ADVERTISEMENT

FBI probe of Kavanaugh constrained by Trump White House, report finds

cigaretteman

HB King
May 29, 2001
78,538
60,692
113
In September 2018, as allegations of sexual misconduct against Brett M. Kavanaugh threatened his confirmation to the Supreme Court, President Donald Trump vowed that the FBI would have “free rein” to vet the claims. Trump said the FBI was “talking to everybody” and added on social media: “I want them to interview whoever they deem appropriate, at their discretion.”


Cut through the 2024 election noise. Get The Campaign Moment newsletter.

The president’s comments came as a surprise to the FBI, according to a new report from a Democratic senator based on previously undisclosed correspondence between the agency and the White House. FBI officials — directed to conduct a very limited inquiry in a week’s time — requested “additional guidance” from the White House, citing the public remarks by Trump and other officials describing a freewheeling investigation. But the White House never authorized the agency to independently probe the sexual misconduct allegations, which Kavanaugh staunchly denied.
The report, which was produced by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a Judiciary Committee member and leading critic of the Kavanaugh confirmation, and provided to The Washington Post ahead of a public release on Tuesday, provides additional evidence of the tight control exercised by the White House over the FBI investigation — despite Trump’s claims to the contrary.


ADVERTISING


The report found that messages to the FBI tip line regarding Kavanaugh were forwarded directly to the White House and never probed, and that the FBI had no written protocols for the supplemental background investigation ordered by the White House. It notes that the FBI was instructed by the White House to talk to 10 potential witnesses and was not given the leeway to pursue corroborating evidence — the absence of which was cited by senators as they narrowly voted to confirm Kavanaugh, marking a major triumph for the conservative movement and locking in a right-leaning majority that would later overturn the constitutional right to abortion.
🏛️
Follow Politics
Trump ordered the additional inquiry following nationally televised testimony by Christine Blasey Ford that Kavanaugh had groped her and tried to take off her clothes more than three decades earlier, when they were in high school at a party in suburban Maryland. Another accuser, Deborah Ramirez, had come forward in a New Yorker story, saying Kavanaugh had shoved his penis into her face during a dorm party when they were at Yale University in the early 1980s.
“The Congressional report published today confirms what we long suspected: the FBI supplemental investigation of then-nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh was, in fact, a sham effort directed by the Trump White House to silence brave victims and other witnesses who came forward and to hide the truth,” said Blasey Ford’s lawyers, Debra Katz and Lisa Banks.

Advertisement


An attorney for Ramirez, John Clune, said of the report: “It’s really disappointing since our client was so candid about something that was a pretty awful experience.”
Kavanaugh did not respond to a request for comment sent to the Supreme Court on Monday. Trump campaign spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said Kavanaughwas unfairly slandered and smeared with lies.”
Some of the limits placed by the Trump White House on the inquiry were widely reported at the time. The FBI did not question Kavanaugh or Blasey Ford about the allegations. Nor did the FBI interview dozens of people whose names were provided by lawyers for Blasey Ford and Ramirez who said they could have offered corroborating evidence. It was also clear at the time that the FBI was not conducting a criminal investigation in which it would have broad authority,



The FBI declined to comment on the report but explained in a statement how it responds to requests from the White House to conduct background investigations.
“The FBI follows a long-standing, established, process through which the scope of the investigation is limited to what is requested,” the statement said. “The FBI does not have the independent authority to expand the scope of a supplemental background investigation outside the requesting agency’s parameters.”
In an interview, Whitehouse said the review of the FBI probe took six years because of resistance from both the Trump and Biden administrations to providing correspondence with the FBI, access to FBI officials and answers to questions about the investigation. Until 2021, the only information Democratic senators said they were able to obtain about the procedures for a supplemental background investigation was a publicly accessible YouTube video explaining how the FBI tip line works.

 
How does one go about investigating a 35-year-old allegation, exactly?

She makes the allegation, he denies it. The end. No one will ever know for sure what really happened.
 
LOL, some chick makes up a story about being assaulted in a house somewhere (not sure where) during the eighties (not sure what year) with people who say they weren’t there and this didn’t happen (including her best friend) and you want an investigation 🤣🤣🤣

Must be different for Kamala since she married a woman beater who cheats on his wife and gets the nanny pregnant. But hey, believe all women 🤣🤣🤣
 
Sure, but that doesn’t discount the process. Shouldn’t you save your eye roll for anyone thinking Trump promised a clean investigation and delivered one?
Here's the thing(s)...I think that statement is just low hanging political fruit.

1. The reality of that situation was (and the reality of similar situations is) that once one such allegation is made and some sand gets thrown into the gears, then copycats follow to throw more sand in the gears. In a nomination background check context, I actually don't have problems with trying to put "some" parameters around the "supplemental." That is particularly the case here because, lest we forget, the Senate, as part of its advice and consent function, has its own full powers to delay the process as long as it wants, to do its own investigation.
2. The "tell" here, for me, is Whitehouse's vague reference to unleashing the FBI on the problem. As the FBI itself said, background investigations are separate and distinct from its usual powers, which are to investigate crimes against the United States. I'm pretty sure that alleged drunken frat boy conduct isn't quite within their normal jurisdiction and process, but of course folks tend to gloss over that.
3. As a practical matter, there's a little bit of CYA here - the reality is that it's a he said she said situation from thirty years prior that the FBI was asked to do a supplemental on, and indeed, from a political attack perspective, that's the beauty of it! I'm sure that if Ford had retained her dress from that night like Monica had, we'd have seen it. But alas.... I can't blame the FBI or the white house for this - the last thing the FBI wants is to be the "responsible' party in a matter that was as politically contentious as this, and the last thing the white house (any white house) wants is to engage in a strategy that is predicated on infinite delay. So, report your findings, but emphasize your constraints.
4. I might be more intrigued by this whole charade if Whitehouse had identified something specific - anything - from an evidentiary perspective that was material to the particular incident and wasn't considered. But, Whitehouse gonna Whitehouse, just like White House gonna White House.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT