THANKS.
Kimberley Strassel
@KimStrassel
https://twitter.com/KimStrassel/status/104479092642463334
1) Breaking: So Debra Ramirez’s attorney, John Clune, went on CNN’s Anderson Cooper 360 tonight. In interview, he accuses “game playing” by “majority party” with regards her testimony. But read the emails that have gone back and forth (I have), and that is downright false
2) First majority email goes Sunday, Sept 23, two days ago, hours from when New Yorker story runs, 7:43 pm. It goes to attorneys, notes story, asks when Ramirez is available for interview. Says it is “determined” to take statement and “investigate further.”
3) At 10:30 pm, a Ramirez attny says will get back. But not till Monday, 3 PM, does Ramirez attny say she wants FBI. Says she might be open to be “interviewed in person”—though only “on appropriate terms (and unclear if by committee or FBI). Attnys suggest call . . next morning.
4) Few mins later,majority says thanks, but asks again if Ramirez has evidence/statements she is willing to provide to committee? Ramirez attnys defer to as-yet-undefinite call. Majority responds that before “next steps” (call), does Ramirez have evidence/testimony? (3rd ask)
5)That evening (still Monday), Ramirez attnys refer to New Yorker article as “evidence,” again demand FBI investigation, say client won’t talk before more “details of whatever process you are contemplating.”
6) Majority instantly responds it “welcomes” any evidence in form of “email or letter” to chairman/ranking, or same from counsel, or statement to committee investigators. (4th ask)
7) Next morning (Tues., sept. 25) Ramirez attny ignores request again but says since he hasn’t had “confirmation on this call” he is “now unavailable.” Now suggests everyone talk end of day.
8) Majority responds, again, that before next steps (call), they need to know if Ramirez has evidence other than that in New Yorker article, and will she provide evidence/testimony to investigators? (5th ask) Again they would “welcome” that evidence, in any official form.
9) (Democrat staff now intervenes with email apologizing for Majority “preconditions.” Offers to put Ramirez attnys in touch with FBI. And offers to get on evening call, undercutting majority request for information.)
10) A few hours later, Majority makes 6th request for information/statement. Then Mr. Clune goes on CNN to complain at length about Majority “game playing.”
11)This is a serious accusation. No law enforcement would commence investigation without such statement—this is basic request, in line with any committee probe.Yet every polite request for basic on record statement is ignored, rebuffed, delayed, denied. GOP has bent backwards.
12) Finally, as you can read, claim by Clune that GOP “blew off scheduled call” (CNN headline) is flat out falsehood. Majority always said testimony/evidence first.Says something that an attny resorts to such deceptions. And that CNN wud report w/o checking.