CHART: Elizabeth Warren DNA = 99.9% NOT Native American + 0.1% Peruvian…

Democrat Senator Elizabeth Warren lied about her Native American ancestry.
Findings from her own DNA test published by the Boston Globe:^[1,2]
– They did not compare her DNA to Native American samples (explanation below*), but to samples from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia (South America).
– Warren is less than 0.1% to 1.56% “Native American.”
– That means she is 99.9% to 98.4% NOT Native American.
– The average American has more Native American genes (0.18%) than Warren’s 0.1 % (0.097%).

Why do we care? Because Elizabeth Warren has used this fake claim to advance her professional and political careers. Isn’t it time we stop politicians from dividing us into different groups?

ANALYSIS
Democrat Senator Elizabeth Warren released a DNA test yesterday claiming that “she had a Native American in her family tree dating back 6 to 10 generations.”^[1,2]
That means, Warren’s so-called Native American DNA could be between 0.1% to 1.56% . (That is a Native American* ancestry between 1/64th and 1/1,024th.)

If Elizabeth Warren had a Native Ancestor 6 generations back in her tree, it means that:
She has 1/64th Native American* ancestry, which means she shares only 1.56% of her ancestors’ DNA, on average.
That means her DNA is 98.44% not Native American.

If Elizabeth Warren had a Native Ancestor 10 generations back in her tree, it means that:
She has 1/1,024th Native American* ancestry, which means she shares less than 0.1 % (0.097%) of her ancestors’ DNA, on average.
That means her DNA is 99.9% not Native American.

*They did not use Native American DNA samples but Mexican, Peruvian, and Colombian samples:
From her DNA test, page 3:^[2]

For Native American references, we used samples within the 1000 Genomes project of Native American ancestry; these samples come from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia. (It is not possible to use Native American reference sequences from inside the United States, since Native American groups within the US have not chosen to participate in recent population genetics studies.)

The Boston Globe^[1] explained further:

Detecting DNA for Native Americans is particularly tricky because there is an absence of Native American DNA available for comparison. This is in part because Native American leaders have asked tribal members not to participate in genetic databases.

“The tribes have felt they have been exploited,” explained Lawrence Brody, a senior investigator with the Medical Genomics and Metabolic Genetics Branch at the National Institutes of Health. “The amount of genetic data that is available from Native Americans is sparse.”

To make up for the dearth of Native American DNA, Bustamante used samples from Mexico, Peru, and Colombia to stand in for Native American.

The average American has 0.18% Native American genes (that is more than Warren’s DNA), as published by The New York Times:^[3]

The researchers found that European-Americans had genomes that were on average 98.6 percent European, .19 percent African, and .18 Native American.

On average, the scientists found, people who identified as African-American had genes that were only 73.2 percent African. European genes accounted for 24 percent of their DNA, while .8 percent came from Native Americans.

Latinos, on the other hand, had genes that were on average 65.1 percent European, 18 percent Native American, and 6.2 percent African. The researchers found that European-Americans had genomes that were on average 98.6 percent European, .19 percent African, and .18 Native American.

REACTION
The Cherokee Nation^[4] rejects Warren’s claims and shenanigans:

Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr.

TAHLEQUAH, Okla. — Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. issued the following statement Monday in response to Senator Elizabeth Warren’s DNA test claiming Native Heritage:

“A DNA test is useless to determine tribal citizenship. Current DNA tests do not even distinguish whether a person’s ancestors were indigenous to North or South America,” Cherokee Nation Secretary of State Chuck Hoskin Jr. said. “Sovereign tribal nations set their own legal requirements for citizenship, and while DNA tests can be used to determine lineage, such as paternity to an individual, it is not evidence for tribal affiliation. Using a DNA test to lay claim to any connection to the Cherokee Nation or any tribal nation, even vaguely, is inappropriate and wrong. It makes a mockery out of DNA tests and its legitimate uses while also dishonoring legitimate tribal governments and their citizens, whose ancestors are well documented and whose heritage is proven. Senator Warren is undermining tribal interests with her continued claims of tribal heritage.“

SOURCES:
[1]- Boston Globe: Warren releases results of DNA test (October 15, 2018)
#https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/10/15/warren-addresses-native-american-issue/YEUaGzsefB0gPBe2AbmSVO/story.html
[2]- Boston Globe: Warren DNA test (October 15, 2018)
#https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/10/15/read-results-warren-dna-test/mBPi8QxENhtHHTP2B1fFBO/story.html?p1=Article_Related_Box_Article
[3]- NYT: White? Black? A Murky Distinction Grows Still Murkier (Dec. 24, 2014)
#https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/25/science/23andme-genetic-ethnicity-study.html
[4]- Cherokee Nation responds to Senator Warren’s DNA test (10/15/2018)
#http://www.cherokee.org/News/Stories/20181015_Cherokee-Nation-responds-to-Senator-Warrens-DNA-test

Advertisements

LIST: How Senators Voted on Kavanaugh’s Confirmation to the Supreme Court

The U.S. Senate voted 50-48 this afternoon to confirm Brett M. Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Roll Call Vote 115th Congress – 2nd Session^[1]
Grouped By Vote Position

YEAs —50
Alexander (R-TN) Barrasso (R-WY) Blunt (R-MO) Boozman (R-AR) Burr (R-NC) Capito (R-WV) Cassidy (R-LA) Collins (R-ME) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Cotton (R-AR) Crapo (R-ID) Cruz (R-TX) Enzi (R-WY) Ernst (R-IA) Fischer (R-NE) Flake (R-AZ)	Gardner (R-CO) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Heller (R-NV) Hoeven (R-ND) Hyde-Smith (R-MS) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johnson (R-WI) Kennedy (R-LA) Kyl (R-AZ) Lankford (R-OK) Lee (R-UT) Manchin (D-WV) McConnell (R-KY) Moran (R-KS)	Paul (R-KY) Perdue (R-GA) Portman (R-OH) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Rounds (R-SD) Rubio (R-FL) Sasse (R-NE) Scott (R-SC) Shelby (R-AL) Sullivan (R-AK) Thune (R-SD) Tillis (R-NC) Toomey (R-PA) Wicker (R-MS) Young (R-IN)
NAYs —48
Baldwin (D-WI) Bennet (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Booker (D-NJ) Brown (D-OH) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Coons (D-DE) Cortez Masto (D-NV) Donnelly (D-IN) Duckworth (D-IL) Durbin (D-IL) Feinstein (D-CA) Gillibrand (D-NY	Harris (D-CA) Hassan (D-NH) Heinrich (D-NM) Heitkamp (D-ND) Hirono (D-HI) Jones (D-AL) Kaine (D-VA) King (I-ME) Klobuchar (D-MN) Leahy (D-VT) Markey (D-MA) McCaskill (D-MO) Menendez (D-NJ) Merkley (D-OR) Murphy (D-CT) Murray (D-WA)	Nelson (D-FL) Peters (D-MI) Reed (D-RI) Sanders (I-VT) Schatz (D-HI) Schumer (D-NY) Shaheen (D-NH) Smith (D-MN) Stabenow (D-MI) Tester (D-MT) Udall (D-NM) Van Hollen (D-MD) Warner (D-VA) Warren (D-MA) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR)
Present – 1
Murkowski (R-AK)
Not Voting – 1
Daines (R-MT)

THE MOST EXHAUSTIVE SENATE REVIEW OF ANY SUPREME COURT NOMINEE IN U.S. HISTORY
U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) delivered the following remarks on the Senate floor regarding the nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Brett Kavanaugh (Oct. 3, 2018):^[2]

“This evening, the Senate will receive the results of the FBI’s supplemental background investigation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh. This is now the seventh time the FBI has looked into Judge Kavanaugh’s background. And this information comes on top of what has already been one of the most thorough and most exhaustive Senate reviews of any Supreme Court nominee in the entire history of our country.

“Five days of public hearings. Sixty-five private meetings with Senators. More than 1,200 responses to written questions from members. More than 500,000 pages of documents for review — the most produced for any Supreme Court nomination in our history. And the 300-plus opinions Judge Kavanaugh has issued during his 12 years on the D.C. Circuit.

YES, KAVANAUGH WAS INVESTIGATED
– 7th FBI Investigation Results: There is no Corroboration of the Allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh (10/5/2018)
– TRANSCRIPT of Kavanaugh Interview on 9/26/2018 by Senate Judiciary Investigators (re: Julie Swetnick Allegations)
– TRANSCRIPT of Kavanaugh Interview on 9/25/2018 by Senate Judiciary Investigators (re: Deborah Ramirez Allegations)
– TRANSCRIPT of Kavanaugh Interview on 9/17/2018 by Senate Judiciary Investigators (re: Christine Ford Allegations)

ASSAULT ALLEGATIONS WERE NOT CORROBORATED BY WITNESSES
– (PDF) Leland Keyser Statement to Judiciary Denying Ford’s Allegations (9/22/2018)
– (PDF) Mark Judge Statement to Judiciary Denying Ford’s Allegations (9/18/2018)
– (PDF) Patrick J. Smyth Statement to Judiciary Denying Ford’s Allegations (9/18/2018)
– (PDF) 60+High School Friends Deny Julie Swetnick Story Against Kavanaugh (9/26/2018)
– Christina King Miranda Recanted her story re: Ford’s Allegations (9/23/2018)
– Myth vs Fact: Avenatti’s Statements on Investigation into his Clients Allegations (9/27/2018)

ONE OF THE MOST QUALIFIED NOMINEES:
Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Chuck Grassley, said this about Kavanaugh qualifications (Sept. 4, 2018):^[3]

Judge Kavanaugh is one of the most qualified nominees – if not the most qualified nominee –I have seen. Judge Kavanaugh is a graduate of Yale Law School. He clerked for three federal judges, including the man he is nominated to replace. He spent all but three years of his career in public service and has served as a judge for twelve years on the D.C. Circuit – the most influential federal circuit court. He has one of the most impressive records for a lower court judge in the Supreme Court. In at least a dozen separate cases, the Supreme Court adopted positions advanced by Judge Kavanaugh.

The American Bar Association, whose assessment Democratic leaders have called the “gold standard” of judicial evaluations, rated Judge Kavanaugh unanimously well-qualified.

A review of Judge Kavanaugh’s extensive record demonstrates a deep commitment to the rule of law. He has written eloquently that both judges and federal agencies are bound by the laws Congress enacts. And he has criticized those who substitute their own judgments about what a statute should say for what the statute actually says.

After the President nominated Judge Kavanaugh, I said this would be the most thorough and transparent confirmation process in history. It has proven to be. Judge Kavanaugh has a twelve-year record on the D.C. Circuit, where he authored 307 opinions and joined hundreds more—amounting to more than 10,000 pages.

He submitted more than 17,000 pages of speeches, articles, and other material to the committee, along with his 120-page written response to the Senate Questionnaire—the most robust ever submitted to a Supreme Court nominees. These add up to more than 27,000 pages of Judge Kavanaugh’s record already available to the American people.

And we received just shy of half a million pages of emails and other documents from Judge Kavanaugh’s service as an executive branch lawyer—which is more than we received for the last five Supreme Court nominees combined. Every one of these more than 483,000 pages of executive branch records are available to any senator, anytime, 24/7.

And I pushed for federal officials to significantly expedite the public disclosure process under federal law, so that all Americans have online access to more than 290,000 pages of these records right now on the Judiciary Committee website.

In short, the American people have unprecedented access and more materials to review for Judge Kavanaugh than they ever had for a Supreme Court nominee. And to support the review of Judge Kavanaugh’s historic volume of material, I’ve worked to ensure that more Senators have more access to more material than ever.

RELATED
– Christine Blasey Ford Coached a Friend on Polygraphs, said Ex-Boyfriend to Senate Judiciary
– CHART: Shifting Dates of Kavanaugh’s Accuser = She was 13 to 22 Years Old when Assaulted
– (PDF) Prosecutor Mitchell Memo: Christine Ford’s Allegations Weaker than “He said, She said” Case
– What this 7th Kavanaugh FBI Investigation is and isn’t

SOURCES
[1] U.S. Senate #https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&session=2&vote=00223
[2] Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell Press Release: “Leader McConnell Files Cloture on the Nomination of Judge Kavanaugh” (Oct. 3, 2018)
#https://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ID=FB553042-25BB-4224-8D33-7EE01F3E45BC
[3] Grassley Statement at Hearing on Nomination of Judge Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court (Sept. 4, 2018)
#https://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-statement-hearing-nomination-judge-kavanaugh-supreme-court

Investigation Results: There is no Corroboration of the Allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh (10/5/2018)

The Senate Judiciary Committee provided today a summary of the results of their investigation of allegations raised against Judge Kavanaugh by: Christine Blasey Ford, Deborah Ramirez, Julie Swetnick, an anonymous allegation from Colorado, and other allegations.

They concluded: “The Committee’s investigation, like the FBI supplemental background investigation, has found that there is no corroboration of the allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh.”

OCTOBER 05, 2018
Summary of Senate Judiciary Committee Investigation
(as of October 4, 2018)

Background

The Senate Judiciary Committee has engaged in a thorough and robust investigation of allegations raised against Judge Kavanaugh. Throughout the last month, Committee staff members have collected statements, letters, and calls from individuals around the country. The reports range from substantive allegations of sexual misconduct, to short messages to senators passing along internet rumors and theories.

Committee staff continue to work tirelessly to pursue any and all substantive leads. In the course of the continuing investigation, staff members have spoken with 35 individuals, a task that requires extensive work during nights and weekends. More than 20 Committee staffers have contributed to the investigative efforts. The Committee has not received any evidence that would corroborate the claims made by Dr. Ford, Ms. Ramirez, Ms. Swetnick, or anybody else.

Allegations and Subjects

Ford Allegations

In response to Dr. Ford’s allegations, Committee staff repeatedly requested an opportunity to interview Dr. Ford, but her lawyers repeatedly refused. Committee staff offered to fly to California or any other location to interview Dr. Ford. But as Dr. Ford explained at her hearing, she was not clear that this offer had been made.

The Committee thus reopened the hearing on Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination.
· During the additional hearing day (Day 5), the Committee solicited more than 8 total hours of public testimony under oath from Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh.
· In connection with the hearing, the Committee collected 24 pages of evidence from Dr. Ford in two productions. The Committee also received Judge Kavanaugh’s calendars.

The Committee also received a statement, submitted under penalty of felony, from Dr. Ford’s ex-boyfriend, who cast serious doubt on the credibility of some of Dr. Ford’s testimony before the Committee.
· Notably, he stated that he had not known her to have any fear of flying or related claustrophobia and that she had previously provided advice to someone on how to successfully take a polygraph, directly contradicting her hearing testimony.
· Despite repeated requests by the Chairman, Dr. Ford still has not supplied several key items, including the charts from her polygraph examination, any recording of her polygraph examination, and the therapy notes that she claimed corroborated her story. Dr. Ford has not provided these therapy notes to the Committee, even though she shared these same notes with the media.

In addition to conducting the hearing, the Committee obtained statements from the three individuals who Dr. Ford identified as being present at the 1982 gathering: PJ Smyth, Leland Ingham Keyser, and Mark Judge (who submitted two statements).
· Each person denied having any knowledge of the alleged gathering. Ms. Keyser stated that she does not even know Judge Kavanaugh and does not recall ever meeting him. And Mr. Smyth and Mr. Judge each said they had never witnessed Judge Kavanaugh engage in conduct of the kind described by Dr. Ford.

The Committee contacted a total of 15 former classmates of Judge Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford. The Committee also received several statements, signed under penalty of felony, that support Judge Kavanaugh’s explanation of terms in his high school yearbook.

Finally, prior to Day 5 of the hearing, the Committee staff conducted a transcribed telephone interview with Judge Kavanaugh regarding Dr. Ford’s allegations. The Minority staff refused to attend.

Ramirez Allegations

In response to the allegations from Ms. Ramirez, the Committee contacted Ms. Ramirez’s counsel 7 times seeking evidence to support the claims made in The New Yorker. Ms. Ramirez produced nothing in response. Ms. Ramirez’s counsel refused the Committee’s request for an interview. Committee staff nevertheless pursued the investigation. Staff interviewed 5 witnesses with relevant information. Committee staff also investigated the public statements of 3 other individuals and found they had no knowledge of the alleged event.

Prior to Day 5 of the hearing, Committee staff conducted a transcribed telephone interview with Judge Kavanaugh, subject to penalty of felony. He denied Ms. Ramirez’s allegations. Minority staff attended the interview under protest and refused to participate.

Swetnick Allegations

In response to allegations by Ms. Swetnick, the Committee requested evidence on 6 occasions from her. Ms. Swetnick refused the Committee’s request for an interview. Despite this obstruction, Committee staff attempted to pursue the investigation by interviewing 12 witnesses who claimed to have relevant information. Committee staff obtained two sworn statements from individuals with knowledge of Ms. Swetnick’s character and allegations.

Prior to Day 5 of the hearing, Committee staff also interviewed Judge Kavanaugh on these allegations on two separate transcribed telephone interviews, subject to penalty of felony—both before (when Ms. Ramirez’s allegations were also discussed) and after Ms. Swetnick was identified by name. Judge Kavanaugh denied Ms. Swetnick’s allegations, asserting that he does not even know Ms. Swetnick. Minority staff attended the interview under protest and refused to participate.

Anonymous Allegation from Colorado

In response to an anonymous allegation claiming Judge Kavanaugh pushed his girlfriend against a wall in a violent and sexual manner in 1998, Committee staff obtained a sworn statement from the woman dating Judge Kavanaugh at the time. She unequivocally denied that this incident ever took place.

Committee staff also questioned Judge Kavanaugh on these allegations during a transcribed telephone interview, subject to penalty of felony. Like his then-girlfriend, he denied that the incident ever took place. Minority staff attended but refused to participate in the interview.

Allegations by Others

The author of one allegation recanted in a public Tweet. The Committee referred the individual to the FBI for possible violations of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 (materially false statements) and 1505 (obstruction of congressional-committee proceedings). Committee staff questioned Judge Kavanaugh about the allegation during a transcribed telephone interview, subject to penalty of felony. He unequivocally denied the allegation. Minority staff attended but refused to participate in the interview.

A second allegation was completely anonymous. Committee staff questioned Judge Kavanaugh about the allegation during a transcribed telephone interview, subject to penalty of felony. He unequivocally denied the allegation. Minority staff attended but refused to participate in the interview. A woman has subsequently begun contacting Senate offices, claiming to be the author of the anonymous letter. Even though there are doubts about the authenticity of her claim, Committee staff is investigating.

Conclusion

The Committee’s investigation, like the FBI supplemental background investigation, has found that there is no corroboration of the allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh.

SOURCE:
Summary of Senate Judiciary Committee Investigation
#https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/summary-of-senate-judiciary-committee-investigation

READ Summary of Senate Judiciary Cmmtt Investigation: Conclusion: "The Committee’s investigation, like the FBI supplemental background investigation, has found that there is no corroboration of the allegations made against Judge Kavanaugh."https://t.co/uRJn3kVBhk#KavanaughVote

— Fact REAL (@FactREAL) October 5, 2018

(PDF) 60+High School Friends Deny Julie Swetnick Story Against Kavanaugh (9/26/2018)

Letter from sixty four high school friends of Kavanaugh denying Julie Swetnick allegation of “gang rape” of girls. They added: “Kavanaugh is a good man. He has always treated women with respect and decency.”

Dear Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein:

We are men and women who knew Brett Kavanaugh well in high school. We have seen reports today that Julie Swetnick, who says she graduated from Gaithersburg High School, submitted a declaration to the Committee alleging that Brett participated in horrific conduct during high school, including targeting girls for gang rape. Nonsense. We never witnessed any behavior that even approaches what is described in this allegation. It is reprehensible.

In the extensive amount of time we collectively spent with Brett, we do not recall having ever met someone named Julie Swetnick. Nor did we ever observe Brett engaging in any conduct resembling that described in Ms. Swetnick’s declaration.

Brett Kavanaugh is a good man. He has always treated women with respect and decency. He is a man of honor, integrity, and compassion. These shameful attacks must end. This process is a disgrace and is harming good people.

SOURCE:
Senate Judiciary Committee
#https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/download/09/26/18-64-of-kavanaughs-high-school-freinds_-avenatti-allegation&download=1

READ LETTER FROM 60+ HIGH SCHOOL FRIENDS OF KAVANAUGH DENYING Julie Swetnick allegation of "gang rape" of girls. They added: "Kavanaugh is a good man. He has always treated women with respect and decency." (1/2)https://t.co/xmsDEbxXJ9#KavanaughVote pic.twitter.com/jG7WIvRBzk

— Fact REAL (@FactREAL) October 5, 2018

Christina King Miranda Recanted her story re: Ford’s Allegations (9/23/2018)

Senate Judiciary Committee wrote on September 23, 2018:

WASHINGTON – For the last week, the Judiciary Committee has been investigating Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation that Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a house party while in high school approximately 36 years ago. […]

A former schoolmate of Dr. Ford’s—Ms. Christina King Miranda—claimed on social media posts on September 20 that “[t]his incident did happen, many of us heard about it in school.” Hours later, the Committee reached out to Ms. Miranda and asked her to participate in a confidential interview on Dr. Ford’s allegations with Committee investigators. Shortly thereafter, however, she deleted her posts and claimed on National Public Radio that she “ha[d] no idea” whether the incident “happened or not.” She further stated that she would not participate in an interview with the Committee. […]

Ms. King subsequently recanted her claim of secondhand knowledge and publicly refused to cooperate with the Committee’s investigation

SOURCE:
Senate Judiciary Committee – Sept. 23, 2018
#https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/update-on-the-senate-judiciary-committees-investigation-into-allegations-involving-supreme-court-nominee-judge-brett-m-kavanaugh

Re: Christine Blasey Ford's former schoolmate (Christina King Miranda), the Senate Judiciary found: "Ms. King subsequently recanted her claim of secondhand knowledge & publicly refused to cooperate with the Committee’s investigation." (1/4)https://t.co/ZVxigvf20l#KavanaughVote

— Fact REAL (@FactREAL) October 5, 2018

(PDF) Leland Keyser Statement to Judiciary Denying Ford’s Allegations (9/22/2018)

Leland Keyser, a lifelong friend of Christine Blasey Ford, submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee the following statement dated 9/22/18: “Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”

Ms. Leland Keyser has engaged me in the limited capacity to address your request for information in the email below. Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.

Ms. Keyser hopes this information is helpful to your investigation. I am avaiable [sic] for any further questions you may have.

Sincerely,

—
Howard J. Walsh III, Esq.

SOURCE:
Senate Judiciary Committee – Sept. 23, 2018
#https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/press/rep/releases/update-on-the-senate-judiciary-committees-investigation-into-allegations-involving-supreme-court-nominee-judge-brett-m-kavanaugh

READ LELAND KEYSER STATEMENT (lifelong friend of Christine Blasey Ford) to Judiciary (9/22/18): She “does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford.”https://t.co/ZVxigvf20l#KavanaughVote

— Fact REAL (@FactREAL) October 5, 2018