Democratic senators who have rallied behind Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh are doing the same for a second woman who accused the Supreme Court nominee — though they acknowledge she came forward with doubts about her memory.

Multiple Democrats told POLITICO on Monday that they see Deborah Ramirez’s account in The New Yorker as credible — if not airtight — evidence for a case that President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee has a pattern of untoward behavior toward women. They want the Judiciary Committee to postpone Thursday’s planned hearing where Ford and Kavanaugh are set to testify to allow more time to look into Ramirez as well as Ford’s claims.

Story Continued Below

Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) called for an FBI investigation of Ramirez’s allegation, which dates to when she and Kavanaugh attended Yale. Coons said he’s concerned more accusers will come forward.

“By pushing forward with this Thursday’s hearing, we’re at real risk of not hearing all of the relevant allegations against Judge Kavanaugh,” Coons said. “Any senator who don’t have real concerns about Judge Kavanaugh’s reputation, his integrity, ought to take a step back and reconsider at this point.”

If the FBI doesn’t investigate the new allegations, the Judiciary panel should, Coons added. Ramirez should be “given an opportunity to testify in front of the committee,” he said.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), a member of Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s (D-N.Y.) leadership team, sounded a similar note in calling for a delay of any committee vote on Kavanaugh “until there is a thorough investigation of Dr. Ford’s statements, and I think the same for Ms. Ramirez.”

Democrats’ move to largely unify behind Ramirez comes as the GOP has tried to undercut her allegation that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a dormitory party. Republicans highlighted that she needed six days and a legal consultation about her recollection of the alcohol-fueled gathering before coming forward in the New Yorker, trying to heighten the political risk for Democrats in going all in on Ramirez’s allegation.

Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), a former Judiciary chairman, swatted away Ramirez’s claims: “I don’t think we need to look into that. You’re going to have these phony allegations.”

But for even some moderate Democrats, the relatively murky corroboration of Ramirez’s allegation bolsters the case for a further investigation into claims that one of the authors of The New Yorker story said initially came from Yale alumni chatter, not from Ramirez herself.

Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), a member of the Democratic caucus who came out against Kavanaugh only after his first confirmation hearing ended, said the Judiciary panel should “try to get the facts.”

Asked whether he was concerned about the credibility of Ramirez’s recollection, given her delay in coming forward and the New York Times’ decision not to report on her claim, King said, “I’m not going to try to game that out. … A hearing is not worthy of the name if it doesn’t examine what facts are available on a given topic.”

While most Democrats are taking Ramirez’s allegation seriously — if not to the extent they’re publicly backed Ford — they’re stopping far short of giving the same treatment to a third, unknown woman tied to the nominee and represented by celebrity lawyer Michael Avenatti.

Avenatti has tweeted that his client is a “woman with credible information” concerning “the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs” by Kavanaugh and his longtime friend Mark Judge, whom Ford has identified as the third person in the room during her alleged assault. But Democratic senators are treading lightly on the claims from Avenatti, who also represents Trump antagonist Stormy Daniels and is weighing a presidential run.

“You know I never have no comment, but I have no comment about Michael Avenatti,” Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said.

“Until we have more information, there’s not much that anyone can do with that,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), like Sanders a member of Schumer’s leadership team and leading 2020 presidential contender, said of Avenatti’s client.

“But since there are two women who have come forward – they have made credible claims, they have made their names public – it now means that the FBI should be conducting a full investigation” into both Ford and Ramirez’s allegations, Warren added.

Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), who’s become one of the Judiciary panel’s most vocal Democrats on sexual misconduct issues, delivered blunt advice to Avenatti: “If he has something to introduce, he should do it now. I haven’t had any contact with him.”

A spokesman for Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said Sunday night that the committee would reach out to Ramirez, and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said Monday that the panel had done so. Ramirez’s attorneys did not return a request for comment on Monday on to what extent she has communicated with the committee.

Avenatti has tweeted screenshots of his communications with Grassley’s staff about his still-anonymous client, which the GOP initiated minutes after the lawyer posted his first declaration that he represents “a woman with credible information regarding Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge.”

Burgess Everett contributed to this report.

He’s dismissed as a publicity hound, a carnival barker and even a “creepy porn lawyer.”

But for the third time this year, the combative Michael Avenatti — a sustained anti-Trump fixture on cable TV who is also exploring a 2020 presidential run — has found a way to claw his way into another major scandal, potentially making a bad situation even worse for the Trump White House.

Story Continued Below

Avenatti says his latest client is a victim of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh who is prepared to take her story public in the next 48 hours.

His claim has been met with more than a little skepticism — as has his prospective presidential bid. But Avenatti’s uncanny knack for drawing blood from the president and beating Trump at his own game has some top Democrats warning that the lawyer shouldn’t be dismissed outright as a factor in the Democratic presidential field.

“There’s no doubt about it. He’s been relentless and he’s been prescient, particularly about the things he’s been involved in. The Michael Cohen matter in particular. He predicted for months that Cohen would plead guilty and cooperate. He did. He predicted this whole deal with his client Stormy Daniels would unravel. It did,” said longtime Democratic strategist David Axelrod. “He has a particular utility right now, which is, with the people who are furious with Trump, he is the avenging angel.”

Best known for representing adult film star Stormy Daniels in her legal tangles with Trump, Avenatti opened a separate legal front this summer by representing mothers separated from their children under President Trump’s controversial border separation policy.

Together, his efforts have shaped a profile resembling a Democratic anti-Trump — a character brazen, pugilistic and media-savvy enough to go toe-to-toe with Trump, whom Democrats have struggled to message against.

Avenatti’s stratospheric ascent from no-name to a household name in just six months hasn’t gone unnoticed among political professionals. A former opposition researcher, Avenatti also has shown an ability to dig up information and frame it in a way to get a rise out of the person with whom he’s quarreling. And his capacity for choreographing news cycle after news cycle has led to stylistic comparisons with Trump himself.

“I think there were a lot of people that discounted Trump in 2014 and 2015, but he had a knack for getting in the middle of stories. What he did in that campaign really sort of rewrote the books for how you run for president,” said Iowa-based Democratic consultant Jeff Link. “I think Avenatti understands how to do the exact same thing as well or as better as anybody else … I think there is such a palpable desire to get rid of Trump and he plays right into that.”

Like Trump, Avenatti uses Twitter as his weapon of choice. Pinned to the top of his page is an outline of where he stands on 20 issues, and his timeline is filled with bold assertions of fact and confrontational statements, mixed with sharp, personal criticism of his opponents.

“I have been practicing law for nearly 20 yrs. Never before have I seen a defendant so frightened to be deposed as Donald Trump, especially for a guy that talks so tough. He is desperate and doing all he can to avoid having to answer my questions. He is all hat and no cattle,” he writes in one tweet.

That approach has made Avenatti a hot item on the Democratic speaking circuit over the past five weeks. His calendar is filled with requests to hold fundraisers and get out the vote events for candidates across the country. He’s headlined major political events in Iowa and New Hampshire and has already said he’ll headquarter his presidential campaign in St. Louis where he grew up.

Link, who traveled with Avenatti on a trip through Iowa earlier this summer, said he visited a farm with Avenatti and was impressed by the ease with which he connected with Democrats at a fundraising dinner.

“He’s more than just someone who understands how a story is going to move. He’s worked in Democratic politics before, he understands Democratic issues in a pretty deep way of how things work in Washington,” he said. “He’s not just some lawyer in L.A. who knows how to generate publicity. He’s more than that.”

Still, Avenatti’s claims are often viewed as bombastic and have been greeted with a degree of suspicion — including his latest allegations against Kavanaugh, which he’s teased out over Twitter.

After Avenatti orchestrated a document dump on Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen, for example, Cohen’s lawyers complained Avenatti included some bank records traced back to a different Michael Cohen.

The idea that he’s playing fast and loose with facts, or making unsubstantiated claims, clearly grates on him.

“I’ve not had to backtrack on one single thing I’ve said. I’ve made a number of bold predictions, they have all either come true or they’re playing out. Not one of them. I was the first person, even before the search warrants were executed on Michael Cohen, to say he would turn on the president and roll over on him,” Avenatti told POLITICO Monday. “I’ll put my track record of the last 6-7 months up against anybody’s. I’ve never had to backtrack on a single statement that I’ve made in well over probably over 700 TV and print interviews.”

He said he and his team have either not pursued or rendered not credible more than 3,000 inquiries to his office in the last six months. “I don’t traffic in rumor and nonsense. I traffic in the truth and fact,” Avenatti said.

Still, there’s a healthy dose of distrust of Avenatti among Capitol Hill Democrats who were hesitant on Monday to take the attorney too seriously on the latest allegations tied to Kavanaugh.

Avenatti scoffed at any suggestion that the claims weren’t credible or that he hadn’t properly vetted his client.

“We will publicly disclose her name and more information about her accusations within the next 48 hours,” Avenatti said. “We’re deciding how that would occur, making sure there is security in place. We’re getting our ducks in a row. This is a very strategic and methodical approach, which is what we did with Stormy Daniels.”

He’s also regularly posting his correspondence with the Senate Judiciary Committee. In a series of tweets, Avenatti alleges a broader scheme involving Kavanaugh and a friend, Mark Judge, that included targeting young women at parties.

Avenatti, who said he represents a victim and corroborating witnesses, told POLITICO Monday that the victim’s identity and details of the accusations would become public over the next 48 hours.

All of it has made him a target of the right. During a Fox News appearance, host Tucker Carlson interviewed Avenatti while a banner appearing on the screen referred to him as a “creepy porn lawyer.”

And Avenatti has become ubiquitous enough in recent months to emerge as a familiar villain to the GOP grassroots. He’s become fodder in the Wisconsin Senate race, where Republican nominee Leah Vukmir pointed to Avenatti’s statements about Kavanaugh as a way to discredit the whole process as a political sham.

“Michael Avenatti, presidential aspirant of Stormy Daniels fame, has decided he also wants to join the Democrat delay circus and what has become clear is that the Far Left is engaged in an all-out, no-holds-barred, last-minute character assassination, rather than responsibly vetting and filling a seat on the Supreme Court,” Vukmir said in a statement.

Republican National Committee Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel offered her own scorn on Twitter Monday.

“How do we know this is a baseless smear against Judge Kavanaugh?”

1) No witnesses. 2) No corroborating evidence. 3) Michael Avenatti is involved.”

There’s still some question over how Avenatti’s ostentatious profile will translate on the campaign trail, Axelrod said, noting that the attorney will have to speak to issues and answer to a more engaged electorate.

“There’s a long way between here and there,” Axelrod warned. “Presidential races are like pole vaulting; it’s easy to clear the early heights but each time the bar gets raised. People look more deeply at you, they want to know what you know. They look at you with greater scrutiny.”

Anyone who counts out Avenatti now hasn’t learned the lessons from 2016, says Link, the Democratic strategist.

“I’ll bet 100 percent of the people who were dismissive of Avenatti probably said that Trump would never win a primary in ‘16,” Link said. “There was almost no one who thought Trump would win that primary at this point four years ago and even at this point three years ago.”