By the Daily Post staff
Palo Alto Congresswoman Anna Eshoo and an unnamed Palo Alto professor are central figures in a new development in the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., has referred a letter alleging possible sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh while he was in high school to the FBI, the New York Times reported this afternoon.
The letter was first sent to Eshoo’s office, and Feinstein received it from Eshoo “this summer,” the Times said.
The Washington, D.C., website Politico said that the letter was written by an unnamed professor.
A story posted by Politico said:
“Senators and aides have been chattering about the details of the letter for the last week, including that it was written by a Stanford Law professor and sent to Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.), who then forwarded it to Feinstein.”
Politico did not identify the professor.
Michele Dauber, the Stanford law professor who led the campaign to recall Judge Aaron Persky over the 6-month jail sentence he gave to Brock Turner in a sexual assault case, told the Daily Post the letter did not come from her and she has no information about it.
Feinstein isn’t saying who that person is or describing the information in any way. She said the person “strongly requested confidentiality, declined to come forward or press the matter further, and I have honored that decision.”
The Times story doesn’t explain why Feinstein waited until the week before Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote by the Judiciary Committee to refer the letter to the FBI. The story also doesn’t say why Eshoo, a Democrat, didn’t refer the letter to the FBI herself.
Eshoo’s office declined comment to the Post, saying matters involving constituents are confidential. Feinstein’s office gave the same response to the Post.
The FBI said today (Sept. 13) that it had received Feinstein’s referral and included it in Judge Kavanaugh’s background file. A bureau official also said that no criminal investigation had been opened related to the matter.
The Times said it spoke to two anonymous sources who say the letter concerned an incident of possible sexual misconduct between Judge Kavanaugh and a woman when they were both in high school.
Kavanaugh is 53 years old and was in high school from 1979 to 1983. He attended Georgetown Preparatory School, an all-boys Jesuit high school in Bethesda, Maryland.
The London newspaper The Guardian said it was told by an anonymous source who was briefed on the letter that the incident involving Kavanaugh and a woman that took place when both were 17 years old and at a party. According to the source, Kavanaugh and a male friend had locked her in a room against her will, making her feel threatened, but she was able to get out of the room.
LOL… I have to laugh at the lame attempts at overcoming the damage that Sen Reid’s nuclear option did to the US Senate. The FBI? High school pranks done 35 years ago? Maybe this should go to the International Court of Justice in The Hague. Welcome to the court, Brett! LOL!
You call this a prank? Wow. Just harmless hjininks, huh? No wonder people don’t want to come forward.
Anyone who could characterize this as a “prank,” would likely characterize his own similar behavior in much the same fashion. It clearly was a sexual assault, though the victim was fortunately not raped.
Evidence? Proof? Care to elaborate on what you know that we regular folks don’t? Orrrr…are you just regurgitating media lies you’ve heard? Right….
Wrong. It was allegedly a sexual assault. Her story is full of holes, including the fact that there were two versions of the “guest list”. One version states that there were 4 other boys there. The other states that there were 3 boys & a girl. None of the alleged witnesses say that they were even at this party. The girl sez she wasn’t there, and that she never met Brett Kavanaugh. Your move, counselor.
You all need to get off your high horse. First there are too many inconsistencies in her story. But more than that find me a guy or girl in high school that hasn’t engaged in inappropriate behavior This is ridiculous to have to go back 36 yrs to try and find something on anyone. The left has lost their mind. Let not forget her history of mates that are reported. Oh yeah that’s right no evidence BOOM. No evidence other than what she says. He says never happened. Why does she get a pass on believability versus him. This is just so wrong. You don’t want him on the court got it but don’t blame him for things that aren’t provable. Everyone has come forward even her girlfriend and said never saw it never heard it he was t there
Funny how Ford social media was scrubbed before the “letter” came to light. Funny how everyone ignored Ford’s high school years of debauchery and drunkenness. Kavanaugh didn’t “attempt to rape” her or any other nonsense. Who we need to interview is Ford’s Psychiatrist.
Perhaps if this is the only article you’ve read on the subject, you might call it a prank. But the accusation is attempted rape, with two young men present, and the music turned up loudly so no one else could hear her protests. It was not “just” locking her in a room for a few minutes, as this article wrongly implies. Very biased reporting from the PADP. Try this article in the New Yorker for more details: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/a-sexual-misconduct-allegation-against-the-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-stirs-tension-among-democrats-in-congress
Hey, “Kalico,” did you see this story a little higher up on the Daily Post website?
“Reports: Peninsula woman claims Kavanaugh held her down”
https://padailypost.com/2018/09/15/reports-peninsula-woman-claims-kavanaugh-held-her-down/
It relates the information you claim the “very biased” PADP omitted. This story that we’re commenting on was posted at 2:59 p.m. on Thursday, and I think it reflects what was known at the time about the complaint.
“Kalico,” do you have a reading problem or are you so angry that you mindlessly lash out at people without bothering to get the facts?
there was no more info in that article. You are now fantasizing about a story. Sad
Eshoo is a nut-job liberal out in La La Land. No credibility. This is just a play out of the Anita Hill Handbook.
Hey, “Dittohead.” You’re quoting that degenerate, Rush Limbaugh. In fact, I was aware of Clarence Thomas’s problems, way back in ’82 or so, when a former employee of mine, who had become an EEOC attorney originally during the Carter administration, told me about improper behavior ironically engaged in by her boss, who directed the agency. She never mentioned the guy’s name, but when I first read the Anita Hill accusations, I called her and she confirmed it had in fact been Thomas doing the cover up. She wasn’t accusing him of the overt sexuality, nor did she say she was one of the assault victims, but rather of Thomas covering it up at length for another African-American supervisor in EEOC, to protect the guy’s pension which he would have lost if he had been fired. He had been moved to a Maryland office, to get him out of the line of fire.
When Hill made her experience public, another African-American who had a very similar experience to Hill’s also came forward, but Biden chose to not have her appear before the Judiciary Committee to testify. ~~~~
Your comments are foolish and pointless..
This kind of prank in high school should definitely disqualify Kavanaugh for the court. Everything he’s done since Kindergarten should be reviewed by the FBI, Senate and news media. His confirmation vote should be delayed until the Democrats have taken back the Senate!
Please don’t call an attempted rape, a “prank.” If it had happened to your or your spouse or partner, I’m sure you would not use that euphemism.
It’s this ridiculous article that implies she was “just” locked in a room for a while. Horrible reporting, they left out the details of the allegation. People need to read more than one story before forming opinions.
The public is sick to death of accusers hiding behind anonymity. Remember the Declaration of Independence. Remember John Hancock and his oversize signature. Remember John Carroll of Carrolton who specifically mentioned his hometown to identify himself. These men had the courage to stand up and be counted. Let the accuser come forward. Otherwise this claim has no credibility.
This accuser was not anonymous. She just asked that her name not be released. As an MBA, you surely have sufficient education to understand that.
An anonymous complainant … accusation’s details are unknown … story is floated at the last minute … no reason to be suspicious about anything here.
This was not an anonymous complaint. The Stanford professor, Eshoo, and Feinstein, all know whom she was, and she specifically asked that her name not be made public, no doubt out of fear of retaliation and/or humiliation. We protect such victims, in our society.
My God….you people do not read any other sources, do you? It was not last minute, and it was not vague, and the report is quite disturbing if you read it….AND it was covered up by Feinstein and Eshoo!!! DiFi already lost my vote, and I’ll never vote for Eshoo again either.
If this professor has anything credible to say against Kavanaugh, she’s dreaming if she thinks she will remain anonymous. If it’s a real incident, she’ll be asked to publicly tell her story and then face cross-examination by senators favorable to Kavanaugh. There’s no way for the Senate or the people to know if she is believable unless she comes forward publicly. An anonymous complaint will not matter. A professor of law should know that.
I’m sure that the rapists, if any exist among those who are reading this article and feedback, would agree with you.
Wow, Pancho, saying that anyone who wants a legitimate investigation of this claim is a “rapist” is going too far. Yes, the woman is anonymous because she asked Eshoo to keep her name anonymous. It’s hard to accept the credibility of a complaint made by an unknown person. Eshoo and Feinstein should have revealed this information earlier in the process and asked Kavanaugh about it. Both sides could have presented witnesses to either support or dispute the claim. That’s how an investigation works, Pancho. Don’t call people terrible names because they simply want credible information.
You really didn’t read Pancho’s reply, did you? Or his previous comments. He’s saying that the person who came forward CAN be protected AND we can still do an investigation. Brad G said that anyone who stays anonymous is not real enough to be investigated, and that is just plain wrong. That is what happened with the Brock Turner case. The victim was known publicly as Emily Doe, but that does not make her a non-real person. There might have been an investigation in this Kavanaugh case sooner IF Eshoo and Feinstein had actually provided the information to the FBI in the first place, instead of withholding it.