DOJ Issues Statement On Kavanaugh Background Check

U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions holds a news conference at the Department of Justice December 15, 2017 in Washington, DC. Sessions called the question-and-answer session with reporters to highlight his department's fight to reduce violent crime.
WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 15: U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions' television image is reflected in President Donald Trump's official portrait during a news conference at the Department of Justice December 15, 2017 ... WASHINGTON, DC - DECEMBER 15: U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions' television image is reflected in President Donald Trump's official portrait during a news conference at the Department of Justice December 15, 2017 in Washington, DC. Sessions called the question-and-answer session with reporters to highlight his department's fight to reduce violent crime. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images) MORE LESS
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

The Justice Department on Wednesday made clear in a statement regarding Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh that it “does not involve any potential federal crime.”

The DOJ issued the statement about the FBI’s process after President Trump suggested that that looking further into Blasey Ford’s allegations is not “their thing” and Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley said that the FBI’s probe is “closed.”

But it would take a simple request from Trump for the FBI to reopen Kavanaugh’s background report file — the same file Ford’s letter alleging the sexual assault went into last week.

A spokesperson for the Justice Department didn’t immediately rule out this possibility, of gathering “more background reports,” when asked.

Read the DOJ’s full statement below:

“The Department of Justice and the FBI conduct background investigations in accordance with a memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed by then-Attorney General Eric H. Holder, Jr., and then-White House Counsel Robert F. Bauer in March 2010.  The MOU provides as follows: 

“‘[P]rior to an Appointee’s assuming the nominated position … if the FBI becomes aware of new information that raises questions about the suitability or trustworthiness of an Appointee … the FBI will so apprise the President or his designated representative as soon as possible.’ 

“The FBI does not make any judgment about the credibility or significance of any allegation. The purpose of a background investigation is to determine whether the nominee could pose a risk to the national security of the United States. On the night of September 12, the FBI received a letter dated from July 2018 alleging that the nominee engaged in an incident of misconduct in the 1980s. Consistent with the memorandum of understanding, the FBI forwarded this letter to the White House Counsel’s Office. The allegation does not involve any potential federal crime. The FBI’s role in such matters is to provide information for the use of the decision makers.”

Latest News

Notable Replies

  1. Avatar for paulw paulw says:

    That statement is clarifying but also manifestly false. It’s a federal crime to provide false or misleading information to congress, and, if the allegations are true the nominee appears to have an intention of doing so with respect to them. (Which means that if we follow the Ken Starr rules of procedure he should be detained and questioned without an attorney present until he gives an answer satisfactory to the investigating officers.)

  2. Avatar for denisj denisj says:

    So the White House and Senator Grassley immediately rushed out and got the 65 signatures attesting to Kavanaugh’s good character and of course made no effort to determine the validity of the claim.

  3. If there is even one witness to contradict Kavanaugh after he’s on SCOTUS (if confirmed), somebody can blackmail him for his vote the rest of his life.

    This is a grotesque dereliction of duty by the FBI.

  4. “‘[P]rior to an Appointee’s assuming the nominated position … if the FBI becomes aware of new information that raises questions about the suitability or trustworthiness of an Appointee …“

    The FBI could ask around to find out if Bret Kavanaugh (aka Bart O’Kavanaugh) was known in high school to get stumbling drunk, and maybe even black out drink.

    If so, then his “I don’t remember” defense would lose credibility, as would his truthfully being able to say ‘I know I never did anything like this”

    But it looks like the Republicans simply don’t want to know the truth

  5. Maybe because so many of them experience that kind of drinking they think it’s completely normal and the behavior is therefore irrelevant to his suitability for the position.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

54 more replies

Participants

Avatar for system1 Avatar for paulw Avatar for hoppy Avatar for bobatkinson Avatar for clemmers Avatar for becca656 Avatar for jkrogman Avatar for cd Avatar for stradivarius50t3 Avatar for maxaroo Avatar for water Avatar for fiftygigs Avatar for sharong Avatar for gajake Avatar for edgarant Avatar for jacksonhts Avatar for castor_troy Avatar for tiowally Avatar for tpr Avatar for coimmigrant Avatar for badabingo Avatar for justruss Avatar for theamericanist Avatar for thetimchannel

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Associate Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: