Avenatti orchestrates coverage while unveiling third Kavanaugh accuser

 

Michael Avenatti managed to make it all about him.
What a shock.
The way he handled the third accuser against Brett Kavanaugh yesterday undercut his client and damaged her case. By teasing this on Twitter, by not making Julie Swetnick available, and by phoning into talk shows instead, Avenatti turned the whole thing into a spectacle.
Kavanaugh quickly shot back that he doesn't even know the woman: "This is ridiculous and from the Twilight Zone." And President Trump, calling it a "disgrace," took aim at the attorney, calling Avenatti "a lowlife."
Now I'm not prejudging Swetnick's allegations, and no one else should, either. Her affidavit is quite chilling. But it does raise certain questions that he hasn't answered.
Unlike Christine Ford, who wrote to members of Congress, Swetnick has spoken only through Avenatti. Unlike Deborah Ramirez, who spoke to the New Yorker, which acknowledged issues with her account, Swetnick hasn't talked to a journalist or any outside investigator.
Swetnick, who has a security clearance and worked for Treasury and the IRS, makes a series of stunning charges in her declaration.
She says she saw Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge at numerous house parties in the early 1980s, where she says the Supreme Court nominee engaged in "abusive behavior." Swetnick says Kavanaugh drank excessively, made "crude sexual comments," and engaged in "fondling and grabbing of girls without their consent ... grinding against girls, attempting to remove or shift their clothing to expose private body parts."
She says Kavanaugh and Judge spiked the punch with alcohol and drugs, and recalled seeing them among boys lined up "waiting for their 'turn' with a girl inside the room."
And then she gets to her own alleged assault, saying she was incapacitated without her consent, "unable to fight off boys raping me." Swetnick says Kavanaugh and Judge were present during this alleged gang rape but does not say they participated.
She also says she told at least two people about this shortly afterward but does not name them. If Avenatti had corroborating statements from them, I'm sure he would have released them.
What I, or any other journalist, would ask Swetnick:
If girls were being groped, drugged, verbally abused and even raped by Kavanaugh and his friends at these parties, why did you keep going to them?
And since such horrendous conduct would have been witnessed by many students at these house parties, why has no one else corroborated either what you say or what Ford has said?
Avenatti succeeded in one respect, generating intensive coverage of Swetnick's account. And it will obviously be brought up at today's Judiciary Committee hearing, which originally was going to be devoted to just the two witnesses, Christine Ford and Brett Kavanaugh.
The fact that there are now three accusers could be seen as bolstering the case against Kavanaugh. But I suspect it's having the opposite effect, coming at the last minute: conflating all the claims (even involving his yearbook) and neutralizing the strongest allegations by making them seem part of a giant pile-on.
I do think the Senate Republicans made a tactical misstep by announcing the vote on Kavanaugh would be Friday. That made it sound like they're just going through the motions with today's hearing and will vote to confirm the judge regardless of what Ford says.
As the pols and pundits continue their partisan attacks — either saying he's a liar or the women are lying — it almost seems like the details no longer matter, only who's got the political muscle.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author "Media Madness: Donald Trump, The Press and the War Over the Truth." Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.

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