Another Kavanaugh Accuser Falls

Another Kavanaugh Accuser Falls November 3, 2018

As a woman, and as a Never Trump conservative, I caught a lot of grief for defending Brett Kavanaugh during the Senate Judiciary Committee testimony, in regards to accusations that he was a teen rapist and drunkard, per a spate of female accusers who came forward to speak of his alleged crimes.

My position then, as it is now, has always been that we don’t condemn anyone based on accusations, alone. We can have opinions, certainly, but when those opinions turn into malicious actions, meant to destroy lives, then a line has been crossed that all people of moral character should reject.

I was not a fan of the idea of Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court justice. There were better, more conservative choices.

I’m even less of a fan of the #MeToo movement being wielded as a political weapon, and that’s exactly what has happened.

If liberals wanted to assure that every woman coming forward with a harrowing story of sexual abuse or rape was looked at with skepticism, they’re off to a great start.

Great work, guys. Really. Awesome.

Brett Kavanaugh was confirmed and now can be called Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and that’s great. I doubt he’ll do anything to advance a conservative agenda in the courts, and that sucks, but at least the women who came against him didn’t have the final victory.

No, it would appear that last laugh will belong to Kavanaugh.

A week ago, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) referred one of Kavanaugh’s accusers, Julie Swetnick, as well as her attorney, Michael Avenatti (also the lawyer of former Trump mistress, Stormy Daniels) to the Department of Justice for potential criminal charges, pertaining to lying to Congress and obstructing a criminal investigation.

Swetnick is the woman who claimed she was gang raped at a party Kavanaugh attended, and that she’d attended many such parties, observing Kavanaugh and his friends spiking the drinks with drugs and gang raping girls.

None of that made sense, and in fact, makes Swetnick seem kind of creepy for continuing to go to these alleged “rape parties” and never once reporting them.

Swetnick later claimed Avenatti had twisted her words. Of course, she only said that after it appeared there would be a price to pay for giving false testimony.

On Friday, another piece of that #MeToo offensive against Brett Kavanaugh and his character came crashing down.

Another accuser will be facing potential criminal charges for making false statements to Congress, and she’s furiously trying to take it all back.

Grassley, in a letter to the Justice Department and FBI, said a woman by the name of Judy Munro-Leighton took responsibility for authoring an anonymous letter that made allegations that Kavanaugh and a friend raped her. After she was tracked down and interviewed by Senate investigators, the woman recanted and said she was not the author and had never met Kavanaugh.

Grassley claims the woman is a left-wing activist and told investigators it was “just a ploy,” he wrote in the letter. Her full comments to investigators were not made available and efforts by USA TODAY to reach Munro-Leighton were unsuccessful.

So who is Judy Munro-Leighton? I mean, who is she, besides a liar?

To figure that out, you have to look at California hypocrite and Democrat, Senator Kamala Harris. She’s one of the aforementioned liberal saboteurs of the #MeToo movement.

Harris received a letter from a woman who signed off as “Jane Doe” that contained graphic details of sexual assault and rape in the back seat of a car, by Kavanaugh, as well as one of his friends.

Kavanaugh vehemently denied the charges during his September hearing.

Several days later Grassley says Munro-Leighton wrote an email that included her name. He said Senate investigators were able to track her down and found she lived in Kentucky, not California, and was a Democrat.

Investigators got in touch with her over the phone and Munro-Leighton admitted she wrote the email after seeing the letter in news reports. She said she claimed to be Jane Doe so the letter would gain attention.

“I was angry and I sent it out,” the woman told investigators, according to Grassley’s letter.

She wanted attention, so she claimed to be a rape victim.

She also was opposed to Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court, so what better way to head that off than to dive into the feeding frenzy of false allegations against Kavanaugh’s character? When asked if she had ever even met Kavanaugh, she was quick to point out that no, she had not.

Are we at a place, at least in the minds of liberals, where truth is only valued in as far as it can achieve your political agenda?

Grassley is absolutely correct in referring Munro-Leighton for criminal charges. What she did was despicable, and there is zero defense for it.

“The Committee is grateful to citizens who come forward with relevant information in good faith, even if they are not one hundred percent sure about what they know,” he wrote in the letter to the FBI and DOJ. “But when individuals intentionally mislead the Committee, they divert Committee resources during time-sensitive investigations and materially impede our work. Such acts are not only unfair; they are potentially illegal.”

And that is reasonable and fair.

To date, four people are looking at criminal charges, related to Kavanaugh’s case: Munro-Leighton, Swetnick, Avenatti, and an unnamed man who recanted a statement he’d made about Kavanaugh.

Only the initial accuser, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has not folded, but she currently sits on a tidy $1 million GoFundMe haul, so her testimony, wrought with inconsistencies as it was, has proven to be too profitable to go back on, now.

People, I don’t care what your politics are. Fair is fair. Truth is truth. What was attempted against Brett Kavanaugh should never be allowed in a society that supposedly honors order and justice.

You can read Grassley’s full letter to the DOJ here. 

"If by "Satan", you mean "the economy", then maybe I'd agree.Since he's been elected, Trump ..."

Christians More Dangerous Than Nuclear Weapons? ..."
"I take a few issues with this article: I'd classify Juche as a religion, and ..."

Christians More Dangerous Than Nuclear Weapons? ..."
"Is this perhaps why our cities (especially the inner cities) seem to be the source ..."

Christians More Dangerous Than Nuclear Weapons? ..."
"Thanks for bringing us up to date on the worsening religious crisis in North Korea ..."

Christians More Dangerous Than Nuclear Weapons? ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • captcrisis

    Women can accuse Democrats without fear of prosecution. But if women accuse Republicans, there are now . . . consequences.

  • GotMyLoveGlassesOn

    Apparently so.
    Just look at the woman who accused Keith Ellison – CREDIBLY, with evidence to back it up, even!
    What happened to him? Has he been drug over the coals?
    So you’re right. He has no fear of prosecution.

  • captcrisis

    “Credibly”? She says she has a video of the abuse — but won’t let anyone see it.

    My point is, nobody is referring her for prosecution.

  • Polarbearpapa

    17 The first to put forth his case seems right, until someone else steps forward and cross-examines him.

    Proverbs 18

  • Marcion

    It’s amazing how Kavanaugh ripped the mask of the remaining #nevertrump conservatives. They’ve spent years saying Trump is massively corrupt, totally untrustworthy, possibly predatory, and a threat to American democracy. And then Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh, who showed himself to be belligerent, conspiratorial, possibly predatory, thought the president couldn’t be indicted, and had hundreds of thousands of dollars in weird debts from “baseball tickets.”

    What did the #nevertrump conservatives do? They all rallied around Kavanaugh and said that Trump should be able to influence the supreme court for a generation! The idea that Kavanaugh and other Trump judicial nominees might be an extension of Trump’s corruption never seemed to occur to them. They didn’t even want him to nominate a different judge. It was all about putting a mini-Trump on the supreme court to own the libs. That right there shows that their problem with Trump was just that his tweets are bad.

    Meanwhile, Trump’s allies are already counting on Kavanaugh to protect Trump from investigations into his corruption:

    During a live interview hosted by The Washington Post on Thursday evening, political columnist Karen Tumulty asked Gingrich what he expected should Democrats, who could win a majority in the House of Representatives in the coming midterm elections, subpoena Trump’s tax returns.
    “Then they’ll be trapped into appealing to the Supreme Court, and we’ll see whether or not the Kavanaugh fight was worth it,” Gingrich replied.

    Credit where credit is due, the only anti-Trump conservative I saw who maintained any coherent position on Trump’s nomination of Kavanaugh was IllinoisPatriot.

  • GotMyLoveGlassesOn

    There was less than that from Dr. Ford against Kavanaugh, and you want him hung out to dry.
    You cant have it both ways.

  • GotMyLoveGlassesOn

    Personally, I rallied around justice, ‘innocent until proven guilty,’ and as always, against the partisan bickering that even made this a thing.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Are we at a place, at least in the minds of liberals, where truth is only valued in as far as it can achieve your political agenda?

    Let’s not forget that that is EXACTLY where we are with Trump – by his own admission and as reported multiple times on this very same blog.

    When BOTH sides are willing to lie with abandon – even under oath – just to advance their personal or political agendas, where can the truth be found ?

    On what basis can conciencence voters cast their ballots ? On what basis and just what (exactly) are we now voting for ? The most believable liar ? The most belligerent hot-air merchant ? Popularity ? Tribal allegiances ?

    On what basis do our courts now operate when sworn affidavits can be purchased and falsified at will ? On what basis do we even decide to start investigating potential wrongdoing ? Should we believe our President when he declares Mueller’s probe a “witch hunt” ? Should we believe female accusations of sexual misconduct during elections ? Can we believe them any more now that the Democrats have used them to “disqualify” candidates and now we find that Democrat are willing to lie under oath without consequence for not only those that actually lie under oath, but those that solicit the lies in the first place for political gain ?

    Has truth become so relative that it now means nothing at all and calling witnesses in our legal system is a waste of time because there’s no way to know whether they will be lying under oath or not ? What is the meaning or purpose of an Oath of Office in today’s political culture ?

    We need our Justice Department to rediscover the meaning of “justice” and to prosecute ALL miscreants – regardless of rank, popularity, party, wealth, or privilege. Until we get that, we have to continue living in this cesspool of lies, accusations, and corruption that Donald Trump has exacerbated when he has encouraged his followers to abandon law and order in favor of “winning at any cost”, including violent revenge and “fake news” while lying under oath and that the Democrats have allowed with their (relatively) new practice of false accusations, in addition to their lying under oath, and “win at any cost”.

    Character in a politician or civic leader matters. It’s time for voters to realize that and start voting that way.

  • Marcion

    Innocent until proven guilty is a criminal standard, for when people are at risk of being imprisoned by the state or worse. If Kavanaugh was found guilty, his “punishment” would be that he couldn’t move from one prestigious lifetime appointment on a federal court to another, even more prestigious lifetime appointment on the supreme court. Not being on the supreme court is not a punishment, and being denied a seat on it is not an injustice. It’s a simple fact of life for the vast majority of Americans. It’s interesting how #nevertrump conservatives all forgot this when it came to letting Trump influence the supreme court for decades.

    So we’ll see whether or not the Kavanaugh fight was worth it for #nevertrump conservatives when Kavanaugh rules that Trump can’t be subpoenaed or indicted for his crimes or corruption. Of course, that’s if #nevertrump conservatives haven’t all bent the knee to Trump by the time something like that makes it to the Supreme court.

  • captcrisis

    I don’t think you understand this discussion.

  • IllinoisPatriot

    Your history is one of highly partisan liberal (almost) trolling of this site.

    You should not be surprised when you are treated in line with your history of posting – as a partisan Democrat that is against Kavanaugh for purely political partisan reasons.

    You failed to provide the background logic and chain of reasoning that led you to your conclusion, so in that absence, your posting history of partisan liberal relative-morality is used as the basis for judging your posts.

    You made your bed. Get comfortable lying in it and expect to have fleas when you wake up…..

  • captcrisis

    Switch to decaf!

  • Evermyrtle

    Always tell the truth, as long as it makes a Democrat look good, if it doesn’t, throw it in the trash and forget about it!!!