Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley on Friday referred a woman who'd accused Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh of raping her “several times” in the backseat of a car to the Justice Department for “materially false statements” and “obstruction.”

Kavanaugh, confirmed to the high court on Oct. 6, was infamously accused by multiple women of sexual assault and misconduct before the confirmation.
Judy Munro-Leighton, according to Grassley’s office, “alleged that Justice Kavanaugh and a friend had raped her ‘several times each’ in the backseat of a car.”

Those accusations were made via a "Jane Doe" letter provided to Sen. Kamala Harris, a California Democrat and committee member, Grassley’s office wrote.
Upon further investigation, however, inconsistencies in the story emerged.

“Given her relatively unique name, Committee investigators were able to use open-source research to locate Ms. Munro-Leighton and determine that she: (1) is a left-wing activist; (2) is decades older than Judge Kavanaugh; and (3) lives in neither the Washington DC area nor California, but in Kentucky,” Grassley’s office wrote.

“Under questioning by Committee investigators, Ms. Munro-Leighton admitted, contrary to her prior claims, that she had not been sexually assaulted by ... Kavanaugh and was not the author of the original 'Jane Doe’ letter,” Grassley’s office wrote in a Friday referral to the DOJ.

“When directly asked by Committee investigators if she was, as she had claimed, the ‘Jane Doe’ from Oceanside California who had sent the letter to Senator Harris, she admitted: ‘No, no, no. I did that as a way to grab attention. I am not Jane Doe . . . but I did read Jane Doe’s letter. I read the transcript of the call to your Committee. . . . I saw it online. It was news.”

“In short, during the Committee’s time-sensitive investigation of allegations against Judge Kavanaugh, Ms. Munro-Leighton submitted a fabricated allegation, which diverted Committee resources. When questioned by Committee investigators she admitted it was false, a ‘ploy,’ and a ‘tactic,’” Grassley’s office wrote. “She was opposed to Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation.”

Friday’s referral to the DOJ was not the first time Grassley has asked for an investigation into Kavanaugh’s accusers.

Last week, Grassley referred attorney Michael Avenatti and client Julie Swetnick -- who'd accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct -- for criminal investigation regarding a potential “conspiracy” to provide false statements to Congress and obstruct its investigation.

Avenatti is also a potential 2020 Democratic presidential candidate and works as the attorney for adult film star Stormy Daniels, who maintains she had a sexual encounter with President Trump years before his election. Avenatti represented Swetnick, who accused Kavanaugh during confirmation proceedings of being involved in or present at “gang” and “train” rapes at high school parties in the 1980s.

Kavanaugh denied all the claims against him.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kavanaugh-accuser-referred-to-doj-for-false-statements-grassleys-office-announces

Wow!
That's news right there!

hahaha

I have always argued that women can lie too, so just the claim itself should not be considered gospel without further investigation.

Yeah, and after the claims were investigates so far three of them have been referred to the FBI for a potential criminal case and I have a hunch Ford will be next. The Left has sure abandoned her, just like I said they would the moment the vote came down.

women can lie, I dont think she did or will be found to have either. I just think that one will never have enough 'proof' of what unfolded or when.

im sure most people believe without a dought that nothing happend, some things you know without " proof" . 2+2=4 not 3.

not for nothing, but math is a series of numbers and rules about numbers, there is no 'proof' needed so long as the rules are met.

however, when there are only three people in a room and there is offensive touching, 'proof' in the physical sense would be impossible to gather. It only becomes a he said/she said, which is then usually figured (if we watched Cosby) by the victims past behaviors and words.

K's actions and words lead me to believe Ford was truthful. IT seems to me the thing kids do at parties, particularly boys who live in a culture where it is seen as a right of passage for the boy and only the girl is scorned or shamed for it. It seems highly likely he was a drunk in school(by his fervent defense of how much he loves beer, can anyone say, 'thou doth protest too much?).

It seems that he has little respect for women that don't kiss his behind (by the difference in how he addressed the women who did question him, a real job interview would have immediately disqualified him. "Have you ever been drunk and forgot something" answer, "have you?" who speaks at a job interview to the interviewer like that? NO ONE),

and his method of answering direct questions with more questions, his excessive water drinking, and emotionalism, and his ridiculous 'proof' of innocence being a personal CALENDAR (as if someone would document that they had groped someone at a get together) makes me think he was VERY deceptive.

but, like I said, in such a case where there is touching, it is hard to prove, without the words of the own accused (what did Cosby in was admitting to having drugs for sex, even though he never said he snuck them to anyone).

it seems to me your giving Cosby a pass for admitting he had sex with women under the influence of drugs he supplied , but you want to hang the man who swears he never assaulted the woman that accused him, along with others making a claim and then retracting those claims plus the fact her witnesses said they knew nothing of any assult. Sounds a little bass akwards to me and and the judicial system.

Im not giving him anything. I was not chosen for jury. I am aknowledging that people CONSENTUALLY engage in taking drugs together, just like they drink together. And being the root difference between sex and rape is CONSENT, that seems pretty important.

And I also do not want to HANG anyone, because I was not only not chosen for a trial in K's case, but there was no TRIAL or no criminal charge. all at stake was his suitability for Supreme Court. And Ford had no 'witnesses' to her claim as she was in a room alone with K and his friend, so of course no one would see or know about it.

I have consistently posted my view on the complexity of rape and other sexual crimes, due to the culture of casual sex and 'partying' that is consensual(especially among young people).

It is easy to claim, but hard to prove. It is easy to convict only on whether a substance like drugs or alcohol is involved, which I don't agree with if consumption was consensual.

I believe Cosby used drugs, like people use alcohol, in environments with women who went consensually with him to a bed or bedroom and consensually engaged in consumption. I believe that was the crowd he ran with who ran with him(playboy mansion types). I dont believe any of those women had DOCTORS reports documenting their alleged trauma, or any indication in their lives(like two separate entrances to their home) indicating having had such traumas. I believe they had reason to want to get on with a successful actor.

I don't believe there was motive for a girl to want to get on with a drunk teenager.

that's just my view as an assault survivor myself, and my gut is that K lied and C was used and exploited. The only difference really being that one made a damning statement about his sexual practices and the other did not.

But no one but those involved will ever know for sure.

Trump is a moron.

lol. Im not sure he is, but he surely plays one on TV.

lol. Im not sure he is, but he surely plays one on TV.

lol. Im not sure he is, but he surely plays one on TV.

lol. Im not sure he is, but he surely plays one on TV.

so good, the computer repeated it three times