# data[].attributes.body
I have no problem with Nike but if they are really going to place someone as the face of there product they really should reconsider some things like letting some one that disrespected our flag over and over again be the face of there product. there has already been so many people react to this its crazy

# data[].attributes.body
why are they bring it back up if it happened a long time ago?It's not fair to do that.The 14 year old should have went to her parents or police right when it happened Not years later.No I am not saying if he did it that it was okay. Because that grosses me out and someone who does that should get in huge trouble  .But if he didn't do it he should be sent to jail and serve his time to protect any other littler girl.
https://www.npr.org/2018/09/26/651710715/bill-cosby-and-the-metoo-movement

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nbcblk/bill-cosby-s-fall-ripples-through-metoo-movement-n913361

# data[].attributes.headline
I think this whole thing with Nike was just a way to make money, and make kaepernick someone again.It should just be dropped and left alone because you can fix stupidity. 

# data[].attributes.subject
I think this whole thing with Nike was just a way to make money, and make kaepernick someone again.It should just be dropped and left alone because you can fix stupidity. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The council overseeing New Jersey's $77 billion public worker pension fund will study its investments with Nike at the urging of a member representing police and firefighters who is unhappy with the company's new ad campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick.

Marty Barrett, a representative of retired police officers and firefighters, asked the council to consider divesting from its Nike holdings because of the ad.

Nike's use of the sports figure, whose protests of police brutality during the National Anthem drew controversy, has triggered boycotts of the brand.

Barrett said Thursday that Kaepernick's protest disrespects members of the military and first responders who were killed on 9/11.

Nike "made one of the worst business decisions of all time" in making Kaepernick the face of its ad campaign, Barrett said.

The State Investment Council voted unanimously to review its holdings, which a spokeswoman for the Treasury Department said include 311,500 equity shares valued at $26 million and 20 million principal valued at $18 million.
Pension fund dumps investment in ICE contractor
According to Bloomberg, four other public pension funds in Colorado, Wisconsin, Ohio and Oregon manage police pensions and own Nike stock.

Patrick Colligan, president of the New Jersey State Policemen's Benevolent Association, told NJ Advance Media Barrett was acting without his knowledge and that he is reticent to "involve politics in pension investments."

"I have been adamant, even when the governor chose to become more socially conscious with some of the investments, that I'm not sure we should be in the social justice business when we're investing in pensions, with the vast deficiencies and unfunded liabilities that we have in all the systems."

In recent months the state has dumped investments in a company manufacturing semi-automatic rifles and a private prison contractor that runs family detention centers amid increased scrutiny of the Trump administration's immigration policy.

Nike did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Samantha Marcus may be reached at smarcus@njadvancemedia.com. Follow her on Twitter @samanthamarcus. Find NJ.com Politics on Facebook.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Colin Kaepernick ad campaign prompts N.J. to explore divesting pensions from Nike

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The council overseeing New Jersey's $77 billion public worker pension fund will study its investments with Nike at the urging of a member representing police and firefighters who is unhappy with the company's new ad campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick.

# data[].attributes.body
did he do it? that is the main answer that needs to be answered. if he did then this is justice that needed to be served
if not, then this is something no woman should lie about one or three they are all at fault

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion when Nike chose to use Kaepernick as one of the faces of Nike it could have helped sales with younger generations. The article states that sales were up in the quarter before his commercial came out. I would think that older generations who don't agree with Kaepernick's kneeling would not pay for their kids Nike products, which could hurt their sales. I guess we will find out when the next quarter sales come out. I feel like Nike could've found a more respectable athlete or person for their representation.

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/09/26/strong-nike-earnings-in-wake-of-controversial-colin-kaepernick-campaign/

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion when Nike chose to use Kaepernick as one of the faces of Nike it could have helped sales with younger generations. The article states that sales were up in the quarter before his commercial came out. I would think that older generations who don't agree with Kaepernick's kneeling would not pay for their kids Nike products, which could hurt their sales. I guess we will find out when the next quarter sales come out. I feel like Nike could've found a more respectable athlete or person for their representation.

# data[].attributes.body
I think instagram would connect with younger kids and teens. Facebook is usually used for your parents to post about you were younger or about your birthday. Teen's use facebook just to post drama so they can get in trouble for know reason. Now instagram is more appropriate for teens and kids because all thing use see is famouse people posting about their movies, music, animals, and whats going on in there life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Two of Instagram's co-founders reportedly left Facebook on Tuesday as the result of a falling out with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Mark Elliot Zuckerberg Hillicon Valley: State officials share tech privacy concerns with Sessions | Senator says election security bill won't pass before midterms | Instagram co-founders leave Facebook | Google chief to meet GOP lawmakers over bias claims Instagram co-founders' departure driven by falling out with Zuckerberg: report Protect and innovate online privacy MORE , reports NBC.

Instagram CEO Kevin Systrom and Chief Technical Officer Mike Krieger left their posts at the image sharing app on Tuesday. The two sold Instagram to Facebook in 2012 for $1 billion.

The split reportedly came amid Systrom's growing frustration with Zuckerberg's treatment of Instagram.

"Kevin [Systrom] has been super-pissed-off at Mark," a top Facebook source reportedly told NBC News.

Zuckerberg's move to cease funneling traffic from Facebook to Instagram was reportedly one point of contention among the founders. The two platforms previously enabled a feature that allowed users to post on Instagram through Facebook.

One source told NBC that there was a sense at Facebook that Instagram "could stand on its own two feet."

Instagram's growth helped drive Facebook's success during a year in which the tech company was mired in controversy. Facebook's reputation was hard hit following revelations that Russian trolls had used the platform to try to influence the 2016 presidential election. The company also came under scrutiny after The Guardian reported that a British research firm linked to the Trump campaign improperly harvested data from tens of millions of Facebook users.

Despite its parent company's problems, Instagram hit 1 billion monthly users in June.

Adam Mosseri, Facebook's former head of news feed and current head of product at Instagram will take over as CEO at Instagram, according to NBC.

"We're planning on leaving Instagram to explore our curiosity and creativity again," Systrom and Krieger said in a statement. "Building new things requires that we step back, understand what inspires us and match that with what the world needs; that's what we plan to do."

"We remain excited for the future of Instagram and Facebook in the coming years as we transition from leaders to two users in a billion," they said.

The Instagram founders' departure comes after the founders of another Facebook-acquired app, Whatsapp, stepped down from their posts, also over reported disagreement with the direction Facebook was taking the messaging app.

Unlike Instagram's founders, however, Whatsapp's co-creators took issue with how their app was reportedly being steered toward weakened encryption and collecting user data.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Instagram co-founders' departure driven by falling out with Zuckerberg: report

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two of Instagram's co-founders reportedly left Facebook on Tuesday as the result of a falling out with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Mark Elliot Zuckerberg Hillicon Valley: State officials share tech privacy concerns with Sessions | Senator says election security bill won't pass before midterms | Instagram co-founders leave Facebook | Google chief to meet GOP lawmakers over bias claims Instagram co-founders' departure driven by falling out with Zuckerberg: report Protect and innovate online privacy MORE , reports NBC.

# data[].attributes.body
Bill Cosby is 81 years old. They are putting him in jail for something he did 14 years ago, or something they say he did. I won't say if I think he did or didn't because honestly I don't know. He's the main one that knows what happened. I think that what he's being accused of is horrible. I also believe that if the accusations are true, which they might be since he is being charged, that he should serve the required amount of time. Justice should be served either way. But if the women are lying just so they can get money and fame then that is very wrong too. People should never lie about things like that.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bill Cosby was sentenced to three to 10 years in state prison Tuesday, more than 14 years after he gave Andrea Constand pills that left her incapacitated in his home.

The 81-year-old once-revered comedian was found guilty by a jury of sexual assault in April for drugging and molesting Constand, a former Temple University employee, in his Philadelphia home in 2004. He was convicted of three counts of aggravated indecent assault.

The hearing, which began on Sept. 24, lasted only two days. During, the judge declared Cosby to be a "sexually violent predator," meaning Cosby must undergo monthly counseling for the rest of his life and report quarterly to authorities. His name will appear on a sex offender registry sent to neighbors, schools and victims.

"It is time for justice. Mr. Cosby, this has all circled back to you. The time has come," said Montgomery County Judge Steven O'Neill. He also denied bail for Cosby.

Cosby's fall from grace is the first celebrity trial of the #MeToo era. More than a decade prior, Constand sued Cosby in 2005, settling for nearly $3.4 million. In the deposition for that case, Cosby admitted to buying Quaaludes and giving women drugs and alcohol before sex - although he said every interaction was consensual.

But in 2014, comedian Hannibal Buress called Cosby a rapist during a show - opening the floodgates for more than 60 women to come forward and accuse the television star once called "America's Dad" of rape and sexual assault.

Constand's allegations are the only ones that brought a criminal case against Cosby. Many of the other women's accusations fall outside of the statute of limitations.

Read on for a look at the case.

The allegations

Andrea Constand said she met Cosby when she was the director for the women's basketball team at Temple, Cosby's alma mater. The pair "developed what [Constand] believed to be a sincere friendship," and Constand eventually looked to the older man as a mentor, according to court documents.

She said Cosby made sexual advances toward her multiple times, but each time she turned him down. But on one specific visit to his home in January 2004, Cosby gave her "three blue pills" that blurred her vision and made her feel as though she was "in and out" of consciousness, according to court records.
BILL COSBY IS MENTALLY PREPARING HIMSELF FOR PRISON
Cosby then engaged in sex acts with Constand, while she could not move or speak, that she did not consent to, she said.

In court, Constand's mother testified, saying she spoke to Cosby on the phone about one year after the alleged incident. During the conversation, she said, Cosby apologized after he described in graphic detail the encounter. Gianna Constand also said her daughter would scream in her sleep after the assault.

Countering defense

Throughout the trial, Cosby maintained that any interaction between the pair was consensual.

The jury heard Cosby's past testimony addressing the Quaaludes given to women before sex. He said the pills were "the same as a person [who] would say, 'Have a drink [of alcohol],'"

Cosby's defense tried to portray Constand as an opportunist who feigned romantic interest in him and then leveled a false accusation of sexual assault so she could file a lawsuit. The defense also noted that Constand called him twice on Valentine's Day, about a month after the alleged assault.
BILL COSBY RECOMMENDED TO BE CLASSIFIED AS 'SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR' BY PENNSYLVANIA BOARD
Constand said those calls were about basketball to a person she once considered to be a mentor. Records showed she made two brief calls to Cosby on Feb. 14, 2004, around the time of a Temple home game.

Cosby's legal team for the retrial was led by former Michael Jackson attorney Tom Mesereau. However, Cosby fired Mesereau ahead of the sentencing hearing.

#MeToo effect

Prosecutors had hoped to call as many as 19 other accusers to show a pattern of "prior bad acts" over five decades; in the first trial, only one woman was allowed to do so.

But in the retrial, five women testified, including model and reality television star Janice Dickinson. Dickinson, now 63, has alleged Cosby drugged her, rendering her unconscious, and sexually assaulted her when she was 27.
CELEBRITIES REACT TO BILL COSBY GUILTY VERDICT
Dickinson said she did not come forward about what allegedly happened to her at the time because she was afraid of retaliation and damage to her career. After Cosby's sentencing, Dickinson said she felt "vindicated."

The other women who testified were: Lise-Lotte Lublin, Chelan Lasha, Janice Baker-Kinney and Heidi Thomas.

First mistrial

Cosby's original trial ended in a mistrial on June 17, 2017 after the jury deliberated for more than 52 hours over six days and still couldn't reach a verdict.

Prosecutors immediately promised to retry Cosby, who was freed from prison on $1 million bail.
Fox News' Tyler McCarthy, Lissa Kaplan and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Kaitlyn Schallhorn is a Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter: @K_Schallhorn.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bill Cosby found guilty of sexual assault: A look at the case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bill Cosby was sentenced to three to 10 years in state prison Tuesday, more than 14 years after he gave Andrea Constand pills that left her incapacitated in his home. The 81-year-old once-revered comedian was found guilty by a jury of sexual assault in April for drugging and molesting Constand, a former Temple University employee, in his Philadelphia home in 2004.

# data[].attributes.body
I think Tiger Woods has worked hard to get back to where he used to be. He only came back in December from back fusion surgery and won first after five years. He's had some struggle in the past, but he has overcome them and showed people that he is ready to grab the eye of the public again

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A little less than two months after the Hero World Challenge, he teed it up at the Farmers Insurance Open for his official start on the Tour. The comeback was on. This one hasn't ended quickly, and it has been marked by growing expectations.

Here is a breakdown of his results from this past season so far:

This week

Tour Championship

Tiger's takeaway: "80 is a big number. I've been sitting on 79 [wins] for about five years now; to get 80 is a damn good feeling."

Earlier this season ...

BMW Championship

Tiger's takeaway: "To have a chance to win again this year, it's a very positive feeling. Had I made a few more putts this week could have been a different deal coming down the stretch, though I finished at 17 under and good looks on two of the last few holes. That's a positive."

Dell Technologies Championship

Tiger's takeaway: "I think in general here in the last probably month and a half I've really turned the corner. I've really hit some good shot sand I've really played well from tee to green. And it's just a matter of getting one little hot stretch with the putter and get it rolling and get the momentum on my side and just get things rolling."

The Northern Trust

Tiger's takeaway: "You have good weeks and you have bad weeks. The greens, sometimes they look good to you. Sometimes they don't. All of my good putts, basically, went in at Bellerive [two weeks ago at the PGA Championship] and the bad putts lipped out. This week, the good putts lipped out and the bad ones didn't have a chance. That's the way it goes."

The PGA Championship

Tiger's takeaway: "So, at the beginning of the year, if you would say, 'Yeah, I would have a legit chance to win the last two major championships,' I -- with what swing? I didn't have a swing at the time. I had no speed. I didn't have a golf swing. I didn't have -- my short game wasn't quite there yet. My putting was OK. But God, I hadn't played in two years. So it's been a hell of a process, for sure."

WGC-Bridgestone Invitational

Tiger's takeaway: "I didn't hit as many balls as I normally would going into an event, but I needed a break. I pushed it hard through The Open and needed a break because this stretch coming up here is going to be a big stretch starting [at the PGA] and through the playoffs."

The Open

Tiger's takeaway: "A little ticked off at myself for sure. I had a chance starting that back nine to do something, and I didn't do it. ... I was saying earlier that I need to try and keep it in perspective because, the beginning of the year, if they'd have said you're playing The Open Championship, I would have said I'd be very lucky to do that."

Quicken Loans National

Tiger's takeaway: "Oh, it was frustrating because I played better than what my score indicates ... I just didn't finish it off the right way."

U.S. Open

Round 1: 78
Round 2: 72
Finish: Missed cut
Official World Golf Ranking after the tournament: 79

Tiger's takeaway: "I'm not very happy the way I played and the way I putted. I'm 10 over par. So I don't know that you can be too happy and too excited about 10 over par."

The Memorial

Tiger's takeaway "If I just putt normally, I probably would be right up there with those guys and up there in the last couple of groups. Overall, if I just keep building on this, with how I'm hitting it right now, I'm in good shape for two weeks from now [at the U.S. Open].

The Players Championship

Tiger's takeaway: "I got my playing feels back and it's just a matter of playing and executing and putting the shots together."

Wells Fargo Championship

Tiger's takeaway: "Again, I just did not putt well. I did not make a birdie [on Sunday]. I got shut out. ... I just didn't hit good putts. And on top of that, the ones I did hit well, they didn't have enough speed on them. It was just one of those weeks."

The Masters

Tiger's takeaway "It's disappointing that I didn't hit the ball well enough. But to be able to just be out here competing again, if you had said that last year at this particular time, I would have said you're crazy. I had a hard time just sitting or walking. So now to be able to play and compete and hit the ball the way I did, that's quite a big change from last year."

Arnold Palmer Invitational

Tiger's takeaway: "If I can play with no pain and I can feel like I can make golf swings, I'll figure it out. I'm starting to piece it together tournament by tournament, and each tournament's gotten a little crisper and a little bit better."

Valspar Championship

Tiger's takeaway: "I was close. I had a chance [to win]. Unfortunately I just didn't quite feel as sharp as I needed to with my irons, played a little conservative because of it."

Honda Classic

Tiger's takeaway: "I feel like each time out I've gotten better, and I've gotten more of a feel for playing tournament golf. The last couple days, it felt easy to play tournament golf. The warmup felt good. I get into the flow of the round. I could find the rhythm of the rounds faster. The more golf I'm playing tournament-wise, the faster I'm able to click into the feel of the round."

Genesis Open

Tiger's takeaway: "I didn't really play that well. I missed every tee shot left, and I did not putt well, didn't feel very good on the greens, and consequently never made a run. I knew I had to make a run on that back nine, and I went the other way."

Farmers Insurance Open

Tiger's takeaway: "I can feel some of the things I'm doing wrong in my swing, so we're going to go back to work. It's nice to have two weeks off, but it's more important that I got this tournament under my belt where I can feel some of the things I need to work on, because hometown speed versus game speed is two totally different things. As much as we try to simulate it at home, it's never the same."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A step-by-step look at Tiger Woods' 2018 season

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A little less than two months after the Hero World Challenge, he teed it up at the Farmers Insurance Open for his official start on the Tour. The comeback was on. This one hasn't ended quickly, and it has been marked by growing expectations.

# data[].attributes.body
My opinion on the is that he has all of this fame and these girls got jelly and so they divided to take him together plus all of these "assaults" happened a long time a go

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bill Cosby's conviction for the 2004 sexual assault of ex-Temple University employee Andrea Constand is the first of its kind in the #MeToo era, and his designation as a sexually violent predator and the sentence of three to 10 years in prison could be an indication that he won't be the last powerful, famous man to see the inside of a jail cell.

Cosby's case is unquestionably unique. It involves multiple trials, an agreement to not prosecute from a prior district attorney, varying decisions on the admission of "prior bad acts" witness testimony, allegations that the judge held a grudge against a key witness and that prosecutors tampered with evidence. Despite the atypical aspects of his case, experts believe it can shed light on how future juries and judges will treat #MeToo-related matters - including Cosby's own civil cases.

Former prosecutor turned litigator Priya Sopori says she was surprised by Cosby's sentence, given his age and health.

"I think it would be tough to argue that he continues to be a danger to society as an 81-year-old blind man," says Sopori. "This isn't about protection. This is about retribution. From my perspective, it is a good sentence."

While the jurors have said they weren't influenced by the #MeToo movement, Sopori believes they were at least educated by it.

"I think that one of the differences between the first trial and the retrial was that Cosby's team went after her credibility, which I think is really out of touch," she says. "I hope what we've learned through the #MeToo movement is that there are a multitude of very complicated reasons why victims don't come forward, and veracity really isn't one of them."

Judge Steven T. O'Neill made it abundantly clear that in his courtroom Cosby's celebrity status didn't do him any favors, which experts expect will continue as other Hollywood honchos see their day in court.

"It's fair to say that the movement, coupled with the extended two-day sentencing hearing and powerful victim impact statements, all played a role in sending a message that celebrities will not get special treatment, no matter how old or infirm they might be," says entertainment litigator Mathew Rosengart, a former federal prosecutor.

#MeToo may also be shaping the kinds of testimony courts are willing to consider.

"While speculative, it's also possible that the movement informed some of the judge's evidentiary decisions - including his decision to allow five witnesses in addition to Ms. Constand to testify against Cosby under what we call 'prior bad acts' evidence - which is often disallowed by courts under the theory that its probative value is outweighed by supposed undue prejudice to a defendant," says Rosengart. "That crucial decision might have been dispositive in the jury's analysis of 'reasonable doubt,' as it went the other way during the first trial, which was more of a 'he said, she said,' resulting in a hung jury."

Now that Cosby has been convicted of a violent felony, Sopori says, his criminal background can be used against him in civil court. (Both Lisa Bloom and Joe Cammarata, whose clients claim to have been assaulted by Cosby and are suing for defamation after their claims were publicly denied by his camp, tell THR they intend to do just that.)

"It shows a certain method of operating by Cosby that has been repeated in many of his victims' allegations," says litigator Bryan Sullivan, who notes that civil liability is a lower standard than criminal liability. The jury must find him liable by only "a preponderance of the evidence versus beyond a reasonable doubt."

Once the plaintiffs' lawyers establish a modus operandi, odds of which are boosted by the conviction, Sopori says it will be easier for the court to justify the discretionary decision to admit prior bad acts evidence and #MeToo testimony. She expects the precedent set here will extend beyond Cosby's own legal fights.

"I hope it has an impact on the way these kinds of cases are prosecuted, and that it has an impact on the willingness of victims to come forward," she says. "Ultimately our greater understanding of victim psychology is going to change the way that we view, prosecute and convict criminals."

Cosby may be the first person to stand trial since the #MeToo movement began last year, but Sopori says his conviction sends a powerful message and he won't be the last to face a jury.

"A tremendous body of work and respect in the industry is not going to protect you," she says. "You can't cloak yourself in your success. If there was anyone who would have been able to do it, it would have been Bill Cosby."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bill Cosby's Sentence: Experts Weigh Implications of the #MeToo Era

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bill Cosby's conviction for the 2004 sexual assault of ex-Temple University employee Andrea Constand is the first of its kind in the #MeToo era, and his designation as a sexually violent predator and the sentence of three to 10 years in prison could be an indication that he won't be the last powerful, famous man to see the inside of a jail cell.

# data[].attributes.body
Bill Cosby was accused of molesting  Andrea Constand in 2004.But why wasn't it brought up in 2004 I mean why bring it up now. You cant wait when something like that happens you need to tell someone.I think she needs some money and right now in time if a girl screams some innocent man gets charges filled because they were in the surrounding area. I think its just a way to get money,

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bill Cosby was sentenced to three to 10 years in state prison Tuesday, more than 14 years after he gave Andrea Constand pills that left her incapacitated in his home.

The 81-year-old once-revered comedian was found guilty by a jury of sexual assault in April for drugging and molesting Constand, a former Temple University employee, in his Philadelphia home in 2004. He was convicted of three counts of aggravated indecent assault.

The hearing, which began on Sept. 24, lasted only two days. During, the judge declared Cosby to be a "sexually violent predator," meaning Cosby must undergo monthly counseling for the rest of his life and report quarterly to authorities. His name will appear on a sex offender registry sent to neighbors, schools and victims.

"It is time for justice. Mr. Cosby, this has all circled back to you. The time has come," said Montgomery County Judge Steven O'Neill. He also denied bail for Cosby.

Cosby's fall from grace is the first celebrity trial of the #MeToo era. More than a decade prior, Constand sued Cosby in 2005, settling for nearly $3.4 million. In the deposition for that case, Cosby admitted to buying Quaaludes and giving women drugs and alcohol before sex - although he said every interaction was consensual.

But in 2014, comedian Hannibal Buress called Cosby a rapist during a show - opening the floodgates for more than 60 women to come forward and accuse the television star once called "America's Dad" of rape and sexual assault.

Constand's allegations are the only ones that brought a criminal case against Cosby. Many of the other women's accusations fall outside of the statute of limitations.

Read on for a look at the case.

The allegations

Andrea Constand said she met Cosby when she was the director for the women's basketball team at Temple, Cosby's alma mater. The pair "developed what [Constand] believed to be a sincere friendship," and Constand eventually looked to the older man as a mentor, according to court documents.

She said Cosby made sexual advances toward her multiple times, but each time she turned him down. But on one specific visit to his home in January 2004, Cosby gave her "three blue pills" that blurred her vision and made her feel as though she was "in and out" of consciousness, according to court records.
BILL COSBY IS MENTALLY PREPARING HIMSELF FOR PRISON
Cosby then engaged in sex acts with Constand, while she could not move or speak, that she did not consent to, she said.

In court, Constand's mother testified, saying she spoke to Cosby on the phone about one year after the alleged incident. During the conversation, she said, Cosby apologized after he described in graphic detail the encounter. Gianna Constand also said her daughter would scream in her sleep after the assault.

Countering defense

Throughout the trial, Cosby maintained that any interaction between the pair was consensual.

The jury heard Cosby's past testimony addressing the Quaaludes given to women before sex. He said the pills were "the same as a person [who] would say, 'Have a drink [of alcohol],'"

Cosby's defense tried to portray Constand as an opportunist who feigned romantic interest in him and then leveled a false accusation of sexual assault so she could file a lawsuit. The defense also noted that Constand called him twice on Valentine's Day, about a month after the alleged assault.
BILL COSBY RECOMMENDED TO BE CLASSIFIED AS 'SEXUALLY VIOLENT PREDATOR' BY PENNSYLVANIA BOARD
Constand said those calls were about basketball to a person she once considered to be a mentor. Records showed she made two brief calls to Cosby on Feb. 14, 2004, around the time of a Temple home game.

Cosby's legal team for the retrial was led by former Michael Jackson attorney Tom Mesereau. However, Cosby fired Mesereau ahead of the sentencing hearing.

#MeToo effect

Prosecutors had hoped to call as many as 19 other accusers to show a pattern of "prior bad acts" over five decades; in the first trial, only one woman was allowed to do so.

But in the retrial, five women testified, including model and reality television star Janice Dickinson. Dickinson, now 63, has alleged Cosby drugged her, rendering her unconscious, and sexually assaulted her when she was 27.
CELEBRITIES REACT TO BILL COSBY GUILTY VERDICT
Dickinson said she did not come forward about what allegedly happened to her at the time because she was afraid of retaliation and damage to her career. After Cosby's sentencing, Dickinson said she felt "vindicated."

The other women who testified were: Lise-Lotte Lublin, Chelan Lasha, Janice Baker-Kinney and Heidi Thomas.

First mistrial

Cosby's original trial ended in a mistrial on June 17, 2017 after the jury deliberated for more than 52 hours over six days and still couldn't reach a verdict.

Prosecutors immediately promised to retry Cosby, who was freed from prison on $1 million bail.
Fox News' Tyler McCarthy, Lissa Kaplan and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Kaitlyn Schallhorn is a Reporter for Fox News. Follow her on Twitter: @K_Schallhorn.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bill Cosby found guilty of sexual assault: A look at the case

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bill Cosby was sentenced to three to 10 years in state prison Tuesday, more than 14 years after he gave Andrea Constand pills that left her incapacitated in his home. The 81-year-old once-revered comedian was found guilty by a jury of sexual assault in April for drugging and molesting Constand, a former Temple University employee, in his Philadelphia home in 2004.

# data[].attributes.body
I don't think Bill Cosby is guilt it happened in 2004 why would you come out know what happen in his home. Just because his rich doesn't mean you have to start speaking up know you should've done in 2004 when it happen not know the mean is 81 years old he is no danger to know because he's been blind for the past 4 years. Giving him 3 to 10 years because people say they saw him sexual assault her in his home but his daughter said he would never hurt any women and I agree what she says.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Bill Cosby's conviction for the 2004 sexual assault of ex-Temple University employee Andrea Constand is the first of its kind in the #MeToo era, and his designation as a sexually violent predator and the sentence of three to 10 years in prison could be an indication that he won't be the last powerful, famous man to see the inside of a jail cell.

Cosby's case is unquestionably unique. It involves multiple trials, an agreement to not prosecute from a prior district attorney, varying decisions on the admission of "prior bad acts" witness testimony, allegations that the judge held a grudge against a key witness and that prosecutors tampered with evidence. Despite the atypical aspects of his case, experts believe it can shed light on how future juries and judges will treat #MeToo-related matters - including Cosby's own civil cases.

Former prosecutor turned litigator Priya Sopori says she was surprised by Cosby's sentence, given his age and health.

"I think it would be tough to argue that he continues to be a danger to society as an 81-year-old blind man," says Sopori. "This isn't about protection. This is about retribution. From my perspective, it is a good sentence."

While the jurors have said they weren't influenced by the #MeToo movement, Sopori believes they were at least educated by it.

"I think that one of the differences between the first trial and the retrial was that Cosby's team went after her credibility, which I think is really out of touch," she says. "I hope what we've learned through the #MeToo movement is that there are a multitude of very complicated reasons why victims don't come forward, and veracity really isn't one of them."

Judge Steven T. O'Neill made it abundantly clear that in his courtroom Cosby's celebrity status didn't do him any favors, which experts expect will continue as other Hollywood honchos see their day in court.

"It's fair to say that the movement, coupled with the extended two-day sentencing hearing and powerful victim impact statements, all played a role in sending a message that celebrities will not get special treatment, no matter how old or infirm they might be," says entertainment litigator Mathew Rosengart, a former federal prosecutor.

#MeToo may also be shaping the kinds of testimony courts are willing to consider.

"While speculative, it's also possible that the movement informed some of the judge's evidentiary decisions - including his decision to allow five witnesses in addition to Ms. Constand to testify against Cosby under what we call 'prior bad acts' evidence - which is often disallowed by courts under the theory that its probative value is outweighed by supposed undue prejudice to a defendant," says Rosengart. "That crucial decision might have been dispositive in the jury's analysis of 'reasonable doubt,' as it went the other way during the first trial, which was more of a 'he said, she said,' resulting in a hung jury."

Now that Cosby has been convicted of a violent felony, Sopori says, his criminal background can be used against him in civil court. (Both Lisa Bloom and Joe Cammarata, whose clients claim to have been assaulted by Cosby and are suing for defamation after their claims were publicly denied by his camp, tell THR they intend to do just that.)

"It shows a certain method of operating by Cosby that has been repeated in many of his victims' allegations," says litigator Bryan Sullivan, who notes that civil liability is a lower standard than criminal liability. The jury must find him liable by only "a preponderance of the evidence versus beyond a reasonable doubt."

Once the plaintiffs' lawyers establish a modus operandi, odds of which are boosted by the conviction, Sopori says it will be easier for the court to justify the discretionary decision to admit prior bad acts evidence and #MeToo testimony. She expects the precedent set here will extend beyond Cosby's own legal fights.

"I hope it has an impact on the way these kinds of cases are prosecuted, and that it has an impact on the willingness of victims to come forward," she says. "Ultimately our greater understanding of victim psychology is going to change the way that we view, prosecute and convict criminals."

Cosby may be the first person to stand trial since the #MeToo movement began last year, but Sopori says his conviction sends a powerful message and he won't be the last to face a jury.

"A tremendous body of work and respect in the industry is not going to protect you," she says. "You can't cloak yourself in your success. If there was anyone who would have been able to do it, it would have been Bill Cosby."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bill Cosby's Sentence: Experts Weigh Implications of the #MeToo Era

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Bill Cosby's conviction for the 2004 sexual assault of ex-Temple University employee Andrea Constand is the first of its kind in the #MeToo era, and his designation as a sexually violent predator and the sentence of three to 10 years in prison could be an indication that he won't be the last powerful, famous man to see the inside of a jail cell.

# data[].attributes.body
I personally think Facebook is not a good thing for young kids to be have and Instagram is not any better. Facebook allow strangers to look at things that you only want your friends and family to see.But Instagram has a little more privacy because you can make your account private and only the people you let follow you can see what you post. And investing so much money into Instagram was useless honestly. It is just like Facebook I don't see the different between them. To me younger kids are more into Instagram because they know their parents don't have the app.Facebook you can Facetime your friends or family and if you are cheap you can buy things off of Facebook.I  don;t think it is worth fighting over though. If people want to keep Facebook let them.And if people want to keep Instagram let them. https://www.wired.com/story/with-instagram-cofounders-out-facebook-all-the-way-down/

# data[].attributes.body
I completely believe that people have the right to have their own opinions on everything; however, I also think some people get a little out of hand. In my opinion there is nothing wrong with Nike using Colin as the face of their new ad, nor do I believe there is anything wrong with Colin Kaepernick protesting.  He has the right to peacefully protest. I don't understand why people are so upset with Nike. By burning shoes and other Nike products they are just wasting their own money.  They've already bought the products so it really isn't affecting Nike at all. Colin Kaepernick is just trying to bring attention to subjects that need attention. I'm with him and Nike.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CLOSE

By now you've seen it.

Nike hit its mark as it made Colin Kaepernick the face of the 30th anniversary celebration of the "Just Do It" campaign. The ad is simple: Black and white, tightly cropped image of Kaepernick's bearded face and Afro. The white type across his face: "Believe in something. Even if it means sacrificing everything."

Bold. Powerful. Polarizing. Exactly what Nike wants.

Whether you love the ad (as do many of Kaepernick's peers and supporters, who shared the image across their social media platforms) or hate it (as do the same pre-existing outraged Kaepernick critics, many of whom now say they're burning their Nike gear), the apparel company and former San Francisco 49ers quarterback both win.

Ideally, the ad would further fuel the conversation about the need to fix our country's wretched problem of racial and social injustice. Ideally, people will have seen the image and recall why Kaepernick first took a knee during the playing of the national anthem before a preseason game two years ago. Ideally, there's yet another discussion about the need to ensure the end of police brutality and the need for criminal justice reform, particularly as it pertains to black men.

That, according to Kaepernick, was the goal all along: to start the conversation on how to fix these very real problems.

It will be interesting to see what good can be achieved when a large corporation decides to support people trying to make a positive change. It could take time to measure that impact.

But in the present, little has radically changed.

More: Colin Kaepernick's new 'Just Do it' Nike ad puts pressure on NFL to take a stand

Some of those backing Kaepernick noted the boldness of Nike - the official outfitter of the NFL - for championing one of the league's biggest enemies. Meanwhile, some in the anti-Kaepernick camp have taken offense to the "sacrificing everything" notion being applied to the still-unsigned quarterback.

For now, Nike and Kaepernick both win because we're talking about them. But beyond that?

Nike will continue to make money, and lots of it. The NFL and its fan base will remain divided. And Kaepernick - although he now has some new income - will remain on the outside rather than on an NFL roster.

A portion of Americans started wringing their hands, wondering why on earth Nike would alienate customers by promoting Kaepernick. Let's get something straight: Nike doesn't care about that lost patronage in the grand scheme of things. Those types weren't religiously rocking the swoosh anyway. Burn those old sneakers, as you say you will. Nike is after a younger, more loyal and socially conscious customer who would gladly pay for the new Kaepernick merchandise that Yahoo Sports reported the company plans to roll out. And to a degree, Nike also wants to join the conversation as well. But this is primarily a business move, and that's fine. Nike is a business.

As Philadelphia Eagles defensive end Chris Long astutely tweeted Tuesday morning, "Nike is a huge business. They've calculated risk. They may even have reason to believe this will make the brand more popular which means the guy burning his white air monarchs is in the minority. Bitter pill to swallow, I'm sure. Good luck (with) the protest. Bet they anticipated it."

And yes, Nike has been scrutinized for its labor practices, including the minimum wage and working conditions at contract factories in Vietnam, China and Indonesia. But, as Long also said, "I'm glad they're addressing the elephant in the room, though."

The question of Kaepernick's playing future still looms. Although the ad shows his popularity remains strong, don't expect the campaign to translate into a career revival.

NFL owners weren't swayed by the fact that Kaepernick's 49ers jersey has remained among the top 50 sellers the last two years. Many weren't swayed by their own pressing quarterback needs, either. They haven't forgotten that Kaepernick remains engaged in a legal battle with them, accusing them of colluding against him to keep him out of the league. And the ad won't cause them to forget that Kaepernick recently celebrated a preliminary triumph over the league when a judge recently denied the NFL's request to dismiss his grievance.

The owners are dug in on this, even though they will not admit it. In all likelihood, Kaepernick's not coming back.

So, while the ad might have surprised some within the league, the overwhelming response among the ownership ranks was likely nothing more than an eye-roll.

But that's OK. Why? Because even though Kaepernick aims to win this collusion case, and although he once badly wanted back into the league, it's believed that he knew filing the grievance likely sealed his fate as a player. At this point, some players familiar with Kaepernick's situation aren't even convinced that he even wants to play anymore.

But that doesn't mean Kaepernick isn't winning. At this point, he doesn't need football.

By standing firm and refusing to sway from the methods that he deemed most effective, Kaepernick did sacrifice his career in this possession. But his legacy is now cemented.

Yes, he has alienated some. He hurt his message with some antics, like the pig socks or the Fidel Castro T-shirt. But his reach has extended beyond the locker room and into little-known communities across the country. He has inspired peers to use their voices and resources to change lives as well.

And that's why whether in an NFL uniform or not, Kaepernick says, "Just do it."
Follow Mike Jones on Twitter @ByMikeJones.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Colin Kaepernick and Nike both won with their new ad, even if little will immediately change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CLOSE By now you've seen it. Nike hit its mark as it made Colin Kaepernick the face of the 30th anniversary celebration of the "Just Do It" campaign. The ad is simple: Black and white, tightly cropped image of Kaepernick's bearded face and Afro. The white type across his face: "Believe in something.

# data[].attributes.body
In my opinion Nike is supporting someone who knows what they believe in, he could have gone about it in a different way, but he did ask a veteran what to do and they did tell him to kneel. He meant no disrespect. Some people really are over reacting...

# data[].attributes.body
I think that, yes, Colin Kaepernick kneeled during the National Anthem for a protest against police brutality and that might have been the wrong way of protesting, but all of this talk is just to get Nike's name out in the news. Colin maybe thought that this was the best way to reach the public eye. With that, Nike saw a chance to gain more media money and views for their company. They took an old topic that hit the public hard and made it something big again. The company is getting over 50% more media exposure just over the promotional video. Other reactions included burning shoes and cutting of swooshes. This gave Nike an uproar for people to talk about, which in turn will make them more money. I don't agree with kneeling during the National Anthem because many Veterans can't stand due to their service in the army. I also don't agree with police brutality, but Colin's way of protesting doesn't exactly hit the desired purpose of the protest.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Nike is set to report earnings today after the close, and Wall Street is giddy with excitement. While Nike is a huge multinational corporation with a broad line of products, many investors and observers are interested in just one thing -- how has the company fared since its controversial Colin Kaepernick campaign was released?

The answer may surprise you.
Kaepernick outrage was a flash in the pan
To measure consumer reaction in real-time, LikeFolio analyzes social media posts by consumers about brands and products owned by publicly-traded companies.

In Nike's case, the consumer reaction to the Kaepernick ad was quite extreme, as you can see from this chart of consumer happiness:

But, like most consumer boycott campaigns, the initial outrage has subsided. Consumer happiness levels have quickly and quietly returned to Nike's normal range, indicating that the backlash against Nike was short-lived and ineffective.
Nike's brand visibility is smashing all-time highs
With controversy comes exposure...and Nike seems to have played this perfectly.

Mentions of Nike-owned brands on social media surged during the Kaepernick ad controversy, peaking at over 450,000 mentions in a single day on Twitter alone. But more importantly, as outrage subsided and consumer happiness rebounded, Nike has been able to maintain buzz. In fact, Nike is still getting over 50% more online chatter about its products today than it did prior to the Kaepernick campaign rollout .

In addition, Purchase Intent data from LikeFolio also suggests a significant net increase in consumer spending on Nike products since the campaign was released, especially via online channels.

Bottom line: The Kaepernick campaign has breathed new life into the Nike brand. While the initial reaction was full of outrage and controversy, the lasting impact is likely to be a net positive for the company and its shareholders.

I am a technologist, entrepreneur, bourbon connoisseur, sports fan, and co-founder of LikeFolio.

-- Andy Swan is the founder of LikeFolio, which provides investors and companies with actionable research based on social-data.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Proof Nike Is Cashing In Big On Controversial Kaepernick Campaign

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While Nike is a huge multinational corporation with a broad line of products, many investors and observers are interested in just one thing -- how has the company fared since its controversial Colin Kaepernick campaign was released? The answer may surprise you.

# data[].attributes.body
I thought our democracy was founded on the principle of "innocent until proven guilty," but these days it seems to be the opposite. All of Kavanaugh's accusers admit to having been drinking and to having gaps in their memory. Plus, just because someone did something in his/her teen years or college years doesn't mean he/she hasn't matured and grown over the years. It doesn't mean that person isn't a model citizen today. I know I am not the same person I was 30 years ago. This #metoo movement seems to be getting out of hand. As a mother of a teen-aged son, I fear for him and his future. His reputation could be ruined at any given moment with a simple accusation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As an extraordinary series of uncorroborated, lurid last-minute allegations threatens to derail his confirmation to the Supreme Court, nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Ford, the California professor accusing him of sexually assaulting her more than three decades ago, are set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday morning.

The proceedings may be upended by late-breaking developments: In a statement released Wednesday evening, Judiciary Committee Republicans revealed that on Monday, they conducted their "first interview with a man who believes he, not Judge Kavanaugh, had the encounter with Dr. Ford in 1982 that is the basis of his [sic] complaint." They conducted a second interview the next day.

On Wednesday, Republicans said in the statement, they received a "more in-depth written statement from the man interviewed twice previously who believes he, not Judge Kavanuagh, had the encounter in question with Dr. Ford." GOP investigators also spoke on the phone with another man making a similar claim.

Those claims, too, are a matter of dispute. On Thursday morning, Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham told "Fox & Friends" that one of those individuals is "crazy as a loon ... the one that I've heard about, I think, is not reliable." He did not name the individual, and the committee would not release further details about either person when reached for comment by Fox News. Another source, though, said "there's no reason to doubt they're both of sound mind and are both sincere in their claims."

Ford has previously said there is "zero chance" she would have confused Kavanaugh for anyone else.

In response, an aide to Democrats on the Judiciary Committee reportedly unloaded on Senate Republicans: "Republicans are flailing," the aide said, according to NBC News. "They are desperately trying to muddy the waters. ... Twelve hours before the hearing they suggest two anonymous men claimed to have assaulted her. Democrats were never informed of these assertions in interviews, in violation of Senate rules."

The aide, before again calling for an FBI probe into Ford's accusations, added, "This is shameful and the height of irresponsibility."

But Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, shot back on Twitter late Wednesday, writing, "Some might find it exceedingly difficult to imagine Judiciary Committee Democrats expressing this complaint with straight faces."

Ford first brought her allegations to the attention of Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., in July, but Feinstein didn't disclose the allegations to her Senate colleagues or federal authorities until days before a crucial Judiciary Committee vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation earlier this month. Republicans have accused Feinstein's office of compromising Ford's anonymity by sitting on the allegations until she could deploy them for maximum political gain.

The stakes for Kavanaugh could not be higher: Key swing-vote senators have said Thursday's hearing, which will begin at 10:00 a.m. ET, presents a pivotal opportunity to assess Ford's credibility and determine whether to advance Kavanaugh to the nation's highest court.

The hearing, which for days had been in doubt, will be a chance for the public to see Ford, in person, explain in detail what she claims happened at the Maryland house party in 1982 where Kavanaugh allegedly jumped on top of her and tried to muffle her screams -- and why she didn't tell anyone about the episode until 2012.

The proceedings will commence with opening statements from Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and ranking committee member Feinstein. After taking an oath, Ford will deliver the prepared remarks she has already provided publicly, according to a schedule provided by the committee. Each senator on the committee will then be afforded a single five-minute round of questions, with the opportunity to ask questions alternating between Democrats and Republicans.

Republicans have retained Rachel Mitchell, an experienced sex-crimes prosecutor, to handle some of their questioning, saying it will help avoid an overtly political atmosphere. Grassley has hammered Democrats, including Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., for "grandstanding" during the confirmation hearings earlier this month.
WATCH: CORY BOOKER COMPARES HIMSELF TO GLADIATOR 'SPARTACUS,' CLAIMS HE'S RISKING EXPULSION BY RELEASING CONFIDENTIAL KAVANAUGH DOCS
Democrats have indicated they intend to ask their own questions. After Ford's testimony is completed, the process will repeat for Kavanaugh.

"It's bad -- it's doing damage to the Supreme Court."
- Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh

In her prepared remarks, which Ford's attorney's released in advance on Wednesday, Ford will tell senators that she "thought that Brett [Kavanaugh] was accidentally going to kill me," and "I believed he was going to rape me."

She will explain that she remembers "four boys" being at the party, including one "whose name I cannot recall." The people she did name -- Kavanaugh and his classmates Mark Judge and P.J. Smyth -- have denied under penalty of felony knowing anything about the alleged episode.

Ford will also describe one girl, "my friend Leland Ingham," as also in attendance. Ingham, in a previously released statement, has also denied knowing Kavanaugh or having information about the alleged assault.
POLYGRAPH REPORT REVEALS APPARENT INCONSISTENCIES IN FORD'S CLAIMS

Ford's letter to Feinstein in July, however, gave a different tally, saying that the gathering "included me and 4 others."

Additionally, in a handwritten statement she provided the former FBI agent who administered her polygraph exam in August, Ford wrote "there were 4 boys and a couple of girls" at the party -- again apparently contradicting her letter to Feinstein.

Republicans, through Mitchell, are expected to question Ford on the apparent discrepancies.

Ford is also expected to tell senators that she finally decided to disclose the alleged assault during a therapy session in 2012 because during a remodeling of her house that year, she insisted on installing a "second front door" -- leaving her husband and others wondering why.

Additionally, questions have surfaced concerning the credibility of some of Kavanaugh's other accusers, who will not be present Thursday because they have not responded to overtures from committee Republicans.
KAVANAUGH FIGHTS BACK, TELLS INVESTIGATORS ALLEGATIONS ARE A 'DISGRACE' THAT WILL KEEP GOOD PEOPLE OUT OF PUBLIC SERVICE
For example, Julie Swetnick, who emerged Wednesday to accuse Kavanaugh of participating in "gang rapes" and rape "trains" in the 1980s, had a restraining order filed against her by an ex-boyfriend, Politico reported.

"Right after I broke up with her, she was threatening my family, threatening my wife and threatening to do harm to my baby at that time," Richard Vinneccy told Politico. "I know a lot about her. ... She's not credible at all. Not at all."

Swetnick is represented by anti-Trump lawyer Michael Avenatti, who has refused multiple requests by the Senate Judiciary Committee to interview her in the past week. On Wednesday afternoon, 60 men and women who attended Kavanaugh's high school or sister schools signed a letter saying they had never heard of Swetnick or anything like the overt, systemic gang raping that she described.

According to The Washington Post, both the state of Maryland and the federal government have filed since-resolved liens on her property in recent years for unpaid taxes totalling tens of thousands of dollars. It was not immediately clear exactly how Swetnick, who has held multiple security clearances relating to her work with the government, resolved both liens.

Republicans, i ncluding President Trump, have repeatedly pointed out that none of the sexual misconduct allegations against Kavanaugh has first-hand corroboration. In The New Yorker on Sunday, former Kavanaugh classmate Deborah Ramirez claimed that Kavanaugh had exposed his penis to her at a party decades ago, even as her close college friend denied ever hearing about the episode and suggested she was making the claim for political reasons.

Ramirez, who also did not immediately respond to GOP Judiciary Committee inquiries, has acknowledged not being sure whether Kavanaugh had assaulted her until last week, after she spent days consulting with her attorney.

Several other allegations emerged this week. On Tuesday, a constituent told the office of Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., that in 1985, two "heavily inebriated men" referred to as "Brett and Mark" had sexually assaulted a "close friend" on a boat.

The constituent, whose name was redacted in a document release by the Judiciary Committee but uncovered through tweets cited by the committee, recanted the claim Wednesday night on Twitter -- but several media outlets continued to report the allegations for hours afterwards.

In Twitter posts, the person making the accusation had also evidently advocated removing President Trump from the White House by means of military coup. On Wednesday, a post on the accuser's Twitter account read, "Do everyone who is going crazy about what I had said I have recanted because I have made a mistake and apologize for such mistake."

In a separate case, Kavanaugh was asked by GOP investigators this week specifically about a new claim in a letter received by Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., from an anonymous individual apparently in Denver, alleging that Kavanaugh "shoved" someone up against a wall "very aggressively and sexually" during an outing in front of four witnesses in 1998. Gardner's office received the letter on Sept. 22.

"We're dealing with an anonymous letter about an anonymous person and an anonymous friend," Kavanaugh told committee investigators asking about the alleged episode. "It's ridiculous. Total Twilight Zone. And no, I've never done anything like that.
Fox News' Brooke Singman and Mike Emanuel contributed to this report.
"It's bad -- it's doing damage to the Supreme Court," Kavanaugh added. "It's doing damage to the country. It's doing damage to this process. It's become a total feeding frenzy, you know? Every -- just unbelievable."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ahead of pivotal Senate hearing, witnesses surface to say Christine Ford may have mistaken them for Kavanaugh

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As an extraordinary series of uncorroborated, lurid last-minute allegations threatens to derail his confirmation to the Supreme Court, nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Ford, the California professor accusing him of sexually assaulting her more than three decades ago, are set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee Thursday morning.