Lying malicious bytches are OK with zzBru
Julie Swetnick’s Former Employer: She Lied About Attending Johns Hopkins, Set Out to ‘Defraud, Defame, and Harass’
Published
9 hours ago on
Sep 27, 2018
By
Patrick Howley
Share Tweet
Brett Kavanaugh’s third accuser Julie Swetnick was the defendant in a defamation case filed by her former employer, WebTrends. Big League Politics has obtained the court documents from this case.
Swetnick is represented by Michael Avenatti, who did not publicize Swetnick’s history, including the restraining order stemming from the domestic violence civil case filed against her by her ex-boyfriend.
Webtrends, represented by Perkins Coie, sued Swetnick, who has multiple liens against her including a federal tax lien, and whose ex-boyfriend filed a restraining order against.
take our poll - story continues below
Whom do you consider to be the most corrupt Democrat Politician?
Trending: BREAKING: Facebook Bans User Who Posted Audio Of CNN Producer Cold-Calling Kavanaugh Classmate
READ THE DOCUMENTS HERE: Webtrends v Swetnick
“Swetnick began her fraud against Webtrends before she was hired. On her job application she claimed to have graduated from Johns Hopkins University. That university has no record of her attendance. She also falsely described her work experience at Host Marriott Services Corp…Since this initial fraud and despite her brief tenure, Swetnick has continued over the last several months, to defraud, defame and harass WebTrends and its employees,” the complaint reads.
“Shortly after becoming employed with Webtrends, a co-worker reported to WebTrends’ Human Resources department that Swetnick had engaged in unwelcome, sexually offensive conduct. Rather than accept responsibility for her actions, Swetnick made false and retaliatory allegations that other co-workers had engaged in inappropriate conduct toward her. Swetnick then began a leave of absence for suspicious and unsubstantiated reasons and from which she has never returned. During her absence, Swetnick has engaged in a campaign of false and malicious allegations with the intent to harm the reputations of WebTrends and its employees and in the hope that WebTrends would pay her money rather than uphold and defend its reputation,” the complaint reads. |
