Daily Check-In 09/26/2018

Wednesday, September 26, 2018



Joint U.S.-Russian raids to kill top terrorists. Teamwork between an American government agency and a sanctioned Russian fund. Moscow pouring money into the Midwest.

These are just a few of the ideas the head of a Russian sovereign wealth fund touched on during his meeting with former Blackwater head Erik Prince in the Seychelles, just weeks before President Donald Trump’s inauguration, according to a memo exclusively reviewed by The Daily Beast.

The meeting between Prince, an influential Trump ally, and Kirill Dmitriev, the CEO of the sanctioned fund, took place on Jan. 11, 2017, at the Four Seasons Hotel in a bar overlooking the Indian Ocean. George Nader, a Lebanese-American businessman who advises the crown prince of the United Arab Emirates, was also present.

Special counsel Robert Mueller has looked into the meeting as part of his larger investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. And nearly a year after the meeting, Prince told Congress his discussion with Dmitriev was just happenstance and took place “over a beer.” Prince also said he did not attend the meeting as a representative of the Trump team.

The first bullet point proposes the U.S. and Russia work together on “military coordination and joint actions in Syria against ISIS.” It’s an idea that appealed to some of the most important players in the early Trump administration; Mike Flynn, Trump’s first and famously Kremlin-friendly national security adviser, pushed to expand U.S.-Russian military communications in Syria, a move that may have been illegal.

Second, the memo proposes “a serious joint effort by U.S. and Russia to actively address the threat of nuclear, biological and chemical (WMD) terror.” While Trump, during the campaign and in the White House, talked of rebuilding America’s nuclear stockpile—and Putin rattled his saber similarly—the memo recommends the two countries work together on nuclear nonproliferation.

Third, the memo proposes ways the U.S. and Russia can develop “win-win economic investment initiatives that will be supported by both electorates.” “Understanding U.S. production by foreign companies is a focus of the new administration,” the memo says. It goes on to note that Russian companies would “make investments with RDIF financing to serve the U.S. market in the Midwest, creating real jobs for hard hit area with high employment.”

Fourth, the memo says the U.S. and Russia should have an “honest and open and continual dialogue on differences and concerns.” One of those concerns, the memo says, is resolving the Ukraine crisis—instigated by Russia’s invasion and annexation of Crimea in 2014—“through Minsk agreements and ensuring Ukraine fulfills its commitments.” The Minsk agreements were drafted and signed by warring parties to alleviate the conflict in Ukraine.

The memo also says the two countries should also coordinate a “working group between the State Department and Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs to address key differences.” It is unclear from the memo what those differences are.

Last, the memo proposes the U.S. and Russia set up a small working group with “2-3 people from each side authorized to finalize an action plan for a major improvement in the U.S.-Russia relationship” and proposes “coordination across major agencies and government bodies to achieve tangible impact in the next 9-12 months.”

Well, fuck.  That’s all legitimate sounding, right?  Nothing to fret over, just some friendly chit-chat over a beer on a remote island halfway around the world, right?

If it wasn’t obvious from the tone, that last part was sarcasm.  But, for shits and giggles, let’s break down the claims that Erik Prince has made, and look at it in the grand scheme of things.

The same day that news of the Steele Dossier makes headlines, less than a month after the last time Jared Kushner proposed a backchannel, and about 2 weeks after Mike Flynn was caught talking to the Russian Ambassador about sanctions, Erik Prince, a close associate and supporter of Trump whose sister is the soon-to-be Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos,  goes on a “business trip” to meet with representatives from Dubai on this exclusive island resort where a close and personal friend and representative of Putin just happens to be sitting at the bar with a memo.

A fucking memo.  With bullet points.

Who the fuck brings bullet points to a bar meeting?  I’ve had many meetings in bars, and they’ve never involved bullet points or memos.  That’s not something that gets handled “over a beer.”

What else strains credulity is that this meeting is taking place right after Russia attacked the United States, and instead of discussing economy breaking sanctions or which criminals are getting extradited, they’re coordinating joint military campaigns?

Might want to look up the definition of Treason, because coordinating military activities with a country that just attacked us gets pretty fucking close to the definition.


I talked about this yesterday on Daily Check-In 09/25/2018, but /r/politics saw it and decided it was the newest, craziest theory.  Jed’s thread brings up a great point that I did miss about dual sovereignty.  Many states, like New York, Virginia, and California, already have Double Jeopardy protection built into their states that prevent repeat prosecutions for the exact same crime.  State and Federal prosecutors in those states can’t charge the same person with the same crime using the same facts.  They have to use different facts, evidence, or instances of the crimes.  What Gamble would do is, if SCOTUS ruled in that way, it would extend that protection to all states and territories.

Here’s where I’m torn.  Outside of the lens of the Mueller Investigation, I like this idea.  I really do.  Prosecuting someone twice for the same crime seems malicious, cruel, and desperate.  With the Mueller Investigation, I’m worried that if this ruling goes through, that Trump would try to pardon everyone.  Not that they would go through, but he’ll try.  If that’s the case, that could make things a little more difficult to bring people to justice.

Ultimately, this is something that will have to be solved with an Amendment limiting the power of a Presidential Pardon.




Julie Swetnick


1, JULIE SWETNICK, declare as follows:

1 – My name is Julie Swetnick and I am a resident of Washington, D.C. I fully understand the seriousness of the statements contained within this declaration. I have personal knowledge of the information stated herein and if called to testify to the same would and could do so.

2 – I am a graduate of Gaithersburg High School in Gaithersburg, MD.

3 – I presently hold the following active clearances associated with working within the federal government: Public Trust – U.S. Department of Treasury (DOT), U.S. Mint (USM), Internal Revenue Service (IRS). I have also previously held the following inactive clearances: Secret – U.S.

4 – Department of State (DOS), U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Public Trust – U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS), Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

5 – My prior employment includes working with (a) Vietnam War Commemoration (VWC), Joint Services Providers (JSP), U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) in Arlington, Virginia; (b) U.S. Mint, U.S. Department of Treasury; (c) U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS), U.S. Department of Treasury; (d) Government Affairs and Communications Department, D.C. Department of General Services (DGS), Government of the District of Columbia (DC.Gov); (e) Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Department of Homeland Security; and (d) the U.S. Department of State (DOS). I was also one of the first 100 women in the world to achieve a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineering Certification (MCSE).

6 – I first met Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh in approximately 1980-1981. I was introduced to them at a house party that I attended in the Washington, D.C. area. I observed Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh as extremely close friends during the early 1980s when I knew them and interacted with them. I would describe them as “joined at the hip” and I consistently saw them together in many social settings, There is no question in my mind that Mark Judge has significant information concerning the conduct of Brett Kavanaugh during the 1980s, especially as it relates to his actions toward women.

7 – Following that first introduction, I attended well over ten house parties in the Washington, D.C. area during the years 1981-1983 where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present. These parties were a common occurrence in the area and occurred nearly every weekend during the school year. On numerous occasions at these parties, I witnessed Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh drink excessively and engage in highly inappropriate conduct, including being overly aggressive with girls and not taking “No” for an answer. This conduct included the fondling and grabbing of girls without their consent.

8 – I observed Brett Kavanaugh drink excessively at many of these parties and engage in abusive and physically aggressive behavior toward girls, including pressing girls against him without their consent, “grinding” against girls, and attempting to remove or shift girls’ clothing to expose private body parts. I likewise observed him be verbally abusive towards girls by making crude sexual comments to them that were designed to demean, humiliate and embarrass them. I often witnessed Brett Kavanaugh speak in a demeaning manner about girls in general as well as specific girls by name. I also witnessed Brett Kavanaugh behave as a “mean drunk” on many occasions at these parties.

9 – I have been told by other women that this conduct also occurred during the Summer months in Ocean City, Maryland on numerous occasions. I also witnessed such conduct on one occasion in Ocean City, Maryland during “Beach Week.”

10 – I have reviewed Brett Kavanaugh’s recent claim on Fox News regarding his alleged “innocence” during his high school years and lack of sexual activity. This claim is absolutely false and a lie. I witnessed Brett Kavanaugh consistently engage in excessive drinking and inappropriate contact of a sexual nature with women during the early 1980s.

11 – During the years 1981-82, I became aware of efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to “spike” the “punch” at house parties I attended with drugs and/or grain alcohol so as to cause girls to lose their inhibitions and their ability to say “No.” This caused me to make an effort to purposely avoid the “punch” at these parties. I witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to “target” particular girls so they could be taken advantage of; it was usually a girl that was especially vulnerable because she was alone at the party or shy.

12 – I also witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be “gang raped” in a side room or bedroom by a “train” of numerous boys. I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their “turn” with a girl inside the room. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.

13 – In approximately 1982, I became the victim of one of these “gang” or “train” rapes where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present. Shortly after the incident, I shared what had transpired with at least two other people. During the incident, I was incapacitated without my consent and unable to fight off the boys raping me. I believe I was drugged using Quaaludes or something similar placed in what I was drinking.

14 – I am aware of other witnesses that can attest to the truthfulness of each of the statements above.

I declare, under penalty of perjury and under the laws of the United States of America, that the foregoing is true and correct. I have executed this declaration on September 25, 2018.

Julie Swetnick



If anyone needs some help, here’s some links From Reddit /u/katieames

For anyone who needs it:


1in6 (Resource for male survivors.)

The next days/weeks are going to get ugly. Please take advantage of resources, should you need them. You are not alone.

Edit: Also, in addition to 1in6, be sure to consult RAINN’s page on Sexual Assault of Men and Boys.

There’s also MaleSurvivor.

Please take care of yourself this week, everyone.

Sorry, extra edit: It’s not at all my intention to overlook the fact that this Coach Kav nightmare is especially potent for women, as it encompasses everything wrong with a rich, powerful male centered power structure. I just wanted to drop those extra resources while we were here.


Rhode Island and 1998

A fifth accusation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh was revealed in an interview transcript released by the Senate Judiciary Committee Wednesday night.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) received a call from a man who claimed his “close acquaintance” had been sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh and pal Mark Judge on a docked boat in Newport, Rhode Island, in 1985.

The anonymous constituent said his friend was assaulted “by two heavily inebriated men she referred to at the time as Brett and Mark,” according to the committee. After she told the caller, he and another man went to the harbor to confront “Brett” and “Mark,” “leaving them with significant injuries.”

The caller said that he identified Kavanaugh after seeing the judge’s high school yearbook photo on TV over the weekend, at which point he called Whitehouse’s office.

Kavanaugh denied the allegations.

“I was not in Newport, haven’t been on a boat in Newport, not with Mark Judge on a boat, nor all those three things combined,” he said during the interview. “This is just completely made up, or at least not me. I don’t know what they’re referring to.”

This new accusation is the fifth made against Kavanaugh: three others of a sexual nature and one of physical assault.

Judge, Kavanaugh’s high school friend, has been named in multiple claims. Julie Swetnick said Wednesday that Judge was at the high school parties were “‘gang’ or ‘train’ rapes” occurred and Christine Blasey Ford,claimed that he was in the room when Kavanaugh tried to rape her. Judge’s ex-girlfriend, Elizabeth Rasor, told the New Yorker that he had told her about he and other classmates taking turns having sex with a drunken woman.


The Senate Judiciary Committee has asked Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh about another allegation of misconduct, according to redacted transcripts of phone conversations between committee staffers and Kavanaugh made available by the committee Wednesday evening.

The allegation was made in a letter sent to Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Co. on Sept. 22. According to the unnamed author of the letter, Kavanaugh drunkenly slammed a woman against a wall outside a bar in Washington D.C. in 1998. Kavanaugh had been out for the evening with the daughter of the woman who wrote the complaint as well as several friends.

“Her friend was dating him, and they left the bar under the influence of alcohol. They were all shocked when Brett Kavanaugh, shoved her friend up against the wall very aggressively and sexually,” the letter said. The letter said at least four witnesses were present, though it did not provide any names.

Kavanaugh denied the allegation during the phone call, saying “no” when asked if the events described in the letter ever occurred.

“It’s ridiculous. Total twilight zone. And no, I’ve never done anything like that,” Kavanaugh said.


I’m starting to lose track of all of the victims and accusers that have come forward, so it’s time to make a list.

  1. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.  She was attacked at a house party in high school, got away when Mark Judge tried to join in and knocked Brett off of her.  Around 1981-1982.
  2. Deborah Ramirez.  Had too much to drink at a dorm party and while she was trying to get in her room, Brett dropped trou and hit her in the face with his dick.  At Yale, around 1982-85.
  3. Julie Swetnick.  Claims that Brett and Mark were rapists that got girls drunk or drugged enough so they couldn’t fight back against a gang rape.  She says she was raped in 1982 in the same manner she described.
  4. Unknown woman who went to the Montgomery County Police on Daily Check-In 09/24/2018, further detailed in Daily Check-In 09/25/2018.
  5. Rhode Island, 1985 boat assault.  Victim unknown.
  6. 1998 attack.

How many will we hear about before Thursday?  I think the over/under total will be 6.

That was me, from Daily Check-In 09/24/2018.  I swear to fuck I did not know, and was just taking an educated guess.  I have no internal sources, no hidden microphones anywhere, nothing.  I predicted that things would accelerate, but fuck, I wasn’t expecting this.

Sometimes, I hate being right.

But what if they’re fake claims?

I just saw a thread on Reddit where some people were trying to claim that one or more of these claims could be fake.  I don’t think so.  Here’s why…

It’s tactically a bad move. The time for multiple fake allegations would have been last week, while it was only one publicly known accuser with a name, not a day before a rushed show trial.

A fake claim needs time to sink in to the public awareness, percolate, then get attacked and debunked. This takes a few days, possibly a week. By the time the GOP could expose the accusations as fake, it’s past their desired timetable for a Kavanaugh vote. What good is a claim of fake accusations after they’ve voted?

Plus, planting fake claims only works if the original claim was suspect to begin with. If the first claim was an addict, a deadbeat, or someone of less than irreproachable character, then they could use claims of “they were in it for the money or fame” or “there was a revenge angle.” Instead, the first publicly known accuser is a Professor at Stanford Medical. The second works at/runs a non-profit for women sexual assault survivors, and the third is a Federal employee with so many clearances that she can literally use the phrase “I could tell you, but then I’d have to kill you.” The women in the claim aren’t prostitutes or runaways, they’re not women of color from bad neighborhoods. These are mostly white women from the most privileged backgrounds, going to private schools and Ivy League colleges. These women are in or near the circles of power.

Breaking down the anonymous accusations, there is the police report from Monday morning, a forceful dry-hump outside of a bar while Brett was working on the Starr Investigation, and an assault/rape on a boat where a friend of the victim grabbed a boy and beat the crap out of Mark and Brett, and only called it in when he saw the yearbook picture. Could any of those be a fake claim?

We know literally nothing about the first claim, but if a woman went to the police after all of this time, I’d tend to believe her. The only way I can see this being fake would be if the whole story was fabricated. However, fabricating this story runs the chance of bringing more women forward with similar claims. It’s a risky move with little upside and lot of downside.

The 1998 accusation is the only one that doesn’t fall into the mythical, magical lost times of the 1980’s, but it’s claims can be easily proved or disproved. The claim comes from the mother of a woman whose friend was dating Kavanaugh, and it was this friend that was assaulted outside of a bar in front of 3-4 friends. How many women were claiming to date Brett Kavanaugh back in 1998? It wouldn’t take a lot of investigative work to narrow this down and pinpoint it to a small group of women. This wouldn’t fit the pattern of a fake. A planted fake has to look like the other claims, not stand out on its own. A fake is supposed to kill existing claims, not drag the focus to a new, unexplored land of possible accusations. This one could be even riskier as a fake than the police report, as this brings grown women, working in Washington D.C. at the time of the attack, into the fray. What if the woman turns out to be Dick Cheney’s secretary? Do they call her a lying whore?

The only one of these claims that could possibly be a planted fake is the boat story, and this comes from a dude. That story claims that a girl went to a boat with two drunk guys, and they sexually assaulted her. She got away, and called her friend, the dude who called it in. Dude called up his buddy, let’s call him Buddy, and Dude and Buddy looked for the boat that the girl described to him. They found the boat, found the guys named Brett and Mark, and they proceeded to beat the crap out of them. Dude never knew their full names until he saw Brett’s yearbook picture on the news last week, at which point he called his Senator and relayed the story. This one is the only one of the three that could be a fake in my opinion. It’s the most outlandish, the most violent, the only one called in by a guy, and fits with the desire for revenge. However, the claims in it can be easily investigated. What kind of injuries were incurred? When did this happen? Did anyone see Mark or Brett walk around with a shiner or a chipped tooth during that time? Who are Dude and Buddy? Who was the girl? This claim is the most likely of the three to be a fake, but there are 5 people involved that could corroborate parts of it. Plus, if this claim is true, Dude just admitted to assault and battery.

I’m not saying these aren’t fake claims, but they don’t fit the established pattern of previous fake attempts from Project Veritas and their ilk, the timing doesn’t line up, they are too easily verifiable, and they run the risk of bringing forth more claims and risk against Kavanaugh.

Plus, this doesn’t even begin to examine the optics of planting fake assault and rape accusations in the #MeToo era.  Fake accusations only help the rich and powerful to keep up the narrative of the evil woman looking to make a payday, hurt some man, or get revenge for some perceived slight.  If someone or some group, like James O’Keefe and Project Veritas, planted a fake accusation then got caught planting it, they would be in serious danger.  The vast majority of rapes and sexual assaults never get reported, and assholes like him planting fake claims are a large part of it.  He would be seen as an enemy of women everywhere, and him and his staff would need protection.  On a good day, there would be protests outside of his office until it closed down and all of his staff would be harassed until they quit.  On a bad day, someone would go vigilante on him.

Now, if we get half a dozen claims of being gang-raped from these house parties from the early 80’s with explicit memories of the rapes themselves while they claim to be drugged or drunk, and they come from Right Wing Media, those will be the fakes. Planted fakes tend to expand upon existing claims, pushing details a little too far, but at the same time trying to maintain credulity. But the time is running out on any plants to be useful.

















Oh, thank fuck, we’re back to something normal.  Remember when the craziest things going on for a couple days was Omarosa?  Pepperidge Farms remembers.












That’s it for Wednesday.  The Kavanaugh Hearing is scheduled for Thursday.  It’s gonna be an ugly day.  The trolls will be out in force, and all of it focusing on one woman testifying before a rigged Senate Committee who’s too afraid to ask their own questions.

The Republicans will relentlessly attack Dr. Ford, hoping for some type of crack or slip-up, and will move to attack her.  That’s why they brought in a woman attorney to ask questions.  They understand the optics of old white men berating a woman about a sexual assault looks bad, but another woman doing it is okay.

This is the world we currently live in.  It’s in our power to change it.


Thank you, and have a good one.


“Without Journalists, it’s just propaganda.”

– Katy Tur





3 thoughts on “Daily Check-In 09/26/2018

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s