Something has always seemed suspicious about the allegations brought forth by Michael Avenatti’s client Julie Swetnick against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh.
Swetnick apparently has a rather interesting past, one that includes a previous suit filed AGAINST her for “sexually offensive conduct.”
In 2000, Swetnick’s employer filed a civil suit against her.
At the time, she was working for WebTrends, a web analytics company in Portland.
Two male co-workers claimed her conduct was unprofessional during a business luncheon.
The employees stated she had been engaging in “unwelcome sexual innuendo and inappropriate conduct” in front of customers.
Swetnick, in turn, “made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her,” according to the suit.
After the HR department conducted its investigation, it found zero corroboration for Swetnick’s case, but did find Swetnick had acted inappropriately.
According to the report, after the HR department released its findings, Swetnick actually walked back her complaint.
Soon after, she took a leave of absence from the company — but that too was problematic. “In short, Swetnick continued to claim the benefits of a full-time employee of WebTrends, sought disability payments from WebTrends’ insurance carrier and falsely claimed unemployment insurance payments from the District of Columbia,” the suit read.
The company dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice shortly after filing.
Swetnick’s attorney in her current allegations against Kavanaugh tells you all you need to know about her current claim.
Michael Avenatti, the same attorney representing porn star Stormy Daniels, has crawled out from under a rock to take her case.
He dismissed Webtrends’ previous suit against his client as “completely bogus.”
Avenatti has proven over the last few months the only thing he is worried about is getting more TV time.
Since the allure of the Daniels case has worn off, he had to get involved in the Kavanaugh confirmation to get his face on TV.
Anyone that has heard Swetnick’s wild claim finds it very hard to believe. If her shocking account is true, however, Swetnick herself has a lot to answer for, such as:
Why, as a college student, was she hanging out with high school boys?
Why did she never tell the police about the horrors she had witnessed?
Why have no other witnesses or victims come forward?
Why did she continue to attend parties where girls were allegedly being gang-raped?
That last point, in particular, should be inquired about by any journalist who interviews her if they really want to be taken seriously.
There is simply nothing that makes sense, at least to a reasonable person, about her claims.
Oh, there is also the problem her claims have not been corroborated, which is why the Senate Judiciary Committee has not found her claims to be worth exploring.