# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What we're covering here
What we're covering here

Brett Kavanaugh: Trump's Supreme Court nominee told Fox News he's "not going anywhere" despite the allegation of sexual assault from more than three decades ago that continues to threaten his confirmation.

Two allegations: A new accuser came forward on Sunday hours after arrangements were finally locked in for a Senate hearing on Thursday with his first accuser, Christine Blasey Ford.

What Trump is saying: The President dismissed the allegations of inappropriate against Kavanaugh, calling them "totally political."

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders on GMA this morning said that the White House would be open to Brett Kavanaugh's second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, testifying on Thursday.

She continued: "Multiple lives have been ruined. Both families have been drug through the mud when they didn't have to be because Dianne Feinstein could have done this in a much more structured process."

Brett Kavanaugh looked less like a Supreme Court justice than an ordinary political candidate whose campaign is on the skids, mired in scandal as he battles to keep his hopes of high office alive.

With his wife Ashley by his side, Kavanaugh seized control of his own defense against allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct that are threatening to overwhelm his hopes of joining the bench.

"I am not going anywhere," Kavanaugh told Fox News in an interview on Monday night.

Why this is notable: The joint appearance by the Kavanaughs was a startling moment, unprecedented in the history of the Supreme Court confirmation process, and may end up registering a new threshold in the politicization of the institution he hopes to join.

A big television interview has long been a weapon in a political consultant's political arsenal. And Kavanaugh learned from some of best as one of the President's men in the George W. Bush White House.
Keep reading here.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, a Republican senator from Texas, suggested that the Senate Judiciary Committee could move to vote on Kavanaugh's nomination as early as this week, but said he would defer to committee Chairman Chuck Grassley for an official announcement. .

"I would defer to the chairman but I don't think we would do it on Thursday. Friday would be possible but I'm gonna let him make those announcements," Cornyn said.

Cornyn also said the GOP was leaning toward having an outside lawyer do the questioning "for continuity."

Sen. John Kennedy, R-Louisiana, said the Senate Judiciary Committee Republican staff is in touch with counsel for Deborah Ramirez, the latest woman to accuse Judge Brett Kavanaugh of inappropriate sexual behavior. However, Kennedy said her lawyer has "not been terribly cooperative" and is telling the committee to read the allegations in The New Yorker.

"Our majority staff has been in touch with Ms. Ramirez's counsel. We are told if we want to know the allegations, read the New Yorker. And that's all they're willing to say," Kennedy told reporters. "So we will continue to try to investigation Ms. Ramirez's allegations, but so far her counsel has not been terribly cooperative other than to say to read the New Yorker."

Asked whether Ramirez's attorney had asked to provide testimony, Kennedy said: "You have to crawl before you can walk. We're trying to learn about the basis for the allegations other than a periodical."

Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, a veteran member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he believed the GOP would likely rely on a female outside counsel to ask questions at the Thursday hearing.

Asked why GOP Senators wouldn't question, he said: " We are hopeful she's going to do the job that needs to be done."

The committee has made no announcement about who the female counsel will be.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins -- a key vote -- said she believes judiciary committee investigators should "reach out" to Deborah Ramirez, the latest woman who has accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of inappropriate sexual behavior.

"I believe that the committee investigators should reach out to Deborah Ramirez in order to question her under oath about what she is alleging happened. I also am eager for the hearing to take place this Thursday and hear from both Judge Kavanaugh and and from Dr. Ford," Collins said Monday.

Collins added that she did not think Ramirez should be present at Thursday's hearing because "there hasn't even been an interview of her yet with the committee staff and I think that needs to take place first."

Similarly, fellow Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who is also seen as a key vote, responded to a question about if she was moving closer to a decision on the nomination by saying: "There is a hearing on Thursday."

Judge Brett Kavanaugh told Fox News that he neither "sexually assaulted anyone" nor had sex -- "or anything close to sexual intercourse" -- throughout high school and for "many years" after that.

The remarks came in an interview with Fox News' Martha MacCallum due to air later this evening.

Kavanaugh seemed to raise the fact that he was a virgin in those years unprompted, disclosing it while defending against accusations he sexually assaulted a teenage girl at a party while in high school.
Here's the full exchange:
Kavanaugh: "We're talking about an allegation of sexual assault. I've never sexually assaulted anyone. I did not have sexual intercourse or anything close to sexual intercourse or for many years thereafter. And the girls from the schools I went to and I were friends..."
Fox: "So you're saying through all these years that you were in question you were a virgin?"
Kavanaugh: "That's correct."
Fox: "Never had sexual intercourse with anyone in high school?"
Kavanaugh: "That's correct."
Fox: "And, through what years in college, since we're probing into your personal life here?"
Kavanaugh: "Many years, many years after. I'll leave it at that, many years after."

Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Republican from Utah, was just asked about the latest allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

"Well it's amazing to me that these allegations come out of nowhere at the last minute and that they weren't brought up earlier in this process," he said.

"And it's not untypical for our friends on the other side to pull that kind of crap," he added, referencing the Democrats.

He also called the allegations from Deborah Ramirez "phony accusations," and said, "I think she is sincere, at least I hope so but I think she is sincerely wrong."

"I am frustrated," he added. "I am angry because I get a little tired of the way some of these people have been treated on our side."

What we're covering here

Brett Kavanaugh: Trump's Supreme Court nominee told Fox News he's "not going anywhere" despite the allegation of sexual assault from more than three decades ago that continues to threaten his confirmation.

Two allegations: A new accuser came forward on Sunday hours after arrangements were finally locked in for a Senate hearing on Thursday with his first accuser, Christine Blasey Ford.

What Trump is saying: The President dismissed the allegations of inappropriate against Kavanaugh, calling them "totally political."

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders on GMA this morning said that the White House would be open to Brett Kavanaugh's second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, testifying on Thursday.

She continued: "Multiple lives have been ruined. Both families have been drug through the mud when they didn't have to be because Dianne Feinstein could have done this in a much more structured process."

Brett Kavanaugh looked less like a Supreme Court justice than an ordinary political candidate whose campaign is on the skids, mired in scandal as he battles to keep his hopes of high office alive.

With his wife Ashley by his side, Kavanaugh seized control of his own defense against allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct that are threatening to overwhelm his hopes of joining the bench.

"I am not going anywhere," Kavanaugh told Fox News in an interview on Monday night.

Why this is notable: The joint appearance by the Kavanaughs was a startling moment, unprecedented in the history of the Supreme Court confirmation process, and may end up registering a new threshold in the politicization of the institution he hopes to join.

A big television interview has long been a weapon in a political consultant's political arsenal. And Kavanaugh learned from some of best as one of the President's men in the George W. Bush White House.
Keep reading here.

Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, a Republican senator from Texas, suggested that the Senate Judiciary Committee could move to vote on Kavanaugh's nomination as early as this week, but said he would defer to committee Chairman Chuck Grassley for an official announcement. .

"I would defer to the chairman but I don't think we would do it on Thursday. Friday would be possible but I'm gonna let him make those announcements," Cornyn said.

Cornyn also said the GOP was leaning toward having an outside lawyer do the questioning "for continuity."

Sen. John Kennedy, R-Louisiana, said the Senate Judiciary Committee Republican staff is in touch with counsel for Deborah Ramirez, the latest woman to accuse Judge Brett Kavanaugh of inappropriate sexual behavior. However, Kennedy said her lawyer has "not been terribly cooperative" and is telling the committee to read the allegations in The New Yorker.

"Our majority staff has been in touch with Ms. Ramirez's counsel. We are told if we want to know the allegations, read the New Yorker. And that's all they're willing to say," Kennedy told reporters. "So we will continue to try to investigation Ms. Ramirez's allegations, but so far her counsel has not been terribly cooperative other than to say to read the New Yorker."

Asked whether Ramirez's attorney had asked to provide testimony, Kennedy said: "You have to crawl before you can walk. We're trying to learn about the basis for the allegations other than a periodical."

Utah Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch, a veteran member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he believed the GOP would likely rely on a female outside counsel to ask questions at the Thursday hearing.

Asked why GOP Senators wouldn't question, he said: " We are hopeful she's going to do the job that needs to be done."

The committee has made no announcement about who the female counsel will be.

Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins -- a key vote -- said she believes judiciary committee investigators should "reach out" to Deborah Ramirez, the latest woman who has accused Judge Brett Kavanaugh of inappropriate sexual behavior.

"I believe that the committee investigators should reach out to Deborah Ramirez in order to question her under oath about what she is alleging happened. I also am eager for the hearing to take place this Thursday and hear from both Judge Kavanaugh and and from Dr. Ford," Collins said Monday.

Collins added that she did not think Ramirez should be present at Thursday's hearing because "there hasn't even been an interview of her yet with the committee staff and I think that needs to take place first."

Similarly, fellow Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who is also seen as a key vote, responded to a question about if she was moving closer to a decision on the nomination by saying: "There is a hearing on Thursday."

Judge Brett Kavanaugh told Fox News that he neither "sexually assaulted anyone" nor had sex -- "or anything close to sexual intercourse" -- throughout high school and for "many years" after that.

The remarks came in an interview with Fox News' Martha MacCallum due to air later this evening.

Kavanaugh seemed to raise the fact that he was a virgin in those years unprompted, disclosing it while defending against accusations he sexually assaulted a teenage girl at a party while in high school.
Here's the full exchange:
Kavanaugh: "We're talking about an allegation of sexual assault. I've never sexually assaulted anyone. I did not have sexual intercourse or anything close to sexual intercourse or for many years thereafter. And the girls from the schools I went to and I were friends..."
Fox: "So you're saying through all these years that you were in question you were a virgin?"
Kavanaugh: "That's correct."
Fox: "Never had sexual intercourse with anyone in high school?"
Kavanaugh: "That's correct."
Fox: "And, through what years in college, since we're probing into your personal life here?"
Kavanaugh: "Many years, many years after. I'll leave it at that, many years after."

Sen. Orrin Hatch, a Republican from Utah, was just asked about the latest allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

"Well it's amazing to me that these allegations come out of nowhere at the last minute and that they weren't brought up earlier in this process," he said.

"And it's not untypical for our friends on the other side to pull that kind of crap," he added, referencing the Democrats.

He also called the allegations from Deborah Ramirez "phony accusations," and said, "I think she is sincere, at least I hope so but I think she is sincerely wrong."

"I am frustrated," he added. "I am angry because I get a little tired of the way some of these people have been treated on our side."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kavanaugh fights second allegation: Live updates

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What we're covering here What we're covering here Brett Kavanaugh: Trump's Supreme Court nominee told Fox News he's "not going anywhere" despite the allegation of sexual assault from more than three decades ago that continues to threaten his confirmation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Human trafficking is a terrible crime that we must all work to end. Traffickers force their victims to work without pay, imprison them against their will, or force them to perform commercial sex acts. Sometimes they do all three.

Through violence, fraud, threats, and other forms of coercion, human traffickers turn human beings into profit centers against their will. They view their victims as commodities -commodities that can be sold not just once, but over and over again.

Human trafficking is big business. It's believed to be the third-largest criminal activity in the world. By one estimate, traffickers make over $9.5 billion annually in the United States alone. This is not a crime that affects just one region of the country; it is a nationwide problem.

Many of the victims are brought into the country from abroad, but the vast majority of victims trafficked in the United States come from our own communities. They are often young girls from foster homes, runaway youth, or adults who are vulnerable due to disability, drug dependency or a history of abuse.

If everyone from hotel clerks to flight attendants to emergency room doctors learn how to spot the signs of human trafficking, we will rescue more victims and bring more traffickers to justice.

Just a few weeks ago, a defendant in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, was sentenced to 21 years in prison for sex trafficking. After recruiting young women and girls to dance at clubs using false promises of money and a better life, he used a combination of physical violence, isolation, emotional manipulation, sexual assault, and threats to harm the victims' families to force them into commercial sex acts.

On one occasion, he used a heated wire hanger to brand a "P" on a victim's buttock to demonstrate his ownership of her. When another victim considered leaving, he put a gun in her mouth and threatened to "blow her head off."

Bringing traffickers like this one to justice is one of the top priorities of the U.S. Department of Justice. We are using every tool at our disposal to eradicate human trafficking. We vigorously investigate and prosecute offenders. We fund training for local law enforcement officers in how to identify trafficking victims. We provide millions of dollars in grants to organizations that assist trafficking victims. And we take every opportunity to raise public awareness of the problem.

But we know that law enforcement cannot win this fight alone. We rely on the help of other government agencies, nonprofit victim services providers and industry. On Friday we are hosting a summit on this issue, where all representatives from all of these fields will share perspectives on how we can all better engage in our fight against trafficking.

We also need the help of the public. If everyone from hotel clerks to flight attendants to emergency room doctors learn how to spot the signs of human trafficking, we will rescue more victims and bring more traffickers to justice.

Those signs could include, for example, an older man traveling with young girls not related to him, or a young woman carrying many hotel keys.

If you're a teacher or a parent, look for a sudden drop in school performance or the sudden appearance of expensive things that a child simply could not afford.

We urge everyone to be vigilant, particularly in places frequented by traffickers, such as hotels, casinos, truck stops, and major sporting events like this weekend's Super Bowl.

If you see something suspicious, you should immediately contact local law enforcement. You can also contact the National Human Trafficking Hotline toll-free at 1-888-373-7888 or at https://humantraffickinghotline.org/ where specialists are available at any time to answer trafficking-related questions.

It will take only a few minutes of your time. And it might just set someone free.

Rachel L. Brand is Associate Attorney General of the United States. As Associate Attorney General, she serves as the third-ranking officer in the Department of Justice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Human trafficking is big business. Law enforcement needs your help to put an end to it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Human trafficking is a terrible crime that we must all work to end. If everyone from hotel clerks to flight attendants to emergency room doctors learn how to spot the signs of human trafficking, we will rescue more victims and bring more traffickers to justice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As Senate Republicans press for a swift vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump's nominee to the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats are investigating a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh. The claim dates to the 1983-84 academic school year, when Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale University. The offices of at least four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation, and at least two have begun investigating it. Senior Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week and, in conversations with The New Yorker, expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh's nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote. The Democratic Senate offices reviewing the allegations believe that they merit further investigation. "This is another serious, credible, and disturbing allegation against Brett Kavanagh. It should be fully investigated," Senator Mazie Hirono, of Hawaii, said. An aide in one of the other Senate offices added, "These allegations seem credible, and we're taking them very seriously. If established, they're clearly disqualifying."

The woman at the center of the story, Deborah Ramirez, who is fifty-three, attended Yale with Kavanaugh, where she studied sociology and psychology. Later, she spent years working for an organization that supports victims of domestic violence. The New Yorker contacted Ramirez after learning of her possible involvement in an incident involving Kavanaugh. The allegation was also conveyed to Democratic senators by a civil-rights lawyer. For Ramirez, the sudden attention has been unwelcome, and prompted difficult choices. She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh's role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away. Ramirez is now calling for the F.B.I. to investigate Kavanaugh's role in the incident. "I would think an F.B.I. investigation would be warranted," she said.

In a statement, Kavanaugh wrote, "This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name--and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building--against these last-minute allegations."

White House spokesperson Kerri Kupec said the administration stood by Kavanaugh. "This 35-year-old, uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the Democrats designed to tear down a good man. This claim is denied by all who were said to be present and is wholly inconsistent with what many women and men who knew Judge Kavanaugh at the time in college say. The White House stands firmly behind Judge Kavanaugh."

Ramirez said that, when both she and Kavanaugh were freshmen at Yale, she was invited by a friend on the women's soccer team to a dorm-room party. She recalled that the party took place in a suite at Lawrance Hall, in the part of Yale known as the Old Campus, and that a small group of students decided to play a drinking game together. "We were sitting in a circle," she said. "People would pick who drank." Ramirez was chosen repeatedly, she said, and quickly became inebriated. At one point, she said, a male student pointed a gag plastic penis in her direction. Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words as that male student and another stood nearby. (Ramirez identified the two male onlookers, but, at her request, The New Yorker is not naming them.)

A third male student then exposed himself to her. "I remember a penis being in front of my face," she said. "I knew that's not what I wanted, even in that state of mind." She recalled remarking, "That's not a real penis," and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to "kiss it." She said that she pushed the person away, touching it in the process. Ramirez, who was raised a devout Catholic in Connecticut, said that she was shaken. "I wasn't going to touch a penis until I was married," she said. "I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated." She remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. "Brett was laughing," she said. "I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants." She recalled another male student shouting about the incident. "Somebody yelled down the hall, 'Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie's face,' " she said. "It was his full name. I don't think it was just 'Brett.' And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there."

Ramirez acknowledged that there are significant gaps in her memories of the evening, and that, if she ever presents her story to the F.B.I. or members of the Senate, she will inevitably be pressed on her motivation for coming forward after so many years, and questioned about her memory, given her drinking at the party.

And yet, after several days of considering the matter carefully, she said, "I'm confident about the pants coming up, and I'm confident about Brett being there." Ramirez said that what has stayed with her most forcefully is the memory of laughter at her expense from Kavanaugh and the other students. "It was kind of a joke," she recalled. "And now it's clear to me it wasn't a joke."

By his freshman year, Kavanaugh was eighteen, and legally an adult. During his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Kavanaugh swore under oath that as a legal adult he had never "committed any verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature."

The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party. A classmate of Ramirez's, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh's nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two. The classmate said that he is "one hundred per cent sure" that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself to Ramirez. He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself. The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled that the party took place in a common room on the first floor in Entryway B of Lawrance Hall, during their freshman year. "I've known this all along," he said. "It's been on my mind all these years when his name came up. It was a big deal." The story stayed with him, he said, because it was disturbing and seemed outside the bounds of typically acceptable behavior, even during heavy drinking at parties on campus. The classmate said that he had been shocked, but not necessarily surprised, because the social group to which Kavanaugh belonged often drank to excess. He recalled Kavanaugh as "relatively shy" until he drank, at which point he said that Kavanagh could become "aggressive and even belligerent."

Another classmate, Richard Oh, an emergency-room doctor in California, recalled overhearing, soon after the party, a female student tearfully recounting to another student an incident at a party involving a gag with a fake penis, followed by a male student exposing himself. Oh is not certain of the identity of the female student. Ramirez told her mother and sister about an upsetting incident at the time, but did not describe the details to either due to her embarrassment.

Mark Krasberg, an assistant professor of neurosurgery at the University of New Mexico who was also a member of Kavanaugh and Ramirez's class at Yale, said Kavanaugh's college behavior had become a topic of discussion among former Yale students soon after Kavanaugh's nomination. In one e-mail that Krasberg received in September, the classmate who recalled hearing about the incident with Ramirez alluded to it and wrote that it "would qualify as a sexual assault," he speculated, "if it's true."

One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. "I don't think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter," he said. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation, he responded, "I have no idea." The other male classmate Ramirez said was involved in the incident commented, "I have zero recollection."

In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and three other classmates, Dino Ewing, Louisa Garry, and Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez's account of events: "We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it-and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett's Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this."

The former friend who was married to the male classmate alleged to be involved, and who signed the statement said of Ramirez, "This is a woman I was best friends with. We shared intimate details of our lives. And I was never told this story by her, or by anyone else. It never came up. I didn't see it; I never heard of it happening." She said she hadn't spoken with Ramirez for about ten years, but that the two women had been close all through college, and Kavanaugh had remained part of what she called their "larger social circle." In an initial conversation with The New Yorker, she suggested that Ramirez may have been politically motivated. Later, she said that she did not know if this was the case.

Ramirez is a registered Democrat, but said that her decision to speak out was not politically motivated and, regarding her views, that she "works toward human rights, social justice, and social change." Ramirez said that she felt "disappointed and betrayed" by the statements from classmates questioning her allegation, "because I clearly remember people in the room whose names are on this letter."

Several other classmates said that they believed Ramirez to be credible and honest, and vouched for her integrity. James Roche was roommates with Kavanaugh at the time of the alleged incident and is now the C.E.O. of a software company in San Francisco. "Debbie and I became close friends shortly after we both arrived at Yale," he said. "She stood out as being exceptionally honest and gentle. I cannot imagine her making this up." He said that he never witnessed Kavanaugh engage in any sexual misconduct, but did recall him being "frequently, incoherently drunk." He described Ramirez as a vulnerable outsider. "Is it believable that she was alone with a wolfy group of guys who thought it was funny to sexually torment a girl like Debbie? Yeah, definitely. Is it believable that Kavanaugh was one of them? Yes." Another acquaintance from college, Jennifer Klaus, similarly said that she considered the allegation plausible, adding, "Debbie's always been a very truthful, kind-almost to the point of being selfless-individual." A third classmate, who Ramirez thought had attended the party, said that she was not present at the incident. The former student, who asked not to be named, said that she also found Ramirez credible.

Former students described an atmosphere at Yale at the time in which alcohol-fuelled parties often led to behavior similar to that described by Ramirez. "I believe it could have happened," another classmate who knew both Kavanaugh and Ramirez said. Though she was not aware of Kavanaugh being involved in any specific misconduct, she recalled that heavy drinking was routine and that Ramirez was sometimes victimized and taunted by male students in his social circle. "They were always, like, 'Debbie's here!,' and then they'd get into their 'Lord of the Flies' thing," she said. While at Yale, Kavanaugh became a member of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity, or "Deke," which several students said was known for its wild and, in the view of some critics, misogynistic parties. Kavanaugh was also a member of an all-male secret society, Truth and Courage, which was popularly known by the nickname "Tit and Clit."

Ramirez said that she continued to socialize with one of the male classmates who had egged Kavanaugh on during the party during college; she even invited the classmate to her house for Thanksgiving one year, after he told her that he had nowhere to go. She also attended his wedding, years later, as a guest of his wife, and said that she posed for photographs with Kavanaugh, smiling.

Ramirez said that she remained silent about the matter and did not fully confront her memories about it for years because she blamed herself for drinking too much. "It was a story that was known, but it was a story I was embarrassed about," she said. More recently, she has begun to reassess what happened. "Even if I did drink too much, any person observing it, would they want their daughter, their granddaughter, with a penis in their face, while they're drinking that much?" she said. "I can say that at fifty-three, but when I was nineteen or twenty I was vulnerable. I didn't know better." Reflecting on the incident now, she said she considers Kavanaugh's male classmates culpable. "They're accountable for not stopping this," she said. However, "What Brett did is worse." She added, "What does it mean, that this person has a role in defining women's rights in our future?"

As Kavanaugh's confirmation hearings became a national story, the discussions among Ramirez and Kavanaugh's classmates took on heightened urgency, eventually spreading to news organizations and to the Senate. Senate aides from Ramirez's home state of Colorado alerted a lawyer, Stanley Garnett, a former Democratic district attorney in Boulder, who currently represents her. Ramirez ultimately decided to begin telling her story publicly, before others did so for her. "I didn't want any of this," she said. "But now I have to speak."

Ramirez said that she hoped her story would support that of Christine Blasey Ford, the California professor who has raised an allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh that bears several similarities to Ramirez's claim. Like Ramirez, Ford said that Kavanaugh was involved in sexual misconduct at a party while drunk and egged on by a male friend. In July, she sent a letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein alleging that, at a party in the summer of 1982, when she was fifteen and Kavanaugh was seventeen and in high school, Kavanaugh pushed her into a bedroom, locked the door, pinned her to a bed, and covered her mouth to stop her screams as he attempted to pull off her clothes. Details of Ford's allegation were initially made public by The New Yorker, which did not name her at the time. Subsequently, she disclosed her name in an interview with the Washington Post. In her letter, Ford said that during the incident she feared that Kavanaugh might inadvertently kill her. She alleged that a male friend and Georgetown Prep classmate of Kavanaugh's, Mark Judge, was present in the room, alternately urging Kavanaugh to "go for it" and to "stop." Kavanaugh has denied the allegation.

Ford's allegation has made Judge a potentially pivotal witness for Kavanaugh. Judge told The New Yorker that he had "no recollection" of such an incident. Judge, who is a conservative writer, later gave an interview to The Weekly Standard in which he called Ford's allegation "just absolutely nuts," adding, "I never saw Brett act that way." Asked by the interviewer whether he could remember any "sort of rough-housing with a female student back in high school" that might have been "interpreted differently by parties involved," Judge told the publication, "I can't. I can recall a lot of rough-housing with guys." He added, "I don't remember any of that stuff going on with girls."

After seeing Judge's denial, Elizabeth Rasor, who met Judge at Catholic University and was in a relationship with him for about three years, said that she felt morally obligated to challenge his account that " 'no horseplay' took place at Georgetown Prep with women." Rasor stressed that "under normal circumstances, I wouldn't reveal information that was told in confidence," but, she said, "I can't stand by and watch him lie." In an interview with The New Yorker, she said, "Mark told me a very different story." Rasor recalled that Judge had told her ashamedly of an incident that involved him and other boys taking turns having sex with a drunk woman. Rasor said that Judge seemed to regard it as fully consensual. She said that Judge did not name others involved in the incident, and she has no knowledge that Kavanaugh participated. But Rasor was disturbed by the story and noted that it undercut Judge's protestations about the sexual innocence of Georgetown Prep. (Barbara Van Gelder, an attorney for Judge, said that he "categorically denies" the account related by Rasor. Van Gelder said that Judge had no further comment.)

Another woman who attended high school in the nineteen-eighties in Montgomery County, Maryland, where Georgetown Prep is located, also refuted Judge's account of the social scene at the time, sending a letter to Ford's lawyers saying that she had witnessed boys at parties that included Georgetown Prep students engaging in sexual misconduct. In an interview, the woman, who asked to have her name withheld for fear of political retribution, recalled that male students "would get a female student blind drunk" on what they called "jungle juice"-grain alcohol mixed with Hawaiian Punch-then try to take advantage of her. "It was disgusting," she said. "They treated women like meat."

Kavanaugh's attitude toward women has come to play a central role in his confirmation process. His backers have offered portrayals of his strong support for girls and women. When Kavanaugh accepted Trump's nomination to the Court at a White House event in July, he and Trump both stressed that he had numerous female law clerks, and that he coached his young daughters' school basketball teams. During his Senate confirmation hearings, Kavanaugh at one point ushered into the Senate hearing room a large group of school girls whose basketball games he had coached, showcasing his warm and supportive relationships with women. Earlier this month, on the same day The New Yorker reported details of Ford's allegation, Republicans on the Judiciary Committee released a letter from sixty-five women defending the nominee. On Monday, CNN reported that the White House has been contacting many of those women again, hoping to present their perspective to the media, perhaps as part of a group news conference.

The very different portrayals of Kavanaugh and his social scene offered by Ford, and now Ramirez, come at a crucial point in the confirmation process. On Friday, Republican Senator Charles Grassley, of Iowa, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, issued a public ultimatum to Ford, announcing that he would schedule the committee's vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation for Monday morning if she did not respond to an invitation to testify by a deadline, set first for Friday night and then for Saturday afternoon. Lawyers for Ford had pushed back, demanding an outside investigation of Ford's allegation by the F.B.I. before she offered testimony, and said that she needed additional time to prepare. The White House and F.B.I. have declined to pursue that F.B.I. investigation, though Grassley has stated that his office has conducted its own inquiries into the matter. On Sunday, Ford's lawyer and the committee reached an agreement for her to testify on Thursday.

In a statement, Kavanaugh's attorneys Beth Wilkinson and Alexandra Walsh, wrote, "Judge Kavanaugh fully and honestly answered the Judiciary Committee's questions over multiple days only to have unsubstantiated allegations come out when a vote on his confirmation was imminent. What matters in situations like these are facts and evidence." Like Kavanaugh, they said that on Thursday, "testimony and evidence will confirm what Judge Kavanaugh has made clear all along-that he did not commit the sexual assault Dr. Blasey Ford describes."

The issue has proved to be politically delicate for the White House. Last week, Vanity Fair reported that White House officials were concerned about additional allegations against Kavanaugh emerging, and cited a source who claimed that Ivanka Trump, the President's daughter and adviser, had urged him to withdraw Kavanaugh's nomination. Trump has defended Kavanaugh in the wake of Ford's allegations. In a series of tweets on Friday, he sought to undermine her account of events, writing, "I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents." He described Kavanaugh as "a fine man," who he wrote was "under assault by radical left wing politicians."

Ramirez said that witnessing the attempts to discredit Ford had made her frightened to share her own story, which she knew would be attacked due to the gaps in her memory and her level of inebriation at the time. "I'm afraid how this will all come back on me," she said. Her attorney, Garnett, said that he and Ramirez had not yet decided when and how she would convey the details of her allegation to the Senate Judiciary Committee and whether new counsel would represent her in Washington. "We're carefully evaluating what the appropriate next steps would be," he said. They both said that an F.B.I. investigation of the matter was merited. "I do believe an F.B.I. investigation of this kind of character-related information would be appropriate, and would be an effective way to relay the information to the committee," Garnett said. Of Ramirez, he added, "She's as careful and credible a witness as I've encountered in thirty-six years of practicing law." Ramirez said that she hoped an investigation could be carried out before the committee voted on Kavanaugh's nomination. "At least look at it," she said of her claim. "At least check it out."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh's College Years

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer on a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump's second Supreme Court nominee. His Yale classmate, Deborah Ramirez, accuses Kavanaugh of putting his penis near her face when they were at a college party.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For most of the twentieth century the stock market made only small gains compared to the golden era we are living in today. Since the 2008 financial crisis, markets have soared and, month after month, the major stock indexes have broken new records. In July, the NASDAQ and the S&P 500 broke new all-time highs, with the Dow Jones not far behind. The stock market has not just recovered from the financial crisis. It is making serious bank.

One of the stock market's most popular cheerleaders has been President Donald Trump. Since July, Trump has sent out eleven tweets championing the strength of the stock market. Two in particular seem to suggest that a rising stock market goes hand in hand with increased wages:

Stock Market at all time high, unemployment at lowest level in years (wages will start going up) and our base has never been stronger!

- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 2, 2017

Highest Stock Market EVER, best economic numbers in years, unemployment lowest in 17 years, wages raising, border secure, S.C.: No WH chaos!

- Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 31, 2017

Former President Barack Obama was a bit more discerning when he compared the stock market to wages. However, he still used the stock market as a yardstick to measure the strength of the economy. A few years after the financial crisis, when the stock market began to pick up, Obama said in his 2011 State of the Union Address:

Two years after the worst recession most of us have ever known, the stock market has come roaring back. Corporate profits are up. The economy is growing again.

Our political leaders seem to suggest a soaring stock market means great things for our country. But, what does the stock market do for average Americans? More specifically, what does it do for their wages?

The figure above compares the average real wages of nonsupervisory workers and the real level of the S&P 500 from the early twentieth century to today. Both series are adjusted for inflation using the CPI (pre-1978) and CPI-U-RS (post-1978).

To begin, let's look at real wages measured in 2016 dollars. From 1920 to the early 1970s, real wages rise quickly and consistently. But in the mid-1970s real wages begin to decline. Then in the mid-1990s wages begin to slowly rise. The S&P, on the other hand, behaves quite differently. From the 1920s to the early 1970s it also moves upward, but slowly. Then the S&P rapidly shoots up just as wages begin to decline.

Let us study the figure in more detail. Before 1980, real wages grow at an average rate of two and one half cents ($0.025) per month. Then, after 1980 wages grow by only an average rate of 0.7 cents ($0.007) per month - a 71 percent drop in the average rate of growth. The S&P 500 follows a different pattern. Before 1980, the S&P grew at an average pace of 0.53 points per month. But, after 1980 the S&P begins to soar. The index increases by 4.0 points per month - a 660 percent rise in its growth rate.

Looking at this more abstractly, how does the real wage respond when the S&P increases by one point? Before 1980, when the S&P rises by one point, on average the real wage increases by three cents ($0.027). After 1980, when the S&P rises by one point, the real wage increases by only one tenth of one cent ($0.001).

This leads us to ask: Are these two variables even correlated? When the S&P increases, does the real wage also increase? Correspondingly, when the S&P decreases, does the real wage decrease? From 1950 to 1975, they were largely positively correlated. But after 1975, the correlation tended to be more negative than positive. Meaning, when the S&P increases the real wage tends to decrease, and when the S&P decreases the real wage tends to increase. After 1975, on average, while one was moving up the other was moving down.

Political leaders seem to believe that what's good for the stock market is good for the larger economy. But the data show that since the 1980s, when the stock market rises, wages barely move. Today, hourly wage earners - who constitute nearly 60 percent of the workforce - are only making slightly more on average than they did forty years ago. In fact, if the federal minimum wage kept pace with the average hourly wage and average productivity since the late 1960s, it would be over $18 per hour today.

Yet, political and business leaders still proceed as if the stock market is key to measuring the success of the economy. Perhaps the stock market tells us about the prospects of capital owners, but it certainly doesn't tell us much about the average worker.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Does The Stock Market Do For Workers' Wages? Nothing

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For most of the twentieth century the stock market made only small gains compared to the golden era we are living in today. Since the 2008 financial crisis, markets have soared and, month after month, the major stock indexes have broken new records.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Wall Street pay keeps rising.

Including bonuses, the average salary in New York City's securities industry jumped by 13% to $422,500 in 2017, according to a report from New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli.

That's the highest figure since 2008 and the third-highest on record, once adjusted for inflation.

"Ten years after Lehman Brothers' collapse it is clear that Wall St. does not need to return to the days of excessive risk-taking to enjoy rising profits," DiNapoli said in a statement.

Bank profits reached a record $60.2 billion last quarter, driven in part by corporate tax cuts, according to FDIC numbers.

Despite healthy profits, DiNapoli's office found that the number of Wall Street jobs dipped slightly in 2017 to 176,900 from 177,000 a year before. That's 6% below the pre-crisis high in 2007.

Wall Street drives a large chunk of the economy in both New York state and New York City.

The industry accounted for a fifth of all private sector wages in the city last year, though it made up less than 5% of overall employment, according to DiNapoli's report.

However, compensation at banks remains a touchy subject.

Bad incentives have been blamed for the flimsy mortgage underwriting standards and risky bets by Wall Street that led to the 2008 crisis. More recently, overly aggressive sales goals were at the heart of the Wells Fargo fake-accounts scandal.

-- CNNMoney's Matt Egan contributed to this report.

CNNMoney (New York) First published September 18, 2018: 2:39 PM ET

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wall Street pay is the highest since the financial crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Including bonuses, the average salary in New York City's securities industry jumped by 13% to $422,500 in 2017, according to a report from New York State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli. That's the highest figure since 2008 and the third-highest on record, once adjusted for inflation. "Ten years after Lehman Brothers' collapse it is clear that Wall St.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Analysis | Trump says human trafficking 'is worse than it's ever been in the history of the world.' Where to begin?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
President Trump is not a historian. In fact, as The Washington Post's Jenna Johnson documented so well Wednesday, he often seems to be learning basic historical facts before our very eyes while boldly claiming nobody previously knew those basic facts. Other times, he makes huge historical claims without any real basis.

# data[].attributes.body
President Trump´s nominee to the Supreme Court is Brett Kavanaugh. Concerns about his nominations have sparked, due to information that was found that suggested he had been accused of sexual misconduct while studying at Yale in 1984.The offices of at least four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation, and at least two have begun investigating it. This was not the only allegation against him- as the first came from  Christine Blasey Ford, who will stand at trial against him. She also says she was sexually abused by Kavanaugh at a party in the 1980´s. Trump says that these allegations are ¨totally political¨.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It is messy, tentacled, and increasingly confusing. Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination has become ensnared by a he-said-they-said debate over sexual misconduct allegations.

Here's what we know.
THE BASICS
The issue: Two women have accused Kavanaugh of sexual crimes - one at a party in high school and another in college. Kavanaugh has categorically denied their allegations.

Where it gets complicated: The resulting debate about who is telling the truth has been more nuanced and difficult to unpack, with no irrefutable evidence on either side and a backdrop of #MeToo-era awareness of sexual assault and harassment.

What happens next: At the moment, the Senate Judiciary Committee has planned a Thursday hearing with Christine Blasey Ford, who first accused Kavanaugh of sexual assault, and Kavanaugh himself. The committee has said it is also investigating accusations made Sunday by Deborah Ramirez, though it is not clear if her claims will prompt a separate hearing. Democrats have requested that all proceedings regarding Kavanaugh be postponed to allow more time for further investigations into both accusations.

Here is a look at the allegations in greater detail, along with who is supporting the judge and who is supporting the women accusing him.

Deborah Ramirez

Ramirez alleges that Kavanaugh exposed his penis to her in front of onlookers at a dormitory party while they were both in college in the early 1980s. Ramirez claims he was standing to her right while she was on the ground. When she moved to push Kavanaugh away, Ramirez says, she touched his penis unintentionally. In the New Yorker story outlining the event, Ramirez makes some careful distinctions, saying she remembers "a penis being in front of [her] face," that Kavanaugh was next to her, and that he pulled up his pants. She acknowledged she was heavily drunk at the time and admits to having gaps in her memory.

Kavanaugh's response:

In a statement released Sunday by the White House, Kavanaugh wrote: "This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name-and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building-against these last-minute allegations."

Accusation details, according to Ramirez:

When: The 1983-84 school year, according to Ramirez. At this time, Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale University.
Where: A suite in Lawrance Hall, a Yale University dormitory, according to Ramirez.
Who was there? An unknown number of other college students and friends.

This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth."- Brett Kavanaugh

People who support Ramirez's account:

Unnamed classmate who heard of the alleged incident second-hand: The New Yorker story quotes an unnamed classmate as saying that he remembers a party in that precise location, and heard about the incident either that night or within the next day or two. That classmate said he was "100 percent sure" that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the person who had exposed himself.

Richard Oh: Now a physician, Oh remembers a tearful female student telling a friend about an incident involving a fake penis gag and then a student exposing himself.

Ramirez's mother and sister: Ramirez says she told her mother and sister about an "upsetting incident" at the time, but did not give them specifics.

People who dispute Ramirez's account:

Male classmate 1: Ramirez gave the New Yorker the names of three men who she says were at the party in question. (The outlet did not publish their names.) The first of those is a man Ramirez says was egging on Kavanaugh. He denied any memory of the party to the New Yorker.

Male classmate 2: A second classmate who Ramirez said was involved in the incident told the New Yorker, "I have zero recollection [of that happening]."

Wife of male classmate 3 and three other named classmates: The New Yorker story included a joint statement from a total of six Yale classmates of Kavanaugh's: the two male classmates who are mentioned above, the wife of the third, unnamed male classmate who Ramirez says was involved, and three other former Yale students who knew Kavanaugh: Dino Ewing, Louisa Garry, and Dan Murphy. It reads:
"We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it-and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett's Supreme Court nomination was pending."

"We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it - and we did not."

Ramirez responded to the statement saying she was disappointed and clearly remembers some of the people who signed it as being in the room.

No eyewitnesses. The New Yorker reported that it had not located any eyewitnesses to the incident.
READ MORE: In Kavanaugh debate, 'boys will be boys' is an unscientific excuse for assault
Key stories and documents:

The New Yorker article first reported Ramirez's name and accusation Sept.23.

Soon after that, the New York Times wrote that its reporters spent several days interviewing potential witnesses but "could find no one with firsthand knowledge" of Ramirez's allegation. The paper also reported that Ramirez had told some people that "she could not be certain Mr. Kavanaugh was the one who exposed himself."

Christine Blasey Ford

Accusation:

Ford alleges that Kavanaugh and a friend of his named Mark Judge corralled her in a bedroom at a party when all three were in high school, locked the door, and turned up the music so she would not be heard by other friends in the house. Then, she says, a drunken Kavanaugh pushed her onto a bed, put his hand over her mouth, groped her, grinded against her and started pulling at her clothing. Ford says he was interrupted when Judge jumped on them both, at which point she was able to escape from the room.

Kavanaugh's responses:

To the first general allegation: "I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time." (Sept. 14)
To Ford's specific account: "This is a completely false allegation. I have never done anything like what the accuser describes - to her or to anyone. Because this never happened, I had no idea who was making this accusation until she identified herself yesterday. I am willing to talk to the Senate Judiciary Committee in any way the Committee deems appropriate to refute this false allegation, from 36 years ago, and defend my integrity." (Sept. 17)

Accusation details, according to Ford:

When: The summer of 1982. Ford was 15 and Kavanaugh was 17 at that time.
Where: An unknown home in suburban Maryland, according to Ford.
Who was there? Kavanaugh and Judge, according to Ford. (Judge has denied the allegation see more below). Ford also claims three other high school students were in the house at the time - two boys and a girl.

Supporting Ford's account:

A therapist's notes. According to the Washington Post, a therapist's notes from 2012 and 2013 show Ford at that time described a decades-old attack that matches her allegation against Kavanaugh. The notes include Ford's description of an attacker from "an elitist" boys school who went on to be a "high-ranking" member of Washington society. (There is at least one discrepancy: the therapist wrote that Ford had spoken of an attack by "four" boys. Ford says that was a mistake by the therapist, and that she described four boys being at the party in general, but only two in the room.)

Her husband. Ford's husband told the Washington Post that during couples therapy in 2012, his wife used Kavanaugh's last name when talking about her attacker.

Polygraph. Ford's attorney supplied the Washington Post with polygraph results from August indicating Ford was telling the truth when summarizing her allegation. Some lawmakers are highly critical of this potential evidence, pointing to the flaws of polygraph tests.

Friend Jim Gensheimer. Ford's friend recounted to the Los Angeles Times that Ford looked for homes with bedrooms that had two exit points. On July 11, Gensheimer says Ford told him and another friend that she was taking her story to the Post and was anxious about what it would mean for her.
READ MORE: It took 2 days for the FBI to investigate Anita Hill's sexual harassment allegation
People who dispute Ford's account:

Mark Judge. Kavanaugh's former high school friend wrote the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 18., saying: "I have no memory of this alleged incident. Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr. Ford's letter. More to the point, I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes."

Patrick J. Smyth. Another former schoolmate of Kavanaugh's wrote to the Judiciary Committee after he was told that Ford had named a "P.J." as also being at the party. Smyth said he had no knowledge of such a party or of any such improper conduct by Kavanaugh.

Leland Keyser. Ford told the Washington Post that Keyser was among those at the party. While Keyser said she believes Ford's allegations, she sent a letter to the Judiciary Committee saying she does not know Kavanaugh, nor recall being at a party with him.

Key stories and documents:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Everything we know about the allegations against Kavanaugh

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is messy, tentacled, and increasingly confusing. Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination has become ensnared by a he-said-they-said debate over sexual misconduct allegations. Here's what we know. THE BASICS The issue: Two women have accused Kavanaugh of sexual crimes - one at a party in high school and another in college.

# data[].attributes.body
Stock Market Boom

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Over the past few years, many economic indicators have returned to where they were before the Great Recession - among them, the unemployment rate, which has dropped below the 5 percent mark of 2007, housing prices and the stock market, which has nearly doubled its pre-recession peak.

Another, buoyed by rising stock prices: the enormous pay difference between CEOs of the largest U.S. companies and their employees, who earn more than 300 times less than those at the top, according to new data.

Here's a closer look at the issue.

How has CEO compensation changed?

In 2000, the average CEO was paid 343 times more than the average worker, according to the liberal-leaning Economic Policy Institute. That number dropped to about 188-to-1 in 2009.

It has since rebounded to 312-to-1 last year, according to a report from the Economic Policy Institute.

From 2016 to 2017, the average pay of CEOs from the top 350 publicly traded firms increased 17.6 percent - to $18.9 million - even after being adjusted for inflation, the group found.

Other analyses find a slightly less drastic increase in the gap between executive and average workers' wages.

A Wall Street Journal analysis published earlier this year found the median pay for chief executives of the 133 largest U.S. companies increased 9.9 percent, reaching an average of $11.6 million last year.

Another report from Equilar, a company that tracks data relating to corporate governance, found CEOs across 100 companies were on average earning 235 times more than the average worker.

"It's emblematic of the unequal recovery and an increasingly disparate market for workers and executives," said Lawrence Mishel, a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute.

What's behind the pay gap?

It is important to note that the pay gap between CEOs and average worker is real, but also largely symbolic.

CEO pay data is publicly available, and the Securities and Exchange Commission recently required publicly-traded companies to publish the ratio of their CEOs' salaries and the median compensation of other employees.

CEOs are not the only ones being paid hundreds of times more than the average worker, but the salaries of hedge fund managers and private equity analysts, for example, are not as easily available to the public.

If stock options are not included in CEO annual compensation, they are actually paid slightly less than they were in 2000.

The pay increases CEOs and other company executives have see over the past decade have come mostly from stocks that are part of their compensation packages.

If stock options are not included in CEO annual compensation, the executives are actually paid slightly less than they were in 2000, according to the Economic Policy Institute data.

Steve Kaplan, a University of Chicago Booth School of Business professor who studies economics and corporate governance, said stock options are important to corporate profitability because they ensure executives' personal success is tied to the company's performance.

"CEOs have basically crushed it," Kaplan said. "Maybe they are doing too good of a job because instead of being congratulated, they are criticized."

The link between pay and profit

Large corporations are making near-record profits. At the end of last year, corporate profits accounted for more 9 percent of the country's GDP, above the historic average of 7.5 percent.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average ended 2017 about 25 percent higher than where it began the year. If you compare CEO compensation to that number, Kaplan said companies could even make the case that their executives are not getting paid enough.

Others argue that basing executives' compensation on stocks encourages companies to overinflate their stock value using buybacks.

As the PBS NewsHour recently explained, companies have a variety of options when it comes to spending their profits.

They can purchase new equipment, invest more in research and development or hire more employees. They could also pay existing workers more.

"Or they could buy back shares to increase the profitability of their shareholders and, in many cases boost the income of their corporate executives whose pay is often based on the value of those shares," said Jared Bernstein, an economist who worked in the Obama administration. "They've been choosing a lot of the latter."

Research from the National Employment Law Project and the Roosevelt Institute found that between 2015 and 2017, companies spent almost 60 percent of their net profits on stock buybacks.

Who benefits from stock buybacks?

Some economists argue buying back stocks artificially inflates stock prices, which again means more money for the executive and other wealthy shareholders.

But Republican economist Douglas Holtz-Eakin, who admits he is not a fan of connecting CEO pay to stock prices, argues other factors like tax cuts have a greater influence on stock prices. Plus, he said, executives are not the only one who benefit from buybacks.

"The biggest holders of corporate stocks are actually retirement plans, your 401(k)s, your IRAs, your pension plans that unions and others have," Holtz-Eakin said.

"The average shareholder, is not benefiting from this at all. This is really benefiting the very, very elite few."

But those employees would only benefit if the stock price stayed higher long term, said Irene Tung, a policy analyst with the National Employment Law Project.

"The average shareholder, the retiree with the pension fund or the 401k, is not benefiting from this at all. This is really benefiting the very, very elite few," she said.

Tung points to a speech Security and Exchange Commissioner Robert Jackson gave in June, where he said more company insiders sell their stock in the days after the company announces it is buying back the stock, allowing them to make money off the inflated stock price.

Jackson said the practice is "not necessarily illegal" but "troubling."

Retirement plan holders do not sell their stocks at the peak price, so they are not likely to benefit from the price going up temporarily.

How to close the gap

The reason for the pay disparity between CEOs and employees is relatively simple. Closing the gap is much more complex.

A number of methods have been proposed to close the gap, including a cap on compensation, clawbacks for poor performance or executive misconduct, and, as mentioned previously, mandatory publishing of CEOs' salaries.

James Galbraith, the director of the University of Texas Inequality Project who also served as an adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign, said U.S. companies should look to other countries where laws encourage business leaders to reinvest in their tangible products instead of their stocks.

Sanders introduced the not-so-subtly-named Stop BEZOS Act earlier this month that would force large companies like Amazon and Walmart to pay a tax equal to the amount of government aid their low-wage workers receive.

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos was paid a salary of $81,840 last year plus another $1.6 million that was spent on his security. But Bezos, who is one of the richest people in the world, is also the company's largest shareholder and Amazon's stock rose 56 percent in 2017. The average Amazon worker - including part-time and seasonal employees - made $28,446, according to an annual Securities and Exchange Commission filing.

President Donald Trump recently asked the SEC to consider eliminating quarterly-earnings requirements for public companies. Gabraith said that proposal will need to be studied thoroughly, but does signal that the president recognizes company decisions are often driven by a desire to please investors in the short-term instead of by sustainable long-term business practices.

Still, even if CEO pay comes down, that does not automatically translate to more money for the average worker. That is why Galbraith advocates for increased access to health care, more investments in the income tax credit and increasing the minimum wage to $15 per hour.

The nationwide push called the "Fight for $15" has gained steam in the form of regular protests organized by labor unions and other workers' rights groups but has been a non-starter with federal lawmakers.

Adjusting CEO pay "would affect the Fortune 500 people," Galbraith said. "The minimum wage would affect millions."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The stock market boom has given CEOs a raise. What about average workers?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Over the past few years, many economic indicators have returned to where they were before the Great Recession - among them, the unemployment rate, which has dropped below the 5 percent mark of 2007, housing prices and the stock market, which has nearly doubled its pre-recession peak.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the southwestern Cameroonian city of Kumba, Francisca Awah Mbuli and her team walk door-to-door, warning young women about trusting community members who promise them highly paid jobs abroad - a scheme of human traffickers.

She pulls out her phone at every stop, sharing photos of her time in Kuwait, where she was forced into service as a domestic worker for three months.

She tells her own story, from the moment she was approached by a community member who promised her a teaching job in Kuwait with a $1,000-a-month paycheck, to a month later when she was working for a family in Kuwait City. She cleaned their home and took care of two children. She lived without a salary and was sexually abused by the children's father.

After three months, Mbuli fled to the embassy of the Central African Republic in Kuwait for refuge, and finally left the country through funding from the New-York based organization Freedom For All, which paid for her return airfare to Cameroon.

Traffickers tend to be people these women trust, like pastors in the community or even their relatives, she said. "I lived in the same neighborhood as my trafficker. We grew up together. ... He used my vulnerability as a path to get to me."

She left for Kuwait on her son's second birthday, and said the trafficker convinced her she could give him a chance for a better livelihood with the money she would earn in Kuwait.
Watch a 2017 report from PBS NewsHour special correspondent Fred de Sam Lazaro on ways some advocates are protecting workers, including Mbuli's group.
Mbuli said her own experience being trafficked is what led her to start her organization. She launched the Survivors' Network in 2016 to spread awareness about human trafficking, rescue women from abusive situations, and reintegrate women who have been trafficked back into society. The organization is led and run by other survivors of human trafficking.

"It's a lot of talking, counseling, convincing them. Because I can't just tell someone not to travel to a country," Mbuli said. "But I can share my story, I can tell them what went wrong with the others, and with me."

Most important, Mbuli said, is giving women a reason to stay in Cameroon. "That's why I always go back to the point of empowerment. They need something promising back home," she said.

Mbuli, who has a degree in business administration, organizes vocational training workshops for women in project management and proposal writing.

The organization also launched a microfinance program, providing seed capital to women to start their own businesses. So far, the Survivors' Network has helped launch 19 business projects, including a thrift shop, beauty salon, and a broiler bird poultry farm, Mbuli said.

The poultry business, called Jaden's Farm, sells chickens to local customers. Mbuli said once it begins egg production, she hopes to employ 10 more human trafficking survivors.

In June, the State Department released its annual Trafficking in Persons Report, which ranks governments around the world on their work preventing and combating human trafficking. The report assigns countries to three tiers, one being the best and three being the worst in preventing and combating trafficking. Mbali received recognition from the State Department this year for her work combating trafficking in Cameroon, as part of the report's release.

This year, Cameroon moved from tier three to tier two, because its government increased investigations, prosecutions and convictions of suspected traffickers, improved direct services to potential trafficking victims, and trained law enforcement and government officials on trafficking laws, according to the report.

But Mbuli said the Cameroonian government can do more to address human trafficking. The government should launch a national awareness campaign and form a task force that can be stationed at ports of entry or exit of the country. She also said the government should address the economic problems, like unemployment, that lead people to seek work in other countries.

Thousands have fled their homes in the country as government forces fight separatists in the anglophone Southwest and Northwest regions of Cameroon. Activists in these regions are protesting what they call an unfair domination from the Francophone minority in government.

Rights groups have accused the government of several human rights violations. A recent investigation by Amnesty International found evidence that Cameroonian soldiers carried out extrajudicial executions of women and children. The government said the video is propaganda.

Cameroon holds presidential elections on Oct. 7, when President Paul Biya, who has been in power since 1982, plans to run again. The 85-year-old is currently the longest-ruling leader in Africa, and critics say his time in office should come to an end, citing corruption.

Mbuli said internally displaced persons (IDPs) are especially vulnerable to trafficking, because they are looking for work and a way out of the camps. She said her organization plans to set up a vocational training center and transitional home for IDPs and survivors of human trafficking in Kumba if they can get the funding. There are 241,000 IDPs in the country, according to the United Nations.

Many women are lured by the opportunity for a higher income in labor-receiving countries, and later contact Mbuli about the traps. She said she gets phone calls from domestic workers across the world - one who hasn't been paid in months, another is sexually abused by the men in the house. She said her team has helped more than 500 girls escape.

Mbuli hopes her organization can do more, starting with expanding their door-to-door campaigns across the entire country. "There is so much more work to be done," she said. "But the first step is awareness. Speak to the people around you, try to educate everyone you know about the risks of trafficking."
View more stories about people working to make a difference in our Agents for Change series.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How this human trafficking survivor gives women a future at home

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the southwestern Cameroonian city of Kumba, Francisca Awah Mbuli and her team walk door-to-door, warning young women about trusting community members who promise them highly paid jobs abroad - a scheme of human traffickers. She pulls out her phone at every stop, sharing photos of her time in Kuwait, where she was forced into service as a domestic worker for three months.