has "no way of knowing" whether Ford will actually testify Thursday. Ford, through her legal team, has said several times this week she would show up at the hearing, following days of delays and setbacks last week in scheduling the proceedings.
The questioning is expected to center on Ford's claim that Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and tried to remove her clothes at a Maryland house party when they were teenagers. Ford has said she is unable to recall who owned the house or why there was a gathering there. According to Ford, who says she eventually escaped to a bathroom, Kavanaugh covered her mouth briefly as music blared.
FEINSTEIN: 'I HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING' WHETHER FORD WILL SHOW AT THE HEARING
Ford told The Washington Post last week that there were a total of "four boys at the party" where the alleged episode occurred, and that two -- Kavanaugh and Judge -- were in the room during her attack. She said that her therapist made an error by indicating she told him in 2012 that all four boys were involved.
Those boys purportedly included Kavanaugh, Judge and another classmate, Patrick Smyth -- all of whom have since denied to the Senate Judiciary Committee, under penalty of felony, any knowledge of the particular party in question or any misconduct by Kavanaugh.
However, a woman, Leland Ingham Keyser, a former classmate of Ford's at the Holton-Arms all-girls school in Maryland, has since been identified by Ford as the fourth witness at the party. In a dramatic twist, Keyser, who has never been describable as a "boy," emerged Saturday night to say she doesn’t know Kavanaugh or remember being at the party with him.
"We’re in the Twilight Zone when it comes to Kavanaugh," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News on Capitol Hill Monday. Later that evening, in an interview with Fox News' "Hannity," Graham said the allegations against Kavanaugh are "collapsing."

Rachel Mitchell, prosecutor experienced in sex-crimes cases, to question Kavanaugh and Ford, Grassley announces

Rachel Mitchell

Senate Republicans announced late Tuesday that Rachel Mitchell, a decorated career sex crimes prosecutor with decades of experience, will handle some of the questioning of Christine Blasey Ford at a scheduled hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday.
Ford, the California professor accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault decades ago, had requested through her attorneys that only senators be able to ask questions at the hearing, in order to avoid a "trial-like" atmosphere.
Senate Democrats are still able to ask their own questions of Ford and Kavanaugh, who is also set to testify Thursday, and some have explicitly said they intend to do so.

"The goal is to de-politicize the process and get to the truth."
- Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa

KEY SWING VOTE REPUBLICAN SEN. MURKOWSKI SHOWS SIGNS OF WAVERING ON KAVANAUGH
Saying he wants the hearing to be a "safe, comfortable, and dignified" environment, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley wrote in a statement that Mitchell's presence would help take politics out of the proceedings.
"The goal is to de-politicize the process and get to the truth, instead of grandstanding and giving senators an opportunity to launch their presidential campaigns," Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote. "I’m very appreciative that Rachel Mitchell has stepped forward to serve in this important and serious role."
Grassley then took a more explicit shot at the conduct of Senate Democrats at Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings earlier this month. During those proceedings, Cory Booker, D-N.J., suggested that he would be expelled from the Senate for releasing confidential committee documents, and compared himself to the gladiator Spartacus.
WATCH: TOP DEM ASKS KAVANAUGH IF HE EVER HAD IMPROPER MUELLER CONVERSATIONS, REFUSES TO CLARIFY QUESTION
"I promised Dr. Ford that I would do everything in my power to avoid a repeat of the ‘circus’ atmosphere in the hearing room that we saw the week of September 4," Grassley wrote. "I’ve taken this additional step to have questions asked by expert staff counsel to establish the most fair and respectful treatment of the witnesses possible."
Mitchell, who has been a prosecutor since 1993 and won several awards for her legal service, is currently on leave as the deputy county attorney in the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office in Phoenix and the division chief of the Special Victims Division, according to Grassley's office. She has overseen prosecutions of a variety of sex-related offenses, including child molestation, sexual assault, and domestic violence.
The county prosecutor's office is entirely distinct from the sheriff's office in Maricopa County, which was led by Joe Arpaio until last year.
Fox News has been told Grassley and Feinstein are expected to give opening statements to kick off Thursday's hearing, followed by Christine Blasey Ford, who would speak with no time limit.
That would be followed by a round of five-minute questioning periods for each senator, who could turn over questioning to other counsel. The process would repeat for Kavanaugh.
As recently as Monday night, Ford's attorneys have suggested that it would be inappropriate for outside counsel to ask questions. 
Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, considered a key potential swing vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation, had suggested the use of outside counsel to question Ford last week, saying the optics of having the all-male Republican contingent from the Judiciary Committee would be undesirable. 
Kavanaugh has repeatedly denied all allegations against him. Deborah Ramirez, a former classmate of Kavanaugh's at Yale University who this week also accused him of sexual misconduct, reportedly has not responded to Judiciary Committee inquiries or White House overtures to also testify at the hearing.
The questioning Thursday will center on Ford's claim that Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and tried to remove her clothes at a Maryland house party when they were teenagers. Ford has said she is unable to recall who owned the house or why there was a gathering there. According to Ford, who says she eventually escaped to a bathroom, Kavanaugh covered her mouth briefly as music blared.
DEM ON JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: KAVANAUGH DOESN'T DESERVE DUE PROCESS BECAUSE HE'S CONSERVATIVE

"We’re in the Twilight Zone when it comes to Kavanaugh."
- Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.

Ford told The Washington Post last week that there were a total of "four boys at the party" where the alleged episode occurred, and that two -- Kavanaugh and friend Mark Judge -- were in the room during her attack. She said that her therapist made an error by indicating she told him in 2012 that all four boys were involved.
Those boys purportedly included Kavanaugh, Judge and another classmate, Patrick Smyth -- all of whom have since denied to the Senate Judiciary Committee, under penalty of felony, any knowledge of the particular party in question or any misconduct by Kavanaugh.
However, a woman, Leland Ingham Keyser, a former classmate of Ford's at the Holton-Arms all-girls school in Maryland, has since been identified by Ford as the fourth witness at the party. In a dramatic twist, Keyser, who has never been describable as a "boy," emerged Saturday night to say she doesn’t know Kavanaugh or remember being at the party with him.
Washington Post spokeswoman Kristine Coratti Kelly told Fox News that Keyser went unmentioned in the original story on Ford's accusations because she was unreachable, and that the article was not intended to provide a comprehensive tally of everyone at the party.
GRASSLEY UNLOADS ON FEINSTEIN FOR SITTING ON ACCUSATIONS: 'I CANNOT OVERSTATE HOW DISAPPOINTED I AM'
"We didn’t name Keyser in the original story because we had not reached her for comment by that time, as the story indicates," Kelly said in an email. "The story never addressed how many girls were at the party. The story addressed the question of how many boys were in the room with her – in the context of Ford’s explanation for what she was said was an error in her therapist’s notes."
However, the letter sent by Ford to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., in July that outlined her allegations said: "The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others."
Feinstein did not report that letter to her colleagues or federal authorities until earlier this month, after a leak describing the letter appeared in The Intercept. Republicans have accused Democrats of orchestrating that leak for political gain only days before a key vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation.
"We’re in the Twilight Zone when it comes to Kavanaugh," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told Fox News on Capitol Hill Monday. Later that evening, in an interview with Fox News' "Hannity," Graham said the allegations against Kavanaugh are "collapsing."

 

Real Classy Democrat Cartoons

Trump doubles down on support for Kavanaugh, blames Dems for trying to destroy 'wonderful man'

President Donald Trump reaffirmed his support for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in a tweet late Monday and blamed Democrats for working to destroy a “wonderful man” by casting a series of “false acquisitions.”
The support comes amid new allegations of decades-old sexual misconduct against the nominee.
“The Democrats are working hard to destroy a wonderful man, and a man who has the potential to be one of our greatest Supreme Court Justices ever, with an array of False Acquisitions the likes of which have never been seen before,” Trump tweeted.
Christine Blasey Ford has accused Kavanaugh of covering her mouth and trying to remove her clothing at a party in the early 1980s, when they were both in high school. The New Yorker reported allegations from Debbie Ramirez on Sunday, who claimed Kavanaugh exposed himself to her during a party at Yale University when he was a freshman.
Michael Avenatti, the attorney for porn star Stormy Daniels, said he has information that Kavanaugh and high school friend Mark Judge had plied women with drugs and alcohol at parties so other men could gang rape them. Kavanuagh called the allegations "totally false and outrageous."
In an exclusive interview with Fox News’ Martha MacCallum on Monday, Kavanaugh denied the allegations against him and said he wants a “fair process where I can defend my integrity, and I know I'm telling the truth.”
"What I know is the truth, and the truth is I've never sexually assaulted anyone," Kavanaugh said. "I want a fair process where I can defend my integrity, and I know I'm telling the truth. I know my lifelong record, and I'm not going to let false accusations drive me out of this process. I have faith in God and I have faith in the fairness of the American people."
Kavanagh and Ford are set to testify at a hearing on Thursday after days of back-and-forth negotiations between Ford's legal team and Senate Republicans.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, who delivered a nationally televised speech on the Senate floor Monday defending Kavanaugh, vowed an up-or-down vote on the nominee after the planned hearing on Thursday.
“This shameful smear campaign has hit a new low," McConnell said, recalling that Democrats had promised to stop a generational rightward shift on the Supreme Court by "any means" available. "Senate Democrats are trying to destroy a man’s personal and professional life."
McConnell also reiterated that none of the allegations against Kavanaugh -- including the claims published Sunday in The New Yorker and last week by The Washington Post -- had any first-hand corroboration.
Republicans on the Judiciary Committee do not expect, however, to be able to vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation until Friday at the absolute earliest. That would almost certainly mean that the Supreme Court would be without a ninth justice when its next term begins Oct. 1, a date set by federal law.

Judge appears ready to dismiss Stormy Daniels lawsuit against Trump: report

Adult film actress Stormy Daniels, speaks during a ceremony for her receiving a City Proclamation and Key to the City in West Hollywood, Calif.  (AP)

A U.S. federal judge in Los Angeles on Monday appeared poised to throw out adult film actress Stormy Daniel’s defamation lawsuit against President Donald Trump on free-speech grounds, Reuters reported. 
Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, sued the president in April over a tweet in which he denied her claims of being subtly threatened by a man in a Las Vegas parking lot in 2011.
TRUMP MOCKS STORMY DANIELS' SKETCH OF 'NONEXISTENT' HARASSER: 'TOTAL CON JOB'
Daniels said the man was threatening her for going public about an alleged sexual encounter with Trump in 2006. Trump has denied the affair took place, and cast doubt on her story of being threatened.
“A sketch years later about a nonexistent man. A total con job, playing the Fake News Media for Fools (but they know it)!” Trump tweeted.
Daniels’ attorney Michael Avenatti said the tweet damaged her credibility by portraying her as a liar. Trump’s attorneys have asked a federal judge in Los Angeles to dismiss the suit.

To allow the complaint to go forward and to have one consider this to be defamatory in the context it was made would have a chilling effect.
- U.S. District Judge James Otero

Judge S. James Otero said Monday that the U.S. Constitution’s guarantee of free-speech protects Trump from defamation, but did not issue a formal ruling.
“To allow the complaint to go forward and to have one consider this to be defamatory in the context it was made would have a chilling effect,” Otero said during the hearing.
Avenatti told reporters he expects a ruling within days and plans to appeal if the suit is dismissed.

File: Michael Avenatti, the attorney for porn actress Stormy Daniels replies to questions by reporters during a news conference in front of the U.S. Federal Courthouse in Los Angeles.  (AP)

Otero scheduled a hearing Dec. 3 to discuss Trump’s efforts to dismiss another lawsuit by Daniels over a hush-money agreement related to their alleged affair.
Daniels sued Trump and his former lawyer Michael Cohen, who negotiated the deal, so she could speak publicly about the alleged affair without fear of reprisal. Cohen had threatened to sue her for $20 million.
COMPANY SET UP BY MICHAEL COHEN OFFERS TO DROP STORMY DANIEL’S HUSH-MONEY AGREEMENT
Lawyers for Trump and Cohen now say the deal that paid Daniels $130,000 to keep quiet was invalid and they won't sue her for breaking it. Cohen has pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations for arranging payments to both Daniels and a former Playboy model to influence the election.
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Bradford Betz is an editor for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @bradford_betz.

Ted Cruz heckled by protesters in DC restaurant: video

Republican U.S. Senator Ted Cruz takes part in a debate for the Texas U.S. Senate with Democratic Rep. Beto O'Rourke, in Dallas.  (AP)

A group of protesters in Washington, D.C., shouted down Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and his wife in a restaurant Monday night, according to video footage that was posted on Twitter.
The group appeared to chastise Cruz over Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, who is facing multiple sexual assault allegations. Two one-minute video clips were posted to the Twitter page of a group called “Smash Racism DC.”
The group’s Facebook page states that it is “united” in the fight against the “Nazis, Ku Klux Klan.”
In the first video clip, a group of protesters approach Cruz and his wife at a restaurant table, repeatedly shouting, “We believe survivors!”
“Hi, I’d love to talk to with about Brett Kavanaugh tonight. I’m a constituent, love to know what your vote is gonna be tonight. I know that you’re very close friends with Mr. Kavanaugh,” says a woman off camera. “Do you believe survivors?”
“Senator, I have a right to know what your position is on Brett Kavanaugh,” she continues.
“God bless you, mam,” Cruz says amid the shouts.
“Bless you as well, I really appreciate you,” the woman responds. “I’m a survivor of sexual assault, mam. I believe all survivors. There are now three people who have come forward and who have said that Brett Kavanaugh has attacked them. I know that you’re close friends with him. Could you talk to him about that? Could you talk to him about his position?”
Cruz then appears to get up and head for the exit with his wife.
“How are you gonna vote sir?” the woman asks.
In the second video, the protesters continue shouting, “We believe survivors!” as Cruz is seen struggling to get through the crowd.
“Beto’s way hotter than you, dude!” says one protestor off camera, in reference to Democratic congressman Beto O’Rourke, Cruz’s challenger for his U.S. Senate seat.
“Excuse me, let my wife through,” Cruz says to the hostile crowd.
As Cruz nears the exit a woman is heard shouting, “Are you going to confirm your best friend Kavanaugh?”
Another protester shouts: “Sexist, racist, anti-gay!”
When Cruz leaves the restaurant, the protesters cheer. A restaurant worker appears, telling the group to leave.
Cruz has pushed for Christine Blasey Ford, one of Kavanaugh’s accusers, to testify in public, according to The Texas Tribune.
"These allegations are serious and deserve to be treated with respect," Cruz said in a statement. "Professor Ford should have a full opportunity to tell her story before the Judiciary Committee, and Judge Kavanaugh should have a full opportunity to defend himself. That hearing should be sooner, rather than later, so the committee can make the best assessment possible of the allegations."
Cruz's office did not immediately respond to Fox News' request for comment.
Bradford Betz is an editor for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @bradford_betz.

Avenatti says more Kavanaugh accusations will go public within 48 hours: 'I state facts and have evidence to back it up'

Michael Avenatti, the lawyer for adult-film star Stormy Daniels in her lawsuit against President Trump, now says he has a client who will reveal allegations against embattled Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh within 48 hours -- shortly before Kavanaugh is set to testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee amid other sexual misconduct accusations.
"Let me just be really clear about something," Avenatti said in an interview with CNN on Monday night. "They know that I do not traffic in rumor and nonsense. I state facts and I have evidence to back it up. I would not make these allegations lightly."
Earlier Monday, Avenatti said that the unnamed woman knew Kavanaugh around the time of high school but attended a different school. The woman, according to the attorney, has had multiple security clearances from the U.S. government, including the State Department and Justice Department.
"I’m highly confident in the accusations that are going to be made by my client," Avenatti said. "As it relates to the woman whose name will be publicly disclosed, multiple security clearances have been issued by the federal government."
Asked if he was prepared to prove his client's allegations, Avenatti said that "it is our burden. We are going to embrace and meet it."
In a separate interview Monday night on MSNBC, Avenatti said he thought "there very well may be a criminal complaint relating to this conduct."
Kavanaugh has been accused of committing sexual misconduct decades ago by Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez. He has denied all the claims.
Ford said a friend of Kavanaugh's, Mark Judge, witnessed her alleged assault. Judge denied it as well.
GOP SENATORS DEFEND KAVANAUGH: 'WE'RE IN THE TWILIGHT ZONE HERE'
Avenatti revealed new claims Sunday on Twitter. His client, he said, had knowledge of Kavanaugh, Judge and others in high school "targeting women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them."
Kavanaugh elaborated on his denials in an exclusive Fox News interview on Monday, while explaining the environment where he grew up.
"Yes, there were parties and the drinking age was 18 and yes, the seniors were legal and had beer there," he said. "And, yes, people might have had too many beers on occasion ... I think all of us have probably done things we look back on in high school and regret or cringe a bit. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about an allegation of sexual assault. I've never sexually assaulted anyone."
Avenatti wasn't buying the judge's explanation.
"I think it's just absolutely unbelievable and I think the American people are smarter than this," he said.

Democrat Snake Pit Political Cartoons

Feinstein, other Dems largely silent on abuse claims against Keith Ellison

As top Democrats speak out on sexual misconduct claims against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh, they've been largely silent on physical and verbal harassment claims against one of their own: Rep. Keith Ellison, a top Democratic National Committee (DNC) official.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, revealed earlier this month she knew of the initial accusations that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted a woman in the early 1980s, when he and the accuser were teenagers. Feinstein, D-Calif., called for an immediate postponement of the Kavanaugh nomination process Sunday night after another woman publicly claimed he harassed her. Feinstein said the serious allegations deserve a “fair, independent” investigation from the FBI.
Kavanaugh has denied both accusers' claims strongly.
Meanwhile, Ellison’s ex-girlfriend, Karen Monahan, on Sunday claimed there's been a smear campaign against her to help her husband. Last week, she said many Democrats haven't believed her claims: “I've been smeared, threatened, isolated from my own party.”
Asked for comment on the accusations against Ellison, Feinstein's office did not respond.
Monahan has said Ellison sent her threatening text messages and once screamed obscenities at her as he dragged her off a bed by her feet. She tweeted Sunday: “I said this would happen early on. Keith is getting others to write commentary, sharing personal info, like being sexually abused, making false statements about who broke up, how it happened, etc. He will stop at nothing. #WhyIDidntReport victims get smeared, shamed,lied on.”
She continued in a tweet addressed to Ellison: “This isn't right. This is not going away and you are making it worse for you, your family and district by lying, smearing, getting others to do your dirty work, victim shaming, etc.  You know I have the video and more. I am still trying to offer grace and a way out.” She did not appear to clarify her tweets.
Ellison has pushed back on allegations of domestic abuse in their relationship, saying his accuser made up the story about him.
The Minnesota Democrat running for state attorney general also has dismissed a medical record that named him as the abuser, but said he could not be sure more people wouldn't “cook up” allegations against him.
His representatives didn’t return Fox News’ request for comment.
In a Facebook post last month, Monahan’s son, Austin, wrote that he saw a video of Ellison “screaming and calling her a f------ b----’ and telling her to get the f--- out of his house.” His mother later said her son's claims were “true.”
Last Wednesday, as Fox News reported, Monahan published a medical document in which a doctor wrote that Monahan “states that she was in a very stressful environment for years, emotional and physical abuse by a partner with whom she is now separated.”
“She identifies the individual she was involved with as Congressman Ellison, and she is worried about retribution if she identifies him publicly,” the document added.
WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT KEITH ELLISON ABUSE CLAIMS
Ellison, who serves as deputy chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), decried Monahan’s story as “not true” and assured that an “ongoing investigation” will conclude that Monahan’s claims are false. Speaking at a televised debate last week, he dismissed the medical record, saying it was written a year after his relationship with Monahan ended.
When pressed whether the investigation would be done before the election, Ellison said it was an independent investigation and he wasn't sure about the timetable.
Doug Wardlow, a Republican opponent, wasn’t satisfied with Ellison’s answer, saying Monahan’s claims would not be reviewed by an actual independent investigator. “It’s not an independent investigation!” he said. “It’s independent by your friends and fellow party members. That’s not an independent investigation.”
Fox News' Chad Pergram and Lukas Mikelionis contributed to this report.
Frank Miles is a reporter and editor covering geopolitics, military, crime, technology and sports for FoxNews.com. His email is Frank.Miles@foxnews.com.

Hillary Clinton’s attack on the Electoral College is only her latest act of desperation -- and denial

Last week on Twitter, Hillary Clinton issued a call to arms to her loyal supporters, telling them that progressives must “fight back” against the Republicans and stop the GOP’s assault on America’s democracy.
“The president is waging war on the truth. The administration is undermining the national unity that makes democracy possible. And then there's the breathtaking corruption.”
Clinton listed a slew of policies that Democrats should embrace to stop President Trump as well as shore up the electoral system. A few ideas were refreshingly non-partisan, like mandatory paper ballots to backup electronic voting machines.
But also in the mix was the return of a favorite punching bag for Clinton supporters: abolishing the Electoral College.
It’s a demand she first made back in 2000, insisting that America adopt a national popular vote to directly select our president rather than letting a group of state electors do it for us.
Had the country adopted her proposal, recent political history would read very differently. For starters, we’d be debating the legacy of President Al Gore instead of President George Bush.
And, yes, we would also be debating the current successes and failures of a President Hillary Clinton rather than President Donald Trump. As her supporters are fond of saying, Mrs. Clinton won the popular vote but lost the all-important Electoral College.
Just like Al Gore.
Yet Clinton’s continued demand for change ignores a rather inconvenient bit of truth: 14 Democratic nominees before her were able to win the Electoral College and go on to the White House.
Roosevelt did it four times, in fact. Barack Obama twice.

While claiming that “our democracy is in crisis” and “our institutions and traditions under siege,” her remedy is an unambiguous assault on the constitution and a siege against the traditions that have served 14 Democrats quite well.

In other words, America doesn’t have a broken electoral system in need of fixing. Rather, Hillary Clinton was simply a broken candidate.
But instead of acknowledging any degree of ownership over her loss, Clinton and her supporters continue to point fingers at everything and everyone else. Activists like Michael Moore, for example, have raged in particular that the Electoral College is “racist.”
He promised to “lead the charge” to disband it.
Meanwhile, media partners like The New York Times have thrown their weight behind legislation – dubbed the “Interstate Compact” – that would effectively gut the Electoral College through legislative trickery. In short, state electors would be forced to vote for whomever wins the national popular vote, regardless of how a candidate performs in a particular state.
In other words, the electors from Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania would have been compelled to vote for Clinton in 2016 even though their states went for Trump.
Clinton would now be in the White House.
Most reasonable people see this proposal for what it is: an act of political desperation. In fact, constitutional scholars have made the case that the Interstate Compact is a violation of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 if not the constitution itself.
And that is the greatest irony of Clinton’s latest Tweetstorm.
While claiming that “our democracy is in crisis” and “our institutions and traditions under siege,” her remedy is an unambiguous assault on the constitution and a siege against the traditions that have served 14 Democrats quite well.
Just not her.
None of this is to say that Clinton doesn’t have a point on the importance of electoral reforms. Indeed, most Americans would likely support things like a return to paper ballots to avoid a hacked election.
But by attacking the constitution in such a transparent way, she and her supporters have reminded the nation not only of the importance of the Electoral College but why so many of us have rejected her candidacy for president. Twice.
It’s a lesson that disgruntled Democrats would be wise to remember.
Bryan Dean Wright is a former CIA officer and member of the Democratic Party who resides in Oregon. He contributes on issues of politics, national security, and the economy. Follow him on Twitter @BryanDeanWright.

James Woods refuses to delete meme that he says got him locked out of Twitter

FILE: Actor James Woods poses at the premiere of the film "Bleed for This" at the Samuel Goldwyn Theater in Beverly Hills, Calif.  (AP)

Actor James Woods has been locked out of his Twitter account over a two-month-old tweet that was found to be in violation of the tech company’s rules.
The tweet, posted July 20, included a hoax meme that said it came from Democrats and encouraged men not to vote in the midterm elections.

The meme that Woods posted in July said #LetWomenDecide and #NoMenMidterm. Woods acknowledged the tweet was "not likely" real.  (Twitter)

Woods said he received an email from Twitter on Thursday saying the tweet "has the potential to be misleading in a way that could impact an election."
The email said Woods can use his account again if he deletes the tweet, but would be suspended from the social media platform permanently if there are repeated abuses.
Woods told The Associated Press Sunday, he interpreted the message to mean he’ll be allowed back on Twitter only if he decides to do what Twitter says.
"Free speech is free speech — it's not Jack Dorsey's version of free speech," Woods said, referring to Twitter Chief Executive Jack Dorsey.
"The irony is, Twitter accused me of affecting the political process, when in fact, their banning of me is the truly egregious interference," Woods said. "Because now, having your voice smothered is much more disturbing than having your vocal chords slit. If you want to kill my free speech, man up and slit my throat with a knife, don't smother me with a pillow."
Twitter told the AP that it doesn't comment on individual accounts for privacy and security reasons. A spokesman for the social media platform said by email that he had nothing more to share when asked if Dorsey would respond directly to Wood's comments.
Fox News reached out to Twitter early Monday but did not immeidately hear back.
His Twitter page is still online, though he can't access it. Many of his recent tweets include his views of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her decades ago.
KAVANAUGH ACCUSER CHRISTINE FORD OPENS DOOR TO TESTIFYING NEXT WEEK
Woods, who has more than 1.7 million Twitter followers and is outspoken in his conservative views, believes he was singled out. He said the original tweet was reposted by his girlfriend Friday and had been retweeted thousands of times by Sunday. His girlfriend's account wasn't locked, which he said proves his claim.
The meme, posted in July, said #LetWomenDecide and #NoMenMidterm. It claimed to be from a Democratic group, but it was determined to be a hoax campaign to encourage liberal men not to vote in November, according to the website knowyourmeme.com. Woods called it a parody.
Woods acknowledged the meme likely wasn't real in the original tweet, saying: "Pretty scary that there is a distinct possibility this could be real. Not likely, but in this day and age of absolute liberal insanity, it is at least possible ..."
Social media companies like Twitter have come under pressure to flag hate speech and posts that could influence elections offline. Numerous conservative and right-wing groups have protested that the tech companies disproportionately target them over liberal-leaning groups. Dorsey testified before the GOP-led House Energy and Commerce Committee earlier this month, as the committee examined whether Twitter has censored conservatives.
TWITTER CEO JACK DORSEY ADMITS CONSERVATIVE STAFFERS ‘DON’T FEEL SAFE TO EXPRESS THEIR OPINIONS’ AT LIBERAL TECH GIANT
Woods said he wants open discourse, and called the situation a dangerous precedent for free speech.
"I wish this were about an unknown Twitter user so that I could be even more passionate about it," Woods said. "This is not about a celebrity being muzzled. This is about an American being silenced — one tweet at a time."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Bradford Betz is an editor for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @bradford_betz.