Skip to main content

Michael Avenatti’s next move is unclear after Senate agrees to Kavanaugh FBI investigation

Lawyer Michael Avenatti outside of a California court in September 2018.

Avenatti says if his client isn’t part of the FBI probe, he’ll take his case to the American public.

Since Michael Avenatti and his client Julie Swetnick, who claims she witnessed Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assault girls in high school and says he was at a party where she was gang raped, came forward, they have insisted they want an FBI investigation into her claims. Now the FBI is probing “credible allegations” against Kavanaugh — but it’s not clear where that leaves Avenatti, or his client.

The Senate on Friday agreed to allow the bureau to conduct a “supplemental FBI background investigation” into the allegations against Kavanaugh. The move came after Arizona Republican Sen. Jeff Flake during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing heavily implied, but did not say outright, that he would vote against Kavanaugh’s confirmation on the Senate floor unless a one-week investigation was opened.

On Thursday, Kavanaugh and Palo Alto University professor Christine Blasey Ford testified before the committee about her allegations that he sexually assaulted her in high school. Ford says that while at a party in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh pinned her down, tried to take her clothes off, and put his hand over her mouth as she screamed while one of his friends, Mark Judge, looked on. Kavanaugh vehemently denied Ford’s allegations, and all other allegations of sexual misconduct.

The Senate in a statement announcing the week-long delay in a confirmation vote on Kavanaugh said that FBI would look into “credible allegations” against him. That certainly includes Ford’s claims. It’s not clear whether that means the bureau will also look into claims made by Deborah Ramirez, who says Kavanaugh exposed himself to her while they were both drunk at a party in college, or the allegations from Swetnick.

What Avenatti’s up to has been a bumpy ride from the start

On Wednesday, Avenatti posted on Twitter a sworn affidavit from Swetnick in which she alleges that Kavanaugh, Judge, and others targeted women with drugs and alcohol to cause them to “lose their inhibitions” so they could be “gang raped” — and says she was a victim of one of these “train” rapes. (She says that Judge and Kavanaugh were present when she was raped but does not accuse them of participating.)

But even before she was named, Avenatti has been tweeting about Swetnick’s claims — and insisting that she sit down with the FBI to tell her story. As the Judiciary Committee was preparing to vote on advancing Kavanaugh’s nomination on Friday, Avenatti tweeted he and Swetnick would “thoroughly enjoy embarrassing” Republican members of the panel over the weekend “when her story is told and is deemed credible.” He added that he doesn’t “traffic in nonsense.”

Avenatti’s threat was contingent on the committee advancing Kavanaugh’s nomination, which it did, but with the stipulation of the week-long FBI investigation. It’s not clear whether that’s appeased the combative lawyer, or whether his client will be involved. After Flake’s request became public, Avenatti tweeted another email he sent Friday afternoon reiterating his request that Swetnick be able to speak to the FBI. He also retweeted a tweet from screenwriter Allison Burnett saying that Swetnick’s claims are true.

Republicans have been swift to dismiss Avenatti and his claims, using the fact that he also represents Stormy Daniels, the porn actress who claims she had an affair with President Donald Trump in 2006, to discredit him. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on Wednesday characterized him as a “lawyer to porn stars,” and Sen. Chuck Grassley said that Avenatti “wants to protect people that are involved in pornography and that he’s running for president.”

Trump himself has also responded to Avenatti, calling him a “third rate lawyer who is good at making false accusations” in a tweet.

Whether Avenatti and his client have more to say — or whether they’ll take part in the FBI’s Kavanaugh investigation — remains to be seen. At the moment, Avenatti appears to be getting at least part of what he’s wanted, including for Judge, Kavanaugh’s friend, to cooperate with the FBI.

In an appearance on MSNBC’s AM Joy on Saturday, Avenatti said that if the Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans try to “hide” his clients and witnesses and they aren’t included in the FBI investigation, he’ll keep pushing. “Then we’re going to take our case to the American public,” he said, “and we’re going to let them decide who’s telling the truth and who’s lying to them.”

He tweeted later that he and his client had not yet heard from the FBI and called for the bureau’s investigation to have an “unlimited” scope.

Vox - All https://ift.tt/2Oj8Av8 September 29, 2018 at 08:10PM

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Explaining models with Triplot, part 1

[This article was first published on R in ResponsibleML on Medium , and kindly contributed to R-bloggers ]. (You can report issue about the content on this page here ) Want to share your content on R-bloggers? click here if you have a blog, or here if you don't. Explaining models with triplot, part 1 tl;dr Explaining black box models built on correlated features may prove difficult and provide misleading results. R package triplot , part of the DrWhy.AI project, is aiming at facilitating the process of explaining the importance of the whole group of variables, thus solving the problem of correlated features. Calculating the importance of explanatory variables is one of the main tasks of explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). There are a lot of tools at our disposal that helps us with that, like Feature Importance or Shapley values, to name a few. All these methods calculate individual feature importance for each variable separately. The problem arises when features used ...

The con behind every wedding

With her marriage on the rocks, one writer struggles to reconcile her cynicism about happily-ever-after as her own children rush to tie the knot A lavish wedding, a couple in love; romance was in the air, as it should be when two people are getting married. But on the top table, the mothers of the happy pair were bonding over their imminent plans for … divorce. That story was told to me by the mother of the bride. The wedding in question was two summers ago: she is now divorced, and the bridegroom’s parents are separated. “We couldn’t but be aware of the crushing irony of the situation,” said my friend. “There we were, celebrating our children’s marriage, while plotting our own escapes from relationships that had long ago gone sour, and had probably been held together by our children. Now they were off to start their lives together, we could be off, too – on our own, or in search of new partners.” Continue reading... The Guardian http://ift.tt/2xZTguV October 07, 2017 at 09:00AM