Two reporters, and , spent months independently reporting out Deborah Ramirez’s allegation against Brett Kavanaugh and found it credible—and documented another serious claim of misconduct with an eyewitness
We have deleted an earlier tweet to this article that was poorly phrased.
The NYT added an editors’ note to Kavanaugh story which could help explain why the new allegation wasn’t the headline.
There must be a full Congressional investigation to determine whether someone, and if so who, gave orders that kept the FBI from investigating credible allegations & speaking to witnesses who reached out to them. We were told this was a full investigation.
NY Times find 7 people who heard about the Ramirez incident years before. But per WH instructions, and Senate R insistence, the FBI interviewed none of them or 18 other witnesses. The renewed background investigation was a total con job.
Brett Kavanaugh liked to pull his pants down at Yale and force women to touch him. When Deborah Ramirez gave the FBI a list of 25 people to corroborate her experience, none were interviewed even though some tried in vain to reach the FBI on their own.
“A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier notified senators and the F.B.I. but the F.B.I. did not investigate”
When people demanded an investigation last year, they wanted an actual investigation, before a confirmation vote. They got a barely phoned-in sham. Now there’s been investigation, turning up corroboration and more, & he has a lifetime appointment.
Wow. "During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been 'the talk of campus.' Our reporting suggests that it was."
. did not contacted Sen. Grassley’s office for this story. If they had, we would've reminded them of a few key public facts they omitted: 1. staff proactively contacted Ms. Ramirez' lawyers soon after the New Yorker story broke.
This is a lot to absorb tonight. Trying not to get too distracted by the strangely off-point headline & the appalling, now-deleted tweet. Because the substance of the story is devastating & demands careful, sober examination.
“Ramirez’s legal team gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the FBI interviewed none of them, though we learned many of these potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I. on their own.”
We deleted a previous tweet regarding this article. It was offensive, and we apologize.
"During his Senate testimony, Brett Kavanaugh said that if the incident Deborah Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been 'the talk of campus,'" write and . "Our reporting suggests that it was."
“Ms. Ramirez’s legal team gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the bureau — in its supplemental background investigation — interviewed none of them.”
weird how extensive investigation corraborated one alleged incident of sexual misconduct and uncovered another
One can argue that the failure to remember, given her intoxication, is not dispositive. One can’t argue, however, that that fact didn’t need to be in the Kavanaugh story from the outset.
Deborah Ramirez was having a hard first year at Yale. Then came a drunken dorm party with another freshman named Brett Kavanaugh. From my new book w
“Ramirez’s legal team gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the bureau...interviewed none of them, though we learned many of these potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I.”
Side note: “New Sexual Assault Uncovered While Investigating Supreme Court Justice Already Accused of Sexual Assault” might be a better way to frame this story than “Young Woman Didn’t Fit In at Yale”
You know, it's weird of this, uh, rather significant revision to the 's Brett Kavanaugh story over the weekend hasn't merited a mention on the New York Times Corrections page.
Fascinating definition of "corroborated". In other words: we found two people who told us some guy who would not talk directly to us said he told them he saw something happen to someone who says she has no memory of that thing happening. Corroborated!!
#ItsOnUs to believe survivors. The first time.
Dear Lord. Try to read this Brett Kavanaugh article. Got a few paragraphs in and could not continue. So troubling. I still believe Deborah Ramirez. I still believe Christine Blasey Ford. I still believe Anita Hill. #PTSD. #NotFit
"A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier ... notified senators and the F.B.I. ... but the F.B.I. did not investigate."
Per and , Deborah Ramirez’s allegation against Brett Kavanaugh had further corroboration than was previously known—and a male Yale classmate saw Kavanaugh push his penis into the hand of another female student at different dorm party.
New NYT report uncovers a *third* incident involving Brett Kavanaugh while he was at Yale
Kavanaugh should be impeached.
Finally. THIS is why I thought Kavanaugh’s confirmation would never go through. The FBI and a group of senators were given credible information on other acts of sexual assault that were committed by Kavanaugh - DOJ kept them from looking into it.
The Kavanaugh confirmation was the largest collective gas lighting of women in history. Women knew it at the time. It doesn't really help that history proves us right but here you go.
And there is also another alleged incident of sexual assault: "A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student."
For those of you who choose not to read the NYT Kavanaugh hit piece, here is the new editor's note:
“During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been “the talk of campus.” Our reporting suggests that it was.”
As far as I can tell, there's still no independent, firsthand eyewitness testimony to the Deborah Ramirez incident. No one has yet to state on the record they were there and saw it happen. If that person exists, the authors don't cite them in this story.
Having a penis thrust in your face at a drunken dorm party may seem like harmless fun. But when Brett Kavanaugh did it to her, Deborah Ramirez says, it confirmed that she didn't belong at Yale in the first place.
Trending on Twitter, Trump has tweeted 3x in response and Kamala Harris/Julián Castro calling for Kavanaugh’s impeachment. Our adapted book excerpt in NYT’s Sunday Review explores and corroborates Deborah Ramirez’s story. Also reveals new allegation.
The Times is a disgrace. The plot to destroy Kavanaugh was a disgusting political hit. The 3 women who came forward were either deluded or liars. The Left’s incentive to take him out was obvious. No “reporting” will change any of that.
This is why we fought so hard. We knew.
"A classmate, Max Stier, saw Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Stier...notified senators and the FBI...but the FBI did not investigate."🤬 #ImpeachKavanaugh
The New York Times has confirmed a third incident involving Brett Kavanaugh while he was at Yale. He is unfit to sit on the Supreme Court. House Democrats must investigate Kavanaugh.
"Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ramirez described occurred it would have been 'the talk of campus.' Our reporting suggests that it was. At least 7 people, including Ramirez’s mother, heard about the incident long before Kavanaugh was a federal judge."
I dunno I would’ve gone with a headline like “A new story of sexual misconduct by Justice Kavanaugh, plus more corroboration for an old one.”
Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed on the basis that, as the chairman of the Judiciary Committee Senator Chuck Grassley put it, there was "no corroboration of the allegations made by Dr. Ford or Ms. Ramirez.” There wasn't even a fucking investigation.
TW: Sexual assault This confirms what we already knew - Brett Kavanaugh and the president that appointed him have a history of committing sexual assault - and lying about it. We must impeach them both.
As you read this, recall that the Justice Department will soon present an award to the lawyers who helped clinch Kavanaugh's confirmation to the Supreme Court.
What’s especially galling about this awful tweet from awful NYT Opinion is that it undermines a really important story from NYT reporters, the gist of which is that Kavanaugh is a serial offender and the GOP covered it up and now he’s on SCOTUS for life
What's unfortunate is that the world-historically bad tweet is promoting a very good and important story!
Brett Kavanaugh is a credibly accused sexual predator. The FBI and the Senate refused to hear his accusers' corroborating witnesses. He lied under oath. He does not belong on our highest court with a lifetime appointment. Congress should impeach him now.
Deborah Ramirez’s story is: 1. “Corroborated” 2. “FBI credible” 3. Kavanaugh wouldn’t talk bc couldn’t agree to terms - what terms?! #: 4. You want to know why women are angry?
“Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been ‘the talk of campus.’ Our reporting suggests that it was... We also uncovered a previously unreported story... that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation.”
I would recommend reading the actual article (always read the article!), which foregrounds how Kavanaugh’ behavior was about putting women, especially those from backgrounds he considered “lesser”, in their place.
Most revealing sentence in NYT piece: "Ms. Ramirez also did not see herself as a victim of ethnic discrimination. The college campuses of the 1980s had yet to be galvanized by the identity and sexual politics that course through today’s cultural debates."
My TL is full of a bad and now deleted NY Times tweet, but this seems like a bigger deal
"Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly." "publicly"? The authors do not say in their piece that Stier refused an interview request from them, just that "Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly." So did they request an interview?
In the Kavanaugh article, it says "Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.”" "telling her" So it's Ms. Ramirez telling Times reporters that the FBI agents said she was "credible".
What a disservice to the actual piece, which is quite good.
It’s telling of the conservative hostility to truth that it’s quickly becoming “known” in right wing circles that the New York Times “retracted” the Kavanaugh story. You know, even though you can literally go right to the page right now and see it
Raise your hand if you think: 1. should lead with the damning news, not its take on rape culture at , and: 2. should proceed to #ImpeachKavanaugh
“Max Stier, saw..Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier..notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate”
In which the confirms another account of alleged sexual assault by Justice Kavanaugh
Brett Kavanaugh Fit In With the Privileged Kids. She Did Not.
“During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been ‘the talk of campus.’ Our reporting suggests that it was.”
We believe Deborah Ramirez. We believe Christine Blasey Ford. And we believe abusers everywhere must be held accountable for their actions. The House Judiciary issued subpoenas earlier this yr to investigate Kavanaugh—now would be a good time for answers.
“During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been “the talk of campus.” Our reporting suggests that it was.”
Whoo boy, what an "editor's note" this is. This pattern is almost predictable at this point.
"During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been “the talk of campus.” Our reporting suggests that it was." Incredible work from Times' and
Overpowering class pathos signaled here with reference to the aboveground pool
The protects and promotes suspected rapists. It’s not complicated. There is one in the White House and one on the Supreme Court. Brett Kavanaugh Fit In With the Privileged Kids. She Did Not. - The New York Times
I don't have an opinion on overall accuracy of this piece, but this passage jumped out at me. Whites were over 80% of the US population in 1980; Yale's POC % was actually above the national %. "Brett Kavanaugh Fit In With the Privileged Kids. She Did Not."
Next time I need to explain habitus, I'm invoking Deborah Ramirez: At Yale, “they invite you to the game, but they never show you the rules or where the equipment is.”
Bombshell Investigation Finds Brett #Kavanaugh Lied About Sexual Assaults
For anyone reading my review of the excellent new Kavanaugh book make sure you also read on what became the real news of the book, about other creative things he did w his hands while drunk at Yale
I read every word. Really excruciating.
"During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been 'the talk of campus.' Our reporting suggests that it was." Meanwhile, Mr. Trump's FBI found nothing. So strange.
2/ potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I. on their own. Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.” But the Republican-controlled Senate had imposed strict limits on the investigation.'
Brett Kavanaugh Fit In With the Privileged Kids. She Did Not. - The New York Times
Brett Kavanaugh Fit In With the Privileged Kids. She Did Not.