MAJOR BREAKING NEWS: Please read (and RETWEET ASAP, as time is short now) this new witness statement against Kavanaugh—made under penalty of perjury and not only corroborating Swetnick on her sexual assault and drink-spiking allegations but indicating *more witnesses* are coming.
1/ This new accuser knows *both* Dr. Ford *and* Swetnick—which has the dual effect of CORROBORATING Swetnick's claim she was enough within Kavanaugh's social circle to be at events with him *and* CORROBORATING other items in both women's accounts (see subsequent tweets for more).
2/ Before getting to her allegations, this new accuser—whose name has been sent to Congress along with this *sworn* affidavit (i.e., made under penalty of perjury)—offers herself as a character witness in support of *both* Dr. Ford *and* Julie Swetnick in terms of their honesty.
3/ This is key because NBC News—I felt a bit prematurely—had announced they couldn't yet identify other women who could confirm Swetnick had been at parties with Kavanaugh (I think they should've noted that it was still early innings in terms of them getting that corroboration).
4/ This new witness says she knows Kavanaugh *and* Judge—*and* shares *many* mutual friends with each—*and* was friends with their friends. *And* she attended *20* house parties where *both* Kavanaugh and Judge were present. This is, therefore, a *major* new *percipient* witness.
5/ Her sworn claim to have met the two men at "Beach Week"—and having attended house parties from 1980-82 at which both men were present—is corroborated by statements made by both Kavanaugh and Judge in terms of their presence at Beach Week and (together) at local house parties.
6/ If the sworn statement is true, all its elements are CORROBORATED by other evidence: Kavanaugh/Judge drinking underage; both getting "aggressive" and being "verbally abusive" to women and—most importantly—*sexual assaults* ("[unsolicited] physical contact of a sexual nature").
7/ In witness statements, witnesses rarely use legal terms, so "inappropriate physical contact of a sexual nature" *is* "sexual assault" here. It's usually a misdemeanor but sometimes a felony—but *always* a crime and a *serious* one that Kavanaugh appears to have falsely denied.
8/ The new accuser also confirms Kavanaugh's vomiting (CORROBORATION includes "The Ralph Club" and *many* other witnesses) and Kavanaugh drinking to the point of incoherence (CORROBORATION includes *many* other witnesses, including Ludington, Brookes, Swisher, Roche, and others).
9/ The says she "witnessed firsthand" Kavanaugh and Judge *spiking party drinks* with "Quaaludes and/or grain alcohol"—which CORROBORATES Swetnick saying she "became aware," via circumstantial evidence, of likely attempts by Kavanaugh and Judge to spike drinks with grain alcohol.
10/ There is CORROBORATION for the claim Kavanaugh drank *more than beer* in high school and college, a fact he seemed to be at pains to hide and which evasion now makes more sense than before (as no one spikes anything with beer, you really have to possess and use hard alcohol).
11/ The weakest part of the affidavit—only because it's vague, not because it's at all misleading on whether the affiant was a percipient witness—is the accuser's claim says she "understood" Kavanaugh/Judge wanted women who drank the spiked alcohol to be (as it were) uninhibited.
12/ The reason this isn't a weakness is because it follows a legal form of sorts: when you say you "understood" something to be the case in an affidavit, but do not claim direct testimonial knowledge—e.g. a confession—occurred, you are saying that something was *your impression*.
13/ A common in-court sort of question for an accuser under these circumstances would be, "And what did you understand to be the *purpose* of spiking the alcohol?" Opposing counsel would object ("Calls for speculation!") but judges *will* allow "present sense impression" answers.
14/ So this accuser is being *quite* responsible: she's saying what she saw, and saying how she interpreted what she saw—and to be clear, her interpretation is, let's be frank, the *universal interpretation* in such a situation—but she's not claiming Kavanaugh "confessed" to her.
15/ But at a house party where alcohol and sex are present, and where the boys spiking the punch are sexually assaulting women (groping), roughly 100 out of 100 criminal-trial jurors—or all 100—will interpret that as this new accuser did: an effort to lower women's "inhibitions."
16/ The new accuser *also* asks to be interviewed by the FBI, and says she can give the FBI multiple CORROBORATING WITNESSES who confirm her account—and therefore Swetnick's—in all relevant particulars. This is major news—but, incredibly, it's not clear the FBI will speak to her.
17/ The new witness says she has information on "other inappropriate conduct" by Kavanaugh but says she wants to disclose it directly to the FBI—which suggests, in an affidavit of this sort, that the additional conduct is *more* (not less) serious than misdemeanor sexual assault.
18/ It's difficult to imagine a world in which a) the White House and Senate say they've given the FBI free rein to do this supplemental background check, and b) the FBI ignores a sworn statement alleging sexual assault when they have *three more days* to investigate the nominee.
19/ That said, Congress is apparently refusing to answer Avenatti—I've already addressed, at length, this *historic* effort to ignore credible, sworn allegations of sexual assault because one doesn't like the victims' attorney—and there's no sign the FBI has been in touch either.
20/ So I hope, given everything in this thread and the news that Trump is now openly mocking a sexual assault victim—Dr. Ford—at a campaign-style rally in Mississippi tonight, people will understand why I'm asking anyone willing to do so to RETWEET the pinned tweet on this feed.
