'What a con'! Michael Avenatti just dug Julie Swetnick's grave about ten miles deeper [video]

When it comes to evidence against Brett Kavanaugh, new accuser Julie Swetnick has come up short. But the evidence that her lawyer Michael Avenatti is full of sh*t is overwhelming:

.@jaketapper to AVENATTI: Is your client claiming that Kavanaugh raped her?

AVENATTI: I'm not going to have any further comment on that specific allegation

— Saagar Enjeti (@esaagar) September 26, 2018

Because of course.

pic.twitter.com/ESEcwQbMBU

— GinaNation (@BGBandita) September 26, 2018

pic.twitter.com/3bNeXSLv3o

— Reginald Harper (@harperreginald1) September 26, 2018

Weird. https://t.co/RuTamJkPHT

— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) September 26, 2018

Sooooo…no?

— Jags Movie Guy (@MoviePaul) September 26, 2018

when you tryin not get disbarred

— Dan (@LawoftheGator) September 26, 2018

And then there’s this:

Avenatti just refused to say when he first spoke to his new client. "Within the last month."

Jake Tapper asks, "Was it before or after Ford's allegation?"

Avenatti: "I honestly don't know."

— Elizabeth Harrington (@LizWFB) September 26, 2018

CNN @jaketapper asks Avenatti: Did client Swetnick contact you before or after the Christine Ford allegation came out? Avenatti: 'It was in the last month.' But before or after Ford allegation? Avenatti: 'I don't know.'

— Byron York (@ByronYork) September 26, 2018

This f*cking guy.

How can he have no concept of what the time line is/has been? https://t.co/NeiuBhcsZq

— It's Only Words (@itsonlywords) September 26, 2018

Ridiculous

— Bstone (@bstone73) September 26, 2018

What lawyer doesn’t know that?

— MiloMania (@Milo_McCormack) September 26, 2018

Uh…. after maybe. What a sleaze bucket

— Trista Blair (@tristalblair) September 26, 2018

"I can't remember if something happened in the last two weeks but please believe this uncorroborated story from 35 years ago" is….a big ask. https://t.co/jHYEDk0isA

— Drew McCoy (@_Drew_McCoy_) September 26, 2018

Oh well. If Swetnick’s case crumbles, at least Avenatti got his TV time, right? And that’s what really matters.

Clown https://t.co/wZsZTiZ6e6

— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) September 26, 2018

What a con. https://t.co/UT8j35ereB

— Lee Doren (@LDoren) September 26, 2018

Avenatti is a two bit hustler …. nothing more

— AmPhibIaN5 (@Amphibian5Thx) September 26, 2018

Some parting food for thought:

Observation from the entire Kavanaugh thing – media-hungry lawyers do immense damage to the credibility of accusers. A lot of the anger at these women is the result of stuff their lawyers said and/or did.

— NeoN: Automataster ??? (@neontaster) September 26, 2018

Editor’s note: This post has been updated with additional text and a tweet.

***

Update:

Tapper went off on Avenatti for the "egregious lack of specificity" in the sworn declaration in saying Kavanaugh was "present"

— Peter J. Hasson (@peterjhasson) September 26, 2018

Good for Jake Tapper.

Watch below:

Video: @JakeTapper calls out @MichaelAvenatti for his "really egregious lack of specificity" and refusing to to say under firm questioning whether Swetnick thinks Kavanaugh raped her -> "I'm not going to have any further comment on that specific allegation." Unreal. pic.twitter.com/UGNYreQ2LV

— Curtis Houck (@CurtisHouck) September 26, 2018

Editor’s note: The headline of this post has been amended to reflect the addition of video.

***

Related:

‘This is such BS’! Looks like Michael Avenatti just helped Julie Swetnick … right over the cliff

The hits keep comin’! NYT deals another blow to Julie Swetnick’s case against Brett Kavanaugh