LIVE: Professor Christine Blasey Ford & Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh testify (Day 1)

LIVE: Professor Christine Blasey Ford & Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh testify (Day 1)

Articles, Blog , , , , , , , 100 Comments


>>WE’RE LIVE ON CAPITOL HILL WHERE THE SENATE JUDICIARY HEARING WILL HEAR FROM CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD AND BRETT KAVANAUGH. THIS IS AN ADDITIONAL HEARING SCHEDULED AFTER THE ALLEGATION BECAME PUBLIC. THE COMMITTEE IS EXPECTED TO VOTE TOMORROW ON THE KAVANAUGH’S NOMINATION TO THE NATION’S HIGHEST RCHLT. …. OFESSOR>>>THIS MORNING, WE CONTINUE OUR HEARING ON THE NOMINATION OF JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH TO SERVE AS ASSOCIATE JUSTICE ON OUR SUPREME COURT. WE WILL HEAR FROM TWO WITNESSES, DR. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD AND JUDGE KAVANAUGH. THANKS, OF COURSE, TO DR. FORD AND JUDGE KAVANAUGH FOR ACCEPTING OUR COMMITTEE’S INVITATION TO TESTIFY AND ALSO THANK THEM FOR THEIR VOLUNTEERING TO TESTIFY BEFORE WE EVEN INVITE IT. BOTH DR. FORD AND JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAVE BEEN THROUGH A TERRIBLE COUPLE WEEKS. THEY AND THEIR FAMILIES HAVE RECEIVED VILE THREATS. WHAT THEY HAVE ENDURED OUGHT TO BE CONSIDERED BY ALL OF US AS UNACCEPTABLE AND A POOR REFLECTION ON THE STATE OF CIVILITY IN OUR DEMOCRACY. SO I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO YOU BOTH FOR THE WAY YOU’VE BEEN TREATED AND I INTEND HOPEFULLY FOR TODAY’S HEARING TO BE SAFE, COMFORTABLE, AND DIGNIFIED FOR BOTH OF OUR WITNESSES. I HOPE MY COLLEAGUES WILL JOIN ME IN THAT IS EFFORT OF A SHOW OF CIVILITY. WITH THAT SAID, I’LL LAMENT THIS HEARING — HOW THIS HEARING HAS COME ABOUT. ON JULY THE 9th, 2018, THE PRESIDENT ANNOUNCED JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S NOMINATION TO SERVE ON THE SUPREME COURT. JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAS SERVED ON THE MOST IMPORTANT FEDERAL APPELLATE COURT FOR 12 YEARS. BEFORE THAT, HE HELD SOME OF THE MOST SENSITIVE POSITIONS IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. THE PRESIDENT ADDED JUDGE KAVANAUGH TO HIS SHORT LIST OF SUPREME COURT MORE THAN NINE MONTHS AGO IN NOVEMBER 2017. AS PART OF JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S NOMINATION TO THE SUPREME COURT, THE FBI CONDUCTED ITS SIXTH FULL-FIELD BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION OF JUDGE KAVANAUGH SINCE 1993, 25 YEARS AGO. NOWHERE IN ANY OF THESE SIX FBI REPORTS WHICH COMMITTEE INVESTIGATORS HAVE REVEALED ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS WAS THERE A WHIFF OF ANY ISSUE, ANY ISSUE AT ALL, RELATED IN ANY WAY TO INAPPROPRIATE SEXUAL BEHAVIOR. DR. FORD FIRST RAISED HER ALLEGATIONS IN A SECRET LETTER TO THE RANKING MEMBER NEARLY TWO MONTHS AGO IN JULY. THIS LETTER WAS SECRET FROM JULY 30th UNTIL SEPTEMBER 13th WHEN I FIRST HEARD ABOUT IT. THE RANKING MEMBER TOOK NO ACTION. THE LETTER WASN’T SHARED WITH ME OR COLLEAGUES OR MY STAFF. THESE ALLEGATIONS COULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED IN A WAY THAT MAINTAINED THE CONFIDENTIALITY THAT DR. FORD REQUESTED. BEFORE THIS HEARING, JUDGE KAVANAUGH MET PRIVATELY WITH 65 SENATORS, INCLUDING THE RANKING MEMBER. BUT THE RANKING MEMBER DIDN’T ASK JUDGE KAVANAUGH ABOUT THE ALLEGATIONS WHEN SHE MET WITH HIM PRIVATELY IN AUGUST, THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HELD ITS FOUR-DAY PUBLIC HEARING FROM SEPTEMBER 4th TO SEPTEMBER 7th. JUDGE KAVANAUGH TESTIFIED FOR MORE THAN 32 HOURS IN PUBLIC. WE HELD A CLOSED SESSION FOR MEMBERS TO ASK SENSITIVE QUESTIONS ON THAT — ON THE LAST EVENING WHICH THE RANKING MEMBER DID NOT ATTEND. JUDGE KAVANAUGH ANSWERED NEARLY 1300 WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY SENATORS AFTER THE HEARING. MORE THAN ALL PRIOR SUPREME COURT NOMINEES. THROUGHOUT THIS PERIOD WE DID NOT KNOW ABOUT THE RANKING MEMBER’S SECRET EVIDENCE. THEN ONLY AT AN 11th HOUR, ON THE EVE OF JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S CONFIRMATION, DID THE RANKING MEMBER REFER THE ALLEGATIONS TO THE FBI AND THEN, SADLY, THE ALLEGATIONS WERE LEAKED TO THE PRESS. AND THAT’S WHERE DR. FORD WAS MISTREATED. THIS IS A SHAMBLE WAY TO TREAT OUR WITNESS WHO INSISTED ON CONFIDENTIALITY AND, OF COURSE, JUDGE KAVANAUGH, WHO HAS HAD TO ADDRESS THESE ALLEGATIONS IN THE MIDST OF A MEDIA CIRCUS. WHEN I RECEIVED DR. FORD’S LETTER ON SEPTEMBER THE 13th, MY STAFF AND I RECOGNIZED THE SERIOUSNESS OF THESE ALLEGATIONS AND IMMEDIATELY BEGAN OUR COMMITTEE’S INVESTIGATION CONSISTENT WITH THE WAY THE COMMITTEE HAS HANDLED SUCH ALLEGATIONS IN THE PAST. EVERY STEP OF THE WAY, THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE IN WHAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A PARTNERSHIP INVESTIGATION AND AS FAR AS I KNOW ON ALL OF OUR JUDGESHIPS THROUGHOUT THE LAST THREE YEARS THAT’S BEEN THE WAY IT’S BEEN HANDLED. AFTER DR. FORD’S IDENTITY BECAME PUBLIC, MY STAFF CONTACTED ALL THE INDIVIDUALS SHE SAID ATTENDED THE 1982 PARTY DESCRIBED IN “THE WASHINGTON POST” ARTICLE. JUDGE KAVANAUGH IMMEDIATELY SUBMITTED TO AN INTERVIEW UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY FOR ANY KNOWINGLY FALSE STATEMENTS. HE DENIED THE ALLEGATIONS CATEGORICALLY. DEMOCRATIC STAFF WAS INVITED TO PARTICIPATE AND COULD HAVE ASKED ANY QUESTIONS THEY WANTED TO, BUT THEY DECLINED. WHICH LEADS ME THEN TO WONDER, IF THEY’RE REALLY CONCERNED WITH GOING TO THE TRUTH, WHY WOULDN’T YOU WANT TO TALK TO THE ACCUSED? THE PROCESS AND PROCEDURE IS WHAT THE COMMITTEE ALWAYS DOES WHEN WE RECEIVE ALLEGATIONS OF WRONGDOING. MY STAFF REACHED OUT TO OTHER INDIVIDUALS ALLEGEDLY AT THE PARTY, MARK JUDGE, PATRICK SMITH, LELAND KAISER, ALL THREE SUBMITTED STATEMENTS TO THE SENATE UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY DENYING ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE EVENTS DESCRIBED BY DR. FORD. DR. FORD’S LIFE-LONG FRIEND MISS KAISER STATED SHE DOESN’T KNOW JUDGE KAVANAUGH AND DOESN’T RECALL EVER ATTENDING A PARTY WITH HIM. MY STAFF MADE REPEATED REQUESTS TO INTERVIEW DR. FORD DURING THE PAST 11 DAYS. EVEN VOLUNTEERING TO FLY TO CALIFORNIA TO TAKE HER TESTIMONY. BUT HER ATTORNEYS REFUSED TO PREVENT — PRESENT HER ALLEGATIONS TO CONGRESS. I NEVER — I NEVERTHELESS HONORED HER REQUEST FOR A PUBLIC HEARING SO DR. FORD TODAY HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT HER ALLEGATIONS UNDER OATH. AS YOU CAN SEE THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WAS ABLE TO CONDUCT THOROUGH INVESTIGATIONS INTO ALLEGATIONS OR INTERNAL INVESTIGATIONS INTO ALLEGATIONS. SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES CONSISTENT WITH THEIR STATED DESIRES TO OBSTRUCT KAVANAUGH’S NOMINATION BY ANY MEANS NECESSARY PUSHED FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION INTO THE ALLEGATIONS. BUT I HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO FORCE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH AGENCY TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION INTO A MATTER IT CONSIDERS TO BE CLOSED, MOREOVER, ONCE THE ALLEGATIONS BECOME — BECAME PUBLIC, IT WAS EASY TO IDENTIFY ALL THE ALLEGED WITNESSES AND CONDUCT OUR OWN INVESTIGATION. CONTRARY TO WHAT THE PUBLIC HAS BEEN LED TO BELIEVE THE FBI DOESN’T PERFORM ANY CREDIBILITY ASSESSMENTS OR VERIFY THE TRUTH OF ANY EVENTS IN THESE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS. I’LL QUOTE THEN CHAIRMAN JOE BIDEN DURING JUSTICE THOMAS’ CONFIRMATION HEARING. THIS IS WHAT SENATOR BIDEN SAID, QUOTE, THE NEXT PERSON WHO REFERS TO AN FBI REPORT AS BEING WORTH ANYTHING OBVIOUSLY DOESN’T UNDERSTANDING ANYTHING. THE FBI EXPLICITLY DOES NOT IN THIS OR ANY OTHER CASE REACH A CONCLUSION, PERIOD. THEY SAY HE SAID/SHE SAID/THEY SAID, PERIOD. SO WHEN PEOPLE WAVE AN FBI REPORT BEFORE YOU, UNDERSTAND THEY DO NOT, THEY DO NOT, THEY DO NOT REACH CONCLUSIONS. THEY DO NOT MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS. END OF SENATOR BIDEN’S QUOTE. THE FBI PROVIDED US WITH THE ALLEGATIONS. NOW IT’S UP TO THE SENATE TO ASSESS THEIR CREDIBILITY, WHICH BRINGS US TO THIS VERY TIME. I LOOK FORWARD TO FAIR AND RESPECTFUL HEARING. THAT’S WE PROMISED DR. FORD. SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THE FACT THAT AN EXPERT ON THIS SIDE INVESTIGATING THE SEX CRIMES WILL BE QUESTIONING THE WITNESS. I SEE NO BASIS FOR COMPLAINT OTHER THAN JUST PLAIN POLITICS. THE TESTIMONY WE WILL HEAR TODAY CONCERNS ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT, VERY SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS. THIS IS AN INCREDIBLY COMPLEX AND SENSITIVE SUBJECT TO DISCUSS. IT’S NOT AN EASY ONE TO DISCUSS. THAT IS WHY THE SENATORS ON THIS SIDE BELIEVE AN EXPERT WHO HAS DEEP EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING IN INTERVIEWING VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND INVESTIGATING SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATIONS SHOULD BE ASKING QUESTIONSP THIS WILL BE A STARK CONTRAST TO THE GRANDSTANDING AND CHAOS WE SAW FROM THE OTHER SIDE DURING THE PREVIOUS FOUR DAYS IN THIS HEARING PROCESS. I CAN THINK OF NO ONE BETTER EQUIPPED TO QUESTION THE WITNESSES THAN RACHEL MITCHELL. MISS MITCHELL IS A CAREER PROSECUTOR, CIVIL SERVANT, WITH DECADES OF EXPERIENCE INVESTIGATING AND PROSECUTING SEX THE CRIMES. MOST RECENTLY, RACHEL WAS A DIVISION CHIEF OF THE SPECIAL VICTIMS DIVISION MARICOPA COUNTY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE WHICH PROSECUTES SEX CRIMES AND FAMILY VIOLENCE. THEN DEMOCRATIC SENATOR — GOVERNOR JANET NAPOLITANO PREVIOUSLY RECOGNIZED HER AS THE OUTSTANDING ARIZONA SEXUAL ASSAULT PROSECUTOR OF THE YEAR. AND SHE HAS SPENT YEARS INSTRUCTING PROSECUTORS, DETECTIVES AND CHILD PROTECTION WORKERS ON HOW TO PROPERLY INTERVIEW VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND ABUSE. WITH HER AID, I LOOK FORWARD TO A FAIR AND PRODUCTIVE HEARING. I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE TWO OTHER PUBLIC ALLEGATIONS. TODAY’S HEARING WAS SCHEDULED TO — IN CLOSE CONSULTATION WITH DR. FORD’S ATTORNEYS AND HER TESTIMONY WILL BE THE SUBJECT OF THIS HEARING. WE’VE BEEN TRYING TO INVESTIGATE OTHER ALLEGATIONS. AT THIS TIME, WE HAVE NOT HAD COOPERATION FROM ATTORNEYS REPRESENTING OTHER CLIENTS. THEY HAVE MADE NO ATTEMPT TO SUBSTANTIATE THEIR CLAIMS. MY STAFF HAS TRIED TO SECURE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE FROM ATTORNEYS FOR BOTH DEBORAH RAMIREZ AND JULIE SWETNICK. MY STAFF MADE EIGHT REQUESTS. YES, EIGHT REQUESTS FOR EVIDENCE FROM ATTORNEYS FOR MISS RAMIREZ AND SIX REQUESTS FOR EVIDENCE FOR ATTORNEYS FOR MISS SWETNICK. NEITHER ATTORNEY HAS MADE THEIR CLIENTS AVAILABLE FOR INTERVIEW. THE COMMITTEE CAN’T DO AN INVESTIGATION IF ATTORNEYS ARE STONEWALLING. I HOPE YOU ALL UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE ATTEMPTED TO SEEK ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS WE DO A LOT OF TIMES WHEN THERE ARE HOLES IN WHAT WE CALL THE BI REPORTS. ADDITIONALLY ALL THE WITNESSES WITNESSES, I MEAN DR. FORD AND JUDGE KAVANAUGH, ALL THE WITNESSES SHOULD KNOW THEY HAVE THE RIGHT UNDER SENATE RULE 26.5 TO ASK THAT COMMITTEE GO INTO CLOSED SESSION IF A QUESTION REQUIRES AN ANSWER THAT IS A CLEAR INVASION OF THEIR RIGHT TO PRIVACY. IF EITHER DR. FORD OR JUDGE KAVANAUGH FEEL SENATE RULE 26.5 OUGHT TO BE INVOLVED THEY SHOULD SIMPLY SAY SO. SENATOR FEINSTEIN.>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN. I’LL MAKE JUST A BRIEF COMMENT ON YOUR REFERENCES TO ME. YES, I DID RECEIVE A LETTER FROM DR. FORD. IT WAS CONVEYED TO ME BY A MEMBER OF CONGRESS ON AN ISSUE. THE NEXT DAY, I CALLED DR. FORD. WE SPOKE ON THE PHONE. SHE REITERATED THAT SHE WANTED THIS HELD CONFIDENTIAL. I HELD IT CONFIDENTIAL UP TO A POINT WHERE THE WITNESS WAS WILLING TO COME FORWARD. I THINK AS I MAKE MY REMARKS, PERHAPS YOU’LL SEE WHY BECAUSE HOW WOMEN ARE TREATED IN THE UNITED STATES WITH THIS KIND OF CONCERN IS REALLY WANTING A LOT OF REFORM AND I’LL GET TO THAT FOR A MINUTE. BUT IN THE MEANTIME GOOD MORNING, DR. FORD. THANK YOU FOR COMING FORWARD AND BEING WILLING TO SHARE YOUR STORY WITH US. I KNOW THIS WASN’T EASY FOR YOU. BUT BEFORE YOU GET TO YOUR TESTIMONY, AND THE CHAIRMAN CHOSE NOT TO DO THIS, I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE YOU’RE PROPERLY INTRODUCED.>>BY THE WAY, I WAS GOING TO INTRODUCE HER BUT IF YOU WANT TO INTRODUCE HER I’LL BE GLAD TO HAVE YOU DO THAT. I WANT YOU TO KNOW I DIDN’T FORGET TO DO IT BECAUSE I WOULDED DO THAT JUST AS SHE WAS ABOUT TO SPEAK.>>THANK YOU. I HAVE TO SAY WHEN I SAW YOUR CV I WAS EXTREMELY IMPRESSED. YOU HAVE A BACHELOR’S DEGREE FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL, TWO MASTERS DEGREES, ONE FROM STANFORD AND ONE FROM PEPPERDINE, AND A Ph.D. FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. BETTER KNOWN TO SENATOR HARRIS AND I AS USC. YOU ARE A PROFESSOR AFFILIATED WITH BOTH STANFORD UNIVERSITY AND PALO ALTO UNIVERSITY. YOU HAVE PUBLISHED OVER 65 PEER REVIEW ARTICLES AND HAVE RECEIVED NUMEROUS AWARDS FOR YOUR WORK AND RESEARCH. AS IF THAT WERE NOT ENOUGH, YOU ARE A WIFE, A MOTHER OF TWO SONS, AND A CONSTITUENT FROM CALIFORNIA. SO I AM VERY GRATEFUL TO YOU FOR YOUR STRENGTH AND YOUR BRAVERY IN COMING FORWARD. I KNOW IT’S HARD. BEFORE I TURN IT OVER I WANT TO SAY SOMETHING ABOUT WHAT IS TO BE DISCUSSED TODAY AND WHERE WE ARE AS A COUNTRY. SEXUAL VIOLENCE IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM AND ONE THAT LARGELY GOES UNSEEN. IN THE UNITED STATES, IT’S ESTIMATED BY THE CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL ONE IN THREE WOMEN AND ONE IN SIX MEN WILL EXPERIENCE SOME FORM OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN THEIR LIFETIME. ACCORDING TO THE RAPE ABUSE AND INCEST NATIONAL NETWORK, 60% OF SEXUAL ASSAULTS GO UNREPORTED. IN ADDITION, WHEN SURVIVORS DO REPORT THEIR ASSAULTS, IT’S OFTEN YEARS LATER, DUE TO THE TRAUMA THEY SUFFERED AND FEARING THEIR STORIES WILL NOT BE BELIEVED. LAST WEEK I RECEIVED A LETTER FROM A 60-YEAR-OLD CALIFORNIA CONSTITUENT WHO TOLD ME THAT SHE SURVIVED AN ATTEMPTED RAPE AT AGE 17. SHE DESCRIBED AS BEING TERRIFIED AND EMBARRASSED. SHE NEVER TOLD A SOUL UNTIL MUCH LATER IF LIFE. THE ASSAULT STAYED WITH HER FOR 43 YEARS. I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THESE REALITIES AS WE HEAR FROM DR. FORD ABOUT HER EXPERIENCE. THERE’S BEEN A GREAT DEAL OF PUBLIC DISCUSSION ABOUT THE METOO MOVEMENT TODAY VERSUS THE YEAR OF THE WOMAN ALMOST 27 YEARS AGO. BUT WHILE YOUNG WOMEN ARE STANDING UP AND SAYING NO MORE, OUR INSTITUTIONS HAVE NOT PROGRESSED IN HOW THEY TREAT WOMEN WHO COME FORWARD. TOO OFTEN WOMEN’S MEMORIES AND CREDIBILITY COME UNDER ASSAULT. IN ESSENCE, THEY ARE PUT ON TRIAL AND FORCED TO DEFEND THEMSELVES AND OFTEN REVICTIMIZED IN THE PROCESS. 27 YEARS AGO, I WAS WALKING THROUGH AN AIRPORT WHEN I SAW A LARGE GROUP OF PEOPLE GATHERED AROUND A TV TO LISTEN TO ANITA HILL TELL HER STORY. WHAT I SAW WAS AN ATTRACTIVE WOMAN IN A BLUE SUIT BEFORE AN ALL-MALE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE SPEAKING OF HER EXPERIENCE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT. SHE WAS TREATED BADLY ACCUSED OF LYING, ATTACKED, AND HER CREDIBILITY PUT TO THE TEST THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS. TODAY, DR. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD HAS COME FORWARD TO TELL HER STORY OF BEING ASSAULTED AND FEARING FOR HER LIFE WHEN SHE WAS A TEENAGER. INITIALLY AS I SAID, DR. FORD DID NOT WANT TO MAKE HER STORY PUBLIC. THEN WITHIN 36 HOURS OF COMING FORWARD, REPUBLICANS SCHEDULED A HEARING WITHOUT TALKING TO HER OR EVEN INVITING HER TO TESTIFY. SHE WAS TOLD SHE HAD TO SHOW UP FOR THE — OR THE COMMITTEE WOULD MOVE FORWARD WITH A VOTE. IT TOOK A PUBLIC OUTCRY FROM THE MAJORITY — FOR THE MAJORITY TO BACK DOWN AND GIVE HER EVEN A FEW DAYS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMITTEE. REPUBLICANS ALSO SCHEDULED THIS HEARING WITH DR. FORD WITHOUT HAVING HER ALLEGATIONS INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI. IN 1991, ANITA HILL’S ALLEGATIONS WERE REVIEWED BY THE FBI, AS IS THE NORMAL PROCESS AND SQUARELY WITHIN ITS JURISDICTION. HOWEVER, DESPITE REPEATED REQUESTS, PRESIDENT TRUMP AND THE REPUBLICANS HAVE REFUSED TO TAKE THIS ROUTINE STEP AND DIRECT THE FBI TO CONDUCT AN IMPARTIAL INVESTIGATION. THIS WOULD CLEARLY BE THE BEST WAY TO ENSURE A FAIR PROCESS TO BOTH JUDGE KAVANAUGH AND TO DR. FORD. IN 1991 THE SENATE HEARD FROM 22 WITNESSES OVER THREE DAYS. TODAY, WHILE REJECTING AN FBI INVESTIGATION, REPUBLICANS ARE REFUSING TO HEAR TESTIMONY FROM ANY OTHER WITNESS. INCLUDING MARK JUDGE WHO DR. FORD IDENTIFIED AS BEING IN THE ROOM WHEN THE ATTACK TOOK PLACE. WE BELIEVE JUDGE SHOULD BE SUBPOENAED SO THE COMMITTEE CAN HEAR FROM HIM DIRECTLY. REPUBLICANS HAVE ALSO REFUSED TO CALL ANYONE WHO COULD SPEAK TO THE EVIDENCE THAT WOULD SUPPORT OR REFUTE DR. FORD’S CLAIM AND NOT ONE WITNESS WHO COULD ADDRESS CREDIBILITY AND CHARACTER OF EITHER FORD OR KAVANAUGH HAS BEEN CALLED. WHAT I FIND MOST INEXCUSABLE IS THIS RUSH TO JUDGMENT. THE UNWILLINGNESS TO TAKE THESE KINDS OF ALLEGATIONS AT FACE VALUE AND LOOK AT THEM FOR WHAT THEY ARE, A REAL QUESTION OF CHARACTER FOR SOMEONE WHO IS ASKING FOR A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT ON THE SUPREME COURT. IN 1991 REPUBLICANS BELITTLED PROFESSOR HILL’S EXPERIENCE SAYING AND I, QUOTE, IT WON’T MAKE A BIT OF DIFFERENCE IN THE OUTCOME, END QUOTE. AND THE BURDEN OF PROOF WAS ON PROFESSOR HILL. TODAY, OUR REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES ARE SAYING THIS IS A HICCUP. DR. FORD IS MIXED UP AND DECLARING I’LL LISTEN TO THE LADY BUT WE’RE GOING TO BRING THIS TO A CLOSE. WHAT’S WORSE, MANY OF OUR COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE HAVE ALSO MADE IT CLEAR THAT NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS TODAY THE SENATE WILL PLOW RIGHT THROUGH AND ENSURE JUDGE KAVANAUGH WOULD BE ELEVATED WITHIN A WEEK. IN FACT, ON TUESDAY, THE MAJORITY WENT AHEAD AND SCHEDULED A VOTE ON THE NOMINATION BEFORE WE HEARD ONE WORD OF TESTIMONY REGARDING ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND MISCONDUCT BY BRETT KAVANAUGH. REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP EVEN TOLD SENATORS THEY SHOULD PLAN TO BE IN OVER THIS WEEKEND SO THE NOMINATION CAN BE PUSHED THROUGH WITHOUT DELAY. THIS IS DESPITE THE FACT THAT IN THE LAST FEW DAYS, TWO MORE WOMEN HAVE COME FORWARD WITH THEIR OWN SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT INVOLVING BRETT KAVANAUGH. THIS PAST SUNDAY WE LEARNED ABOUT DEBBIE RAMIREZ WHO WAS A STUDENT AT YALE WITH BRETT KAVANAUGH. SHE, TOO, DID NOT WANT TO COME FORWARD BUT AFTER BEING APPROACHED BY REPORTERS SHE TOLD HER STORY. SHE WAS AT A COLLEGE PARTY WHERE KAVANAUGH EXPOSED HIMSELF TO HER. SHE RECALLS PUSHING HIM AWAY AND THEN SEEING HIM LAUGHING AND PULLING HIS PANTS UP. THEN YESTERDAY, JUDY SWETNICK CAME FORWARD TO SAY SHE HAD EXPERIENCES OF BEING AT HOUSE PARTIES WITH BRETT KAVANAUGH AND MARK JUDGE. SHE RECOUNTED SEEING KAVANAUGH ENGAGE AND I, QUOTE, IN ABUSIVE AND PHYSICALLY AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR TOWARD GIRLS. END QUOTE. INCLUDING ATTEMPTS TO, QUOTE, REMOVE OR SHIFT GIRLS’ CLOTHING, END QUOTE. NOT TAKING, QUOTE, NO FOR AN ANSWER, GRABBING GIRLS, QUOTE, WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT, END QUOTE, AND TARGETING, QUOTE, PARTICULAR GIRLS SO THAT THEY COULD BE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF. END QUOTE. EACH OF THESE STORIES ARE TROUBLING ON THEIR OWN, AND EACH OF THESE ALLEGATIONS SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI. ALL THREE WOMEN HAVE SAID THEY WOULD LIKE THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE, PLEASE DO SO. ALL THREE HAVE SAID THEY HAVE OTHER WITNESSES AND EVIDENCE TO CORROBORATE THEIR ACCOUNTS AND YET, REPUBLICANS CONTINUE TO BLINDLY PUSH FORWARD. SO, TODAY WE’RE MOVING FORWARD WITH A HEARING AND BEING ASKED TO ASSESS THE CREDIBILITY OF BRETT KAVANAUGH. HE’S MADE SEVERAL STATEMENTS ABOUT HOW HIS FOCUS OUTS W WAS ON SCHOOL, BASKETBALL, SERVICE PROJECTS, AND GOING TO CHURCH. HE DECLARED THAT HE, QUOTE, NEVER END, QUOTE, DRANK SO MUCH HE COULDN’T REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED AND HE HAS, QUOTE, ALWAYS TREATED WOMEN WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT. END QUOTE. WHILE HE HAS MADE THESE DECLARATIONS, MORE AND MORE PEOPLE HAVE COME FORWARD CHALLENGING HIS CHARACTERIZATION OF EVENTS AND BEHAVIORS. JAMES ROACH, HIS FRESHMAN ROOMMATE AT YALE, STATED KAVANAUGH WAS AND I QUOTE AGAIN, FREQUENTLY INCOHERENTLY DRUNK END QUOTE. AND THAT WAS WHEN, QUOTE, HE BECAME AGGRESSIVE AND BELLIGERENT, END QUOTE, WHEN HE WAS DRUNK. LIZ SWISHER, A FRIEND OF HIS FROM YALE, SAID AND I QUOTE, THERE’S NO MEDICAL WAY I CAN SAY THAT HE WAS BLACKED OUT, BUT IT’S NOT CREDIBLE FOR HIM TO SAY THAT HE HAS NO MEMORY LAPSES IN THE NIGHTS THAT HE DRANK TO EXCESS, END QUOTE. LYNN BROOKS, A COLLEGE CLASSMATE, SAID THE PICTURE KAVANAUGH IS TRYING TO PAINT DOESN’T MATCH HER MEMORIES OF HIM AND I QUOTE, HE’S TRYING TO PAINT HIMSELF AS SOME KIND OF CHOIR BOY. YOU CAN’T LIE YOUR WAY ON TO THE SUPREME COURT AND WITH THAT STATEMENT OUT HE’S GONE TOO FAR. IT’S ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THE INSTITUTION, END QUOTE. ULTIMATELY MEMBERS AND LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, I REALLY THINK THAT’S THE POINT. WE’RE HERE TO DECIDE WHETHER TO EVALUATE THIS NOMINEE TO THE MOST PRESTIGIOUS COURT IN OUR COUNTRY. IT’S ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF THAT INSTITUTION AND THE INTEGRITY OF THIS INSTITUTION THE ENTIRE COUNTRY IS WATCHING HOW WE HANDLE THESE ALLEGATIONS. I HOPE THE MAJORITY CHANGES THEIR TACTICS, OPENS THEIR MIND AND SERIOUSLY REFLECTS ON WHY WE ARE HERE. WE ARE HERE FOR ONE REASON, TO DETERMINE WHETHER JUDGE KAVANAUGH SHOULD BE ELEVATED TO ONE OF THE MOST POWERFUL POSITIONS IN OUR COUNTRY. THIS IS NOT A TRIAL OF DR. FORD. IT’S A JOB INTERVIEW FOR JUDGE KAVANAUGH. IS BRETT KAVANAUGH WHO WE WANT ON THE MOST PRESTIGIOUS COURT IN OUR COUNTRY? IS HE THE BEST WE CAN DO? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.>>I’M SORRY YOU BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE UNSUBSTANTIATED ALLEGATIONS OF OTHER PEOPLE BECAUSE WE’RE HERE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF LISTENING TO DR. FORD AND WE’LL CONSIDER OTHER ISSUES OTHER TIMES. I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE YOU RISE SO I CAN SWEAR YOU. DO YOU SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD?>>I DO. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASE BE SEATED AND BEFORE YOU GIVE YOUR STATEMENT, I WANT TO SAY THAT — TO EVERYBODY THAT SHE HAS ASKED FOR ANY TIME YOU ASK FOR A BREAK, YOU GET A BREAK. ANY TIME THERE IS SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED, YOU DON’T HAVE, JUST ASK US AND YOU CAN HAVE AS MUCH TIME FOR YOUR OPENING STATEMENT AS YOU WANT. JUST GENERALLY LET US KNOW IF THERE’S ANY ISSUES. PROCEED, PLEASE. THANK YOU, SENATOR GRASSLEY. I THINK AFTER I READ MY OPENING STATEMENT I ANTICIPATE NEEDING SOME CAFFEINE IF THAT IS AVAILABLE. >>OKAY.>>CAN YOU PULL THE MICROPHONE CLOSER TO YOU, PLEASE.>>OKAY. CAN THE WHOLE BOX GO A LITTLE BIT CLOSER. >>THAT’S WHAT I’M TRYING, SENATOR. NO.>>OKAY.>>I’LL LEAN FORWARD. >>THANK YOU.>>OKAY.>>IS THIS GOOD?>>YEAH.>>OKAY. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY AND RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, MY NAME IS CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD. I’M A PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY AT PALO ALTO UNIVERSITY AND A RESEARCH PSYCHOLOGIST AT THE STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE. I WON’T DETAIL MY EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND SINCE IT HAS ALREADY BEEN SUMMARIZED. I HAVE BEEN MARRIED TO RUSSELLE FORD SINCE 2002 AND WE HAVE TWO CHILDREN. I AM HERE TODAY NOT BECAUSE I WANT TO BE. I AM TERRIFIED. I AM HERE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS MY CIVIC DUTY TO TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENED TO ME WHILE BRETT KAVANAUGH AND I WERE IN HIGH SCHOOL. I HAVE DESCRIBED THE EVENTS PUBLICLY BEFORE. I SUMMARIZED THEM IN MY LETTER TO RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN AND AGAIN IN A LETTER TO CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY. I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR HEARING FROM ME DIRECTLY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO ME AND THE IMPACT THAT IT HAS HAD ON MY LIFE AND FAMILY. I GREW UP IN THE SUBURBS OF WASHINGTON, D.C. I ATTENDED THE SCHOOL IN BEST DA MARYLAND FROM 1978 TO 1984. HOLTON ARMS IS AN ALL GIRLS SCHOOL THAT OPENED IN 1901. DURING MY TIME AT THE SCHOOL GIRLS AT HOLTON ARMS FREQUENTLY MET AND BECAME FRIENDLY WITH BOYS FROM ALL BOYS SCHOOLS IN THE AREA INCLUDING THE LANDON SCHOOL, GEORGETOWN PREP, GONZAGA HIGH SCHOOL AND OUR COUNTRY CLUBS AND OTHER PLACES WHERE KIDS AND FAMILIES SOCIALIZED. THIS IS HOW I MET BRETT KAVANAUGH, THE BOY WHO SEXUAL ASSAULTED ME. DURING MY FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE SCHOOL YEARS, WHEN I WAS 14 AND 15 YEARS OLD, MY GROUP OF FRIENDS INTERSECTED WITH BRETT AND HIS FRIENDS FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. I HAD BEEN FRIENDLY WITH A CLASSMATE OF BRETT’S FOR A SHORT TIME DURING MY FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE YEAR. IT WAS THROUGH THAT CONNECTION THAT I ATTENDED A NUMBER OF PARTIES THAT BRETT ALSO ATTENDED. WE DID NOT KNOW EACH OTHER WELL, BUT I KNEW HIM AND HE KNEW ME. IN THE SUMMER OF 1982, LIKE MOST SUMMERS, I SPENT MOST EVERY DAY AT THE COLUMBIA COUNTRY CLUB IN CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND, SWIMMING AND PRACTICING DIVING. ONE EVENING THAT SUMMER AFTER A DAY OF DIVING AT THE CLUB, I ATTENDED A SMALL GATHERING AT A HOUSE IN THE BETHESDA AREA. THERE WERE FOUR BOYS I REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY BEING AT THE HOUSE — BRETT KAVANAUGH, MARK JUDGE, A BOY NAMED PJ, AND ONE OTHER BOY WHOSE NAME I CANNOT RECALL. I ALSO REMEMBER MY FRIEND LELAND ATTENDING. I DO NOT REMEMBER ALL OF THE DETAILS OF HOW THAT GATHERING CAME TOGETHER, BUT LIKE MANY THAT SUMMER, IT WAS ALMOST SURELY A SPUR OF THE MOMENT GATHERING. I TRULY WISH I COULD BE MORE HELPFUL WITH MORE DETAILED ANSWERS TO ALL OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE AND WILL BE ASKED ABOUT HOW I GOT TO THE PARTY AND WHERE IT TOOK PLACE AND SO FORTH. I DON’T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS AND I DON’T REMEMBER AS MUCH AS I WOULD LIKE TO. BUT THE DETAILS THAT — ABOUT THAT NIGHT THAT BRING ME HERE TODAY ARE THE ONES I WILL NEVER FORGET. THEY HAVE BEEN SEARED INTO MY MEMORY AND HAVE HAUNTED ME EPISODICALLY AS AN ADULT. WHEN I GOT TO THE SMALL GATHERING, PEOPLE WERE DRINKING BEER IN A SMALL LIVING ROOM FAMILY ROOM TYPE AREA ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE. I DRANK ONE BEER. BRETT AND MARK WERE VISIBLY DRUNK. EARLY IN THE EVENING, I WENT UP A VERY NARROW SET OF STAIRS LEADING FROM THE LIVING ROOM TO A SECOND FLOOR TO USE THE REST ROOM. WHEN I GOT TO THE TOP OF THE STAIRS, I WAS PUSHED FROM BEHIND INTO A BEDROOM ACROSS FROM THE BATHROOM. I COULDN’T SEE WHO PUSHED ME. BRETT AND MARK CAME INTO THE BEDROOM AND LOCKED THE DOOR BEHIND THEM. THERE WAS MUSIC PLAYING IN THE BEDROOM. IT WAS TURNED UP LOUDER BY EITHER BRETT OR MARK ONCE WE WERE IN THE ROOM. I WAS PUSHED ON THE BED AND BRETT GOT ON TOP OF ME AND HE BEGAN RUNNING HIS HANDS OVER MY BODY AND GRINDING INTO ME. I YELLED, HOPING THAT SOMEONE DOWNSTAIRS MIGHT HEAR ME AND I TRIED TO GET AWAY FROM HIM, BUT HIS WEIGHT WAS HEAVY. BRETT GROPED ME AND TRIED TO TAKE OFF MY CLOTHES. HE HAD A HARD TIME BECAUSE HE WAS VERY INEBRIATED AND BECAUSE I WAS WEARING A ONE-PIECE BATHING SUIT UNDERNEATH MY CLOTHING. I BELIEVED HE WAS GOING TO RAPE ME. I TRIED TO YELL FOR HELP. WHEN I DID, BRETT PUT HIS HAND OVER MY MOUTH TO STOP ME FROM YELLING. THIS IS WHAT TERRIFIED ME THE MOST AND HAS HAD THE MOST LASTING IMPACT ON MY LIFE. IT WAS HARD FOR ME TO BREATHE AND I THOUGHT THAT BRETT WAS ACCIDENTALLY GOING TO KILL ME. BOTH BRETT AND MARK WERE DRUNKINGLY LAUGHING DURING THE ATTACK. THEY SEEMED TO BE HAVING A VERY GOOD TIME. MARK SEEMED AMBIVALENT AT TIMES URGING BRETT ON AND AT TIMES TELLING HIM TO STOP. A COUPLE OF TIMES I MADE EYE CONTACT WITH MARK AND THOUGHT HE MIGHT TRY TO HELP ME, BUT HE DID NOT. DURING THIS ASSAULT MARK CAME OVER AND JUMPED ON THE BED TWICE WHILE BRETT WAS ON TOP OF ME. THE LAST TIME THAT HE DID THIS, WE TOPPLED OVER AND BRETT WAS NO LONGER ON TOP OF ME. I WAS ABLE TO GET UP AND RUN OUT OF THE ROOM DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE BEDROOM WAS A SMALL BATHROOM. I RAN INSIDE THE BATHROOM AND LOCKED THE DOOR. I WAITED UNTIL I HEARD BRETT AND MARK LEAVE THE BEDROOM LAUGHING AND LOUDLY WALKED DOWN THE NARROW STAIRWAY, PINBALLING OFF THE WALLS ON THE WAY DOWN. I WAITED AND WHEN I DID NOT HEAR THEM COME BACK UP THE STAIRS, I LEFT THE BATHROOM, WENT DOWN THE SAME STAIRWELL THROUGH THE LIVING ROOM AND LEFT THE HOUSE. I REMEMBER BEING ON THE STREET AND FEELING AN ENORMOUS SENSE OF RELIEF THAT I ESCAPED THAT HOUSE AND THAT BRETT AND MARK WERE NOT COMING OUTSIDE AFTER ME. BRETT’S ASSAULT ON ME DRASTICALLY ALTERED MY LIFE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. I WAS TOO AFRAID AND ASHAMED TO TELL ANYONE THESE DETAILS. I DID NOT WANT TO TELL MY PARENTS THAT I AT AGE 15 WAS IN A HOUSE WITHOUT ANY PARENTS PRESENT DRINKING BEER WITH BOYS. I CONVINCED MYSELF THAT BECAUSE BRETT DID NOT RAPE ME, I SHOULD JUST MOVE ON AND JUST PRETEND THAT IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. OVER THE YEARS, I TOLD VERY, VERY FEW FRIENDS THAT I HAD THIS TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE. I TOLD MY HUSBAND BEFORE WE WERE MARRIED THAT I HAD EXPERIENCED A SEXUAL ASSAULT. I NEVER TOLD THE DETAILS TO ANYONE, THE SPECIFIC DETAILS, UNTIL MAY OF 2012 DURING A COUPLE’S COUNSELING SESSION. THE REASON THIS CAME UP IN COUNSELING IS THAT MY HUSBAND AND I HAD COMPLETED A VERY EXTENSIVE, VERY LONG REMODEL OF OUR HOME AND I INSISTED ON A SECOND FRONT DOOR, AN IDEA THAT HE AND OTHERS DISAGREED WITH AND COULD NOT UNDERSTAND. IN EXPLAINING WHY I WANTED A SECOND FRONT DOOR, I BECAME TO DESCRIBE THE ASSAULT IN DETAIL. I RECALL SAYING THAT THE BOY WHO ASSAULTED ME COULD SOME DAY BE ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT AND SPOKE A BIT ABOUT HIS BACKGROUND AT AN ELITIST ALL BOYS SCHOOL IN BETHESDA, MARYLAND. MY HUSBAND RECALLS THAT I NAMED MY ATTACKER AS BRETT KAVANAUGH. AFTER THAT MAY 2012 THERAPY SESSION, I DID MY BEST TO IGNORE THE MEMORIES OF THE ASSAULT BECAUSE RECOUNTING THEM CAUSED ME TO RELIVE THE EXPERIENCE AND CAUSED PANIC AND ANXIETY. OCCASIONALLY I WOULD DISCUSS THE ASSAULT IN AN INDIVIDUAL THERAPY SESSION BUT TALKING ABOUT IT CAUSED MORE RELIVING OF THE TRAUMA SO I TRIED NOT TO THINK ABOUT IT OR DISCUSS IT. OVER THE YEARS, I WENT THROUGH PERIODS WHERE I THOUGHT ABOUT THE ATTACK. I HAD CONFIDED IN SOME CLOSE FRIENDS I HAD AN EXPERIENCE WITH SEXUAL ASSAULT. OCCASIONALLY I STATED MY ASSAILANT WAS A PROMINENT LAWYER OR JUDGE BUT I DID NOT USE HIS NAME. I DO NOT RECALL EACH PERSON I SPOKE TO ABOUT BRETT’S ASSAULT AND SOME FRIENDS HAVE REMINDED ME OF THESE CONVERSATIONS SINCE THE PUBLICATION OF “THE WASHINGTON POST” STORY ON SEPTEMBER 16th, 2018. BUT UNTIL JULY 2018, I HAD NEVER NAMED MR. KAVANAUGH AS MY ATTACKER OUTSIDE OF THERAPY. THIS CHANGED IN EARLY JULY 2018. I SAW PRESS REPORTS STATING THAT BRETT KAVANAUGH WAS ON THE SHORT LIST OF A LIST OF VERY WELL-QUALIFIED SUPREME COURT NOMINEES. I THOUGHT IT WAS MY CIVIC DUTY TO RELAY THE INFORMATION I HAD ABOUT MR. KAVANAUGH’S CONDUCT SO THOSE CONSIDERING HIS NOMINATION WOULD KNOW ABOUT THE ASSAULT. ON JULY 6th, I HAD A SENSE OF URGENCY TO RELAY THE INFORMATION TO THE SENATE AND THE PRESIDENT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE BEFORE A NOMINEE WAS SELECTED. I DID NOT KNOW HOW SPECIFICALLY TO DO THIS. I CALLED MY CONGRESSIONAL REPRESENTATIVE AND LET HER RECEPTIONIST KNOW THAT SOMEONE ON THE PRESIDENT’S SHORT LIST HAD ATTACKED ME. I ALSO SENT A MESSAGE TO THE ENSCRIPTED “WASHINGTON POST” CONFIDENTIAL TIP LINE. I DID NOT USE MY NAME, BUT I PROVIDED THE NAMES OF BRETT KAVANAUGH AND MARK JUDGE. I STATED THAT MR. KAVANAUGH HAD ASSAULTED ME IN THE 1980s IN MARYLAND. THIS WAS AN EXTREMELY HARD THING FOR ME TO DO, BUT I FELT THAT I COULDN’T NOT DO IT. OVER THE NEXT TWO DAYS, I TOLD A COUPLE OF CLOSE FRIENDS ON THE BEACH IN CALIFORNIA THAT MR. KAVANAUGH HAD SEXUALLY ASSAULTED ME. I WAS VERY CONFLICTED AS TO WHETHER TO SPEAK OUT. ON JULY 9th, I RECEIVED A RETURN PHONE CALL FROM THE OFFICE OF CONGRESSWOMAN ANNA ESHEW AFTER MR. KAVANAUGH HAD BECOME THE NOMINEE. I MET WITH HER STAFF ON JULY 18th AND WITH HER ON JULY 20th DESCRIBING THE ASSAULT AND DISCUSSING MY FEARS ABOUT COMING FORWARD. LATER WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF SENDING A LETTER TO RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN WHO IS ONE OF MY STATE SENATORS DESCRIBING WHAT OCCURRED. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT REPRESENTATIVE ESHEW’S OFFICE DELIVERED A COPY OF MY LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN’S OFFICE ON JULY 30th. THE LETTER INCLUDED MY NAME, BUT ALSO A REQUEST THAT IT BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. MY HOPE WAS THAT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION CONFIDENTIALLY WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE SENATE TO CONSIDER MR. KAVANAUGH’S SERIOUS MISCONDUCT WITHOUT HAVING TO MAKE MYSELF, MY FAMILY, OR ANYONE’S FAMILY VULNERABLE TO THE PERSONAL ATTACKS AND INVASIONS OF PRIVACY THAT WE HAVE FACED SINCE MY NAME BECAME PUBLIC. IN A LETTER CATED AUGUST 31st, SENATOR FEINSTEIN SAID SHE WOULD NOT SHARE THE LETTER WITHOUT MY EXPLICIT CONSENT AND I APPRECIATED THIS COMMITMENT. SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIMS SHOULD BE ABLE TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES WHEN AND WHETHER THEIR PRIVATE EXPERIENCE IS MADE PUBLIC. AS THE HEARING DATE GOT CLOSER, I STRUGGLED WITH A TERRIBLE CHOICE, DO I SHARE THE FACTS WITH THE SENATE AND PUT MYSELF AND MY FAMILY IN THE PUBLIC SPOTLIGHT OR DO I PRESERVE OUR PRIVACY AND ALLOW THE SENATE TO MAKE ITS DECISION WITHOUT KNOWING THE FULL TRUTH OF HIS PAST BEHAVIORS. I AGONIZED DAILY WITH THIS DECISION THROUGHOUT AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER OF 2018. THE SENSE OF DUTY THAT ORIGINALLY MOTIVATED ME TO REACH OUT CONFIDENTIALLY TO “THE WASHINGTON POST” AND TO ANNA ESHEW’S OFF WHEN STILL A LIST OF EXTREMELY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES AND TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN WAS ALWAYS THERE. BUT MY FEARS OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF SPEAKING OUT STARTED TO EXPONENTIALLY INCREASE. DURING AUGUST 2018, THE PRESS REPORTED THAT MR. KAVANAUGH’S CONFIRMATION WAS VIRTUALLY CERTAIN. THE PERSONS PAINTED HIM AS A CHAMPION OF WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT. I BELIEVED THAT IF I CAME FORWARD, MY SINGLE VOICE WOULD BE DROWNED OUT BY A CHORUS OF POWERFUL SUPPORTERS. BY THE TIME OF THE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS, I HAD RESIGNED MYSELF TO REMAINING QUIET AND LETTING THE COMMITTEE AND THE SENATE MAKE THEIR DECISION WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT MR. KAVANAUGH HAD DONE TO ME. ONCE THE PRESS STARTED REPORTING ON THE EXISTENCE OF THE LETTER I HAD SENT TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN I FACED MOUNTING PRESSURE. REPORTERS APPEARED AT MY HOME AND AT MY WORKPLACE DEMANDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE LETTER IN THE PRESENCE OF MY GRADUATE STUDENTS. THEY CALLED MY BOSSES AND CO-WORKERS AND LEFT ME MANY MESSAGES MAKING IT CLEAR THAT MY NAME WOULD INEVITABLY BE RELEASED TO THE MEDIA. I DECIDED TO SPEAK OUT PUBLICLY TO A JOURNALIST WHO HAD ORIGINALLY RESPONDED TO THE TIP I HAD SENT TO “THE WASHINGTON POST” AND WHO HAD GAINED MY TRUST. IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR ME TO DESCRIBE THE DETAILS OF THE ASSAULT IN MY OWN WORDS. SINCE SEPTEMBER 16th, THE DATE OF “THE WASHINGTON POST” STORY, I HAVE EXPERIENCED AN OUTPOURING OF SUPPORT FROM PEOPLE IN EVERY STATE OF THIS COUNTRY. THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD THEIR LIVES DRAMATICALLY ALTERED BY SEXUAL VIOLENCE HAVE REACHED OUT TO SHARE THEIR EXPERIENCE AND HAVE THANKED ME FOR COMING FORWARD. WE HAVE RECEIVED TREMENDOUS SUPPORT FROM OUR FRIENDS AND OUR COMMUNITY. AT THE SAME TIME, MY GREATEST FEARS HAVE BEEN REALIZED AND THE REALITY HAS BEEN FAR WORSE THAN WHAT I EXPECTED. MY FAMILY AND I HAVE BEEN THE TARGET OF CONSTANT HARASSMENT AND DEATH THREATS AND I HAVE BEEN CALLED THE MOST VILE AND HATEFUL NAMES IMAGINABLE. THESE MESSAGES WELL FAR FEWER THAN THE EXPRESSIONS OF SUPPORT, HAVE BEEN TERRIFYING AND HAVE ROCKED ME TO MY CORE. PEOPLE HAVE POSTED MY PERSONAL INFORMATION AND THAT OF MY PARENTS ON-LINE ON THE INTERNET. THIS HAS RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL E-MAIL, CALLS AND FORCED TO MOVE OUT OF OUR HOME. SINCE SEPTEMBER 16th, MY FAMILY AND I HAVE BEEN VISITING IN VARIOUS SECURE LOCALS, AT TIMES SEPARATED AND AT — AT TIMES TOGETHER WITH THE HELP OF SECURITY GUARDS. THIS PAST TUESDAY EVENING MY WORK E-MAIL WAS HACKED AND MESSAGES WERE SENT OUT TRYING TO RECANT MY DESCRIPTION OF THE SEXUAL ASSAULT. APART FROM THE ASSAULT ITSELF, THESE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS HAVE BEEN THE HARDEST OF MY LIFE. [ TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES ] OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA AND OTHER MEDIA AND IN THIS BODY WHO HAVE NEVER MET ME OR SPOKEN WITH ME. I HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF ACTING OUT OF PARTISAN POLITICAL MOTIVES. THOSE WHO SAY THAT DO NOT KNOW ME. I AM AN INDEPENDENT PERSON AND I AM NO ONE’S PAWN. MY MOTIVATION IN COMING FORWARD WAS TO BE HELPFUL AND TO PROVIDE FACTS ABOUT HOW MR. KAVANAUGH’S ACTIONS HAVE DAMAGED MY LIFE SO THAT YOU COULD TAKE INTO A SERIES CONSIDERATION AS YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION ABOUT HOW TO PROCEED. IT IS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE WHETHER MR. KAVANAUGH DESERVES TO SIT ON THE SUPREME COURT. MY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH. I UNDERSTAND THAT A PROFESSIONAL PROSECUTOR HAS BEEN HIRED TO ASK ME QUESTIONS AND I’M COMMITTED TO DOING MY VERY BEST TO ANSWER THEM. I HAVE NEVER BEEN QUESTIONED BY A PROSECUTOR AND I WILL DO MY BEST. AT THE SAME TIME, BECAUSE THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL BE JUDGING MY CREDIBILITY, I DO HOPE TO BE ABLE TO ENGAGE DIRECTLY WITH EACH OF YOU AND AT THIS POINT, I WILL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS. AND I REQUEST SOME CAFFEINE.>>A COKE OR SOMETHING?>>THAT SOUNDS GOOD. THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BEFORE I USE MY FIVE MINUTES OF QUESTIONING, I THOUGHT THAT I WOULD TRY TO REMIND MY COLLEAGUES AND IN THIS CASE MISS MITCHELL AS WELL THAT THE FIVE MINUTES — THE WAY I TRADITIONALLY HAVE DONE — IF YOU ASK A QUESTION BEFORE YOUR TIME RUNS OUT AND EVEN THOUGH YOU GO OVER YOUR TIME, AS LONG AS YOU AREN’T FILIBUSTERING, I’LL LET YOU ASK YOUR QUESTION. AND I’M GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT BOTH DR. FORD AND — DR. FORD AND JUDGE KAVANAUGH, AS CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE, I KNOW THEY’RE GOING TO GET A CHANCE TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS FULLY BEYOND THAT FIVE MINUTES. BUT WHEN THAT — WHEN EITHER DR. FORD OR JUDGE KAVANAUGH GETS DONE, THEN WE IMMEDIATELY GO TO THE NEXT PERSON. SO I HOPE THAT THAT WILL BE DONE IN A — AND DR. FORD, I’M TOLD THAT YOU WANT A BREAK RIGHT NOW. AND IF DO YOU, THAT’S FINE.>>I’M OKAY. I GOT THE COFFEE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THINK I CAN PROCEED AND SIP ON THE COFFEE. >>NOBODY CAN MIX UP MY COFFEE RIGHT, SO I — SO YOU’RE PRETTY FORTUNATE. SO NOW WITH THAT, MISS MITCHELL, YOU HAVE MY FIVE MINUTES TO ASK QUESTIONS.>>GOOD MORNING, DR. FORD.>>HI. >>WE HAVEN’T MET. MY NAME IS RACHEL MITCHELL.>>NICE TO MEET YOU. >>I JUST WANTED TO TELL YOU THAT THE FIRST THING THAT STRUCK ME FROM YOUR STATEMENT THIS MORNING THAT YOU WERE TERRIFIED AND I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW I’M VERY SORRY. THAT’S NOT RIGHT. I KNOW THIS IS STRESSFUL SO I WOULD LIKE TO SET FORTH SOME GUIDELINES THAT MAYBE WILL ALLEVIATE THAT A LITTLE BIT. IF I ASK YOU A QUESTION THAT YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND, PLEASE ASK ME TO CLARIFY IT. OR ASK IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY. WHEN I ASK QUESTIONS SOMETIMES I’LL REFER BACK TO OTHER INFORMATION YOU’VE PROVIDED, IF I DO THAT AND I GET IT WRONG, PLEASE CORRECT ME.>>OKAY.>>I’M NOT GOING TO ASK YOU TO GUESS. I KNOW IT WAS A LONG TIME AGO. IF YOU DO ESTIMATE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW YOU’RE ESTIMATING. OKAY. >>FAIR.>>WE’VE PUT BEFORE YOU — AND I’M SURE YOU HAVE COPIES OF THEM ANY WAY — FIVE PIECES OF INFORMATION AND I WANTED TO GO OVER THEM. THE FIRST IS A SCREEN SHOT OF A WHAT’S APP TEXTING BETWEEN YOU AND SOMEBODY AT THE WASHINGTON POST. DO YOU HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU?>>YES.>>THE FIRST TWO TEXTS WERE SENT BY YOU ON JULY 6th, IS THAT CORRECT?>>CORRECT.>>AND THEN THE LAST ONE SENT BY YOU WAS ON JULY 10th?>>CORRECT.>>ARE THOSE THREE COMMENTS ACCURATE?>>I WILL READ THEM, YES.>>TAKE YOUR TIME.>>SO THERE IS ONE CORRECTION. >>OKAY.>>I’VE MISUSED THE WORD BYSTANDER AS AN ADJECTIVE.>>OKAY.>>BYSTANDER MEANS SOMEONE THAT IS LOOKING AT AN ASSAULT AND THE PERSON NAMED P.J. WAS NOT TECHNICALLY A BYSTANDER. I WAS WRITING VERY QUICKLY WITH A SENSE OF URGENCY AND SO I WOULD NOT CALL HIM A BUY STANDIR AND — BYSTANDER AND HE WAS DOWNSTAIRS AND A TALL AND VERY NICE PERSON AND I DIDN’T KNOW HIM WELL, AND HE WAS DOWNSTAIRS, NOT ANYWHERE NEAR THE EVENT. >>OKAY. THANK YOU.>>I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE THAT WORD OUT IF IT IS POSSIBLE. >>THANK YOU FOR — FOR CLARIFYING THAT. THE SECOND IS THE LETTER THAT YOU WROTE TO SENATE FEINSTEIN DATED JULY 30th OF THIS YEAR. >>YES. >>DID YOU WRITE THE LETTER YOURSELF?>>I DID.>>AND I — SINCE IT IS DATED JULY 30th, DID YOU WRITE IT ON THAT DATE?>>I BELIEVE SO. IT SOUNDS RIGHT. I WAS IN REHOBOTH, DELAWARE AT THE TIME, I COULD LOOK INTO MY CALENDAR FOR THAT TIME. >>WAS IT WRITTEN ON OR ABOUT THAT DATE. >>YES. I TRAVELED TON JULY FROM REHOBOTH AND THAT MAKES SENSE T SINCE I WROTE IT THERE. >>IS THE LETTER ACCURATE?>>I’LL TAKE A MINUTE TO READ. IT I COULD READ FAST. >>TAKE YOUR TIME.>>OKAY.>>OKAY, SO I HAVE THREE AREAS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS. >>OKAY.>>IN THE SECOND PARAGRAPH WHERE IT SAYS THIS — THE ASSAULT OCCURRED IN A SUBURBAN MARYLAND AREA HOME — >>YES. >>AT A GATHERING THAT INCLUDED ME AND FOUR OTHERS. I CAN’T GUARANTEE THAT THERE WEREN’T A FEW OTHER PEOPLE THERE. BUT THEY ARE NOT IN MY PURVIEW OF MY MEMORY. >>WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THERE WERE AT LEAST FOUR OTHERS. >>YES. >>OKAY. WHAT IS THE SECOND CORRECTION. >>OH, OKAY. THE NEXT SENTENCE BEGINS WITH “KAVANAUGH PHYSICALLY PUSHED ME INTO THE BEDROOM”, I WOULD SAY I CAN’T PROMISE THAT MARK JUDGE DIDN’T ASSIST WITH THAT. I DON’T KNOW. IT WAS FROM BEHIND SO I DON’T WANT TO PUT THAT SOLELY ON HIM.>>OKAY.>>MISS MITCHELL, I DON’T KNOW WHETHER THIS IS FAIR TO INTERRUPT, I WANT TO KEEP PEOPLE WITHIN FIVE MINUTES. IS THAT A MAJOR PROBLEM FOR YOU IN THE MIDDLE OF A QUESTION? BECAUSE I DON’T — WE HAVE TO — I’VE GOT TO TREAT EVERYBODY THE SAME.>>I UNDERSTAND THAT.>>CAN I GO TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN OR — >>YES, SIR. >>I DIDN’T SEE THE LIGHT WAS RED. PLEASE DO. >>SENATOR FEINSTEIN — >>I DIDN’T GET TO — >>WE’RE GOING TO COME BACK TO THAT. >>I SEE. OKAY.>>WHEN SHE COMES BACK — SHE’LL COME BACK AND ASK YOU — >>FOR THE BENEFIT OF DR. FORD, I THINK SHE’LL CONTINUE THAT AFTER THE FIVE MINUTES HERE.>>OKAY.>>MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO BEGIN BY PUTTING SOME LETTERS IN THE RECORD. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. >>THANK YOU. >>IF YOU WANT TO TELL ME — >>140 LETTERS FROM FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS OF THE WITNESS AND A THOUSAND FEMALE PHYSICIANS ACROSS THE COUNTRY. THOSE ARE WHAT THE LETTERS ARE. I WANT TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. I KNOW HOW VERY, VERY HARD IT IS. WHY — WHY YOU HAVE HELD IT TO YOURSELF ALL THESE YEARS? AS YOU LOOK BACK, CAN YOU INDICATE WHAT THE REASONS ARE?>>WELL, I HAVEN’T HELD IT IN ALL THESE YEARS, I DID DISCLOSE IT IN THE CONFINES OF THERAPY WHERE I FELT LIKE IT WAS AN APPROPRIATE PLACE TO COPE WITH THE SEC WILLI OF THE EVENT. >>CAN YOU TELL US WHAT IMPACT THE EVENTS HAD ON YOU. >>WELL, I THINK THAT THE SECULI OF SEXUAL ASSAULT VARIES BY PERSON SO FOR ME PERSONALLY, ANXIETY, PHOBIA AND PTSD-LIKE SYMPTOMS ARE THE TYPES OF THINGS I’VE BEEN COPING WITH. SO MORE SPECIFICALLY, CLAUSTROPHOBIA, PANIC AND THAT TYPE OF THING. >>IS THAT THE REASON FOR THE SECOND DOOR — FRONT DOOR — >>CORRECT. >>IS CLAUSTROPHOBIA. >>CORRECT. OUR HOUSE DOES NOT LOOK AESTHETICALLY PLEASING FROM THE CURB.>>I SEE. AND DO YOU HAVE THAT SECOND FRONT DOOR?>>YES. IT NOW IS A PLACE TO HOST GOOGLE INTERNS BECAUSE WE LIVE NEAR GOOGLE SO WE — AND OTHER STUDENTS COULD — >>CAN YOU TELL US, IS THERE ANY OTHER WAY THIS HAS AFFECTED YOUR LIFE?>>THE PRIMARY IMPACT WAS IN THE INITIAL FOUR YEARS AFTER THE EVENT. I STRUGGLED ACADEMICALLY. I STRUGGLED VERY MUCH IN CHAPEL HILL IN COLLEGE. WHEN I WAS 17 AND WENT OFF TO COLLEGE, I HAD A VERY HARD TIME, MORE SO THAN OTHERS FORMING NEW FRIENDSHIPS AND ESPECIALLY FRIENDSHIPS WITH BOYS. AND I HAD ACADEMIC PROBLEMS.>>WHAT WERE THE — WHEN — WHEN WE SPOKE AND IT BECAME VERY CLEAR HOW DEEPLY YOU FELT ABOUT THIS AND THE NEED THAT YOU WANTED TO REMAIN CONFIDENTIAL, CAN YOU TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT?>>YES, SO I WAS WATCHING CAREFULLY THROUGHOUT THE SUMMER — WELL MY ORIGINAL INTENT, I WANT TO REMIND, IS TO COMMUNICATE WITH EVERYONE WHEN THERE WAS STILL A LIST OF CANDIDATES WHO ALL SEEMED TO BE JUST FROM MY PERSPECTIVE FROM WHAT I COULD READ EQUALLY QUALIFIED AND I WAS IN A HURRY TO TRY TO GET THE INFORMATION FORWARD BUT DIDN’T QUITE KNOW HOW TO DO THAT. HOWEVER, ONCE HE WAS SELECTED AND IT SEEMED LIKE HE WAS POPULAR AND IT WAS A SURE VOTE, I WAS CALCULATING DAILY THE RISK BENEFIT FOR ME OF COMING FORWARD AND WONDERING WHETHER I WOULD JUST BE JUMPING IN FRONT OF A TRAIN THAT WAS HEADED TO WHERE IT WAS HEADED ANYWAY AND THAT I WOULD JUST BE PERSONALLY ANNIHILATED.>>HOW DID YOU DECIDE TO COME FORWARD?>>ULTIMATELY BECAUSE REPORTERS WERE SITTING OUTSIDE OF MY HOME TRYING TO TALK TO MY DOG — THROUGH THE WINDOW TO CALM THE DOG DOWN AND A REPORTER APPEARED IN MY GRADUATE CLASSROOM AND I MISTOOK HER FOR A STUDENT AND SHE CAME UP TO ASK ME A QUESTION AND I THOUGHT THAT SHE WAS A STUDENT AND IT TURNED OUT SHE WAS A REPORTER. SO AT THAT POINT I FELT LIKE ENOUGH WAS ENOUGH. PEOPLE WERE CALLING MY COLLEAGUES AT STANFORD AND LEAVING MESSAGES ON THEIR VOICE MAIL AND ON THEIR E-MAIL SAYING THEY KNEW MY NAME, CLEARLY PEOPLE KNEW MY ADDRESS BECAUSE THEY WERE OUT IN FRONT OF MY HOUSE AND IT JUST — THE MOUNTING PRESSURE SEEMED LIKE IT WAS TIME TO SAY WHAT I NEEDED TO SAY. >>I’M SORRY. I WANT TO ASK YOU ONE QUESTION ABOUT THE ATTACK ITSELF. YOU ARE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THE ATTACK, BEING PUSHED INTO THE ROOM. YOU SAY YOU DON’T KNOW QUITE BY WHOM. BUT THAT IT WAS BRETT KAVANAUGH THAT COVERED YOUR MOUTH TO PREVENT YOU FROM SCREAMING. AND THEN YOU ESCAPED. HOW ARE YOU SO SURE THAT IT WAS HE?>>THE SAME WAY THAT I’M SURE THAT I’M TALKING TO YOU RIGHT NOW. JUST BASIC MEMORY FUNCTIONS AND ALSO JUST THE LEVEL OF NOR EPINEPHRINE AND THE EPINEPHRINE IN THE BRAIN THAT AS YOU KNOW ENCODES THAT NEUROTRANSMITTER THAT CODES MEMORIES INTO THE HYPO CAMPUS AND SO THE TRAUMA RELATED EXPERIENCE IS LOCKED THERE WHEREAS OTHER DETAILS KIND OF DRIFT. >>SO WHAT YOU ARE TELLING US, THIS COULD NOT BE A CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY?>>ABSOLUTELY NOT.>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>MISS MITCHELL, FOR SENATOR HATCH.>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. WHEN WE WERE STOPPED, YOU WERE GOING TO TELL US A THIRD CORRECTION THAT YOU WANTED TO MAKE ON THAT STATEMENT? OR I’M SORRY THE LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN.>>IT WASN’T A CORRECTION. BUT I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT ON IT SINCE WE’RE LOOKING AT THIS LETTER. THAT I DID SEE MARK JUDGE ONCE AT THE POTOMAC VILLAGE SAFEWAY AFTER THE TIME OF THE ATTACK AND IT WOULD BE HELPFUL WITH ANYONE’S RESOURCES IF — TO FIGURE OUT WHEN HE WORKED THERE, IF PEOPLE ARE WANTING MORE DETAILS FROM ME ABOUT WHEN THE ATTACK OCCURRED, IF WE COULD FIND OUT WHEN HE WORKED THERE, THEN I COULD PROVIDE A MORE DETAILED TIMELINE AS TO WHEN THE ATTACK OCCURRED.>>OKAY. AND THAT IS — SO THAT IS NOT A CORRECTION IN YOUR STATEMENT — >>IT IS JUST — NO.>>OKAY. YOU ALSO WROTE OUT A HANDWRITTEN STATEMENT FOR THE CALLIGRAPHER WHEN YOU TOOK YOUR POLYGRAPH TEST, IS THAT CORRECT. >>YES.>>AND I SEE CORRECTIONS ON THAT WHERE YOU CROSSED OUT SO I WILL GO ON TO THE WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE THAT WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED ON SEPTEMBER 16th.>>OKAY. >>– OF THIS YEAR. >>AND SHOULD I NOT LOOK AT THIS FOR ACCURACY OR WE’RE JUST GOING TO LEAVE THAT BE — >>WE MAY COME BACK TO IT IF YOU NEED TO REFER TO IT. >>OKAY.>>ON THE WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE, DID YOU SUBMIT TO AN INTERVIEW BY A REPORTER WITH “THE WASHINGTON POST” FOR THAT ARTICLE TO BE WRITTEN?>>CORRECT.>>OKAY. AND THEN FINALLY WAS THE STATEMENT THAT YOU PROVIDED THIS MORNING, I ASSUME THAT TO THE BEST OF YOUR RECOLLECTION THAT THAT WAS ACCURATE?>>THIS WHOLE ARTICLE IS ACCURATE?>>NO, THE STATEMENT THAT YOU MADE THIS MORNING. >>YES.>>I WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT THE DAY THAT THIS HAPPENED LEADING UP TO THE GATHERING.>>OKAY.>>IN YOUR STATEMENT THIS MORNING, YOU HAVE YOU TOLD US EVERYTHING THAT YOU REMEMBER ABOUT THE DAY LEADING UP TO THAT. >>YES. >>LET ME ASK A FEW QUESTIONS TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU’VE THOUGHT OF EVERYTHING. OKAY. YOU INDICATED THAT YOU WERE AT THE COUNTRY CLUB SWIMMING THAT DAY?>>THAT’S MY BEST ESTIMATE OF HOW THIS COULD HAVE HAPPENED. >>OKAY.>>AND WHEN YOU SAY BEST ESTIMATE, IS THAT BASED ON THE FACT THAT YOU SAID YOU WENT THERE PRETTY MUCH EVERY DAY. >>MM-HMM. >>IS THAT A YES?>>YES.>>DO YOU RECALL PRIOR TO GETTING THERE — SO I’M ONLY TALKING ABOUT UP TO THE GATHERING, HAD YOU HAD ANYTHING TO DRINK?>>NOT AT ALL.>>WERE YOU ON ANY SORT OF MEDICATION?>>NONE.>>OKAY. DO YOU RECALL KNOWING BEFORE YOU WENT WHO WAS GOING TO BE AT THAT GATHERING?>>I RECALL THAT — EXPECTING THAT MARK JUDGE AND LEELAND WOULD BE AT THE GATHERING. >>DO YOU RECALL AN EXPECTATION THAT BRETT KAVANAUGH WOULD BE THERE. >>I DON’T RECALL WHETHER OR NOT I EXPECTED THAT. >>OKAY. NOW, LET’S TALK ABOUT THE GATHERING. FROM THE TIME ARRIVED UNTIL RIGHT — WHEN YOU WENT UP THE STAIRS, JUST THAT PERIOD OF TIME, OKAY, WHAT WAS THE ATMOSPHERE LIKE AT THE GATHERING?>>UM, MR. KAVANAUGH AND MR. JUDGE WERE EXTREMELY INEBRIATED. THEY HAD CLEARLY BEEN DRINKING PRIOR AND THE OTHER PEOPLE AT THE PARTY WERE NOT. THE LIVING — >>CAN I ASK YOU JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. IT WAS CLEAR THEY HAD BEEN DRINKING PRIOR, DO YOU MEAN PRIOR TO THE TIME HAD YOU GOTTEN THERE OR PRIOR TO THE TIME THEY HAD ARRIVED?>>PRIOR TO THE TIME THAT THEY ARRIVED. I DON’T RECALL WHO ARRIVED FIRST, THOUGH. WHETHER IT WAS ME OR THEM.>>OKAY. PLEASE CONTINUE.>>OKAY. SO I RECALL THAT I CAN SKETCH A FLOOR PLAN. I RECALL THAT IT WAS A SPARSELY FURNISHED, FAIRLY MODEST LIVING ROOM. AND IT WAS NOT REALLY A PARTY. LIKE THE NEWS HAS MADE IT SOUND. IT WAS JUST A GATHERING THAT I ASSUMED WAS GOING TO LEAD TO A PARTY LATER ON, THAT THOSE BOYS WOULD ATTEND BECAUSE THEY ATTENDED — THEY TENDED TO HAVE PARTIES LATER AT NIGHT THAN I WAS ALLOWED TO STAY OUT SO IT WAS A PRE-GATHERING. >>WAS IT LOUD?>>NO, NOT IN THE LIVING ROOM. >>DESPITE THE MUSIC YOU DESCRIBED PLAYING IN THE BEDROOM, WAS THERE ANY OTHER MUSIC OR TELEVISION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT THAT WAS ADDING — >>NO.>>OKAY. SO THERE WASN’T A STEREO PLAYING DOWNSTAIRS?>>NO.>>OKAY.>>SENATOR LEAHY. >>DR. FORD, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU KNOW THE WAY TO MAKE THIS INQUIRY TRULY CREDIBLE IS TO DO WHAT WE’VE ALWAYS DONE WHEN NEW INFORMATION ABOUT A NOMINEE COMES TO LIGHT, TO USE YOUR WORD THIS IS MORNING, YOU WANT TO REACH THE TRUTH. THE EASY WAY TO DO THAT IS ASK THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE. IS WHAT WE’VE ALWAYS DONE. LET THEM INVESTIGATE AND REPORT BACK TO US, THE SAME APPLIED TO THE SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS MADE BY DEBORAH RAMIREZ AND JULIE SWETNICK. LET’S HAVE A NONPARTISAN PROFESSIONAL INVESTIGATION AND THEN TAKE THE TIME TO HAVE THESE WITNESSES TESTIFY. CHAIRMAN, YOU AND I WERE BOTH HERE 27 YEARS AGO. AT THAT TIME THE SENATE FAILED ANITA HILL. I SAID I BELIEVED HER. BUT I’M CONCERNED THAT WE’RE DOING A LOT LESS FOR THESE THREE WOMEN TODAY. THAT IS MY PERSONAL VIEW. NOW, DR. FORD, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS WITH THIS HEARING TODAY, NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS NOMINATION, I KNOW AND I HEAR FROM SO MANY OF MY OWN STATE OF VERMONT, THERE ARE MILLIONS OF VICTIMS AND SURVIVORS OUT THERE WHO HAVE BEEN INSPIRED BY YOUR COURAGE. I AM. BRAVERY IS CONTAGIOUS AND INDEED THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THE ME-TOO MOVEMENT AND YOU SHARING YOUR STORY IS GOING TO HAVE A LASTING, POSITIVE IMPACT ON SO MANY SURVIVORS IN OUR COUNTRY. WE OWE YOU A DEBT OF GRATITUDE FOR THAT, DOCTOR. NOW SOME SENATORS HAVE SUGGESTED YOU WERE SIMPLY MIXED UP ABOUT WHO ASSAULTED YOU. AND NOW JUDGE KAVANAUGH AND THE WHITE HOUSE PROMOTED A WILD THEORY ABOUT A KAVANAUGH LOOK-A-LIKE. YOU IMMEDIATELY REJECTED THAT THEORY. AS DID THE INNOCENT MAN WHO HAD BEEN CALLED THAT LOOK-A-LIKE. IN FACT HE SENT A LETTER TO THIS COMMITTEE FORCEFULLY REJECTING THE ABSURD THEORY AND ASK FOR CONSENT TO ENTER THAT INTO THE RECORD. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. >>NOW HOW DID YOU KNOW BRETT KAVANAUGH AND MARK JUDGE? AND IS IT POSSIBLE THAT YOU HAD MIXED THEM UP WITH SOMEBODY ELSE?>>NO, IT IS NOT. AND THE PERSON THAT WAS BLAMED FOR THE INCIDENT IS ACTUALLY THE PERSON WHO INTRODUCED ME TO THEM ORIGINALLY. SO HE WAS A MEMBER OF COLUMBIA COUNTRY CLUB AND I DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT HIM BECAUSE I THINK IT IS UNFAIR THAT HE IS THE PERSON THAT INTRODUCED ME TO THEM.>>BUT YOU — YOU WOULD NOT MIX UP SOMEBODY ELSE WITH BRETT KAVANAUGH, CORRECT. >>CORRECT. >>OR MARK JUDGE?>>CORRECT.>>WELL THEN LET’S GO BACK TO THE INCIDENT. WHAT IS THE STRONGEST MEMORY YOU HAVE? STRONGEST MEMORY OF THE INCIDENT? SOMETHING THAT YOU CANNOT FORGET? TAKE WHATEVER TIME YOU NEED.>>IN DELLIBLE INTO THE HIPPOCAMPUS IS THE LASTER. THE UPROARIOUS LAUGHTER BETWEEN THE TWO AND HAVING FUN AT MY EXPENSE.>>YOU HAVE NEVER FORGOTTEN THAT LAUGHTER, FORGOTTEN THEM LAUGHING AT YOU.>>THEY WERE LAUGHING WITH EACH OTHER.>>AND YOU WERE THE OBJECT OF THE LAUGHTER?>>I WAS UNDERNEATH ONE OF THEM WHILE THE TWO LAUGHED. TWO FRIENDS HAVING A REALLY GOOD TIME WITH ONE ANOTHER.>>LET ME ENTER INTO THE RECORD BY THE NATIONAL TASK FORCE IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. >>A LETTER FROM 24 MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES URGING THE COMMITTEE TO USE THE NTS TRAUMA INFORMED APPROACH IN QUESTIONING DR. FORD.>>WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. >>AND A LETTER FROM 116 MEMBERS OF THE HOUSE ASKING TO DELAY UNTIL ALL OF THIS HAS BEEN HEARD. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED.>>AND DR. FORD HAS AT TIMES BEEN CRITICIZED FOR WHAT SHE DOESN’T REMEMBER FROM 36 YEARS AGO. BUT WE HAVE NUMEROUS EXPERTS INCLUDING A STUDY BY THE U.S. ARMY MILITARY POLICE SCHOOL MILITARY AND SCIENCES EDUCATION THAT LAPSES OF MEMORY ARE WHOLLY CONSISTENT WITH SEVERE TRAUMA AND STRESSFUL ASSAULT AND I WOULD ASK CONSENT THAT BE ENTERED. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. >>AND DR. FORD, I JUST CONCLUDE WITH THIS. YOU DO REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED, DO YOU NOT?>>VERY MUCH SO.>>THANK YOU. THANK YOU.>>NOW MISS MITCHELL FOR SENATOR GRAHAM AND THEN IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT IS WHERE YOU WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A BREAK?>>DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU? DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU AS WELL?>>WE’RE HERE TO ACCOMMODATE YOU, NOT TO ACCOMMODATE US. >>THANK YOU. I’M USED TO BE COLLEGIAL. >>GO AHEAD. MISS MITCHELL FOR SENATOR GRAHAM. >>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. YOU TOLD SENATOR FEINSTEIN IN YOUR LETTER THAT YOU AND FOUR OTHERS WERE PRESENT. YOU’VE CORRECTED THAT TODAY TO SAY IT WAS AT LEAST FOUR OTHERS. WHEN YOU WERE INTERVIEWED BY THE WASHINGTON POST YOU SAID THAT THERE WERE FOUR BOYS PRESENT AT THE PARTY. AND THEN IN YOUR POLYGRAPH STATEMENT YOU SAID THERE WERE FOUR BOYS AND TWO GIRLS. WHEN YOU SAY TWO GIRLS, WAS THAT YOU AND ANOTHER OR WAS THAT TWO OTHER GIRLS?>>THAT WAS ME AND ONE OTHER GIRL. >>AND THAT OTHER GIRL’S NAME?>>LEELAND.>>LEELAND KAISER NOW?>>CORRECT.>>OKAY. SO THEN WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY AT LEAST P.J., BRETT KAVANAUGH, MARK JUDGE, LEELAND INGRAM AT THE TIME AND YOURSELF WERE PRESENT AND POSSIBLY OTHERS?>>AND ONE OTHER BOY, SO THERE WERE FOUR BOYS. I JUST DON’T KNOW THE NAME OF THE OTHER BOY.>>HAVE YOU BEEN CONTACTED BY ANYBODY SAYING, HEY, I WAS AT THAT PARTY, TOO?>>NO, I HAVEN’T TALKED WITH ANYONE FROM PARTY.>>OKAY. NOW, YOU’VE BEEN DETAILED ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED ONCE YOU GOT UP THE STAIRS AND SO I DON’T NEED TO GO THROUGH THAT AGAIN. I’M SORRY, GO AHEAD. >>I JUST REALIZED THAT I SAID SOMETHING THAT WASSIN AACCURATE. I SAID I HAVEN’T SPOKEN WITH ANYONE FROM THE PARTY SINCE THAT — I’VE SPOKEN WITH LEELAND. >>THANK YOU FOR CORRECTING THAT. I APPRECIATE THAT. YOU’VE GON INTO DETAIL ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED SINCE YOU WENT UP THE STAIRS SO I DON’T FEEL LIKE IT IS NECESSARY TO GO OVER THOSE THINGS AGAIN. >>OKAY, THANK YOU.>>HAVE YOU TOLD US EVERYTHING THAT YOU DO REMEMBER ABOUT IT?>>I BELIEVE SO, BUT IF THERE ARE OTHER QUESTIONS, I CAN ATTEMPT TO ANSWER THEM. >>OKAY. YOU SAID THAT THE MUSIC WAS SOLELY COMING FROM THAT ROOM, IS THAT CORRECT?>>CORRECT.>>AND IT WAS TURNED UP ONCE THE THREE OF YOU WERE INSIDE OF THAT ROOM, IS THAT CORRECT?>>YES.>>OKAY. AT SOME POINT DO YOU RECALL IT BEING TURNED DOWN?>>I DON’T REMEMBER IF IT WAS TURNED DOWN ONCE I WAS LEAVING THE HOUSE. I DON’T REMEMBER.>>OKAY.>>LIKELY, SINCE I COULD HEAR THEM WALKING DOWN THE STAIRS VERY CLEARLY FROM THE BATHROOM. >>AND THE BATHROOM DOOR WAS CLOSED WHEN YOU HEARD THIS, WAS THAT CORRECT?>>I COULD HEAR THEM VERY CLEARLY HITTING THE WALLS, GOING DOWN THE STAIRWELL. >>IN FACT, IN YOUR LETTER YOU SAID THAT — THEY WENT DOWN THE STAIRS AND THEY WERE TALKING WITH OTHER PEOPLE.>>MM-HMM. >>IN THE HOUSE — >>CORRECT. >>WERE YOU ABLE TO HEAR THAT CONVERSATION. >>I WAS NOT ABLE TO HEAR THAT CONVERSATION BUT I WAS AWARE THEY WERE DOWNSTAIRS AND I WOULD HAVE TO WALK PAST THEM TO GET OUT OF THE HOUSE.>>NOW LET ME MAKE SURE WE’RE ON THE SAME PAGE. WERE YOU NOT ABLE TO HEAR THE CONVERSATION OR NOT ABLE TO UNDERSTAND THE CONVERSATION?>>I COULDN’T HEAR THE CONVERSATION. I WAS UPSTAIRS.>>HOW DO YOU KNOW THERE WAS A CONVERSATION?>>JUST ASSUMING SINCE IT WAS A SOCIAL GATHERING PEOPLE WERE TALKING. I DON’T KNOW.>>OKAY. IN YOUR LETTER — >>I COULD HEAR THEM TALKING AS THEY WENT DOWN THE STAIRWELL. THEY WERE LAUGHING AND — >>OKAY. IN YOUR LETTER YOU WROTE BOTH LOUDLY STUMBLED DOWN THE STAIRWELL AT WHICH POINT OTHER PERSONS AT THE HOUSE WERE TALKING WITH THEM. DOES THAT RING A BELL?>>YES. I HAD TO WALK PAST EVERYONE TO LEAVE THE HOUSE. SO — >>OKAY.>>I’M NOT UNDERSTANDING, I’M SORRY. >>YOUR NEXT SENTENCE, LET ME TRY TO CLARIFY THIS. AFTER YOU SAID OTHER PERSONS AT THE HOUSE WERE TALKING WITH THEM, THE LETTER GOES ON WITH A VERY NEXT SENTENCE, I EXITED THE BATHROOM, RAN OUTSIDE OF THE HOUSE AND WENT HOME.>>CORRECT.>>OKAY. YOU SAID THAT YOU DID NOT REMEMBER HOW YOU GOT HOME, IS THAT CORRECT?>>I DO NOT REMEMBER. OTHER THAN THAT I DID NOT DRIVE HOME. >>I’M GOING TO SHOW YOU, IF SOMEBODY COULD PROVIDE TO YOU A MAP OF THE VARIOUS PEOPLE’S HOUSES AT THE TIME AND IF COULD YOU VERIFY THAT THIS IS WHERE YOU WERE LIVING AT THE TIME.>>WHERE I WAS LIVING AT THE TIME?>>YES.>>OKAY.>>MR. CHAIRMAN, DO WE HAVE A COPY OF THESE DOCUMENTS?>>WE DO NOT HAVE A COPY. BUT I PRESUME IF YOU WANT ONE, WE COULD GET YOU ONE. >>BEFORE THE QUESTIONS BEGIN, SO WE COULD FOLLOW THE TESTIMONY. >>OKAY. MY STAFF SAID WE SHOULD NOT PROVIDE THE COPY.>>NO, WE WILL PROVIDE THE COPY.>>OH, WELL SPEAK PLAINLY WITH ME, PLEASE.>>OH, SURE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHAT SHE’S LOOKING AT.>>YOU HAVE ANOTHER 30 SECONDS, NOW, BECAUSE I WAS RUDELY INTERRUPTED. >>OKAY. MR. CHAIRMAN, SENATOR HARRIS, WE DO HAVE A BLOWN-UP COPY OF THIS FOR THE MEMBERS TO VIEW IF THAT IS HELPFUL.>>OKAY, I’M GOING TO PUT CHECK MARKS NEXT TO HOMES THAT I CAN CONFIRM ARE THE CORRECT LOCATIONS AND THEN AN X OR A QUESTION MARK WHEN I DON’T KNOW WHERE THESE PEOPLE LIVE. >>I’M ONLY ASKING YOU TO CONFIRM IF THAT MAP ACCURATELY SHOWS WHERE YOU WERE LIVING AT THE TIME. >>WHERE I AM LIVING. I CAN’T SEE THE STREET NAME BUT I’M HAPPY TO REFER TO THE ADDRESS OR NEIGHBORHOOD. >>OKAY. COULD YOU TELL US THAT. >>IT IS RIVER FALLS. IT IS NEAR THE — LIKE — WHAT THE PLACE CALLED, THE NAVAL RESEARCH CENTER ON CLARA BARTON PARKWAY. >>WAS THAT A HOUSE OR APARTMENT?>>IT WAS MY PARENTS’ HOME. >>ALL RIGHT.>>SENATOR DURBIN.>>MR. CHAIRMAN, I ASK CONSENT TO ENTER INTO THE RECORD LETTERS OF SUPPORT FOR DR. FORD FROM HER CLASSMATES AT HOLTEN-ARMS SCHOOL, 1200 ALUMNI OF THE SCHOOL AND 195 OF YOUR MENTOR AND 1,400 AND MEN AND WOMEN THAT ATTENDED D.C. SCHOOLS AND 50 MEMBERS OF THE YALE FACULTY CALLING FOR A FULL FBI INVESTIGATION. ASK FOR CONSENT TO ENTER INTO THE RECORD. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. >>AS DIFFICULT AS THIS EXPERIENCE MUST BE, I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT YOUR COURAGE IN COMING FORWARD HAS GIVEN COUNTLESS AMERICANS THE STRENGTH TO FACE THEIR OWN LIFE SHATTERING PAST AND BEGIN TO HEAL WOUNDS. BY EXAMPLE YOU HAVE BROUGHT MANY FAMILIES INTO AN HONEST AND SOMETIMES PAINFUL DIALOGUE THAT SHOULD HAVE OCCURRED A LONG TIME AGO. I’M SORRY FOR WHAT THIS HAS DONE TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. NO ONE — NO ONE SHOULD FACE HARASSMENT, DEATH THREATS AND DISPARAGING COMMENTS BY CHEAP SHOT POLITICIANS SIMPLY FOR TELLING THE TRUTH. YOU AND YOUR FAMILY SHOULD KNOW THAT FOR EVERY SKURLESS CHARGE AND PATHETIC TWEET, THERE HAVE BEEN THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS, MEN AND WOMEN WHO BELIEVE YOU AND SUPPORT YOU AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COURAGE. WATCHING YOUR EXPERIENCE, IT IS NO WONDER THAT MANY SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVORS HIDE THEIR PAST AND SUFFERING IN PAIN AND SILENCE. YOU HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO GAIN BY BRINGING THESE FACTS TO THE SENATE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE. THE FACT THAT YOU ARE TESTIFYING HERE TODAY, TERRIFIED THOUGH YOU MAY BE, THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE CALLED FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION OF THIS INCIDENT, THE FACT THAT YOU ARE PREPARED TO NAME BOTH JUDGE KAVANAUGH AND EYEWITNESS MARK JUDGE STANDS IN SHARP CONTRAST TO THE OBSTRUCTION WE’VE SEEN ON THE OTHER SIDE. THE FBI SHOULD HAVE INVESTIGATED YOUR CHARGES AS THEY DID IN THE ANITA HILL HEARING BUT THEY DID NOT. MARK JUDGE SHOULD BE SUBPOENAED FROM HIS BETHANY BEACH HIDEAWAY AND REQUIRED TO TESTIFY UNDER OATH BUT HE HAS NOT. JUDGE KAVANAUGH, IF HE TRULY BELIEVES THERE IS NO EVIDENCE, NO WITNESSES THAT CAN PROVE YOUR CASE, SHOULD BE JOINING US IN DEMANDING A THOROUGH FBI INVESTIGATION, BUT HE HAS NOT. TODAY YOU COME BRG THIS COMMITTEE AND THIS NATION ALONE. I KNOW YOU’RE JOINED BY COUNSEL AND FAMILY. THE PROSECUTOR ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE WILL CONTINUE TO ASK QUESTIONS TO TEST YOUR MEMORY AND VERACITY. AFTER SPENDING DECADES TRYING TO FORGET THAT AWFUL NIGHT, IT IS NO WONDER YOUR RECOLLECTION IS LESS THAN PERFECT. A POLISHED LIAR COULD CREATE A SEAMLESS STORY BUT A TRAUMA SURVIVOR CANNOT BE EXPECTED TO REMEMBER EVERY PAINFUL DETAIL. THAT IS WHAT SENATOR LEAHY MENTIONED EARLIER. ONE QUESTION IS CRITICAL. IN JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S OPENING TESTIMONY WHICH WE WILL HEAR AFTER YOU LEAVE, THIS IS WHAT HE SAYS. I NEVER HAD ANY SEXUAL OR PHYSICAL ENCOUNTER OF ANY KIND WITH DR. FORD. I’M NOT QUESTIONING THAT DR. FORD MAY HAVE BEEN SEXUAL ASSAULTED BY SOME PERSON AT SOMEPLACE AT SOME TIME. LAST NIGHT THE REPUBLICAN STAFF OF THIS COMMITTEE RELEASED TO THE MEDIA A TIME LINE THAT SHOWS THEY’VE INTERVIEWED TWO PEOPLE WHO CLAIM THEY WERE THE ONE THAT’S ACTUALLY ASSAULTED YOU. I’M ASKING YOU TO ADDRESS THIS NEW DEFENSE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY DIRECTLY. DR. FORD, WITH WHAT DEGREE OF CERTAINTY DO YOU BELIEVE BRETT KAVANAUGH ASSAULTED YOU?>>100%. >>100%. IN THE LETTER YOU SENT TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN, YOU HAVE SAID I HAVE NOT KNOWINGLY SEEN KAVANAUGH SINCE THE ASSAULT AND I DID SEE MARK JUDGE ONCE AT THE POTOMAC SAFEWAY WHO WAS EXTREMELY UNCOMFORTABLE TO SEE ME AND WOULD YOU DESCRIBE WHAT LED YOU TO SEE MARK JUDGE AND WHAT LED YOU TO BELIEVE HE WAS UNCOMFORTABLE?>>YES. I WAS GOING TO THE POTOMAC VILLAGE SAFEWAY ON THE CORNER OF FALLS AND RIVER ROAD AND WITH MY MOTHER AND I WAS A TEENAGER SO I WANTED HER TO GO IN ONE DOOR AND ME GO IN THE OTHER. SO I CHOSE THE WRONG DOOR BECAUSE THE DOOR I CHOSE WAS THE ONE WHERE MARK JUDGE WAS — LOOKED LIKE HE WAS WORKING THERE. AND ARRANGING THE SHOPPING CARTS. AND I SAID HELLO TO HIM. AND HIS FACE WAS WHITE, AND VERY UNCOMFORTABLE SAYING HELLO BACK. AND WE HAD PREVIOUSLY BEEN FRIENDLY AT THE TIMES THAT WE SAW EACH OTHER OVER THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS. ALBEIT NOT VERY MANY TIMES, WE WERE ALWAYS FRIENDLY WITH ONE ANOTHER. I WOULDN’T CHARACTERIZE HIM AS NOT FRIENDLY, HE WAS JUST NERVOUS AND NOT REALLY WANTING TO SPEAK WITH ME. AND HE LOOKED A LITTLE BIT ILL.>>HOW LONG DID THIS OCCUR AFTER THE INCIDENT?>>I WOULD ESTIMATE SIX TO EIGHT WEEKS.>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>BEFORE WE TAKE A BREAK, I CAN’T LET WHAT DURBIN — SENATOR DURBIN SAID — BY THE WAY, HE’S E HE’S MY FRIEND, WE WORK ON A LOT OF LEGISLATION TOGETHER, BUT YOU TALKED ABOUT THE OBSTRUCTION FROM THE OTHER SIDE. I CANNOT LET IT GO BY WHAT YOU’VE HEARD ME SAY SO MANY TIMES THAT BETWEEN JULY 30th AND SEPTEMBER 13th THERE WERE 45 DAYS THIS COMMITTEE COULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATING THIS SITUATION AND HER PRIVACY WOULD HAVE BEEN PROTECTED. SO SOMETHING HAPPENED HERE IN BETWEEN — ON YOUR SIDE THAT THE WHOLE COUNTRY — WELL NOT THE WHOLE COUNTRY — SHOULD HAVE KNOWN ABOUT IT — NO, WE SHOULD HAVE INVESTIGATED IT. WE’LL TAKE A BREAK NOW FOR 15 MINUTES. [ PAUSE IN PROCEEDINGS ]>>>DIANNE FEINSTEIN AND SENATOR HER ONNO OF HAWAII, A DEMOCRATIC MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE DURING THIS 15-MINUTE BREAK, WE’RE LIVE INSIDE OF 226 OF THE DIRK SEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, A SMALLER ROOM THAN THE HART BUILDING NEXT DOOR WHERE THE CONFIRMATIONS WERE HELD FOR JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH AS WE WATCH THE SCENE WITH TWO DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE AND WE’LL USE THIS HUNT TO HEAR FROM YOU AND GET YOUR REACTION. OUR PHONE LINES ARE OPEN AT 202-748-8920 OUR LINE FOR DEMOCRATS AND 202-748-8922 FOR REPUBLICANS. C-SPAN IS THE POOL AND THE CAMERAS INSIDE OF THAT ROOM ARE OUR CAMERAS AS WE PROVIDE COVERAGE OF THIS HEARING AND NEXT DOOR IN THE HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING SUPPORTERS AND OPPONENTS OF BRETT KAVANAUGH ARE ALSO GATHERED IN THE ROOM. YOU ALSO SEE ON THE SCREEN SHELDON WHITEHOUSE FROM RHODE ISLAND. WE’LL WATCH THE SCENE FOR A MOMENT AND GET YOUR REACTION AND THE GOLF WOULD COME BACK IN 12 TO 15 MINUTES FOR ANOTHER ROUND OF QUESTIONING TO CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD.>>>MEMBERS OF THE SENATE JUDICIAL COMMITTEE AND DR. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD TAKING A SHORT BREAK DURING THE PROCEEDINGS. WE’LL CONTINUE LIVE HERE ON THE C-SPAN NETWORK AND ON C-SPAN RADIO. A REMINDER, ALL TV AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE AT C-SPAN.ORG AND FROM HER OPENING STATEMENT A PORTION OF WHAT DR. FORD TOLD THE COMMITTEE.>>I AM HERE TODAY NOT BECAUSE I WANT TO BE. I AM TERRIFIED. I AM HERE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS MY CIVIC DUTY TO TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENED TO ME WHILE BRETT KAVANAUGH AND I WERE IN HIGH SCHOOL. I HAVE DESCRIBED THE EVENTS PUBLICLY BEFORE. I SUMMARIZE THEM IN MY LETTER TO RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN. AND AGAIN IN A LETTER TO CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY. I UNDERSTAND AND APPRECIATE THE IMPORTANCE OF YOUR HEARING FROM ME DIRECTLY ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO ME AND THE IMPACT THAT IT HAS HAD ON MY LIFE AND ON MY FAMILY. I GREW UP IN THE SUBURBS OF WASHINGTON, D.C. I ATTENDED THE HOLTEN-ARMS SCHOOL IN BETHESDA, MARYLAND, FROM 1978 TO 1984. HOLTEN-ARMS IS AN ALL-GIRLS SCHOOL THAT OPENED IN 1901. DURING MY TIME AT THE SCHOOL, GIRLS AT HOLTON-ARMS FROOEK WENTLY MET AND BECAME FRIENDLY FROM BOYS FROM ALL BOYS SCHOOLS IN THE AREA INCLUDING THE LANDON SCHOOL, GEORGETOWN PREP, GONZAGA HIGH SCHOOL AS WELL AS OUR COUNTRY CLUBS AND OTHER PLACES WHERE KIDS AND FAMILIES SOCIALIZED. THIS IS HOW I MET BRETT KAVANAUGH, THE BOY WHO SEXUALLY ASSAULTED ME. DURING MY FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE SCHOOL YEARS, WHEN I WAS 14 AND 15 YEARS OLD, MY GROUP OF FRIENDS INTERSECTED WITH BRETT AND HIS FRIENDS FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. I HAD BEEN FRIENDLY WITH A CLASSMATE OF BRETT’S FOR A SHORT TIME DURING MY FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE YEAR. AND IT WAS THROUGH THAT CONNECTION THAT I ATTENDED A NUMBER OF PARTIES THAT BRETT ALSO ATTENDED. WE DID NOT KNOW EACH OTHER WELL, BUT I KNEW HIM AND HE KNEW ME. IN THE SUMMER OF 1982, LIKE MOST SUMMERS, I SPENT ALMOST EVERY DAY AT THE COLUMBIA COUNTRY CLUB IN CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND, SWIMMING AND PRACTICING DIVING. ONE EVENING THAT SUMMER, AFTER A DAY OF DIVING AT THE CLUB, I ATTENDED A SMALL GATHERING AT A HOUSE IN THE BETHESDA AREA. THERE WERE FOUR BOYS, I REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY BEING AT THE HOUSE. BRETT KAVANAUGH, MARK JUDGE, A BOY NAMED P.J., AND ONE OTHER BOY WHOSE NAME I CANNOT RECALL. I ALSO REMEMBER MY FRIEND LEELAND ATTENDING. I DO NOT REMEMBER ALL OF THE DETAILS OF HOW THAT GATHERING CAME TOGETHER, BUT LIKE MANY THAT SUMMER, IT WAS ALMOST SURELY A SPUR OF THE MOMENT GATHERING. I TRULY WISH I COULD BE MORE HELPFUL WITH MORE DETAILED ANSWERS TO ALL OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE AND WILL BE ASKED ABOUT HOW I GOT TO THE PARTY AND WHERE IT TOOK PLACE AND SO FORTH. I DON’T HAVE ALL OF THE ANSWERS, AND I DON’T REMEMBER AS MUCH AS I WOULD LIKE TO. BUT THE DETAILS THAT — ABOUT THAT NIGHT THAT BRING ME HERE TODAY ARE THE ONES I WILL NEVER FORGET. THEY HAVE BEEN SEARED INTO MY MEMORY AND HAUNTED ME EPISODICALLY AS AN ADULT. WHEN I GOT TO THE SMALL GATHERING, PEOPLE WERE DRINKING BEER IN A SMALL LIVING ROOM/FAMILY ROOM-TYPE AREA ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE. I DRANK ONE BEER. BRETT AND MARK WERE VISIBLY DRUNK. EARLY IN THE EVENING I WENT UP A VERY NARROW SET OF STAIRS LEADING FROM THE LIVING ROOM TO A SECOND FLOOR TO USE THE RESTROOM. WHEN I GOT TO THE TOP OF THE STAIRS, I WAS PUSHED FROM BEHIND INTO A BEDROOM ACROSS FROM THE BATHROOM. I COULDN’T SEE WHO PUSHED ME. BRETT AND MARK CAME INTO THE BEDROOM AND LOCKED THE DOOR BEHIND THEM. THERE WAS MUSIC PLAYING IN THE BEDROOM. IT WAS TURNED UP LOUDER BY EITHER BRETT OR MARK ONCE WE WERE IN THE ROOM. I WAS PUSHED ON TO THE BED AND BRETT GOT ON TOP OF ME. HE BEGAN RUNNING HIS HANDS OVER MY BODY AND GRINDING INTO ME. I YELLED HOPING THAT SOMEONE DOWNSTAIRS MIGHT HEAR ME. AND I TRIED TO GET AWAY FROM HIM BUT HIS WEIGHT WAS HEAVY. BRETT GROPED ME AND TRIED TO TAKE OFF MY CLOTHES. HE HAD A HARD TIME BECAUSE HE WAS VERY INEBRIATED AND BECAUSE I WAS WEARING A ONE-PIECE BATHING SUIT UNDERNEATH MY CLOTHING. I BELIEVED HE WAS GOING TO RAPE ME. I TRIED TO YELL FOR HELP. WHEN I DID, BRETT PUT HIS HAND OVER MY MOUTH TO STOP ME FROM YELLING. THIS IS WHAT TERRIFIED ME THE MOST AND HAD THE MOST LASTING IMPACT ON MY LIFE. IT WAS HARD FOR ME TO BREATHE AND I THOUGHT THAT BRETT WAS ACCIDENTALLY GOING TO KILL ME. BOTH BRETT AND MARK WERE DRUNKENLY LAUGHING DURING THE ATTACK. THEY SEEMED TO BE HAVING A VERY GOOD TIME. MARK SEEMED AMBIVALENT AT TIMES URGING BRETT ON AND AT TIMES TELLING HIM TO STOP. A COUPLE OF TIMES I MADE EYE CONTACT WITH MARK AND THOUGHT HE MIGHT TRY TO HELP ME, BUT HE DID NOT. DURING THIS ASSAULT MARK CAME OVER AND JUMPED ON THE BED TWICE WHILE BRETT WAS ON TOP OF ME. AND THE LAST TIME THAT HE DID THIS WE TOPPLED OVER AND BRET WAS NO LONGER ON TOP OF ME. I WAS ABLE TO GET UP AND RUN OUT OF THE ROOM. DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE BEDROOM WAS A SMALL BATHROOM. I RAN INSIDE OF THE BATHROOM AND LOCKED THE DOOR. I WAITED UNTIL I HEARD BRETT AND MARK LEAVE THE BEDROOM LAUGHING AND LOUDLY WALK DOWN THE NARROW STAIRWAY, PIN BAWLING OFF THE WALLS ON THE WAY DOWN. I WAITED AND WHEN I DID NOT HEAR THEM COME BACK UP THE STAIRS, I LEFT THE BATHROOM, WENT DOWN THE SAME STAIRWELL, THROUGH THE LIVING ROOM, AND LEFT THE HOUSE. I REMEMBER BEING ON THE STREET AND FEELING ENORMOUS SENSE OF RELIEF THAT I HAD ESCAPED THAT HOUSE AND THAT BRETT AND MARK WERE NOT COMING OUTSIDE AFTER ME. >>A PORTION OF THE OPENING STATEMENT BY DR. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD INSIDE OF THE DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE AND IN THE HART BIELDING WHICH JOINS THE DIRKSEN BUILDING WHERE PROTESTERS AND SUPPORTERS OF JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAVE GATHERED. THESE ARE LIVE PICTURES AS WE WATCH THAT SCENE. WE WANT TO GET YOUR REACTION DURING THIS 15-MINUTE BREAK. FIRST FROM PRINCETON, INDIANA, JAMES ON THE INDEPENDENT LINE, GOOD MORNING. >>GOOD MORNING, HOW ARE YOU DOING?>>WE’RE FINE. YOUR REACTION TO WHAT YOU HEARD SO FAR?>>SO FAR, THE TRUTH ABOUT IT, SHE’S LYING LIKE A DOG.>>WHY SO?>>I’M NOT A BIG TRUMP SUPPORTER AT ALL. BY NO MEANS. >>BUT WHY DO YOU SAY SHE’S LYING?>>LET’S — SHE SAID SO MUCH INCONSISTENCY IN HER STATEMENTS THAT YOU COULD DRIVE A MACK TRUCK THROUGH. >>SO NAME ONE. WHAT IS — WHAT INCONSISTENCY –>>WELL SHE CAN’T REMEMBER THIS SHE CAN’T REMEMBER THAT, SHE CAN’T REMEMBER, CAN’T REMEMBER, CAN’T REMEMBER. IT IS AUTOMATICALLY — I WISH I WOULD HAVE BEEN THE PROSECUTOR SAY LISTEN I NEED MORE THAN FIVE MINUTES AND I COULD TAKE HER TO THE WOOD SHED.>>WELL GO TO TRACY, RIVERTON, WYOMING, REPUBLICAN LINE. GOOD MORNING, YOUR REACTION TO THE OPENING ROUND OF QUESTIONING?>>WELL I THINK IT IS JUST — JUST HORRID — >>LET ME STOP YOU, SENATOR KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND IS SPEAKING TO REPORTERS. >>IT IS EXTRAORDINARY. I THINK HER TESTIMONY IS INCREDIBLY HEART FELT AND HONEST AND DELIBERATIVE AND EFFECTIVE AND I DON’T KNOW HOW ANY OF MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES COULD, AFTER HEARING HER TELL HER STORY, COULD NOT ONLY NOT BELIEVE HER BUT COULD POSSIBLY VOTE FOR BRETT KAVANAUGH.>>WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE — [ INAUDIBLE QUESTION ]. >>I THINK THE SENATE IS OUTRAGE OUT AND I THINK IT IS UNFAIR AND I THINK THE FACT THAT MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES DON’T FEEL THEY COULD DO THEIR OWN JOB BY ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS I THINK IS UNFAIR. I THINK TO HAVE A PROSECUTOR ASKING THE QUESTION AS TO — AS IF SHE’S ON TRIAL IS ALSO OUTRAGEOUS. SO I THINK IT IS SET UP TO BE A LIMITED HEARING OF HE SAID, SHE SAID WHICH IS NOT DESIGNED TO GET TO THE FACTS OR THE TRUTH OF THE MATTER. >>DO YOU FIND HER BELIEVABLE?>>I DO. I BELIEVE HER.>>THANK YOU.>>SENATOR GILLIBRAND. AND TRACY, I APOLOGIZE. A LOT OF MOVING PARTS. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM KEY PLAYERS BUT GO AHEAD. >>I FEEL LIKE SHE’S REALLY SCRIPTED AND PUTTING ON A ACT. I ALSO — ALL OF HER INCONSISTENCIES AND WHAT NOT, SHE’S JUST — YOU CAN JUST TELL SHE’S LYING.>>WE’LL GO TO BRENDA, VALLEY PARK, MISSOURI, DEMOCRAT LINE. >>EV, I’M A 76-YEAR-OLD WOMAN WHO WAS SEXUALLY MOLESTED IN THE SECOND GRADE. THIS BRINGS BACK SO MUCH PAIN. THOUGHT I WAS OVER IT, BUT IT’S NOT. YOU WILL NEVER FORGET IT. YOU GET CONFUSED AND YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND IT, BUT YOU NEVER FORGET WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU. WITHOUT MY FAMILY I WOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN ABLE TO GO THROUGH THIS AND NOW I’M 76 YEARS OLD AND I THOUGHT I WAS OVER IT UNTIL I HEARD WHAT HAPPENED TO SOMEONE ELSE AND IT IS JUST — IT IS SUCH A SHAME. >>BRENDA, HOW OLD WERE YOU AT THE TIME. >>I WAS IN THE SECOND GRADE. AND IT WAS A 7th GRADER AT MY SCHOOL. AND YOU KNOW ON RAINY DAYS THEY HAVE YOU MARCH AROUND THE SCHOOL, WE CALL IT BACK THEN BECAUSE THEY COULDN’T LET YOU OUT AND I WOULD SEE HIM AND I WOULD GET SO UPSET AND SO UPSET. I’VE HAD A WEIGHT PROBLEM MY WHOLE LIFE BECAUSE I WAS SO AFRAID THAT SOMEONE WAS GOING TO HURT ME. AND I’M MARRIED AND I HAVE A WONDERFUL FAMILY AND I HAVE A WONDERFUL HUSBAND AND A CHILD AND A GREAT — GREAT GRANDCHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN AND I THOUGHT I WAS OVER THIS AND I HAVE NOT BROUGHT THIS UP FOR YEARS UNTIL I HEARD THIS TESTIMONY AND IT IS JUST BREAKING MY HEART.>>BRENDA, THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SHARING YOUR STORY. WE’RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING. SENATOR JEFF MERKLEY. >>ACROSS FROM THE SEPARATION OF POWERS, THE PRESIDENT IS SUPPOSED TO NOMINATE AND THE SENATE EVALUATES THE RECORD OF THE NOMINEE. HE REACHED OUT TO BLOCK, WITH PRESIDENTIAL PRIVILEGE OR EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, VAST AMOUNTS OF DOCUMENTS RELEVANT TO KAVANAUGH’S OPINIONS, EXPERIENCE AND LIFE. THIS, TO OUR KNOWLEDGE, HAS NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE. THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH IS NOT SUPPOSED TO COMPROMISE THE ROLE OF THE SENATE IN REVIEWING THE RECORD SO THAT IS WHY I FILED SUIT YESTERDAY TO SAY THIS EXTRAORDINARY VIOLATION OF OUR CONSTITUTION MEANS THAT ABSOLUTELY THE PROCEDURE SHOULD BE BLOCKED UNTIL THE SENATE HAS FULL ACCESS TO KAVANAUGH’S ENTIRE RECORD SO WE CAN EVALUATE IT IN FULL FILLING OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY. SO I HOPE IT IS — IT IS UNPRECEDENTED AND UNTESTED GROUND BUT IT IS IMPORTANT TO CALL ATTENTION TO THIS ENORMOUS VIOLATION. SO I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL AS BEING HERE AS CITIZENS BECAUSE WHAT IS GOING ON HERE IS A BATTLE BETWEEN GOVERNMENT BY AND FOR THE POWERFUL, THE 1%, WHICH IS EVERYTHING KAVANAUGH REPRESENTS, AND GOVERNMENT BY AND FOR THE PEOPLE. FOR THE CONSUMERS FOR THE WORKERS AND FOR THE WOMEN OF AMERICA. [ APPLAUSE ]>>THANK YOU FOR WHAT YOU DO — WE SEE THAT. >>YOU’RE WELCOME. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE.>>THANK YOU SO MUCH. >>TO BRING YOUR FEET ON THE STREET, YOUR VOICES TO DEMAND FAIRNESS — FAIRNESS TO THE WOMEN WHO ARE BRINGING THEIR EXPERIENCES FORWARD, FAIRNESS IN TERMS OF THE SENATE APPROPRIATELY EVALUATING NOMINEE KAVANAUGH’S BACKGROUND.>>SENATOR, DOES VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN’S STATEMENT ABOUT FBI INVESTIGATIONS DIMINISH YOUR STATEMENT. >>I’M NOTE FAMILIAR WITH HIS STATEMENT. >>COME ON, IT IS ALL OVER THE NEWS. HE SAID CANDIDATES LIKE JUDGE KAVANAUGH KNEW NOTHING. >>I WOULD HAVE TO TRUST MY OWN OPINION. WHICH IS THAT WHEN — WHEN DR. FORD SAID SHE WOULD LIKE THE FBI TO LOOK INTO THE DETAILS, BECAUSE SHE HAS NOTHING TO HIDE, SHE’S TELLING THE AUTHENTIC AND TRUE STORY, I THINK THAT IS POWERFUL AND I THINK IT IS BEEN A TRADITION. IN FACT MOMENTS AGO, AS I WAS LEAVING A ROOM, I HEARD SENATOR LEAHY REFERRING TO A FACT THAT SUCH A FOLLOW-UP BACKGROUND WORK BY THE FBI IS STANDARD PROCEDURE AND THAT STANDARD PROCEDURE IS BEING VIOLATED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [ APPLAUSE ]>>YOU HAVE A SENSE OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING AND NOW THE DIRKSEN OFFICE BUILDING AND IT 26 AND SENATOR MERKLEY, DEMOCRAT OF OREGON, REFERRING TO A FEDERAL INJUNCTION HE’S FILED TO STOP A FINAL VOTE ON THE NOMINATION OF BRETT KAVANAUGH TO SERVE ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT. THE SHORT BREAK IS JUST ABOUT OVER. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD WILL BE RE-ENTERING THE ROOM AND ANOTHER ROUND OF QUESTIONING, OUR LIVE COVERAGE CONTINUES HERE ON THE C-SPAN NETWORKS. [ GAVEL ]>>>DR. FORD, LET ME ASK YOU A PROCESS QUESTION HERE. WE WERE GOING TO SCHEDULE A BREAK FOR 12:05 THIS LAST BREAK CAME JUST A LITTLE BIT LATER. I DIDN’T CALL IT AT THE RIGHT TIME. WE’RE GOING TO HAVE A VOTE AT 12:40 SO WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE FOR YOU TO GO FROM NOW UNTIL 12:40 WITHOUT A BREAK?>>YES.>>YEAH. OKAY. NOW IT IS SENATOR CORNYN’S TIME SO PROCEED, MISS MITCHELL. >>THANK YOU, SENATOR. I HAVE A BLOW-UP TO MY RIGHT OF THE MAP THAT WAS SHOWN TO YOU. THE ADDRESS THAT IS INDICATED ON HERE AS BELONGING TO YOUR FAMILY IS WHAT ALL OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECORDS SHOW AS BEING YOUR ADDRESS.>>OKAY. >>JUST TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE, I WOULD LIKE TO SHOW YOU A FURTHER OUT ZOOMED OUT PICTURE SO THAT WE CAN PUT IT INTO PERSPECTIVE. SO WE CAN SHOW THE GREATER WASHINGTON AREA. YOU COULD SEE THE BELTWAY ON THAT. THE BELTWAY AREA.>>OKAY.>>AND THEN NUMBER THREE, IF WE COULD LOOK AT THAT, WE DREW A ONE-MILE RADIUS AROUND THE COUNTRY CLUB AND THEN WE CALCULATED FROM THE FURTHER — >>MR. CHAIRMAN, AGAIN, WE DON’T HAVE THESE DOCUMENTS. NO WE’RE NOT. THAT IS WHY SHE SHOWED THREE DIFFERENT DOCUMENTS BECAUSE THEY DEPICT THREE DIFFERENT THINGS SO WE’D LIKE TO SEE ALL THREE DOCUMENTS, PLEASE, SO WE CAN FOLLOW ALONG. >>PROCEED, PLEASE.>>OKAY. LOOKING AT NUMBER — THE THIRD THING HERE, WE CALCULATED THE DISTANCE FROM THE CLOSEST POINT TO YOUR HOUSE FROM A MILE RADIUS OF THE COUNTRY CLUB AND THEN THE FARTHEST POINT, YOU COULD SEE IT IS 6.2 AND 8.2 MILES. AND YOU’VE DESCRIBED THIS AS BEING NEAR THE COUNTRY CLUB, WHEREVER THIS HOUSE WAS, IS THAT RIGHT?>>I WOULD DESCRIBE IT AS SOMEWHERE BETWEEN MY HOUSE AND THE COUNTRY CLUB IN THAT VICINITY THAT IS SHOWN IN YOUR PICTURE.>>OKAY.>>AND THE COUNTRY CLUB IS ABOUT A 20-MINUTE DRIVE FROM MY PARENTS’ HOME. >>A 20 MINUTE DRIVE. AND OF COURSE I’VE MARKED AS THE CROW FLIES. WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT SOMEBODY DROVE YOU SOMEWHERE, EITHER TO THE PARTY, OR HOME FROM THE PARTY?>>CORRECT.>>HAS ANYONE COME FORWARD TO SAY TO YOU, REMEMBER, I WAS THE ONE THAT DROVE YOU HOME?>>NO. >>OKAY. IN YOUR JULY 6 TEST TO THE WASHINGTON POST THAT YOU LOOKED AT EARLIER, YOU SAID THIS HAPPENED IN THE MID ’80s AND IN YOUR LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN YOU SAID IT OCCURRED IN THE EARLY ’80s. >>UH-HUH. >>AND IN YOUR POLYGRAPH SAID IT WAS HIGH SCHOOL SUMMER IN THE ’80s, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE CORRECTIONS YOU REFERRED TO EARLIER. IN THE “WASHINGTON POST” YOU WERE MORE SPECIFIC, YOU SAID EARLY IN 1982 IN YOUR SOPHOMORE YEAR. HOW WERE YOU ABLE TO NARROW DOWN THE TIME FRAME?>>I CAN’T GIVE THE EXACT DATE AND I WOULD LIKE TO BE MORE HELPFUL ABOUT THE DATE AND IF I KNEW WHEN MARK JUDGE WORKED AT THE POTOMAC SAFE WAY, I WOULD BE ABLE TO BE MORE HELPFUL IN THAT WAY. SO I’M JUST USING MEMORIES OF WHEN I GOT MY DRIVER’S LICENSE, I WAS 15 AT THE TIME AND DID NOT DRIVE HOME FROM THAT PARTY OR TO THAT PARTY. AND ONCE I DID HAVE MY DRIVER’S LICENSE, I LIKED TO DRIVE MYSELF.>>I ASSUME THE LEGAL DRIVING AGE WAS 16?>>YES.>>NOW YOU’VE TALKED ABOUT ATTENDING THERAPY. IN YOUR TEXT TO “THE WASHINGTON POST” DATED 7/6. SO THAT’S THE VERY FIRST STATEMENT WE HAVE FROM YOU. YOU PUT IN THERE, QUOTE, HAVE THERAPY RECORDS TALKING ABOUT IT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT. DID YOU ALREADY HAVE YOUR THERAPY RECORDS AT THAT TIME?>>I HAD LOOKED AT THEM ONLINE TO SEE IF THEY EXISTED, YES.>>OKAY SO THIS WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS AVAILABLE TO YOU VIA A COMPUTER, LIKE A PATIENT PORTAL?>>ACTUALLY, NO IT WAS IN THE OFFICE OF A PROVIDER.>>OKAY.>>SHE HELPED ME GO THROUGH THE RECORD TO LOCATE WHETHER I HAD RECORD OF THIS CONVERSATION THAT I HAD REMEMBERED.>>DID YOU SHOW A FULL OR PARTIAL SET OF THOSE MARRIAGE THERAPY RECORDS TO “THE WASHINGTON POST”?>>I DON’T REMEMBER. I REMEMBER SUMMER R SUMMARIZING WHO THEY SAID, DO I DON’T KNOW IF I EVER ACTUALLY GAVE HER THE RECORD.>>SO IT’S POSSIBLE THE REPORTER DID NOT SEE THESE NOTES?>>I DON’T KNOW IF SHE — I CAN’T RECALL WHETHER SHE SAW THEM DIRECTLY, OR IF I JUST TOLD HER WHAT THEY SAID.>>HAVE YOU SHOWN THEM TO ANYONE ELSE BESIDES YOUR COUNSEL?>>JUST THE COUNSEL.>>OKAY. WOULD IT BE FAIR TO SAY THAT BRETT KAVANAGH’S NAME IS NOT LISTED IN THOSE NOTES?>>HIS NAME IS NOT LISTED IN THOSE NOTES. >>WOULD IT ALSO BE FAIR TO SAY THAT THE THERAPIST’S NOTES WE ARE TALKING ABOUT SAY THAT THERE WERE FOUR BOYS IN THE ROOM?>>IT DESCRIBES THE SEXUAL ASSAULT AND IT SAYS ERRONEOUSLY BY FOUR BOYS. SO THE THERAPIST GOT THE CONTENT OF IT WRONG. >>AND YOU CORRECTED THAT TO “THE WASHINGTON POST” REPORTER, CORRECT?>>CORRECT.>>SENATOR WHITEHOUSE?>>THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU DR. BLASEY FORD, A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE PROUD OF YOU TODAY. FROM A PROSECUTOR’S EYE VIEW, ONE OF THE HARDEST THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO DO IS TO SPEAK TO SOMEBODY WHO’S COME FORWARD WITH AN ALLEGATION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND LET THEM KNOW THAT WE CAN’T PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE TO GO FORWARD TO TRIAL. IT’S A HARD DAY FOR THE PROSECUTOR TO DO THAT. AND SO BOTH BECAUSE MAKING A SINCERE AND THOROUGH INVESTIGATIVE EFFORT IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT CONSOATION TO THE VICTIM IN THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, AND BECAUSE IT’S WHAT YOU’RE OBLIGED TO DO PROFESSIONALLY, SINCERE AND THOROUGH INVESTIGATION IS CRITICAL TO THESE CLAIMS IN A PROSECUTOR’S WORLD. IT MAY BE THE MOST BASIC THING THAT WE OWE A VICTIM OR A WITNESS COMING FORWARD IS TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE THEM A FULL, THOROUGH AND SINCERE INVESTIGATION. YOU HAVE MET ALL OF THE STANDARDS OF WHAT I MIGHT CALL PRELIMINARY CREDIBILITY WITH YOUR INITIAL STATEMENT. YOU HAVE VIVID, SPECIFIC AND DETAILED RECOLLECTIONS, SOMETHING PROSECUTORS LOOK FOR. YOUR RECOLLECTIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH KNOWN FACTS. YOU MADE PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENTS, SOMETHING ELSE PROSECUTORS AND LAWYERS LOOK FOR. YOU WERE WILLING TO AND DID TAKE A LIE DETECTOR TEST. AND YOU WERE WILLING TO TESTIFY HERE, HERE YOU ARE, SUBJECT TO PROFESSIONAL CROSS-EXAMINATION BY A PROSECUTOR. SO YOU HAVE MET ANY CONDITION ANY PROSECUTOR COULD EXPECT TO GO FORWARD. AND YET, THERE HAS BEEN NO SINCERE OR THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OF YOUR CLAIMS. YOU SPECIFICALLY ASKED FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION, DID YOU NOT?>>YES.>>AND ARE YOU AWARE THAT WHEN THE FBI BEGINS INVESTIGATING, THEY MIGHT FIND CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE AND THEY MIGHT FIND EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE?>>I DON’T KNOW WHAT EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE.>>YOUR VERSION OF EVENTS HELPFUL TO THE ACCUSED.>>OKAY, YES.>>AND YOU ARE STILL NOT JUST WILLING, BUT INSISTENT THAT THE FBI SHOULD INVESTIGATE YOUR RECOLLECTION AND YOUR CLAIM?>>YES, I FEEL LIKE IT WOULD — I COULD BE MORE HELPFUL IN THAT — IF THAT WAS THE CASE IN PROVIDING SOME OF THE DETAILS THAT MAYBE PEOPLE ARE WANTING TO KNOW ABOUT.>>AND AS WE KNOW, THEY DIDN’T. AND I SUBMIT THAT NEVER, NEVER IN THE HISTORY OF BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS HAS AN INVESTIGATION NOT BEEN PURSUED WHEN NEW CREDIBLE, DEROGATORY INFORMATION WAS BROUGHT FORWARD ABOUT THE NOMINEE OR THE CANDIDATE. I DON’T THINK THIS HAS EVER HAPPENED IN THE HISTORY OF FBI BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS. MAYBE SOMEBODY CAN PROVE ME WRONG, BUT IT’S WILDLY UNUSUAL AND OUT OF CHARACTER. AND IN MY VIEW, IT IS A GRAVE DISSERVICE TO YOU AND I WANT TO TAKE THIS MOMENT TO APOLOGIZE TO YOU FOR THAT AND TO REPORT TO ANYBODY WHO MIGHT BE LISTENING, THAT WHEN SOMEBODY’S WILLING TO COME FORWARD, EVEN UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES, EVEN HAVING BEEN NOT GIVEN THE MODICUM OF COURTESY AND SUPPORT OF A PROPER INVESTIGATION, YOU’VE SHOWN YOURSELF PARTICULARLY PROUD IN DOING THAT AND THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THIS DECISION BEING THE ONLY BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION IN HISTORY TO BE STOPPED AS DEROGATORY HISTORY BECAME FORWARD, IS EIGHT MEN, DR. WRAY OF THE FBI AND EIGHT OTHER GENTLEMEN. JUDGE KAVANAGH’S TESTIMONY HAS NOT BEEN CORROBORATED UNDER OATH, HAS NOT BEEN INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI, TELLS YOU ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT HOW CREDIBLE THIS PERFORMANCE IS. THE VERY BARE MINIMUM THAT A PERSON WHO COMES FORWARD IS OWED IS SINCERE AND THOROUGH INVESTIGATION AND YOU’VE BEEN DENIED THAT AND I WILL MAKE A PERSONAL PLEDGE TO YOU HERE THAT HOWEVER LONG IT TAKES, IN WHATEVER FORUM I CAN DO IT, WHENEVER IT IS POSSIBLE, I WILL DO EARNING IN MY POWER TO MAKE SURE THAT YOUR CLAIMS GET A FULL AND PROPER INVESTIGATION AND NOT JUST THIS. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.>>THANK YOU.>>SINCE THIS ISSUE HAS COME UP SO MANY TIMES, I WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT. THE NEW YORKER PUBLISHED ANONYMOUS ACCOUNT OF ALLEGATIONS SEPTEMBER THE 14th. TWO DAYS LATER DR. FORD IDENTIFIED HERSELF AS A VICTIM IN A POST ARTICLE, DETAILING HER ALLEGATIONS. I IMMEDIATELY DIRECTED MY STAFF TO INVESTIGATE. SEPTEMBER 17, DR. FORD’S COUNSEL WENT ON SEVERAL TELEVISION SHOWS REQUESTING THAT HER CLIENT HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO TELL HER STORY. THE SAME DAY I SCHEDULED A HEARING FOR MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 24th, GIVING DR. FORD A WEEK TO PREPARE HER TESTIMONY AND COME TO WASHINGTON, D.C. ON SEPTEMBER 17, COMMITTEE INVESTIGATIVE STAFF REACHED OUT TO DR. FORD AND JUDGE KAVANAGH TO SCHEDULE FOLLOW-UP INTERVIEWS WITH — UNDER CRIMINAL PENALTY, DR. FORD DECLINED. IN HIS INTERVIEW ON SEPTEMBER 17, JUDGE KAVANAGH DENIED THE ALLEGATIONS AND REQUESTED A HEARING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. DEMOCRATIC STAFF REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT INTERVIEW. THE NEXT DAY, SEPTEMBER 18th, INVESTIGATIVE STAFF CONTACTED MARK JUDGE AND REQUESTED AN INTERVIEW. MARK JUDGE SUBMITTED A STATEMENT, UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY, DENYING KNOWLEDGE OF THE PARTY DESCRIBED BY DR. FORD AND STATES THAT HE NEVER SAW BRETT AT THE — IN THE MANNER DESCRIBED BY DR. FORD. AND I CAN GO ON AND ON ABOUT THAT. BUT WE GOT TO REALIZE THAT WHAT WE HAVE DONE IN THIS CASE, OF ALL OF THE TIME YOU GO THROUGH A BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION BY THE FBI, THEN IT COMES TO US. AND THERE’S ALWAYS SOME HOLES IN IT THAT WE HAVE TO FOLLOW UP ON, AND BESIDES — >>MR. CHAIRMAN.>>WE’RE RESPONDING TO DR. FORD’S REQUEST TO TELL HER STORY, THAT’S WHY WE’RE HERE.>>MR. CHAIRMAN — >>MS. MITCHELL.>>MR. CHAIRMAN, I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT WHAT SENATOR WHITEHOUSE SAID, IN THE ANITA HILL CASE. >>CAN WE HEAR FROM DR. FORD?>>GEORGE BUSH ORDERED THE INVESTIGATION BE OPENED AGAIN. >>DR. MITCHELL, WILL YOU PROCEED FOR SENATOR LEE?>>THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. DR. FORD, “THE WASHINGTON POST” REPORTED IN THEIR SEPTEMBER 16 ARTICLE THAT YOU DID SHOW THEM THERAPIST NOTES, IS THAT INCORRECT?>>I DON’T REMEMBER PHYSICALLY SHOWING HER A NOTE. PERHAPS MY COUNSEL DID. I DON’T REMEMBER PHYSICALLY SHOWING HER MY COPY OF THE NOTE.>>OKAY.>>BUT I JUST DON’T REMEMBER. I’M SORRY. I HAVE RETRIEVED A PHYSICAL COPY OF THOSE MEDICAL RECORDS.>>OKAY, THANK YOU.>>YOU ALSO ATTENDED INDIVIDUAL THERAPY. DID YOU SHOW ANY OF THOSE NOTES TO THE REPORTER FOR “THE WASHINGTON POST”?>>AGAIN, I DON’T REMEMBER IF I SHOWED HER, LIKE, SOMETHING THAT I SUMMARIZED OR IF I JUST SPOKE ABOUT IT. OR IF SHE SAW IT IN MY COUNSEL’S OFFICE. I CAN’T — I DON’T KNOW FOR SURE. BUT I CERTAINLY SPOKE WITH HER ABOUT THE 2013 RECORD WITH THE INDIVIDUAL THERAPIST.>>AND BRETT KAVANAGH’S NAME IS NOT IN THOSE NOTES, IS THAT CORRECT?>>CORRECT. >>IN READING “THE WASHINGTON POST” ARTICLE. IT MENTIONS THAT THIS INCIDENT THAT WE’RE HERE ABOUT CONTRIBUTED TO ANXIETY AND PTSD PROBLEMS WITH WHICH YOU HAVE STRUGGLED. THE WORD CONTRIBUTED, DOES THAT MEAN THAT THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED THAT HAVE ALSO CONTRIBUTED TO ANXIETY AND PTSD?>>I THINK THAT’S A GREAT QUESTION. I THINK THE IDEOLOGY OF ANXIETY AND PTSD IS MULTIFACTORIA. WE CONSIDER IT A RISK FACTOR, SO THAT WOULD ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE SYMPTOMS THAT I NOW HAVE. THAT DOESN’T MEAN THAT OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN MY LIFE WOULD MAKE IT WORSE OR BETTER, THERE ARE OTHER RISK FACTORS AS WELL.>>SO HAVE THERE BEEN OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE ANXIETY AND PTSD THAT YOU SUFFERED?>>I THINK THERE’S SORT OF BUY LOGICAL PREDISPOSITIONS THAT EVERYONE HAS FOR CERTAIN DISORDERS. SO I DON’T KNOW IF I WOULD HAVE THE BIOLOGICAL PREDISPOSITION TO ANXIETY. >>WHAT ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL?>>ENVIRONMENTAL? NOTHING THAT I CAN THINK OF. CERTAINLY NOTHING AS STRIKING AS THAT EVENT.>>IN YOUR INTERVIEW WITH THE “WASHINGTON POST,” YOU SAID YOU TOLD YOUR HUSBAND BEFORE YOU WERE MARRIED THAT YOU HAD EXPERIENCED SEXUAL ABUSE. IT AND LATER YOU TOLD HIM THAT YOU WERE THE VICTIM OF A SEXUAL ASSAULT. WERE THESE THE SAME INCIDENT?>>YES.>>ON EITHER OF THESE TWO TIMES, DID YOU USE ANY NAMES?>>NO.>>MAY I ASK, DR. FORD, HOW DID YOU GET TO WASHINGTON?>>IN AN AIRPLANE.>>OKAY. I ASK THAT BECAUSE IT’S BEEN REPORTED BY THE PRESS THAT YOU WOULD NOT SUBMIT TO AN INTERVIEW WITH THE COMMITTEE BECAUSE OF YOUR FIRE OF FLYING. IS THAT TRUE?>>WELL, I WAS HOPING THAT THEY WOULD COME TO ME. BUT THEN I REALIZED THAT WAS AN UNREALISTIC REQUEST.>>IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A QUICKER TRIP FOR ME.>>YES.>>SO THAT WAS CERTAINLY WHAT I WAS HOPING WAS TO AVOID HAVING TO GET ON AN AIRPLANE. BUT I EVENTUALLY WAS ABLE TO GET UP THEGUMPTION WITH THE HELP OF SOME FRIENDS TO GET ON A PLANE.>>WHEN YOU WERE HERE BACK IN AUGUST, END OF JULY, AUGUST, HOW DID YOU GET HERE?>>ALSO BY AIRPLANE. I COME HERE ONCE A YEAR DURING THE SUMMER TO VISIT MY FAMILY.>>OKAY. >>I’M SORRY, NOT HERE, I GO TO DELAWARE.>>IN FACT YOU FLY FAIRLY FREQUENTLY FOR YOUR HOBBIES AND YOU HAVE HAD TO FLY FOR YOUR WORK, IS THAT TRUE?>>CORRECT, UNFORTUNATELY.>>YOU WERE CONSULTING BY A STATISTICIAN IN SIDNEY, AUSTRALIA, CORRECT?>>I DON’T THINK I’LL MAKE IT TO AUSTRALIA.>>IT IS LONG.>>I ALSO SAW ON YOUR — YOU IN TALKED ABOUT HAWAII, POLYNESIAN ISLANDS. HAVE YOU BEEN TO ALL OF THOSE PLACES?>>CORRECT. >>AND YOUR INTERESTS ALSO INCLUDE OCEANOGRAPHY AND HAWAIIAN AND TAHITIAN STUDIES.>>THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, DR. FORD, IN MY OLD JOB AS A PROSECUTOR, WE INVESTIGATED REPORTS LIKE THIS, SO IT GAVE ME A WINDOW ON THE TYPES OF CASES THAT HURT WOMEN AND HURT ALL OF US. AND I WOULD ALWAYS TELL THE WOMEN THAT CAME BEFORE US THAT THEY WERE GOING TO HAVE TO TELL THEIR STORY BEFORE A JURY BOX OF STRANGERS. AND YOU HAVE HAD TO TELL YOUR STORY BEFORE THE ENTIRE NATION. FOR SO MANY YEARS, PEOPLE SWEPT CASES LIKE YOURS UNDER THE RUG, THEY WOULD SAY WHAT HAPPENS INSIDE A HOUSE DIDN’T BELONG INSIDE A COURTHOUSE. WELL TIMES HAVE CHANGED. SO I JUST WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING FORWARD TO SHARE YOUR STORY WITH US. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU HAVE TAKEN A POLYGRAPH TEST, DR. FORD, THAT FOUND YOU WERE TRUTHFUL WHEN YOU TOLD WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU. CAN YOU TELL US HOW YOU DECIDED TO TAKE THAT TEST?>>I WAS MEETING WITH ATTORNEYS, I WAS INTERVIEWING VARIOUS ATTORNEYS AND THE ATTORNEYS ASKED IF I WAS WILLING TO TAKE IT AND I SAID ABSOLUTELY. THAT SAID, IT WAS ALMOST AS ANXIETY PROVOKING AS AN AIRPLANE FLIGHT.>>AND YOU’VE TALKED ABOUT YOUR RECOLLECTIONS AND SEEING MARK JUDGE AT THAT SAFEWAY, IF THERE HAD BEEN AN APPROPRIATE REOPENING OF THIS BACKGROUND CHECK AND FBI INTERVIEWS, WOULD THAT HELP YOU FIND THE TIME PERIOD IF YOU KNEW WHEN HE WORKED AT THAT SAFEWAY?>>I THINK I WOULD FIND IT HELPFUL IF I COULD BE PROVIDED THAT DATE THROUGH THE IRS OR ANYTHING.>>I ASSUME THAT’S TRUE, BUT UNDER FEDERAL LAW, BUT STATEMENTS MADE TO MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS ARE CONSIDERED TO BE MORE RELIABLE, THERE’S A FEDERAL RULE OF EVIDENCE ABOUT THIS. YOU TOLD YOUR COUNSELOR ABOUT THIS BACK IN 2012, IS THAT RIGHT?>>MY THERAPIST?>>UH-HUH. >>MY INDIVIDUAL THERAPIST, CORRECT. >>AND I UNDERSTAND THAT YOUR HUSBAND WAS ALSO PRESENT WHEN YOU SPOKE ABOUT THIS INCIDENT IN FRONT OF A COUNSELOR AND HE RECALLS YOU USING JUDGE KAVANAGH’S NAME, IS THAT RIGHT?>>YES, I JUST HAVE TO SLOW DOWN A MINUTE, BECAUSE I MIGHT HAVE BEEN CONFUSING. SO THERE WERE TWO SEPARATE INCIDENTS WHERE IT’S REFLECTED IN MY MEDICAL RECORDS. I REFLECTED ABOUT IT MORE THAN THOSE TWO TIMES, BUT THERAPISTS TYPICALLY DON’T WRITE DOWN CONTEMPT, THEY’RE TYPICALLY TRACKING YOUR SYMPTOMS. I JUST HAPPEN TO HAVE REMEMBRANCES OF TWICE, THE FIRST TIME WAS IN COUPLE’S THERAPY, IN THE QUIBBLING OVER THE REMODEL. AND THEN IN 2013 WITH MY INDIVIDUAL THERAPIST.>>SO IF SOMEONE WOULD HAVE ACTUALLY DONE THE INVESTIGATION, YOUR HUSBAND WOULD BE ABLE TO SAY YOU NAMED HIS NAME AT THAT TIME?>>CORRECT. 2012.>>I KNOW YOU’VE BEEN CONCERNED WITH YOUR PRIVACY THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS. AND YOU FIRST REQUESTED THAT YOUR ACCOUNT BE KEPT CONFIDENT — CONFIDENTIAL, CAN YOU BRIEFLY TELL US WHY?>>AS I STATED ONCE BEFORE, I WAS UNSUCCESSFUL IN GETTING MY INFORMATION TO YOU BEFORE THE CANDIDATE WAS CHOSEN. MY ORIGINAL INTENT WAS TO GET THE INFORMATION WHEN THERE WAS STILL A LIST OF OTHER CANDIDATES AVAILABLE. AND ONCE THAT WAS NOT SUCCESSFUL, AND I SAW THAT PERSONS WERE VERY SUPPORTIVE OF THE NOMINEE, I CHECKED IT ALL SUMMER AND REALIZED THAT WHEN I WAS CALCULATING THAT RISK-BENEFIT RATIO, THAT IT LOOKED LIKE I WAS GOING TO JUST SUFFER ONLY FOR NO REASON.>>YOU KNOW, FROM MY EXPERIENCE WITH MEMORY, I REMEMBER DISTINCTLY THINGS THAT HAPPENED TO ME IN HIGH SCHOOL OR HAPPENED TO ME IN COLLEGE, BUT DON’T EXACTLY REMEMBER THE DATE. I DON’T EXACTLY REMEMBER THE TIME. I SOMETIMES MAY NOT EVEN REMEMBER THE EXACT PLACE WHERE IT OCCURRED. BUT I REMEMBER THE INTERACTION. AND MANY PEOPLE ARE FOCUSED TODAY ON WHAT YOU’RE NOT ABLE TO REMEMBER ABOUT THAT NIGHT. I ACTUALLY THINK YOU REMEMBER A LOT. I’M GOING TO PHRASE IT A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. CAN YOU TELL US WHAT YOU DON’T FORGET ABOUT THAT NIGHT?>>THE STAIRWELL, THE LIVING ROOM, THE BEDROOM, THE BED ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ROOM AS YOU WALK INTO THE ROOM, THERE WAS A BED TO THE RIGHT. THE BATHROOM IN CLOSE PROXIMITY. THE LAUGHTER, THE UPROAROUS LAUGHTER. THE ATTEMPT TO ESCAPE AND THE FINAL ABILITY TO DO SO.>>THANK YOU, DR. FORD. >>DR. FORD, I WANT TO CORRECT THE RECORD, BUT IT’S NOT SOMETHING I’M SAYING THAT YOU STATED WRONGLY BECAUSE YOU MAY NOT KNOW THE FACT THAT WHEN YOU SAID YOU DIDN’T THINK IT WAS POSSIBLE FOR US TO GO TO CALIFORNIA AS A COMMITTEE OR INVESTIGATORS TO GO TO CALIFORNIA TO TALK TO YOU, WE DID IN FACT OFFER THAT TO YOU. AND WE HAD THE CAPABILITY OF DOING IT AND WE WOULD HAVE DONE IT ANYWHERE OR ANY TIME.>>THANK YOU.>>AND MR. CHAIRMAN, COULD I PUT THE POLYGRAPH RESULTS ON THE RECORD PLEASE? THE POLYGRAPH RESULTS IN THE RECORD. IS THERE ANY OBJECTION?>>LET US SEE THE CHART?>>THE POLYGRAPH? YOU WANT TO ALL SEE IT?>>WILL YOU HOLD IT JUST A MINUTE?>>I THINK YOU MAY HAVE IT?>>CAN WE HAVE THE UNDERLYING CHARTS TOO?>>THE UNDERLYING CHARTS?>>I HAVE THE POLYGRAPH RESULTS THAT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO PUT IN THE RECORD. I’LL DEAL WITH THE CHARTS AFTER THAT. COULD I PUT THE POLYGRAPH TESTS IN THE RECORD.>>MR. CHAIRMAN, WE WERE — WE HAD PROPOSED HAVING THE POLYGRAPH EXAMINER TESTIFY AS YOU KNOW. IF THAT HAD HAPPENED, THE FULL INFORMATION HE HAD SUPPORTING HIS EXAMINATION WOULD HAVE BEEN PROVIDED, YOU REJECTED THAT REQUEST, SO WHAT WE DID PROVIDE IS THE POLYGRAPH REPORT WHICH IS WHAT THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE HAVE.>>AND ON SEPTEMBER 24, THIS WAS ACTUALLY SENT TO YOUR CHIEF COUNSEL. AND I JUST WANT TO SHARE IT WITH AMERICA SO THEY HAVE THIS REPORT AS WELL.>>WE WILL ACCEPT WITHOUT OBJECTION WHAT YOU HAVE REQUESTED TO INCLUDE AND WE ALSO REQUEST THE OTHER MATERIALS THAT I HAVE JUST STATED. >>BUT MR. CHAIRMAN, YOU WOULDN’T ALLOW THE POLYGRAPH EXAMINER TO TESTIFY, NOR WOULD YOU ALLOW MARK JUDGE TO TESTIFY. THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING THIS REPORT IN THE RECORD, BUT THAT IS THE REASON WE DON’T HAVE THE UNDERLYING INFORMATION FOR YOU.>>YOU GOT WHAT YOU WANTED, SO I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD BE SATISFIED.>>I AM SATISFIED.>>WHEN WAS THE POLYGRAPH ADMINISTERED?>>IT WAS ADMINISTERED ON AUGUST 7, 2018. AND THE DATE OF THE REPORT IS AUGUST 10, 2018.>>WHEN WAS IT PROVIDED TO THE COMMITTEE?>>LET’S JUST SEE IF WE CAN’T DO THIS IN A MORE ORDERLY WAY.>>HE WAS ASKING AND I HAVE IT HERE AND YOU HAVE IT AS WELL. IT’S SEPTEMBER 26.>>ACCEPTED.>>MS. MITCHELL FOR SENATOR CRUZ.>>THANK YOU.>>DR. FORD, WE TALKED ABOUT THE DAY AND THE NIGHT THAT YOU’VE DESCRIBED IN THE SUMMER OF 1982 AND THANK YOU FOR BEING WILLING TO DO THAT. I KNOW IT’S DIFFICULT. I WOULD LIKE TO SHIFT GEARS AND DISCUSS THE LAST SEVERAL MONTHS.>>OKAY.>>IN YOUR STATEMENT, YOU SAID THAT ON JULY 6, YOU HAD A, QUOTE, SENSE OF URGENCY TO RELAY THE INFORMATION TO THE SENATE AND THE PRESIDENT. DID YOU CONTACT EITHER THE SENATE OR THE PRESIDENT ON OR BEFORE JULY 6?>>NO, I DID NOT. I DID NOT KNOW HOW TO DO THAT.>>OKAY. PRIOR TO JULY 6, HAD YOU SPOKEN TO ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS. AND WHEN I SAY CONGRESS, I MEAN THE SENATE OR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OR ANY CONGRESSIONAL STAFF MEMBERS ABOUT YOUR ALLEGATIONS.>>NO.>>WHY DID YOU CONTACT “THE WASHINGTON POST” ON JULY 6?>>SO I WAS PANICKING BECAUSE I KNEW THE TIMELINE WAS SHORT FOR THE DECISION. AND PEOPLE WERE GIVING ME ADVISE. ON THE BEACH. PEOPLE WHO DON’T KNOW ABOUT THE PROCESSES, BUT THEY WERE GIVING ME ADVICE. AND MANY PEOPLE TOLD ME, YOU NEED TO HIRE A LAWYER, AND I DIDN’T DO THAT. I DIDN’T UNDERSTAND WHY I WOULD NEED A LAWYER. SOMEBODY SAID, CALL THE “NEW YORK TIMES,” CALL “THE WASHINGTON POST.” PUT IN ANONYMOUS TIP. GO TO YOUR CONGRESS PERSON, AND WHEN I WEIGHED THOSE OPTIONS, I FELT LIKE THE BEST OPTION WAS TO TRY TO DO THE CIVIC ROUTE, WHICH IS TO GO TO MY CONGRESS PERSON WHO HAPPENS TO BE ANNA ESCHEW. SO I CALLED HER OFFICE AND I ALSO PUT IN THE ANONYMOUS TIP TO “THE WASHINGTON POST,” UNFORTUNATELY, NEITHER GOT BACK TO ME BEFORE THE SELECTION OF THE NOMINEE.>>YOU TESTIFIED THAT CONGRESSWOMAN ESCHEW’S OFFICE CONTACTED YOU ON SEPTEMBER 9.>>THEY CONTACTED ME ON THE DAY THAT THE NOMINEE WAS ANNOUNCED.>>HAVE YOU TALKED ABOUT ANYONE IN HER OFFICE BEFORE THE DATE OF JULY 9.>>I TOLD THE RECEPTIONIST ON THE PHONE. >>ON JULY 10, YOU TEXTED “THE WASHINGTON POST” AGAIN, WHICH WAS REALLY THE THIRD TIME, IS THAT RIGHT? SECOND DATE, THIRD TIME.>>LET’S SEE. ONE MOMENT. CORRECT.>>AND YOU TEXTED, BEEN ADVISED TO CONTACT SENATORS OR “NEW YORK TIMES.” HAVEN’T HEARD BACK FROM “WASHINGTON POST.” WHO ADVISED YOU TO CONTACT SENATORS OR THE “NEW YORK TIMES”?>>BEACH FRIENDS. COMING UP WITH IDEAS OF HOW I COULD TRY TO GET TO PEOPLE. BECAUSE PEOPLE WEREN’T RESPONDING TO ME VERY QUICKLY. SO VERY QUICKLY THEY RESPONDED TO THAT TEXT, FOR WHAT UNKNOWN REASON. ONCE I SENT THAT ENCRYPTED TEXT THEY RESPONDED VERY QUICKLY. >>DID YOU CONTACT THE “NEW YORK TIMES”?>>NO.>>WHY NOT?>>I WASN’T INTERESTED IN PURSUING THE MEDIA ROUTE PARTICULARLY, SO I FELT LIKE ONE WAS ENOUGH, “THE WASHINGTON POST.” AND I WAS NERVOUS ABOUT DOING THAT. MY PREFERENCE WAS TO TALK WITH MY CONGRESSPERSON.>>”THE WASHINGTON POST” TEXTED BACK THAT SOMEONE WOULD GET YOU IN TOUCH WITH A REPORTER. DID YOU SUBSEQUENTLY TALK TO A REPORTER WITH “THE WASHINGTON POST”?>>YES. UNDER THE ENCRYPTED APP AND OFF THE RECORD.>>OKAY. WHO WAS THAT REPORTER?>>EMMA BROWN.>>THE PERSON WHO ULTIMATELY WROTE THE STORY ON SEPTEMBER 16?>>CORRECT.>>OKAY. DID YOU TALK TO ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS, AND AGAIN, REMEMBER, CONGRESS INCLUDES THE SENATE OR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OR ANY CONGRESSIONAL STAFF MEMBERS ABOUT YOUR ALLEGATIONS BETWEEN JULY 10 AND THE JULY — AND JULY 30th, WHICH WAS THE DATE OF YOUR LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN?>>YES, I MET WITH CONGRESSWOMAN ESCHEW’S STAFF AND I THEY’S JULY 18. THE WEDNESDAY AND THEN ON THE FRIDAY, I MET WITH THE CONGRESSWOMAN HERSELF.>>OKAY.>>WHEN YOU MET WITH HER, DID YOU MEET WITH HER ALONE? OR DID SOMEONE COME WITH YOU?>>I WAS ALONE. SHE HAD A STAFF PERSON.>>OKAY. WHAT DID YOU TALK ABOUT WITH CONGRESSWOMAN ESCHEW AND HER STAFF ON JULY 18 AND THE 20th?>>I DESCRIBED THE NIGHT OF THE INCIDENT. AND WE SPENT TIME SPEAKING ABOUT THAT. AND I ASKED HER HOW TO — WHAT MY OPTIONS WERE IN TERMS OF GOING FORWARD AND HOW TO GET THAT INFORMATION RELAYED FORWARD AND ALSO TALKED TO HER ABOUT FEARS OF WHETHER THIS WAS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION AND SHE DISCUSSED THE CONSTITUENT CONFIDENTIALITY PRINCIPLE.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY, I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO SUBMIT FOR THE RECORD FIVE ARTICLES, ONE ENTITLED WHY DO SEXUAL ASSAULT MEMORIES STICK.>>WITHOUT OBJECTION SO ORDERED.>>DR. FORD, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR COMING TO TESTIFY IN FRONT OF US TODAY. YOU CAME FORWARD WITH VERY SERIOUS AND RELEVANT INFORMATION ABOUT A NOMINEE FOR A LIFETIME POSITION ON OUR SUPREME COURT. YOU DIDN’T HAVE TO AND I KNOW YOU HAVE DONE IT AT GREAT PERSONAL COST. THIS IS A PUBLIC SERVICE AND I WANT YOU TO KNOW THAT I’M GRATEFUL TO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM YOU DIRECTLY TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO JUST FIRST FOLLOW UP ON THAT LINE OF QUESTIONING MS. MITCHELL WAS FOLLOWING. BECAUSE I THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE DON’T REALIZE THAT YOU CHOSE TO COME FORWARD WITH YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT JUDGE KAVANAGH BEFORE HE WAS NOMINATED TO THE SUPREME COURT. DO I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY THAT WHEN YOU FIRST REACHED OUT TO CONGRESSWOMAN ESCHEW AND TO “THE WASHINGTON POST” TIP LINE, THAT WAS BEFORE HE WAS NOMINATED, IS THAT CORRECT?>>CORRECT. >>AND IF I UNDERSTOOD YOUR TESTIMONY EARLIER, YOU WERE MOTIVATED BY A SENSE OF CIVIC DUTY AND FRANKLY A HOPE THAT SOME OTHER HIGHLY QUALIFIED NOMINEE WOULD BE PICKED, NOT OUT OF A MOTIVATION AT A LATE STAGE TO HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE FINAL DECISION?>>CORRECT. I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY IMPORTANT TO GET THE INFORMATION DIRECTLY TO YOU, BUT I DIDN’T KNOW HOW TO DO IT WHILE THERE WAS STILL A SHORT LIST OF CANDIDATES.>>THANK YOU, DOCTOR. ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVORS DON’T REPORT THEIR ASSAULTS. BASED ON YOUR EXPERIENCE, I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HEARING FROM YOU ABOUT THIS, BECAUSE YOU BORE THIS ALONE. YOU BORE THIS ALONE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. AND IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US TO BETTER UNDERSTAND THE WAYS THAT THAT’S IMPACTED YOUR WHOLE LIFE.>>WELL, IT’S IMPACTED ME AT DIFFERENT STAGES OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF MY LIFE. SO THE IMMEDIATE IMPACT WAS PROBABLY THE WORST, SO THE FIRST FOUR YEARS, I THINK I DESCRIBED EARLIER A FAIRLY DISASTROUS FIRST TWO YEARS OF UNDERGRADUATE STUDIES AT UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA WHERE I WAS FINALLY ABLE TO PULL MYSELF TOGETHER AND THEN ONCE COPING WITH THE IMMEDIATE IMPACTS, THE SHORT-TERM IMPACTS, I EXPERIENCED LONGER TERM IMPACTS OF ANXIETY AND RELATIONSHIP CHALLENGES.>>THANK YOU FOR SHARING THAT. AND YET YOU WENT ON TO GET A PhD FROM USC, IS THAT CORRECT?>>CORRECT. >>AS YOU PREDICTED, THERE IS A WIDE RANGE OF RESPONSES TO YOUR COMING FORWARD. SOME THOUSANDS OF SURVIVORS HAVE BEEN MOTIVATED AND INSPIRED BY YOUR COURAGE, OTHERS HAVE BEEN CRITICAL. AND AS I HAVE REVIEWED THE WIDE RANGE OF REACTIONS, I HAVE BEEN TROUBLED BY THE EXCUSE OFFERED BY TOO MANY THAT THIS WAS A HIGH SCHOOL INCIDENT AND BOYS WILL BE BOYS. TO ME THAT’S JUST FAR TOO LOW A STANDARD FOR THE CONDUCT OF BOYS AND MEN IN OUR COUNTRY. IF YOU WOULD, I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR REACTION TO THE EXCUSE THAT BOYS WILL BE BOYS.>>I CAN ONLY SPEAK FOR HOW IT HAS IMPACTED ME GREATLY FOR THE LAST 36 YEARS, EVEN THOUGH I WAS 15 YEARS OLD AT THE TIME AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE YOUNGER YOU ARE WHEN THESE THINGS HAPPEN, IT COULD POSSIBLY HAVE WORSE IMPACT THAN WHEN YOUR BRAIN IS FULLY DEVELOPED AND YOU HAVE BETTER COPING SKILLS THAT YOU HAVE DEVELOPED.>>EXPERTS HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT HOW IT’S COMMON FOR SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVORS TO REMEMBER SOME FACTS ABOUT THE EXPERIENCE VERY SHARPLY AND VERY CLEARLY BUT NOT OTHERS. AND THAT HAS TO DO WITH A SURVIVAL MODE THAT WE GO INTO WHEN EXPERIENCING TRAUMA. IS THAT YOUR EXPERIENCE AND IS THAT SOMETHING YOU CAN HELP THE LAY PERSON UNDERSTAND?>>YES, I WAS DEFINITELY EXPERIENCING THE FIGHT OR FLIGHT MODE, IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE REFERRING TO?>>YES.>>SO I WAS DEFINITELY EXPERIENCING THE SURGE OF CORTISOL AND NOREPINEPHRINE FOR MY ABILITY TO GET OUT OF THE SITUATION. BUT ALSO SOME OTHER LUCKY EVENTS THAT OCCURRED THAT ALLOWED ME TO GET OUT OF THE EVENT.>>DR. FORD, WE ARE GRATEFUL THAT YOU CAME THROUGH IT AND THAT YOU SHARED YOUR ACCOUNT WITH US AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. I THINK YOU HAVE PROVIDED IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR MEETING YOUR CIVIC DUTY. I WISH WE COULD HAVE PROVIDED FOR YOU A MORE THOROUGH HEARING FOR YOU. I THINK ASKING THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE THIS MATTER FULLY WAS NOT ASKING TOO MUCH. I THINK ASKING TO HAVE THE OTHER INDIVIDUAL INVOLVED IN YOUR ASSAULT, MARK JUDGE APPEAR BEFORE US TODAY WAS NOT ASKING TOO MUCH. I’M GRATEFUL YOU CAME FORWARD AND I’M GRATEFUL FOR YOUR COURAGE THAT SETS AN IMPORTANT EXAMPLE.>>DR. FORD WE TALKED IN JULY ABOUT YOU MEETING WITH CONGRESSWOMAN ESCHEW. DID YOU TALK IN REALITY TO ANY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS OR CONGRESSIONAL STAFF?>>I DID NOT. WHERE I LIVE, THE CONGRESSMAN IS A DEMOCRAT.>>WAS IT COMMUNICATED TO YOU BY YOUR COUNSEL OR SOMEONE ELSE THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD ASKED TO INTERVIEW YOU AND THAT THEY OFFERED TO COME OUT TO CALIFORNIA TO DO SO?>>WE’RE GOING TO OBJECT, MR. CHAIRMAN, TO ANY CALL FOR PRIVILEGED CONVERSATION BETWEEN COUNSEL AND DR. FORD.>>COULD YOU VALIDATE THE FACT THAT THE OFFER WAS MADE WITHOUT HER SAYING A WORD?>>IS IT POSSIBLE FOR THAT QUESTION TO BE ANSWERED WITHOUT VIOLATING ANY COUNSEL RELATIONSHIPS?>>CAN I SAY SOMETHING? DO YOU MIND IF I SAY SOMETHING TO YOU DIRECTLY?>>YES.>>I JUST APPRECIATE THAT OFFER, I WASN’T CLEAR ON WHAT THE OFFER WAS, IF YOU WERE GOING TO COME OUT TO SEE ME, I WOULD HAVE HAPPILY HOSTED YOU AND BEEN HAPPY TO SPEAK WITH YOU OUT THERE. BUT IT WASN’T CLEAR TO ME THAT THAT WAS THE CASE.>>DOES THAT TAKE CARE OF YOUR QUESTION?>>YES, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.>>PROCEED THEN.>>BEFORE JULY 30th, THE DATE ON YOUR LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN, HAD YOU RETAINED COUNSEL WITH REGARD TO THESE ALLEGATIONS?>>NO. I DIDN’T THINK — I DIDN’T UNDERSTAND WHY I WOULD NEED LAWYERS, ACTUALLY. SO I JUST DIDN’T.>>A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE THAT FEELING. LET’S TALK ABOUT THE LETTER THAT YOU WROTE ON JULY 30th. YOU ASKED SENATOR FEINSTEIN TO MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY, QUOTE — >>WAIT UNTIL SHE RETRIEVES IT.>>I’M JUST TRYING TO LOOK FOR IT.>>SO STOP THE CLOCK, WILL YOU?>>I FOUND IT.>>SO YOU WANTED TO MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY UNTIL WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK, AND YOU REMAINED ON VEGAS IN THE MID-ATLANTIC UNTIL AUGUST 7, IS THAT CORRECT?>>THE LAST LINE, IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE — I’M NOW JUST CATCHING UP WITH YOU, SORRY I’M A LITTLE SLOWER. MY MIND IS GETTING TIRED. I’M IN THE AREA IF YOU WISH TO DISCUSS. YES, I WAS IN DELAWARE UNTIL AUGUST 7, AND FROM THERE I WENT TO NEW HAMPSHIRE AND THEN BACK TO CALIFORNIA. >>DID YOU TALK TO ANYBODY ABOUT THIS LETTER BEFORE YOU SENT IT?>>I TALKED WITH ANNA ESCHEW’S OFFICE.>>OKAY AND WHY DID YOU TALK TO CONGRESSWOMAN ESCHEW ABOUT THAT LETTER?>>BECAUSE THEY WERE WILLING TO FORWARD IT TO DIANNE FIENSTEIN.>>DID ANYONE HELP YOU WRITE THE LETTER?>>NO.>>DID YOU OR ANYONE ON YOUR BEHALF SPEAK TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN PERSONALLY OR WITH ANY SENATE STAFFER?>>YES, I HAD A PHONE CALL WITH SENATOR FEINSTEIN?>>AND WHEN WAS THAT?>>THAT WAS WHILE I WAS STILL IN DELAWARE SO BEFORE AUGUST 7.>>OKAY, AND HOW MANY TIMINGS DID YOU SPEAK WITH SENATOR FEINSTEIN?>>ONCE.>>WHAT DID YOU TALK ABOUT?>>SHE ASKED ME SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE INCIDENT. AND I ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS. >>AND WAS THAT THE EXTENT OF THE CONVERSATION?>>YES, I ANSWERED THE PHONE CALL. >>DID YOU GIVE SENATOR FEINSTEIN OR ANYONE ELSE PERMISSION TO RELEASE THAT LETTER?>>NOT THAT I KNOW OF.>>BETWEEN THE LETTER DATE, JULY 30th AND AUGUST THE 7th, DID YOU SPEAK WITH ANY OTHER PERSON ABOUT YOUR ALLEGATIONS?>>COULD YOU SAY THE DATES AGAIN?>>BETWEEN THE LETTER DATE OF JULY 30th AND AUGUST 7, SO WHILE YOU WERE STILL IN DELAWARE, DID YOU SPEAK WITH ANY OTHER PERSON ABOUT YOUR ALLEGATIONS?>>I’M JUST TRYING TO REMEMBER WHAT DATES THAT — >>YOU’RE ASKING HER ABOUT ANY LAWYERS THAT SHE MAY HAVE SPOKEN TO?>>YES.>>YES, I INTERVIEWED LAWYERS, BUT I DIDN’T SPEAK TO ANYBODY PERSONALLY ABOUT IT. >>BESIDES TALKING TO LAWYERS WHO MIGHT REPRESENT YOU, DID YOU SPEAK WITH ANYBODY ELSE ABOUT IT AT THE TIME?>>I WAS STAYING AT MY PARENTS AT THE TIME.>>DID YOU TALK TO THEM ABOUT IT?>>DEFINITELY NOT. >>DID YOU TALK TO ANYONE ELSE BETWEEN JULY 30th AND AUGUST 7.>>I CAN’T REMEMBER, BUT I WAS INTERVIEWING LAWYERS DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME SITTING IN THE CAR IN THE WALMART PARKING LOT IN REHOBOTH, DELAWARE. I WAS FIGURING OUT HOW TO INTERVIEW LAWYERS AND HOW TO PICK ONE. >>YOU SAID EARLIER THAT YOU DIDN’T SEE THE NEED FOR LAWYERS. AND NOW YOU’RE TRYING TO HIRE THEM, WHAT MADE YOU CHANGE YOUR MIND?>>IT SEEMED LIKE MOST OF THE INDIVIDUALS I HAD TOLD, THE TOTAL NUMBER WAS NOT VERY HIGH, BUT THOSE PERSONS ADVISED ME AT THIS POINT TO GET ADVICE ABOUT WHETHER TO PUSH FORWARD OR TO STAY BACK. >>DID THEY INCLUDE SENATOR ESCHEW OR SENATOR FEINSTEIN?>>NO.>>I WANT TO PUSH FORWARD IN ACKNOWLEDGING THAT WE SAID WE WOULD COME TO CALIFORNIA. SENATOR BLUMENTHAL?>>THANKS MR. CHAIRMAN. I WANT TO JOIN IN THANKING YOU FOR BEING HERE TODAY AND JUST TELL YOU I HAVE FOUND YOUR TESTIMONY POWERFUL AND CREDIBLE AND I BELIEVE YOU. YOU’RE A TEACHER, CORRECT?>>CORRECT.>>YOU HAVE GIVEN AMERICA AN AMAZING TEACHING MOMENT. AND YOU MAY HAVE OTHER MOMENTS IN THE CLASSROOM, BUT YOU HAVE INSPIRED AND YOU HAVE ENLIGHTENED AMERICA, YOU HAVE INSPIRED AND GIVEN COURAGE TO WOMEN TO COME FORWARD AS THEY HAVE DONE TO EVERY ONE OF OUR OFFICES. AND MANY OTHER PUBLIC PLACES. YOU HAVE INSPIRED AND YOU HAVE ENLIGHTENED MEN IN AMERICA TO LISTEN RESPECTFULLY TO WOMEN SURVIVORS AND MEN WHO HAVE SURVIVED SEXUAL ATTACK. AND THAT IS A PROFOUND PUBLIC SERVICE, REGARDLESS OF WHAT HAPPENS WITH THIS NOMINATION. AND SO THE TEACHERS OF AMERICA, PEOPLE OF AMERICA SHOULD BE REALLY PROUD OF WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. LET ME TELL YOU WHY I BELIEVE YOU. NOT ONLY BECAUSE OF THE PRIOR CONSISTENT STATEMENTS AND THE POLYGRAPH TESTS AND YOUR REQUEST FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION AND YOUR URGING THAT THIS COMMITTEE HEAR FROM OTHER WITNESSES WHO COULD CORROBORATE OR DISPUTE YOUR STORY. BUT ALSO, YOU HAVE BEEN VERY HONEST ABOUT WHAT YOU CANNOT REMEMBER. AND SOMEONE COMPOSING A STORY CAN MAKE IT ALL COME TOGETHER IN A SEEMLESS WAY. BUT SOMEONE WHO IS HONEST, I SPEAK FROM MY EXPERIENCE AS A PROSECUTOR AS WELL, IS ALSO CANDID ABOUT WHAT SHE OR HE CANNOT REMEMBER. THE SENATORS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE HAVE BEEN SILENT. THIS PROCEDURE IS UNPRECEDENTED IN A CONFIRMATION HEARING. BUT I WANT TO QUOTE ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES, SENATOR LINDSAY GRAHAM IN A BOOK THAT HE WROTE IN 2015 WHEN HE WAS DESCRIBING HIS OWN SERVICE AND VERY DISTINGUISHED NAVAL SERVICE AS A TRAVELER. I’M NOT UNDER OATH. HE SAID, QUOTE, OF HIS PROSECUTIONS OF RAPE CASES, I LEARNED HOW MUCH UNEXPECTED COURAGE FROM A DEEP AND HIDDEN PLACE IT TAKES FOR A RAPE VICTIM OR SEXUALLY ABUSED CHILD TO TESTIFY AGAINST THEIR ASSAILANT. I LEARNED HOW MUCH COURAGE FROM A DEEP AND HIDDEN PLACE IT TAKES FOR A RAPE VICTIM OR SEXUALLY ABUSED CHILD TO TESTIFY AGAINST THEIR ASSAILANT. IF WE AGREE ON NOTHING ELSE TODAY, I HOPE ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS, WE CAN AGREE ON HOW MUCH COURAGE IT HAS TAKEN FOR YOU TO COME FORWARD AND I THINK YOU HAVE EARNED AMERICA’S GRATITUDE.>>THANK YOU.>>NOW THERE’S BEEN SOME TALK ABOUT YOUR REQUESTING AN FBI INVESTIGATION. AND YOU MENTIONED A POINT JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO, THAT YOU COULD BETTER ESTIMATE THE TIME THAT YOU RAN INTO MARK JUDGE IF YOU KNEW THE TIME THAT HE WAS WORKING AT THAT SUPERMARKET. THAT’S A FACT THAT COULD BE UNCOVERED BY AN FBI INVESTIGATION THAT WOULD HELP FURTHER ELUCIDATE YOUR ACCOUNT. WOULD YOU LIKE MARK JUDGE DATE OF BIRTH — MARK JUDGE TO BE INTERVIEWED IN CONNECTION WITH THE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION AND THE SERIOUS CREDIBLE ALLEGATIONS THAT YOU HAVE MADE?>>THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE. I’M NOT SURE IT’S REALLY UP TO ME. BUT I CERTAINLY WOULD FEEL LIKE I COULD BE MORE HELPFUL TO EVERYONE IF I KNEW THE DATE THAT HE WORKED AT THE SAFEWAY SO THAT I COULD GIVE A MORE SPECIFIC DATE OF THE ASSAULT.>>WELL, IT’S NOT UP TO YOU, IT’S UP TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND HIS FAILURE TO ASK FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION IN MY VIEW IS TANTAMOUNT TO A COVER-UP. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.>>SENATOR FLAKE, MS. MITCHELL FOR SENATOR FLAKE.>>AND WE HAVE HEARD THIS MORNING SEVERAL TIMES THAT YOU DID TAKE A POLYGRAPH AND THAT WAS ON AUGUST THE 7th, IS THAT RIGHT?>>I BELIEVE SO. IT WAS THE DAY I WAS FLYING FROM BWI TO MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE.>>WHY DID YOU DECIDE TO TAKE A POLYGRAPH?>>I DIDN’T SEE ANY REASON NOT TO DO IT.>>WERE YOU ADVISED TO DO THAT?>>AGAIN, YOU’RE SEEMING TO CALL FOR COMMUNICATIONS BETWEEN COUNSEL AND CLIENT. AND I DON’T THINK YOU MEAN TO DO THAT. IF YOU DO, SHE SHOULDN’T HAVE TO ANSWER THAT.>>COUNSEL, COULD YOU LET HER ANSWER THE EXTENT TO WHICH IT DOESN’T VIOLATE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN YOU AND DR. FORD?>>BASED ON THE ADVISE OF THE COUNSEL, I WAS HAPPY TO UNDER GO THE POLYGRAPH TEST, ALTHOUGH I FOUND IT EXTREMELY STRESSFUL. MUCH LONGER THAN I ANTICIPATED. I TOLD MY WHOLE LIFE STORY, I FELT LIKE. I ENDURED IT. IT WAS FINE.>>I UNDERSTAND THEY CAN BE THAT WAY. HAVE YOU EVER TAKEN ANY OTHER POLYGRAPHS IN YOUR LIFE?>>NEVER.>>OKAY. YOU WENT TO SEE A GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME OF JEREMIAH HANOPHEN TO SERVE AS THE POLYGRAPHER. DID ANYBODY ADVISE YOU ON THAT CHOICE?>>YES, I BELIEVE HIS NAME WAS JERRY 67. >>JERRY HANOPHEN?>>YES.>>DID ANYONE ADVISE YOU ON THAT CHOICE?>>I DON’T UNDERSTAND — YEAH, I DIDN’T CHOOSE HIM MYSELF, HE WAS THE PERSON THAT CAME TO DO THE POLYGRAPH TEST.>>HE ACTUALLY CONDUCTED THE POLYGRAPH NOT IN HIS OFFICE IN VIRGINIA, BUT ACTUALLY AT THE HOTEL NEXT TO BALTIMORE-WASHINGTON AIRPORT, IS THAT RIGHT?>>CORRECT.>>WHY WAS THAT LOCATION CHOSE ENFOR THAT?>>I HAD LEFT MY GRANDMOTHER’S FUNERAL EARLIER IN THE DAY AND I HAD TO CATCH A PLANE TO MANCHESTER, NEW HAMPSHIRE, SO HE CAME THERE WHICH I APPRECIATED.>>I SPENT THE NIGHT IN THE HOTEL. I DON’T REMEMBER THE EXACT DAY.>>HAVE YOU EVER HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH ANYONE BESIDES YOUR ATTORNEYS, ON HOW TO TAKE A POLYGRAPH?>>NEVER.>>AND I DON’T JUST MEAN COUNTER MEASURES, BUT I MEAN JUST ANY SORT OF TIPS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT?>>NO. I WAS SCARED OF THE TEST ITSELF, BUT WAS COMFORTABLE THAT I COULD TELL THE INFORMATION AND THE TEST WOULD REVEAL WHATEVER IT WAS GOING TO REVEAL. I DIDN’T EXPECT IT TO BE AS LONG AS IT WAS GOING TO BE. SO IT WAS A LITTLE BIT STRESSFUL. >>HAVE YOU EVER GIVEN TIPS OR ADVISE TO SOMEBODY WHO WAS LOOKING TO TAKE A POLYGRAPH TEST?>>NEVER.>>DID YOU PAY FOR THE POLYGRAPH YOURSELF?>>I DON’T THINK SO.>>OKAY. DO YOU KNOW WHO DID PAY FOR THE POLYGRAPH?>>NOT YET, NO.>>DID — YOU HAVE THE HANDWRITTEN STATEMENT THAT YOU WROTE OUT. DID ANYONE ASSIST YOU IN WRITING THAT STATEMENT?>>NO, BUT YOU CAN TELL HOW ANXIOUS I WAS BY THE TERRIBLE HANDWRITING.>>DID YOU — WE TOUCHED ON IT EARLIER, DID YOU KNOW THAT THE COMMITTEE HAS REQUESTED, NOT ONLY THE CHARTS FROM THE POLYGRAPH TEST, OR ANY AUDIO OR VIDEO RECORDING OF THE POLYGRAPH TEST?>>NO.>>WERE YOU AUDIO OR VIDEO RECORDED DURING THAT TEST?>>I REMEMBER A MACHINE BEING PLACED ON TO MY BODY AND BEING ASKED A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND CRYING A LOT. THAT’S MY PRIMARY MEMORY OF THAT TEST. I DON’T KNOW. I KNOW HE TOOK LABORIOUS DETAIL INTO EXPLAINING WHAT HE WAS DOING, I WAS JUST KIND OF FOCUSED ON MY FEAR AND I WASN’T LISTENING TO EVERY DETAIL OF WHETHER IT WAS AUDIO OR VIDEO RECORDED. >>WELL, YOU WERE IN A HOTEL ROOM, CORRECT?>>A REGULAR HOTEL ROOM WITH A BED AND A BATHROOM?>>NO IT WAS IN A CONFERENCE ROOM. I WAS SITTING IN A CHAIR AND HE WAS BEHIND ME.>>DID YOU NOTICE ANY CAMERAS IN THE ROOM?>>I HAD A COMPUTER SET UP SO I GUESS I NOTICED SOMEHOW THAT HE WAS TAPING AND RECORDING ME.>>SO YOU ASSUME YOU WERE BEING VIDEO AND AUDIO RECORDED. >>CORRECT. >>BUT YOU DON’T KNOW FOR SURE?>>WE’RE GOING TO RECESS NOW FOR A HALF HOUR FOR LUNCH. THANK YOU, DR. FORD.>>>LIVE PICTURES INSIDE THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, AND ONE OF THE MEMBERS, CHRIS COONS SPEAKING TO REPORTERS NOW.>>THREE DIFFERENT PEOPLE WHO I KNOW HAVE REACHED OUT FROM DELAWARE WHO SHARED WITH ME THEIR STORIES OF SURVIVING SEXUAL ASSAULT. A HIGH SCHOOL CLASSMATE, SOMEONE ELSE WHO’S KNOWN TO ME FROM HOME AND SOMEONE I HAVE KNOWN A LONG TIME. AND I HAVE HEARD FROM OTHER SENATORS THIS IS ALSO HAPPENING TO THEIR OFFICES AND TO THEM PERSONALLY. SO FIRST, IT IS STRIKING HOW MANY SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT ARE WATCHING AND ARE CHOOSING THIS MOMENT TO COME FORWARD WITH THEIR ACCOUNTS. AND I THINK THAT SPEAKS TO WHAT A PUBLIC SERVICE IS BEING DONE HERE BY HAVING A MEASURED AND A RESPECTFUL HEARING OF DR. FORD’S ALLEGATIONS.>>THESE PEOPLE HAVE CALLED YOU TODAY?>>LITERALLY RIGHT AFTER I FINISHED MY TESTIMONY, SOMEONE I KNEW FROM HIGH SCHOOL. AND EARLIER TODAY, DURING THE TESTIMONY FROM SOMEONE WHO I HAVE SPOKEN ABOUT ON THE FLOOR BEFORE, BECAUSE SHE BARELY SURVIVED CANCER AND THE AFFORDABLE CARE ACT GOT HER TREATMENT THAT HELPED SAVE HER LIFE. SO I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT.>>WE WILL HEAR FROM PATRICK LEAHY DEMOCRAT FROM MINNESOTA.>>TWO OTHER WOMEN HAVE COME FORTH, YOU’VE GOT THE KEY WITNESS WHO WAS THERE. WHY HAVEN’T THEY ASKED THE FBI TO GO OUT AND INVESTIGATE THIS? INSTEAD THEY’RE TRYING TO RUSH IT THROUGH AND WHEN YOU RUSH SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO HIDE?>>WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THE QUESTIONING FROM THE REPUBLICANS’ PROSECUTOR? WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE TONE AND THINGS LIKE THAT?>>SHE’S VERY PROFESSIONAL. YOU HAVE TO ASK THE QUESTION, WHY DON’T THEY ASK THEIR OWN QUESTIONS. >>YEAH. I THINK THAT THEY LOOK MUTED, THEY’RE SITTING THERE, THEY LOOK LIKE THEY WANT TO RESPOND, BUT THEY HAVE MADE A DECISION TO NOT REALLY DO THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY AND PARTICIPATE IN THIS HEARING. THAT’S THEIR CHOICE, BUT I THINK THE BIG LESSON THAT CAME OUT OF THIS, IS THAT THIS WOMAN IS EXTRAORDINARY, SHE’S CALM, AND SHE’S HONEST. AND I THINK THAT’S WHAT OUR COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE AISLE ARE SEEING TODAY.>>SHE’S DOING THE JOB THEY ASKED HER TO DO.>>WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT JUDGE KAVANAGH?>>WE CAN’T WAIT.>>TWO MEMBERS OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, THE FORMER CHAIR, PAT LEAHY, DEMOCRAT FROM VERMONT. THERE ARE TEN DEMOCRATIC SENATORS. IN A HALF-HOUR VOTES AS WE CONTINUE HERE ON C-SPAN 3. WE’LL CONTINUE TO HAVE THE VIDEO POSTED ON OUR WEBSITE AT C-SPAN.ORG. BUT RIGHT NOW, THE OPENING STATEMENT EARLIER TODAY. THE HEARING BEGAN SHORTLY AFTER 10:00 AND CHRISTINE FORD SPEAKING JUST BEFORE 11:00. HERE IT IS IN ITS ENTIRETY.>>DO YOU SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU’RE ABOUT TO GIVE BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE THIS BE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. PLEASE BE SEATED. BEFORE YOU GIVE YOUR STATEMENT, I WANT TO SAY THAT TO EVERYBODY THAT SHE HAS ASKED FOR ANY TIME YOU ASK FOR A BREAK, YOU GET A BREAK. AND ANY TIME THERE’S SOMETHING THAT YOU NEED YOU DON’T HAVE, JUST ASK US. AND YOU CAN HAVE AS MUCH TIME FOR YOUR OPENING STATEMENT AS YOU WANT. JUST LET US KNOW IF THERE’S ANY ISSUES. PROCEED PLEASE.>>. >>THANK YOU, SENATOR GRASSLEY. I THINK AFTER I READ MY OPENING STATEMENT I ANTICIPATE NEEDING SOME CAFFEINE IS THAT IS AVAILABLE.>>CAN YOU PULL THE MICROPHONE JUST A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO YOU, PLEASE? CAN THE WHOLE BOX GO A LITTLE FURTHER.>>I’M TRYING, SENATOR, NO.>>I’LL LEAN FORWARD.>>THANK YOU.>>IS THIS GOOD?>>YEAH.>>OKAY. THANK YOU, CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY AND RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. MY US NAME IS CHRISTINE FORD AND I’M A PROFESSOR OF PSYCHOLOGY AT PALO ALTO UNIVERSITY AND RESEARCH PSYCHOLOGIST AT THE STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE. I WON’T DETAIL MY EDUCATIONAL BACKGROUND SINCE THIS HAS ALREADY BEEN SUMMARIZED. I HAVE BEEN MARRIED TO RUSSELL FORD SINCE 2002. WE HAVE TWO CHILDREN. I AM HERE TODAY NOT BECAUSE I WANT TO BE. I’M TERRIFIED. I’M HERE BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT IS MY CIVIC DUTY TO TELL YOU WHAT HAPPENED TO ME WHILE BRETT KAVANAUGH AND I WERE IN HIGH SCHOOL. I HAVE DESCRIBED THE EVENTS PUBLICLY BEFORE. I SUMMARIZED THEM IN MY LETTER TO RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN AND AGAIN IN A LETTER TO CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY. I UNDERSTAND WHAT HAPPENED TO ME AND THE IMPACT THAT IT HAS HAD ON MY LIFE AND MY FAMILY. I GREW UP IN THE SUBURBS OF WASHINGTON, D.C. I ATTENDED THE SCHOOL IN BETHESDA, MARYLAND, FROM 1978 TO 1984. IT’S AN ALL GIRLS SCHOOL THAT OPENED IN 1901. GIRLS FREQUENTLY MET AND BECAME FRIENDLY WITH BOYS FROM ALL BOYS SCHOOLS IN THE AREA INCLUDING THE LANDON SCHOOL, GEORGETOWN PREP, GONZALES SA GA HIGH SCHOOL. THIS IS HOW I MET BRETT KAVANAUGH, THE BOY SEXUALLY ASSAULTED ME. DURING MY FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE SCHOOL YEARS WHEN I WAS 14 AND 15 YEARS OLD, BY GROUP OF FRIENDS INTERSECTED WITH BRETT AND HIS FRIENDS FOR A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME. I HAD BEEN FRIENDLY WITH A CLASSMATE OF BRETT’S FOR A SHORT TIME THAT I ATTENDED A NUMBER OF PARTIES THAT BRETT ALSO ATTENDED. ET WE DID NOT KNOW EACH OTHER WELL, BUT I KNEW HIM AND HE KNEW ME. IN THE SUMMER OF 1982 SWIMMING AND PRACTICING DYEING. ONE EVENING THAT SUMMER AFTER A DAY OF DIVING AT THE CLUB, I ATTENDED A SMALL GATHERING AT A HOUSE IN THE BETHESDA AREA. THERE WERE FOUR BOYS I REMEMBER SPECIFICALLY BEING AT THE HOUSE. BRETT KAVANAUGH, MARK JUDGE, A BOY NAMED PJ AND ONE OTHER BOY WHOSE NAME I CANNOT RECALL. IT WAS A SPUR OF THE MOMENT GATHERING. I TRULY WISH I COULD BE MORE HELPFUL WITH MORE DETAILED ANSWERS TO ALL OF OF THE QUESTIONS THAT HAVE AND WILL BE ASKED ABOUT HOW I GOT TO THE PARTY AND WHERE IT TOOK PLACE AND SO FORTH. I DON’T HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS AND I DON’T REMEMBER AS MUCH AS I WOULD LIKE TO, BUT THE DETAILS ABOUT THAT NIGHT THAT BRING ME HERE TODAY ARE THE ONES I WILL NEVER FORGET. THEY HAVE BYE-BYE SERED INTO MY MEMORY AND HAUNTED ME AS AN ADULT. WHEN I GOT TO THE SMALL GATHERING, PEOPLE WERE DRINKING BEER IN A SMALL LIVING ROOM/FAMILY ROOM-TYPE AREA ON THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE HOUSE. I DRANK ONE BEER. BRETT AND MARK WERE VISIBLY DRUNK. EARLY IN THE EVENING I WENT UP A VERY NARROW SET OF STAIRS LEADING FROM THE LIVING ROOM TO A SECOND FLOOR TO USE THE RESTROOM. WHEN I GOT TO THE TOP OF THE STAIRS, I WAS PUSHED FROM BEHIND INTO A BEDROOM ACROSS FROM THE BATHROOM. I COULDN’T SEE WHO PUSHED ME. BRETT AND MARK CAME INTO THE BEDROOM AND LOCKED THE DOOR BEHIND THEM. THERE WAS MUSIC PLAYING IN THE BEDROOM. IT WAS TURNED UP LOUDER BY EITHER BRETT OR MARK ONCE WE WERE IN THE ROOM. I WAS PUSHED ON TO THE BED AND BRETT GOT ON TOP OF ME. HE BEGAN RUNNING HIS HANDS OVER MY BODY AND GRINDING INTO ME. I YELLED HOPING THAT SOMEONE DOWNSTAIRS MIGHT HEAR ME. AND I TRIED TO GET AWAY FROM HIM BUT HIS WEIGHT WAS HEAVY. BRETT GROPED ME AND TRIED TO TAKE OFF MY CLOTHES. HE HAD A HARD TIME BECAUSE HE WAS VERY INEBRIATED AND BECAUSE I WAS WEARING A ONE-PIECE BATHING SUIT UNDERNEATH MY CLOTHING. I BELIEVED HE WAS GOING TO RAPE ME. I TRIED TO YELL FOR HELP. WHEN I DID, BRETT PUT HIS HAND OVER MY MOUTH TO STOP ME FROM YELLING. THIS IS WHAT TERRIFIED ME THE MOST AND HAD THE MOST LASTING IMPACT ON MY LIFE. IT WAS HARD FOR ME TO BREATHE AND I THOUGHT THAT BRETT WAS ACCIDENTALLY GOING TO KILL ME. BOTH BRETT AND MARK WERE DRUNKENLY LAUGHING DURING THE ATTACK. THEY SEEMED TO BE HAVING A VERY GOOD TIME. MARK SEEMED AMBIVALENT AT TIMES URGING BRETT ON AND AT TIMES TELLING HIM TO STOP. A COUPLE OF TIMES I MADE EYE CONTACT WITH MARK AND THOUGHT HE MIGHT TRY TO HELP ME, BUT HE DID NOT. DURING THIS ASSAULT MARK CAME OVER AND JUMPED ON THE BED TWICE WHILE BRETT WAS ON TOP OF ME. AND THE LAST TIME THAT HE DID THIS WE TOPPLED OVER AND BRETT WAS NO LONGER ON TOP OF ME. I WAS ABLE TO GET UP AND RUN OUT OF THE ROOM. DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE BEDROOM WAS A SMALL BATHROOM. I RAN INSIDE OF THE BATHROOM AND LOCKED THE DOOR. I WAITED UNTIL I HEARD BRETT AND MARK LEAVE THE BEDROOM LAUGHING AND LOUDLY WALK DOWN THE NARROW STAIRWAY, PIN BAWLING OFF THE WALLS ON THE WAY DOWN. I WAITED AND WHEN I DID NOT HEAR THEM COME BACK UP THE STAIRS, I LEFT THE BATHROOM, WENT DOWN THE SAME STAIRWELL, THROUGH THE LIVING ROOM, AND LEFT THE HOUSE. I REMEMBER BEING ON THE STREET AND FEELING ENORMOUS SENSE OF RELIEF THAT I HAD ESCAPED THAT HOUSE AND THAT BRETT AND MARK WERE NOT COMING OUTSIDE AFTER ME. >>BRETT’S ASSAULT ON ME DRASTICALLY ALTERED MY LIFE. I WAS TOO AFRAID AND ASHAMED TO TELL ANYONE THESE DETAILS. I DID NOT WANT TO TELL MY PARENTS THAT I AT AGE 15 WAS IN A HOUSE WITHOUT ANY PARENTS PRESENT I CONVINCED MYSELF BECAUSE BRETT DID NOT RAPE ME I SHOULD JUST MOVE ON AND JUST PRETENT IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. OVER THE YEARS I TOLD FEW FRIENDS THAT I HAD THIS TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE. I TOLD MY HUSBAND BEFORE WE WERE MARRIED THAT I EXPERIENCED A SEXUAL ASSAULT. I HAD NEVER TOLD THE DETAILS TO ANYONE THE SPECIFIC DETAILS UNTIL MAY 2012 DURING A COUPLES COUNSELLING SESSION. THE REASON THIS CAME UP IN COUNSELLING AND THAT MY HUSBAND AND I HAD COMPLETED A VERY EXTENSIVE, VERY LONG REMODEL OF OUR HOME AND I INSISTED ON A SECOND FRONT DOOR, AN IDEA THAT HE AND OTHERS DISAGREED WITH AND COULD NOT UNDERSTAND. IN EXPLAINING WHY, I WANTED A SECOND A FRONT DOOR, I BEGAN TO DRAB THE ASSAULT IN DETAIL. I RECALL SAYING THAT THE BOY WHO ASSAULTED ME COULD SOME DAY BE ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT AND SPOKE A BIT ABOUT HIS BACKGROUND AT AN ET ELITIST ALL BOYS SCHOOL IN BETHESDA, MARYLAND. MY HUSBAND RECALLS THAT I NAMED MY ATTACKER AS BRETT KAVANAUGH. AFTER THAT MAY 2012 THERAPY SESSION, I DID MY BEST TO IGNORE THE MEMORIES OF THE ASSAULT BECAUSE RECOUNTING THEM CAUSED ME TO RELIVE THE EXPERIENCE AND CAUSE PANIC AND ANXIETY. OCCASIONALLY, I WOULD DISCUSS THE ASSAULT IN AN INDIVIDUAL THERAPY SESSION BUT TALKING ABOUT IT CAUSED MORE RELIVING OF THE TRAUMA, SO I TIED NOT TO THINK OBJECT IT OR DISCUSS IT. BUT OVER THE YEARS, I WENT THROUGH PERIODS WHERE I THOUGHT ABOUT THE ATTACK. I CONFIDED IN SOME CLOSE FRIENDS THAT I HAD AN EXPERIENCE WITH THE SEXUAL ASSAULT. OCCASIONALLY STATED THAT HE WAS A PROMINENT LAWYER OR JUDGE BUT DID NOT USE HIS NAME. I DO NOT RECALL EACH PERSON I SPOKE TO ABOUT THE ASSAULT AND SOME FRIENDS HAVE REMINDED ME OF THESE CONVERSATIONS SINCE THE PUBLICATION OF THE “WASHINGTON POST” STORY ON SEPTEMBER 16th, 2018. BUT UNTIL JULY 2018, I HAD NEVER NAMED MR. KAVANAUGH AS MY ATTACKER OUTSIDE OF THERAPY. THIS CHANGED IN EARLY JULY 2018. US SAW PRESS REPORTS STATING THAT BRETT KAVANAUGH WAS ON THE SHORT LIST OF A LIST OF VERY WELL QUALIFIED SUPREME COURT NOMINEES. I THOUGHT IT WAS MY CIVIC DUTY TO RELAY THE INFORMATION ABOUT HIS CONDUCT SO THAT THOSE CONSIDERING HIS NOMINATION WOULD KNOW ABOUT THIS ASSAULT. I CALLED MY REPRESENTATIVE AND LET HER RECEPTIONIST KNOW THAT SOMEONE ON THE PRESIDENT’S SHORT LIST HAD ATTACKED ME. I ALSO SENT A MESSAGE TO THE INEN CRYPTED “WASHINGTON POST” CONFIDENTIAL TIP LINE. I DID NOT KWLUZ MY NAME BUT PROVIDED THE NAMES OF BRETT KAVANAUGH AND MARK JUDGE. I STATED THAT MR. KAVANAUGH HAD ASSAULTED ME IN THE 1980s IN MARYLAND. THIS WAS AN EXTREMELY HARD THING FOR ME TO DO, BUT I FELT THAT I COULDN’T NOT DO IT. OVER THE NEXT TWO DAYS, I TOLD A COUPLE OF CLOSE FRIENDS ON THE BEACH IN CALIFORNIA THAT MR. KAVANAUGH HAD SEXUALLY ASSAULTED ME. I WAS VERY CONFLICTED AS TO WHETHER TO SPEAK OUT. ON JULY 9th, I RECEIVED A RETURN PHONE CALL FROM THE OFFICE OF CONGRESSWOMAN ANNA ESHEW AFTER MR. KAVANAUGH HAD BECOME THE NOMINEE. I MET WITH HER STAFF ON JULY 18th AND WITH HER ON JULY 20th DESCRIBING THE ASSAULT AND DISCUSSING MY FEARS ABOUT COMING FORWARD. LATER WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY OF SENDING A LETTER TO RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN WHO IS ONE OF MY STATE SENATORS DESCRIBING WHAT OCCURRED. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT REPRESENTATIVE ESHEW’S OFFICE DELIVERED A COPY OF MY LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN’S OFFICE ON JULY 30th. THE LETTER INCLUDED MY NAME, BUT ALSO A REQUEST THAT IT BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. MY HOPE WAS THAT PROVIDING THE INFORMATION CONFIDENTIALLY WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE SENATE TO CONSIDER MR. KAVANAUGH’S SERIOUS MISCONDUCT WITHOUT HAVING TO MAKE MYSELF, MY FAMILY, OR ANYONE’S FAMILY VULNERABLE TO THE PERSONAL ATTACKS AND INVASIONS OF PRIVACY THAT WE HAVE FACED SINCE MY NAME BECAME PUBLIC. IN A LETTER CATED AUGUST 31st, SENATOR FEINSTEIN SAID SHE WOULD NOT SHARE THE LETTER WITHOUT MY EXPLICIT CONSENT AND I APPRECIATED THIS COMMITMENT. SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIMS SHOULD BE ABLE TO DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES WHEN AND WHETHER THEIR PRIVATE EXPERIENCE IS MADE PUBLIC. AS THE HEARING DATE GOT CLOSER, I STRUGGLED WITH A TERRIBLE CHOICE, DO I SHARE THE FACTS WITH THE SENATE AND PUT MYSELF AND MY FAMILY IN THE PUBLIC SPOTLIGHT OR DO I PRESERVE OUR PRIVACY AND ALLOW THE SENATE TO MAKE ITS DECISION WITHOUT KNOWING THE FULL TRUTH OF HIS PAST BEHAVIORS. I AGONIZED DAILY WITH THIS DECISION THROUGHOUT AUGUST AND SEPTEMBER OF 2018. THE SENSE OF DUTY THAT ORIGINALLY MOTIVATED ME TO REACH OUT CONFIDENTIALLY TO “THE WASHINGTON POST” AND TO ANNA ESHEW’S OFF WHEN STILL A LIST OF EXTREMELY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES AND TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN WAS ALWAYS THERE. BUT MY FEARS OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF SPEAKING OUT STARTED TO EXPONENTIALLY INCREASE. DURING AUGUST 2018, THE PRESS REPORTED THAT MR. KAVANAUGH’S CONFIRMATION WAS VIRTUALLY CERTAIN. THE PERSONS PAINTED HIM AS A CHAMPION OF WOMEN’S RIGHTS AND EMPOWERMENT. I BELIEVED THAT IF I CAME FORWARD, MY SINGLE VOICE WOULD BE DROWNED OUT BY A CHORUS OF POWERFUL SUPPORTERS. BY THE TIME OF THE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS, I HAD RESIGNED MYSELF TO REMAINING QUIET AND LETTING THE COMMITTEE AND THE SENATE MAKE THEIR DECISION WITHOUT KNOWING WHAT MR. KAVANAUGH HAD DONE TO ME. ONCE THE PRESS STARTED REPORTING ON THE EXISTENCE OF THE LETTER I HAD SENT TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN I FACED MOUNTING PRESSURE. REPORTERS APPEARED AT MY HOME AND AT MY WORKPLACE DEMANDING INFORMATION ABOUT THE LETTER IN THE PRESENCE OF MY GRADUATE STUDENTS. THEY CALLED MY BOSSES AND CO-WORKERS AND LEFT ME MANY MESSAGES MAKING IT CLEAR THAT MY NAME WOULD INEVITABLY BE RELEASED TO THE MEDIA. I DECIDED TO SPEAK OUT PUBLICLY TO A JOURNALIST WHO HAD ORIGINALLY RESPONDED TO THE TIP I HAD SENT TO “THE WASHINGTON POST” AND WHO HAD GAINED MY TRUST. IT WAS IMPORTANT FOR ME TO DESCRIBE THE DETAILS OF THE ASSAULT IN MY OWN WORDS. SINCE SEPTEMBER 16th, THE DATE OF “THE WASHINGTON POST” STORY, I HAVE EXPERIENCED AN OUTPOURING OF SUPPORT FROM PEOPLE IN EVERY STATE OF THIS COUNTRY. THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE HAD THEIR LIVES DRAMATICALLY ALTERED BY SEXUAL VIOLENCE HAVE REACHED OUT TO SHARE THEIR EXPERIENCE AND HAVE THANKED ME FOR COMING FORWARD. WE HAVE RECEIVED TREMENDOUS SUPPORT FROM OUR FRIENDS AND OUR COMMUNITY. AT THE SAME TIME, MY GREATEST FEARS HAVE BEEN REALIZED AND THE REALITY HAS BEEN FAR WORSE THAN WHAT I EXPECTED. MY FAMILY AND I HAVE BEEN THE TARGET OF CONSTANT HARASSMENT AND DEATH THREATS AND I HAVE BEEN CALLED THE MOST VILE AND HATEFUL NAMES IMAGINABLE. THESE MESSAGES WELL FAR FEWER THAN THE EXPRESSIONS OF SUPPORT, HAVE BEEN TERRIFYING AND HAVE ROCKED ME TO MY CORE. PEOPLE HAVE POSTED MY PERSONAL INFORMATION AND THAT OF MY PARENTS ON-LINE ON THE INTERNET. THIS HAS RESULTED IN ADDITIONAL E-MAIL, CALLS AND THREATS. MY FAMILY AND I WERE FORCED TO MOVE OUT OF OUR HOME. SINCE SEPTEMBER 16th, MY FAMILY AND I HAVE BEEN VISITING IN VARIOUS SECURE LOCALES AT TIMES SEPARATED AND AT TIMES TOGETHER, WITH THE HELP OF SECURITY GUARDS. THIS PAST TUESDAY EVENING, MY WORK E-MAIL WAS HACKED AND MESSAGES WERE SENT OUT TRYING TO RECANT MY DESCRIPTION OF THE SEXUAL ASSAULT. APART FROM THE ASSAULT ITSELF, THESE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS HAVE BEEN THE HARDEST OF MY LIFE. I HAVE SEEN MY LIFE PICKED APART BY PEOPLE ON TELEVISION, ON TWITTER, OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA I HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF ACTING OUT OF PARTISAN POLITICAL MOTIVES. THOSE WHO SAY THAT DO NOT KNOW ME, I AM AN INDEPENDENT PERSON AND I’M NO ONE’S PAWN. MY MOTIVATION IN COMING FORWARD WAS TO BE HELPFUL AND TO PROVIDE FACTS ABOUT HOW MR. KAVANAUGH’S ACTIONS HAVE DAMAGED MY LIFE SO THAT YOU COULD TAKE INTO A SERIOUS CONSIDERATION AS YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION ABOUT HOW TO PROCEED. IT IS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO DETERMINE WHETHER MR. KAVANAUGH DESERVES TO SIT ON THE SUPREME COURT. MY RESPONSIBILITY IS TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH. I UNDERSTAND THAT A PROFESSIONAL PROSECUTOR HAS BEEN HIRED TO ASK ME QUESTIONS AND I’M COMMITTED TO DOING MY VERY BEST TO ANSWER THEM. I HAVE NEVER BEEN QUESTIONED BY A PROSECUTOR AND I US WILL DO ANY BEST. BECAUSE THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WILL BE JUDGING CREDIBILITY, I HOPE TO ENGAGE DIRECTLY WITH EACH OF YOU. I LO WILL DO MY BEST O TO ANSWER REQUESTER QUESTIONS.>>THE OPENING STATEMENT BY DR. FORD AS THE SENATE COMMITTEE CONTINUES. A LUNCH BREAK RECESS WITH ALSO VOTES NOW LIVE ON C-SPAN 2. LET’S RECAP WHERE WE ARE NOW. JUST PAST 1:00 IN THE EAST COAST TIME. WE NEED TO HEAR FROM SIX SENATORS. THREE OF THOSE REPUBLICAN SENATORS ARE SEATING THE TIME TO ATTORNEY RACHEL MITCHELL, WHO IS QUESTIONING DR. FORD ON BEHALF OF THE 11 REPUBLICANS ON THE COMMITTEE. ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE, WE STILL NEED TO HEAR FROM DEMOCRAT OF HAWAII, CORY BOOKER OF NEW JERSEY AND THE SENATOR FROM HARRIS, WHO HER HERSELF IS AN ATTORNEY AND PROSECUTOR. WE WANT TO OPEN OUR PHONE LINES AND ET SHOW YOU THE SCENE AROUND CAPITOL HILL. THIS IS AN ANTI-BRETT KAVANAUGH RALLY TAKE PLACE ON CAPITOL HILL. THERE’S ALSO A PRO BRETT KAVANAUGH RALLY. WE’LL SHOW THAT TO YOU AS WELL. BUT AS WE LOOK AT THAT SCENE AND ALSO LOOK AT THE SCENE INSIDE 226 OF THE OFFICE BUILDING, LET’S HEAR FROM YOU. ON THE REPUBLICAN LINE FROM CALIFORNIA, SHERRI, YOU’RE NEXT.>>Caller: HELLO.>>GO AHEAD, WHAT DO YOU THINK SO FAR?>>Caller: WHAT I THINK IS THAT WHEN I WAS 17, I WAS ATTACKED BY THREE MEN. THEY TRIED TO SEXUALLY ASSAULT ME. THEY BROKE ME, THEY SLUGGED ME IN THE CHEST SO HARD I COULDN’T BREATHE AND I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO BE RAPED. HOWEVER, A PASSING MOTORIST ON A DESERTED ROAD CAME AROUND THE CORNER, JUMPED OUT OF HIS TRUCK AND STARTED RUNNING. HE GOT AHOLD OF ONE OF THEM AND THEN ALL THREE EVENTUALLY WERE PROSECUTED.>>HOW OLD WERE YOU AT THE TIME?>>Caller: ALL I FELT WAS RELIEF BECAUSE I WASN’T RAPED. THERE WAS THREE GUYS GRABBING AT ME AND TRYING TO THROW ME TO THE GROUND. AND ALL I COULD FEEL WAS RELIEF. HAD I BEEN RAPED, I DON’T KNOW HOW I WOULD HAVE FELT. I THINK IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TOTALLY DIFFERENT THING.>>HOW OLD WERE YOU AT THE TIME?>>Caller: I WAS 1.>>HOW OLD ARE YOU NOW?>>Caller: I’M 65.>>I ASK YOU THAT BECAUSE AS YOU HEARD THE OPENING STATEMENT AND THE QUESTIONS TO DR. FORD, DOES SHE SEEM CREDIBLE?>>Caller: NO, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW I CAN TALK ABOUT IT. IT DOESN’T BOTHER ME BECAUSE I DIDN’T GET TO GO THROUGH WITH WHAT THEY WERE PLANNING TO DO. IT’S A RELIEF WHEN YOU’RE SAVED. AND I FELT LIKE I WAS SAVED EVEN THOUGH WHAT THEY HAD DONE TO ME PRIOR TO THAT THEY WERE ATTACKING ME, HER LIKE SHE’S GOING TO CRY AFTER 36 YEARS IS JUST UNBELIEVABLE. SHE KEEPS SAYING SEXUALLY ASSAULTED. THEY LAID ON HER AND GROPED AT HER, THAT’S HORRIBLE. BUT SHE DIDN’T GET RAPED OR FURTHER STUFF DONE, BUT SHE TALKS LIKE SHE WAS RAPED. AND WHEN THE ONE SENATOR WAS TALKING, HE KEPT SAYING RAPE. AND I’M SAYING WAS SHE RAPED OR NOT. AND APPARENTLY, SHE WASN’T. I DON’T UNDERSTAND WHY SHE’S TRYING NOW LIKE IT WAS — IT’S A HORRIBLE THING TO BE ATTACKED BY ANYBODY, BUT YOU GET OVER IT. ESPECIALLY YOU FEEL SO GOOD THAT IT DIDN’T GO ANY FURTHER. YOU DIDN’T DIE AND YOU WEREN’T RAPED.>>SHERRI FROM CALIFORNIA, THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. WE KNOW THE PRESIDENT IS WATCHING THE HEARING. HE’S AT THE WHITE HOUSE RETURNING FROM NEW YORK RLIER TODAY. AT THIS HOUR WE’RE TOLD HE’S IN THE RESIDENCE AND WE ALSO KNOW FROM A STATEMENT FROM THE WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY THAT THAT SCHEDULED MEETING WITH ROD ROSENSTEIN AND THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN POSTPONED. IN A STATEMENT SAYING IN LIGHT OF THE HEARING TODAY, WE WILL MEET NEXT WEEK. SO NO ANNOUNCEMENT ON THAT FRONT. THE FOCUS IS ALL INSIDE THE OFFICE BUILDING AND THE HEARING WILL CONTINUE THIS AFTERNOON. WE ALSO KNOW THAT JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH IS ON CAPITOL HILL. HE WILL IS HAVE AN OPENING STATEMENT LATER THIS AFTERNOON LIVE HERE ON C-SPAN. INDEPENDENT LINE FROM MINNESOTA, WHAT DO YOU THINK SO FAR? WHAT HAVE YOU HEARD?>>Caller: THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL. I HAVE LOST ALL RESPECT FOR THE CHAIR SENATOR GRASSLEY AND HIS ABILITY TO CONDUCT FAIR AND JUST PROCEEDINGS. BY DISALLOWING FBI INTERVIEWS, THOSE WHO COLLABORATE THE TRUTH OF DR. FORD’S TESTIMONY, OR TO DISAVOW IT, THE COMMITTEE AND PROBABLY THE PRESIDENT ARE ACTING IN UNCONSTITUTIONAL MANNER. THE SUPREME COURT POSITION IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR OUR CHILDREN AND OUR DEMOCRACY AND HOWEVER, THE PRESIDENT IS BEHAVING LIKE AN AUTOCRAT. THIS COMMITTEE IS KOWTOWING TO HIM. ET THINK WE SHOULD BE ET EMBARRASSED AND WE ARE CHALLENGED TO HOPE FOR A CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY WHERE PEOPLE ARE LISTENED TO AND PROPER PROCEDURES OCCUR.>>THANKS FOR THE CALL. IN CASE YOU MISSED ANY OF THE HEARING, ALL OF IT AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE AND REAIRING TONIGHT IN PRIME TIME. 8:00 EASTERN. FROM CHICAGO, DEMOCRATS LINE, JESSICA, YOU’RE NEXT.>>Caller: I JUST WANTED TO TALK A BIT ABOUT WHAT I HAVE BEEN PERSONALLY EXPERIENCING AND WHAT I HAVE HEARD BOTH FROM A LOT OF WOMEN I KNOW AND ONLINE THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA. THAT IS THAT WE FIND DR. FORD VERY CREDIBLE BECAUSE OF HOW FAMILIAR HER EXPERIENCE IS. BUT ALSO HOW HER EXPERIENCE OF RECALLING IT AND HER EXPERIENCE OF HAVING DIFFICULTY SHARING IT WITH OTHER PEOPLE.>>JESSICA, WHAT IS YOUR STORY?>>Caller: I WAS SEXUALLY ASSAULTED WHEN I WAS 19 IN COLLEGE. I PREFER NOT TO GO INTO TOO MUCH MORE DETAIL THAN THAT. I’M SORRY.>>I’M SO SORRY TO HEAR ABOUT THAT. YOU STILL WITH US?>>Caller: YES, I AM. I APOLOGIZE.>>NO NEED TO WORRY. AS YOU WATCH THIS UNFOLD TODAY, WHAT’S GOING THROUGH YOUR MIND?>>Caller: JUST THAT IT’S VERY IMPORTANT, I THINK, TO VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT THAT WE TAKE THESE ACCUSATIONS SERIOUSLY. AND I’M DISAPPOINTED THAT THERE HASN’T BEEN AN FBI INVESTIGATION BECAUSE IT’S 2018. THE ME TOO MOVEMENT HAS HAPPENED AND I THINK WE NEED TO COME FROM A PERSPECTIVE OF BELIEVING WOMEN WHEN THEY COME FORWARD WITH THESE STORIES BECAUSE IT’S NOT AN SIZE THING TO DO AND I DON’T THINK IT’S SOMETHING ANYONE WOULD UNDERTAKE LIGHTLY.>>HOW OLD ARE YOU NOW? I’M CURIOUS THE TIME DIFFERENCE?>>Caller: I’M 26. SO RELATIVELY RECENT.>>THANK YOU FOR CALLING AND THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR STORY WITH US.>>Caller: THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME.>>LET’S GO NEXT TO MICHELLE IN FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, REPUBLICAN LINE, GOOD AFTERNOON.>>Caller: HI, JUST TO GIVE YOU THE BACKGROUND. I’M 53 AND I WENT TO HIGH SCHOOL IN UPPER MIDDLE CLASS AREA IN NEW ENGLAND AREA IN THOSE SAME YEARS AS JUDGE KAVANAUGH. WITH THAT BEING SAID, I’M A SURVIVOR MYSELF. WHEN I WAS 12, MY BEST FRIEND AND HER PARENTS WERE ALSO BEST FRIENDS, OUR FAMILIES WERE BEST FRIENDS, SLEEPING OVER AT HER HOUSE. AND AROUND 4:00 IN THE MORNING IN THE DIM LIGHT OF THE NIGHT LIGHT, HER 17-YEAR-OLD BROTHER WAS HOVERED HER ON TO ME ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BED WITH HIS HANDS IN MY UNDERWEAR AND FONDLING ME. AND I REMEMBER BEING SO FRIGHTENED AND NOT WANTING TO NOT WANTING ANYBODY TO BE UPSET BECAUSE I LOVE THIS FAMILY A LOT. SO I THOUGHT I WOULD PRETEND TO WAKE UP. THEN HE LEFT AND THAT WAS THE END. AND THE ONLY PERSON I TOLD THAT TO WAS MY HUSBAND WHEN I FIRST MARRIED HIM A FEW YEARS LATER. AND A GIRLFRIEND SINCE THEN. THAT BEING SAID, I’M STILL FRIENDS WITH THAT PERSON, SO I WOULD NEVER, EVER WANT TO CAUSE HARM. IT’S NOT WORTH IT. MY DAUGHTER WHO IS NOW 23 IS A TWICE VICTIM. THE FIRST TIME SHE WAS 13 AND HAD THE LAST BALLET DANCE TEACHER IN THE AREA WAS A 4 2-YEAR-OLD MALE. AND HE WAS FONDLING HER AND IT WAS SOMETHING MY DAUGHTER LOVED VERY MUCH AND AS A CHILD COULD NOT MAKE A PROPER DECISION. AND HE MADE IT SEEM LIKE ALL WAS SAFE BECAUSE I WAS BEHIND A CURTAIN, BUT HE WOULD FONDLE HER IN PRIVATE. AND SO A COUPLE MONTHS LATER I PULLED HER OUT ANYMORE BECAUSE SOMETHING FELT WRONG. AND I FOUND OUT WHEN SHE WAS 19 THROUGH BEHAVIOR SHE WAS EXHIBITING. AND SHE DID FILE A POLICE REPORT. YOU DON’T DO THAT LIGHTLY. BECAUSE DOING IT AGAIN JUST LETS THEM WIN. YOU GET TO SUFFER ALL OVER AGAIN. AND YOU GET TO RELIVE IT. I DON’T CALL US SURVIVORS. I CALL US VICTIMS THAT OVERCOME. YES, THEY ARE PAINFUL. PEOPLE GO THROUGH ALL KINDS OF TRAGEDIES IN THE WORLD. AND WE AS HUMAN BEINGS TO LIVE ON THIS EARTH NEED TO OVERCOME AND MOVE ON.>>WE’RE SHORT ON TIME. WE WANT TO SHOW WHAT’S HAPPENING, BUT YOUR STORY IS COMPELLING AND VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT CHRISTINE FORD IS ALLEGING. DOES SHE COME ACROSS FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE AS A CREDIBLE WITNESS?>>Caller: SHE COMES ACROSS AS A CREDIBLE PERSON THAT’S BEEN THROUGH THE TRAUMA. BUT I WILL SAY I HAVE CAV THE YATS ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS SHE MIGHT BE DIRECTING IT IN THE WRONG PLACE AND I ALSO FIND JUDGE KAVANAUGH JUST AS COMPELLING. I BELIEVE THE RIGHT TO INNOCENCE — I LOVE AMERICA AND BLESS. ED TO BE AN AMERICAN. I THINK THAT SHOULD BE HELD UP TO THE HIGHEST THING. YOU DON’T DESTROY PEOPLE’S LIVES WITHOUT EVIDENCE. I’M WONDERING WHAT SHE CHOOSES TO ACCOMPLISH. IF I WAS GOING TO DO THIS, IT WOULD BE IF I SAW HE DID RECORDS OF HURTING WOMEN ON THE BENCH AND THESE KIND OF CASES. THEN I’D SEE THE POINT OF THIS. BUT IF THAT’S NOT THE CASE, WHY? WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS IF IT’S NOT TO PREVENT HIM HARMING WOMEN ON THE BENCH IN THIS PARTICULAR TYPE OF INSTANCE OF SEXUAL ABUSE?>>MICHELLE JOINING US FROM FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, THANK YOU FOR THE CALL.>>AGAIN, WE’RE WELL PAST THE HALF HOUR BREAK AND WE EXPECT THE SENATE COMMITTEE WILL GAVEL IN AS SOON AS THE SENATORS WALK IN THE ROOM. WE WANT TO SHOW YOU THAT. THERE’S A DEMONSTRATION TAKING PLACE OUTSIDE ON CAPITOL HILL. THIS IS A DEMONSTRATION OPPOSED TO JUDGE KAVANAUGH. FOX NEWS IS REPORTING THAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH IS IN THE CEREMONIAL OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT ON CAPITOL HILL MONITORING THE PROCEEDINGS. HE WILL THEN ENTER THE ROOM AFTER DR. FORD HAS LEFT THE ROOM. WE’LL HAVE IT HERE ON THE C-SPAN NETWORKS. HILLARY ON THE DEMOCRATS LINE, GOMPB.>>I HAVE TO SAY I’M REALLY WONDERING HOW MY SENATOR TOOMEY IS PLANNING ON VOING AFTER LISTENING TO ALL OF THIS. I AM ALSO A SURVIVOR OF A VIOLENT ASSAULT AND LISTENING TO DR. FORD, I RECOGNIZE WHAT SHE’S SAYING IS HORRIFYING. I CAN’T IMAGINE IF SOMEONE WHO HAD THE ATTITUDES THAT ALLOWED FOR ATTACKING ANOTHER PERSON IN THIS WAY TO BE ON THE HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND, I JUST CAN’T IMAGINE WHY ARE WE PUTTING THIS MAN FORWARD.>>DO YOU WANT TO AND DON’T HAVE TO, BUT DO YOU WANT TO SHARE YOUR STORY?>>Caller: VERY CONCISELY, I WAS IN COLLEGE. I WAS AT A PARTY. AND I DIDN’T KNOW THAT SOMEONE THERE WAS CONTINUING TO KEEP SPIKING MY DRINK. WHEN I REALIZED IT, I STUMBLED OUT OF THE BUILDING AND FOUND ME AND VIOLENTLY ATTACKED ME. I GOT AWAY. I WAS ABLE TO FIGHT HIM, BUT IT WAS A HORRIBLE INCIDENT.>>I HAVE ASKED THE SAME QUESTION TO EVERYONE ELSE. AS YOU WATCH DR. FORD AND OUTLINES HER TESTIMONY, TAKES QUESTIONS FROM THE ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE REPUBLICANS AND THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORS, YOUR TAKE AWAY IS WHAT?>>I THINK THE REPUBLICANS RIGHT NOW ARE HEARTLESS AND SPINELESS. AND I CAN’T IMAGINE WHY THEY ARE PUTTING A VICTIM OF ASSAULT OR EVEN JUST A SUPPOSED VICTIM OF ASSAULT UP UNDER PROSECUTION. SHE’S NOT ON TRIAL. AND I THINK THEY ARE TREATING HER BADLY.>>THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR STORY WITH US.>>THANK YOU.>>WE’RE GOING TO CONTINUE WITH MORE PHONE CALLS DURING THE COURSE OF THE AFTERNOON. AGAIN, THERE’S PROBABLY ANOTHER 45 MINUTES OF QUESTIONING BY THE REPUBLICAN LAWYER AND THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORS AND THAT WILL FOLLOW PRESUMABLY BY A BREAK AS WE HEAR FROM BRETT BRT. HE WILL ALSO BE SWORN IN IN OPENING STATEMENT AND QUESTIONS FROM THE REPUBLICAN LAWYER AND THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORS. THERE ARE 11 REPUBLICANS ON THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. LET’S TAKE YOU BACK INSIDE 226 OF THE OFFICE BUILDING AS STAFFERS CONTINUE TO GATHER AROUND THE ROOM. DR. FORD EXPECTED TO ENTER MOMENTARILY REMINDER ALL OF IT AVAILABLE ON THE WEBSITE AT C-SPAN.ORG. THANKS FOR BEING WITH US.>>YOU’RE LOCKING AT LIVE. PICTURES OF THE SENATE OFFICE BUILDING. A LUNCH BREAK THAT HAS EXTENDED INTO THE HOUR. WE WANT THE TO TAKE YOU OUTSIDE ON CAPITOL HILL TO SHOW YOU WHAT’S BEEN HAPPENING. THIS IS AN ANTI-BRETT KAVANAUGH PROTEST AND MARCH. THEY ARE NOW LEAVING THE CAPITOL. YOU CAN HEAR SOME OF THE CHANTS. THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW OUTSIDE THE U.S. CAPITOL. ONE OF THREE SENATE OFFICE BUILDINGS. THE 226 IS MUCH SMALLER THAN WHERE THE CONFIRMATION HEARINGS TOOK PLACE FOR BRETT KAVANAUGH EARLIER IN THE MONTH AND EARLIER TODAY ON CAPITOL HILL A GROUP OF SUPPORTERS IN SUPPORT OF BRETT KAVANAUGH WITH A DEMONSTRATION SAYING THAT IT’S TIME TO CONFIRM JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH TO THE SUPREME COURT. THAT OCCURRED BEFORE THE HEARING GOT UNDERWAY THIS MORNING AT 10:00 A.M. EASTERN TIME. THE EVENTS HAPPENING ON CAPITOL HILL, WE CONTINUE TO LOOK LIVE INSIDE THE HEARING ROOM. SENATORS EXPECTED TO COME BACK MOMENTARILY. DR. FORD AND THERE ARE THREE DEMOCRATIC SENATORS AND ATTORNEY MITCHELL ASKING THE QUESTIONS FOR THE REPUBLICAN SENATORS. THIS IS INSIDE THE SENATE OFFICE BUILDING OUTSIDE 226. YOU CAN SEE THE SECURITY DETAIL AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE BEGINNING TO ARRIVE. WE’LL CONTINUE TO WATCH THE SCENE HERE ON THE C-SPAN NETWORKS.>>DR. FORD, YOU TELL ME WHEN YOU’RE READY.>>I’M JUST ORGANIZING MY PAPERS. I’LL BE READY IN 20 SECONDS. THANK YOU.>>TAKE AS LONG AS YOU NEED.>>I’M READY.>>OKAY. SENATOR?>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. IS IT YOUR INTENT TO SEED ALL REPUBLICAN SENATORS TIME TO YOUR PROSECUTOR RATHER THAN THEY THEMSELVES SEEDING THEIR TIME TO HER?>>YES.>>WE ALL KNOW THAT THE PROSECUTOR EVEN THOUGH THIS CLEARLY IS NOT A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING IS ASKING DR. FORD ALL KINDS OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE AND AFTER, BUT BASICALLY NOT DURING THE ATTACK. THE PROSECUTOR SHOULD KNOW THAT SEXUAL ASSAULT SURVIVORS OFTEN DO NOT REMEMBER INFORMATION SUCH AS WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE OR AFTER THE TRAUMATIC EVENT, AND YET SHE WILL PART CYST IN ASKING THESE QUESTIONS ALL TO UNDERMINE THE MEMORY AND BASICALLY THE CREDIBILITY OF DR. FORD. BUT WE ALL KNOW DR. FORD’S MEMORY OF THE ASSAULT IS VERY CLEAR. DR. FORD, THE REPUBLICANS’ PROSECUTOR HAS ASKED YOU ALL KINDS OF QUESTIONS ABOUT WHO YOU CALLED AND WHEN, ASKING DETAILS THAT WOULD BE ASKED IN A CROSS-EXAMINATION OF A WITNESS IN A CRIMINAL TRIAL. BUT THIS IS NOT A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING. THIS IS A CONFIRMATION PROCEEDING. I THINK I KNOW WHAT SHE’S TRYING TO GET AT. SO I’LL JUST ASK YOU VERY PLAINLY, DR. FORD, IS THERE A POLITICAL MOTIVATION FOR YOUR COMING FORWARD WITH YOUR ACCOUNT OF THE ASSAULT BY BRETT KAVANAUGH?>>NO, AND I’D LIKE TO REITERATE THAT I WAS TRYING TO GET THE INFORMATION TO YOU WHILE THERE WAS STILL A LIST OF OTHER WHAT LOOKED LIKE EQUALLY QUALIFIED CANDIDATES.>>AND YET THEY ARE NOT HERE TO TESTIFY. I’D LIKE TO JOIN ME COLLEAGUES TO THANK YOU FOR COMING FORWARD TODAY AND I AND WE ALL ADMIRE YOU FOR WHAT YOU’RE DOING AND I UNDERSTAND WHY YOU HAVE COME FORWARD. YOU WANTED US AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO KNOW WHAT YOU KNEW ABOUT THE CHARACTER, THE CHARACTER OF THE MAN WE ARE CONSIDERING FOR A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT TO THE SUPREME COURT. I WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT ALSO TO NOTE THE SIGNIFICANT PERSONAL SACRIFICES YOU HAVE MADE TO COME FORWARD TO SHARE YOUR TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE WITH US AND THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. YOU HAVE HAD TO MOVE, YOU HAVE HAD DEATH THREATS, ALL MANNER OF BASICALLY REVICTIMIZATION EXPERIENCES HAVE COLT YOUR WAY. BUT YOU HAVE INSERTED THE QUESTION OF CHARACTER INTO THIS NOMINATION AND HOPEFULLY BACK INTO AMERICAN LIFE. AND RIGHTLY SO, WE SHOULD BE MADE TO FACE THE QUESTION OF WHERE IT IS WE’RE PUTTING IN POSITIONS OF POWER AND DECISION MAKING IN THIS COUNTRY. WE SHOULD LOOK THE QUESTIONS SQUARE IN THE FACE. DOES CHARACTER MATTER? DO OUR REAL VALUES ABOUT WHAT IS RIGHT AND WHAT IS WRONG AND ABOUT WHETHER WE TREAT OUR FELLOW HUMAN BEINGS WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT MATTER ANYMORE? I BELIEVE THEY DO. AND I BELIEVE THE REACTION WE HAVE SEEN TO THIS COVERAGE RIGHT NOW IN YOUR COURAGE ALL OVER THIS COUNTRY SHOWS US THAT WE’RE NOT ALONE. YOU’RE NOT ALONE. THAT WOMEN AND MEN ALL ACROSS AMERICA ARE DISGUSTED AND SICK AND TIRED OF THE WAY BASIC HUMAN DOTE SIT HAS BEEN DRIVEN FROM OUR PUBLIC LIFE. THE PRESIDENT ADMITS ON TAPE TO ASSAULTING WOMEN HE SEPARATES CHILDREN FROM THEIR PARENTS, TAKES BASIC HEALTH CARE PROTECTIONS FROM THOSE WHO NEED THEM MOST. HE NOMINATES AND STANDS BEHIND A MAN WHO STANDS CREDLY ACCUSED OF A HORRIBLE ACT. MR. CHAIRMAN, I ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT SIX ITEMS CONSISTING ON VARIOUS LETTERS, FACTS, POSTS ARE INSERTED INTO THE RECORD.>>IS THAT ONE REQUEST OR YOU WANT ME TO WAIT FOR SIX?>>WELL, I HAVE SIX SEPARATE ITEMS. I US CAN GO OVER THEM FOR YOU.>>OKAY, NO.>>I WOULD LIKE — >>LET ME NOT INTERRUPT YOU. YOUR REQUEST IS ACCEPTED WITHOUT OBJECTION.>>THANK YOU.>>I WOULD LIKE TO READ FROM AN ITEM THAT’S ALREADY BEEN ENTERED INTO THE RECORD, BUT THIS IS FROM A LETTER FROM THE NATIONAL TASK FORCE TO END SEXUAL ASSAULT AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. THE LETTER STATES, THIS MOMENT HAS BECOME A CRUCIBLE. IT’S A TEST OF OUR PROGRESS. DO WE START BY BELIEVING VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND TREATING THEM WITH DIGNITY OR DON’T WE. SO FAR SENATE LEADERS ARE FAILING THAT TEST. PREJUDGING THE OUTCOME OF A HEARING. SYMPATHIZING WITH HER PERPETRATOR, ATTACKING HER CREDIBILITY. THEY SEND A MESSAGE TO EVERY VICTIM OF SWAUL VIOLENCE THAT THEIR PAIN DOESN’T MATTER, THAT THEY DO NOT DESERVE JUSTICE AND THAT FOR THEM FAIR TREATMENT IS OUT OF REACH. THIS WILL ONLY SERVE TO DRIVE VICTIMS INTO THE SHADOWS AND FURTHER EMBOLDEN ABUSERS. ONCE AGAIN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THIS IS A MOMENT FOR OUR COUNTRY.>>GOOD AFTERNOON.>>HI.>>WHEN WE LEFT OFF, WE WERE STILL TALKING ABOUT THE POLYGRAPH AND I BELIEVE YOU SAID IT HASN’T BEEN PAID FOR YET. IS THAT CORRECT?>>LET ME PUT AN END TO THIS MISERY. HER LAWYERS HAVE PAID FOR HER POLYGRAPH.>>AS IS ROUTINE.>>AS IS ROUTINE.>>DR. FORD, DO YOU EXPECT THE PRICE OF THAT POLYGRAPH TO BE PASSED ON TO YOU?>>I’M NOT SURE YET. I HAVEN’T TAKEN A LOOK AT ALL THE REQUESTS. WE HAVE RELOCATED NOW TWICE. I HAVEN’T KEPT TRACK OF ALL THAT PAPERWORK. I’M SURE I HAVE A LOT OF WORK TO CATCH UP ON ALL OF THAT LATER.>>I GET YOU HAVE A LOT GOING ON. YOU HAVE HAD THAT FOR SEVERAL MONTHS. BUT IS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT SOMEONE ELSE IS GOING TO ASSIST YOU WITH SOME OF THESE FEES INCLUDING THE COSTS FOR YOUR POLYGRAPH?>>I’M AWARE THAT THERE’S BEEN SEVERAL GOFUNDME SITES THAT I HAVEN’T HAD A CHANCE TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MANAGE THOSE BECAUSE I HAVE NEVER HAD ONE DONE FOR ME.>>SEVERAL WHAT?>>GOFUNDME SITES THAT HAVE RAISED MONEY PRIMARILY FOR OUR SECURITY DETAIL. I’M NOT EVEN QUITE SURE HOW TO KWEKT THAT MONEY OR CONTRIBUTE IT YET. I HAVEN’T BEEN ABLE TO FOCUS ON THAT.>>IN YOUR TESTIMONY THIS MORNING, YOU STATED THAT SENATOR FEINSTEIN SENT YOU A LETTER ON AUGUST 31st OF THIS YEAR, IS THAT RIGHT?>>AUGUST 31st? LET ME SEE. I SENT HER A LETTER ON JULY 30th. I DON’T HAVE ARE THE DATE. I WOULD HAVE TO PULL UP MY ET E-MAIL TO FIND OUT THE DATE OF HER E-MAIL TO ME SAYING THAT — IT WAS RIGHT BEFORE THE HEARINGS THAT SHE WAS GOING TO MAINTAIN THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF THE LETTER.>>SAY THAT AGAIN. IT WAS UNTIL RIGHT BEFORE THE HEARINGS?>>THAT’S MY MEMORY, BUT I CAN LOOK IT UP IF YOU’D LIKE THE EXACT DATE.>>I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU SAID.>>THAT DOCUMENT HAS BEEN TURNED OVER IN RESPONSE TO A REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTS. YOU HAVE IT.>>THANK YOU, COUNSEL. YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU SAID. WAS IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING IT WAS GOING TO BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL UP UNTIL RIGHT BEFORE THE HEARING?>>IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL, PERIOD.>>OKAY. BETWEEN YOUR POLYGRAPH ON AUGUST 7th AND YOUR RECEIPT OF THE LETTER FROM SENATOR FEINSTEIN, DID YOU OR ANYONE ON YOUR BEHALF SPEAK TO ANY MEMBER OF CONGRESS OR CONGRESSIONAL STAFF ABOUT THESE ALLEGATIONS?>>I PERSONALLY DID NOT.>>SO MY QUESTION WAS DID YOU OR ANYBODY ON YOUR BEHALF?>>WHAT DO YOU MEAN DID SOMEONE SPEAK FOR ME?>>SOMEBODY THAT IS WORKING WITH YOU OR HELPING YOU — DID SOMEBODY AT YOUR BEHALF SPEAK TO SOMEBODY IN CONGRESS OR A STAFF?>>I’M NOT SURE. I’M NOT SURE HOW THOSE EXCHANGES WENT. BUT I DIDN’T SPEAK TO ANYONE.>>IS IT POSSIBLE THAT SOMEBODY DID?>>WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE? I’M GUESSING IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE. BUT I DON’T KNOW.>>YOU ASKED HR NOT TO GUESS AND NOW YOU’RE ASKING HER WHAT’S POSSIBLE. I THINK IF YOU WANT TO ASK HER WHAT SHE KNOWS, YOU SHOULD ASK HER WHAT TO KNOWS.>>IS THAT AN OBJECTION?>>I’LL HAVE THE CHAIR RULE ON THAT.>>UNLESS THERE’S A LEGAL REASON FOR NOT ANSWERING IT ON ADVICE OF YOUR COUNSEL.>>SO I DON’T TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION, BUT I DIDN’T SPEAK WITH ANYONE DURING THAT TIMEFRAME OTHER THAN MY COUNSEL.>>OKAY. YOU HAVE SAID REPEATEDLY THAT YOU DID NOT THINK THAT THAT LETTER THAT YOU WROTE ON JULY 30th WAS GOING TO BE RELEASED TO THE PUBLIC. IS THAT CORRECT?>>CORRECT.>>AND IS IT TRUE THAT YOU DID NOT AUTHORIZE IT TO BE RELEASE ED AT ANY TIME?>>CORRECT.>>BESIDES YOUR ATTORNEYS, DID YOU PROVIDE — YOU PROVIDED THAT LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN OPINION IS THAT CORRECT?>>I PROVIDED HER A LETTER ON JULY 30th.>>WE’RE TALKING ABOUT THE JULY 30th LETTER. YOU PROVIDED THAT LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN.>>YES.>>AND YOU PROVIDED THE LETTER TO REPRESENTATIVE TO DELIVER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN.>>YES.>>BESIDES THOSE TWO INDIVIDUALS, AND YOUR ATTORNEYS, DID YOU PROVIDE THAT LETTER TO ANYONE ELSE?>>NO.>>DO YOU KNOW HOW THAT LETTER BECAME PUBLIC?>>NO.>>AFTER THAT LETTER WAS MADE PUBLIC OR LEAKED, DID YOU REACH BACK OUT TO “THE WASHINGTON POST”?>>I REACHED OUT TO THE WASHINGTON — WELL, THEY WERE CONTINUOUSLY REACHING OUT TO ME, AND I WAS NOT RESPONDING. BUT THE TIME THAT I DID RESPOND AND AGREE TO DO THE SIT-DOWN WAS ONCE THE REPORTERS STARTED SHOWING UP AT MY HOME AND MY WORKPLACE.>>OKAY.>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. DR. FORD, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I JUST WANT TO REMIND EVERYONE THAT THIS IS NOT A COURTROOM. THIS IS NOT A LEGAL PROCEEDING. YOU ARE HERE UNDER YOUR OWN VOLITION. ALTHOUGH A PROSECUTOR HAS BEEN ENGAGED HERE TO REPRESENT MY COLLEAGUES, YOU’RE HERE, AS YOU SAID, OUT OF A CIVIC DUTY. AND I WANT TO JOIN MY COLLEAGUES THAT IT’S REALLY MORE THAN THAT. OUR FOUNDING DOCUMENTS TALK ABOUT CIVIC DUTY OR TALKS ABOUT FOR THIS COUNTRY, PLEDGING YOUR LIVES, YOUR FORTUNES AND SACRED HONOR. ANYBODY WHO HAS READ YOUR TESTIMONY KNOWS WHAT YOU HAVE HAD TO SACRIFICE BY COMING FORWARD. YOUR LIFE HAS BEEN UPENDED. YOU HAVE RECEIVED VICIOUS, HATEFUL THREATS, DEATH THREATS. YOU HAVE HAD TO MOVE OUT OF YOUR FAMILY HOME TO SOME EXPENSE, I IMAGINE, TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY. YOU HAVE HAD TO ENGAGE. SECURITY. YOU HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH INCREDIBLE CHALLENGES. AND WHAT’S AMAZING AND I WANT US TO JOIN MY COLLEAGUES IN THANKING YOU FOR YOUR COURAGE AND BRAVERY ALL TO HELP US DEAL WITH ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT OBLIGATIONS A SENATOR HAS TO ADVISE AND CONSENT ON ONE OF THE BRANCHS OF OUR GOVERNMENT, THE HIGHEST LAND, AN INDIVIDUAL GOING FOR A LIFETIME EMPLOYMENT. THE PRESIDENT HAD A LOT OF FOLKS ON THAT LIST AND YOUR FEAR WAS THAT THIS INDIVIDUAL, WHO ASSAULTED YOU, WOULD ASCEND TO THAT SEAT. THAT’S CORRECT, RIGHT?>>CORRECT. >>YES. AND IT IS CORRECT THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN A LOT OF RESOURCES, TAKEN A LOT OF THREATS TO COME FORWARD. CORRECT?>>CORRECT. >>ASSAULT ON YOUR DIGNITY AND HUMANITY?>>ABSOLUTELY. >>HOW HAS IT AFFECTED YOUR CHILDREN?>>THEY’RE DOING FAIRLY WELL, CONSIDERING. THANK YOU FOR ASKING. >>AND YOUR HUSBAND?>>DOING FAIRLY WELL, CONSIDERING. YEAH, THANK YOU. WE HAVE A VERY SUPPORTIVE COMMUNITY. >>THAT’S GOOD TO HEAR. I WANT TO USE A DIFFERENT WORD FOR YOUR COURAGE, BECAUSE THIS IS MORE — AS MUCH AS THIS HEARING IS ABOUT A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, THE REALITY IS BY YOU COMING FORWARD, YOUR COURAGE, YOU ARE AFFECTING THE CULTURE OF OUR COUNTRY. WE HAVE A WONDERFUL NATION, AN INCREDIBLE CULTURE, BUT THERE ARE DARK ELEMENTS THAT ALLOW UNCONSCIONABLE LEVELS, UNACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AND HARASSMENT THAT ARE AFFECTING GIRLS AND BOYS AND AFFECTING MEN AND WOMEN FROM BIG MEDIA OUTLETS TO CORPORATIONS TO FACTORY FLOORS, TO SERVERS. I STEPPED OUT DURING THE BREAK AND THERE ARE LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WATCHING YOUR TESTIMONY RIGHT NOW AND NOTE AFTER NOTE THAT I GOT, PEOPLE IN TEARS, FEELING PAIN AND ANGUISH. NOT JUST FEELING YOUR PAIN BUT FEELING THEIR OWN, WHO HAVE NOT COME FORWARD. YOU ARE OPENING UP TO OPEN AIR HURT AND PAIN THAT GOES ON ACROSS THIS COUNTRY. AND FOR THAT, THE WORD I WOULD USE, IT’S NOTHING SHORT OF HEROIC, BECAUSE WHAT YOU’RE DOING FOR OUR NATION RIGHT NOW BESIDES GIVING TESTIMONY GERMANE TO OUR OFFICE IS YOU ARE SPEAKING TRUTH THAT THIS COUNTRY NEEDS TO UNDERSTAND. AND HOW WE DEAL WITH SURVIVORS WHO COME FORWARD RIGHT NOW IS UNACCEPTABLE. AND THE WAY WE DEAL WITH THIS, UNFORTUNATELY, ALLOWS FOR THE CONTINUED DARKNESS OF THIS CULTURE TO EXIST. AND YOUR BRILLIANCE, SHINING LIGHT ON TO THIS, SPEAKING TRUTH, IS NOTHING SHORT OF HEROIC. BUT TO THE MATTER AT HAND, ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES, WHO I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR — AND I DO CONSIDER HIM A FRIEND — WENT TO THE SENATE FLOOR AND SPOKE TRUTH TO BOTH SIDES OF THE POLITICAL AISLE. SENATOR FLAKE SAID YESTERDAY THIS IS A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT. AND THIS IS SAID TO BE A DELIBERATIVE BODY. IN THE INTEREST OF DUE DILIGENCE AND FAIRNESS, HER CLAIMS MUST BE FULLY AIRED AND CONSIDERED. I AGREE WITH HIM. BUT YOU’VE ASKED FOR THINGS THAT WOULD GIVE A FULL AIRING FROM CORROBORATING WITNESSES TO BE CALLED. YOU SUBMITTED TO AN INTRUSIVE POLYGRAPH TEST. ANSWER FOR ME, HOW DO YOU FEEL THAT ALL THE THINGS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DONE HAVE NOT BEEN HONORED IN THIS SO-CALLED INVESTIGATION?>>I WISH THAT I COULD BE MORE HELPFUL AND THAT OTHERS COULD BE MORE HELPFUL, AND THAT WE COULD COLLABORATE IN A WAY THAT WOULD GET AT MORE INFORMATION. >>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO INTRODUCE FOR THE RECORD SEVEN LETTERS FROM MOREMON WOMEN FOR ETHICAL GOVERNMENT. YOUTH-LED ORGANIZATIONS AROUND THIS COUNTRY, THE INTERNATIONAL UNIONS, BRICK LAYERS, ALLIED CRAFT LETTERS, 290 SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN SUPPORT OF DR. FORD AND A LETTER FROM 1,600 MEN IN SUPPORT OF DR. FORD AND THOSE WHO WANT TO ASSERT, MEN A NOT OPPORTUNISTS BUT SPEAK THEIR TRUTH TO TRY TO END THE SKOURGE OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE AND HARASSMENT IN OUR COUNTRY. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION, SO ORDERED. MISS MITCHELL FOR SENATOR TILLIS.>>IN CHOOSING ATTORNEYS, DID ANYONE HELP YOU WITH A CHOICE ON WHO TO CHOOSE?>>VARIOUS PEOPLE REFERRED ME TO LAWYERS THAT THEY KNEW IN THE WASHINGTON, D.C., AREA. AS YOU KNOW, I GREW UP IN THIS AREA SO I ASKED SOME FAMILY MEMBERS AND FRIENDS, AND THEY REFERRED ME TO LIKE DIVORCE ATTORNEYS THAT MIGHT KNOW SOMEBODY THAT MIGHT KNOW SOMEBODY AND ENDED UP INTERVIEWING SEVERAL LAW FIRMS FROM THE D.C. AREA. >>AND DID ANYBODY BESIDES FRIENDS AND FAMILY REFER YOU TO ANY ATTORNEYS?>>I THINK THAT THE STAFF OF DIANNE FEINSTEIN’S OFFICE SUGGESTED THE POSSIBILITY OF SOME ATTORNEYS. >>INCLUDING THE TWO THAT ARE SITTING ON EITHER SIDE OF YOU?>>NOT BOTH OF THEM, NO. >>WE’VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT FBI INVESTIGATIONS. WHEN DID YOU PERSONALLY FIRST REQUEST AN FBI INVESTIGATION?>>HOW MANY WEEKS AGO? I GUESS WHEN WE FIRST STARTED TALKING ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF A HEARING. I WAS HOPING THAT THERE WOULD BE A MORE THOROUGH INVESTIGATION. >>WOULD THAT INVESTIGATION HAVE BEEN SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD HAVE SUBMITTED TO AN INTERVIEW?>>I WOULD BE HAPPY TO COOPERATE WITH THE FBI, YES. >>WOULD YOU HAVE BEEN HAPPY TO SUBMIT TO AN INTERVIEW BY STAFF MEMBERS FROM THIS COMMITTEE?>>ABSOLUTELY. >>BESIDES — YOU MENTIONED SOME GO FUND ME ACCOUNTS. BESIDES THOSE, ARE THERE ANY OTHER EFFORTS OUTSIDE OF YOUR OWN PERSONAL FINANCES TO PAY FOR YOUR LEGAL FEES OR ANY OF THE COSTS OCCURRED — INCURRED?>>IT’S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT SOME OF MY TEAM IS WORKING ON A PRO BONO BASIS, BUT I DON’T KNOW THE EXACT DETAILS. THERE ARE MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY IN PALO ALTO THAT HAVE THE MEANS TO CONTRIBUTE TO HELP ME WITH THE SECURITY DETAIL, ET CETERA. >>HAVE YOU BEEN PROVIDED — >>I CAN HELP YOU WITH THAT. BOTH COUNSEL ARE DOING THIS PRO BONO. WE ARE NOT BEING PAID AND HAVE NO EXPECTATION OF BEING PAID. >>THANK YOU, COUNSEL. HAVE YOU SEEN ANY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU TODAY?>>NO. >>HAVE YOU — YOU’VE BEEN ASKED A FEW QUESTIONS BY OTHER PEOPLE AS WELL. HAVE YOU SEEN ANY OF THOSE QUESTIONS IN ADVANCE?>>NO. >>HAVE YOU BEEN TOLD THEM IN ADVANCE?>>NO. >>AND, LIKEWISE, WITH MY QUESTIONS, HAVE YOU BEEN TOLD MY QUESTIONS IN ADVANCE?>>DEFINITELY NOT. >>OKAY. YOU MENTIONED ABOUT SOME POSSIBLE INFORMATION SUCH AS WHEN MARK JUDGE WORKED AT THE SUPERMARKET. I WANT TO ASK YOU ABOUT SOMEONE ELSE. YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS A CLASSMATE WHO WAS REALLY SORT OF THE CONNECTION BETWEEN YOU AND BRETT KAVANAUGH. >>UH-HUH. >>WHO WAS THIS PERSON?>>I THINK THAT THAT CASE WITH MR. WHALEN, WHO WAS LOOKING AT MY LINKEDIN PAGE AND THEN TRYING TO BLAME THE PERSON, I JUST DON’T FEEL LIKE IT’S RIGHT FOR US TO BE TALKING ABOUT THAT. >>I’M NOT TRYING TO BLAME ANYBODY. I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHO THE COMMON FRIEND THAT YOU AND — >>THE PERSON THAT MR. WHALEN WAS TRYING TO SAY LOOKED LIKE MR. KAVANAUGH. >>OKAY. HOW LONG DID YOU KNOW THIS PERSON?>>MAYBE FOR A COUPLE OF MONTHS WE SOCIALIZED, BUT HE ALSO WAS A MEMBER OF THE SAME COUNTRY CLUB AND I KNEW HIS YOUNGER BROTHER AS WELL. >>OKAY. SO A COUPLE OF MONTHS BEFORE THIS TOOK PLACE?>>YES. >>OKAY. HOW WOULD YOU CHARACTERIZE YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER THIS TOOK PLACE, THIS PERSON?>>HE WAS SOMEBODY THAT WE USED THE PHRASE I WENT OUT WITH. I WOULDN’T SAY DATE. I WENT OUT WITH FOR A FEW MONTHS. THAT WAS HOW WE TERMED IT AT THE TIME. AND AFTER THAT, WE WERE DISTANT FRIENDS AND RAN INTO EACH OTHER PERIODICALLY AT COLOMBIA COUNTRY CLUB, BUT I DIDN’T SEE HIM OFTEN. I SAW HIS BROTHER AND HIM SEVERAL TIMES. >>WAS THIS PERSON THE ONLY COMMON LINK BETWEEN YOU AND MR. — JUDGE KAVANAUGH?>>HE IS THE ONLY ONE THAT I WOULD BE ABLE TO NAME RIGHT NOW THAT I WOULD LIKE TO NOT NAME, BUT YOU KNOW WHO I MEAN. BUT THERE ARE CERTAINLY OTHER MEMBERS OF COLOMBIA COUNTRY CLUB THAT WERE COMMON FRIENDS, OR THERE WERE MORE ACQUAINTANCES OF MINE AND FRIENDS OF MR. KAVANAUGH. >>OKAY. CAN YOU DESCRIBE ALL OF THE OTHER SOCIAL INTERACTIONS THAT YOU HAD WITH MR. KAVANAUGH?>>BRIEFLY, YES, I CAN. DURING FRESHMAN AND SOPHOMORE YEAR, PARTICULARLY MY SOPHOMORE YEAR, WHICH WOULD HAVE BEEN HIS JUNIOR YEAR OF HIGH SCHOOL, FOUR TO FIVE PARTIES THAT MY FRIENDS AND I ATTENDED THAT WERE ATTENDED ALSO BY HIM. >>OKAY. DID ANYTHING HAPPEN AT THESE EVENTS WE’RE TALKING ABOUT? BESIDES THE TIME WE’RE TALKING ABOUT?>>YOU CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION AND THEN I’LL GO TO SANDRA HARRIS. GO AHEAD AND ANSWER THAT QUESTION. >>THERE WAS NO SEXUAL ASSAULT AT ANY OF THOSE EVENTS. IS THAT WHAT YOU’RE ASKING?>>YES. >>YES. THOSE WERE JUST PARTIES. >>OR ANYTHING INAPPROPRIATE IS WHAT I’M ASKING. >>MAYBE WE CAN GO INTO MORE DETAIL WHEN THERE’S MORE TIME. I FEEL TIME PRESSURE ON THAT QUESTION. YEAH. I’M HAPPY TO ANSWER IN FURTHER DETAIL IF YOU WANT ME TO. >>I’M SORRY. GO AHEAD AND FINISH ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION. >>OH, OKAY. DID YOU WANT ME TO DESCRIBE THOSE PARTIES OR — >>SHOULD WE SAVE THIS FOR THE NEXT ROUND, MR. CHAIRMAN?>>NO, ANSWER THE QUESTION. >>I’M HAPPY TO DESCRIBE THEM IF YOU WANTED ME TO. AND I’M HAPPY TO NOT. JUST WHATEVER YOU WANT. >>MAYBE THIS WILL — >>WHATEVER IS YOUR PREFERENCE. >>– CUT TO THE CHASE. MY QUESTION IS, WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WAS SEXUALLY INAPPROPRIATE, ANY INAPPROPRIATE SEXUAL BEHAVIOR ON THE PART OF MR. KAVANAUGH TOWARDS YOU AT ANY OF THESE OTHER FUNCTIONS?>>NO. >>OKAY. >>SENATOR HARRIS?>>DR. FORD, FIRST OF ALL, JUST SO WE CAN LEVEL SET, YOU KNOW YOU ARE NOT ON TRIAL. YOU ARE NOT ON TRIAL. YOU ARE SITTING HERE BEFORE MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE’S JUDICIARY COMMITTEE BECAUSE YOU HAD THE COURAGE TO COME FORWARD, BECAUSE, AS YOU HAVE SAID, YOU BELIEVE IT WAS YOUR CIVIC DUTY. I WAS STRUCK IN YOUR TESTIMONY BY WHAT YOU INDICATED AS YOUR INTENTION WHEN YOU FIRST LET ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THESE HEARINGS KNOW ABOUT IT. AND WHAT YOU BASICALLY SAID IS, YOU REACHED OUT TO YOUR REPRESENTATIVE IN THE UNITED STATES CONGRESS, HOPING THAT PERSON WOULD INFORM THE WHITE HOUSE BEFORE JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAD BEEN NAMED. THAT’S EXTREMELY PERSUASIVE ABOUT YOUR MOTIVATION FOR COMING FORWARD. AND SO I WANT TO THANK YOU. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR COURAGE AND I WANT TO TELL YOU, I BELIEVE YOU. I BELIEVE YOU. AND I BELIEVE MANY AMERICANS ACROSS THIS COUNTRY BELIEVE YOU. WHAT I FIND STRIKING ABOUT YOUR TESTIMONY IS YOU REMEMBER KEY SEARING DETAILS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU. YOU TOLD YOUR HUSBAND AND THERAPIST, TWO OF THE MOST INTIMATE OF YOUR CONFIDANTES, AND YOU TOLD THEM YEARS AGO ABOUT THIS ASSAULT. YOU HAVE SHARED YOUR EXPERIENCE WITH MULTIPLE FRIENDS YEARS AFTER THAT AND BEFORE THESE HEARINGS EVER STARTED. I KNOW HAVING PERSONALLY PROSECUTED SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES AND CHILD SEXUAL ASSAULT CASES THAT STUDY AFTER STUDY SHOWS TRAUMA, SHAME AND THE FEAR OF CONSEQUENCES ALMOST ALWAYS CAUSE SURVIVORS TO, AT THE VERY LEAST, DELAY REPORTING, IF THEY EVER REPORT AT ALL. POLICE RECOGNIZE THAT. PROSECUTORS RECOGNIZE THAT. MEDICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH PROFESSIONALS RECOGNIZE THAT. THE NOTES FROM YOUR THERAPY SESSIONS WERE CREATED LONG BEFORE THIS NOMINATION AND CORROBORATE WHAT YOU HAVE SAID TODAY. YOU HAVE PASSED A POLYGRAPH AND SUBMITTED THE RESULTS TO THIS COMMITTEE. JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAS NOT. YOU HAVE CALLED FOR OUTSIDE WITNESSES TO TESTIFY AND FOR EXPERT WITNESSES TO TESTIFY. JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAS NOT. BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, YOU HAVE CALLED FOR AN INDEPENDENT FBI INVESTIGATION INTO THE FACTS. JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAS NOT. AND WE OWE YOU THAT. WE OWE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THAT. AND LET’S TALK ABOUT WHY THIS IS SO IMPORTANT. CONTRARY TO WHAT HA BEEN WHAT H SAID TODAY, THE FBI GATHERS FACTS AND PROVIDES THAT INFORMATION TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE FOR OUR CONSIDERATION. THIS COMMITTEE KNOWS THAT, DESPITE WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN TOLD. IN 1991 DURING A SIMILAR HEARING, ONE OF MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES IN THIS COMMITTEE STATED THESE CLAIMS WERE TAKEN SERIOUSLY BY HAVING THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATIONS LAUNCH AN INQUIRY TO DETERMINE THEIR VALIDITY. THE FBI FULFILLED ITS DUTY AND ISSUED A CONFIDENTIAL REPORT. WELL, THAT COULD HAVE AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE HERE. THIS MORNING, IT WAS SAID THAT THIS COULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED CONFIDENTIALLY BACK IN JULY. BUT THIS ALSO COULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED IN THE LAST 11, LELAND KEYSER, YOU AND JUDGE KAVANAUGH. THE FBI COULD HAVE EXAMINED VARIOUS MAPS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED BY THE PROSECUTOR WHO STANDS IN. THE FBI COULD HAVE GATHERED FACTS ABOUT THE MUSIC OR CONVERSATION OR ANY OTHER DETAILS ABOUT THE GATHERING THAT OCCURRED THAT EVENING. THAT IS STANDARD PROCEDURE IN A SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE. IN FACT, THE MANUAL THAT IS SIGNED OFF, THE MANUAL THAT IS POSTED ON THE MARICOPA COUNTY’S SITE AS BEST PRINCIPLE AND PRACTICES FOR WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN HIGHLIGHTS THE DETAILS OF WHAT SHOULD HAPPEN IN TERMS OF THE NEED FOR AN OBJECTIVE INVESTIGATION INTO ANY SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE. EFFECTIVE INVESTIGATION REQUIRES COOPERATION WITH A MULTIDISCIPLINARY TEAM THAT INCLUDES MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS, VICTIM ADVOCATES, CRIMINALISTS. OUTSIDE WITNESS INFORMATION. YOU HAVE BRAVELY COME FORWARD. YOU HAVE BRAVELY COME FORWARD. AND I WANT TO THANK YOU BECAUSE YOU CLEARLY HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN FOR WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. I BELIEVE HISTORY WILL SHOW THAT YOU ARE A TRUE PROFILE IN COURAGE AT THE MOMENT IN TIME IN THE HISTORY OF OUR COUNTRY AND I THANK YOU. >>SENATOR KENNEDY NOW. PROCEED, MISS MITCHELL. >>DR. FORD, WE’RE ALMOST DONE. JUST A COUPLE OF CLEAN-UP QUESTIONS, FIRST OF ALL. WHICH OF YOUR TWO LAWYERS DID SENATOR FEINSTEIN’S OFFICE RECOMMEND?>>THE KATZ. >>I’M SORRY?>>THE KATZ FIRM. >>OKAY. AND WHEN YOU DID LEAVE THAT NIGHT, DID LELAND KEYSER, NOW KEYSER, EVER FOLLOW UP WITH YOU AND SAY, HEY, WHAT HAPPENED TO YOU?>>I’VE HAD COMMUNICATIONS WITH HER RECENTLY. >>UH-HUH. I’M TALKING ABOUT LIKE THE NEXT DAY. >>OH, NO, SHE DIDN’T KNOW ABOUT THE EVENT. SHE WAS DOWNSTAIRS DURING THE EVENT AND I DID NOT SHARE IT WITH HER. >>HAVE YOU BEEN — ARE YOU AWARE THAT THE THREE PEOPLE AT THE PARTY BESIDES YOURSELF AND BRETT KAVANAUGH HAVE GIVEN STATEMENTS UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY TO THE COMMITTEE?>>YES. >>AND ARE YOU AWARE OF WHAT THOSE STATEMENTS SAY?>>YES. >>ARE YOU AWARE THAT THEY SAY THAT THEY HAVE NO MEMORY OR KNOWLEDGE OF SUCH A PARTY?>>YES. >>DO YOU HAVE ANY PARTICULAR MOTIVES TO ASCRIBE TO LELAND?>>I GUESS WE COULD TAKE THOSE ONE AT A TIME. LELAND HAS SIGNIFICANT HEALTH CHALLENGES AND I’M HAPPY THAT SHE’S FOCUSING ON HERSELF AND GETTING THE HEALTH TREATMENT THAT SHE NEEDS. AND SHE LET ME KNOW THAT SHE NEEDED HER LAWYER TO TAKE CARE OF THIS FOR HER, AND SHE TEXTED ME RIGHT AFTERWARD WITH AN APOLOGY AND GOOD WISHES, ET CETERA. SO I’M GLAD THAT SHE’S TAKING CARE OF HERSELF. I DON’T EXPECT THAT PJ AND LELAND WOULD REMEMBER THIS EVENING. IT WAS A VERY UNREMARKABLE PARTY. IT WAS NOT ONE OF THEIR MORE NOTORIOUS PARTIES, BECAUSE NOTHING REMARKABLE HAPPENED TO THEM THAT EVENING. THEY WERE DOWNSTAIRS. AND MR. JUDGE IS A DIFFERENT STORY. I WOULD EXPECT THAT HE WOULD REMEMBER THAT THIS HAPPENED. >>UNDERSTOOD. SENATOR HARRIS JUST QUESTIONED YOU FROM THE MARICOPA COUNTY PROTOCOL ON SEXUAL ASSAULT. THAT’S THE PAPER SHE WAS HOLDING UP. ARE YOU AWARE THAT — AND, YOU KNOW, I’VE BEEN REALLY IMPRESSED TODAY BECAUSE YOU’VE TALKED ABOUT NOREPENEPHRINE AND WHAT WE CALL IN THE PROFESSION THE NEUROLOGICAL EFFECTS OF TRAUMA. HAVE YOU ALSO EDUCATED YOURSELF ON THE BEST WAY TO GET TO MEMORY AND TRUTH IN TERMS OF INTERVIEWING VICTIMS OF TRAUMA?>>FOR ME INTERVIEWING VICTIMS OF TRAUMA?>>NO. THE BEST WAY TO DO IT, THE BEST PRACTICES FOR INTERVIEWING VICTIMS OF TRAUMA. >>NO. >>OKAY. WOULD YOU BELIEVE ME IF I TOLD YOU THERE’S NO STUDY THAT SAYS THIS SETTING IN FIVE-MINUTE INCREMENTS IS THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT?>>WE’LL STIPULATE TO THAT. >>THANK YOU, COUNSEL. >>AGREED. >>DID YOU KNOW THAT THE BEST WAY TO DO IT IS TO HAVE A TRAINED INTERVIEWER TALK TO YOU ONE ON ONE IN A PRIVATE SETTING AND TO LET YOU DO THE TALKING, JUST LET YOU DO A NARRATIVE? DID YOU KNOW THAT?>>THAT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. >>IT DOES MAKE A LOT OF SENSE, DOESN’T IT? AND TO FOLLOW UP, OBVIOUSLY, TO FILL IN THE DETAILS AND ASK FOR CLARIFICATION, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE AS WELL?>>YES. AND THAT RESEARCH IS DONE BY A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THE CHILD ABUSE FIELD, TWO OF THE MORE PROMINENT ONES IN THE SEXUAL ASSAULT FIELD ARE GIESEL AND FISHER AND IT’S CALLED A COGNITIVE INTERVIEW. THIS IS NOT A COGNITIVE INTERVIEW. DID ANYBODY EVER ADVISE YOU FROM SENATOR FEINSTEIN’S OFFICE OR REPRESENTATIVE ESHOO’S OFFICE TO GO GET A FORENSIC INTERVIEW?>>NO. >>INSTEAD, YOU WERE ADVISED TO GET AN ATTORNEY AND TAKE A POLYGRAPH, IS THAT RIGHT?>>MANY PEOPLE ADVISED ME TO GET AN ATTORNEY. ONCE I HAD AN ATTORNEY, MY ATTORNEY AND I DISCUSSED USING THE POLYGRAPH. >>AND INSTEAD OF SUBMITTING TO AN INTERVIEW IN CALIFORNIA, WE’RE HAVING A HEARING HERE TODAY IN FIVE-MINUTE INCREMENTS. IS THAT RIGHT?>>I AGREE THAT’S WHAT WAS AGREED UPON BY THE GROUP HERE. >>THANK YOU. I HAVE NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. >>I HAVE SOMETHING TO SUBMIT FOR THE RECORD. WE RECEIVED THREE STATEMENTS UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY FROM THREE WITNESSES IDENTIFIED BY DR. FORD, MARK JUDGE, LELAND KEYSER AND PATRICK SMITH. ALL THREE DENIED ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE INCIDENT OR GATHERING DESCRIBED BY DR. FORD. WITHOUT OBJECTION, I’LL ENTER INTO THE RECORD. >>MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE SOMETHING FOR THE RECORD AS WELL, A NUMBER OF LETTERS FROM THE WITNESS’ FAMILY, FRIENDS, INCLUDING HER HUSBAND. >>OKAY. I’LL GET TO YOU JUST AS SOON AS THE RANKING MEMBER. >>MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE THREE LETTERS ADDRESSED TO BOTH YOU AND THE RANKING MEMBER AND I WOULD ASK THAT THEY BE ENTERED INTO THE RECORD. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION. >>AND IT’S ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT MR. JUDGE IS NOT WILLING TO COME FORWARD TO ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS. AS A RESULT, WE CANNOT TEST HIS MEMORY OR MAKE ANY ASSESSMENT OF HIS THOUGHTFULNESS OR CHARACTER. AND I THINK THAT’S WHY THE FAILURE TO CALL HIM TO TESTIFY IS SO VERY CRITICAL. AND I HOPE THE MAJORITY WOULD RECONSIDER THAT. >>SENATOR BLUMENTHAL?>>MR. CHAIRMAN, I ASK IF YOU HAVE SWORN STATEMENTS THAT YOU’RE SUBMITTING TO THE RECORD THAT WE HAVE THOSE INDIVIDUALS COME BEFORE US SO WE CAN ASK THEM QUESTIONS ABOUT THOSE STATEMENTS. I THINK THAT THE NATURE OF THIS PROCEEDING WOULD BE COMPROMISED IF WE LACK AN OPPORTUNITY TO ASK THEM QUESTIONS ABOUT SWORN STATEMENTS THAT WILL BE PART OF THE RECORD. SO, FRANKLY, MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD OBJECT TO ENTERING THEM INTO THE RECORD. >>MR. CHAIRMAN?>>SENATOR WHITEHOUSE?>>I HAVE A NUMBER OF LETTERS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK SUBMITTED TO THE RECORD THAT RELATE TO THE IMPORTANCE OF PROPER INVESTIGATION BY TRAINED PROFESSIONALS IN PULLING THESE KIND OF INVESTIGATIONS TOGETHER FROM THE LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE ON CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS, NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER, NATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR WOMEN AND SO FORTH. >>SENATOR KENNEDY?>>MR. CHAIRMAN I HAVE A QUESTION FOR OUR CHAIRMAN. THE STATEMENTS THAT SENATOR BLUMENTHAL TALKED ABOUT, THOSE WERE STATEMENTS TAKEN BY OUR MAJORITY STAFF?>>THEY’RE ALREADY IN THE RECORD. >>YES, SIR, BUT THOSE STATEMENTS WERE TAKEN BY OUR MAJORITY STAFF?>>YES. >>DID MINORITY STAFF PARTICIPATE?>>NO. >>WHY NOT?>>YOU’LL HAVE TO ASK THEM. >>WELL, WERE THEY INSTRUCTED NOT TO PARTICIPATE?>>NO. >>THEY CHOSE NOT TO?>>THAT’S RIGHT. >>IF I MAY, MR. CHAIRMAN — >>AND IF I COULD, I THINK I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>LET’S LISTEN TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN. >>CAN WE BE EXCUSED? THE WITNESS IS QUITE TIRED. SHE WOULD LIKE TO BE EXCUSED. >>IF YOU WOULD WAIT JUST A MINUTE, I WOULD LIKE TO THAVENG DR. FORD. IN FACT, WE’RE GOING TO CONTINUE THIS MEETING. SO LET’S JUST BE NICE TO HER. DR. FORD, I CAN ONLY SPEAK AS ONE OF 21 SENATORS HERE, BUT I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. MORE IMPORTANTLY, FOR YOUR BRAVERY COMING OUT AND TRYING TO ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS AS BEST YOU CAN REMEMBER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE’LL ADJOURN FOR 45 MINUTES — NOT ADJOURN. RECESS FOR 45 MINUTES. [ INDISTINCT CHATTER ]>>BASED ON WHAT YOU HEARD HEAR — [ INAUDIBLE ]>>DR. BLASEY-FORD SHOWED US WHAT COURAGE LOOKS LIKE. SHE’S AN EXTRAORDINARILY STRONG INDIVIDUAL WHO JUST TOLD, UNFORTUNATELY, THE WORST MOMENTS OF HER LIFE IN FRONT OF THE WORLD AND THAT TOOK ENORMOUS GRACE AND STRENGTH AND COURAGE, AND I THINK THE AUTHENTICITY AND THE HEARTFELT REMARKS JUST SHOWED NOT ONLY THAT SHE’S TELLING THE TRUTH BUT HOW BELIEVABLE HER STORY IS. >>AND WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE WHITE HOUSE. IT’S A SITUATION OF A MOTION VERSUS FACTS, THAT HER TESTIMONY MAY BE COMPELLING, BUT THEY NOTE THERE ARE GAPS IN THE STORY AS WELL. >>AND IF THEY BOTHERED TO HAVE AN FBI INVESTIGATION, AS THEY WOULD FOR ANY JUDICIAL NOMINEE HAVE A COMPLETE BACKGROUND CHECK, THEY WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE DETAILS. WE WOULD KNOW, FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN MARK JUDGE WAS WORKING AT THE LOCAL GROCERY STORE, SO SHE COULD TRY TO PINPOINT THE DATE OF THIS EVENT. BUT THE PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HAVE NOT INITIATED THE BACKGROUND CHECK. [ INAUDIBLE ]>>I WOULD ASK HIM ABOUT HIS RECORD OF DRINKING, WHICH HE BRAGGED ABOUT IN HIS OWN HIGH SCHOOL YEARBOOK. I WOULD GO THROUGH EVERY LINE OF THAT YEARBOOK AND SAY WHAT DOES 100 KEGS MEAN, WHAT DO THESE REMARKS ABOUT THE FOURTH OF JULY MEAN? WHY ARE YOU BRAGGING ABOUT SEXUAL CONQUESTS AND LARGE AMOUNTS OF ALCOHOL? WERE YOU SOMEONE WHO DRANK LARGE AMOUNTS OF ALCOHOL IN HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE? WHY DOES YOUR COLLEGE ROOMMATE SAY THAT YOU CAME HOME DRUNK AND BELLIGERENT? ARE YOU A DRUNK AND BELLIGERENT PERSON WHEN YOU DRINK?>>SENATOR, HE HAS ADMITTED THAT HE WAS NOT A PERFECT PERSON, THAT HE MADE A LOT OF MISTAKES. >>HE HAS NOT ADMITTED TO DRINKING AND HE HAS NOT ADMITTED TO NOT BEING ABLE TO REMEMBER DETAILS IN THE MORNING AND CERTAINLY SAID I WAS NEVER HARMFUL TOWARD WITH WOMEN OR HAD AGGRESSIVE ACTIONS TOWARD WOMEN. I FORGET HIS ACTUAL QUOTES BUT BASICALLY SAID I’VE NEVER DONE ANYTHING BAD TO WOMEN WHEN, IN FACT, THERE ARE CORROBORATING WITNESSES WHO SAID YES, YOU DID DO THAT. THE MOST RECENT WOMAN TO COME OUT SAID SHE WITNESSED HIM BEING AGGRESSIVE TOWARD WOMEN AND TOUCHING THEM AND DOING THINGS TO THEM WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. THERE ARE MANY CORROBORATING WITNESSES AND THE FACT THAT THIS JUDICIARY COMMITTEE DID NOT BOTHER TO CALL ANY CORROBORATING WITNESSES, DID NOT BOTHER TO MAKE MARK JUDGE TESTIFY UNDER OATH, FIRST TO AN FBI INVESTIGATION AND THEN SECOND TO THIS COMMITTEE IS AN OUTRAGE. THIS HEARING HAS BEEN UNFAIR TO DR. BLASEY-FORD AND TO ASK A PROSECUTOR TO QUESTION HER, SHE’S NOT ON TRIAL. >>WHAT DO MESSAGE DOES THIS SEND TO SURVIVORS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT? THIS IS AN ISSUE YOU HAVE BEEN FIGHTING AGAINST PASSIONATELY. >>WHAT — THE WAY THIS HEARING HAS BEEN HELD, WHAT SENATORS — REPUBLICAN SENATORS HAVE ALREADY SAID, THE MESSAGE WE’RE SENDING TO SURVIVORS IS THAT WE DON’T BELIEVE YOU, THAT YOUR VOICE DOESN’T MATTER AND WE DON’T VALUE YOU. IT TELLS AMERICAN WOMEN WE DON’T VALUE WOMEN. AND IT IS SUCH A TRAUMATIC EXPERIENCE FOR WOMEN ALL ACROSS AMERICA TO WATCH WHAT THIS COMMITTEE IS DOING TO DR. BLASEY-FORD. THEY HAVE HAD THEIR OWN EXPERIENCES THAT THEY ARE ALSO RELIVING AND IT’S A VERY, VERY DIFFICULT TIME. MANY WOMEN COULD NOT WATCH HER TESTIMONY WITHOUT THEIR OWN TEARS. >>AND YOUR MESSAGE FOR MITCH McCONNELL?>>DO THE RIGHT THING. VOTE NO. >>THANK YOU, SENATOR. >>ALL RIGHT, GUYS. [ INDISTINCT CHATTER ]>>>NEW YORK SENATOR KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, DEMOCRAT, TAKING QUESTIONS FROM A REPORTER. LYNN SWEET FOR THE CHICAGO SUN TIMES IN HER INTERVIEW WITH THE SENIOR DEMOCRATIC SENATOR AND MEMBER OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE DICK DURBIN OF ILLINOIS. WE ARE INSIDE AND OUTSIDE 226 OF THE OFFICE BUILDING, ALSO DEMONSTRATIONS THAT TOOK PLACE IN THE CAPITAL NOW MOVING TO THE STEPS OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, AS THIS STORY CONTINUES TO UNFOLD. WE HEARD FROM DR. CHRISTINE BLASEY-FORD AND IN ABOUT 45 MINUTES TO THE NEXT HOUR, JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH WILL TESTIFY. HE WILL BEGIN WITH OPENING STATEMENTS, FOLLOWED BY QUESTIONS FROM DEMOCRATIC SENATORS AND RACHEL MITCHELL, WHO IS TAKING THE QUESTIONS FOR THE 11 REPUBLICANS ON THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. OUR PHONE LINES ARE OPEN. WE WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU. 202 IS THE AREA CODE. GIVE US A CALL AND TELL US WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU’VE HEARD SO FAR. 748-8920 AND 202-748-89 1 FOR REPUBLICANS FOR INDEPENDENTS, 202-748-8922. LET’S BEGIN WITH DENISE IN ARLINGTON, TEXAS, REPUBLICAN LINE. GOOD AFTERNOON. >>Caller: HELLO. CAN YOU HEAR ME?>>WE SURE CAN. GO AHEAD, DENISE. >>Caller: I HAVE WATCHED THE TESTIMONY OF DR. FORD THROUGH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDING AND I REMEMBER AT ONE POINT SHE WAS ASKED. SHE REMEMBERS MOST THE LAUGHING OF THE TWO MEN IN THE ROOM BUT EARLIER SHE HAD SAID THAT DURING THE ALLEGED ATTACK, SHE HAD HER MOUTH COVERED BY JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S HAND AND THAT AT THAT POINT SHE WAS AFRAID, SHE WAS REALLY WORRIED HE MIGHT EVEN KILL HER, THAT SHE MIGHT NOT EVEN BE ABLE TO BREATHE. THAT, TO ME, SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE THE EVENT MOST MEMORABLE OUT OF THE ENTIRE EXPERIENCE RATHER THAN THE FACT THAT THEY WERE LAUGHING. SO THAT JUST CALLS INTO QUESTION HER VORACITY, I BELIEVE. >>DENISE, DO YOU BELIEVE HER? DO YOU BELIEVE HER STORY?>>Caller: I AM NOT CERTAIN THAT I DO BECAUSE OF OTHER THINGS SHE SAID AS WELL. ALSO DURING HER INITIAL OPENING STATEMENT, SHE SAID THAT ONCE ALLEGEDLY JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAD BEEN THROWN OFF OF HER OR WHATEVER HAPPENED, SHE RAN THROUGH THE DOOR AND JUST RAN OUT. NOW, AT THE BEGINNING OF THAT STATEMENT, SHE MENTIONED THAT THEY HAD LOCKED THE DOOR BEHIND THEM WHEN SHE WENT INTO THE ROOM. AND I THINK SHE WOULD HAVE STRUGGLED. I WOULD HAVE BEEN IN A PANIC AND I WOULD HAVE STRUGGLED WITH THE DOOR, TRYING TO UNLOCK IT, BUT SHE DIDN’T EVEN MENTION THAT. SHE SAID SHE GOT UP AND RAN OUT. THAT KIND OF MAKES ME A LITTLE BIT SUSPICIOUS OF ALSO HER CONVERSATION. >>DENISE, THANK YOU. WE’LL MOVE ON TO CHARLIE, JOINING US FROM WATERVILLE, MAINE, OUR LINE FOR INDEPENDENTS. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHARLIE. >>Caller: HEY. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOME OF THE STUFF SHE SAID DOESN’T MAKE SENSE. SHE WAS DINING AT THE CLUBHOUSE POOL SHORTLY BEFORE THE PARTY AND THAT SUPPOSEDLY HE WAS TRYING TO TAKE HER CLOTHES OFF AND HER BATHING SUIT. WHO PUTS A WET BATHING SUIT ON AFTER THEY GO SWIMMING, UNDER THEIR CLOTHES?>>JENNIFER FROM ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, GOOD AFTERNOON, JENNIFER.>>Caller: HI. CALLING FROM MINNESOTA. I’VE BEEN WATCHING THE HEARINGS TODAY AND FOLLOWING THIS IN THE NEWS. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THIS ISN’T A HEARING FOR BRETT KAVANAUGH BUT A HEARING FOR THE CAUSE AND THAT KAVANAUGH IS BEING SACRIFICED FOR ALL WOMEN WHO HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED, REGARDLESS WHATEVER IS TRUE IN THE FORD CASE. HE IS THE PERFECT LAMB. >>JENNIFER, I’M GOING TO STOP FOR A MOMENT. HERE IS SENATOR DICK DURBIN. >>SENATOR, ANY REACTION?>>SHE’S CREDIBLE, CALM. SHE TOLD US SHE WAS TERRIFIED BUT I THOUGHT SHE HANDLED THE QUESTIONS PROFESSIONALLY AND HONESTLY. VOLUNTEERED ANSWERS WHEN SHE DIDN’T HAVE TO. I THOUGHT SHE MADE A VERY CREDIBLE PRESENTATION. >>DO YOU THINK IT BACKFIRED ON THE REPUBLICANS TO HAVE AN OUTSIDE COUNSELOR OR COUNSEL QUESTION DR. FORD?>>IF YOU LISTEN TO THE PROSECUTORS CONCLUSION, DOING AN INTERVIEW IN FIVE-MINUTE SEGMENTS IS NOT RECOMMENDED. YOU CAN TELL SHE, TOO, WAS FRUSTRATED. I COULDN’T FOLLOW HER LINE OF THINKING. I TRIED TO UNDERSTAND WHERE SHE WAS COMING FROM. IT SEEMED SO OBLIQUE AND SO FRAGMENTED. I NEVER QUITE UNDERSTOOD WHAT SHE WAS TRYING TO SAY. [ INAUDIBLE ]>>THE THING WE DIDN’T HEAR IS THE MOST OBVIOUS. IF THERE IS NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT WHAT SHE’S SAYING, WHY AREN’T YOU SUPPORTING AN INVESTIGATION BY THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION? WOULDN’T YOU WANT TO CLEAR YOUR NAME AND MAKE SURE THAT THE COURT DIDN’T HAVE A PERSON THAT CAME UNDER A SHADOW OF SUSPICION?>>SENATE KYLE EXPECTED TO STAY AT LEAST THE END OF THIS YEAR. WE’RE IN A 45-MINUTE BREAK. YOUR REACTION TO WHAT YOU HEARD THIS MORNING AND WHAT YOU EXPECT THIS AFTERNOON AND THEN QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. JENNIFER, WE HAD TO CUT YOU OFF A MOMENT AGO, SO PLEASE CONTINUE. >>THANK YOU. >>ATTORNEY BROTHER TO NAME A FEW. I CAN’T SAY WHAT HAPPENED. ASSAULT IS TERRIBLE. AND MAYBE WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT MAKING A BETTER PATH FOR WOMEN WHO ARE ASSAULTED IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS PEOPLE BEING ACCUSED TO HAVE THEIR SAY AS WELL. >>GO TO MARK IN BLOOMFIELD, CONNECTICUT, DEMOCRATS LINE. GO AHEAD, MARK. >>I KNOW. I JUST RECENTLY TURNED 65 AND GREW UP AS A MALE AND, YOU KNOW, WHAT I FIND AMAZING IS SO MUCH OF MY MEMORY OF ADOLESCENCE IN HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE HAS TO DO WITH THIS KIND OF LOCKER ROOM TALK. GUYS GOING AFTER GIRLS, THINGS LIKE THIS HAPPEN ALL THE TIME. HE’S NOT WILLING TO HAVE IT INVESTIGATED. WHETHER OR NOT IT HAPPENED IS ALMOST A SIDELIGHT TO ME. IT SEEMS TO BE MORE IMPORTANT THAT IT’S OBVIOUS WITH DRINKING PATTERNS THAT WE’VE HEARD OF AND KNOWING HOW THE AMERICAN MALE GROWS UP IN THIS SOCIETY THAT THE CHANCES ARE THAT THINGS LIKE THIS HAPPENED. >>MARK, JUST TO BE CLEAR — >>Caller: WOULD WANT TO HAVE THAT BE INVESTIGATED IF I WERE HIM. >>HE IS CATEGORICALLY DENIED THAT IT EVER HAPPENED OR HE HAS EVER DONE ANYTHING LIKE THAT, ACROSS THE BOARD. HIGH SCHOOL, COLLEGE OR EVER. >>Caller: THAT’S MY POINT. YEAH, THAT’S MY POINT, YOU SEE. BECAUSE ESPECIALLY BEING IN A SCHOOL OF LAW WITH THAT KIND OF CAMARADERIE AND ALL THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE HEARD ABOUT IN THAT SOCIETY, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE — IT SEEMS PRETTY OBVIOUS TODRINK COLLEGE, THAT THINGS GET OUT OF HAND WHEN YOU’RE DRUNK, THAT THOSE KINDS OF THINGS ARE A COMMON OCCURRENCE. AND FOR ME, IF I WERE WANTING TO BE A MEMBER OF THE HIGHEST COURT IN THE LAND FOR A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT, I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT MY SLATE WAS CLEAN, MY PLATE WAS CLEAN AS FAR AS ANY — OR MY SLATE WAS CLEAN AS FAR AS ANY OF THESE KIND OF ALLEGATIONS. >>SURE. LET ME JUMP IN. I WANT TO MOVE ON BUT BOTTOM LINE, DO YOU THINK HE IS STILL CONFIRMED TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT?>>Caller: SAY AGAIN. >>DO YOU THINK HE WILL BE CONFIRMED TO THE NEXT ASSOCIATE JUSTICE ON THE SUPREME COURT?>>Caller: IF HE IS, I WILL BE SORELY DISAPPOINTED WITH THE REPUBLICAN COUNTY. >>BERNIE, REPUBLICAN LINE, CUYAHOGA FALLS, OHIO. YOUR REACTION SO FAR?>>Caller: HI, THIS IS BERNIE. >>HI, BERNIE. >>Caller: I THINK THAT SOMETHING REALLY HAPPENED TO HER. SOMEBODY WOULDN’T GET UP AND HAVE AS MUCH EMOTION AS SHE DOES AND LOOK AS SHE DOES. BUT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH DID IT. AND IT’S NOT UP TO HIM TO PROVE HE’S INNOCENT. IT’S UP TO THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE HE’S GUILTY. >>SO WHY NOT HAVE AN INVESTIGATION?>>Caller: THIS SHOULD BE IN A COURT OF LAW. SHE SHOULD FILE CHARGES AGAINST HIM AND HAVE IT IN THE COURT OF LAW. >>SHE CAN’T DO THAT BECAUSE OF THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS. DO YOU THINK THERE SHOULD BE AN FBI INVESTIGATION?>>Caller: THERE’S ALREADY BEEN AN INVESTIGATION. >>NOT ON THESE CHARGES. THERE HASN’T BEEN ONE ON THIS. >>Caller: THEY WOULD HAVE UNCOVERED IT, IF THEY HAD DONE A GOOD JOB. >>BERNIE, THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. JOHN, LUMBERTON, TEXAS. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >>Caller: YES, SIR. I WAS LOOKING AT THIS CIRCUS, IT LOOKS LIKE, THEY’RE HAVING. FROM WHAT I SEE HERE IS THE MORE THAT IT GOES, IT LOOKS LIKE THIS HAS BEEN — I HATE TO SAY BUT ORCHESTRATED. PEOPLE TRYING TO SUPPORT DR. FORD, YOU KNOW, THE OTHER GUYS LET THE LADY SPEAK BUT WHEN SHE STARTS ASKING QUESTIONS ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS AT THE END, THEN THEY STARTED INTERRUPTING. AND IT JUST LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW — I DON’T KNOW IF ANYTHING HAPPENED TO THIS LADY OR NOT. BUT THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS AND GOING ON, IT’S A FRAME JOB. OR I WOULD HATE FOR THEM TO RUIN THIS MAN’S CREDIBILITY AND THEN A FEW YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, SHE SAYS OH, I MADE A MISTAKE. >>JOHN, THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. THE RAIN CONTINUES TO FALL HERE IN WASHINGTON. BUT THERE ARE PROTESTERS OUTSIDE, ADJACENT TO THE U.S. CAPITAL IN FRONT OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT. THESE DEMONSTRATORS SAYING WE NEED TO HEAR FROM US. SOME SAYING THEY ARE VICTIMS OF SEXUAL ABUSE AND THEY ARE DEMONSTRATING IN OPPOSITION OF JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH. THERE IS ALSO A DEMONSTRATION IN SUPPORT OF JUDGE KAVANAUGH. THAT GOT UNDER WAY THIS MORNING. JUDGE KAVANAUGH IS ON CAPITOL HILL. WE HEARD EARLIER HE WAS INSIDE THE VICE PRESIDENT’S CEREMONIAL OFFICE AND HE WILL DELIVER OPENING STATEMENTS FOLLOWED BY QUESTIONS. IF ALL GOES AS SCHEDULED, THERE WILL BE A SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HEARING TOMORROW MORNING, 9:30 EASTERN TIME AND THE SENATE WILL LIKELY BE IN SESSION THIS WEEKEND FOR A SERIES OF VOTES. THE TIMELINE RIGHT NOW, ACCORDING TO SENATOR MITCH McCONNELL — OF COURSE, THINGS COULD CHANGE. FINAL VOTE TUESDAY. OF COURSE, LIVE COVERAGE ON C-SPAN 2. CHERYL IN NEW YORK, DEMOCRATS LINE, GOOD AFTERNOON.>>Caller: GOOD AFTERNOON. HOW ARE YOU?>>FINE, HOW ARE YOU?>>Caller: GOOD, THANKS. I WANT TO SAY THAT I FIND DR. FORD TO BE 100% CREDIBLE AND, IN FACT, THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO DOUBT IN MY MIND — AND I’M SHOCKED AND APPALLED THAT THERE COULD BE ANYONE WHO DOESN’T BELIEVE HER. I GUESS MEN MIGHT NOT UNDERSTAND, BUT THIS SAME KIND OF SEXUAL ASSAULT HAPPENED TO ME TWICE IN HIGH SCHOOL IN THE 1970s. VERY SIMILAR SCENARIO. I LIVED IT. AND THIS WOMAN IS — HAS SUCH INTEGRITY, IS SO HONEST AND SHE STANDS NOTHING TO GAIN BY COMING OUT AND EVERYTHING TO LOSE. >>AGAIN, I’LL ASK THE SAME QUESTION TO YOU, IF YOU WANT TO SHARE YOUR STORY AND HOW THAT RESONATES FROM YOUR STANDPOINT FROM WHICH YOU HEARD FROM CHRISTINE BLASEY-FORD TODAY. >>Caller: I WILL, THANK YOU. I WASN’T AS BLAMELESS AS MISS FORD. I WAS ALREADY KISSING A BOY AT A PARTY, KISSING HIM AND HE PUSHED ME ON TO THE FLOOR AND GOT ON TOP OF ME. I DIDN’T KNOW WHAT COULD HAPPEN WHEN YOU WERE KISSING A BOY ON THE FLOOR AND HE STARTED GRINDING AND I SAID NO, AND I ENDED UP HAVING TO BITE AND KICK TO GET HIM OFF OF ME. AND I’M VERY ASSERTIVE, AND I WAS ABLE TO GET HIM OFF OF ME. IT HAPPENED A SECOND TIME AT ANOTHER PARTY SIMILARLY. IT’S ABSOLUTELY CLASSIC AND EVEN HAPPENED TO ME AT THE SAME AGE. >>SAME INDIVIDUAL?>>AS DR. FORD. >>SAME INDIVIDUAL IN BOTH CASES OR SOMEBODY DIFFERENT?>>Caller: NO, DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS. I WAS EVEN THE SAME AGE, A TENTH GRADER, STUPID LITTLE TENTH GRADER AT A PARTY WITH TWELFTH GRADE BOYS GL DID YOU TELL OTHERS WHAT HAPPENED, PARENTS, FRIENDS OR SIBLINGS?>>Caller: NO, YOU KNOW, I DIDN’T. >>WERE YOU EMBARRASSED?>>Caller: I WAS EMBARRASSED FOR A SHORT — I FELT EMBARRASSED THAT I WAS SO NAIVE AND THAT I HAD, YOU KNOW, BROUGHT IT — I THOUGHT I HAD BROUGHT IT ON MYSELF BY STARTING TO KISS HIM. >>UH-HUH. SO, WHAT WOULD YOU TELL MEMBERS OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS AS THEY PROCEED WITH JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S NOMINATION?>>Caller: WELL, BECAUSE I BELIEVE THAT SHE IS 100% CREDIBLE, THEN I BELIEVE THAT HE IS LYING. AND, YOU KNOW, HERE IS THE THING. THE QUESTION IS, IN A COUNTRY THAT ELECTED A PRESIDENT WHO BRAGGED ABOUT GRABBING WOMEN, HOW MUCH DO WE CARE ABOUT THIS? HOW MUCH DO WE CARE ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF MEN RESISTING THEIR AGGRESSIVE IMPULSES AND DEMONSTRATING A RESPECT FOR WOMEN?>>CHERYL, THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR STORY. I ASSUME NOW YOU’RE IN YOUR 60s IF THAT TOOK PLACE IN THE 1970s?>>Caller: I AM. I’M 65. I BECAME A SENIOR THIS YEAR. >>CONGRATULATIONS AND HAVE LIVED A FULL LIFE, I SUSPECT. >>Caller: YES. THANK YOU. >>CHERYL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE CALL. WE APPRECIATE IT. >>Caller: YOU’RE WELCOME. BYE-BYE. >>NEXT IS CAROL, JOINING US FROM ATLANTA. REPUBLICAN LINE. GO AHEAD, CAROL.>>Caller: YEAH. I JUST HAVE A COMMENT. I JUST WONDER WHY HER ATTORNEY HASN’T MARCHED HER IN TO A POLICE STATION AND FILED CHARGES BECAUSE THIS IS RIDICULOUS. IF SOMETHING HAPPENED, THEN THESE WOMEN NEED TO FILE CHARGES. >>THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. BRENDAN, PHILADELPHIA, DEMOCRATS LINE. GO AHEAD, PLEASE.>>Caller: HI. I’VE BEEN WATCHING THE HEARING AND LISTENING TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS. I FIND THE LACK OF NUANCE REALLY SICKENING. LIKE YOU CAN ACTUALLY BELIEVE THAT THE PERSON, THAT THE ACCUSER IS ACTUALLY CREDIBLE, BUT YOU CAN ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE DEMOCRATIC ESTABLISHMENT IS SETTING UP A HIT JOB. IT’S NOT THEY ARE TRYING TO GO AFTER HIM AND HE IS LYING OR SHE IS LYING AND REPUBLICANS ARE COMPLETELY INNOCENT. >>THANK YOU. WE’LL GO TO LANCE, JOINING US FROM INDIANAPOLIS.>>Caller: HI. I WANT TO THANK YOU, FIRST OF ALL, FOR YOUR COVERAGE THROUGHOUT THE MORNING AND AFTERNOON. I’VE ENJOYED WATCHING AND FOLLOWING ALONG. I WANT TO THANK CHERYL, A FEW CALLERS BACK, FOR SHARING HER EXPERIENCE AS A SURVIVOR OF SEXUAL ASSAULT. >>WE’VE HAD A NUMBER OF THEM TODAY. IT’S BEEN VERY MOVING. >>Caller: IT HAS. IT’S INSPIRING. I THINK THE POINT SHE ENDED WITH WAS WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO DEMONSTRATE TO OUR COUNTRY? I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT THAT THE SUPREME COURT, THE HIGHEST JUDICIARY IN OUR COUNTRY, THAT WE HOLD PEOPLE TO ACCOUNT AND ARE PROPERLY VETTING THEM. AND I UNDERSTAND SOME CALLERS HAVE VOICED KAVANAUGH IS INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. YEAH, THAT’S A JUDICIAL ARGUMENT. UNFORTUNATELY, WE’RE NOT IN THE COURT OF LAW. WE’RE IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION RIGHT NOW. AND THE SENATE, RIGHT NOW THEIR JOB SHOULD BE TO ENSURE THAT SOMEONE WHO IS GOING TO SIT ON THIS COURT IS NOT ONLY QUALIFIED FROM AN EXPERIENCE STANDPOINT AS A JUDGE BUT MORALLY AND OF HIGH CHARACTER TO SIT ON THE COURT LIKE THAT. AND FROM MY VANTAGE POINT IT’S BEEN DISAPPOINTING TO SEE REPUBLICANS, ONE, DRAG THEIR FEET IN TERMS OF OPENING UP AN INVESTIGATION OR EVEN LETTING OTHER WITNESS TESTIMONIES OCCUR LIKE MARK JUDGE, FOR INSTANCE. I THINK WATCHING TODAY, IT SEEMED LIKE A LOT OF THE QUESTIONS THAT ARE STILL UNANSWERED COULD BE FLUSHED OUT IF SOME OTHER PEOPLE WERE CALLED TO TESTIFY. AND, TO ME, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE REPUBLICANS ARE TRYING TO RUSH IT THROUGH. I UNDERSTAND IF IT’S A GREAT CHANCE TO GET — TO CONSENT TO JUDICIAL INTERVIEW. BUT THE PROCESS NEEDS TO OCCUR IN THE NATURAL WAY. I THINK — BUT PEOPLE ON BOTH SIDES SHOULD BE ABLE TO AGREE THAT TESTIMONIES ARE NEEDED, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, ADDITIONAL TIME IS NEEDED TO ENSURE THAT THIS GENTLEMAN, KAVANAUGH, IS FIT TO SERVE ON THE SUPREME COURT. >>BOTTOM LINE, YES, NO, OR TO BE DETERMINED. DOES HE SURVIVE THIS? WILL HE BE CONFIRMED BY THE SENATE?>>I THINK IT’S INDICATIVE THAT THE SENATE IS ALREADY SCHEDULED TO VOTE IN THE MORNING BEFORE –>>COMMITTEE VOTE. >>AND I ASSUME THAT WITH THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY THERE IT WOULD PASS. I ASSUME THAT THEY’RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TRY TO GET THIS PASSED THROUGH BEFORE THE NOVEMBER MID TERMS BECAUSE I THINK THEY PROBABLY FEAR THAT THEIR MAJORITY IN THE SENATE COULD BE LOST THEN AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO SETTLE FOR A MODERATE OR SOMEBODY ELSE ON THE COURT AND THEY SEEM PRETTY SET ON KAVANAUGH FOR SOME REASON. >>OKAY. LANCE, THANK YOU. AND THEY SCHEDULED THAT THREE DAYS IN ORDER TO ANNOUNCE A COMMITTEE HEARING AND, OF COURSE, THEY CAN ALWAYS CANCEL IT. IT IS SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE TOMORROW MORNING 9:30 IN THE MORNING. KEY REPUBLICAN SENATOR AND KEY DEFENDER OF JUDGE KAVANAUGH, SENATOR JON CORNYN TELLING FOX NEWS THAT THE TEXAS REPUBLICAN SAID, QUOTE, I FOUND NO REASON TO FIND HER NOT CREDIBLE. LET’S GO TO ANNIE NEXT FROM GARDNER, KANSAS. DEMOCRATS LINE. ARE YOU WITH US?>>Caller: YEAH, HI!>>HELLO. GO AHEAD, PLEASE.>>Caller: I JUST — I’VE BEEN LISTENING TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS. I WANTED TO SAY YOU HAD A CALLER A FEW MOMENTS AGO WHO WAS TALKING ABOUT SEXUAL ASSAULT. ONE, IT’S NEVER YOUR FAULT, NO MATTER HOW FAR YOU ARE. TWO, I’VE BEEN WATCHING THE TRIAL — IT SEEMS LIKE A TRIAL. I’M SORRY. >>RIGHT. IT’S A HEARING. >>Caller: YEAH. AND I FIND DR. FORD FAIRLY CREDIBLE. THIS — DEMOCRATS ARE NOT DOING THEMSELVES ANY FAVORS RIGHT NOW. THEY — IT SEEMS LIKE THEY’RE KIND OF CRAWLING UP HER BUTT A BIT. WHY AREN’T THEY ASKING HER ANY QUESTIONS? THEY COULD FURTHER THE PROCESS ALONG AS MUCH AS THEY CAN. OTHER THAN THE FACT ABOUT THE FBI INVESTIGATION. WE KNOW HE DIDN’T HAVE AN INVESTIGATION. >>THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. THE RULE WAS THAT EACH SENATOR WOULD HAVE FIVE MINUTES. SO CHRISTINE BLASEY-FORD’S QUESTIONING IS OVER. UP NEXT IS JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH. FOLLOW-UP TWEET FROM SENATOR JON CORNYN’S OFFICE WRITING THE FOLLOWING. BUT WE HAVEN’T HEARD FROM JUDGE KAVANAUGH YET AND NO CORROBORATION FOR HER ALLEGATIONS. WE NEED TO CONSIDER ALL THE EVIDENCE TO SEE WHETHER BURDEN OF PROOF HAS BEEN MET. THAT FROM REPUBLICAN SENATOR JON CORNYN OF TEXAS. KEVIN, FROM BRIGHTON, MASSACHUSETTS, ON THE REPUBLICAN LIEN. WHAT HAVE YOU SEEN SO FAR, KEVIN? WHAT DO YOU THINK?>>Caller: THANKS FOR TAKING MY CALL. I WANTED TO WATCH THIS HEARING. I REALLY DIDN’T KNOW WHAT TO THINK. THE WHOLE THING HAS BEEN A REAL CIRCUS. I HAVE TO SAY I WAS TOTALLY STUNNED BY MY PERCEIVED COWARDNESS OF MY OWN PARTY. I MEAN, WE’VE GOT — WHAT IS IT, SIX REPUBLICAN SENATORS UP THERE AND NONE OF THEM CAN ASK THEIR OWN QUESTIONS. >>11. THERE’S 11. >>Caller: SORRY, 11 REPUBLICAN SENATORS AND THEY PUT A PROSECUTOR IN FRONT TO ASK HER QUESTIONS, LIKE SHE’S ON TRIAL FOR SOMETHING? I DIDN’T BELIEVE DR. FORD AT THE BEGINNING OF THE DAY, AT THE END OF THE DAY I’M PRETTY SURE WHAT SHE’S SAYING IS THE TRUTH AND I’M WORRIED THAT KAVANAUGH IS GOING TO GET CONFIRMED. I DON’T WANT TO SEE THAT GUY ON THE COURT. I’M A REPUBLICAN BUT I DON’T WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. >>KEVIN, THANK YOU. NEXT TO ANN FROM PISTON, PENNSYLVANIA, DEMOCRATS LINE. GOOD AFTERNOON, ANN. >>Caller: GOOD AFTERNOON. I WANTED TO REITERATE ONE OF YOUR OTHER PREVIOUS CALLERS, CHERYL, AS SOMEONE WHO WAS A VICTIM AND WAS ABUSED IN EVERY WAY POSSIBLE, BOTH SEXUALLY, PHYSICALLY AND MENTALLY, YOU ARE NOT AT FAULT. NO VICTIM OF ABUSE IS AT FAULT. SORRY. AND I’M DEEPLY DISMAYED AT THE CONDUCT OF OUR CONGRESS AND OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS. I CAN’T EVEN BELIEVE THAT THIS HAS FALLEN ON PARTY LINE. THIS SHOULD TRANSCEND PARTY LINES. WE SHOULD NOT WANT SOMEONE WHO COULD BE A POTENTIAL SEXUAL PREDATOR TO BE IN THE HIGHEST OFFICE OF THE LAND, DETERMINING THE VALUE AND WORTH OF WOMEN’S BODIES. AND AS A VICTIM OF ABUSE I CAN SAY THAT I EMPATHIZE AND UNDERSTAND HER POINT OF VIEW. MY OWN STEPFATHER, HE TWISTED MY ARM REPEATEDLY UNTIL IT ALMOST BROKE. MY MOTHER TOOK ME TO THE E.R. AND I TOLD A ROOM FULL OF DOCTORS AND MEDICAL PERSONNEL WHAT HAD HAPPENED. THEY TOLD ME THAT BECAUSE HE HAD NOT BROKEN MY ARM THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THAT COULD BE DONE. I DON’T REMEMBER HOW I GOT TO THE HOSPITAL. I DON’T REMEMBER THE DOCTOR’S NAMES OR THEIR FACES. I DON’T REMEMBER HOW I GOT HOME FROM THE HOSPITAL. BUT I DO REMEMBER MY STEPFATHER ABSOLUTELY WAS THE INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBLE FOR MY BEING THERE. SO I REALLY THINK THAT IT’S TIME THAT VICTIMS START TALKING ABOUT THEIR STORIES AND PEOPLE START LISTENING AND BELIEVING THEM. >>LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT YOUR SITUATION IN TERMS OF YOUR FATHER. DID YOU PRESS ANY CHARGES? HOW OLD WERE YOU AT THE TIME?>>Caller: I WAS YOUNG. I EVENTUALLY DID TAKE OUT A PSA AGAINST MY STEPFATHER. I WAS A SENIOR IN HIGH SCHOOL AND TOLD A JUDGE TELL ME IF I DIDN’T LIKE THE ABUSE I SHOULD LEAVE BECAUSE I WAS AN ADULT. >>WHAT ABOUT YOUR MOM AT THE TIME? DID YOU CONFIDE IN HER?>>Caller: OF COURSE, SHE KNEW. OF COURSE SHE KNEW. SHE CONDONED IT. >>WHY?>>Caller: I DON’T KNOW. BECAUSE SHE WAS ABUSED AS A CHILD HERSELF AND SHE THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, SHE DESERVED IT. I DON’T KNOW. SHE IS STILL MARRIED TO HIM. YOU WOULD HAVE TO ASK HER. I’VE BEEN STRUGGLING MY WHOLE LIFE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY. YOU FEEL WORTHLESS. YOU FEEL NOT GOOD ENOUGH. >>ONE OF THE THINGS — >>Caller: I DON’T — I DON’T THINK I WILL EVER GET OVER THIS MY ENTIRE LIFE. >>ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAS COME UP IS THAT SHE IS NOW COMING FORWARD, 36 YEARS AFTER THE FACT. CAN YOU RELATE TO THAT?>>Caller: YEAH, OF COURSE, I CAN. I MEAN, I CAME OUT TO MANY, MANY PEOPLE. AND I WASN’T BELIEVED. I EVEN — I TELL PEOPLE AND THEY WOULD SAY, WELL, THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM IS NO BETTER. BETTER. IT’S RIFE WITH ABUSE. SO THIS IS EVERYWHERE. THIS IS PERVASIVE THROUGHOUT OUR CULTURE AND I REALLY THINK IT’S TIME THAT WE — I KNOW I SOUND ANGRY BECAUSE I AM.>>YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO FEEL THAT WAY.>>IT’S — IT’S TEAM THAT WE AS A COUNTRY START DEALING WITH THESE ISSUES. ABUSE IS AROUND US. IT’S EVERYWHERE AND WE NEED TO START RECOGNIZING IT FOR WHAT IT IS.>>AND WHAT ARE YOU DOING TODAY?>>WHAT AM I DOING TODAY? I’M WATCHING THE SENATE HEARINGS>>WHAT HAVE YOU DONE SINCE YOUR ABUSE? HOW HAVE YOU MOVED ON WITH YOUR LIFE IS WHAT I MEANT TO ASK.>>I FEEL LIKE I’M TRAPPED. LIKE, I WASN’T. I DIDN’T DO WELL IN SCHOOL. SO I WASN’T ABLE TO GET A FORMAL EDUCATION. I’M UNEMPLOYED. I’VE WORKED IN CUSTOMER SERVICE AND I’VE HAD TO DEAL WITH SCREAMING CUSTOMERS WHICH IS ANOTHER FORM OF TRAUMA, AND I PROBABLY HAVE PTSD THAT’S UNDIAGNOSED, BUT I CAN’T GET MEDICAL TREATMENT AND I’M 34 YEARS OLD. I HAVEN’T HAD HEALTH INSURANCE SINCE I WAS 16. I IMAGINE THAT THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE IN MY SHOES THAT ARE SUFFERING IN THE SAME WAYS THAT I AM AND THEY’RE NOT GETTING TREATMENT THAT THEY NEED AND THEY’RE NOT LIVING FULFILLED LIVES AND I’M REALLY SAD. I’M REALLY SAD. THEY HAVE TRIED TO SHAME HER. I’VE SEEN COMMENTS ONLINE PEOPLE TRYING TO SHAME FORD FOR BEING SUCCESSFUL, FOR PERSEVERING DESPITE THE ABUSE SHE ENDURED.>>HANG IN THERE.>>IT’S DISGUSTING. >>THANK YOU FOR THE CALL.>>THANKS.>>WE APPRECIATE IT. FROM PENNSYLVANIA, SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN IS RANKING MEMBER AND JUST A SHORT WHILE AGO, WHAT I FIND MOST INEXCUSABLE IS THE RUSH TO JUDGMENT AND THE UNWILLINGNESS TO TAKE THESE KINDS OF ALLEGATIONS AT FACE VALUE AND LOOK AT THEM FOR WHAT THEY ARE, A REAL QUESTION OF CHARACTER FOR SOMEONE ASKING FOR A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT ON THE SUPREME COURT. NEXT IS JODY LYNN JOINING US FROM WEST JORDAN UTAH, REPUBLICAN LINE. YOU’VE WATCHED THE PROCEEDINGS THUS FAR. WHAT DO YOU THINK?>>WELL, AFTER THAT LAST LADY I KIND OF GOT LOST IN IT ALL. I’M SORRY. I’M AN OLDER LADY, IN MY 60s AND I HAVE TWO STORIES BEFORE I GET INTO THIS.>>I HAD AN OLDER GENTLEMAN, MY BOYFRIEND’S DAD WHO RAPED ME, AND HIS SON ACTUALLY HAD TO PULL HIM OFF OF ME. MY BOYFRIEND’S BROTHER, AND THEN I TRIED TO GET AWAY AND HE TRIED TO RUN ME OVER IN THE FIELD WHEN I WAS TRYING TO GET AWAY. IF THAT WASN’T BAD ENOUGH THEN MY FATHER RAPED ME. I COULDN’T TELL MY FATHER ABOUT THIS, AND I BROUGHT THIS ALL OUT OF ME AND IN EIGHT YEARS I DIDN’T TELL ANYBODY ABOUT IT BECAUSE THE COPS SAID SUPPRESSED MEMORY.>>CAN I STOP YOU. WHY ARE VICTIMS SO RELUCTANT TO TALK ABOUT IT, TO SPEAK OUT?>>WELL, I REALLY DO REMEMBER MY DAD AT ALL. HE SAID DON’T TELL YOUR MOM. FROM THAT POINT ON I DID NOT REMEMBER. >>YOU BLOCKED IT OUT. I BLOCKED IT TOTALLY. I DON’T REMEMBER SO I REALLY DID NOT REMEMBER, AND ONE DAY I WAS MAD AND I TOLD HIM HE WOULD BE SORRY AND MY MOM CAME HOME FROM WORK AND IT JUST CAME OUT AND I DON’T EVEN KNOW FROM WHERE AND IT JUST SHOCKED ME, YOU KNOW WHAT I’M SAYING? AND I REMEMBER EVERY LITTLE DETAIL. I MEAN, I REMEMBERED EVERYTHING AND THEN YEARS LATER WHEN MY MOM WAS WORKING IN THE OILFIELD ONE DAY MY EX-BOYFRIEND’S BROTHER CAME IN 30 YEARS LATER AND THAT’S WHEN I REMEMBERED ABOUT HIS DAD. THAT WAS 30 YEARS LATER. SO YEAH, YOU SUPPRESS THIS STUFF JUST LIKE THIS LADY SAYS, BUT WHEN I REMEMBERED, I REMEMBERED EVERY DETAIL AND I REMEMBER EVERY PLACE AND I REMEMBERED EVERYTHING.>>WHY DO YOU THINK YOU BLOCKED IT OUT IN YOUR MIND?>>BECAUSE IT WAS JUST SUPPRESSED AND I DIDN’T WANT TO REMEMBER. I DID NOT WANT TO REMEMBER. IT WAS HORRIBLE. HOW OLD ARE YOU NOW, JUDY LYNN.>>I’M IN MY 60s.>>SO THIS IS, WHAT? 47 YEARS AGO. I WAS ON THE HONOR ROLL THROUGH MY HIGH SCHOOLING AND IT WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM THIS LADY. AND I USED TO MAKE GOOD MONEY WHEN I WORKED. I ALWAYS MADE GOOD MONEY AND I HAD GOOD JOBS.>>SO WOULD YOU TELL — ORRIN HATCH? HOW SHOULD THEY VOTE?>>AT FIRST I WAS ALL FOR KAVANAUGH, BUT I WATCHED HER AND SOMETIMES — AND I BELIEVE YOU CAN SUPPRESS IT AND THEN I STARTED HEARING THE POLITICAL VIEWS ABOUT HOW SHE DIDN’T KNOW HOW SHE WAS PAYING FOR IT SO I’M GOING TO WAIT AND I’M NOT GOING TO SAY ANYTHING UNTIL I WATCH KAVANAUGH. I’LL LET HIM SAY HIS, AND I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I KNOW YOU SUPPRESS IT. I FEEL SORRY FOR HER, ACTUALLY, BECAUSE I FEEL LIKE SHE’S BEING USED AS A PAWN.>>JODY LYNN, THANKS FOR THE CALL. WE’LL MOVE ON WITH MORE CALLS AND YOU’RE LOOKING ON ONE SIDE OF THE SCREEN INSIDE THE DIRKSEN, THIS IS 226, SECOND FLOOR OF THE DIRKSEN BUILDING NAMED AFTER THE REPUBLICAN OF ILLINOIS, A FORMER REPUBLICAN LEADER AND OUTSIDE ON THE STEPS OF THE U.S. CAPITOL, THE SOUNDS, THE CHANT, THE DEMONSTRATIONS. THESE DEMONSTRATORS OPPOSED TO JUDGE GREG KAVANAUGH. JUDGE KAVANAUGH WILL DELIVER AN OPENING STATEMENT AND THEN TAKE QUESTIONS, FIVE MINUTES FROM EACH SIDE, ATTORNEY MITCHELL IS DOING THE QUESTIONING FOR THE REPUBLICANS AND THEY’LL EACH HAVE FIVE MINUTES IN THE ROUND. ALEX FROM GEORGIA. INDEPENDENT LINE, GO AHEAD, PLEASE.>>HELLO. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT ALL THESE REPUBLICANS TALKING ABOUT — WELL, NOT EVEN TALKING. THEY HAD THIS FEMALE ATTORNEY OUT IN FRONT OF THEM AND IT’S JUST AWFUL. I CAN’T BELIEVE, LIKE, THIS HAS ECHOES OF CONSPIRACY THEORIES OF PEOPLE NOT BELIEVING SHOOTING SURVIVORS. CAN YOU NOT BELIEVE THIS VICTIM? HOW CAN YOU NOT BELIEVE ALL THESE VICTIMS? AND I JUST THINK ALL REPS ARE JUST AWFUL, TRYING TO PUSH THIS NOMINATION THROUGH.>>ALEX, THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. THIS IS THE HEADLINE FROM THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE. UTAH SENATOR DURING THE HEARINGS AND THIS IS FROM “THE WASHINGTON TIMES,” A PHOTOGRAPH OF CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD DURING HER HEARING AND CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD TELLS SENATORS SHE IS 100% SURE THAT BRETT KAVANAUGH WAS HER ATTACKER. LET’S GO NEXT TO MAYA JOINING US FROM BROOKLYN, NEW YORK. DEMOCRAT LINE. GO AHEAD, PLEASE. >>HI. THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL. I WANTED TO SHARE MY PERSPECTIVE ON WHAT WAS GOING ON. I USUALLY VOTE DEMOCRATIC AND TO ME WHEN I FIRST HEARD ABOUT THESE ALLEGATIONS, TO ME IT SOUNDED MORE LIKE A QUESTION OF CRUELTY RATHER THAN A QUESTION OF SEXUAL ASSAULT. WHEN I FIRST HEARD THE ALLEGATION THE FIRST THING THAT CAME INTO MY MIND WAS THE WAY THAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH TREATED FRED GUTTENBERG WHEN HE APPROACHED HIM, A VERY ICY, LACK OF COMPASSION AND ONLY A SHORT WHILE LATER — >>WE SHOULD POINT OUT THAT HIS DAUGHTER WAS KILLED ON FEBRUARY 14th IN THAT FLORIDA SCHOOL SHOOTING.>>YES, AND ONLY A SHORT WHILE LATER WHEN JUDGE KAVANAUGH WAS BEING QUESTIONED BY JUDGE TILLIS HE WAS LAUGHING FONDLY ABOUT BEING ABLE TO COME HOME EVERY NIGHT AND GREET HIS OWN DAUGHTER. SO I’M NOT WORRIED THAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH WOULD COMMIT ANOTHER SEXUAL ASSAULT, BUT FOR HIM TO BE ON THE SUPREME COURT, THE HIGHEST JUSTICE IN THE LAND, I THINK THE CHARACTER OF, LIKE, YOU HAVE CRUELTY. IF YOU WERE BORN IN SUCH A SPACE — IN SUCH A CRUCIBLE OF PRIVILEGE AND AND YOU DID THESE THINGS WHEN YOU WERE A KID AND SOMETHING HAPPENED WHERE YOU GREW AS A PERSON THAT WOULD BE ONE THING, BUT TO ME SHE’S SEXUAL ALLEGATIONS ONLY CORROBORATED OTHER THINGS THAT I FOUND TO BE DISQUALIFYING ABOUT HIM, AND IT MADE ME REALLY START THINKING ABOUT THE PARADIGM OF ADVANCING PEOPLE WHO COME FROM SUCH PRIVILEGE AND ARE THEY ABLE TO RELATE TO PEOPLE IN THE WORKING CLASS. >>THIS IS SENATOR TILLIS AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE COME TOGETHER AND I WANT TO SHOW YOU THE FRONT PAGE OF THE NEW YORK TIMES AND YOU WILL SEE CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD. AS YOU LOOK ON THE SCREEN, SEATED BEHIND BRETT KAVANAUGH IS CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD’S ATTORNEY. HE WILL BE THERE AND HE WILL BE IN THE SHOT AS JUDGE KAVANAUGH BEGINS HIS OPENING STATEMENT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT POINT. WE’LL TAKE YOU BACK OUTSIDE TO THE HEARING ROOM AS MEMBERS OF THE SENATE CONTINUE TO COME IN AND TRY TO SQUEEZE IN MAYBE ONE OR TWO MORE CALL, BUT THE HEARING PRESUMABLY WILL START MOMENTARILY. LET’S GO TO CHASE JOINING US FROM TERRE HAUTE, INDIANA. GO AHEAD, CHASE.>>HELLO?>>YOU’RE ON THE AIR.>>HEY, THANKS FOR TAKING MY CALL. CAN YOU HEAR ME?>>WE CAN, CHASE. GO AHEAD.>>HI. THANKS FOR TAKING MY CALL.>>CHASE, YOU HAVE A MINUTE BECAUSE THE HEARING WILL BEGIN SHORTLY.>>OH, WELL I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT, OF COURSE, KAVANAUGH’S GOING TO BE CONFIRMED KIND OF WHAT THE REPUBLICANS ARE GOING FOR AND IT’S KIND OF THEIR MOTTO, THEY’LL FORCE HIM THROUGH. IT’S THEIR WAY. >>WE SHOULD POINT OUT THAT CAPITOL POLICE HAVE NOW MOVED THE ATTORNEY FOR CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD. SO HE IS NOW NO LONGER DIRECTLY BEHIND JUDGE KAVANAUGH. WE’LL GO TO CHERYL IN BLAINE, WASHINGTON, DEMOCRATS LINE. GOOD AFTERNOON. >>HI. I’D JUST LIKE TO COMMENT REGARDING ON BEING SEXUALLY ASSAULTED. I WAS SEXUALLY ASSAULTED AT 14. I WAS ISSUED DRUGS AND IF IT HADN’T BEEN FOR MY MOTHER IT WOULD HAVE NEVER GONE TO COURT. BUT EVEN THIS HAPPENED BACK IN 1976. GOING TO COURT AND THE QUESTIONS THAT THE POLICE ASK YOU AND THE PROSECUTOR ASK YOU ARE SO INTIMATE AND DEGRADING AND YOU DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT AND IT IS A HARD THING, AND YOU NEVER — YOU NEVER FORGET IT. I’M NOW 58 YEARS OLD. THIS HAPPENED WHEN I WAS 14. I CAN TELL YOU THEIR NAMES AND I CAN DESCRIBE TO YOU WHAT THEY LOOKED LIKE AND EVEN THOUGH I WAS DRUGGED. I CAN TELL YOU EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. IF THIS MAN GETS CONFIRMED AND THERE ARE OTHER WOMEN NOW THAT HAVE COME FORWARD, IT IS A HORRIBLE THING FOR THIS COUNTRY TO DO THAT AND THAT’S MY OPINION AND I THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. >>CHERYL, JUST STAY ON THE LINE, CHRIS COONS, DO YOU FIND CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD CREDIBLE?>>YES, I DO. >>THANK YOU FOR THE CALL AND THANK YOU FOR SHARING YOUR STORY WITH US.>>THANK YOU.>>WE’RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WATCH THE ROOM BOTH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE AS MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE BEGIN TO GATHER THEIR PROCEEDINGS. WE’LL GO TO SCOTT FOR A QUICK MOMENT FROM TEXAS CITY, TEXAS.>>GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL. >>GO AHEAD.>>I’VE BECOME — WITH THE INSTANT CREDIBILITY THAT EACH SIDE HAS BEEN GIVING TO DR. FORD OR JUDGE KAVANAUGH. IT’S JUST BECOME SO POLITICIZED THAT EVERYONE INSTANTLY HAS THEIR OWN OPINION AND THEY’RE SO ENTRENCHED THAT THEY WON’T OPEN THEIR EARS AND LISTEN TO IT. THANKFULLY WE’LL GET TO WATCH BOTH SIDES ANSWER QUESTIONS AND AT THAT POINT I THINK WE CAN MAKE CREDIBILITY ASSESSMENTS, BUT THIS IS — IN THE END IT SHOULD COME DOWN TO THE BURDEN OF PROOF AND HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET SOME BURDEN OF PROOF FROM ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER AND WE CAN MAKE A GOOD DECISION ON WHO SHOULD AND SHOULDN’T BE SUPREME COURT JUSTICE.>>THANK YOU FOR THE CALL.>>WE’RE GOING JUST WATCH THE ROOM FOR THE MOMENT. IF THERE IS AN EXTENDED BREAK AND THERE IS TOM TILLIS OF NORTH CAROLINA AND LET ME SHARE WITH YOU THE HEADLINES OF THE NEW YORK TIMES. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD SHE IS 100% SURE THAT KAVANAUGH WAS HER ATTACKER AND ALSO THE TWITTER FEED AND A REMINDER, ALL OF OUR COVERAGE IS AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE OF C-SPAN.ORG. OUR LIVE COVERAGE CONTINUES.>>>JUDGE KAVANAUGH. WE WELCOME YOU. ARE YOU READY? I HAVE A — I HAVE SOMETHING I WANT TO CLEAR UP FROM THE LAST MEETING THAT DOESN’T AFFECT YOU. SO BEFORE I SWEAR YOU, I WOULD LIKE TO EXPLAIN MY RESPONSE TO SENATOR KENNEDY RIGHT AFTER THE BREAK. AT THAT TIME I ENTERED INTO THE RECORD THE STATEMENTS OF THREE WITNESSES DR. FORD SAID WERE ALSO AT THE PARTY. THESE STAPLES WERE PROVIDED TO US UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY BY LYING — IF YOU LIE TO CONGRESS. AS SOON AS MY TEAM LEARNED THE NAMES OF THREE POTENTIAL WITNESSES, WE REACHED OUT REQUESTING AN INTERVIEW. IN RESPONSE ALL THREE SUBMITTED STATEMENTS TO US DENYING ANY KNOWLEDGE OF THE GATHERING, DR. FORD DESCRIBED. IF WE HAD CALLS WITH THEM WE WOULD HAVE INVITED THE MINORITY TO JOIN. ANY TIME WE RECEIVED ANY INFORMATION REGARDING JUDGE KAVANAUGH WE’VE SOUGHT TO IMMEDIATELY FOLLOW THROUGH AND INVESTIGATE. DR. FORD’S LETTER FOR WEEKS AND THE STAFF TOLD US THAT THEY BELIEVED IT IS, QUOTE, HIGHLY INAPPROPRIATE TO HAVE THESE FOLLOW-UP CALLS BEFORE THE FBI FINISHES ITS INVESTIGATION, END QUOTE, EVEN THOUGH THE FBI HAD COMPLETED ITS BACKGROUND INFORMATION WHEN WE FOLLOWED UP WITH JUDGE KAVANAUGH AFTER WE RECEIVED DR. FORD’S ALLEGATIONS, THE RANKING MEMBER STAFF JOINED US, EVEN THOUGH THESE CALLS ARE USUALLY DONE ON A BIPARTISAN BASIS. THEY JOINED OTHER CALLS WITH THE JUDGE, BUT THEY DIDN’T PARTICIPATE OR ASK ANY QUESTION. WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE, SIR? DO YOU AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY THAT YOU’RE ABOUT TO GIVE BEFORE THE COMMITTEE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING, BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD?>>I DO.>>AND LIKE WE — LIKE WE OFFERED TO SENATOR — OR TO DR. FORD, YOU CAN TAKE WHATEVER TIME YOU WANT NOW FOR YOUR OPENING STATEMENT AND THEN WE’LL GO TO QUESTIONS. SO PROCEED.>>MR. CHAIRMAN, RANKING MEMBER FEINSTEIN, MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, THANK YOU FOR ALLOWING ME TO MAKE MY STATEMENT. I WROTE IT MYSELF YESTERDAY AFTERNOON AND EVENING, NO ONE HAS SEEN A DRAFT OR IT EXCEPT FOR ONE OF MY FORMER LAW CLERKS. THIS IS MY STATEMENT. LESS THAN TWO WEEKS AGO DR. FORD PUBLICLY ACCUSED ME OF COMMITTING WRONGDOING AT AN EVENT MORE THAN 36 YEARS AGO WHEN WE WERE BOTH IN HIGH SCHOOL. I DENIED THE ALLEGATION IMMEDIATELY, CATEGORICALLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY. ALL FOUR PEOPLE ALLEGEDLY AT THE EVENT INCLUDING DR. FORD’S LONGTIME FRIEND, MISS KEISER HAVE SAID THEY RECALLED NO SUCH EVENT. HER LONGTIME FRIEND MISS KEISER SAID UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY THAT SHE DOES NOT KNOW ME, AND DOES NOT BELIEVE SHE EVER SAW ME AT A PARTY EVER. HERE IS THE QUOTE FROM MISS KEISER’S ATTORNEY’S LETTER. QUOTE, SIMPLY PUT, MISS KEISER DOES NOT KNOW MR. KAVANAUGH. SHE HAS NO RECOLLECTION OF EVER BEING AT A PARTY OR GATHERING WHERE HE WAS PRESENT WITH OR WITHOUT DR. FORD, END QUOTE. THINK ABOUT THAT FACT. THE DAY AFTER THE ALLEGATION OCCURRED I TOLD THIS COMMITTEE THAT I WANTED A HEARING AS SOON AS POSSIBLE TO CLEAR MY NAME. I DEMANDED THE HEARING FOR THE VERY NEXT DAY. UNFORTUNATELY, IT TOOK THE COMMITTEE TEN DAYS TO GET TO THIS HEARING AND THOSE TEN LONG DAYS AS WAS PREDICTABLE AND AS I PREDICTED MY FAMILY AND MY NAME HAVE BEEN TOTALLY AND PERMANENTLY DESTROYED BY VICIOUS AND FALSE ADDITIONAL ACCUSATIONS. THE TEN-DAY DELAY HAS BEEN HARMFUL TO ME AND MY FAMILY, TO THE SUPREME COURT AND TO THE COUNTRY. WHEN THIS ALLEGATION FIRST AROSE I WELCOMED ANY KIND OF INVESTIGATION, SENATE, FBI OR OTHERWISE. THE COMMITTEE NOW HAS CONDUCTED A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION AND I’VE COOPERATED FULLY. I KNOW THAT ANY KIND OF INVESTIGATION, SENATE, FBI, MONTGOMERY COUNTY POLICE, WHATEVER WILL CLEAR ME. LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE I KNOW. LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE KNOWN ME MY WHOLE LIFE. LISTEN TO THE PEOPLE I’VE GROWN UP WITH AND WORKED WITH AND PLAYED WITH AND COACHED WITH AND DATED AND TAUGHT AND GONE TO GAMES WITH AND HAD BEERS WITH AND LISTEN TO THE WITNESSES WHO ALLEGEDLY WERE AT THIS EVENT 36 YEARS AGO. LISTEN TO MISS KEYSER. SHE DOES NOT KNOW ME. I WAS NOT AT THE PARTY DESCRIBED BY DR. FORD. THIS CONFIRMATION PROCESS HAS BECOME A NATIONAL DISGRACE. THE CONSTITUTION GIVES THE SENATE AN IMPORTANT ROLE IN THE CONFIRMATION PROCESS, BUT YOU HAVE REPLACED ADVICE AND CONSENT WITH SEARCH AND DESTROY. SINCE MY NOMINATION IN JULY THERE’S BEEN A FRENZY ON THE LEFT TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING, ANYTHING TO BLOCK MY CONFIRMATION. SHORTLY AFTER I WAS NOMINATED THE DEMOCRATIC SENATE LEADER SAID HE WOULD, QUOTE, OPPOSE ME WITH EVERYTHING HE’S GOT. A DEMOCRATIC SENATOR ON THIS COMMITTEE PUBLICLY REFERRED TO ME AS EVIL. EVIL. THINK ABOUT THAT WORD, AND SAID THAT THOSE WHO SUPPORTED ME WERE, QUOTE, COMPLICIT IN EVIL. ANOTHER DEMOCRATIC SENATOR ON THIS COMMITTEE SAID, QUOTE, JUDGE KAVANAUGH IS YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE. A FORMER HEAD OF THE NATIONAL DEMOCRATIC COMMITTEE SAID, QUOTE, JUDGE KAVANAUGH WILL THREATEN THE LIVES OF MILLIONS OF AMERICANS FOR DECADES TO COME. I UNDERSTAND THE PASSIONS OF THE MOMENT, BUT I WOULD SAY TO THOSE SENATORS, YOUR WORDS HAVE MEANING. MILLIONS OF AMERICANS LISTEN CAREFULLY TO YOU GIVEN COMMENTS LIKE THOSE, IS IT ANY SURPRISE THAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN WILLING TO DO ANYTHING TO MAKE ANY PHYSICAL THREAT AGAINST MY FAMILY, TO SEND ANY VIOLENT E-MAIL TO MY WIFE, TO MAKE ANY KIND OF ALLEGATIONS AGAINST ME AND AGAINST MY FRIENDS, TO BLOW ME UP AND TAKE ME DOWN. FOR DECADES TO COME I FEAR THE COUNTRY WILL REAP THE WHIRLWIND. THE BEHAVIOR OF SEVERAL OF THE DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF THIS COMMITTEE AT MY HEARING A FEW WEEKS AGO WAS AN EMBARRASSMENT, BUT AT LEAST IT WAS A GOOD OLD-FASHIONED ATTEMPT AT WORKING. THOSE EFFORTS DIDN’T WORK. WHEN I DID AT LEAST OKAY ENOUGH AT THE HEARINGS THAT IT LOOKED LIKE I MIGHT ACTUALLY GET CONFIRMED A NEW TACTIC WAS NEEDED. SOME OF YOU WERE LYING IN WAIT AND HAD IT READY. THIS FIRST ALLEGATION WAS HELD IN SECRET FOR WEEKS BY A DEMOCRATIC MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE AND BY STAFF. IT WOULD BE NEEDED ONLY IF YOU COULDN’T TAKE ME OUT ON THE MERIT. WHEN IT WAS NEEDED THIS ALLEGATION WAS UNLEASHED AND PUBLICLY DEPLOYED OVER DR. FORD’S WISHES. AND THEN — AND THEN AS NO-DOUBT WAS EXPECTED IF NOT PLANNED, CAME A LONG SERIES OF FALSE, LAST-MINUTE SMEARS DESIGNED TO SCARE ME AND DRIVE ME OUT OF THE PROCESS BEFORE ANY HEARING OCCURRED, CRAZY STUFF, GANGS, ILLEGITIMATE CHILDREN, FIGHTS ON BOATS IN RHODE ISLAND, ALL NONSENSE REPORTED BREATHLESSLY AND OFTEN UNCRITICALLY BY THE MEDIA. THIS HAS DESTROYED MY FAMILY AND MY GOOD NAME. A GOOD NAME BUILT UP THROUGH DECADES OF VERY HARD WORK AND PUBLIC SERVICE AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF THE AMERICAN GOVERNMENT. THIS WHOLE TWO-WEEK EFFORT HAS BEEN A CALCULATED AND ORCHESTRATED POLITICAL HIT FUELLED WITH APPARENT PENT-UP ANGER ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP AND THE 2016 ELECTION, FEAR THAT HAS BEEN UNFAIRLY STOKED ABOUT MY JUDICIAL RECORD. REVENGE ON BEHALF OF THE CLINTONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN MONEY FROM OUTSIDE LEFT-WING OPPOSITION GROUPS. THIS IS A CIRCUS. THE CONSEQUENCES WILL EXTEND LONG PAST MY NOMINATION. THE CONSEQUENCES WILL BE WITH US FOR DECADES. THIS GROTESQUE, CHARACTER ASSASSINATION WILL DISSUADE CONFIDENT AND GOOD PEOPLE OF ALL POLITICAL PERSUASIONS FROM SERVING OUR COUNTRY AND AS WE ALL KNOW IN THE POLITICAL SYSTEM OF THE EARLY 2000s, WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND. I AM AN OPTIMISTIC GUY. I ALWAYS TRY TO BE ON THE SUNRISE SIDE OF THE MOUNTAIN AND BE OPTIMISTIC ABOUT THE DAY THAT IS COMING, BUT TODAY I HAVE TO SAY THAT I FEAR FOR THE FUTURE. THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE I TOLD THIS COMMITTEE THAT A FEDERAL JUDGE MUST BE INDEPENDENT, NOT SWAYED BY PUBLIC OR POLITICAL PRESSURE. I SAID I WAS SUCH A JUDGE, AND I AM. I WILL NOT BE INTIMIDATED INTO WITHDRAWING FROM THIS PROCESS. YOU’VE TRIED HARD. YOU’VE GIVEN IT YOUR ALL. NO ONE CAN QUESTION YOUR EFFORTS AND YOUR COORDINATED AND WELL-FUNDED EFFORT TO DESTROY MY GOOD NAME AND DESTROY MY FAMILY WILL NOT DRIVE ME OUT. THE VILE THREATS OF VIOLENCE AGAINST MY FAMILY WILL NOT DRIVE ME OUT. YOU MAY DEFEAT ME IN THE FINAL VOTE, BUT YOU’LL NEVER GET ME TO QUIT. NEVER. I’M HERE TODAY TO TELL THE TRUTH. I’VE NEVER SEXUALLY ASSAULTED ANYONE. NOT IN HIGH SCHOOL, NOT IN COLLEGE, NOT EVER. SEXUAL ASSAULT IS HORRIFIC. ONE OF MY CLOSEST FRIENDS TO THIS DAY IS A WOMAN WHO WAS SEXUALLY ABUSED AND WHO IN THE 1990s WHEN WE WERE IN OUR 30s CONFIDED IN ME ABOUT THE ABUSE AND SOUGHT MY ADVICE. I WAS ONE OF THE ONLY PEOPLE SHE CONSULTED. ALLEGATIONS OF SEXUAL ASSAULT MUST ALWAYS BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. ALWAYS. THOSE WHEN MAKE ALLEGATIONS ALWAYS DESERVE TO BE HEARD. AT THE SAME TIME THE PERSON WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF THE ALLEGATIONS ALSO DESERVES TO BE HEARD. DUE PROCESS IS A FOUNDATION OF THE AMERICAN RULE OF LAW. DUE PROCESS MEANS LISTENING TO BOTH SIDES. AS I TOLD YOU IN MY HEARING THREE WEEKS AGO, I’M THE ONLY CHILD OF MARTHA AND ED KAVANAUGH. THEY’RE HERE TODAY. WHEN I WAS 10 MY MOM WENT TO LAW SCHOOL AND AS A LAWYERS SHE WORKED HARD AND OVERCAME BARRIERS INCLUDING THE WORKPLACE SEXUAL HARASSMENT THAT SO MANY WOMEN FACED AT THE TIME AND STILL FACE TODAY. SHE BECAME A TRAILBLAZER, ONE OF MARYLAND’S EARLIEST WOMEN PROSECUTORS AND TRIAL TESTED. SHE AND MY DAD TAUGHT ME THE IMPORTANCE OF EQUALITY AND RESPECT FOR ALL PEOPLE AND SHE INSPIRED ME TO BE A LAWYER AND A JUDGE. LAST TIME I WAS HERE I TOLD YOU THAT WHEN MY MOM WAS A PROSECUTOR AND I WAS IN HIGH SCHOOL SHE USED TO PRACTICE HER CLOSING ARGUMENTS AT THE DINING ROOM TABLE ON MY DAD AND ME. AS I TOLD YOU, HER TRADEMARK LINE WAS USE YOUR COMMON SENSE, WHAT RINGS TRUE, WHAT RINGS FALSE. HER TRADEMARK LINE IS A GOOD REMINDER AS WE SIT TODAY SOME 36 YEARS AFTER AN EVENT OCCUR WITH NO CORROBORATION AND REFUTED BY THE PEOPLE WHO WERE ALLEGEDLY THERE. AFTER BEING IN THE PUBLIC ARENA OF 36 YEARS WITHOUT A HINT, A WHIFF OF AN ALLEGATION LIKE THIS. AND WITH MY NOMINATION TO THE SUPREME COURT WAS JUST ABOUT TO BE VOTED ON AT A TIME WHEN I’M CALLED EVIL BY DEMOCRATIC MEMBER OF THIS COMMITTEE, WHILE DEMOCRATIC OPPONENTS OF MY NOMINATION SAY PEOPLE WILL DIE IF I AM CONFIRMED. THIS ONSLAUGHT OF LAST-MINUTE ALLEGATIONS DOES NOT RING TRUE. I’M NOT QUESTIONING THAT DR. FORD MAY HAVE BEEN SEXUALLY ASSAULTED BY SOME PERSON IN SOME PLACE AT SOME TIME, BUT I HAVE NEVER DONE THIS TO HER OR TO ANYONE. THAT’S NOT WHO I AM. IT IS NOT WHO I WAS. I AM INNOCENT OF THIS CHARGE. I INTEND NO ILL WILL TO DR. FORD AND HER FAMILY. MY DAUGHTER LIZA SAID THEIR PRAYERS AND LITTLE LIZA, 10 YEARS OLD — SAID TO ASHLEY, WE SHOULD PRAY FOR THE WOMAN, A LOT OF WISDOM FROM A 10-YEAR-OLD — WE MEAN — WE MEAN NO ILL WILL. FIRST, LET’S START WITH MY CAREER. FOR THE LAST 26 YEARS SINCE 1992, I’VE SERVED IN MANY HIGH-PROFILE AND SENSITIVE GOVERNMENT POSITIONS FOR WHICH THE FBI HAS INVESTIGATED MY BACKGROUND SIX SEPARATE TIMES. SIX SEPARATE FBI BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS OVER 26 YEARS. ALL OF THEM AFTER THE EVENT ALLEGED HERE. I’VE BEEN IN THE PUBLIC ARENA AND UNDER EXTREME PUBLIC SCRUTINY FOR DECADES. IN 1992 I WORKED FOR THE OFFICE OF SOLICITOR GENERAL IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. IN 1993 I CLERKED ON THE SUPREME COURT FOR JUSTICE ANTHONY KENNEDY. I SPENT FOUR YEARS AT THE INDEPENDENT COUNSEL’S OFFICE DURING THE 1990s. THAT OFFICE WAS THE SUBJECT OF ENORMOUS SCRUTINY FROM THE MEDIA. THE YEAR OF THE IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT CLINTON OUR OFFICE AND I PERSONALLY WERE IN THE MIDDLE OF INTENSE NATIONAL MEDIA AND POLITICAL SPOTLIGHT. I AND OTHER LEADING MEMBERS OF KEN STARR’S OFFICE WERE OPPOSITION RESEARCH FROM HEAD TO TOE, FROM BIRTH TO THE PRESENT DAY. RECALL THE PEOPLE WHO WERE EXPOSED THAT YEAR OF 1998 OF HAVING ENGAGED IN SEXUAL WRONGDOING OR INDISCRETIONS IN THEIR PAST. ONE PERSON ON THE LEFT EVEN PAID $1 MILLION FOR PEOPLE TO REPORT EVIDENCE OF SEXUAL WRONGDOING AND IT WORKED. IT EXPOSED SOME PROMINENT PEOPLE. NOTHING ABOUT ME. FROM 2001 TO 2006 I WORKED FOR GEORGE W. BUSH IN THE WHITE HOUSE. AS SECRETARY I WAS BY PRESIDENT BUSH’S SIDE FOR THREE YEARS AND WAS ENTRUSTED WITH THE NATION’S MOST SENSITIVE SECRETS. I TRAVELLED ON AIR FORCE ONE ALL OVER THE COUNTRY AND THE WORLD WITH PRESIDENT BUSH. I WENT EVERYWHERE WITH HIM FROM TEXAS TO PAKISTAN, FROM ALASKA TO AUSTRALIA, FROM BUCKINGHAM PALACE TO THE VATICAN. THREE YEARS IN THE WEST WING, FIVE AND A HALF YEARS IN THE WHITE HOUSE. I WAS THEN NOMINATED TO BE A JUDGE ON THE D.C. CIRCUIT. I WAS THOROUGHLY VETTED BY THE WHITE HOUSE, THE FBI, THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION AND THIS COMMITTEE. I SAT BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE FOR TWO THOROUGH CONFIRMATION HEARINGS IN 2004 AND 2006. FOR THE PAST 12 YEARS LEADING UP TO MY NOMINATION TO THIS JOB, I’VE SERVED IN A VERY PUBLIC ARENA AS A FEDERAL JUDGE ON WHAT IS OFTEN REFERRED TO AS THE SECOND MOST IMPORTANT COURT IN THE COUNTRY. I’VE HANDLED SOME OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT AND SENSITIVE CASES AFFECTING THE LIVES AND LIBERTIES OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. I HAVE BEEN A GOOD JUDGE AND FOR THIS NOMINATION ANOTHER FBI BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION, ANOTHER BAR ASSOCIATION INVESTIGATION, 31 HOURS OF HEARINGS, 65 SENATOR MEETINGS, 1200 WRITTEN QUESTIONS, MORE THAN ALL PREVIOUS SUPREME COURT NOMINEES COMBINED. THROUGHOUT THAT ENTIRE TIME, THROUGHOUT MY 53 YEARS AND SEVEN MONTHS ON THIS EARTH UNTIL LAST WEEK, NO ONE EVER ACCUSED ME OF ANY KIND OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT. NO ONE EVER. A LIFETIME. A LIFETIME OF PUBLIC SERVICE AND A LIFETIME OF HIGH-PROFILE PUBLIC SERVICE AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS OF AMERICAN GOVERNMENT, AND NEVER A HINT OF ANYTHING OF THIS KIND, AND THAT’S BECAUSE NOTHING OF THIS KIND EVER HAPPENED. SECOND, LET’S TURN TO SPECIFICS. I CATEGORICALLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY DENY THE ALLEGATION AGAINST ME BY DR. FORD. I NEVER HAD ANY SEXUAL OR PHYSICAL ENCOUNTER OF ANY KIND WITH DR. FORD. I NEVER ATTENDED A GATHERING LIKE THE ONE DR. FORD DESCRIBES IN HER ALLEGATIONS. I’VE NEVER SEXUALLY ASSAULTED DR. FORD OR ANYONE. AGAIN, I AM NOT QUESTIONING THAT DR. FORD MAY HAVE BEEN SEXUALLY ASSAULTED BY SOME PERSON IN SOME PLACE AT SOME TIME, BUT I’VE NEVER DONE THAT TO HER OR TO ANYONE. DR. FORD’S ALLEGATIONS STEMS FROM A PARTY THAT SHE ALLEGES OCCURRED DURING THE SUMMER OF 1982. 36 YEARS AGO. I WAS 17 YEARS OLD, BETWEEN MY JUNIOR AND SENIOR YEARS OF HIGH SCHOOL AT GEORGETOWN PREP, A RIGOROUS, ALL-BOYS CATHOLIC JESUIT HIGH SCHOOL IN ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND. WHEN MY FRIENDS AND I SPENT TIME AT PARTIES OVER THE WEEKEND IT WAS FROM ALL-GIRLS SCHOOLS FROM IMMACK LATAH, HOLY CROSS AND DR. FORD DID NOT ATTEND ONE OF THOSE SCHOOLS. SHEA ATTENDED A PRIVATE SCHOOL NAMED HOLTON ARMS AND SHE WAS A YEAR BEHIND ME. SHE AND I DID NOT TRAVEL IN THE SAME SOCIAL CIRCLES. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT WE MET AT SOME POINT AT SOME EVENTS, ALTHOUGH I DO NOT RECALL THAT. TO REPEAT, ALL OF THE PEOPLE IDENTIFIED BY DR. FORD AS BEING PRESENT AT THE PARTY HAVE SAID THEY DO NOT REMEMBER ANY SUCH PARTY EVER HAPPENING IMPORTANTLY, HER FRIEND, MISS KEYSER HAS NOT ONLY DENIED KNOWLEDGE OF THE PARTY. MISS KEYSER SAID UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY, SHE DOES NOT KNOW ME. DOES NOT RECALL EVER BEING AT A PARTY WITH ME EVER, AND MY TWO MALE FRIENDS WHO WERE ALLEGEDLY THERE WHO KNEW ME WELL HAVE TOLD THIS COMMITTEE UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY THAT THEY DO NOT RECALL ANY SUCH PARTY AND THAT I NEVER DID OR WOULD DO ANYTHING LIKE THIS. DR. FORD’S ALLEGATION IS NOT NEARLY UNCORROBORATED. IT IS REFUTED BY THE VERY PEOPLE SHE SAYS WERE THERE INCLUDING BY A LONGTIME FRIEND OF HERS, REFUTED. THIRD, DR. FORD HAS SAID THAT THIS EVENT OCCURRED AT A HOUSE NEAR COLUMBIA COUNTRY CLUB WHICH IS AT THE CORNER OF CONNECTICUT AVENUE AND CHEVY CHASE, MARYLAND. IN HER LETTER TO SENATOR FEINSTEIN, SHE SAID THAT THERE WERE FOUR OTHER PEOPLE AT THE HOUSE, BUT NONE OF THOSE PEOPLE NOR I LIVED NEAR COLUMBIA COUNTRY CLUB. AS OF THE SUMMER OF 1982, DR. FORD WAS 15 AND COULD NOT DRIVE YET. SHE DID NOT LIVE NEAR COLUMBIA COUNTRY CLUB. SHE SAID CONFIDENTLY THAT SHE HAD ONE BEER AT THE PARTY. SHE DID NOT SAY HOW SHE GOT TO THE HOUSE IN QUESTION OR HOW SHE GOT HOME OR WHOSE HOUSE IT WAS. FOURTH, I’VE SUBMITTED TO THIS COMMITTEE DETAILED CALENDARS RECORDING MY ACTIVITIES IN THE SUMMER OF 1982. WHY DID I KEEP CALENDARS? MY DAD STARTED KEEPING DETAILED CALENDARS OF HIS LIFE IN 1978. HE DID SO WITH BOTH A CALENDAR AND A DIARY. VERY ORGANIZED GUY, TO PUT IT MILDLY. CHRISTMAS TIME WE’D SIT AROUND AND HE WOULD HAVE OLD MILESTONE, OLD WEDDINGS AND EVENTS FROM HIS CALENDARS. IN NINTH GRADE — IN NINTH GRADE IN 1980 I STARTED KEEPING CALENDARS OF MY OWN. FOR ME ALSO IT’S BOTH A CALENDAR AND A DIARY. I’VE KEPT SUCH CALENDARS AND DIARIES FOR THE LAST 38 YEARS. MINE ARE NOT AS GOOD AS MY DAD’S IN SOME YEARS, AND WHEN I WAS A KID THE CALENDARS ARE ABOUT WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT FROM A KID. SOME GOOFY PARTS TO EMBARRASSING PARTS, BUT I DID HAVE THE SUMMER OF 1982 DOCUMENTED PRETTY WELL. THE EVENT DESCRIBED BY DR. FORD PRESUMABLY HAPPENED ON A WEEKEND AS I BELIEVE EVERYONE WORKED AND HAD JOBS IN THE SUMMERS, AND IN ANY EVENT, A DRUNKEN EARLY EVENING EVENT OF THE KIND SHE DESCRIBES PRESUMABLY HAPPENED ON A WEEKEND. IF IT WAS A WEEKEND, MY CALENDARS SHOW THAT I WAS OUT OF TOWN ALMOST EVERY WEEKEND NIGHT BEFORE FOOTBALL TRAINING CAMP STARTED IN LATE AUGUST. THE ONLY WEEKEND NIGHT THAT I WAS IN D.C. WERE FRIDAY, JUNE 4 WHEN I WAS WITH MY DAD AT A PRO GOLF TOURNAMENT. AND HAD MY HIGH SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENT TEST AT 8:30 THE NEXT MORNING. I ALSO WAS IN D.C. ON SATURDAY NIGHT AUGUST 7th, I WAS AT A SMALL GATHERING AT BECK’S’S HOUSE IN ROCKVILLE WITH MATT, DENISE, LORI AND JENNY. THEIR NAMES ARE ALL LISTED ON MY CALENDAR. I WON’T USE THEIR LASTLORI AND . THEIR NAMES ARE ALL LISTED ON MY CALENDAR. I WON’T USE THEIR LAST NAMES HERE AND THEN THE WEEKEND OF AUGUST 20th, I WAS DOING FINAL PREPARATIONS FOR FOOTBALL TRAINING CAMP THAT BEGAN ON SUNDAY THE 22nd. AS THE CALENDARS CONFIRM, THAT WEEKEND BEFORE A BRUTAL FOOTBALL TRAINING CAMP SCHEDULE WAS NO TIME FOR PARTIES. SO LET ME EMPHASIZE THIS POINT. IF THE PARTY DESCRIBED BY DR. FORD HAPPENED IN THE SUMMER OF 1982 ON A WEEKEND NIGHT, MY CALENDAR SHOWS ALL BUT DEFINITIVELY THAT I WAS NOT THERE. DURING THE WEEK DAYS IN THE SUMMER OF 1982, AS YOU CAN SEE I WAS OUT OF TOWN FOR TWO WEEKS IN THE SUMMER FOR A TRIP TO THE BEACH WITH FRIENDS AND AT THE LEGENDARY FIVE-STAR BASKETBALL CAMP IN HOMESDALE, PENNSYLVANIA. WHEN I WAS IN TOWN I SPENT MUCH OF MY TIME, WORKING, WORKING OUT, LIFTING WEIGHT, PLAYING BASKETBALL OR HANGING OUT AND HAVING SOME BEERS WITH FRIENDS AS WE TALKED ABOUT LIFE AND FOOTBALL AND SCHOOL AND GIRLS. SOME HAVE NOTICED THAT I DIDN’T HAVE CHURCH ON SUNDAYS ON MY CALENDARS. I ALSO DIDN’T LIST BRUSHING MY TEETH AND FOR ME GOING TO CHURCH ON SUNDAYS WAS LIKE BRUSHING MY TEETH. AUTOMATIC. STILL IS. IN THE SUMMER OF 1981 I WORKED CONSTRUCTION. IN THE SUMMER OF 1982 MY JOB WAS CUTTING LAWNS. I HAD MY OWN BUSINESS OF SORTS. YOU SEE SOME SPECIFICS ABOUT THE LAWN CUTTING LISTED ON THE AUGUST CALENDAR PAGE WHEN I HAD THE TIME THE LAST LAWN CUTTING OF THE SUMMER OF VARIOUS LAWNS BEFORE FOOTBALL TRAINING CAMP. I PLAYED IN A LOT OF SUMMER LEAGUE BASKETBALL GAMES FOR THE GEORGETOWN PREP TEAM AT NIGHT AT BLAIR HIGH SCHOOL IN SILVER SPRINGS. MEN NIGHTS I WORKED OUT AT ANOTHER GUY TOBIN’S HOUSE — HE WAS A GREAT QUARTERBACK ON OUR FOOTBALL TEAM AND HIS DAD RAN A WORKOUT. OR LIFTED WEIGHTS AT GEORGETOWN PREP IN PREPARATION FOR THE FOOTBALL SEASON. I ATTENDED AND WATCHED MANY SPORTING, VENTS AS IS MY HABIT TO THIS DAY. THE CALENDARS SHOW A FEW WEEKDAY GATHERINGS AT FRIENDS’ HOUSES AFTER A WORKOUT OR JUST TO MEET UP AND HAVE SOME BEERS, BUT NONE OF THOSE GATHERINGS INCLUDED THE GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT DR. FORD HAS IDENTIFIED. AND AS MY CALENDARS SHOW I WAS VERY PRECISE ABOUT LISTING WHO WAS THERE, VERY PRECISE IN, AND KEEP IN MIND MY CALENDARS WERE ALSO DIARIES OF SORTS, FORWARD LOOKING AND BACKWARD LOOKING JUST LIKE MY DAD’S. HE CAN SEE, FOR EXAMPLE, I CROSSED OUT MISSED WORKOUT AND THE CANCELED DOCTOR’S APPOINTMENTS AND THAT I LISTED THE PRECISE PEOPLE WHO HAD SHOWN UP FOR CERTAIN EVENTS. THE CALENDARS ARE OBVIOUSLY NOT DISPOSITIVE ON THEIR OWN, BUT THEY’RE ANOTHER PIECE OF EVIDENCE IN THE MIX FOR YOU TO CONSIDER. FIFTH, DR. FORD’S ALLEGATION IS RADICALLY INCONSISTENT WITH MY RECORD AND MY CHARACTER FOR MY YOUTH TO THE PRESENT DAY. AS STUDENTS AT AN ALL-BOYS CATHOLIC JESUIT SCHOOL, MANY OF US BECAME FRIENDS AND REMAIN FRIENDS TO THIS DAY WITH STUDENTS AT LOCAL CATHOLIC ALL-GIRL SCHOOLS. ONE FEATURE OF MY LIFE THAT HAS REMAINED TRUE TO THE PRESENT DAY IS THAT I’VE ALWAYS HAD A LOT OF CLOSE FEMALE FRIENDS. I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT GIRLFRIENDS. I’M TALKING ABOUT FRIENDS WHO WERE WOMEN. THAT STARTED IN HIGH SCHOOL. MAYBE IT’S BECAUSE I’M AN OLD CHILD AND HAD NO SISTER, BUT WE HAD NO SOCIAL MEDIA OR TEXT OR E-MAIL AND WE TALKED ON THE PHONE. I REMEMBER TALKING ALMOST EVERY NIGHT IT SEEMED TO MY FRIENDS AMY OR JULIE OR KRISTEN OR KAREN OR SUZANNE OR MORA OR MEGAN OR NICKY. THE LIST GOES ON. FRIENDS FOR A LIFETIME BUILT ON A FOUNDATION OF TALKING THROUGH SCHOOL AND LIFE CHARTING AT AGE 14. SEVERAL OF THOSE GREAT WOMEN ARE IN THE SEATS RIGHT BEHIND ME TODAY. MY FRIENDS AND I SOMETIMES GOT TOGETHER AND HAD PARTIES ON WEEKENDS, THE DRINKING AGE WAS 18 IN MARYLAND FOR MOST OF MY TIME IN HIGH SCHOOL AND WAS FOR ALL OF MY TIME IN HIGH SCHOOL. I DRANK BEER WITH MY FRIENDS. ALMOST EVERYONE DID. SOMETIMES I HAD TOO MANY BEERS. SOMETIMES OTHERS DID. I LIKED BEER. I STILL LIKE BEER, BUT I DID NOT DRINK BEER TO THE POINT OF BLACKING OUT AND I NEVER SEXUALLY ASSAULTED ANYONE. THERE SAY BRIGHT LINE BETWEEN DRINKING BEER WHICH I GLADLY DO AND WHICH I FULLY EMBRACE AND SEXUALLY ASSAULTING SOMEONE WHICH IS A VIOLENT CRIME. IF EVERY AMERICAN WHO DRINKS BEER OR EVERY AMERICAN WHO DRANK BEER IN HIGH SCHOOL IS SUDDENLY PRESUMED GUILTY OF SEXUAL ASSAULT IT WOULD BE AN UGLY NEW PLACE IN THIS COUNTRY. I NEVER COMMITTED SEXUAL ASSAULT PROGRAM AS HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WE SOMETIMES DID GOOFY OR STUPID THINGS.AS HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS SOMETIMES DID GOOFY OR STUPID THINGS. I LOOK BACK AT HIGH SCHOOL AND CRINGING FOR SOME THINGS. FOR ONE THING, OUR YEARBOOK WAS A DISASTER. I THINK SOME EDITORS AND STUDENTS WANTED THE YEARBOOK TO BE SOME COMBINATION OF ANIMAL HOUSE, CADDYSHACK AND FAST TIMES AT RIDGEMONT HIGH WHICH WERE ALL RECENT MOVIES AT THAT TIME. MANY OF US WENT ALONG IN THE YEARBOOK TO THE POINT OF ABSURDITY. THIS PAST WEEK — MY FRIENDS AND I HAVE CRINGED — WHEN WE READ ABOUT IT AND TALKED TO EACH OTHER.>>ONE THING IN PARTICULAR WE’RE SAD ABOUT — ONE OF OUR GOOD — ONE OF OUR GOOD FEMALE FRIENDS WHO WE WOULD DANCE WITH HAD HER NAME USED ON THE YEARBOOK PAGE WITH THE TERM ALUMNUS. THAT YEARBOOK REFERENCE WAS KLUM SILY INTENDED TO SHOW AFFECTION IN THAT SHE WAS ONE OF US, BUT IN THIS CIRCUS, THE MEDIA’S DETERMINES IT WAS RELATED TO SEX. IT WAS NOT RELATED TO SEX. THE WOMAN HERSELF NOTED THE MEDIA ON THE RECORD. SHE AND I NEVER HAD ANY SEXUAL INTERACTION AT ALL. SO SORRY TO HER FOR THAT YEARBOOK REFERENCE. THIS MAY SOUND A BIT TRIVIAL GIVEN ALL THAT WE ARE HERE FOR, BUT ONE THING I WANT TO TRY TO MAKE SURE — SURE OF IN THE FUTURE TO MY FRIENDSHIP WITH HER. SHE WAS AND IS A GREAT PERSON. THIS IS NOT A TOPIC I EVER IMAGINED WOULD COME UP IN A JUDICIAL CONFIRMATION HEARING AND I WANT TO GIVE YOU A FULL PICTURE OF WHO I WAS. I NEVER HAD SEXUAL INTERCOURSE OR ANYTHING CLOSE TO IT DURING HIGH SCHOOL OR FOR MANY YEARS AFTER THAT AND IN SOME CROWDS I WOULD BE OUTWARDLY SHY ABOUT MY INEXPERIENCE. I TRIED TO HIDE THAT. I WAS ALSO INWARDLY PROUD OF IT. FOR ME AND THE GIRLS WHO I WAS FRIENDS WITH, THAT LACK OF MAJOR RAMPANT SEXUAL ACTIVITY IN HIGH SCHOOL WAS A MATTER OF FAITH AND RESPECT AND CAUTION. THE COMMITTEE HAS A LETTER FROM 65 WOMEN WHO KNEW ME IN HIGH SCHOOL. THEY SAID THAT I ALWAYS TREATED THEM WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT. THAT LETTER CAME TOGETHER IN ONE NIGHT. 35 YEARS AFTER GRADUATION, WHILE A SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATION WAS PENDING AGAINST ME IN A VERY FOGGED AND PUBLIC SITUATION WHERE THEY KNEW, THEY KNEW THEY’D BE VILIFIED IF THEY DEFENDED ME. THINK ABOUT THAT. THEY PUT THEMSELVES ON THE LINE FOR ME. THOSE ARE SOME AWESOME WOMEN. I LOVE ALL OF THEM — YOU ALSO HAVE A LETTER FROM WOMEN WHO KNEW ME IN COLLEGE. THOSE WERE VARSITY ATHLETES. THEY DESCRIBED THAT I TREATED THEM AS FRIENDS AND EQUALS AND SUPPORTED THEM IN THEIR SPORTS AT A TIME WHEN WOMEN’S SPORTS WAS EMERGING IN THE WAKE OF TITLE 9. I THANK ALL OF THEM FOR ALL THEIR TEXTS AND THEIR E-MAILS AND THEIR SUPPORT. ONE OF THOSE WOMEN FRIENDS FROM COLLEGE, A SELF-DESCRIBED LIBERAL AND FEMINIST SENT ME A TEXT LAST NIGHT THAT SAID, QUOTE, DEEP BREATHS. YOU’RE A GOOD MAN. A GOOD MAN. GOOD MAN. A TEXT YESTERDAY FROM ANOTHER OF THOSE WOMEN FRIENDS FROM COLLEGE SAID, QUOTE, BRETT, BE STRONG. PULLING FOR YOU TO MY CORE. A THIRD TEXT YESTERDAY FROM YET ANOTHER OF THOSE WOMEN I’M FRIENDS WITH FROM COLLEGE SAID I’M HOLDING YOU IN THE LIGHT OF GOD. AS I SAID IN MY OPENING STATEMENT THE LAST TIME I WAS WITH YOU, CHERISH YOUR FRIENDS, LOOK OUT FOR YOUR FRIEND, LIFT UP YOUR FRIENDS, LOVE YOUR FRIENDS. I FELT THAT LOVE MORE OVER THE LAST TWO WEEKS THAN I EVER HAVE IN MY LIFE. I THANK ALL MY FRIENDS. I LOVE ALL MY FRIENDS. THROUGHOUT MY LIFE, I’VE DEVOTED HUGE EFFORTS TO ENCOURAGING AND FROM MOATING THE CAREERS OF WOMEN. I WILL PUT MY RECORD UP AGAINST ANYONE, MALE OR FEMALE. I AM PROUD OF THE LETTER FROM 84 WOMEN. 84 WOMEN WHEN WORKED WITH ME AT THE BUSH WHITE HOUSE FROM 2001 TO 2006 AND DESCRIBED ME AS, QUOTE, A MAN OF THE HIGHEST INTEGRITY. READ THE OP ED FROM SARAH DAY FROM YARMOUTH, MAINE. SHE WORKED OUTSIDE OF PRESIDENT BUSH’S OFFICE. HERE’S WHAT SHE RECENTLY WROTE IN CENTRALMAINE.COM. TODAY SHE STANDS BY HER COMMENT. QUOTE, BRETT WAS AN ADVOCATE FOR YOUNG WOMEN LIKE ME. HE ENCOURAGED ME TO TAKE ON MORE RESPONSIBILITY AND TO FEEL CONFIDENT IN MY ROLE. IN FACT, DURING THE 2004 REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION BRETT GAVE ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO HELP WITH THE PREPARATION AND REVIEW OF THE PRESIDENT’S REMARKS, SOMETHING I NEVER — SOMETHING I NEVER WOULD HAVE HAD THE CHANCE TO DO IF HE’D NOT INCLUDED ME, AND HE DIDN’T JUST INCLUDE ME IN THE WORK. HE MADE SURE I WAS AT MADISON SQUARE GARDEN TO WATCH THE PRESIDENT’S SPEECH INSTEAD OF BACK AT THE HOTEL WATCHING IT ON TV. END QUOTE. AS A JUDGE SINCE 2006 I’VE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF HIRING FOUR RECENT LAW SCHOOL GRADUATE TO SERVE AS MY LAW CLERK EACH YEAR. THE LAW CLERKS FOR FEDERAL JUDGES ARE THE BEST AND BRIGHTEST GRADUATES OF AMERICAN LAW SCHOOL. THEY WORK FOR ONE-YEAR TERMS FOR JUDGES AFTER LAW SCHOOL AND THEN THEY MOVE ON IN THEIR CAREERS. FOR JUDGES, TRAINING THESE YOUNG LAWYERS IS AN IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITY. THE CLERKS WILL BECOME THE NEXT GENERATION OF AMERICAN LAWYERS AND LEADERS, JUDGES AND SENATORS. JUST AFTER I TOOK THE BENCH IN 2006 THERE WAS A MAJOR NEW YORK TIMES STORY THAT THE LOW NUMBERS OF WOMEN LAW CLERK IN THE SUPREME COURT AND FEDERAL APPEALS COURTS. I TOOK NOTICE AND I TOOK ACTION. A MAJORITY OF MY 48 LAW CLERKS OVER THE LAST 12 YEARS HAVE BEEN WOMEN. IN A LETTER TO THIS COMMITTEE, MY WOMEN LAW CLERK SAID I WAS ONE OF THE STRONGEST ADVOCATES IN THE FEDERAL JUDICIARY FOR WOMEN LAWYERS, AND THEY WROTE THAT THE LEGAL PROFESSION IS FAIRER AND MORE EQUAL FOR WOMEN LAWYERS AND WROTE THE LEGAL PROFESSION IS FAIRER AND MORE EQUAL BECAUSE OF ME. IN MY TIME ON THE BENCH, NO FEDERAL JUDGE, NOT A SINGLE ONE IN THE COUNTRY, HAS SENT MORE WOMEN LAW CLERKS TO CLERK ON THE SUPREME COURT THAN I HAVE. BEFORE THIS ALLEGATION AROSE TWO WEEKS AGO, I WAS REQUIRED TO START MAKING CERTAIN ADMINISTRATIVE PREPARATIONS FOR MY POSSIBLE TRANSFER TO THE SUPREME COURT JUST IN CASE I WAS CONFIRMED. AS PART OF THAT, I HAD TO, IN ESSENCE, CONTINGENTLY HIRE A FIRST GROUP OF FOUR LAW CLERKS WHO COULD BE AVAILABLE TO CLERK AT THE SUPREME COURT FOR ME ON A MOMENT’S NOTICE. I DID SO AND CONTINGENTLY HIRED FOUR LAW CLERKS. ALL FOUR WOMEN. IF CONFIRMED, I’LL BE THE FIRST JUSTICE IN THE HISTORY OF THE SUPREME COURT TO HAVE A GROUP OF ALL WOMEN LAW CLERKS. THAT IS WHO I AM. THAT IS WHO I WAS. OVER THE PAST 12 YEARS, I’VE TAUGHT CONSTITUTIONAL LAW TO HUNDREDS OF STUDENTS. PRIMARILY AT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL. WHILE I WAS HIRED BY THEN-DEAN AND NOW-JUSTICE ELENA KAGAN. ONE OF MY FORMER WOMEN STUDENTS, A DEMOCRAT, TESTIFIED TO THIS COMMITTEE THAT I WAS AN EVEN-HANDED PROFESSOR WHO TREATS PEOPLE FAIRLY AND WITH RESPECT. IN A LETTER TO THIS COMMITTEE, MY FORMER STUDENTS, MALE AND FEMALE ALIKE, WROTE THAT I DISPLAYED A CHARACTER THAT IMPRESSED US ALL. I LOVE TEACHING LAW. THANKS TO WHAT SOME OF YOUEN THIS SIDE OF THE COMMITTEE UNLEASHED, I MAY NEVER BE ABLE TO TEACH AGAIN. FOR THE PAST SEVEN YEAR, I’VE COACHED MY TWO DAUGHTERS’ BASKETBALL TEAMS. YOU SAW MANY OF THOSE GIRLS WHEN THEY CAME TO MY HEARING FOR A COUPLE OF HOURS. YOU HAVE A LETTER FROM THE PARENTS OF THE GIRLS I COACH THAT DESCRIBE MY DEDICATION, COMMITMENT, AND CHARACTER. I COACH BECAUSE I KNOW THAT A GIRL’S CONFIDENCE ON THE BASKETBALL COURT TRANSLATES INTO CONFIDENCE IN OTHER ASPECTS OF LIFE. I LOVE COACHING MORE THAN ANYTHING I’VE EVER DONE IN MY WHOLE LIFE, BUT THANKS TO WHAT SOME OF YOU ON THIS SIDE OF THE COMMITTEE HAVE UNLEASHED, I MAY NEVER BE ABLE TO COACH AGAIN. I’VE BEEN A JUDGE FOR 12 YEARS. I HAVE A LONG RECORD OF SERVICE TO AMERICA AND TO THE CONSTITUTION. I REVERE THE CONSTITUTION. I AM DEEPLY GRATEFUL TO PRESIDENT TRUMP FOR NOMINATING ME. HE WAS SO GRACIOUS TO MY FAMILY AND ME ON THE JULY NIGHT HE ANNOUNCED MY NOMINATION AT THE WHITE HOUSE. I THANK HIM FOR HIS STEADFAST SUPPORT. WHEN I ACCEPTED THE PRESIDENT’S NOMINATION, ASHLEY AND I KNEW THIS PROCESS WOULD BE CHALLENGING. WE NEVER EXPECTED THAT IT WOULD DEVOLVE INTO THIS. EXPLAINING THIS TO OUR DAUGHTERS HAS BEEN ABOUT THE WORST EXPERIENCE OF OUR LIVES. ASHLEY HAS BEEN A ROCK. I THANK GOD EVERY DAY FOR ASHLEY AND MY FAMILY. WE LIVE IN A COUNTRY DEVOTED TO DUE PROCESS AND THE RULE OF LAW. THAT MEANS TAKING ALLEGATIONS SERIOUSLY, BUT IF THE MERE ALLEGATION, THE MERE ASSERTION OF AN ALLEGATION, A REFUTED ALLEGATION FROM 36 YEARS AGO, IS ENOUGH TO DESTROY A PERSON’S LIFE AND CAREER, WE WILL HAVE ABANDONED THE BASIC PRINCIPLES OF FAIRNESS AND DUE PROCESS THAT DEFINE OUR LEGAL SYSTEM IN OUR COUNTRY. I ASK YOU TO JUDGE ME BY THE STANDARD THAT YOU WOULD WANT APPLIED TO YOUR FATHER. YOUR HUSBAND. YOUR BROTHER. OR YOUR SON. MY FAMILY AND I INTENT NO ILL WILL TOWARD DR. FORD OR HER FAMILY, BUT I SWEAR TODAY UNDER OATH BEFORE THE SENATE AND THE NATION, BEFORE MY FAMILY AND GOD, I AM INNOCENT OF THIS CHARGE.>>THANK YOU, JUDGE KAVANAUGH. BEFORE WE START QUESTIONS, I WON’T REPEAT WHAT I SAID THIS MORNING, BUT WE’LL DO IT THE SAME WAY AS WE DID FOR DR. FORD AND FIVE-MINUTE ROUNDS AND SO WE WILL START WITH MISS MITCHELL.>>GOOD AFTERNOON, JUDGE KAVANAUGH. WE HAVE NOT MET. MY NAME IS RACHEL MITCHELL. I’D LIKE TO GO OVER A COUPLE OF GUIDELINES FOR OUR QUESTION AND ANSWER SESSION TODAY. IF I ASK A QUESTION — >>YEAH, I’M READY.>>OKAY.>>THANK YOU. >>IF I ASK A QUESTION THAT YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND, PLEASE ASK ME TO CLARIFY IT OR ASK IT IN A DIFFERENT WAY. I MAY ASK A QUESTION WHERE I INCORPORATE SOME INFORMATION YOU’VE ALREADY PROVIDED. IF I GET IT WRONG, PLEASE CORRECTMY. I’M NOT GOING TO ASK YOU TO GUESS. IF YOU DO ESTIMATE, PLEASE LET ME KNOW YOU’RE ESTIMATING. I WANT TO MAKE SURE ALL THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS HAVE GOTTEN A COPY OF THE DEFINITION OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR. >>YES. AT LEAST I HAVE ONE.>>WE ALL DO.>>? AND YOU HAVE THAT AS WELL, JUDGE KAVANAUGH?>>YEAH. >>OKAY. FIRST OF ALL, HAVE YOU BEEN GIVEN OR REVIEWED A COPY OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I WILL BE ASKING YOU?>>NO.>>HAS ANYONE TOLD YOU THE QUESTIONS THAT I WILL BE ASKING YOU?>>NO.>>I WANT YOU TO TAKE A MOMENT TO REVIEW THE DEFINITION THAT’S BEFORE YOU OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR. HAVE YOU HAD A CHANCE TO REVIEW IT?>>I HAVE. I MAY REFER BACK TO IT, IF I K. >>YES, PLEASE. >I’D LIKE TO POINT OUT TWO SPECIFIC PARTS. AMONG THE EXAMPLES OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR IT INCLUDES RUBBING OR GRINDING YOUR GENITALS AGAINST SOMEBODY, CLOTHED OR UNCLOTHED. I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THE DEFINITION APPLIES WHETHER OR NOT THE ACTS WERE SEXUAL OR HORSEPLAY. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DEFINITION I’VE GIVEN YOU?>>I DO. >>IS AGAIN, IF AT ANY TIME YOU NEED TO REVIEW THAT, PLEASE LET ME KNOW. DR. FORD HAS STATED THAT SOMEWHERE BETWEEN FIVE OR SIX PEOPLE WERE PRESENT AT THE GATHERING ON THIS DATE. YOU, MARK JUDGE, LELAND INGHAM AT THE TIME, LELAND KAISER NOW, DR. P.J. SMITH, DR. FORD, AND AN UNNAMED BOY. DO YOU KNOW MARK JUDGE?>>I DO.>>HOW DO YOU KNOW HIM?>>HE WAS A FRIEND AT GEORGETOWN PREP STARTING IN NINTH GRADE. HE’S SOMEONE WE WOULD — IN IT OUR, YOU KNOW, GROUP OF FRIENDS, WE WERE A VERY FRIENDLY GROUP IN CLASS. YOU SAW THE LETTER THAT’S BEEN SENT BY MY FRIENDS FROM GEORGETOWN PREP. FUNNY GUY. GREAT WRITER. POPULAR. DEVELOPED A SERIOUS ADDICTION PROBLEM THAT LASTED DECADES. NEAR DEATH A COUPLE TIMES FROM HIS ADDICTION. SUFFERED TREMENDOUSLY FROM — >>WHAT IS YOUR RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM LIKE NOW?>>I HAVEN’T TALKED TO HIM IN A COUPLE YEARS. WE’VE PROBABLY BEEN ON MASS E-MAILS, OUR GROUP E-MAILS, THAT GO AROUND AMONG MY HIGH SCHOOL FRIENDS.>>AND HOW DID YOU KNOW PATRICK SMITH?>>ALSO NINTH GRADE. GEORGETOWN PREP. WENT BY P.J. THEN. HE AND I LIVED CLOSE TO ONE ANOTHER. PLAYED FOOTBALL TOGETHER. HE WAS DEFENSIVE TACKLE. I WAS THE CORNERBACK. WIDE RECEIVER. WE CARPOOLED TO SCHOOL ALONG WITH DEE DAVIS. EVERY YEAR, THE THREE OF US FOR TWO YEARS. I DIDN’T HAVE A CAR. ONE OF THE TWO OF THEM WOULD DRIVE EVERY DAY. THEY’D PICK ME UP.>>WHAT’S YOUR RELATIONSHIP LIKE WITH HIM NOW?>>HE LIVESES IN THE AREA. I SEE HIM ONCE IN A WHILE. HAVEN’T SEEN HIM SINCE THIS — THIS THING.>>DO YOU KNOW LELAND ING HAM OR LELAND KAISER?>>I KNOW OF HER. IT’S POSSIBLE I, YOU KNOW, SAW — MET HER IN HIGH SCHOOL AT SOME POINT. AT SOME EVENT. YEAH, I KNOW HER. I KNOW OF HER. AND, AGAIN, I DON’T WANT TO RULE OUT HAVING CROSSED PATHS WITH HER IN HIGH SCHOOL.>>SIMILAR TO YOUR STATEMENTS ABOUT KNOWING DR. FORD?>>CORRECT.>>SENATOR FEINSTEIN?>>JUDGE KAVANAUGH, IT’S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU HAVE DENIED THE ALLEGATIONS BY DR. FORD, MISS RAMIREZ, AND MISS SWETNICK. IS THAT CORRECT?>>YES.>>ALL THREE OF THESE WOMEN HAVE ASKED THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE THEIR CLAIMS. I LISTENED CAREFULLY TO WHAT YOU SAID. YOUR CONCERN IS EVIDENT AND CLEAR. AND IF YOU’RE VERY CONFIDENT OF YOUR POSITION, AND YOU APPEAR TO BE, WHY AREN’T YOU ALSO ASKING THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE THESE CLAIMS?>>SENATOR, I’LL DO WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE WANTS. I WANTED A HEARING THE DAY AFTER THE ALLEGATION CAME UP. I WANTED TO BE HERE THAT DAY. INSTEAD, TEN DAYS PASSED WHERE ALL THIS NONSENSE IS COMING OUT, YOU KNOW, THAT I’M IN GANGS, I’M ON BOATS IN RHODE ISLAND, I’M IN COLORADO, YOU KNOW, I’M SIGHTED ALL OVER THE PLACE. THESE THINGS ARE PRINTED AND RUN BREATHLESSLY BY CABLE NEWS. YOU KNOW, I WANTED TO HEARING THE NEXT DAY. MY FAMILY’S BEEN DESTROYED BY THIS, SENATOR. DESTROYED.>>AND — >>AND WHOEVER WANTS TO — YOU KNOW, WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE DECIDES, YOU KNOW, I’M ALL IN.>>MY QUESTION IS — >>IMMEDIATELY. I’M ALL IN IMMEDIATELY.>>AND THE TERRIBLE AND HARD PART OF THIS IS WHEN WE GET AN ALLEGATION, WE’RE NOT IN A POSITION TO PROVE IT OR DISPROVE IT, THEREFORE, WE HAVE TO DEPEND ON SOME OUTSIDE AUTHORITY FOR IT AND IT WOULD JUST SEEM TO ME THEN WHEN THESE ALLEGATIONS CAME FORWARD THAT YOU WOULD WANT THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE THOSE CLAIMS AND CLEAR IT UP ONCE AND FOR ALL.>>SENATOR, THE COMMITTEE INVESTIGATES — IT’S NOT FOR ME TO SAY HOW TO DO IT, BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW, THE FBI DOESN’T REACH A CONCLUSION. THEY WOULD GIVE YOU A COUPLE 302s THAT JUST TELL YOU WHAT WE SAID. SO I’M HERE. I WANTED TO BE HERE — I WANTED TO BE HERE THE NEXT DAY. IT’S AN OUTRAGE THAT I WAS NOT ALLOWED TO COME IMMEDIATELY DEFEND MY NAME AND SAY I DIDN’T DO THIS AND GIVE YOU ALL THIS EVIDENCE. I’M NOT EVEN — I’M NOT EVEN IN D.C. ON THE WEEKENDS IN THE SUMMER OF 1982. THIS HAPPENED ON A WEEKDAY? WHEN I’M NOT AT A BLAIR HIGH SCHOOL FOR SUMMER LEAGUE GAME? I’M NOT AT TOBIN’S HOUSE WORKING OUT? I’M NOT AT A MOVIE WITH SUZANNE. YOU KNOW, I WANTED TO BE HERE RIGHT AWAY.>>WELL, THE DIFFICULT THING IS THESE HEARINGS ARE SET AND SET BY THE MAJORITY, BUT I’M TALKING ABOUT GETTING THE EVIDENCE AND HAVING THE EVIDENCE LOOKED AT AND I DON’T UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WE HEAR FROM THE WITNESSES BUT THE FBI ISN’T INTERVIEWING THEM AND ISN’T GIVING US ANY FACTS. SO ALL WE HAVE — >>YOU’RE INTERVIEWING ME. YOU’RE INTERVIEWING ME. YOU’RE DOING IT, SENATOR. I’M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, BUT YOU’RE DOING IT. THAT’S — THERE’S NO CONCLUSIONS REACHED.>>AND WHAT YOU’RE SAYING, IF I UNDERSTAND IT, THE ALLEGATIONS BY DR. FORD, MISS RAMIREZ AND MISS SWETNICK ARE WRONG.>>THAT IS EMPHATICALLY WHAT I’M SAYING. EMPHATICALLY. THE SWETNICK THING IS A JOKE. THAT IS A FARCE.>>WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY MORE ABOUT IT?>>NO. >>OKAY. THAT’S IT, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >>MISS MITCHELL?>>OKAY.>>DR. FORD HAS DESCRIBED YOU AS BEING INTOXICATED AT A PARTY. DID YOU CONSUME ALCOHOL DURING YOUR HIGH SCHOOL YEARS?>>YES, WE DRANK BEER. MY FRIENDS AND I. BOYS AND GIRLS. YES, WE DRANK BEER. I LIKED BEER. STILL LIKE BEER. WE DRANK BEER. THE DRINKING AGE AS I NOTED WAS 18 SO THE SENIORS WERE LEGAL. SENIOR YEAR IN HIGH SCHOOL, PEOPLE WERE LEGAL TO DRINK. AND WE — YEAH, WE DRANK BEER AND I SAID SOMETIMES — SOMETIMES PROBABLY HAD TOO MANY BEERS AND SOMETIMES OTHER PEOPLE HAD TOO MANY BEERS. WE DRANK BEER. WE LIKED BEER. >>WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER TO BE TOO MANY BEERS?>>I DON’T KNOW. YOU KNOW, WE — WHATEVER THE CHART SAYS. BLOOD ALCOHOL CHART.>>WHEN YOU TALK TO FOX NEWS THE OTHER NIGHT, YOU SAID THERE WERE TIMES IN HIGH SCHOOL WHEN PEOPLE MIGHT HAVE HAD TOO MANY BEERS ON OCCASION. DOES THAT INCLUDE YOU?>>SURE.>>HAVE YOU EVER PASSED OUT FROM DRINKING?>>PASSED OUT WOULD BE NO, BUT I’VE GONE TO SLEEP. I’VE NEVER BLACKED OUT. THAT’S THE ALLEGATION. AND THAT’S WRONG.>>SO LET’S TALK ABOUT YOUR TIME IN HIGH SCHOOL. IN HIGH SCHOOL, AFTER DRINKING, DID YOU EVER WAKE UP IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION THAN YOU REMEMBERED PASSING OUT OR GOING TO SLEEP?>>NO. NO.>>DID YOU EVER WAKE UP WITH YOUR CLOTHES IN A DIFFERENT CONDITION OR FEWER CLOTHES ON THAN YOU REMEMBERED WHEN YOU WENT TO SLEEP OR PASSED OUT?>>NO. NO.>>DID YOU EVER TELL — DID ANYONE EVER TELL YOU ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED IN YOUR PRESENCE THAT YOU DIDN’T REMEMBER DURING A TIME THAT YOU HAD BEEN DRINKING?>>NO. THE — WE DRANK BEER AND, YOU KNOW, SO DID I THINK THE VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE OUR AGE AT THE TIME. IN ANY EVENT, WE DRANK BEER AND STILL DO. SO WHATEVER, YEAH.>>DURING THE TIME IN HIGH SCHOOL WHEN YOU WOULD BE DRINKING, DID ANYONE EVER TELL YOU ABOUT SOMETHING THAT YOU DID NOT REMEMBER?>>NO.>>DR. FORD DESCRIBED A SMALL GATHERING OF PEOPLE AT A SUBURBAN MARYLAND HOME IN THE SUMMER OF 1982. SHE SAID THAT MARK JUDGE, P.J. SMITH, AND LELAND INGHAM ALSO WERE PRESENT AS WELL AS AN UNKNOWN MALE. AND THAT THE PEOPLE WERE DRINKING TO VARYING DEGREES. WERE YOU EVER AT A GATHERING THAT FITS THAT DESCRIPTION?>>NO. AS I’VE SAID? MY OPENING STATEMENTS. OPENING STATEMENT.>>DR. FORD DESCRIBED AN INCIDENT WHERE SHE WAS ALONE IN A ROOM WITH YOU AND MARK JUDGE. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ALONE IN A ROOM WITH DR. FORD AND MARK JUDGE?>>NO. >>DR. FORD DESCRIBED AN INCIDENT WHERE YOU WERE GRINDING YOUR GENITALS ON HER. HAVE YOU EVER GROUND OR RUBBED YOUR GENITALS AGAINST DR. FORD?>>NO.>>DR. FORD DESCRIBED AN INCIDENT WHERE YOU COVERED HER MOUTH WITH YOUR HAND. HAVE YOU EVER COVERED DR. FORD’S MOUTH WITH YOUR HAND?>>NO.>>DR. FORD DESCRIBED AN INCIDENT WHERE YOU TRIED TO REMOVE HER CLOTHES. HAVE YOU EVER TRIED TO REMOVE HER CLOTHES?>>NO.>>REFERRING BACK TO THE DEFINITION OF SEXUAL BEHAVIOR THAT I HAVE GIVEN YOU, HAVE YOU EVER AT ANY TIME ENGAGED IN SEXUAL BEHAVIOR WITH DR. FORD?>>NO.>>HAVE YOU EVER ENGAGED IN IN SEXUAL BEHAVIOR WITH DR. FORD EVEN IF IT WAS CONSENSUAL?>>NO.>>I WANT TO TALK ABOUT YOUR CALENDARS. YOU SUBMITTED TO THE COMMITTEE COPIES OF THE HANDWRITTEN CALENDARS THAT YOU’VE TALKED ABOUT FOR THE MONTHS OF MAY, JUNE, JULY, AND AUGUST OF 1982. DO YOU HAVE THEM IN FRONT OF YOU?>>I DO.>>DID YOU CREATE THESE CALENDARS IN THE SENSE OF ALL THE HANDWRITING THAT’S ON THEM?>>YES.>>OKAY. IS IT EXCLUSIVELY YOUR HANDWRITING?>>YES.>>WHEN DID YOU MAKE THESE ENTRIES?>>IN 1982.>>HAS ANYTHING CHANGED — BEEN CHANGED FOR THOSE SINCE 1982?>>NO.>>DO THESE CALENDARS REPRESENT YOUR PLANS FOR EACH DAY OR DO THEY DOCUMENT, IN OTHER WORDS, PERSPECTIVELY, OR DO THEY DOCUMENT WHAT ACTUALLY OCCURRED, MORE LIKE A DIARY?>>THEY’RE BOTH FORWARD LOOKING AND BACKWARD LOOKING, AS YOU CAN TELL BY LOOKING AT THEM BECAUSE I CROSS OUT CERTAIN DOCTORS APPOINTMENTS THAT DIDN’T HAPPEN OR ONE NIGHT WHERE I WAS SUPPOSED TO LIFT WEIGHTS, I CROSSED THAT OUT BECAUSE I OBVIOUSLY DIDN’T MAKE IT THAT NIGHT. SO YOU CAN SEE THINGS THAT I DIDN’T DO CROSSED OUT IN RETROSPECT AND ALSO WHEN I LIST THE SPECIFIC PEOPLE WHO I WAS WITH, THAT IS LIKELY BACKWARD LOOKING.>>YOU EXPLAIN THAT YOU KEPT THESE CALENDARS BECAUSE YOUR FATHER STARTED KEEPING THEM IN 1978, I BELIEVE YOU SAID. >>UH-HUH.>>THAT’S WHY YOU KEPT THEM, IN OTHER WORDS, YOU WROTE ON THEM, BUT WHY DID YOU KEEP THEM UP UNTIL THIS TIME?>>WELL, HE’S KEPT THEM, TOO, SINCE 1978. SO HE’S A GOOD ROLE MODEL.>>MISS MITCHELL? WE’LL HAVE TO — >>OH, I’M SORRY. >>JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAS ASKED FOR A BREAK. WE’LL TAKE A 15-MINUTE BREAK.>>ON YOUR SCREEN, SENATOR PATRICK LEAHY, ALSO SENATOR DICK DURBIN OF ILLINOIS AND SENATOR SHELDON WHITEHOUSE OF RHODE ISLAND, THREE DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. PAT LEAHY, FORMER CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE WHEN THE DEMOCRATS HAD THE MAJORITY. A 15-MINUTE BREAK AS WE HEAR FROM JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH. HIS OPENING STATEMENT FOLLOWED BY A ROUND OF QUESTIONS THAT INCLUDED SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN AND RACHEL MITCHELL, THE ATTORNEY, THE REPUBLICAN ATTORNEY, ASKING THE QUESTIONS FOR THOSE 1 1 MEMBERS OF THE JAT JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. WANT TO USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO GET YOUR REACTIONS SO FAR. BASED ON WHAT YOU HEARD THIS MORNING AND EARLY THIS AFTERNOON FROM DR. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD AND NOW THE OPENING STATEMENT AND FIRST ROUND OF QUESTIONS TO JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH. CHRISTY FROM HEATH, OHIO, INDEPENDENT LINE, GOOD AFTERNOON.>>Caller: GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU. MY MAIN CONCERN IS THAT WITH ALL THE POLITICS, WE’RE LOSING THE MAIN OBJECTIVE IN THIS WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, THIS WOMAN HAS GONE THROUGH SOMETHING HORRIFIC. I DON’T BELIEVE, YOU KNOW, THAT KAVANAUGH DID THIS BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY BOTH THEIR WORLDS HAVE BEEN TORN APART FROM THIS. AND WE’RE ALSO MISSING A BIG MAJOR PICTURE, WE’RE EXPECTING MEN TO BE HELD AT HIGHER REGARD THAN WOMEN WITH THE DECISIONS OF SEXUAL ACTIVITY. WELL, A WOMAN AND MAN GET DRUNK, OR, YOU KNOW, DO DRUGS, IT’S ALWAYS UP TO THE MAN TO ALWAYS BE THE RESPONSIBLE ONE. WE FORGET THAT THEY’RE HUMAN BEINGS, ALSO. WHEN YOU DRINK, YOU DO DRUGS, ALL INHIBITIONS, ALL MORALITY, GO OUT THE DOOR. >>CHRISTY, JUDGE KAVANAUGH CALLED THIS, IN HIS WORDS, A NATIONAL DISGRACE. WOULD YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THAT?>>Caller: I AGREE. I AGREE ON THE FACT THAT WE’RE TAKING A VERY MAJOR SITUATION, VERY HORRENDOUS SITUATION, AND TURNING IT INTO A CIRCUS, AS HE SAYS.>>ON YOUR SCREEN, BY THE WAY, TWO TEXAS SENATORS, JOHN CORNYN, REPUBLICAN, AND HIS COLLEAGUE, TED CRUZ, WHO IS IN A RE-ELECTION BATTLE THIS YEAR. BY THE WAY, A DEBATE THAT IS SCHEDULED TO TAKE PLACE ON SUNDAY. ONE OF A NUMBER OF DEBATES THAT WE’LL BE COVERING IN THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS. WATCH FOR THAT. CHECK OUT THE SCHEDULE ON OUR WEBSITE AT C-SPAN.ORG. DOUG, CHEYENNE, WYOMING, REPUBLICAN LINE. SO, TELL US WHAT YOU THINK, DOUG. >>Caller: YES, SIR. I THINK THIS ALL IS A TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE. TO BE ASSUMED GUILTY BEFORE PROVEN INNOCENT. BINGO. THAT’S IT. >>THANK YOU. WE’LL GO TO DAVE IN WILMETTE, ILLINOIS, INDEPENDENT LINE.>>Caller: HI. I’M JUST INTERESTED HOW HE HAS DENIED BEING A BLACKOUT DRINKER AND YET WE HAVE A LOT OF EVIDENCE SAYING THAT HE WAS A BLACKOUT DRINKER OR DRINKS TOO MUCH.>>THANK YOU. WE’LL GO TO LINDA IN ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI. DEMOCRATS LINE. >>Caller: HI. I’M CALLING IN CONCERN OF THE CALENDAR THAT HE’S KEEPING. I WAS SEXUALLY ASSAULTED FROM THE AGE OF 4 TO 10 YEARS OLD BY MY STEPDAD, AND I DIDN’T TELL BECAUSE I WAS AFRAID BECAUSE HE HAD A GUN AND HE TOLD ME HE WOULD KILL THE WHOLE FAMILY. HE WOULD ABUSE AND BEAT MY MOM AND IT WAS EXTREMELY TRAUMATIC. AND WHEN I BECAME A TEENAGER, I WAS HELD AT GUNPOINT AND KIDNAPPED AND RAPED. AND TO HEAR WHAT HE AND OTHERS ARE SAYING THAT IS POLITICAL IS NOT ABOUT DEMOCRAT, REPUBLICAN, OR INDEPENDENT. IT’S ABOUT SEXUAL ASSAULT.>>LINDA, WHO DO YOU BELIEVE?>>Caller: I BELIEVE HER. LOOKING AT HIM SAYING HE HAD A CALENDAR, MY STEPDAD HAD A FILE CABINET. HE HAD FIVE FILE CABINETS IN THE HOUSE. FROM THE ’50s. AND IF HE MET YOU TODAY, THERE WAS A FILE ON YOU. THERE WAS AN INDEX CARD THAT HAD WHAT YOU HAD ON AND EVERYTHING. I CAN CORROBORATE EVERYTHING THAT I AM SAYING. HE HAD THESE CARDS ON EVERYBODY IN HIS LIFE. EVERYTHING IN HIS JOB. EVERYBODY. BUT WHEN HE COMMITTED SUICIDE AND WE LOOKED THROUGH THOSE FILES, THERE WAS NOT ONE ABOUT THE SEXUAL ASSAULT ON ME. THERE WAS NOT ONE ON THE ASSAULT AND THE ABUSE THAT HE TRAUMATIZED OUR FAMILY AND BEAT MY MOM. SO IT’S NOT ABOUT THE CALENDAR. IT’S ABOUT THE EVENT.>>LINDA, THANK YOU FOR YOUR CALL, FROM ST. LOUIS. TAMEKA, YOU’RE NEXT, JOINING US FROM RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA, INDEPENDENT LINE. >>Caller: YES, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO REMOVE THE POLITICAL PARTIES ALL TOGETHER. IN THE STATE THAT WE’RE IN WITH WOMEN’S RIGHTS BEING SO TRIED, AS A FATHER, I THINK HE SHOULD HAVE WITHDREW HIS NOMINATION. BEING THAT IF HE DID NOT WANT HIS FAMILY TO BE DRAGGED THROUGH, AS HE JUST MENTIONED WITH THESE TEARS, THAT I DO NOT FEEL WERE SINCERE AT ALL, HE SHOULD HAVE WITHDREW HIS NOMINATION. WHY PUT YOUR FAMILY THROUGH THIS? ESPECIALLY YOUR DAUGHTER. AND THEN TO KEEP CLAIMING IN YOUR STATEMENT THAT YOUR CHILD MADE, WHAT IF THIS HAPPENED TO YOUR CHILD? HOW WOULD YOU HANDLE IT? WOULD YOU SAY IF IT WAS 30 YEARS DOWN THE LINE THAT IT WAS A LIE OR WOULD YOU BELIEVE HER? BECAUSE I DO BELIEVE DR. FORD. I DON’T BELIEVE ANY WOMAN WOULD MAKE SOMETHING LIKE THIS UP. I DO BELIEVE YOU WILL SUPPRESS IT UNTIL IT COMES TO THE POINT WHERE YOU NEED TO BRING IT TO THE LIGHT.>>TAMEKA, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE CALL. WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME OF THE HEADLINES BEGINNING THIS FROM THE “ASSOCIATED PRESS” AND A LOOK BACK AT 1991 WHEN ANITA HILL TESTIFIED BEFORE THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE FROM THE RUSSELL SENATE OFFICE BUILDING. TODAY’S COMMITTEE IS TAKING PLACE INSIDE THE DIRKSEN SENATE OFFICE BUILDING AND THE HEADLINE, “WILL THE KAVANAUGH/FORD HEARING BE A WHERE YOU ARE MOMENT?” THAT FROM THE “ASSOCIATED PRESS.” THIS HEADLINE FROM “USA TODAY,” “A DEFIANT AND TEARFUL BRETT KAVANAUGH SAYS HE’LL INNOCENT. YOU’LL NEVER GET ME TO QUIT.” THAT QUOTE FROM THE JUDGE. AFTER FORD TESTIFIED SHE WAS SEXUALLY ASSAULTED, KAVANAUGH RESPONDS WITH ANGER AND EMOTION,” THE HEADLINE FROM THE “L.A. TIMES.” FINALLY FROM “THE DES MOINES REGISTER,” SAME HEADLINE FROM “USA TODAY,” “DEFINED AND TEARFUL BRETT KAVANAUGH, YOU’LL NEVER GET ME TO QUIT.” BACK TO THE PHONE LINES. OBI, REPUBLICAN LINE. GOOD AFTERNOON. >>Caller: HI, THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY CALL. LISTEN, I FEEL FOR MISS FORD, AND I DON’T DOUBT THAT SOMETHING HAPPENED TO HER BUT THE BOTTOM LINE HERE, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DEMOCRATS WANTING TO GET TO THE TRUTH OR ELSE SENATOR FEINSTEIN WOULDN’T HAVE KEPT THE LETTER. SHE COULD HAVE GONE INTO CONFIDENTIAL COMMITTEE AND SHARED IT. THE BOTTOM LINE IS HERE THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE STILL MAD ABOUT MERRICK GARLAND, THEY’RE DOUBLY MAD ABOUT HILLARY LOSING THE ELECTION, AND THEN THEY’RE TRIPLY MAD BECAUSE TRUMP WON. NOW THEIR ONLY CARD IS TO SMEAR THIS MAN AND ONLY BECAUSE HE IS APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT TRUMP. I THINK IT’S APPALLING THE WAY THE DEMOCRATIC SENATORS ARE BEHAVIORING. IT’S UNBECOMING TO THEM. AND I JUST, YOU KNOW, IF THEY WANTED AN INVESTIGATION, THEY SHOULD HAVE — SHE SHOULD HAVE SHARED THE LETTER, CALLED FOR A MEETING WITH THE WHOLE COMMITTEE, THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. AND THEY COULD HAVE GONE AHEAD AND SCHEDULED, BUT NOT DROP THIS AFTER THE HEARINGS WERE COMPLETED AND THEY WERE ABOUT TO VOTE ON JUDGE KAVANAUGH. I JUST THINK — >>SO — >>Caller: — IT’S JUST HORRIBLE. I DON’T DOUBT THAT SHE WENT THROUGH A TRAUMA, BUT ALSO I FIND IT DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE THAT YOU WAIT 36 YEARS AND ALL OF A SUDDEN, YOU HAVE AN EPIPHANY MOMENT AND IT ALL COMES BACK? I DON’T BUY IT.>>ODI, THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. LET’S GO NEXT TO LAURA IN HOPE, RHODE ISLAND. DEMOCRATS LINE.>>Caller: HI. MY NAME IS LAURA. I’M ACTUALLY CALLING ABOUT THE SUPREME COURT, ITSELF, RATHER THAN THE HEARING. >>OKAY. >>Caller: THAT WE’RE HAVING. AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT JUSTICE THOMAS AFTER HIS HEARING WAS APPOINTED TO THE COURT IN 1991 1 HEARING WAS APPOINTED TO THE COURT IN 1991991. SINCE THAT TIME, THERE HAVE BEEN VERY MORE SIGNIFICANT COURT DECISIONS ON WHICH THE CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY OR MINORITY HAD A VOICE. NONE OF THOSE DECISIONS OR DISSENTS WERE WRITTEN BY JUSTICE THOMAS. HE HAS BEEN MARGINALIZED ON THE COURT BECAUSE NEITHER CHIEF JUSTICE REHNQUIST NOR CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS HAVE ASSIGNED HIM ANY SIGNIFICANT CASES. CAN YOU IMAGINE A JUSTICE THOMAS, I MEAN, A JUSTICE KAVANAUGH NOW BEING ASSIGNED A SIGNIFICANT CASE THAT INVOLVES WOMEN? I CANNOT SEE IT HAPPENING REGARDLESS OF THE TRUTH OR FALSITY OF THE CLAIMS ALLEGED AGAINST HIM. >>THANK YOU. LET ME JUST POINT OUT, THIS IS JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S MOTHER AND FATHER WALKING INTO THE HEARING ROOM. JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT. PLEASE GO AHEAD, LAURA.>>Caller: HELLO?>>NO, I JUST WANTED TO JUMP IN TO POINT OUT WHAT WE WERE LOOKING AT. THAT WAS BRETT KAVANAUGH’S MOTHER AND FATHER. LET ME SHARE ANOTHER HEADLINE. THIS IS FROM CBS NEWS. “SOUTH CAROLINA SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM, REPUBLICAN TELLING DEMOCRATS, “YOU BETTER WATCH OUT FOR YOUR NOMINEES IF BRETT KAVANAUGH FAILS TO BE CONFIRMED.” THAT FROM CBSNEWS.COM. LET’S GO ON THE REPUBLICAN LINE. SHEILA JOINING US FROM NORTH CAROLINA. GOOD AFTERNOON. >>Caller: GOOD AFTERNOON. I BELIEVE HIM. I’VE KNOWN — I’VE HAD FAMILY MEMBERS WHO HAVE EVEN DECEIVED THE POLICE UNTIL THERE WAS A PHYSICAL EXAM AND THERE WAS NO RAPE. AND ALSO I’VE BEEN MOLESTED, DID NOT TELL ANYBODY, BECAUSE, I MEAN, MY DAD WOULD GO AFTER THEM. HE WASN’T A VIOLENT MAN, BUT HE LOVED HIS CHILDREN.>>SHEILA, THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. THIS IS SENATOR JEFF FLAKE AND BEFORE THAT, WE SAW RACHEL MITCHELL. WE’RE WATCHING INSIDE THE HEARING ROOM AS THE PROCEEDINGS BEGIN TO GET UNDER WAY, AND OUTSIDE, THERE’S SENATOR THOM TILLIS, REPUBLICAN OF NORTH CAROLINA, AND MIKE LEE, REPUBLICAN OF UTAH. THE KEY QUESTION IS WHO SOME OF THE KEY REPUBLICAN SENATORS WITH ILL BE INCLUING LISA MURKOWSKI OF ALASKA, SUSAN COLLINS OF MAINE, JEFF FLAKE WHO YOU SAW A MOMENT AGO AND BOB CORKER, FOUR KEY REPUBLICAN SENATORS, AND WHETHER OR NOT ANY DEMOCRATS SUPPORT THE KAVANAUGH NOMINATION. THE PLAN RIGHT NOW IS FOR THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE TO RECONVENE TOMORROW MORNING AFTER THE CONCLUSION TODAY’S HEARING. THAT SESSION GETTING UNDER WAY AT 9:30 EASTERN TIME AND SENATE VOTE IS EXPECTED THIS WEEKEND. BY THE WAY, THE HEARING THAT IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW WILL RE-AIR IN ITS ENTIRETY BEGINNING AT 8:00 P.M. EASTERN TIME. LET’S GO TO RONNY IN CHICAGO. GOOD EVENING. GOOD AFTERNOON.>>Caller: HEY, HOW’S IT GOING?>>GO AHEAD, RONNIE. >>Caller: SO MY COMMENT IS MORE ABOUT JUST KAVANAUGH’S DEMEANOR. I THINK WHAT WE’RE SEEING IS MORE OF A PRIVILEGED MAN BEING PUSHED IN THE CORNER. >>RONNIE, THANKS FOR THE CALL. WE’LL TAKE YOU INTO THE HEARING ROOM. THERE’S THE CHAIR, CHUCK GRASSLEY, OF IOWA.>>THANK YOU, SIR.>>JUDGE, I WON’T START UNTIL YOU TELL ME YOU’RE READY.>>I’M READY. >>OKAY. I’M GOING TO WAIT FOR SENATOR FEINSTEIN. OR DO YOU WANT ME TO GO AHEAD WITHOUT FEINSTEIN?>>WAIT FOR HER. I ALWAYS WAIT FOR YOU. >>I HOPE I SHOWED UP.>>SENATOR LEAHY?>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. JUDGE, YOU SAID BEFORE AND AGAIN TODAY THAT MARK JUDGE WAS A CLOSE FRIEND OF YOURS IN HIGH SCHOOL. NOW, DR. FORD, AS YOU KNOW, HAS SAID THAT HE WAS IN THE ROOM WHEN SHE WAS ATTACKED. SHE ALSO SAYS YOU WERE, TOO. UNFORTUNATELY, THE FBI HAS NEVER INTERVIEWED HIM. WE’VE NOT BEEN ABLE TO HAVE HIS ATTENDANCE HERE. THE CHAIRMAN REFUSES TO CALL HIM. IF SHE’S SAYING MARK JUDGE WAS IN THE ROOM THEN, THEN HE SHOULD BE IN THE ROOM HERE TODAY. WOULD YOU WANT HIM CALLED AS A WITNESS?>>SENATOR, THIS ALLEGATION CAME INTO THE COMMITTEE — >>NO, I MEAN, JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION, WOULD YOU WANT HIM TO BE HERE AS A WITNESS?>>HE’S ALREADY PROVIDED SWORN TESTIMONY TO THE COMMITTEE. THIS ALLEGATION HAS BEEN HIDDEN BY THE COMMITTEE, BY MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE. >>NO, IT HASN’T BEEN — IT HAS NOT BEEN INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI. THE COMMITTEE HAS REFUSED TO ALLOW IT TO BE. >>IT WAS DROPPED ON ME. IT WAS SPRUNG.>>IT WAS NOT INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI. HE’S NOT BEEN CALLED OR — >>SHOULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED IN A DUE COURSE, SENATOR. WHEN IT CAME IN.>>I WOULD — I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT. I’VE BEEN ON THIS COMMITTEE 44 YEARS. BOTH REPUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS. I’VE NEVER SEEN SOMEBODY THAT CRITICAL AND NOT ALLOWED TO BE HERE, CALLED TO TESTIFY OR AN FBI BACKGROUND. >>HE’S PROVIDED SWORN TESTIMONY AND, SENATOR — >>HE HAS NOT — >>SENATOR, LET ME FINISH. HE — THE ALLEGATION CAME IN WEEKS AGO AND NOTHING WAS DONE WITH IT BY THE RANKING MEMBER. AND THEN IT’S SPRUNG ON ME. >>JUDGE KAVANAUGH, I’VE HEARD YOUR LINE AND YOU STATE IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN, AND I HAVE THAT WELL IN MIND, BUT LET ME ASK YOU THIS. HE AUTHORED A BOOK TITLED “WASTED: TALES OF A GEN-X DRUNK.” HE REFERENCES A BART O’KAVANAUGH VOMITING IN SOMEONE’S CAR DURING BEACH WEEK THEN PASSING OUT. IS THAT YOU THAT HE’S TALKING ABOUT?>>SENATOR, MARK JUDGE WAS — >>TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE, IS THAT YOU THAT HE’S TALKING ABOUT?>>I’LL EXPLAIN IF YOU’LL LET ME — >>PROCEED, PLEASE. >>MARK JUDGE WAS A FRIEND OF OURS IN HIGH SCHOOL WHO DEVELOPED A VERY SERIOUS DRINKING PROBLEM, AN ADDICTION PROBLEM, THAT LASTED DECADES AND WAS VERY DIFFICULT FOR HIM TO ESCAPE FROM. HE NEARLY DIED THEN HE HAD LEUKEMIA AS WELL ON TOP OF IT. NOW, AS PART OF HIS THERAPY, OR PART OF HIS COMING TO GRIPS WITH SOBRIETY, HE WROTE A BOOK THAT IS A FICTIONALIZED BOOK AND AN ACCOUNT. I THINK HE PICKED OUT NAMES OF FRIENDS OF OURS TO THROW THEM IN AS KIND OF CLOSE TO WHAT, FOR CHARACTERS IN THE BOOK. SO, YOU KNOW, WE CAN SIT HERE –>>WE DON’T KNOW WHETHER THAT’S YOU OR NOT?>>WE CAN SIT HERE AND CAN MAKE FUN OF SOME GUY WHO HAS AN ADDICTION. I DON’T THINK THAT REALLY MAKES — >>JUDGE KAVANAUGH, I’M TRYINGING TO GET A STRAIGHT ANSWER FROM YOU UNDER OATH. ARE YOU BART O’KAVANAUGH YOU’RE REFERRING TO? YES OR NO?>>YOU’D HAVE TO ASK HIM. >>WELL, I AGREE WITH YOU THERE. THAT’S WHY I WISH THAT THE CHAIRMAN HAD HIM HERE UNDER OATH. NOW, YOU TALKED ABOUT YOUR YEARBOOK. IN YOUR YEARBOOK, YOU TALKED ABOUT DRINKING AND SEXUAL EXPLOITS. DID YOU NOT?>>SENATOR, LET ME TAKE A STEP BACK AND EXPLAIN HIGH SCHOOL. I WAS NUMBER ONE IN THE CLASS. FRESHMAN — >>I THOUGHT — >>NO, NO, NO, NO.>>I THOUGHT ONLY — >>YOU GOT THIS UP. I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT MY HIGH SCHOOL — NO, NO, I’M GOING TO — >>LET HIM ANSWER.>>I’M GOING TO TALK ABOUT MY HIGH SCHOOL RECORD IF YOU’RE GOING TO SIT HERE AND MOCK ME. >>WE WERE — I THINK WE WERE ALL VERY FAIR TO DR. FORD. SHOULDN’T WE BE JUST AS FAIR TO JUDGE KAVANAUGH?>>I BUSTED MY BUTT IN ACADEMICS. I ALWAYS TRIED TO DO THE BEST I COULD. AS I RECALL, I FINISHED ONE IN THE CLASS, FIRST FRESHMAN AND JUNIOR YEAR RIGHT UP AT THE TOP WITH STEVE CLARK AND EDDIE AYALA. WE WERE ALWAYS KIND IN THE MIX. I PLAYED SPORTS. I WAS CAPTAIN OF THE VARSITY TEAM. I RAN TRACK IN THE SPRING OF ’82 TO TRY TO GET FASTER. I DID MY SERVICE PROJECTS AT THE SCHOOL. WHICH INVOLVED GOING TO THE SOUP KITCHEN DOWNTOWN. LET ME FINISH. AND GOING TO TUTOR INTELLECTUALLY DISABLED KIDS AT THE ROCKVILLE LIBRARY. WENT TO CHURCH. AND, YES, WE GOT TOGETHER WITH OUR FRIENDS. >>DOES THIS REFLECT WHAT YOU ARE? DOES THIS YEARBOOK REFLECT YOUR FOCUS ON ACADEMICS AND YOUR RESPECT FOR WOMEN? THAT’S EASY, YES OR NO, YOU DON’T HAVE TO FILIBUSTER THE ANSWER. DOES IT REFLECT YOUR FOCUS — >>I ALREADY SAID THE YEARBOOK? MY OPENING STATEMENT, THE YEARBOOK — >>JUDGE, JUST WAIT A MINUTE. HE’S ASKED A QUESTION. I’LL GIVE YOU TIME TO ANSWER IT.>>THE YEARBOOK, AS I SAID IN MY OPENING STATEMENT, WAS SOMETHING WHERE THE STUDENTS AND EDITORS MADE A DECISION TO TREAT SOME OF IT AS FARCE AND SOME OF IT AS EXAGGERATION. SOME OF IT CELEBRATING THINGS THAT DON’T REFLECT THE THINGS THAT WERE REALLY THE CENTRAL PART OF OUR SCHOOL. YES, WE WENT TO PARTIES, THOUGH. YES, OF COURSE, WE WENT TO PARTIES AND THE YEARBOOK PAGE DESCRIBES THAT AND KIND OF MAKES FUN OF IT. AND, YOU KNOW, IF WE WANT TO SIT HERE AND TALK ABOUT WHETHER A SUPREME COURT NOMINATION SHOULD BE BASED ON A HIGH SCHOOL YEARBOOK PAGE, I THINK THAT’S TAKING US TO A NEW LEVEL OF ABSURDITY.>>MISS MITCHELL?>>WE GOT A FILIBUSTER BUT NOT A SINGLE ANSWER.>>MISS MITCHELL?>>JUDGE, DO YOU STILL HAVE YOUR CALENDARS THERE?>>I DO.>>I WOULD LIKE YOU TO LOOK AT THE JULY 1st ENTRY.>>YES.>>THE ENTRY SAYS, AND I QUOTE, “GO TO TIMMY’S FOR SKIS WITH JUDGE, TOM, P.J., BERNIE, AND SQUEE.”>>THAT’S A NICKNAME. >>OKAY. TO WHAT DOES THIS REFER AND TO WHOM?>>SO FIRST SAYS TOBIN’S HOUSE, WORKOUT. SO THAT’S ONE OF THE FOOTBALL WORKOUTS THAT WE WOULD HAVE THAT DR. FENIZIO WOULD RUN FOR GUYS ON THE FOOTBALL TEAM DURING THE SUMMER. SO WE WOULD BE THERE. THAT’S USUALLY 6:00 TO 8:00 OR SO. KIND OF UNTIL NEAR DARK. THEN IT LOOKS LIKE WE WENT OVER TO TIMMY’S. YOU WANT TO KNOW THEIR LAST NAMES, TOO? I’M HAPPY TO DO IT. >>IF YOU COULD JUST IDENTIFY, IS JUDGE MARK JUDGE?>>IT IS.>>AND IS P.J. P.J. SMITH?>>IT IS. SO IT’S TIM GAUDET, MARK JUDGE, TOM KANE, P.J. SMITH, BERNIE McCARTHY, CHRIS GARRETT. >>CHRIS GARRETT IS SQUEE?>>HE IS.>>DID YOU IN YOUR CALENDAR ROUTINELY DOCUMENT SOCIAL GATHERINGS LIKE HOUSE PARTIES OR GATHERINGS OF FRIENDS IN YOUR CALENDAR?>>YES. IT CERTAINLY APPEARS THAT WAY. THAT’S WHAT I WAS DOING IN THE SUMMER OF 1982. YOU CAN SEE THAT REFLECTED ON SEVERAL OF THE — SEVERAL OF THE ENTRIES.>>IF A GATHERING LIKE DR. FORD HAS DESCRIBED HAD OCCURRED, WOULD YOU HAVE DOCUMENTED THAT?>>YES. BECAUSE I DOCUMENTED EVERYTHING, THOSE KINDS OF EVENTS, EVEN SMALL GET TOGETHERS. AUGUST 7th IS ANOTHER GOOD EXAMPLE WHERE I DOCUMENTED A SMALL GET TOGETHER THAT SUMMER. SO, YES.>>AUGUST 7th. COULD YOU READ THAT?>>THINK THAT’S GO TO BECKY’S, MATT, DENISE, LORI, JENNY.>>HAVE YOU REVIEWED EVERY ENTRY THAT IS IN THESE CALENDARS OF MAY, JUNE, JULY, AND AUGUST OF 1982?>>I HAVE.>>IS THERE ANYTHING THAT COULD EVEN REMOTELY FIT WHAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT IN TERMS OF DR. FORD’S ALLEGATIONS?>>NO.>>AS A LAWYER AND A JUDGE, ARE YOU — WE’VE TALKED ABOUT THE FBI. ARE YOU AWARE THAT THIS TYPE OF OFFENSE WOULD ACTUALLY BE INVESTIGATED BY LOCAL POLICE?>>YES. I MENTIONED MONTGOMERY COUNTY POLICE EARLIER. YES.>>OKAY. ARE YOU AWARE THAT IN MARYLAND, THERE IS NO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS THAT WOULD PROHIBIT YOU BEING CHARGED EVEN IF THIS HAPPENED IN 1982?>>THAT’S MY UNDERSTANDING.>>HAVE YOU AT ANY TIME BEEN CONTACTED BY ANY MEMBERS OF LOCAL POLICE AGENCIES REGARDING THIS MATTER?>>NO, MA’AM.>>PRIOR TO YOUR NOMINATION FOR SUPREME COURT, YOU’VE TALKED ABOUT ALL OF THE FEMALE CLERKS YOU’VE HAD AND THE WOMEN THAT YOU’VE WORKED WITH. I’M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT THEM. I’M TALKING ABOUT GLOBALLY. HAVE YOU EVER BEEN ACCUSED EITHER FORMALLY OR INFORMALLY OF UNWANTED SEXUAL BEHAVIOR?>>NO.>>AND WHEN I SAY INFORMALLY, I MEAN JUST A FEMALE COMPLAINS, IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE TO ANYBODY ELSE BUT YOU. >>NO. . >>SINCE DR. FORD’S ALLEGATION WAS MADE PUBLIC, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU BEEN INTERVIEWED BY THE COMMITTEE?>>IT’S BEEN THREE OR FOUR. I’M TRYING TO REMEMBER NOW. IT’S BEEN SEVERAL TIMES. EACH OF THESE NEW THINGS, AS ABSURD AS THEY ARE, WOULD GET ON THE PHONE AND KIND OF GO THROUGH THEM. >>SO HAVE YOU SUBMITTED TO INTERVIEWS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT DR. FORD’S ALLEGATION?>>YES. >>AND WHAT ABOUT DEBORAH RAMIREZ’S — >>YES. >>– ALLEGATION THAT YOU WAVED YOUR PENIS IN FRONT OF HER?>>YES. >>WHAT ABOUT JULIE SWETNICK’S ALLEGATION THAT YOU REPEATEDLY ENGAGED IN DRUGGING AND GANG RAPING OR ALLOWING WOMEN TO BE GANG RAPED?>>YES. YES, I’VE BEEN INTERVIEWED ABOUT IT.>>WERE YOUR ANSWERS TO MY QUESTIONS TODAY CONSISTENT WITH THE ANSWERS THAT YOU GAVE TO THE COMMITTEE IN THESE VARIOUS INTERVIEWS?>>YES, MA’AM.>>OKAY. AMOUNT OF TIME. >>SENATOR DURBIN?>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. JUDGE KAVANAUGH, EARLIER TODAY, DR. CHRISTINE FORD SAT IN THAT SAME CHAIR AND UNDER OATH SHE SAID CLEARLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT SHE WAS THE CONVICT OF SEXUAL ASSAULT AT YOUR HANDS. SHE ANSWERED OUR QUESTIONS DIRECTLY AND SHE DIDN’T FLINCH AT THE PROSPECT OF SUBMITTING HERSELF TO AN FBI INVESTIGATION OF THESE CHARGES. WE KNOW AND I’M SURE SHE’S BEEN ADVISED BY HER ATTORNEYS THAT A PERSON LYING TO THE FBI CAN FACE CRIMINAL PROSECUTION. YOU HAVE CLEARLY AND UNEQUIVOCALLY DENIED THAT YOU ASSAULTED DR. FORD. WITH THAT STATEMENT, YOU MUST BELIEVE THAT THERE IS NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE OR ANY CREDIBLE WITNESS THAT CAN PROVE OTHERWISE. YOU STARTED OFF WITH AN IMPASSIONED STATEMENT AT THE BEGINNING AND I CAN IMAGINE, TRY TO IMAGINE, WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN THROUGH, YOUR FAMILY’S BEEN THROUGH, AND I’M SURE I WOULDN’T GET CLOSE TO IT.>>I BET YOU WOULDN’T. >>I’M SURE I WOULDN’T. IT’S AN IMPASSIONED STATEMENT. AND IN THE COURSE OF IT, YOU SAID, “I WELCOME ANY KIND OF INVESTIGATION.” I QUOTE YOU. “I WELCOME ANY KIND OF INVESTIGATION.” I’VE GOT A SUGGESTION FOR YOU. RIGHT NOW, TURN TO YOUR LEFT IN THE FRONT ROW TO DON McGAHN, COUNSEL TO PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP, ASK HIM TO SUSPEND THIS HEARING AND NOMINATION PROCESS UNTIL THE FBI COMPLETES ITS INVESTIGATION OF THE CHARGES MADE BY DR. FORD AND OTHERS AND GOES TO BRING THE WITNESSES FORWARD AND PROVIDES THAT INFORMATION TO THIS HEARING. I’M SURE THAT THE CHAIRMAN AT THAT POINT WILL UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS A REASONABLE REQUEST. TO FINALLY PUT TO REST THESE CHARGES IF THEY ARE FALSE OR TO PROVE THEM IF THEY ARE NOT. YOU SPENT TWO YEARS IN A WHITE HOUSE OFFICE THAT APPROVED JUDICIAL NOMINEES. YOU TURNED TO THE FBI OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN FOR THEIR WORK. LET’S BRING THEM IN HERE AND NOW. TURN TO DON McGAHN AND TELL HIM, IT’S TIME TO GET THIS DONE, AN FBI INVESTIGATION IS THE ONLY WAY TO ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS.>>SENATOR — >>STOP THE CLOCK. THIS COMMITTEE IS RUNNING THIS HEARING. NOT THE WHITE HOUSE. NOT DON McGAHN. NOT EVEN YOU AS A NOMINEE. WE ARE HERE TODAY BECAUSE DR. FORD ASKED FOR AN OPPORTUNITY HERE. I KNOW YOU DID, TOO, AS WELL. IN FACT, MAYBE EVEN BEFORE SHE DID. WE’RE HERE BECAUSE PEOPLE WANTED TO BE HEARD FROM CHARGES THAT THEY ALL THOUGHT WERE UNFAIR OR ACTIVITIES LIKE SEXUAL ASSAULT WAS UNFAIR. SO I WANT TO ASSURE SENATOR DURBIN REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU SAY TO SENATOR DON McGAHN, WE’RE NOT SUSPENDING THIS HEARING. PROCEED TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, OR WHATEVER — OR IF THE GENTLEMAN — >>I’LL JUST SAY THIS, IF YOU, JUDGE KAVANAUGH, TURNED TO DON McGAHN AND TO THIS COMMITTEE AND SAY FOR THE SAKE OF MY REPUTATION, MY FAMILY NAME, AND TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THE TRUTH OF THIS, I AM NOT GOING TO BE OBSTACLE TO AN FBI INVESTIGATION, I WOULD HOPE THAT ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE WOULD JOIN ME IN SAYING, WE’RE GOING TO ABIDE BY YOUR WISHES AND WE WILL HAVE THAT INVESTIGATION.>>I WELCOME WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO DO BECAUSE I’M TELLING THE TRUTH. >>I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. >>I’M TELLING THE TRUTH. >>I WANT TO KNOW WHAT WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, JUDGE. >>I’M INNOCENT. I’M INNOCENT OF THIS CHARGE. >>YOU’RE PREPARED — >>THEY DON’T REACH CONCLUSIONS.>>NO, BUT THEY DO INVESTIGATE QUESTIONS. >>I’M INNOCENT. >>YOU CAN’T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. YOU CAN’T SAY — >>I WANTED A HEARING. >>– I WELCOME ANY KIND OF INVESTIGATION. >>THIS THING WAS SPRUNG ON ME. THIS THING WAS SPRUNG AT THE LAST MINUTE AFTER BEING HELD BY STAFF. YOU KNOW — >>JUDGE. >>I CALLED FOR A HEARING IMMEDIATELY. >>IF THERE IS NO TRUTH TO HER CHARGES, THE FBI INVESTIGATION WILL SHOW THAT. ARE YOU AFRAID THAT THEY MIGHT NOT?>>COME ON.>>THE FBI DOES NOT REACH — YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW THIS — YOU KNOW THAT’S A PHONY QUESTION BECAUSE THE FBI DOESN’T REACH CONCLUSIONS. THEY JUST PROVIDE THE 302s. 302s, SO I CAN EXPLAIN TO PEOPLE WHO DON’T KNOW WHAT THAT IS, THEY JUST GO AND DO WHAT YOU’RE DOING. ASK QUESTIONS AND THEN TYPE UP A REPORT. THEY DON’T REACH THE BOTTOM LINE — >>THIS MORNING I ASKED DR. FORD, I ASKED HER ABOUT THIS INCIDENT WHERE SHE RAN INTO MARK JUDGE IN SAFEWAY, AND SHE SAID, SURE, I REMEMBER. SIX OR EIGHT WEEKS AFTER THIS OCCURRENCE. WELL, SOMEONE AT THE “WASHINGTON POST” WENT IN AND TOOK A LOOK AT MR. JUDGE’S BOOK. AND HAS BEEN ABLE TO — THE RUN THAT HE WROTE ABOUT HIS ADDICTION AND HIS ALCOHOLISM. THEY HAVE NARROWED IT DOWN WHAT THEY THINK WAS A PERIOD OF TIME, SIX OR EIGHT WEEKS AFTER THE EVENT. AND HE WOULD HAVE BEEN WORKING AT THE SAFEWAY AT THAT POINT. SO THE POINT I’M GETTING TO IS WE AT LEAST CAN CONNECT SOME DOTS HERE AND GET SOME INFORMATION. WHY WOULD YOU RESIST THAT — >>THERE’S SOME DOTS — >>– KIND OF INVESTIGATION? WHY WOULD YOU RESIST THAT KIND OF INVESTIGATION?>>SENATOR, I WELCOME, I WANTED THE HEARING LAST WEEK. >>I’M ASKING ABOUT THE FBI INVESTIGATION.>>THE COMMITTEE FIGURES OUT HOW TO ASK THE QUESTIONS. I’VE BEEN ON THE PHONE MULTIPLE TIMES WITH COMMITTEE COUNSEL. I’LL TALK TO — >>JUDGE KAVANAUGH, WILL YOU SUPPORT AN FBI INVESTIGATION RIGHT NOW?>>I WILL DO WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE WANTS TO — >>PERSONALLY, DO YOU THINK THAT’S THE BEST THING FOR US TO DO? YOU WON’T ANSWER?>>LOOK, SENATOR, I’VE — I HAVE SAID I WANTED A HEARING AND I SAID I WAS WELCOME ANYTHING. I’M INNOCENT. THIS THING WAS HELD, HELD WHEN IT COULD HAVE BEEN PRESENTED IN THE ORDINARY WAY. IT COULD HAVE BEEN HELD AND HANDLED CONFIDENTLY AT FIRST WHICH WAS WHAT DR. FORD’S WISHES WERE, AS I UNDERSTAND IT. IT WOULDN’T HAVE CAUSED THIS, LIKE, DESTROYED MY FAMILY LIKE THIS EFFORT HAS.>>I THINK AN FBI INVESTIGATION WILL HELP ALL OF US ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE.>>SENATOR GRAHAM ASKS FOR THE FLOOR. BUT BEFORE HE DOES, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IF YOU WANT TO KNOW SOMETHING, YOU GOT THE WITNESS RIGHT HERE TO ASK HIM. AND SECONDLY, IF YOU WANT AN FBI REPORT, YOU CAN ASK FOR IT YOURSELF. I’VE ASKED FOR FBI REPORTS IN THE PAST. IN THE 38 YEARS I’VE BEEN IN THE SENATE. SENATOR GRAHAM.>>ARE YOU AWARE THAT AT 9:23 ON THE NIGHT OF JULY THE 9th, THE DAY YOU WERE NOMINATED TO THE SUPREME COURT BY PRESIDENT TRUMP, SENATOR SCHUMER SAID 23 MINUTES AFTER YOUR NOMINATION, “I’LL OPPOSE JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S NOMINATION WITH EVERYTHING I HAVE. I HOPE A BIPARTISAN MAJORITY WILL DO THE SAME. THE STAKES ARE SIMPLY TOO HIGH FOR ANYTHING LESS.” IF YOU WEREN’T AWARE OF IT, YOU ARE NOW. DID YOU MEET WITH SENATOR DIANNE FEINSTEIN ON AUGUST 20th?>>I DID MEET WITH SENATOR FEINSTEIN. >>DID YOU KNOW THAT HER STAFF HAD ALREADY RECOMMENDED A LAWYER TO DR. FORD?>>I DID NOT KNOW THAT.>>DID YOU KNOW THAT HER AND HER STAFF HAD THIS ALLEGATIONS FOR OVER 20 DAYS?>>I DID NOT KNOW THAT AT THE TIME.>>IF YOU WANTED AN FBI INVESTIGATION, YOU COULD HAVE COME TO US. WHAT YOU WANT TO DO IS DESTROY THIS GUY’S LIFE, HOLD THIS SEAT OPEN AND HOPE YOU WIN IN 2020. YOU’VE SAID THAT. NOT ME. YOU GOT NOTHING TO APOLOGIZE FOR. WHEN YOU SEE SOTOMAYER AND KAGAN, SAY HELLO BECAUSE I VOTED FOR THEM. I’D NEVER DO TO THE WHAT YOU’VE DONE TO THIS GUY. THIS IS THE MOST UNETHICAL SHAM SINCE I’VE BEEN IN POLITICS AND IF YOU REALLY WANTED TO KNOW THE TRUTH, YOU SURE AS HELL WOULDN’T HAVE DONE WHAT YOU’VE DONE TO THIS GUY. ARE YOU A GANG RAPIST?>>NO.>>I CANNOT IMAGINE WHAT YOU AND YOUR FAMILY HAVE GONE THROUGH. BOY, YOU ALL WANT POWER. GOD, I HOPE YOU NEVER GET IT. I HOPE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN SEE THROUGH THIS SHAM. THAT YOU KNEW ABOUT IT AND YOU HELD IT. YOU HAD NO INTENTION OF PROTECTING DR. FORD. NONE. SHE’S AS MUCH OF A VICTIM AS YOU ARE. GOD, I HATE TO SAY IT BECAUSE THESE HAVE BEEN MY FRIENDS, BUT LET ME TELL YOU, WHEN IT COMES TO THIS, YOU’RE LOOKING FOR A FAIR PROCESS, YOU CAME TO THE WRONG TOWN AT THE WRONG TIME, MY FRIEND. DO YOU CONSIDER THIS A JOB INTERVIEW?>>THE ADVICE AND CONSENT RULE IS LIKE — >>DO YOU CONSIDER THAT YOU’VE BEEN THROUGH A JOB INTERVIEW?>>I’VE BEEN THROUGH A PROCESS OF ADVICE AND CONSENT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION WHICH — >>WOULD YOU SAY YOU’VE BEEN THROUGH HELL?>>I’VE BEEN THROUGH HELL AND THEN SOME. >>THIS IS NOT A JOB INTERVIEW.>>YEAH.>>THIS IS HELL.>>THIS — >>THIS IS GOING TO DESTROY THE ABILITY OF GOOD PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD BECAUSE OF THIS CRAP. YOUR HIGH SCHOOL YEARBOOK. YOU HAVE INTERACTED WITH PROFESSIONAL WOMEN ALL YOUR LIFE, NOT ONE ACCUSATION. YOU’RE SUPPOSED TO BE BILL COSBY WHEN YOU’RE A JUNIOR AND SENIOR IN HIGH SCHOOL. AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU GOT OVER IT. IT’S BEEN MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IF YOU DRUG WOMEN AND RAPE THEM FOR TWO YEARS IN HIGH SCHOOL, YOU PROBABLY DON’T STOP. HERE’S MY UNDERSTANDING. IF YOU LIVED A GOOD LIFE, PEOPLE WOULD RECOGNIZE IT LIKE THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION HAS THE GOLD STANDARD. “HIS INTEGRITY IS ABSOLUTELY UNQUESTIONED. HE IS THE VERY CIRCUMSPECT IN HIS PERSONAL CONDUCT, HARBORS NO BIASES OR PREJUDICES. ENTIRELY ETHICAL. IS A REALLY DECENT PERSON. HE IS WARM, FRIENDLY, UNASSUMING. HE’S THE NICEST PERSON.” THE ABA. ONE THING I CAN TELL OU YOU SHOULD BE PROUD OF, ASHLEY, YOU SHOULD BE PROUD OF THIS. THAT YOU RAISED A DAUGHTER WHO HAD THE GOOD CHARACTER TO PRAY FOR DR. FORD. TO MY REPUBLICAN COLLEAGUES, IF YOU VOTE NO, YOU’RE LEGITIMIZING THE MOST DESPICABLE THING I HAVE SEEN IN MY TIME IN POLITICS. YOU WANT THIS SEAT, I HOPE YOU NEVER GET IT. I HOPE YOU’RE ON THE SUPREME COURT. THAT’S EXACTLY WHERE YOU SHOULD BE. AND I HOPE THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WILL SEE THROUGH THIS CHARADE. AND I WISH YOU WELL. YOU WELL. AND I INTEND TO VOTE FOR YOU, AND I HOPE EVERYBODY WHO’S FAIR MINDED WILL.>>SENATOR WHITEHOUSE.>>SHOULD WE LET THINGS SETTLE A LITTLE BIT AFTER THAT?>>IF YOU WANT TO, WE’LL TAKE A 60-SECOND BREAK.>>NO, I’M GOOD.>>OKAY. GO AHEAD.>>ONE OF THE REASONS, MR. KAVANAUGH, THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THE YEARBOOK IS THAT IT IS RELATIVELY CONSISTENT IN TIME WITH THE EVENTS AT ISSUE HERE, AND BECAUSE IT APPEARS TO BE YOUR WORDS. IS IT, IN FACT, YOUR WORDS ON YOUR YEARBOOK PAGE?>>WE SUBMITTED THINGS TO THE EDITORS, AND I BELIEVE THEY TOOK THEM. I DON’T KNOW IF THEY CHANGED THINGS OR NOT, BUT — >>YOU’RE NOT AWARE OF ANY CHANGES. AS FAR AS YOU KNOW — >>I’M NOT AWARE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER BUT I’M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND CONTEST THAT. HAVE AT IT, IF YOU WANT TO GO THROUGH MY YEARBOOK.>>YEAH, I’M ACTUALLY INTERESTED. YOU KNOW, LAWYERS SHOULD BE WORKING OFF OF COMMON TERMS AND UNDERSTAND THE WORDS THAT WE’RE USING. I THINK THAT’S A PRETTY BASIC PRINCIPLE AMONG LAWYERS, WON’T WOULDN’T YOU AGREE?>>IT IS. IF YOU’RE WORRIED ABOUT MY YEARBOOK, HAVE AT IT, SENATOR.>>LET’S LOOK AT BEACH WEEK RALPH CLUB BIGGEST CONTRIBUTOR. WHAT DOES THE WORD RALPH MEAN IN THAT?>>THAT PROBABLY REFERS TO THROWING UP. I’M KNOWN TO HAVE A WEAK STOMACH AND ALWAYS HAVE. IN FACT, THE LAST TIME I WAS HERE, YOU ASKED ME ABOUT HAVING KETCHUP ON SPAGHETTI. I ALWAYS HAVE HAD A WEAK STOMACH.>>I DON’T KNOW THAT I ASKED ABOUT KETCHUP ON SPAGHETTI.>>YOU DIDN’T. SOMEONE DID. ANYONE WHO’S KNOWN ME LIKE A LOT OF THESE PEOPLE BEHIND ME, HAVE KNOWN ME MY WHOLE LIFE, KNOW, YOU KNOW, I GOT A WEAK STOMACH, WHETHER IT’S WITH BEER OR WITH SPICY FOOD OR ANYTHING.>>SO, THE VOMITING THAT YOU REFERENCE IN THE RALPH CLUB REFERENCE RELATED TO THE CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL?>>SENATOR, I WAS AT THE TOP OF MY CLASS ACADEMICALLY, BUSTED MY BUTT IN SCHOOL, CAPTAIN OF THE VARSITY BASKETBALL TEAM, GOT INTO YALE COLLEGE. WHEN I GOT INTO YALE COLLEGE, GOT INTO YALE LAW SCHOOL, WORKED MY TAIL OFF.>>AND DID THE WORD “RALPH” YOU USED — >>I ALREADY ANSWERED THE QUESTION.>>DID IT REFER TO ALCOHOL? DID IT RELATE TO ALCOHOL?>>I LIKE BEER. I DON’T KNOW IF YOU DO. DO YOU LIKE BEER, SENATOR, OR NOT? WHAT DO YOU LIKE TO DRINK?>>NEXT ONE IS, JUDGE, HAVE YOU — I DON’T KNOW IF IT’S BUFFED — HOW DO YOU PRONOUNCE THAT?>>THAT REFERS TO FLATULENCE. WE WERE 16.>>OKAY. AND SO WHEN YOUR FRIEND, MARK JUDGE, SAID THE SAME — PUT THE SAME THING IN HIS YEARBOOK PAGE BACK TO YOU, HE HAD THE SAME MEANING, IT WAS FLATULENCE.>>I DON’T KNOW WHAT HE DID BUT THAT’S MY RECOLLECTION. WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT FLATULENCE AT AGE 16 ON A YEARBOOK PAGE, I’M GAME.>>YOU MENTIONED THE RENATA — I DON’T KNOW HOW YOU PRONOUNCE THAT. THAT’S THE PROPER NAME OF AN INDIVIDUAL YOU KNOW?>>RENATA.>>IT’S SPELLED RE-N-A-T-E.>>CORRECT.>>AND THEN AFTER THAT IS THE WORD, ALUMNIUS. WHAT DOES THAT MEAN IN THAT CONTEXT?>>I EXPLAINED THAT IN MY OPENING STATEMENT. SHE WAS A GREAT FRIEND OF OURS. BUNCH OF US WENT TO DANCES WITH HER. SHE HUNG OUT WITH US AS A GROUP. THE MEDIA CIRCUS THAT HAS BEEN GENERATED BY THIS THOUGHT AND REPORTED THAT IT REFERRED TO SEX. IT DID NOT. NEVER HAD ANY — SHE HERSELF SAID ON THE RECORD, ANY KIND OF SEXUAL INTERACTION WITH HER AND I’M SORRY HOW THAT’S BEEN MISINTERPRETED AND SORRY ABOUT THAT, AS I EXPLAINED IN MY OPENING STATEMENT BECAUSE SHE’S A GOOD PERSON AND TO HAVE HER NAME DRAGGED THROUGH THIS HEARING IS A JOKE, AND REALLY AN EMBARRASSMENT.>>DEVIL’S TRIANGLE?>>DRINKING GAME.>>HOW’S IT PLAYED?>>THREE GLASSES IN A TRIANGLE.>>AND?>>YOU EVER PLAYED QUARTERS?>>NO.>>OKAY. IT’S A QUARTERS GAME.>>ANN DAUGHERTY’S?>>SHE HAD A PARTY ON THE FOURTH OF JULY IN THE BEACH IN DELAWARE.>>AND THERE ARE, LIKE, ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE, SIX SEVEN Fs IN FRONT OF THE FOURTH OF JULY. WHAT DOES THAT SIGNIFY, IF ANYTHING.>>ONE OF OUR FRIENDS, SQUEE, WHEN HE SAID THE F WORD, STARTING AT A YOUNG AGE, HAD KIND OF A WIND-UP TO THE F WORD. KIND OF FFF. AND THEN THE WORD WOULD COME OUT. AND WHEN WE WERE 15, WE THOUGHT THAT WAS FUNNY AND IT BECAME AN INSIDE JOKE FOR THE — HOW HE WOULD SAY F — AND I WON’T REPEAT IT HERE.>>AND REFERRING TO GEORGETOWN VERSUS LOUISVILLE.>>DO YOU WANT ANY MORE ON THE F SNZ. >>ORIOLES VERSUS RED SOX, WHO WON THAT GAME ANYWAY, SHOULD WE DRAW ANY CONCLUSION THAT A LOSS OF RECOLLECTION ASSOCIATED WITH ALCOHOL WAS INVOLVED IN YOU NOT KNOWING WHO WON THE GAMES THAT YOU ATTENDED?>>NO. FIRST OF ALL, THE GEORGETOWN-LOUISVILLE WAS WATCHING ON TV, A PARTY, AND THE — >>THAT’S NOT INCONSISTENT WITH DRINKING AND NOT REMEMBERING WHAT HAPPENED.>>I’M AWARE. AND THE POINT OF BOTH WAS WE, IN ESSENCE, WERE HAVING A PARTY AND DIDN’T PAY ATTENTION TO THE GAME, EVEN THOUGH THE GAME WAS THE EXCUSE WE HAD FOR GETTING TOGETHER. I THINK THAT’S VERY COMMON. I DON’T KNOW IF YOU’VE BEEN TO A SUPER BOWL PARTY, FOR EXAMPLE, SENATOR, AND NOT PAID ATTENTION TO THE GAME AND JUST HUNG OUT WITH YOUR FRIENDS. I DON’T KNOW IF YOU’VE DONE THAT OR NOT BUT THAT’S WHAT WE WERE REFERRING TO IN THOSE TWO OCCASIONS.>>SENATOR CORNYN.>>JUDGE, I CAN’T THINK OF A MORE EMBARRASSING SCANDAL FOR THE UNITED STATES SENATE SINCE THE McCARTHY HEARINGS. WHEN THE COMMENT WAS ABOUT THE CRUELTY OF THE PROCESS TOWARD THE PEOPLE INVOLVED. AND THE QUESTION WAS ASKED, HAVE YOU NO SENSE OF DECENCY. AND I’M AFRAID WE’VE LOST THAT, AT LEAST FOR THE TIME BEING. DO YOU UNDERSTAND YOU’VE BEEN ACCUSED OF MULTIPLE CRIMES?>>I’M PAINFULLY AWARE, FOR MY FAMILY AND ME, TO READ ABOUT THIS.>>AND — >>BREATHLESS REPORTING.>>AND OF COURSE THE SEXUAL ASSAULT THAT DR. FORD CLAIMS THAT YOU DENIED, THEN THE CLAIMS OF MS. RAMIREZ THAT NOT EVEN “THE NEW YORK TIMES” WOULD REPORT BECAUSE THEY COULDN’T CORROBORATE IT AND THEN STORMY DANIELS’ LAWYER RELEASED A BOMBSHELL ACCUSING YOU OF GANG RAPE. ALL OF THOSE ARE CRIMES, ARE THEY NOT?>>THEY ARE, AND I’M NEVER GOING TO GET MY REPUTATION BACK. IT’S — MY LIFE IS TOTALLY AND PERMANENTLY ALTERED.>>JUDGE, DON’T GIVE UP.>>I’M NOT GIVING UP.>>THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE LISTENING TO THIS AND THEY WILL MAKE THEIR DECISION, AND I THINK YOU’LL COME OUT ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THAT DECISION.>>WELL, I WILL ALWAYS BE A GOOD PERSON AND TRY TO BE A GOOD JUDGE, WHATEVER HAPPENS.>>SO THIS IS NOT A JOB INTERVIEW. YOU’VE BEEN ACCUSED OF A CRIME. IF YOU HAVE LIED TO THE COMMITTEE AND THE INVESTIGATORS, THAT IS A CRIME IN AND OF ITSELF, CORRECT?>>THAT’S CORRECT.>>SO, IN ORDER TO VOTE AGAINST YOUR NOMINATION, WE WOULD HAVE TO CONCLUDE THAT YOU ARE A SERIAL LIAR AND YOU HAVE EXPOSED YOURSELF TO LEGAL JEOPARDY IN THE WAY IN YOUR INTERACTION WITH THIS COMMITTEE AND THE INVESTIGATORS. ISN’T THAT CORRECT?>>THAT’S MY UNDERSTANDING.>>YOU TALKED IN YOUR INTERVIEW ON — WITH MARTHA THE OTHER NIGHT ABOUT A FAIR PROCESS. SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES ACROSS THE AISLE SAY, WELL, THE BURDEN IS NOT ON THE ACCUSER BECAUSE THIS IS A JOB INTERVIEW. THE BURDEN IS ON YOU, BUT YOU SAID YOU WEREN’T THERE AND IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. IT’S IMPOSSIBLE FOR YOU TO PROVE A NEGATIVE. SO, I WOULD JUST SUGGEST THAT YOU HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF A CRIME AND THAT A FAIR PROCESS UNDER THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, UNDER OUR NOTION OF FAIR PLAY, MEANS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE AN ACCUSATION AGAINST YOU HAVE TO COME FORWARD WITH SOME EVIDENCE. ISN’T THAT PART OF A FAIR PROCESS?>>YES, SIR, SENATOR.>>AND PART OF THAT MEANS THAT IF YOU’RE GOING TO MAKE AN ALLEGATION, THERE NEEDS TO BE CORROBORATION. IN OTHER WORDS, YOU’RE NOT GUILTY BECAUSE SOMEBODY MAKES AN ACCUSATION AGAINST YOU IN THIS COUNTRY. WE’RE NOT A POLICE STATE. WE DON’T GIVE THE GOVERNMENT THAT KIND OF POWER. WE INSIST THAT THOSE CHARGES BE PROVEN BY COMPETENT EVIDENCE. AND I KNOW WE’RE NOT IN A COURT. I’VE TOLD MY COLLEAGUES IF WE WERE IN COURT, HALF OF THEM WOULD BE IN CONTEMPT OF COURT. BUT YOU HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF A CRIME, AND I BELIEVE FUNDAMENTAL NOTIONS OF FAIR PLAY AND JUSTICE IN OUR CONSTITUTIONAL SYSTEM REQUIRE THAT IF SOMEBODY’S GOING TO MAKE THAT ACCUSATION AGAINST YOU, THEN THEY NEED TO COME FORWARD WITH SOME CORROBORATION, NOT JUST ALLEGATIONS. AND YOU’RE RIGHT TO BE ANGRY ABOUT THE DELAYS IN YOUR ABILITY TO COME HERE AND PROTECT YOUR GOOD NAME BECAUSE IN THE INTERIM, IT JUST KEEPS GETTING WORSE. IT’S NOT DR. FORD. IT’S THIS STORY THAT NOT EVEN “THE NEW YORK TIMES” WOULD REPORT, THE ALLEGATION OF MS. RAMIREZ, AND THEN STORMY DANIELS’ LAWYER COMES UP WITH THIS INCREDIBLE STORY ACCUSING YOU OF THE MOST SORDID AND SALACIOUS CONDUCT. IT’S OUTRAGEOUS, AND YOU’RE RIGHT TO BE ANGRY. BUT THIS IS YOUR CHANCE TO TELL YOUR STORY, AND I HOPE YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO TELL US EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO TELL US, BUT THE BURDEN IS NOT ON YOU TO DISPROVE THE ALLEGATIONS MADE. THE BURDEN UNDER OUR SYSTEM, WHEN YOU ACCUSE SOMEBODY OF CRIMINAL CONDUCT, IS ON THE PERSON MAKING THE ACCUSATION. NOW, I UNDERSTAND WE’RE NOT — THIS ISN’T A TRIAL, LIKE I SAID, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTOOD. IT’S HARD TO RECONSTRUCT WHAT HAPPENED 36 YEARS AGO, AND I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT DR. FORD, THAT PERHAPS SHE HAS HAD AN INCIDENT AT SOME POINT IN HER LIFE AND YOU ARE SYMPATHETIC TO THAT, BUT YOUR REPUTATION IS ON THE LINE, AND I HOPE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND THE GRAVITY OF THE CHARGES MADE AGAINST YOU AND WHAT A FAIR PROCESS LOOKS LIKE.>>SENATOR KLOBUCHAR.>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. JUDGE, WE’RE TALKING HERE ABOUT DECENCY AND YOU UNDERSTAND WE HAVE THIS CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO ADVISE AND CONSENT. AND FOR ME, WHEN THIS EVIDENCE CAME FORWARD, I DECIDED THAT I NEEDED TO LOOK AT THIS, AND I NEEDED TO FIND OUT ABOUT IT, AND I NEEDED TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT IT AS WELL AS OTHERS THAT WERE INVOLVED. SO, AGAIN, I’M NOT GOING TO TAKE QUITE THE SAME APPROACH AS MY COLLEAGUES HERE AND TALK ABOUT DON McGAHN OR ANY OF THIS. WHY DON’T YOU JUST ASK THE PRESIDENT — THIS IS — DR. FORD CAN’T DO THIS. WE CLEARLY HAVEN’T BEEN ABLE TO DO THIS. BUT JUST ASK THE PRESIDENT TO REOPEN THE FBI INVESTIGATION.>>I THINK THE COMMITTEE IS — YOU’RE DOING THE INVESTIGATION. I’M HERE TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.>>NO.>>AND I SHOULD SAY ONE THING, SENATOR KLOBUCHAR, WHICH IS I APPRECIATE OUR MEETING TOGETHER, AND I APPRECIATE HOW YOU HANDLED THE PRIOR HEARING AND I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR YOU.>>WELL, THANK YOU. ALL OF THAT ASIDE, HERE’S THE THING. YOU COULD ACTUALLY JUST GET THIS OPEN SO THAT WE CAN TALK TO THESE WITNESSES AND THE FBI CAN DO IT INSTEAD OF US AND YOU’VE COME BEFORE US, BUT WE HAVE PEOPLE LIKE MARK JUDGE WHO DR. FORD SAYS WAS A WITNESS TO THIS. WE HAVE THIS POLYGRAPH EXPERT THAT MY COLLEAGUES WERE RAISING ISSUES ABOUT THE POLYGRAPH. WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THAT PERSON COME BEFORE US. AND I JUST THINK IF WE COULD OPEN THIS UP — >>I DON’T MEAN TO INTERRUPT, BUT I GUESS I AM. BUT MARK JUDGE HAS PROVIDED SWORN STATEMENTS, SAYING THIS DIDN’T HAPPEN AND THAT I NEVER DID OR WOULD DO — >>WE WOULD LIKE THE FBI TO BE ABLE TO FOLLOW UP AND ASK HIM QUESTIONS. YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT PAST NOMINATION PROCESS AND YOU TALKED ABOUT THOSE, AND I NOTE THAT PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH, IN THE ANITA HILL, JUSTICE THOMAS CASE, HE OPENED UP THE FBI INVESTIGATION AND LET QUESTIONS BE ASKED, AND I THINK IT WAS HELPFUL FOR PEOPLE. SO, WAS HIS DECISION REASONABLE?>>I DON’T KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THAT. WHAT I KNOW, SENATOR, IS I’M HERE — >>BUT HE JUST — THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE THAT HE OPENED UP THE INVESTIGATION SO THE FBI COULD ASK SOME QUESTIONS. THAT’S WHAT HE — HE OPENED UP THE BACKGROUND CHECK.>>I’M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT MY YEARBOOK OR ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT I DID — SPORTS OR SUMMER BASKETBALL.>>I’M NOT GOING TO ASK ABOUT THE YEARBOOK. SO, MOST PEOPLE HAVE DONE SOME DRINKING IN HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE, AND MANY PEOPLE EVEN STRUGGLE WITH ALCOHOLISM AND BINGE DRINKING. MY OWN DAD STRUGGLED WITH ALCOHOLISM MOST OF HIS LIFE AND HE GOT IN TROUBLE FOR IT AND THERE WERE CONSEQUENCES. HE IS STILL IN AA AT AGE 90, AND HE’S SOBER, AND IN HIS WORDS, HE WAS PURSUED BY GRACE AND THAT’S HOW HE GOT THROUGH THIS. SO IN YOUR CASE, YOU HAVE SAID HERE IS AND OTHER PLACES THAT YOU NEVER DRANK SO MUCH THAT YOU DIDN’T REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED. BUT YET, WE HAVE HEARD, NOT UNDER OATH, BUT WE HAVE HEARD YOUR COLLEGE ROOMMATE SAY THAT YOU DID DRINK FREQUENTLY, THESE ARE IN NEWS REPORTS, THAT YOU WOULD SOMETIMES BE BELLIGERENT. ANOTHER CLASSMATE SAID IT’S NOT CREDIBLE FOR YOU TO SAY YOU DIDN’T HAVE MEMORY LAPSES. SO, DRINKING IS ONE THING.>>I DON’T THINK — I ACTUALLY DON’T THINK THAT’S THE SECOND QUOTE’S CORRECT. ON THE FIRST QUOTE, IF YOU WANT TO — I PROVIDED SOME MATERIAL THAT’S STILL REDACTED ABOUT THE SITUATION WITH THE FRESHMAN YEAR ROOMMATE, AND I DON’T REALLY WANT TO REPEAT THAT IN A PUBLIC HEARING BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW, THERE WERE THREE PEOPLE IN A ROOM, DAVE WHITE, JAMIE ROACH, AND ME, AND IT WAS A CONTENTIOUS SITUATION WHERE JAMIE DID NOT LIKE DAVE WHITE AT ALL AND, I MEAN, THIS — SO DAVE WHITE CAME BACK FROM HOME ONE WEEKEND AND JAMIE ROACH HAD MOVED ALL HIS FURNITURE OUT INTO THE COURTYARD.>>OKAY.>>AND SO HE WALKS IN AND SO THAT’S YOUR SOURCE ON THAT, SO THERE’S SOME OLD — >>SO, DRINKING IS ONE THING.>>AND THERE’S MUCH MORE. LOOK AT THE REDACTED PORTION OF WHAT I SAID. I DON’T WANT TO REPEAT THAT IN A PUBLIC HEARING.>>I WILL. COULD I JUST ASK ONE MORE QUESTION.>>REDACTED INFORMATION ABOUT THAT.>>OKAY. DRINKING IS ONE THING BUT THE CONCERN IS ABOUT TRUTHFULNESS AND IN YOUR WRITTEN TESTIMONY, YOU SAID SOMETIMES YOU HAD TOO MANY DRINKS. WAS THERE EVER A TIME WHEN YOU DRANK SO MUCH THAT YOU COULDN’T REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED OR PART OF WHAT HAPPENED THE NIGHT BEFORE?>>NO, I — NO. I REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED, AND I THINK YOU’VE PROBABLY HAD BEERS, SENATOR, AND SO — >>SO YOU’RE SAYING THERE’S NEVER BEEN A CASE WHERE YOU DRANK SO MUCH THAT YOU DIDN’T REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED THE NIGHT BEFORE OR PART OF WHAT HAPPENED.>>YOU’RE ASKING ABOUT, YEAH, BLACKOUT. I DON’T KNOW — HAVE YOU?>>COULD YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION, JUDGE? JUST SO YOU HAVE — THAT’S NOT HAPPENED? IS THAT YOUR ANSWER?>>YEAH, AND I’M CURIOUS IF YOU HAVE.>>I HAVE NO DRINKING PROBLEM, JUDGE.>>NOR DO I.>>OKAY. THANK YOU.>>SENATOR HATCH.>>SINCE THIS FBI THING KEEPS COMING UP ALL THE TIME, LET’S GET BACK TO BASICS. FIRST OF ALL, ANYBODY, INCLUDING ANY SENATOR THAT’S BROUGHT UP THIS ISSUE, COULD ASK FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION. WHAT THE FBI DOES IS GATHER INFORMATION FOR THE WHITE HOUSE, THEN THE FILE IS SENT TO THE COMMITTEE FOR US TO MAKE OUR OWN EVALUATIONS. WE’RE CAPABLE OF MAKING OUR OWN DETERMINATION ABOUT THE ACCURACY OF ANY OF THOSE ALLEGATIONS. THE FBI HAS PUT OUT A STATEMENT OVER NOW, I SUPPOSE, A MONTH AGO CLEARLY STATING THIS MATTER IS CLOSED AS FAR AS THE LETTER BEING SENT TO THEM. AND THERE IS NO FEDERAL CRIME TO INVESTIGATE. IF SENATOR — SENATE DEMOCRATS HOPE FOR THE FBI TO DRAW ANY CONCLUSIONS ON THIS MATTER, I’M GOING TO REMIND YOU WHAT JOE BIDEN SAID. I SAID THIS IN MY STATEMENT BUT MAYBE PEOPLE AREN’T LISTENING WHEN I SAY AND MAYBE THEY WON’T EVEN HEAR THIS. JOE BIDEN, QUOTE, THE NEXT PERSON WHO REFERS TO AN FBI REPORT AS BEING WORTH ANYTHING OBVIOUSLY DOESN’T UNDERSTAND ANYTHING. THE FBI EXPLICITLY DOES NOT IN THIS OR ANY OTHER CASE REACH A CONCLUSION, PERIOD. THEY SAY HE SAID, SHE SAID, THEY SAID, PERIOD. SO, WHEN PEOPLE WAVE AN FBI REPORT BEFORE YOU OR EVEN BRING IT UP NOW AS SOMETHING PROSPECTIVELY, I’M NOT — THAT WASN’T IN HIS QUOTE. UNDERSTAND THEY DO NOT — THEY DO NOT — THEY DO NOT REACH CONCLUSIONS. THEY DO NOT MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS. SENATOR HATCH.>>MR. CHAIRMAN.>>I NEED A BREAK.>>NO, NO, DON’T TAKE A BREAK. LET ME DO THIS.>>MR. CHAIRMAN, MAY I SAY FOR THE RECORD THAT ACTUALLY WE HAVE ASKED — YOU SAID THAT NOBODY’S ASKED THE FBI OR WE COULD ASK THE FBI. I ACTUALLY HAVE. I THINK OTHERS HAVE. AND I THINK THAT THE ISSUE IS THAT PART OF WHAT AN FBI REPORT DOES IS TO INVESTIGATE AND SEEK EITHER CORROBORATING OR EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE. IT’S NOT SO MUCH THE CONCLUSION THAT IT DRAWS AS THE BREADTH OF THE EVIDENCE THAT IS SOUGHT OUT THROUGH THE INVESTIGATION AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT SOMEBODY MIGHT SAY TO AN FBI AGENT WHEN THEY’RE BEING EXAMINED AND, FOR INSTANCE, MR. JUDGE’S LETTER, SIGNED BY HIS LAWYER, SENT IN. IT’S JUST A DIFFERENT THING. AND I BELIEVE STILL THAT THIS IS THE FIRST BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION IN THE HISTORY OF BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS THAT HASN’T BEEN REOPENED WHEN NEW CREDIBLE DEROGATORY INFORMATION WAS RAISED ABOUT THE SUBJECT, ABOUT THE NOMINEE. SO, YOU KNOW, I JUST DIDN’T WANT LET THE POINT YOU MADE STAND WITHOUT REFERENCING WHAT WE HAD TRIED TO DO.>>PARDON ME, BUT I’LL JUST ADD TO THE POINT YOU MADE. THE LETTER WAS SENT TO THE FBI. THE FBI SENT IT TO THE WHITE HOUSE WITH A LETTER SAYING THE CASE IS CLOSED. WE’RE TAKING A BREAK NOW FOR SENATOR — WE’RE TAKING A BREAK NOW.>>15-MINUTE BREAK.>>>YOU’VE BEEN WATCHING THE SCENE BOTH INSIDE AND OUTSIDE 226 OF THE SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, THE HEARING ROOM FOR THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. A 15-MINUTE BREAK AND SOME EMOTION WITH SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM OF SOUTH CAROLINA, SOME TOUGH QUESTIONS FROM DICK DURBIN, REPUBLICAN SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS AS THE REPUBLICANS JUMP TO ASK QUESTIONS THAT WERE SEATED FOR RACHEL MITCHELL. SHE CONDUCTED THE QUESTIONS IN THE FIRST PART WITH CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD. WE WANT TO OPEN OUR PHONE LINES. THOMAS FROM KENTUCKY, WHAT’S YOUR ASSESSMENT?>>I WAS WANTING TO KNOW IF SHE SAID THAT THE THREE PEOPLE THAT WAS IN THE ROOM, THEY SAID THAT HE DIDN’T DO IT AND THEY DIDN’T KNOW HIM, WHY THEY STILL DRILLING HIM SO HARD.>>THANK YOU. LET’S GO TO JOHN, JOINING US FROM CLIFTON FORGE, VIRGINIA, INDEPENDENT LINE.>>YES, SIR. I JUST WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT I FIND US A LITTLE SUSPICIOUS THAT HE’S NOT WILLING TO TAKE A POLYGRAPH WHEN FORD HAS PASSED A POLYGRAPH AND HE JUST HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO TURN TO HIS LEFT AND ASK THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE SO THAT THEY COULD OBTAIN BETTER EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE THAN THEY HAVE AND HE WAS UNWILLING TO DO SO WHEN HIS EARLIER STATEMENTS WERE THAT HE WANTED TO DO, QUOTE, ANYTHING TO CLEAR HIS NAME, AND TO ME, THAT INDICATES EVASION AND DECEPTION.>>OUR PHONE LINES ARE OPEN AT 202-748-89 20 FOR DEMOCRATS AND 202-748.>>8921 FOR REPUBLICANS. CJ JOINS US FROM PENNSYLVANIA. REPUBLICAN LINE. GO AHEAD, CJ.>>GOOD AFTERNOON. I HAVE TO SAY THAT THE CURRENT INVESTIGATION THAT IS GOING ON RIGHT NOW IS NOT ONLY DEPLORABLE ON THE REPUBLICAN SIDE, IT IS — IT’S ALMOST HOW DO YOU SAY, NAIVE, THE WAY HE DESCRIBED THE DRINKING GAME CALLED THE DEVIL’S TRIANGLE. ALL I NEEDED TO DO WAS DO A GOOGLE SEARCH AND IT DEFINITELY ISN’T A DRINKING GAME. IT SEEMS LIKE THESE PEOPLE ARE LETTING FAR TOO MANY THINGS GO ON THE WAYSIDE WITHOUT FURTHER QUESTIONING AND THE FACT THAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH IS NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS IN A MEANINGFUL LIGHT WITH A YES OR NO ANSWER AND SIMPLY GOING BACK TO HIS HIGH SCHOOL ACCOMPLISHMENTS JUST SEEMS VERY UNETHICAL. NOT UNETHICAL BUT OTHER SUCH WORDS.>>THANK YOU. LET’S GO TO HAROLD IN FLORIDA. DEMOCRATS LINE. GOOD AFTERNOON.>>WELL, THANK YOU. I’D LIKE TO SAY I’VE BEEN A DEMOCRAT SINCE I WAS 18 AND I’M 61 YEARS OLD NOW AND I NEVER HAVE BEEN ASHAMED OF MY DEMOCRAT PARTY UNTIL TODAY. WE GOT A TOUGH ELECTION FOR GOVERNOR AND FOR OUR SENATOR AND I’M IN A RED DISTRICT, NORTHWEST FLORIDA. I GREW UP ON BOB SYKES AND I HAVE NEVER BEEN ASHAMED OF THE DEMOCRAT PARTY UNTIL TODAY, WATCHING THIS HEARING. I AM ASHAMED OF OUR PARTY AND WE NEED TO STEP BACK AND LET THE TRUTH BE SAID AND NOT JUST PROLONG THIS AND PROLONG THAT, AND HAVE A HIGHER MORAL STANDARD THAN WHAT IS BEING SHOWN ON TV TODAY. AND I’M VERY DISAPPOINTED AND I THANK Y’ALL FOR LETTING AN OLD MAN HAVE HIS SPEAKING TIME. THANK YOU.>>SO, HAROLD, WHAT WOULD YOU TELL SENATOR BILL NELSON? HE’S RUNNING FOR REELECTION AND BEING CHALLENGED BY RICK SCOTT, YOUR REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR. WHAT’S YOUR ADVICE?>>MY ADVICE IS, I WOULD CONFIRM THIS MAN. I HAVE SEEN NOTHING THAT WAS NOT RIGHT. I MEAN, I KNOW POLITICS ARE POLITICS, BUT BILL NELSON HAS ALWAYS HELD A HIGH STANDARD. HE’S WORKED VERY HARD WITH PEOPLE IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA. HE COMES TO PENSACOLA ON A REGULAR BASIS AND WE SHOULD HAVE A HIGHER MORAL STANDARD. THIS IS NOT RIGHT, GENTLEMEN. I KNOW Y’ALL COVER THIS STUFF. I KNOW YOU’RE BETTER AT KEEPING YOUR FEELINGS OUT OF IT THAN I AM, BUT I’M VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE DEMOCRAT PARTY. I’M REALLY ASHAMED. I MEAN, I LIVED IN NORTHWEST FLORIDA AND I HAD MY OBAMA SIGN OUT AND YOU KNOW WHAT NORTHWEST FLORIDA DOES, THE WAY THEY VOTE, BUT I AM ASHAMED OF MY PARTY OVER THIS NOMINATION, THE WAY THEY’RE HANDLING THIS.>>HAROLD, THANKS FOR WEIGHING IN. WE’LL GO TO CARL NEXT, INDEPENDENT LINE. 15-MINUTE BREAK IN THIS SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. BY THE WAY, THEY’RE BACK TOMORROW MORNING. WE’LL HAVE LIVE COVERAGE ON C-SPAN2 AND C-SPAN3 AT 9:30 IN THE MORNING FOR A COMMITTEE VOTE ON THE KAVANAUGH NOMINATION. GO AHEAD, CARL.>>HI. I JUST WANTED TO ECHO A FEW THINGS THAT ANOTHER CALLER SAID, WHICH IS THAT A DEVIL’S TRIANGLE IS CERTAINLY NOT A DRINKING GAME. IT’S AN ENCOUNTER WITH TWO MEN AND A WOMAN.>>WE’LL GO NEXT TO MARY IN NEW YORK.>>I’M JUST VERY SURPRISED. I AM A REGISTERED REPUBLICAN, AT HOW THIS IS BEING HANDLED. I DIDN’T FOLLOW THIS QUITE AS MUCH AS I SHOULD UNTIL TODAY, BUT THE FACT THAT KAVANAUGH WOULD NOT ANSWER ANY OF THE DIRECT QUESTIONS FROM SENATOR LEAHY REALLY UPSET ME, AND IT MADE ME WONDER IF MR. KAVANAUGH IS, IN FACT, TELLING THE TRUTH, AND I WAS PREPARED TO ACCEPT HIM AND SAY HE’S BEING, YOU KNOW, DESTROYED UNREASONABLY.>>HAVE YOU WATCHED THE WHOLE DAY’S PROCEEDINGS?>>EXCUSE ME?>>HAVE YOU WATCHED THE ENTIRE DAY?>>YES.>>SO, LET ME FIRST ASK YOU ABOUT CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD. DID SHE COME ACROSS AS CREDIBLE?>>OH, YES, SHE DID. I’VE NEVER HAD AN EXPERIENCE LIKE HERS. I’VE NEVER KNOWN ANYBODY WHO’S EXPERIENCED SEXUAL ABUSE.>>WHAT ABOUT THE OPENING STATEMENT BY JUDGE KAVANAUGH?>>I DIDN’T THINK IT WAS REAL. I FELT IT WAS COMPLETELY FALSE. I FELT LIKE HE WAS THERE AS AN ACTOR. I CAN’T EXPLAIN IT. I JUST — THAT’S MY GUT FEELING.>>AND YOU’RE A REPUBLICAN?>>I AM A REGISTERED REPUBLICAN, AND I AM VERY HAPPY THAT I AM A REPUBLICAN, BUT I’M VERY DISAPPOINTED AT THIS MOMENT AND NOTHING IS PERFECT, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I JUST WISH THEY COULD HAVE A LITTLE MORE DECORUM.>>SO WHAT DO YOU THINK IS GOING TO HAPPEN? WHAT WILL HAPPEN TOMORROW?>>OBVIOUSLY, FROM WHAT I SAW TODAY AND THE FACT THAT THEY’RE GOING TO HAVE A COMMITTEE VOTE TOMORROW, IT APPEARS THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THIS SUBCOMMITTEE ARE GOING TO VOTE NO MATTER WHAT FOR MR. KAVANAUGH AND THEN IT’S GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO A FULL VOTE OF THE SENATE. I MEAN, THAT’S THE IMPRESSION I GET, WHICH SURPRISES ME TOO, IS WHY THEY’RE DOING ALL OF THIS DISCUSSION TODAY AND THEY’RE GOING TO HAVE A VOTE TOMORROW MORNING. IT DOESN’T GIVE ANYBODY AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO ANY DUE DILIGENCE ON ANYTHING THAT’S BEING SAID. IT’S HE SAID, SHE SAID, AND KAVANAUGH IS NOT INTERESTED IN AN FBI INVESTIGATION REALLY LEAVES ME GREAT PAUSE AS TO HIS CREDIBILITY.>>MARY, THANK YOU. THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE OF REFERENCES TO THE FORMER CHAIR OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE, JOE BIDEN. WE AIRED THE HEARING LAST NIGHT BACK IN OCTOBER OF 1991 WHERE HE TALKED ABOUT THE FBI REPORT. IF YOU WANT TO WATCH THAT, IT’S AVAILABLE ON OUR WEBSITE, C-SPAN.ORG FROM 27 YEARS AGO. OLIVIA IS NEXT FROM ILLINOIS, DEMOCRATS LINE. YOU’RE NEXT.>>HI. I WOULD JUST SAY THAT HE’S BEEN TALKING ABOUT HOW HIS WHOLE LIFE AND HIS WHOLE REPUTATION HAS BEEN RUINED BUT SHE WENT OUT HERE AND WAS TALKING ABOUT EVERYTHING SHE HAD TO SAY AND YET HER REPUTATION IS ALSO RUINED NOW, SO I DON’T THINK THAT HER LYING — I DON’T SEE THE POINT OF HER GOING UP THERE AND LYING JUST TO HAVE HER REPUTATION RUINED JUST AS MUCH AS HIS.>>THANK YOU FOR THE CALL. FROM THE “NEW YORK POST,” KAVANAUGH CHOKING BACK TEARS DURING HEATED, EMOTIONAL TESTIMONY IS THE HEADLINE. AND THIS FROM THE “BOSTON GLOBE,” THE KAVANAUGH IS DEFIANT AT THE HEARING AND A LINK TO THE C-SPAN VIDEO. WE, OF COURSE, ARE THE POOL, SO ALL THE VIDEO THAT YOU’RE SEEING FROM CBS AND ALL THE OTHER NETWORKS FROM THE C-SPAN CAMERAS. KAVANAUGH SAYING THE DEMOCRATIC ACTION HAVE HURT HIS LIFE AND YOU HAVE A PICTURE OF BRETT KAVANAUGH AND DR. CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD. THE ST. LOUIS POST DISPATCH, AN ANGRY KAVANAUGH DENIES THE FORD ACCUSATION, SEES THIS AS A NATIONAL DISGRACE. BACK TO YOUR PHONE CALLS. CHARLES IS NEXT, NORTH CAROLINA, INDEPENDENT LINE. YOUR ASSESSMENT THUS FAR.>>HI. YEAH, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO RESPOND TO A COUPLE THINGS. ONE, AS FAR AS THE FBI BEING INVOLVED AND MY OPINION, I’M PRETTY SURE THIS IS SUPPORTED. IF THE FBI DIDN’T EVEN REALLY HAVE SAY-SO OR JURISDICTION — I’M SORRY, YEAH, JURISDICTION AS FAR AS WHO’S RIGHT, WHO’S WRONG, WHAT HAS BEEN COMPLETELY SAID SEVERAL TIMES REALLY, THEY DON’T COME TO A CONCLUSION. IF THEY HAVE QUESTIONS, THEY CAN DO THEM RIGHT THERE AND KAVANAUGH REALLY HAS A POINT WHEN THEY SAY THAT THEY’VE HELD ON TO THIS FOR 20 DAYS AT LEAST. THE OTHER THING IS, I GET WHERE — I HATE TO ADMIT THIS ON AIR, BUT I’M A MAN AND I AM A RAPE VICTIM, YOU KNOW, LOOKING AT CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD, I’M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND SAY THAT SHE’S A LIAR, BUT AT THE SAME TIME — AT THE SAME TIME, THERE IS A CHANCE THAT SHE COULD BE MISTAKEN AS FAR AS WHO IT IS. AND THEN, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE THAT KAVANAUGH PROVIDED, THERE’S NO WAY THAT THEY COULD HAVE EVEN MET.>>CHARLES, THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE THE CALL. YOU SAW JUST A MOMENT AGO CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD’S LAWYER, WHO WAS NEXT TO HER. HE REMAINS IN THE ROOM. A NUMBER OF SENATORS CONTINUE TO GATHER INSIDE THE SENATE OFFICE BUILDING SO WE’RE SHOWING YOU BOTH OUTSIDE AND INSIDE THE HEARING ROOM, THE PRESS GATHERED ALONG THE CORRIDOR. DENNIS FROM BETHLEHEM, PENNSYLVANIA, DEMOCRATS LINE. GO AHEAD.>>YEAH, HEY, I WAS JUST GOING TO POINT OUT THE FACT THAT REGARDLESS OF THE ACCUSATIONS, LOOKING AT HOW KAVANAUGH HANDLES THIS CASE, WE REALLY COULD JUST JUDGE HIS CHARACTER BASED UPON HOW HE’S UNABLE TO EMOTIONALLY HANDLE OR ANSWER QUESTIONS DIRECTLY ON HOW THAT APPEARS TO HIS CHARACTER ON WHETHER OR NOT HE SHOULD BE A SUPREME COURT JUDGE, AND WHETHER THAT BE A META ISSUE TO SAY, LIKE, YOU KNOW, LET’S LOOK AT THE TYPE OF PERSON WE’RE APPOINTING HERE, GUILTY OR INNOCENT, HE’S OBVIOUSLY PUTTING UP A LITTLE BIT OF AN EMOTIONAL STICK TO THE SITUATION. IS THAT REALLY SOMEBODY SUITED FOR A SUPREME COURT JUDGE POSITION.>>THANK YOU, JOHN. AND ALSO, YOU’RE LOOKING ON YOUR SCREEN, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE AS REPORTERS GATHER AND TO COVER THIS STORY. OF COURSE, IT IS AN EVENT THAT IS ACROSS ALL OF THE MAJOR BROADCAST NETWORKS, CABLE TELEVISION, HERE ON C-SPAN, AND GETTING A LOT OF ATTENTION, BOTH HERE IN THIS COUNTRY AND WORLDWIDE. JOHN, TEXAS, REPUBLICAN LINE. GOOD AFTERNOON.>>GOOD AFTERNOON. YOU KNOW, AFTER WATCHING THIS THROUGHOUT THE DAY TODAY, THE LEVEL OF FRUSTRATION, I THINK, MANY OF US WHO HAVE BEEN WATCHING IT HAVE FELT WAS KIND OF ECHOED WHEN SENATOR GRAHAM BECAME VERY EMOTIONAL AND UPSET.>>LET ME STOP YOU THERE. WHAT DID YOU THINK OF SENATOR GRAHAM’S REMARKS? AND BY THE WAY, IT’S INTERESTING THAT HE TOOK THAT TIME AND IT WAS NOT GIVEN TO THE LAWYER THEY BROUGHT IN.>>RIGHT. YOU KNOW, I THINK IT NEEDED TO BE SAID, IN ALL HONESTY, AND THE REASON I SAY THAT IS IF YOU TAKE YOURSELF OUT OF THIS HEARING AND THINK 30 YEARS AGO, 40 YEARS AGO, THESE PEOPLE WERE IN HIGH SCHOOL, MY KIDS ARE IN HIGH SCHOOL NOW, AND IT’S THE SOCIAL MEDIA GENERATION. 30 YEARS FROM NOW, ARE THEY GOING TO WANT TO ANSWER THE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE POSTS THAT THEY DID WHEN THEY WERE 16 ABOUT THE PICTURE THEY TOOK? ALL OF THAT IS THERE NOW AND THIS WAS A SIMPLE HIGH SCHOOL YEARBOOK. THIS IS BENEATH THE DIGNITY OF A BODY LIKE THE SENATE. THIS SEEMS — HONESTLY, IT SEEMED A LOT MORE LIKE A JERRY SPRINGER EPISODE. IT’S JUST SAD. IT REALLY, TRULY IS, BECAUSE THESE ARE PEOPLE’S LIVES, BOTH SIDES. THESE ARE PEOPLE’S LIVES. IT’S VERY HARD TO WATCH.>>WHAT’S THE SENATE GOING TO DO TOMORROW AND THIS WEEK? WE SHOULD POINT OUT WE’LL HAVE LIVE COVERAGE ON C-SPAN2 OF THE SENATE VOTES IF THEY HAPPEN INTO THE WEEKEND WITH A FINAL VOTE WE NOW HEAR COULD HAPPEN ON TUESDAY. BUT WHAT DO YOU THINK, JOHN?>>WELL, I WOULD SUSPECT — YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, WE’VE GOT THE REST OF THE AFTERNOON TO GO AND WHO KNOWS WHAT KIND OF RABBITS THEY CONTINUE TO PULL OUT OF THEIR HAT, BUT ANY REASONABLE PERSON WHO WATCHED BOTH OF THE PEOPLE WHO WERE UP THERE, THEY WERE BOTH EQUALLY BELIEVABLE, IN ALL HONESTY. BEFORE THEY GOT UP THERE, I WOULD HAVE SAID THAT DR. FORD — I WOULDN’T HAVE BELIEVED HER, BUT I BELIEVE — IF I WAS SITTING ON A JURY, LOOKING AT THIS, AS WE COULD CALL THIS A CRIME, BECAUSE IT IS, I WOULD HAVE TO GO FOR KAVANAUGH SIMPLY BECAUSE HE HAS EVIDENCE IN HIS CORNER. HE’S GOT DOCUMENTATION. HE’S GOT PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE FROM HIS HIGH SCHOOL WHO SAY IT DIDN’T EVER HAPPEN. HE DOESN’T KNOW THESE PEOPLE. THAT’S NOT THE WAY HE ACTS.>>JOHN, THANKS FOR THE CALL. WE SAW SENATOR JEFF FLAKE, MIKE LEE OF UTAH, THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE WALKING IN JUST A MOMENT AGO AND THERE’S LINDSEY GRAHAM, WHO GAVE A FIERY SPEECH JUST A COUPLE OF MINUTES AGO AND AGAIN ALL OF THIS ON OUR WEBSITE AT C-SPAN.ORG. WE’LL WATCH FROM OUTSIDE AND INSIDE THE HEARING ROOM AS THE RECESS COME TO AN END. MORE OF THE QUESTIONING WITH JUDGE BRETT KAVANAUGH, THE PRESIDENT’S NOMINEE TO SERVE ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT. OOFRMT JUDGE, ARE YOU READY.>>I AM READY AND CAN I SAY ONE THING.>>YES.>>I’M JUST GOING TO SAY I STARTED MY LAST COLLOQUY BY STAYING TO SENATOR KLOBUCHAR HOW MUCH I RESPECT HER AND RESPECTED WHAT SHE DID AT THE LAST HEARING AND SHE ASKED ME A QUESTION AT THE END AND I RESPONDED BY ASKING HER A QUESTION AND I’M SORRY I DID THAT. THIS IS A TOUGH PROCESS. I’M SORRY I DID THAT.>>I APPRECIATE. I WOULD LIKE TO ADD WHEN YOU HAVE A PARENT THAT’S AN ALCOHOLIC, YOU’RE PRETTY CAREFUL ABOUT DRINKING, AND THE SECOND THING IS I WAS TRULY JUST TRYING TO GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THE FACTS AND THE EVIDENCE AND I, AGAIN, BELIEVE WE DO THAT BY OPENING UP THE FBI INVESTIGATION AND I WOULD CALL IT A BACKGROUND CHECK INSTEAD OF INVESTIGATION. THANK YOU.>>APPRECIATE THAT.>>SENATOR HATCH.>>THANK YOU, JUDGE. WELCOME. WE’RE HAPPY TO HAVE YOU HERE. MY FRIEND FROM — I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY A FEW WORDS. MY FRIEND FROM ARIZONA EMPHASIZED YESTERDAY THAT WE HAVE BEFORE US TODAY TWO HUMAN BEINGS, DR. FORD, AND JUDGE KAVANAUGH. THEY DESERVE — EACH OF YOU DESERVES TO BE TREATED FAIRLY AND RESPECTFULLY. WE TRIED TO DO THAT WITH DR. FORD EARLIER AND I THINK WE SUCCEEDED. IT’S IMPORTANT THAT WE TREAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH FAIRLY NOW AND IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN HOW THAT’S GOING TO WORK OUT. JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAS BEEN A FEDERAL JUDGE FOR 12 YEARS AND HE’S BEEN A GREAT FEDERAL JUDGE ON THE SECOND HIGHEST COURT IN THE NATION. HE’S EARNED A REPUTATION FOR FAIRNESS AND DECENCY. HIS CLERKS LOVE HIM. HIS STUDENTS — HE TEACHES IN LAW SCHOOL AS WELL. HIS STUDENTS LOVE HIM. HIS COLLEAGUES LOVE HIM. THIS MAN IS NOT A MONSTER. NOR IS HE WHAT HAS BEEN REPRESENTED HERE IN THESE HEARINGS. WE’RE TALKING TODAY ABOUT JUDGE KAVANAUGH’S CONDUCT IN HIGH SCHOOL. AND EVEN THEN, AND AS A FRESHMAN IN COLLEGE, I GUESS, AS WELL. SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS HAVE BEEN RAISED IF JUDGE KAVANAUGH COMMITTED SEXUAL ASSAULT, HE SHOULD NOT SERVE ON THE SUPREME COURT. I THINK WE’D ALL AGREE WITH THAT. BUT THE CIRCUS ATMOSPHERE THAT HAS BEEN CREATED SINCE MY DEMOCRATIC COLLEAGUES FIRST LEAKED DR. FORD’S ALLEGATIONS TO THE MEDIA TWO WEEKS AGO AFTER SITTING ON THEM FOR SIX WEEKS, I MIGHT ADD, HAS BROUGHT US THE WORST IN OUR POLITICS. IT CERTAINLY HAS BROUGHT US NO CLOSER TO THE TRUTH. ANONYMOUS LETTERS WITH NO NAME AND NO RETURN ADDRESS ARE NOW BEING TREATED AS NATIONAL NEWS. PORN STAR LAWYERS WITH FACIALLY IMPLAUSIBLE CLAIMS ARE DRIVING THE NEWS CYCLE. I HATE TO SAY THIS, BUT THIS IS WORSE THAN ROBERT BORK AND I DIDN’T THINK IT COULD GET ANY WORSE THAN THAT. THIS IS WORSE THAN CLARENCE THOMAS. I DIDN’T THINK IT COULD GET ANY WORSE THAN THAT. THIS IS A NATIONAL DISGRACE. THE WAY YOU’RE BEING TREATED. AND IN THE MIDDLE OF IT ALL, WE HAVE JUDGE KAVANAUGH, A MAN WHO UNTIL TWO WEEKS AGO, WAS A PILLAR OF THE LEGAL COMMUNITY. THERE’S BEEN NO WHISPER OF MISCONDUCT BY HIM IN THE TIME HE’S BEEN A JUDGE. WHAT WE HAVE ARE UNCORROBORATED, UNSUBSTANTIATED CLAIMS FROM HIS TEENAGE YEARS. CLAIMS THAT EVERY ALLEGED EYE-WITNESS HAS EITHER DENIED OR FAILED TO CORROBORATE. I DO NOT MEAN TO MINIMIZE THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE CLAIMS. YEAH, THEY’VE BEEN SERIOUS CLAIMS, BUT THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH HAS TO INVOLVE MORE THAN BARE ASSERTIONS. LIKE DR. FORD, JUDGE KAVANAUGH DESERVES FAIR TREATMENT. HE WAS AN IMMATURE HIGH SCHOOLER. SO WERE WE ALL. THAT HE WROTE OR SAID STUPID THINGS SOMETIMES DOES NOT MAKE HIM A SEXUAL PREDATOR. I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE OF MY COLLEAGUES TO TEAR DOWN THIS MAN AT ANY COST. I DO UNDERSTAND IT. BUT LET’S AT LEAST BE FAIR AND LOOK AT THE FACTS OR THE ABSENCE THEREOF. GUILT BY ASSOCIATION IS WRONG. IMMATURITY DOES NOT EQUAL CRIMINALITY. THAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH DRANK IN HIGH SCHOOL OR COLLEGE DOES NOT MAKE HIM GUILTY OF EVERY TERRIBLE THING THAT HE’S RECENTLY BEEN ACCUSED OF. A LIFETIME OF RESPECT AND EQUAL TREATMENT OUGHT TO MEAN SOMETHING WHEN ASSESSING ALLEGATIONS THAT ARE FLATLY INCONSISTENT WITH THE COURSE OF A PERSON’S ENTIRE ADULT LIFE. WITH THOSE COMMENTS, JUDGE, I’D JUST LIKE TO ASK YOU A FEW QUESTIONS. IF I CAN, ABOUT HOW — AND IF YOU CAN BE SHORT IN YOUR ANSWERS, IT WOULD HELP ME GET THROUGH A BUNCH OF THEM, ABOUT HOW THIS PROCESS HAS UNFOLDED. WHEN DID YOU FIRST LEARN OF DR. FORD’S ALLEGATIONS AGAINST YOU?>>IT WAS A WEEK AGO SUNDAY WHEN “WASHINGTON POST” STORY.>>ISN’T THAT AMAZING. DID THE RANKING MEMBER RAISE THESE ALLEGATIONS IN YOUR ONE-ON-ONE MEETING WITH HER LAST MONTH?>>SHE DID NOT.>>DID THE RANKING MEMBER RAISE THEM AT YOUR PUBLIC HEARING EARLIER THIS MONTH?>>NO.>>DID THE RANKING MEMBER RAISE THEM AT THE CLOSED SESSION THAT FOLLOWED THE PUBLIC HEARING?>>SHE WAS NOT THERE.>>DID THE RANKING MEMBER OR ANY OF HER COLLEAGUES RAISE THEM IN THE 1,300 WRITTEN QUESTIONS THAT WERE SUBMITTED TO YOU FOLLOWING THE HEARING.>>NO.>>WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE RANKING MEMBER OR HER STAFF ASKED YOU ABOUT THESE ALLEGATIONS.>>TODAY.>>WHEN DID YOU FIRST HEAR OF MS. RAMIREZ’ ALLEGATIONS AGAINST YOU?>>IN THE LAST — IN THE PERIOD SINCE THEN, IN THE NEW YORKER STORY.>>DID THE RANKING MEMBER OR ANY OF HER COLLEAGUES OR STAFF ASK YOU ABOUT MS. RAMIREZ’ ALLEGATIONS BEFORE THEY WERE LEAKED TO THE PRESS?>>NO.>>WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME THAT THE RANKING MEMBER OR ANY OF HER COLLEAGUESES OR ANY OF THEIR STAFF ASKED YOU ABOUT MS. RAMIREZ’ ALLEGATIONS?>>TODAY.>>I THINK IT’S A DISGRACE.>>SENATOR COONS.>>THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. TODAY’S HEARING IS ABOUT DR. FORD’S SERIOUS ALLEGATIONS ABOUT SEXUAL ASSAULT. YOU HAVE UNEQUIVOCALLY DENIED THOSE CLAIMS BUT WE’RE HERE TODAY TO ASSESS HER CREDIBILITY AND YOURS, AND IN OUR PREVIOUS VIGOROUS EXCHANGES IN THE PREVIOUS CONFIRMATION HEARING ROUNDS, I FOUND THAT YOUR ANSWERS AT TIMES VIGOROUSLY DEFENDED BUT OTHER TIMES STRUCK ME AS EVASIVE OR NOT CREDIBLE ON KEY ISSUES. AND IT’S AGAINST THAT BACKDROP THAT I’M SEEKING TO ASSESS YOUR CREDIBILITY TODAY. YOU SAID IN YOUR OPENING THAT RULE OF LAW MEANS TAKING ALLEGATIONS SERIOUSLY. AND I AGREE WITH THAT. IT BRINGS ME NO JOY TO QUESTION YOU ON THESE TOPICS TODAY, BUT I DO THINK THEY’RE SERIOUS AND I THINK THEY ARE WORTHY OF OUR ATTENTION. SO, LET ME, IF I CAN, RETURN TO A LINE OF QUESTIONING MY COLLEAGUE WAS ON BEFORE. WHICH WAS ABOUT WHETHER YOU’VE EVER GOTTEN AGGRESSIVE WHILE DRINKING OR FORGOTTEN AN EVENING AFTER DRINKING.>>THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT QUESTIONS. I’VE ALREADY ANSWERED THE SECOND ONE. AS FOR THE FIRST, I THINK THE ANSWER TO THAT IS BASICALLY NO. I DON’T KNOW, REALLY, WHAT YOU MEAN BY THAT. LIKE, WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?>>WELL — >>I DON’T MEAN IT THAT WAY. BUT NO IS THE BASIC ANSWER UNLESS YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING WHERE — THAT I’M NOT AWARE OF THAT YOU’RE GOING TO ASK ABOUT.>>THE REASON I’M ASKING, WE’VE HAD A VERY BRIEF PERIOD OF TIME TO WEIGH OUTSIDE EVIDENCE AND I’LL JOIN MY COLLEAGUES IN SAYING I WISH WE HAD MORE EVIDENCE IN FRONT OF US TODAY TO WEIGH. DO YOU REMEMBER LIZ SWISHER, A COLLEGE CLASSMATE OF YOURS, FROM YALE?>>FIRST ON YOUR POINT ABOUT THE OUTSIDE EVIDENCE, YOU KNOW, ALL FOUR WITNESSES — >>WELL, LET ME FOCUS — I’M TRYING TO GET THIS QUESTION.>>I KNOW, BUT YOU MADE A POINT AND I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE. ALL FOUR WITNESSES WHO WERE ALLEGEDLY AT THE EVENT HAVE SAID IT DIDN’T HAPPEN, INCLUDING DR. FORD’S LONG-TIME FRIEND, MS. KAISER, WHO SAID — >>AND IF MARK JUDGE WERE IN FRONT OF US TODAY TO QUESTION, WE’D BE ABLE TO ASSESS HIS CREDIBILITY. LET ME GET THROUGH THIS IF I CAN. LIZ SWISHER IS A COLLEGE CLASSMATE, NOW A MEDICAL DOCTOR, AND I’M QUOTING FROM A RECENT INTERVIEW SHE GAVE. SHE SAID, BRETT KAVANAUGHDRANK MORE THAN A LOT OF PEOPLE, HE’D END UP SLURRING WORDS, STUMBLING. IT’S NOT CREDIBLE FOR HIM TO SAY HE’S HAD NO MEMORY LAPSES ON THE NIGHTS HE DRANK TO EXCESS. I KNOW BECAUSE I DRANK WITH HIM. HOW SHOULD WE ASSESS THAT?>>SHE THEN GOES ON AND SAYS SHE CAN’T POINT TO ANY SPECIFIC INSTANCE LIKE THAT.>>THE QUOTE THAT JUMPED OUT AT ME WAS, BRETT WAS A SLOPPY DRUNK AND I KNOW BECAUSE I DRANK WITH HIM. THERE’S ALSO — >>I DON’T THINK THAT — I DO NOT THINK THAT’S A FAIR CHARACTERIZATION, AND CHRIS DUDLEY’S QUOTED IN THAT ARTICLE AND I WOULD REFER YOU TO WHAT CHRIS DUDLEY SAID. I SPENT MORE TIME WITH CHRIS DUDLEY IN COLLEGE THAN JUST ABOUT ANYONE, AND I WOULD REFER YOU TO WHAT HE SAID.>>NO OTHER REPORTING, AS I’M SURE YOU KNOW, A COLLEGE CLASSMATE DESCRIBED YOU AS RELATIVELY SHY BUT SAID THAT WHEN YOU DRANK, YOU COULD BE AGGRESSIVE OR EVEN BELLIGERENT AND YOUR ROOMMATE, AS I THINK YOU DISCUSSED WITH SENATOR KLOBUCHAR, SAID YOU WERE FREQUENTLY DRUNK.>>AND THAT WAS FRESHMAN YEAR ROOMMATE AND THERE WAS CONTENTION BETWEEN HIM AND THE THIRD PERSON. THERE WERE THREE OF US IN A SMALL ROOM, AND YOU SHOULD LOOK AT WHAT I SAID IN THE REDACTED PORTION OF THE TRANSCRIPT ABOUT HIM AND YOU SHOULD ASSESS HIS CREDIBILITY WITH THAT IN MIND.>>PUT YOURSELF IN OUR SHOES FOR A MOMENT, IF YOU WOULD, JUDGE, AND I KNOW THAT’S ASKING A LOT OF YOU IN THIS SETTING. BUT SUPPOSE YOU’D GONE THROUGH A PROCESS TO SELECT SOMEONE FOR AN INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT JOB AND A POSITION, YOU HAD A LOT OF QUALIFIED CANDIDATES AND AS YOU’RE FINISHING THE HIRING PROCESS, YOU LEARN OF A CREDIBLE ALLEGATION THAT IF TRUE WOULD BE DISQUALIFYING. WOULDN’T YOU EITHER TAKE A STEP BACK AND CONDUCT A THOROUGH INVESTIGATION OR MOVE TO A DIFFERENT CANDIDATE? AND WHY NOT AGREE TO A ONE-WEEK PAUSE TO ALLOW THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE ALL THESE ALLEGATIONS AND ALLOW YOU AN OPPORTUNITY, A WEEK FROM NOW, TO HAVE THE FOLKS PRESENT IN FRONT OF US FOR US TO ASSESS THEIR CREDIBILITY AND FOR US TO EITHER CLEAR YOUR NAME OR RESOLVE THESE ALLEGATIONS BY MOVING TO A DIFFERENT NOMINEE.>>ALL FOUR WITNESSES WHO WERE ALLEGED TO BE AT THE EVENT SAID IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. INCLUDING DR. FORD’S LONG-TIME FRIEND, MS. KAISER, WHO SAID THAT SHE DIDN’T KNOW ME AND THAT SHE DOES NOT RECALL EVER BEING AT A PARTY WITH ME, WITH OR WITHOUT DR. FORD.>>WHAT I’VE STRUGGLED WITH, JUDGE KAVANAUGH, IS THE ABSENCE OF A FAIR FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT DRIVEN NONPARTISAN PROCESS TO QUESTION THE VARIOUS PEOPLE WHO I THINK ARE CRITICAL TO THIS. MY CONCERN, SHOULD YOU MOVE FORWARD, IS WHAT IT WILL DO TO THE CREDIBILITY OF THE COURT AND HOW THAT MAY WELL HANG OVER YOUR SERVICE. I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THIS.>>SENATOR, MY REPUTATION — >>CALLING FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION FOR ONE WEEK TO CLEAR OR CONFIRM SOME OF THESE ALLEGATIONS.>>I WILL GIVE YOU TIME TO ANSWER.>>WHEN YOU SAY A WEEK DELAY, DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG THE LAST TEN DAYS HAVE BEEN.>>THEY WERE PROBABLY AN ETERNITY BUT IN THE JUDGE THOMAS CONFIRMATION, THERE WAS A FOUR-DAY DELAY.>>EVERY DAY HAS BEEN A LIFETIME. AND YOU KNOW, YEAH, AND IT’S BEEN INVESTIGATED AND ALL FOUR WITNESSES SAY IT DIDN’T HAPPEN. AND THEY’VE SAID IT UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY, AND I’VE PRODUCED MY CALENDARS, WHICH SHOW, YOU KNOW, A LOT — THAT’S IMPORTANT EVIDENCE. AND YOU ACT LIKE — I MEAN, THE LAST TEN DAYS, I ASKED FOR A HEARING THE DAY AFTER THE ALLEGATION.>>BEFORE I CALL ON SENATOR LEE, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE SOMETHING HERE THAT — TALKING ABOUT DOING SOMETHING WITHOUT ENOUGH TIME. WE HAD 45 DAYS BETWEEN JULY 30th AND SEPTEMBER 13th, I BELIEVE IT IS, WHEN WE COULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATING THIS AND IN REGARD TO THIS CANDIDATE, IF YOU TAKE THE AVERAGE OF 65 TO 70 DAYS BETWEEN THE TIME THAT A PERSON IS ANNOUNCED BY THE PRESIDENT AND THE SENATE VOTES ON IT, IT’S ABOUT 65 TO 70 DAYS, AND HERE WE ARE AT ABOUT 85 TO 90 DAYS. SO, THERE’S PLENTY OF TIME PUT IN ON THIS NOMINATION. SENATOR LEE. OH, NO, WAIT A MINUTE. I GOT ONE OTHER THING. EVERYBODY ELSE HAS BEEN PUTTING LETTERS IN THE RECORD. I HAVE A LETTER HERE FROM 65 WOMEN WHO KNEW JUDGE KAVANAUGH BETWEEN THE YEARS ’79 AND ’83, THE YEARS HE ATTENDED GEORGETOWN PREP HIGH SCHOOL. THESE WOMEN WROTE TO THE COMMITTEE BECAUSE THEY KNOW JUDGE KAVANAUGH AND THEY KNOW THAT THE ALLEGATIONS RAISED BY DR. FORD ARE COMPLETELY, TOTALLY INCONSISTENT WITH HIS CHARACTER. THESE 65 WOMEN KNOW HIM THROUGH SOCIAL EVENTS AND CHURCH. MANY HAVE REMAINED CLOSE FRIENDS WITH HIM. HERE’S WHAT THEY SAY, PARTLY, QUOTING THE LETTER. THROUGH THE MORE THAN 35 YEARS WE’VE KNOWN HIM, BRETT HAS STOOD OUT FOR HIS FRIENDSHIP, CHARACTER, AND INTEGRITY. HE HAS ALWAYS TREATED WOMEN WITH DECENCY AND RESPECT. THAT WAS TRUE IN HIGH SCHOOL AND IT REMAINS TRUE TO THIS DAY. IN CLOSING, THEY WROTE, JUDGE KAVANAUGH HAS ALWAYS BEEN A GOOD PERSON, SO WITHOUT OBJECTION, I PUT IT IN THE RECORD. SENATOR LEE.>>JUDGE KAVANAUGH, YOU’VE BEEN COOPERATIVE AT EVERY STAGE OF THIS INVESTIGATION, BOTH YOUR BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION AND THE INVESTIGATION CONDUCTED BY THIS COMMITTEE, IS THAT CORRECT.>>THAT’S CORRECT, SENATOR.>>IT’S ALSO CORRECT THAT YOU YOURSELF DO NOT CONTROL THE FBI OR WHEN IT CONDUCTS AN INVESTIGATION. YOU ARE A NOMINEE, YOU’RE NOT TASKED WITH THE JOB OF DECIDING WHO, WHEN, WHETHER OR HOW CONDUCTS AN INVESTIGATION.>>THAT’S CORRECT.>>BUT AT EVERY MOMENT WHEN EITHER WE OR PRIOR TO THE COMMITTEE TAKING JURISDICTION OVER IT THE FBI HAS ASKED YOU QUESTIONS, YOU HAVE BEEN ATTENTIVE AND YOU’VE BEEN RESPONSIVE, ISN’T THAT RIGHT.>>THAT’S CORRECT THROUGHOUT MY CAREER.>>I HAVE COLLEAGUES TODAY WHO HAVE REPEATEDLY ASKED FOR AN FBI INVESTIGATION, AND THERE ARE SOME IRONIES IN THIS, IRONIES THAT — AT LEAST TWO LEVELS. IN THE FIRST PLACE, AT LEAST ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES, AT LEAST ONE OF THEM, HAD ACCESS TO THIS INFORMATION MANY, MANY WEEKS BEFORE ANYONE ELSE DID, HAD THE ABILITY AND I BELIEVE THE MORAL DUTY AND OBLIGATION TO REPORT THOSE FACTS TO THE FBI AT WHICH POINT THEY COULD HAVE AND WOULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED BY THE FBI. AND THAT COULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED IN SUCH A WAY THAT DIDN’T TURN THIS INTO A CIRCUS, ONE THAT HAS TURNED YOUR LIFE UP SIDE DOWN AND THAT OF YOUR FAMILY AND THAT OF DR. FORD AND HER FAMILY UPSIDE DOWN. I CONSIDER THIS MOST UNFORTUNATE, GIVEN THAT THIS WAS ENTIRELY WITHIN THE CONTROL OF AT LEAST ONE OF MY DEMOCRATIC COLLEAGUES TO DO THIS. THE SECOND LEVEL OF IRONY HERE IS THAT WHILE CALLING REPEATEDLY FOR AN INVESTIGATION BY THE FBI, AN INVESTIGATION OVER WHICH YOU HAVE NO ABILITY TO CONTROL, BY THE WAY, AN INVESTIGATION YOU HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO CALL FOR, WHILE CALLING FOR AN INVESTIGATION, WE’RE IN THE MIDDLE OF A CONVERSATION THAT INVOLVES QUESTIONS TO YOU. SO I ASK MY DEMOCRATIC COLLEAGUES, IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR JUDGE KAVANAUGH, ASK HIM. HE’S RIGHT HERE. IF THAT’S REALLY WHAT YOU WANT IS THE TRUTH, ASK HIM QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OF OTHER WITNESSES, THEN FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT IS SACRED AND HOLY, PARTICIPATE IN THE COMMITTEE INVESTIGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN GOING ON AS YOU HAVE NOT BEEN PARTICIPATING. WITH THE COMMITTEE STAFF INVESTIGATING THE OUTSIDE WITNESSES. IF SOMEONE REALLY WERE INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH, THIS IS WHAT THEY WOULD DO. THEY WOULD PARTICIPATE IN THE INVESTIGATION AND WHEN WE HAVE A COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION, A COMMITTEE HEARING WITH LIVE WITNESSES, THEY WOULD TALK ABOUT THAT RATHER THAN SOMETHING ELSE THEY WISH THEY WERE HAVING IN FRONT OF THEM. IF WHAT THEY WANT IS A SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH, THEN NOW IS THE CHOICE. IF, ON THE OTHER HAND, WHAT THEY WANT TO DO IS DELAY THIS UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION, WHICH AT LEAST ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES ON THE DEMOCRATIC SIDE HAS ACKNOWLEDGED, THEN THAT MIGHT BE WHAT THEY WOULD DO. FINALLY, I WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THERE IS SIGNIFICANT PRECEDENT FROM OUR FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THIS COMMITTEE, CHAIRMAN JOE BIDEN, DURING THE CLARENCE THOMAS HEARINGS, NEARLY THREE DECADES AGO, CHAIRMAN BIDEN MADE SOME INTERESTING OBSERVATIONS ABOUT FBI REPORTS AND THEIR ROLE IN THIS PROCESS. HERE’S WHAT HE SAID. “THE NEXT PERSON WHO REFERS TO AN FBI REPORT IS BEING WORTH ANYTHING OBVIOUSLY DOESN’T UNDERSTAND ANYTHING. THE FBI EXPLICITLY DOES NOT IN THIS OR ANY OTHER CASE REACH A CONCLUSION, PERIOD. PERIOD.” THOSE ARE HIS DUAL PERIODS, NOT MINE. I CONTINUE THE QUOTE. “THE REASON WHY WE CANNOT RELY ON THE FBI REPORT, YOU WOULD NOT LIKE IT IF WE DID BECAUSE IT IS INCLUSIVE SO WHEN PEOPLE WAVE AN FBI REPORT BEFORE YOU, UNDERSTAND THEY DO NOT, THEY DO NOT, THEY DO NOT REACH CONCLUSIONS. THEY DO NOT MAKE, AS MY FRIEND POINTS OUT MORE ACCURATELY, THEY DO NOT MAKE RECOMMENDATION.” IN OTHER WORDS, THE ROLE OF THE FBI IS TO FLAG ISSUES. THOSE ISSUES HAVE BEEN FLAGGED. SADLY, IN THIS CASE, THEY WERE FLAGGED NOT AS THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN, NOT IN THE TIMING WHICH THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN. AND THEREFORE, THEY COULDN’T HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED IN THE MANNER THAT WOULD PRESERVED A LOT MORE DIGNITY FOR YOU, YOUR FAMILY AND FOR DR. FORD AND HER FAMILY. THEY WERE INSTEAD HELD OUT UNTIL THE FINAL MOMENT. I CONSIDER THAT MOST UNFORTUNATE. AND FOR THAT, ON BEHALF OF THIS COMMITTEE, I EXTEND TO YOU MY MOST PROFOUND SYMPATHIES AND MY MOST PROFOUND SYMPATHIES TO DR. FORD AND HER FAMILY AS WELL.>>MR. CHAIRMAN, SINCE WE DON’T HAVE ENOUGH SLOTS, CAN I HAVE THE LAST MINUTE OF SENATOR LEE SO SENATOR KENNEDY CAN BE RECOGNIZED. JUDGE, WE DID 38 HOURS IN PUBLIC WITH YOU. DID WE HAVE ANY PRIVATE HEARINGS WITH YOU?>>YES.>>WAS THAT A FUN TIME FOR YOU, WHEN PEOPLE — WHEN SENATORS COULD ASK QUESTIONS THAT ARE AWKWARD OR UNCOMFORTABLE ABOUT POTENTIAL ALCOHOLISM, POTENTIAL GAMBLING ADDICTION, CREDIT CARD DEBT, IF YOUR BUDDIES FLOATED YOU MONEY TO BUY BASEBALL TICKETS, DID YOU ENJOY THAT TIME WE SPENT IN HERE LATE ONE NIGHT.>>I’M ALWAYS HAPPY TO COOPERATE WITH THE COMMITTEE.>>THAT’S CHARITABLE. WERE YOU EVER ASKED ABOUT ANY SEXUAL ALLEGATIONS WHEN WE HAD THAT TIME IN HERE WITH YOU ALONE?>>NO.>>DID THE RANKING MEMBER ALREADY HAVE THESE ALLEGATIONS FOR, I GUESS, THIS WOULD HAVE BEEN SEPTEMBER 6th OR 7th AND THE LETTER WAS WRITTEN ON JULY 30th. A RECOMMENDATION WAS MADE BY THE RANKING MEMBER OR HER STAFF TO DR. FORD AND, BY THE WAY, I THINK DR. FORD IS A VICTIM, AND I THINK SHE’S BEEN THROUGH HELL, AND I AM VERY SYMPATHETIC TO HER. BUT DID THE RANKING MEMBER’S STAFF, DID WE HEAR TODAY, MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO HIRE A LAWYER AND SHE KNEW ALL THAT AND YET WE HAD A HEARING WITH YOU AND NONE OF THESE THINGS WERE ASKED BUT THEN ONCE THE PROCESS WAS CLOSED, ONCE THE FBI INVESTIGATION WAS CLOSED, ONCE WE WERE DONE MEETING IN PUBLIC AND IN PRIVATE, THIS WAS SPRUNG ON YOU. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I HAVE THE DATES CORRECT, RIGHT? BECAUSE WE GOT 35-PLUS DAYS FROM ALL THE TIME THAT THIS EVIDENCE WAS IN THE HANDS, RECOMMENDATIONS WERE MADE TO AN OUTSIDE LAWYER, YOU COULD HAVE HANDLED ALL THIS, WE COULD HAVE HAD THIS CONVERSATION IN PRIVATE IN A WAY THAT DIDN’T NOT ONLY DO CRAP TO HIS FAMILY BUT DO A — I YIELD MY TIME.>>TRYING TO SEE IF HE COULD DO MATH ABOUT 35 DAYS. IT WAS A LITTLE BIT OF A QUESTION.>>THANK YOU.>>THANKS, MR. CHAIRMAN. GOOD AFTERNOON, JUDGE KAVANAUGH. AS A FEDERAL JUDGE, YOU’RE AWARE OF THE JURY INSTRUCTION FALSES IN UNIBUS, FALSES IN OMNIBUS, ARE YOU NOT. YOU’RE AWARE OF THAT JURY INSTRUCTION.>>I AM.>>YOU KNOW WHAT IT MEANS.>>YOU CAN TRANSLATE IT FOR ME, SENATOR, YOU CAN DO IT BETTER THAN I CAN.>>FALSE IN ONE THING, FALSE IN EVERYTHING, MEANING IN JURY INSTRUCTIONS, THAT WE — SOME OF US, AS PROSECUTORS, HAVE HEARD MANY TIMES, TOLD A JURY THAT THEY CAN DISBELIEVE A WITNESS IF THEY FIND THEM TO BE FALSE IN ONE THING. SO, THE CORE OF WHY WE’RE HERE TODAY REALLY IS CREDIBILITY. LET ME TALK — >>THE CORE OF WHY WE’RE HERE IS AN ALLEGATION FOR WHICH THE FOUR WITNESSES PRESENT HAVE ALL SAID IT DIDN’T HAPPEN.>>LET ME ASK YOU ABOUT RENATE DOLPHIN, WHO LIVES IN CONNECTICUT. SHE THOUGHT SHE SAID SHE AND I NEVER HAD ANY SEXUAL INTERACTIONS. THE QUESTION IS FALSE AND I ADDRESS THAT IN THE OPENING STATEMENT AND SEE YOUR QUESTION IS BASED ON A FALSE PREMISE THAT DOES GREAT HARM TO HER. I DON’T KNOW WHY YOU’RE BRINGING THIS UP FRANKLY. DOES GREAT HARM TO HER BY EVEN BRINGING HER NAME APPEAR. IT IS REALLY UNFORTUNATE. >>CALLING SOMEONE AN ALUMNUS IN THAT WAY, BY A NUMBER OF YOUR FOOTBALL FRIENDS AT THE TIME AS BOASTING OF SEXUAL CONDUCT. THAT IS THE REASON — >>IT IS FALSE. LOOK AT WHAT YOU ARE BRINGING UP RIGHT HERE ABOUT HER. LOOK AT WHAT YOU ARE DOING. >>DON’T INTERRUPT. >>ASK YOUR QUESTIONS >>SHE IS A GREAT PERSON. SHE IS ALWAYS BEEN A GREAT PERSON. WE NEVER HAD ANY SEXUAL INTERACTIONS. BY BRINGING THIS UP, DRAGGING HER THROUGH THE MUD. IT IS UNNECESSARY. >>THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. >>– YOU HAVE MADE REFERENCE JUDGE TO A SWORN STATEMENT I BELIEVE BY MARK JUDGE TO THE COMMITTEE IS THAT CORRECT? >>I MADE REFERENCE TO WHAT HIS LAWYER SENT TO THE COMMITTEE. >>IT IS NOT A SWORN STATEMENT IS IT? >>UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY. >>IF A STATEMENT — IT IS A STATEMENT SIGNED BY HIS LAWYER, BARBARA VAN GELDER, IT IS CURSORY AND CONCLUSORY SENTENCES. ARE YOU SEEING — SAYING THAT IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR AN INVESTIGATION? BY THE FBI? OR SOME INTERVIEW BY THE FBI UNDER OATH? >>UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY HE SAYS THIS KIND OF EVENT DIDN’T HAPPEN AND THAT I NEVER DID OR WOULD HAVE DONE SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >>AS A FEDERAL JUDGE YOU ALWAYS WANT THE BEST EVIDENCE DON’T YOU? >>HE HAS SAID AND ALL THE WITNESSES PRESENT — LOOK AT MS KEYSER’S STATEMENT. >>YOU HAVE TESTIFIED TO THIS COMMITTEE THIS MORNING AND THIS AFTERNOON, THIS WHOLE TWO WEEK EFFORT HAS BEEN A CALCULATED AND ORCHESTRATED POLITICAL HIT FUELED WITH THE PARENT PENT UP ANGER ABOUT PRESIDENT TRUMP AND THE 2016 ELECTION, FEAR THAT HAS BEEN UNFAIRLY STOKED ABOUT MY JUDICIAL RECORD, REVENGE ON BEHALF OF THE CLINTONS AND MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN MONEY FROM OUTSIDE LEFT-WING OPPOSITION GROUPS. IS IT YOUR TESTIMONY THAT THE MOTIVATION OF THE COURAGEOUS WOMAN WHO SAT WHERE YOU DID JUST A SHORT TIME AGO WAS REVENGE ON BEHALF OF A LEFT- WING CONSPIRACY OR THE CLINTONS?>>SENATOR, I SAID IN MY OPENING STATEMENT THAT SHE PREFERRED CONFIDENTIALITY. OR CONFIDENTIALITY WAS DESTROYED BY THE ACTIONS OF THIS COMMITTEE. >>LET ME ASK YOU THIS, IN A SPEECH THAT YOU GAVE AT YALE, YOU DESCRIBED “FALLING OUT OF THE BUS ONTO THE FRONT STEPS OF THE YALE LAW SCHOOL AT 4:45 AM” >>I WAS NOT DESCRIBING — SENATOR, LET ME FINISH. PLEASE. I ORGANIZED A THIRD YEAR END OF SCHOOL PARTY FOR 30 OF MY CLASSMATES TO RENT A BUS AND GO TO FENWAY PARK IN BOSTON, WHICH IS ABOUT A THREE HOUR TRIP. I BOUGHT ALL THE TICKETS. YOU AND I HAVE DISCUSSED THAT BEFORE. I BOUGHT ALL THE BASEBALL TICKETS. I RENTED THE BUS. I ORGANIZED THE WHOLE TRIP. WE WENT TO FENWAY PARK, ROGER CLEMENS WAS PITCHING FOR THE RED SOX. WE HAD A GREAT TIME. GEORGE BRETT WAS PLAYING THIRD BASE FOR THE ROYALS. HE WAS PLAYING LEFT FIELD THAT NIGHT. WE WENT TO THE GAME AND GOT BACK AND THEN WE WENT OUT. HE WAS A GREAT NIGHT OF FRIENDSHIP. >>I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING JUDGE. BUT I NEED TO FINISH THE QUOTE BEFORE I ASK YOU THE QUESTION. I WASN’T TALKING ABOUT >>THE QUOTE “– YOU TRY TO “PEACE THINGS BACK TOGETHER” TO RECALL WHAT HAPPENED THAT NIGHT. MEETING, >>I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED >>JUDGE, WILL YOU QUICKLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION — >>I KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. >>I WILL FINISH AUNTS — ASKING MY QUESTIONS. >>DO IT QUICKLY. >>DOESN’T THAT IMPLY TO YOU THAT YOU HAD TO PIECE THINGS BACK TOGETHER, YOU HAD ASKED THINGS THAT HAPPENED THAT NIGHT? >>YOU TAKE YOUR TIME NOW AND ANSWER THE QUESTION. AKELEY — >>DEADLY NIGHT. IS A GREAT NIGHT OF FUN. IT WAS GREAT CALM RODDY. EVERYBODY LOOKS FOR — TOM TOM ROBBERY. EVERYONE LOOKS GREAT — BACK FINALLY AND I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. >>DO YOU BELIEVE IN ANY HILL — ANITA HILL? >>THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. JUDGE CAVANAUGH — JUDGE KAVANAUGH I WANT TO GET INTO THIS QUESTION IS BANDIED BACK AND FORTH ENDLESSLY TODAY ABOUT THE FBI INVESTIGATION PROCESS. BECAUSE I THINK I WANT TO FOLLOW UP ON WHAT SENATOR LEE AND SENATOR SASS HAVE REFERENCED. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF TALK ABOUT WE NEED AN FBI INVESTIGATION. IN THESE PROCESSES, WHICH YOU BEEN THROUGH A NUMBER OF TIMES NOW WHEN THE FBI DOES THE BACKGROUND CHECK WITH REGARD TO A NOMINATION, COULD YOU QUICKLY DESCRIBE THAT FOR US? WHAT DOES THE FBI DEAL? >>THE FBI GATHER STATEMENTS FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE INFORMATION. THEY DON’T RESOLVE CREDIBILITY. THEY GATHER THE INFORMATION AND THE CREDIBILITY DETERMINATION IS MADE BY THE ULTIMATE FACTFINDER, WHICH IN THIS CASE IS THE UNITED STATES SENATE, THE COMMITTEE THAT IS GATHERED. >>IN THE FBI THEN GIVES THAT REPORT TO THE WHITE HOUSE IF I UNDERSTAND IN THE WHITE HOUSE THEN TRANSFERS IT TO THE SENATE. >>THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. >>AS YOU INDICATED, IT HAS BEEN SAID MANY TIMES ARE TODAY, THE FBI DOES NOT MAKE JUDGMENTS. IT GIVES THE SENATE COMMITTEE INFORMATION. AT THAT POINT IN TIME, IF I UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS CORRECTLY, THE UNITED STATES SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE HAS LEGAL AUTHORITIES IF IT RECEIVES INFORMATION AND AN FBI REPORT THAT IT WANTS TO FURTHER INVESTIGATE, THE SENATE HAS LEGAL AUTHORITY TO CONDUCT FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS. IS THAT CORRECT? >>THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. >>AND THAT IS WHAT HAS BEEN REFERENCED HERE MANY TIMES ABOUT HOW SOME OF THESE WITNESSES THAT WERE IDENTIFIED IN THE VERY LATE INFORMATION WE RECEIVED HAVE MADE STATEMENTS THAT ARE UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY. THAT IS A FELONY FOR LYING TO THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, WHAT HAPPENS IS, THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WHICH HAS AUTHORITY UNDER LAW TO CONDUCT THOSE KINDS OF INVESTIGATION, FOLLOWS UP ON THE FBI REPORT TO FINISH OUT THE INVESTIGATION THAT IT WANTS WITH REGARD TO ANY INFORMATION IT RECEIVES THAT NEEDS FURTHER INVESTIGATION. IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROCESS? >>THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. >>IN THIS CASE, THERE’S BEEN A LOT OF TALK HERE TODAY, AND IF I HAVE TIME I WILL GET INTO IT, BUT IN THIS CASE, THERE IS A LOT OF CONCERN BY MANY THAT THERE WAS NOT SO MUCH AN INTEREST IN AN FBI INVESTIGATION AS THERE WAS IN DILLEY. I’M NOT — DELAY. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE SENATE COMMITTEES INVESTIGATION. BECAUSE AS I UNDERSTAND IT, AND THIS MAY BE MORE OF A QUESTION TO — AS SOON AS WE RECEIVED THE INFORMATION, WHICH WAS ABOUT 45 DAYS AFTER OTHERS ON THE COMMITTEE RECEIVED IT, WE CONDUCTED AN INVESTIGATION. IS THAT CORRECT? WE BEGAN THAT LEGAL SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION. >>YES. >>AND THAT INVESTIGATION INVOLVED OUR FULLY, LAWFULLY ENABLED INVESTIGATORS TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION. AND IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, THE DEMOCRATIC MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE REFUSED TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT INVESTIGATION. AND SO WE HAVE CONDUCTED THE INVESTIGATION, THE VERY KINDS OF THINGS MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE ARE ASKING THAT WE TELL THE FBI TO DO, THIS COMMITTEE HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO IT, AND THIS COMMITTEE DOES IT AND HAVE DONE IT. NOW THERE MAY BE MORE DEMANDS FOR MORE INTERVIEWS AND MORE INVESTIGATION, BUT WHEN YOU, JUDGE KAVANAUGH, HAVE REFERENCED THE TESTIMONY THAT IS COME FROM THOSE WHO IDENTIFIED AS BEING AT THIS EVENT, THE TESTIMONY THAT HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM THEM IS INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN RECEIVED PURSUANT TO A SENATE COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION. I THINK IT SHOULD BE MADE CLEAR. I THINK THERE’S BEEN A LOT OF BACK-AND-FORTH AIR ABOUT WE ARE NOT GETTING INFORMATION, WE ARE NOT LOOKING AT THIS, WE DON’T WANT TO LOOK INTO THE INVESTIGATION, YOU DON’T WANT TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS. THE REALITY IS THIS COMMITTEE IMMEDIATELY AND THOROUGHLY INVESTIGATED EVERYONE IS THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED — EVERY WITNESS IDENTIFIED TO US. A STATEMENT UNDER PENALTY OF FELONY FROM THEM. I JUST WANT TO CONCLUDE WITH THAT. I 45 SECONDS LEFT. I’M GOING TO ASK YOU ONE QUICK QUESTION. YOU HAD A MEETING WITH SENATOR FEINSTEIN ON AUGUST 20. MY UNDERSTANDING. I HAD A MEETING. THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE DATE. >>WHAT WAS ESTABLISHED IN TESTIMONY EARLIER TODAY WAS THAT THE RANKING MEMBER STAFF HELPED TO — HELPED DR. FORD TO RETAIN THE LAW FIRM BETWEEN JULY 30 AND AUGUST 7. I JUST WANTED YOU TO CLARIFY ONE MORE TIME. IN THE MEETING THAT YOU HAD TWO WEEKS OR MORE LATER, THIS ISSUE WAS NOT RAISED. >>THE ISSUE WAS NOT RAISED. >>THANK YOU. MY TIME IS UP. >>WE WILL TAKE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK NOW.>>>WE ARE IN OUR NUMBER 8 OF THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE. THIS IS A VERY SHORT FIVE MINUTE BREAK. MOST COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE STAYING IN PLACE. DEMOCRAT AND REPUBLICAN MEMBERS. HERE YOU ARE SOME OF THE HEADLINES. FURIOUS KAVANAUGH DENIES . ALSO FROM OVERSEAS, BBC, AN EMOTIONAL KAVANAUGH SWEARS HIS INNOCENCE. AND THERE IS THIS FROM THE TORONTO SUN, ORRIN HATCH CALLS FOR TO PLEASING. AND FROM RUSSIA TODAY, AN EMOTIONAL AND HEROIC TESTIMONY. AND FROM THE GUARDIAN, KAVANAUGH REFUSES TO SAY YES TO AN FBI INQUIRY AND REPUBLICANS ERUPT OVER SHAM HEARING. A VERY SHORT FIVE MINUTE BREAK. A REMINDER, THE FULL HEARING WILL BE AIRING AT 8 O’CLOCK EASTERN TIME ON THE C-SPAN TELEVISION AND ALSO ON OUR WEBSITE. THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE WILL GAVEL AND TOMORROW MORNING FOR A VOTE ON THE NOMINATION BEFORE MOVING TO THE FULL SENATE. WE WILL CONTINUE FROM THE ROOM DURING THE SHORT BRECK — BREAK.>>>CAN SOMEBODY GET THE JUDGE BACK FOR US? THE RANKING MEMBER?>>THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE ARE ACCUSING THE DEMOCRATS OF SOME SORT OF POLITICAL CONSPIRACY, BUT THAT IS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO DISTRACT US FROM WHAT HAPPENED HERE THIS MORNING. WHAT HAPPENED HERE THIS MORNING WAS THAT WE HEARD FROM DR. FORD, WHO SPOKE TO US WITH QUIET, RAW, EMOTIONAL POWER ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO HER. SHE SAID SHE WAS 100% CERTAIN THAT IT WAS YOU WHO ATTACKED HER. AND SHE EXPLAINED HOW SHE CAME FORWARD, HOW SHE STRUGGLES WITH HER DECISION, HOW SHE WANTED THE PRESIDENT TO KNOW SO THAT SHE COULD MAKE A BETTER CHOICE — HE COULD MAKE A BETTER CHOICE. SO WHEN YOU IN MY COLLEAGUES ON THE OTHER SIDE ACCUSE US OF AMBUSHING YOU, I THINK WE ALL HAVE TO REMEMBER DOCTOR FORD’S TESTIMONY AND HER COURAGE. LET ME GO BACK TO SOMETHING YOU JUST SAID IN YOUR OPENING. YOU SAID YOU SAW DEMOCRATS WERE AN EMBARRASSMENT. WE ASK YOU A LOT OF QUESTIONS. WHICH OF OUR QUESTIONS DO YOU THINK WERE AN EMBARRASSMENT? I ASKED YOU ABOUT THE SENSE YOU WROTE — A DISSENT THE ROAD IS A JUDGE AND HER KNOWLEDGE OF SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND ABUSE BY HER CLOSE FRIEND AND MENTOR, ALL VALID QUESTIONS IN THIS SETTING. THEY ARE VALID BECAUSE THIS IS A JOB INTERVIEW FOR ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT POSITIONS OF TRUST IN THIS COUNTRY. EARLIER — IT IS NOT A CRIMINAL TRIAL. THERE IS NO ENTITLEMENT FOR YOU TO BE CONFIRMED TO THE SUPREME COURT. CREDIBILITY, CHARACTER AND CANDOR OF A NOMINEE ARE THINGS TO CONSIDER IN YOUR JOB INTERVIEW. >>MY WHOLE LIFE IS SUBJECT TO CONSIDERATION. >>IS THAT YES? CREDIBILITY, CHARACTER AND CANDOR. SPECIFIC TRAITS THAT WOULD BE OF INTEREST TO US AS WE CONSIDER PUTTING YOU FOR LIFE ON THE HIGHEST COURT IN THE COUNTRY. CREDIBILITY, CHARACTER AND CANDOR. >>OF COURSE. >>IS TEMPERAMENT ALSO AN IMPORTANT TRAIT TO CONSIDER? >>FOR 12 YEARS, EVERYONE WAS APPEARED BEFORE ME ON THE D.C. CIRCUIT HAS PRAISED MY JUDICIAL TEMPERAMENT. THAT IS WHY I HAVE — >>SO YOU WOULD AGREE THAT TEMPERAMENT IS ALSO IMPORTANT. >>YES. A FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER TESTIFIED TO THE COMMITTEE, TALKED ABOUT HOW I WAS ALWAYS OPEN-MINDED AND RULED IN FAVOR OF UNPOPULAR DEFENDANTS. HOW I WAS FAIR-MINDED. I THINK UNIVERSALLY LAWYERS WHO HAVE APPEARED BEFORE THE D.C. — SPENT THE >>THE ANSWER IS YES. I AM RUNNING OUT OF TIME. WE ONLY HAVE FIVE MINUTES. LET ME COULD DO SOMETHING ELSE. IN YOUR FOX NEWS INTERVIEW YOU SAID THAT YOU ALWAYS TREATED WOMEN WITH DIGNITY AND RESPECT. AND THAT IN HIGH SCHOOL YOU NEVER DRANK SO MUCH THAT YOU COULD NOT REMEMBER WHAT HAPPENED THE NIGHT BEFORE. WOULD YOU SAY THE SAME THING ABOUT YOUR COLLEGE LIFE? >>YES. >>I WOULD LIKE TO READ THE STATEMENTS FROM PEOPLE WHO KNEW YOU IN COLLEGE. >>CAN I SAY ONE THING? >>YOUR ROOMMATE, ALTHOUGH HE WAS NO — NORMALLY RESERVED, HE WAS A NOTABLY HEAVY DRINKER EVEN BY THE STANDARDS OF THE TIME AND BECAME AGGRESSIVE AND BELLIGERENT. SO IS YOUR FORMER COLLEGE ROOMMATE LYING? >>I WOULD REFER YOU TO WHAT I SAID ABOUT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH THE OTHER TWO ROOMMATES. AND I AM GOING TO LEAVE IT AT THAT. I WILL SAY, YOU’RE ASKING ABOUT COLLEGE. I GOT INTO YALE LAW SCHOOL. THAT IS THE NUMBER ONE LAW SCHOOL IN THE COUNTRY. I HAVE NO CONNECTIONS THERE. I GOT THERE BY BUSTING MY TAIL. >>I FEEL INSULTED AS A GEORGETOWN GRADUATE. >>IT IS RANKED NUMBER ONE. THAT DOESN’T MEAN IT IS NUMBER ONE. IN COLLEGE, I STUDIED. I WAS IN CROSS CAMPUS LIBRARY THREE NIGHTS. AND I PLAYED BASKETBALL FOR THE JUNIOR VARSITY. I TRIED OUT FOR VARSITY. THE FIRST DAY I ARRIVED ON CAMPUS, WE HAD CAPTAINS WORKOUTS, PLAYED BASKETBALL EVERY DAY AND THEN AS SOON AS THE SEASON WAS OVER IN LATE FEBRUARY, CAMPUS WORK OUT STARTED AGAIN. >>SO YOU WERE NOT A SLOPPY DRUNK? SO THE ROOMMATE WAS LYING? >>I WILL REFER YOU AGAIN TO THE REDACTED PORTION. I WILL SAY MY ACADEMIC RECORD — AND I DON’T USUALLY LIKE TO TALK ABOUT MYSELF THIS WAY, BUT A RESPONSE, I WORKED VERY HARD IN COLLEGE. MY STUDIES. AND I ALSO PLAYED BASKETBALL. AND I ALSO SOCIALIZE. >>I KNOW THE CHAIRMAN WILL STOP ME, BUT I DO HAVE SOME OTHER REFERENCES FROM PEOPLE WHO KNEW YOU WHO SAY THAT YOU WERE NOT — >>YOUR TIME IS UP. >>I’M SORRY MR. CHAIRMAN. I JUST WANT TO ENTER SOME — INTO THE RECORD. MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD LIKE TO ENTER INTO THE RECORD FOUR LETTERS. ONE DATED SEPTEMBER 18, 2018 TO YOU FROM ALL OF THE DEMOCRATS ON THIS COMMITTEE. ANOTHER IS A LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 18 TWO CHRISTOPHER WRAY, THE DIRECTOR OF THE FBI, AND DON McGAHN, COUNSEL TO THE PRESIDENT. A SEPTEMBER 21 LETTER BY DIANNE FEINSTEIN TO THE PRESIDENT. IN A SEPTEMBER 26 LETTER SIGNED BY ALL THE DEMOCRATS ON THIS COMMITTEE, ALL REQUESTING AN OF F.B.I. F2 — AN OF F.B.I. INVESTIGATION. AND ALL YOU SAID IS THAT WE ASK. THE IMPLICATION BEING AN INVESTIGATION WHAT HAPPENED AND IT CERTAINLY HAS NOT HAPPENED. >>WITHOUT OBJECTION, THAT WILL BE INCLUDED. >>THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. I APOLOGIZE FOR WHAT YOU’RE GOING THROUGH RIGHT NOW. I CAN’T IMAGINE. I HAVE GONE THROUGH A CAMPAIGN THAT HAD A LOT OF SMEARS, BUT IT FEELS IN COMPARISON TO WHAT YOU HAVE HAD TO DEAL WITH. ONE POINT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE FROM THE ONSET, IF WE GO BACK AND REVIEW HOW THIS COMMITTEE PROCESS HAS WORKED. WE GOT A LOT OF WORK TO DO. WE HAVE HAD MEMBERS TAKE IT ON THEMSELVES TO RELEASE CONFIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS INSTEAD OF RESPECTING THE PROCESS. WE HAVE HAD AN ALLEGATION HELD FOR NEARLY 7 WEEKS THAT WOULD HAVE GIVEN US PLENTY OF TIME TO INVESTIGATE. AND THEN WHEN WE FINALLY GOT THE INFORMATION, I INVITE EVERYBODY, PARTICULARLY THE AMERICAN PUBLIC, THERE IS AN INVESTIGATION GOING ON. AND A LOT OF IT HAS BEEN DOCUMENTED. THERE’S A CHRONOLOGY ON THE WEBSITE THAT SAYS EACH AND EVERY TIME AN ALLEGATION WAS MADE THE STAFF FOLLOWED UP ON IT. AND SADLY, IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT INSTANCES, THE DEMOCRATS DECLINED TO PARTICIPATE. THEY LISTENED IN ON ONE INTERVIEW, AND DID NOT ASK A SINGLE QUESTION. WHY NOT ASK? IF YOU’RE REALLY TRYING TO GET TO THE FACTS? IF YOU’RE REALLY TRYING TO DO YOUR JOB TO INVESTIGATE. WE ARE INVESTIGATING. IT IS OUR JOB. I THINK A RESPONSE TO THE RANKING MEMBER QUESTIONED THAT JUDGE KAVANAUGH SAID I’M HERE, YOU’RE ASKING ME QUESTIONS. YOU KNOW WHAT, WHEN THE COMMITTEE STAFF, SAY WE ARE NOT GOING TO ASK QUESTIONS WHEN HE WANTED TO COME IN AND CLEAR HIS GOOD NAME. WHAT YOU REALLY AFTER? YOU MAY NOT BE AFTER THE TRUTH, MAYBE YOU ARE. MAYBE HER AFTER EXECUTING SOME SORT OF A POLITICAL AGENDA. MAYBE IT IS A MIX OF BOTH. BUT I THINK YOU HAVE BEEN TREATED UNFAIRLY. AND I AM AMAZED THAT AFTER 32 HOURS OF TESTIMONY, ONE HALF HOUR BUT I SAID IN THIS ROOM, THAT NONE OF THESE QUESTIONS CAME UP WHEN IT WAS ALL FULLY KNOW. LAWYERED UP AS A MATTER OF FACT. I ALSO WANT TO GO BACK TO THE COMMENTS THIS MORNING. I THINK I HEARD — AND WE CAN GO BACK TO THE RECORD IF SOMEONE DISAGREES, I THINK I HEARD DR. FORD SAY THAT SHE WAS NOT AWARE THE FACT THAT WE SAID WE WOULD COME TO CALIFORNIA AND MAKE A CONFIDENTIAL AND COMPLETELY DEPOSE AND ASK ANY QUESTIONS. I THINK I HEARD HER SAY SHE WASN’T AWARE OF THAT. I DON’T KNOW WHERE THAT CAME FROM? I DON’T KNOW WHETHER HER COUNSEL REGRET — NEGLECTED TO TELL HER. BUT THAT OFFER WAS OUT THERE. WE WERE MOVING HEAVEN AND EARTH AND MOVING THE SCHEDULE TO GET TO THE TRUTH. WE ARE DOING AN INVESTIGATION. WE ARE DOING OUR LEVEL BEST. I HOPE THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING THIS WILL GO OUT TO THE SENATE JUDICIARY WEBSITE AND TAKE A LOOK AT THIS CHRONOLOGY. TAKE A LOOK AT THE LACK OF INVESTIGATION ON THE PART OF PEOPLE WHO WANT THE INVESTIGATION. IT DOESN’T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE. EVERY OPPORTUNITY YOU HAVE TO GO AND QUESTION A WITNESS. EVERY OPPORTUNITY WE HAVE HAD TO FIND MORE TRUTH, TO FIND MORE FACTS, WE HAVE DONE THAT. IT IS DOCUMENTED. WE HAVE GOT SWORN STATEMENTS. WE ARE DOING OUR JOB. WE ARE DOING THE COMMITTEE WORK. JUDGE KAVANAUGH, I ALSO HAVE TO SAY, I BELIEVE THAT YOU ARE A PART — YOU ARE THE FIRST MAJOR TARGET OF A NEW STRATEGY THAT HAS DEVELOPED HERE. AND I THINK YOU ARE RIGHT. I THINK IT IS JUST BASICALLY ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK. IT IS NOT ADVISE AND CONSENT, IT IS SEARCH AND DESTROY. MAYBE THE BEST EVIDENCE OF THIS IS ONE OF THE WEBSITES, ONE OF THE GROUPS OUT THERE ATTACKING YOU AND TRYING TO CREATE FODDER AND ALL THESE RED HERRINGS HAS ALREADY ACQUIRED A URL FOR THE NEXT JUDGE THEY’RE GOING TO ATTACK. IT IS RIGHT HERE. THEY’VE ALREADY PURCHASED IT. THEY’RE READY TO GO. THIS IS THE PLAYBOOK. THIS IS THE WAY WE ARE GOING TO RUIN THIS COMMITTEE FROM THIS POINT FORWARD. TAKE A LOOK AT A. I WILL MAKE IT SURE WE GET IT OUT ON OUR WEBSITE. WE HAVE ALREADY GOT A STOP ANOTHER JUDGE YOU HAVE NOT BEEN NOMINATED URL FROM THE SAME PEOPLE TRYING TO MOBILIZE PEOPLE TO ATTACK YOU. THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE HERE WHO MAY SINCERELY HAVE CONCERNS. I WOULD TELL YOU TO POUND THE TABLE WITH THE RANKING MEMBER AND THE LEADERSHIP ON YOUR SIDE TO SAY, WHY DIDN’T WE ASK QUESTIONS? WHY DIDN’T WE LISTEN IN? WHY DIDN’T WE DO OUR PART OF THE INVESTIGATION WHILE THIS LEADER DID EVERYTHING HE COULD TO ACCOMMODATE DR. FORD AND TO RUN DOWN EVERY SINGLE LEAD THAT IS BEEN PRESENTED TO US. WEEKS AFTER IT WAS KNOWN TO THE MINORITY. I LOOK FORWARD TO SUPPORTING HER CONFIRMATION. I BELIEVE YOU’RE GOING TO BE ON THE BENCH. — HE SAID VOTING NO WOULD BE LEGITIMIZING THE MOST DESPICABLE THING IN AMERICAN POLITICS. DO YOU THINK THAT PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE DR. FORD ARE LEGITIMIZING DESPICABLE THINGS? THOSE OF US WHO THINK SHE IS AN INCREDIBLE WITNESS, DO YOU THINK THAT SOMEHOW WE ARE ENGAGING IN SOMETHING THAT IS DESPICABLE? >>SENATOR. LISTEN TO BOTH SIDES BEFORE YOU MAKE A BOTTOMLINE CONCLUSION, AND >>THAT IS FAIR. WAS A DO BOTH SIDES. THIS IS NOT ABOUT ONE SIDE BE DESPICABLE IN THE OTHER SIDE NIGHT — NOT. LISTEN TO BOTH SIDES. SHE GAVE CREDIBLE, MEANINGFUL TESTIMONY. A WOMAN WHO HAD THE COURAGE TO COME FORWARD AND TELL HER TRUTH. AND THAT IS WHAT I’M ASKING YOU. SHE IS NOT A POLITICAL PAWN. SHE IS NOT PART OF THE CLINTON’S EFFORTS TO GET SOME KIND OF REVENGE. SHE IS A WOMAN WHO CAME HERE WITH CORROBORATING EVIDENCE TO TELL HER TRUTH. >>THE EVIDENCE IS NOT CORROBORATED. THE WITNESSES THERE SAY IT DID NOT HAPPEN. >>JUDGE KAVANAUGH YOU AND YOUR FAMILY HAVE BEEN TREATED INCREDIBLY POORLY BY SENATE DEMOCRATS AND BY THE MEDIA. LET ME SAY ALSO I THINK DR. FORD AND HER FAMILY HAVE BEEN TREATED INCREDIBLY POORLY BY SENATE DEMOCRATS AND THE MEDIA. YOU BOTH SENIOR GOOD NAMES DRAGGED THROUGH THE MUD. AND THIS HAS BEEN SADLY ONE OF THE MOST SHAMEFUL CHAPTERS IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE. LET ME SAY TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY, THANK YOU FOR A LIFETIME OF PUBLIC SERVICE. I WILL SAY WATCHING YOUR MOTHERS PAINED FACE HAS BEEN HEART WRENCHING AS SHE HAS SEEN HER SONS CHARACTER DRAGGED THROUGH THE MUD AFTER NOT ONLY YOUR LIFETIME OF PUBLIC SERVICE, BUT HER LIFETIME OF PUBLIC SERVICE AS WELL. AND I KNOW AS A FATHER THERE HAS BEEN NOTHING MORE PAINFUL TO YOU THAN TALKING TO YOUR DAUGHTERS AND EXPLAINING THESE ATTACKS THE MEDIA IS AIRING. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE FAIR-MINDED PEOPLE. THAT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE CAN SET ASIDE THE PARTISAN WARFARE OF WASHINGTON AND LOOK TO SUBSTANCE AND FACTS. AND THAT IS THE CHARGE OF THIS COMMITTEE. THERE HAVE BEEN THREE DIFFERENT SETS OF ALLEGATIONS THAT HAVE DOMINATED THE MEDIA. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT TWO OF THOSE SETS OF ALLEGATIONS HAD SO LITTLE CORROBORATION THAT EVEN THE NEW YORK TIMES, WHICH IS NO CONSERVATIVE OUTLET, REFUSED TO REPORT ON THE BECAUSE THEY COULD FIND NO BASIS FOR THEM. AND IT WAS STRIKING IN THIS ENTIRE HEARING THAT NOT A SINGLE DEMOCRAT IN THIS COMMITTEE ASKED ABOUT TWO SETS OF THOSE ALLEGATIONS. MISS RAMIREZ ALLEGATIONS AND THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE CLIENT OF MICHAEL AVENATTI. I DON’T KNOW IF THEY WERE TO IN VARIOUS. THE ALLEGATIONS WERE SO SCANDALOUS THAT THE RANKING MEMBER OMITTED HIS CLIENTS MOST SCANDALOUS ACCUSATIONS OF YOU AS A CRIMINAL MASTERMIND ESSENTIALLY. OMITTED THOSE SCANDALOUS ACCUSATIONS FROM HER STATEMENT. THIS HEARING HAS FOCUSED, RIGHTLY SO, ON THE ALLEGATIONS DR. FORD PRESENTED. LET ME SAY, I THINK THE COMMITTEE DID THE RIGHT THING IN GIVING DR. FORD A FULL AND FAIR OPPORTUNITY TO TELL HER STORY. THAT IS WHAT WE NEEDED TO DO WHEN THESE ALLEGATIONS CAME UP. AND THE COMMITTEE TREATED HER WITH RESPECT, AS WE SHOULD. I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT SENATE DEMOCRATS TREATED YOU WITH RESPECT. WHAT DO WE KNOW? WE KNOW THAT HER TESTIMONY AND YOUR TESTIMONY ARE IN CONFLICT. A FAIR-MINDED ASSESSOR OF FACTS WOULD THEN LOOK TO WHAT ELSE DO WE KNOW WHEN YOU HAVE CONFLICTING TESTIMONY. WE KNOW THAT DR. FORD IDENTIFIED THREE FACT WITNESSES WHO SHE SAID OBSERVED WHAT OCCURRED. ALL THREE OF THOSE FACT WITNESSES HAVE STATED ON THE RECORD UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY THAT THEY DO NOT RECALL WHAT SHE IS ALLEGING HAPPENED. THEY HAVE NOT ONLY NOT CORROBORATED HER CHARGES, THEY HAVE EXPLICITLY REFUTED HER CHARGES. THAT IS SIGNIFICANT TO A FAIR- MINDED FACTFINDER. IN ADDITION, YOU HAVE WALKED THROUGH BEFORE THIS COMMITTEE YOUR CALENDARS FROM THE TIME. I WILL SAY YOU ARE MUCH MORE ORGANIZED TEENAGER THAT I WAS. AND THAT MANY OF US WERE. BUT IT WAS A COMPELLING RECITATION OF NIGHT BY NIGHT BY NIGHT WHERE YOU WERE IN THE SUMMER OF 1982. THAT IS YET ANOTHER CONTEMPORANEOUS PIECE OF FACT TO ASSESS WHAT HAPPENED. AND WE ALSO KNOW THAT THE DEMOCRATS ON THIS COMMITTEE ENGAGED IN A PROFOUNDLY UNFAIR PROCESS. THE RANKING MEMBER HAD THESE ALLEGATIONS ON JULY 30. AND FOR 60 DAYS, 60 DAYS AGO, THE RANKING MEMBER DID NOT REFER TO THE FBI FOR AN INVESTIGATION. THE RANKING MEMBER DID NOT REFER TO THE FULL COMMITTEE FOR AN INVESTIGATION. THE RANKING MEMBER, THIS COMMITTEE COULD’VE INVESTIGATED THOSE CLAIMS IN A CONFIDENTIAL WAY THAT RESPECTED DOCTOR FORD’S PRIVACY. AND SOME OF THE MOST SIGNIFICANT TESTIMONY WE HEARD THIS MORNING WAS DR. FORD TOLD THIS COMMITTEE THAT THE ONLY PEOPLE TO WHOM SHE GAVE HER LETTER FOR HER ATTORNEYS, THE RANKING MEMBER, AND HER MEMBER OF CONGRESS. AND SHE STATED THAT SHE AND HER ATTORNEYS DID NOT RELEASE THE LETTER, WHICH MEANS THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT COULD’VE RELEASED THAT LETTER WERE EITHER THE RANKING MEMBER AND HER STAFF ARE THE DEMOCRATIC MEMBER OF COMMERCE BECAUSE — CONGRESS BECAUSE DR. FORD TOLD THE COMMITTEE THOSE WERE THE ONLY PEOPLE THAT HAD IT. THAT IS NOT A FAIR PROCESS. AND WE SHOULD LOOK TO THE FACTS, NOT ANONYMOUS INNUENDO AND SLANDER. >>MR. CHAIRMAN. I ASKED FOR A POINT OF PERSONAL PRIVILEGE TO RESPOND. LET ME BE CLEAR, I DID NOT HIDE DOCTOR FORD’S ALLEGATIONS. I DID NOT LEAD HER STORY. SHE ASKED ME TO HOLD THE CONFIDENTIAL, AND I KEPT IT CONFIDENTIAL AS SHE ASKED. SHE APPARENTLY WAS STALKED BY THE PRESS AND WAS FORCED TO COME FORWARD, AND HER GREATEST FEARS WERE REALIZED. SHE HAS BEEN HARASSED, SHE HAS HAD DEATH THREATS, AND SHE HAS HAD TO FLEE HER HOME. IN ADDITION, THE INVESTIGATION THAT THE REPUBLICAN MAJORITY IS HERALDING IS REALLY NOTHING THAT I KNOW ABOUT OTHER THAN A PARTISAN PRACTICE. NORMALLY, ALL THE WITNESSES WOULD BE INTERVIEWED, HOWEVER, THAT HAS NOT HAPPENED. WHILE THE MAJORITY HAS REACHED OUT TO SEVERAL PEOPLE, THEY DID NOT NOTIFY ME OR MY STAFF THAT THEY WERE DOING THIS, AND SO TO ARGUE THAT WE WOULD NOT PARTICIPATE BUT NOT TELL US WHAT THEY WERE UP TO, IS SOMEWHAT DISINGENUOUS. I WAS GIVEN SOME INFORMATION BY A WOMAN WHO WAS VERY MUCH AFRAID , YOU ASKED THAT IT BE HELD CONFIDENTIAL, AND I HELD IT CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL SHE DECIDED THAT SHE WOULD COME FORWARD. >>MR. CHAIRMAN. WITH THE RANKING MEMBER ANSWER A QUESTION PLEASE? >>IF I CAN. >>I HAVE GREAT RESPECT FOR SENATOR FEINSTEIN. WE WORKED TOGETHER ON MANY TOPICS. AND I BELIEVE WHAT YOU JUST SAID. CAN YOU TELL US THAT YOUR STAFF DID NOT LEAK IT? >>I DON’T BELIEVE MY STAFF WOULD LEAK IT. I HAVE NOT ASKED THAT QUESTION DIRECTLY. >>DO YOU KNOW THAT? HOW IN THE WORLD DID THAT GET IN THE HANDS OF THE PRESS? >>THE ANSWER IS NO. THE STAFF DID NOT. >>HAVE YOU ASKED YOUR STAFF? >>I JUST DID. JENNIFER REMINDS ME, I HAVE ASKED HER BEFORE ABOUT IT. AND THAT IS TRUE. >>SOMEBODY LEAKED IT IF IT WAS NOT YOU. >>I AM TELLING YOU, I DID NOT. I WAS ASKED TO KEEP IT CONFIDENTIAL. AND I AM CRITICIZED FOR THAT. >>MR. CHAIRMAN. COULD I ASKED THE CHAIRMAN A QUESTION? DOES THE COMMITTEE HAVE A PROCESS IF THERE IS AN ALLEGATION AGAINST ANY NOMINEE TO ASSESS THAT ALLEGATION IN A CONFIDENTIAL FORUM RATHER THAN IN THE PUBLIC SINCE DR. FORD REQUESTED TO BE KEPT CONFIDENTIAL. IS THERE A PROCESS FOR CONSIDERING CONFIDENTIALITY? >>THE ANSWER IS YES. SENATOR TILLIS POINTED OUT THE DOCUMENT I PUT OUT TO SHOW ALL THE THINGS WE HAVE DONE ALONG THE LINES OF YOUR QUESTIONS. >>WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE IF ON JULY 30 THE RANKING MEMBER HAD RAISED THIS ALLEGATION WITH YOU? >>WE WOULD’VE DONE LIKE WE HAVE DONE WITH EVERY BACKGROUND — F.B.I. REPORT THE COMES FROM THE WHITE HOUSE WITH A NOMINEE. AND THEN SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, BECAUSE MAYBE THE FBI GOT DONE WITH THAT THREE MONTHS AGO, WE GO THROUGH THE FBI OR INFORMATION COMES TO US, THEN WE HAVE OUR INVESTIGATORS IN A BIPARTISAN WAY, BOTH REPUBLICAN AND DEMOCRAT, FOLLOW-UP ON WHATEVER THOSE QUESTIONS ARE THOSE PROBLEMS THAT HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT. >>SO BIPARTISAN INVESTIGATORS COULD’VE INVESTIGATED THIS TWO MONTHS AGO AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN HEARD IN A CONFIDENTIAL SETTING WITHOUT DOCTOR FORD’S NAME BEING DRAGGED THROUGH THE MUD. >>EXCEPT FOR ONE OR TWO CONVERSATIONS WE HAD WITH THE JUDGE THROUGH INVESTIGATIVE, DEMOCRATS DID NOT PARTICIPATE EXCEPT IN THOSE TWO. BUT IN THOSE THEY DID NOT ASK ANY QUESTIONS. >>THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. >>MR. CHAIRMAN. MAY I RESPOND? IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT HER STORY WAS LEAKED BEFORE THE LETTER BECAME PUBLIC. AND SHE TESTIFIED THAT SHE HAD SPOKEN TO HER FRIENDS ABOUT IT, AND IT IS MOST LIKELY THAT THAT IS HOW THE STORY LEADS AND THAT SHE HAD BEEN ASKED BY PRESS. BUT IT DID NOT LEAK FROM US. I ASSURE YOU OF THAT. >>MR. CHAIRMAN, I’M A LITTLE CONFUSED. I ONLY THE MEMBER OF THE HOUSE AND SENATOR FEINSTEIN AND HER LAWYERS HAD THE LETTER. SO HER FRIEND SHE MIGHT’VE TALK TO ABOUT IT COULD NOT LEAK THE LETTER IF THEY JUST HAD A VERBAL CONVERSATION UNLESS SHE GAVE THEM A COPY OF THE LETTER. >>SENATOR, I DON’T THINK THE LETTER WAS EVER LEAPT. >>HOW DID THE PRESS KNOW TO CONTACT HER ABOUT HER COMPLAINT? >>APPARENTLY SHE TESTIFIED HERE THIS MORNING THAT SHE HAD TALKED TO FRIENDS ABOUT IT. AND THE PRESS HAD TALKED TO HER.>>SINCE THERE WAS REFERENCE TO THE PROBLEMS, THE VILLAGE OF MINUTE PROBLEMS — THE LEGITIMATE PROBLEMS AND CHANGE OF LIFESTYLE THAT DR. FORD HAD. IF YOU WANT SOME TIME TO SAY THE IMPACT ON YOUR FAMILY, I WOULD BE GLAD TO HEAR YOU. IF YOU DON’T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT, THAT’S OKAY. >>I TALKED ABOUT THAT. >>SENATOR HARRIS. >>HAVE YOU TAKEN A PROFESSIONALLY ADMINISTERED POLYGRAPH TEST? AS IT RELATES TO THIS ISSUE? >>NO. I WILL DO WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE WANTS. OF COURSE, THOSE ARE NOT ADMISSIBLE IN FEDERAL COURT. BUT I WILL DO WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE WANTS. THEY’RE NOT A MENOCINO — ADMISSIBLE IN FEDERAL COURT BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT RELIABLE. BECAUSE YOU HAVE NOT TAKEN ONE. ALL THREE OF THE WOMEN WHO’VE MADE SWORN ALLEGATIONS AGAINST YOU HAVE CALLED FOR AN INDEPENDENT F.B.I. INVESTIGATION INTO THE CLAIMS. YOU BEEN ASKED DURING THE COURSE OF THIS HEARING BY FOUR DIFFERENT MEMBERS BY MY COUNT, AT LEAST EIGHT TIMES TODAY, AND ALSO EARLIER THIS WEEK ON NATIONAL TELEVISION WHETHER YOU WOULD CALL FOR THE WHITE HOUSE TO AUTHORIZE AN F.B.I. INVESTIGATION. EACH TIME YOU HAVE DECLINED TO DO SO. YOU KNOW, I KNOW YOU DO, THAT THE FBI IS AN AGENCY OF MEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE SWORN AND TRAINED LAW ENFORCEMENT. IN THE COURSE OF CONDUCTING BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS ON NOMINEES FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES AND OTHERS, THEY ARE CHARGED WITH CONDUCTING THOSE BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS BECAUSE THEY ARE SWORN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND THEY HAVE THE EXPERTISE AND THE ABILITY AND HISTORY OF DOING THAT. SO I’M GOING TO ASK YOU ONE LAST TIME. ARE YOU WILLING TO ASK THE WHITE HOUSE TO AUTHORIZE THE FBI TO INVESTIGATE THE CLAIMS THAT IT BEEN MADE AGAINST YOU? >>I WILL DO WHATEVER THE COMMITTEE WANTS. >>I HAVE HEARD YOU SAY THAT. BUT I HAVE NOT HEARD YOU ANSWER VERY SPECIFICALLY. ARE YOU WILLING TO ASK THE WHITE HOUSE TO CONDUCT AN INVESTIGATION BY THE FBI TO GET TO WHATEVER YOU BELIEVE IS THE BOTTOM OF THE ALLEGATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN LEVIED AGAINST YOU? >>THE FBI WOULD GATHER WITNESS STATEMENTS. >>SIR. I DON’T WANT TO DEBATE WITH YOU HOW THEY DO THEIR BUSINESS. I’M JUST ASKING, ARE YOU WILLING TO ASK THE WHITE HOUSE TO CONDUCT SUCH AN INVESTIGATION BECAUSE, AS YOU ARE AWARE, THE FBI DID CONDUCT A BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION INTO YOU BEFORE WE WERE AWARE OF THESE MOST RECENT ALLEGATIONS. SO ARE YOU WILLING TO ASK THE WHITE HOUSE TO DO THAT? SAY YES OR NO AND WE CAN MOVE ON. >>I HAVE HAD SIX BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS OVER 26 YEARS. >>AS IT RELATES TO THE RECENT ALLEGATIONS? >>THE WITNESS TESTIMONY IS BEFORE YOU. NO WITNESS WHO WAS THERE SUPPORTS THAT I WAS THERE >>I AM GOING TO TAKE THAT IS A NO-NO AND WE CAN MOVE ON. YOU HAVE SAID IN YOUR OPENING STATEMENT, YOU CHARACTERIZED THESE ALLEGATIONS AS A CONSPIRACY DIRECTED AGAINST YOU. I WILL POINT OUT TO YOU THAT NEIL GORSUCH WAS NOMINATED BY THIS PRESIDENT. HE WAS CONSIDERED BY THIS BODY JUST LAST YEAR. I DID A ROUGH ANALYSIS OF SIMILARITIES. HE BOTH ATTENDED GEORGETOWN PREP. YOU BOTH ATTEND A VERY PRESTIGIOUS LAW SCHOOLS. YOU BOTH CLERKED FOR JUSTICE KENNEDY. YOU ARE BOTH CIRCUS JUDGES — CIRCUIT JUDGES AND NOMINATED TO THE SUPREME COURT. YOU ARE BOTH QUESTIONED ABOUT YOUR RECORD. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS THAT YOU HAVE BEEN ACCUSED OF SEXUAL ASSAULT. HOW DO YOU RECONCILE YOUR STATEMENT ABOUT A CONSPIRACY AGAINST YOU WITH THE TREATMENT OF SOMEONE WHO WAS BEFORE THIS BODY NOT VERY LONG AGO? >>I EXPLAINED THAT IN MY OPENING STATEMENT SENATOR. LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE HERE. THE CALENDARS. LOOK AT THE WITNESS STATEMENTS. WILL LOOK AT MS KEYSER’S STATEMENT. >>OKAY. AND THEN, DO YOU AGREE THAT IT IS POSSIBLE FOR MEN TO BOTH BE FRIENDS WITH SOME WOMEN AND TREAT OTHER WOMEN BADLY? >>OF COURSE. BUT THE POINTS I HAVE BEEN EMPHASIZING, IF YOU GO BACK TO AGE 14 FOR ME, YOU WILL FIND PEOPLE, NOT JUST PEOPLE, LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO I HAVE BEEN FRIENDS WITH, SOME OF WHOM ARE IN THIS ROOM TODAY STARTING AT AGE 15, WOMEN, WHO HAVE TALKED ABOUT MY FRIENDSHIPS WITH THEM THROUGH MY WHOLE LIFE. IT IS A CONSISTENT PATTERN ALL THE WAY THROUGH. 65 WOMEN WHO KNEW ME MORE THAN 35 YEARS AGO SIGNED A LETTER TO SUPPORT ME AFTER THE ALLEGATION WAS MADE BECAUSE THEY KNOW ME, AND THEY WERE WITH ME. AND WE GREW UP TOGETHER. WE TALKED ON THE PHONE TOGETHER AND WENT TO EVENTS TOGETHER. THAT IS WHO I AM. WHAT THEY HAVE SAID, WHAT THE PEOPLE WHO WORKED WITH ME IN THE BUSH WHITE HOUSE, THE WOMEN THERE, LOOK AT WHAT SARAH DAY SAID. LOOK AT THE — WHAT THE LAW CLERKS — I HAVE SENT MORE WOMEN LAW CLERKS TO THE SUPREME COURT THAN ANY OTHER FEDERAL JUDGE IN THE COUNTRY. >>I ONLY HAVE A FEW SECONDS LAST — LEFT. DID YOU WATCH DOCTOR FORD’S TESTIMONY? >>I DID NOT. I PLAN TWO. >>THINKING. >>I PLAN TO BUT I DID NOT. I WAS PREPARING MINE. >>OUR LAST FIVE MINUTES WILL BE SENATOR FLAKE ONE MINUTE AND SENATOR KENNEDY FOUR MINUTES. >>THINKING MR. CHAIRMAN. WHEN DR. FORD CAME FORWARD WITH HER ACCOUNT, I IMMEDIATELY SAID THAT SHE SHOULD BE HEARD AND ASKED THE CHAIRMAN TO DELAY THE VOTE THAT WE HAD SCHEDULED. THE CHAIRMAN DAY. AND I APPRECIATE THAT. SHE CAME WITH GREAT DIFFICULTY FOR HER AND OFFERED COMPELLING TESTIMONY. YOU HAVE COME AND DONE THE SAME. I AM SORRY FOR WHAT IS HAPPENED TO YOU AND YOUR FAMILY AS I AM SORRY FOR WHAT IS HAPPENED TO HERS. THIS IS NOT A GOOD PROCESS, BUT IT IS ALL WE’VE GOT. AND I WOULD JUST URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO RECOGNIZE THAT IN THE END WE ARE 21 VERY IMPERFECT SENATORS TRYING TO DO OUR BEST TO PROVIDE ADVICE AND CONSENT. AND IN THE END, THERE’S LIKELY TO BE AS MUCH DOUBT AS CERTAINTY GOING OUT OF THIS ROOM TODAY. AND AS WE MAKE DECISIONS GOING FORWARD, I HOPE THAT PEOPLE WILL RECOGNIZE THAT AND IN THE RHETORIC THAT WE USE AND THE LANGUAGE THAT WE USE GOING FORWARD, THAT WE WILL RECOGNIZE THAT, THAT THERE IS DOUBT. WE WILL NEVER MOVE BEYOND THAT. AND JUST HAVE A LITTLE HUMILITY ON THAT FRONT. THANK YOU. >>SENATOR KENNEDY. >>I’M SORRY JUDGE FOR YOU WHAT YOU AND YOUR FAMILY HAVE BEEN THROUGH. AND I AM SORRY FOR WHAT DR. FORD AND HER FAMILY HAVE BEEN THROUGH. IT COULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED. DO YOU BELIEVE IN GOD? >>I DO. >>I AM GOING TO GIVE YOU A LAST OPPORTUNITY RIGHT HERE IN FRONT OF GOD AND COUNTRY, I WANT YOU TO LOOK ME IN THE EYE, ARE DR. FORD ALLEGATIONS TRUE? >>THEY’RE NOT ACCURATE AS TO ME. I’VE NOT QUESTIONED THAT SHE MIGHT’VE BEEN SEXUALLY ASSAULTED AT SOME POINT IN HER LIFE BY SOMEONE SOMEPLACE, BUT ASKED TO ME, I HAVE NEVER DONE THIS. NEVER. DONE THIS TO HER OR TO ANYONE ELSE. AND I HAVE TALKED TO YOU ABOUT WHAT I WAS DOING THE SUMMER OF 1982. THAT I AM TELLING YOU, I HAVE NEVER DONE THIS TO ANYONE, INCLUDING HER. >>ARE THE ALLEGATIONS BY MS. RAMIREZ ABOUT YOU TRUE? >>THOSE ARE NOT. SHE — NONE OF THE WITNESSES IN THE ROOM SUPPORT THAT. IF THAT HAD HAPPENED, THAT WOULD BEEN THE TALK OF CAMPUS IN OUR FRESHMAN DORM. THE NEW YORK TIMES REPORTED THAT AS RECENTLY AS LAST WEEK SHE WAS CALLING OTHER CLASSMATES SEEKING TO — I’M NOT GOING TO CHARACTERIZE IT, BUT CALLING CLASSMATES LAST WEEK IT SEEMS VERY — I WILL JUST STOP THERE. BUT IT IS NOT TRUE. >>ARE JULIE SWETNICK ALLEGATIONS MADE BY MICHAEL AVENATTI ABOUT YOU TRUE? >>THOSE ARE NOT TRUE. I NEVER MET HER. I DON’T KNOW WHO SHE IS. THERE IS A LETTER RELEASED WITHIN TWO HOURS OF THAT BREAKING YESTERDAY FROM 60 PEOPLE WHO KNEW ME IN HIGH SCHOOL. MEN AND WOMEN WHO SAID IT WAS THEIR WORDS — IN THEIR WORDS, NONSENSE. TOTALLY RIDICULOUS. >>NONE OF THESE ALLEGATIONS ARE TRUE? >>CORRECT. >>NO DOUBT IN YOUR MIND? >>ZERO. I AM 100% CERTAIN. >>NOT EVEN A SCINTILLA? >>100% CERTAIN SENATOR. >>DO YOU SWEAR TO GOD? >>I SWEAR TO GOD. >>JUDGE KAVANAUGH THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HEARING ADJOURNED. >>>

100 thoughts on “LIVE: Professor Christine Blasey Ford & Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh testify (Day 1)

  • Larry Guess Post author

    Democrats playing political games. There's not a person that's been even casually following these proceedings that doesn't know this is just a delaying tactic. If they sincerely wanted the FBI to investigate this matter they would have asked them to when they first received this information almost two months ago. It could have been investigated while honoring Ford's request for privacy. That would have avoided this disgraceful circus and prevented much of the political grandstanding.
    It would also have gone a long way toward restoring the dignity and credibility of the senate.

  • Larry Guess Post author

    OUCH! Crapo burns Feinstein BAD!!!
    Helps Ford retain a lawyer two weeks before a private session with Kavanaugh. Does not bring up Ford's allegation in her session with Kavanaugh. How is Feinstein going to slink out of this one?

  • Nichole Listick Post author

    STOP saying she is lying. You were all not there. It's nh ot the Democrats fault. It's not the Republicans.

  • Bull Durham Post author

    This should be added to the history books as an example of treason by the Democrats. They paid lawyers to coach someone to block a supreme court appointee . They all believe her without question because they want to block it until after the next election. FBI investigation could take years and they know it.

  • Larry Guess Post author

    Here's what is clear Sen. Spartacus, when the democrats received this information about Dr. Ford they shouldn't have waited 45 days before revealing it to the republicans on the committee. When Feinstein ensured Ford has retained a lawyer she should have brought Ford's allegation up when she questioned Kavanaugh in a private session twenty days later. When Ford requested confidentiality the democrats should have honored that request and launched a private investigation not turn this into a political circus and start demanding an investigation at the last minute.

  • Larry Guess Post author

    Sen. Harris knows damn well if they sincerely wanted an FBI investigation, they would have requested a confidential one when they first became aware of this allegation seven weeks ago rather than keeping it hidden and then demanded one at the last minute. If they wanted the truth they would have asked Kavanaugh about it when they talked with him in private sessions. There would have been no need to mention Ford's name. Feinstein certainly would have brought it up in the private session she had with Kavanaugh twenty days after she assisted Ford in retaining a lawyer.
    I will answer your question Sen. Harris. I would have been willing to ask the FBI to do an investigation if you had made that request when you first learned of this matter. Why didn't you? Why did you wait until the hearing was concluding 45 days later–after it had already been delayed twice because of the actions of democrats?
    Americans aren't near as dumb as you seem to believe.

  • Brian Smith Post author

    She sounds like she is 12. Is that how they coached her to speak. If her accusation is fake she needs to be prosecuted.

  • Happy Post author

    Lmao it’s funny to see the pettiness of the senators 😂😂

  • Happy Post author

    Man this lady behind Feinstein w the heartburn is getting annoying; she shouldn’t be allowed to be seen on the camera .. she moves too damn much 😒

  • sexylove60405 Post author

    Is it just me or does anyone else have boiling blood listening to these Democrats? If they really cared they wouldn't have sat on that letter for almost a month and not do anything until last second. They kept saying that she wrote the letter before Brett was nominated.. but even that is debunked. Brett was nominated on July 9th and what's her face's letter was dated July 30th and she cant even remember if that was the date she wrote it. "I cant remember" she says. I call b.s. on this whole thing. She's got a compelling story.. but without ANY evidence, it's just that. INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY.

    She is not brave nor courageous for coming out almost 40 years later. Shit, I was sexually molested at 13 by a family friend and he threatened to kill my whole family if I told anyone. As soon as he got in the shower, after the incident, i ran to my neighbors, whom i helped move in less than a week prior. I was wheeping when they opened the door and they let me inside. I was uncomfortable telling them what happened since they were complete strangers, but I needed help. They suggested I go back home, pretend I didnt say anything, grab the phone to call my sister (whom lived in the same appartment) and lock myself in the bathroom once he got out of the shower. When I walked out of their house, the guy who sexually assaulted me was putting on his shoes at the door way of the front door. He looked at me with this evil look in his eyes and he asked me if I told them. I told him no as I quickly moved past him at the doorway. I grabbed the house phone and ran into the bathroom and almost had difficulty locking the bathroom door bc I was trying to be quick. I am 30 almost 31 and can remember 98% of what happened. We went to court 3 years later, 1st day of my 1st job, and he had the same look in his eyes when I was giving my testimony. He was a level 3 sex offender and had not registered in the city we were living. There was 1 thing I had blacked out of memory and the courts released him and took him off the sex offender data base. I had 4 witnesses, all of whom corroborated my testimony. And they still released him. I remember everything that happened the night before and the night I was sexually assaulted. I know everyone is different, but if it truly traumatized her, she would be able to remember more than what she does. I am actually afraid the guy who assaulted me will come back to find me. But that is still not stopping me from having a life and being happy. I will NOT rent space to him for free in my head. I dont let that fear take hold of me. With God on my side I can get through anything.

  • drakke125 Post author

    if she's a clinical psychologist, wouldn't she have heard dozens of patients or nonpatients' rape stories?

  • drakke125 Post author

    across all of Ford's testimonies and statements almost every second was suspicious. The very first statement reeks of acting. The time peeriod around 1:05:00 to 1:10:00 when she talked about changing words/statements shows something is strange. For someone who was rattling in her voice about Kavanaugh assaulting her, she repeated that same line in the 'changes' to be made like it was a matter of fact and without any sliver of nervousness or hint that she was traumatized. She keeps bouncing back and forth b/w her nervous/traumatized persona and her normal/caffeine happy persona.

  • Happy Post author

    Wow chairman grassley is an asshole !

  • Rodrigo B Post author

    5:00:35 Kevin, a man honest enough to leave team games aside and judge with his own mind and heart, I've become your fan.

  • Duke Makedo Post author

    That Blumenthal rubs me the wrong way. It's like he's doing his best to present himself in a manner calculated for appearance and approval rather than being authentic. It's a gray-haired Eddie Haskell.

  • Lauren S Post author

    She would be more believable if she indicated that her friends left her. Also, if you are speaking as if it had happened…literally…you would not have to LOOK AT PAPER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Its…literally there…I know.

  • Lauren S Post author

    Mine was 17 years….u r a liar

  • jackie star Post author

    fuck you feinstein, old bag of bones.

  • Lauren S Post author

    I am sorry world…this is awful and disgusting…. and,, Mr. Durbin is wrong…u do remember

  • Lauren S Post author

    She has dry mouth ….either she is smoking pot or she is LYING

  • sdlbsch Post author

    Her so emotional opening comments just make me want to throw up! I'm sure she was traumatized by someone, but she has NO evidence against Judge Kavanaugh. I want to know how much socialist-progressive monies are backing her "story".

  • AshAllDay Post author

    This poor man and his family are being dragged through hell with this political hit job. It's clear Kavanaugh is pissed, and you can tell he's fed up with all this bullshit.

  • Anon Ymous Post author

    I don't believe either one of them. Good luck with that.

  • jackie star Post author

    pathetic minnie mouse .

  • jackie star Post author

    can someone explain to me , why this woman is afraid of planes but she has gone to Hawaii, costa rica?

  • Pat Hacker Post author

    She alleges a crime, but she doesn't have to provide proof? That's not American justice. Have we forgotten the McMartin sham trials and how lives were ruined and the American public was stirred up into a frenzy about empty allegations?

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/what-fueled-the-child-sex-abuse-scandal-that-never-was

    https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/10/science/the-witch-hunt-narrative-are-we-dismissing-real-victims.html

  • jackie star Post author

    this woman is a total basket case

  • D.A. Seel Post author

    One of the philosophies of the Left is Postmodernism. At the center of Postmodernism is Deconstruction theory, which is the belief that reality is subjective, therefore it can be deconstructed, and reality reconstructed to be anything they want it to be. Based on this belief, anyone, especially a Psychologist who uses Deconstruction in her science (induction), can manufacture an alternate reality, and actually believe it happened. With no objective evidence, the only thing that matters now is proving a motive for lying. Isn't she a Left Activist?

  • SDFcommander Post author

    As another Black Republican who left the Democrat plantation long ago, I have extreme respect for Mr. Kavanagh especially as a proud father of an amazing young daughter of my own. He is EXACTLY the kind judge we need on the Supreme Court to help temper the sheer LUNACY of the Democrats and the Left. I could also clearly see the hand of God woven in this man's life to protect him for such a day as this. The only thing I regret is that I can't leave the Democrat Party again! I have a VILE disgust for the Democrats and the Left and their followers for putting this good man and his family through this GARBAGE! The big takeaway from all this is that this shines the spotlight brightly on how DISGUSTING, how EVIL, how DEGENERATE, how UNFIT the Democrat Party is for ANY area of leadership for this country. If people still support the Democrat Party and the Left after this circus they are either, deaf, blind or have ZERO interest in the facts. All of this has set us back as a country and not forward. Our enemies abroad look and this and LAUGH at us! #Blacks4Trump #DeathofaNation #WalkAway

  • The Hype Wonder Esq. Post author

    Ford's bravery is commendable. Even so many years later. At any rate maybe lifetime appointment to the highest court should be reserved for people who respect women. For those unaware, women are the other half of all of the people. I'm sure you've seen them on the internet. They're the ones with the life-giving abilities and usually less violently evil.

  • Happy Post author

    Wow Kavanaugh can’t even answer questions straight and keeps blaming the committee as to why he doesn’t ask the fbi to investigate. It’s weird and it appears that he has something to hide. And he is excusing himself from Mark’s book cause he probably knows it shows a different side of Kavanaugh.

    AND NOW HES BLAMING THE EDITING YEARBOOK CLUB FOR HIS YEARBOOK STATEMENT. This is insane. IF there was an FBI investigation, it would be confirmed whether or not the editing team of the yearbook could back up what he is saying BUT for some reason, he doesn’t want the fbi in it. Kavanaugh is not stupid, he knows wtf he is doing. He’s a fucking Judge and like he said, “I was first in my class”….wow.

    Wow Kavanaugh…… Woooow!!!! I can’t believe anyone who would think that Kavanaugh is really not guilty after watching this ?!!?!?!?!

    Y’all are phony asf !

  • Happy Post author

    If he was really innocent, he would not have a problem with the fbi investigating and would stop giving excuses as to why they aren’t being invited to. If he really cared about his family and his name, he would do everything to save his name and protect his family. He has something to hide.

    I understand that some of the senators believe it’s a democratic smear because of the timing… but regardless of that opinion, the fbi needs to investigate. They talk about JUSTICE?!? Justice would be a NON BI PARTISAN INVESTIGATION.

  • patti jesinoski Post author

    Woman who called in and called Kavanaugh a "privileged " man.
    Don't forget she is a "privileged " woman that went to a private girls school, claims she went to the "country club" daily to swim, drank underage, had outrageous pages in her yearbook too.

  • patti jesinoski Post author

    Why did it take 45 days for Dianne Feinstein to come forward or leak this supposed allegation? They had to get the Play Written. They had to have each Act and timing set for the smear campaign. They had to time out and extend as long as possible for their sick, illogical, childish, psychotic, drama to play out in front of the world.

  • IC C Post author

    There are several documented instances of Kavanaugh having lied under oath before (and in one instance, to Senators). He has absolutely no credibility. If he has made false statements under oath in the interest of his career before, there is absolutely no reason for any logical person to think that he would not do the same thing now, especially since the stakes are even higher.

    Essentially his entire testimony boils down to–everybody is lying, nobody else saw anything, and also I'm a choirboy who is being smeared by the Democrats. But his personal history (i.e his behavior in HS, and while at Yale does not bear this out. I do not believe that someone who was a member of the Keg City club, never got blackout drunk, I also do not believe that someone who wrote in his yearbook that he was a member of the "Renate Alumnus" (i.e. where he and his buddies insinuated that a young woman was the town bicycle), has always treated women with respect.

    Kavanuagh is trying to ride the excuse train into the Supreme Court. If he is actually 100% innocent of Blaisey-Ford's allegations (as the well as those of the 3 other women who have come forward since) as he claims and this is a smear campaign, then he should have absolutely no problem with an FBI investigation being conducted. Or with a delay to ensure that justice is being done. The most important thing is that we are making sure that we are putting someone of the appropriate character and fitness on the highest court in the land. Even if we ignore what is going on in this case, Kavanaugh has already proven that he does not meet this standard.

  • Happy Post author

    Some of the republican senators don’t even care about the seriousness of these allegations. They’re more concerned about Feinstein not bringing it up as soon as she heard of it. So it must mean the democrats are making all of this up but DAMN ! DR BLASEY FORD HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS! Waaaay before his nomination! It’s not her fault that some members of the committee held onto to this information. THAT DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THESE ALLEGATIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN MORE SERIOUSLY.

    Kavanaugh keeps saying he wanted a hearing the next day, so why not the FBI TO INVESTIGATE?! An investigation that would be FAIR. FAIR!

    F A I R.

  • patti jesinoski Post author

    Sen Blumenthal…your credibility is in question. You are a paid politicuan. The day you you are in cuffs will be glorious!

    There has been millions paid out to boycotters as evidenced by video film.

  • Lisa Donnell Post author

    Why in the world is Alyssa Milano present??
    Her presence should not be allowed, Weinstein so polar opposite of this accusation.
    But, that's hollywood…
    I have to wonder what her comment will be when Ford's accusation is found to be mistaken identity.
    I fear that this case will not only stop women from bringing forth more unjust or misplaced accusations, my greater fear is that so many women who are abused and have real factual information will fear the circus show and or will feel they won't be believed and are silent.
    This woman simply makes a statement, accusing someone of a very serious crime, with no real proof, her voice teetering on a regulated stream of instability, no tears(the most emphatic reaction any human being has when suffering or in pain, recollection of, etc.) Or anger( another human reaction to pain caused).

  • patti jesinoski Post author

    It is dispicable what The woman in Maxine Waters office did to release personal phone numbers and home addresses of Sen Lee, Sen Graham and Sen ________.
    Maxine Waters holds responsibility for her office. She needs to be brought up on ethics charges immediately.

  • patti jesinoski Post author

    Isn't it true that Dr Ford's father work for the CIA? Possibly still working for the CIA? Isn't it true that Thomas Blasey, brother of dr. Ford, also worked with Jill strozk ? Coincidences? Isn't it true that dr. Ford has 2 go fund me acvounts to the tune of over $400,000 now? Isn't it true that the lawyers for dr. Ford have stated that they are both working pro bono? Isn't it true that the lawyer Senator Feinstein suggested is also a friend of Hillary? Isn't Senator Feinstein also a friend of Hillary? Isn't it true that Brett Kavanaugh had to hire his own lawyer? That would be at his own expense?

  • Lisa Donnell Post author

    Her hair hanging in her face, projecting shame, victimization, etc.
    Her voice.
    Teenager like quality. Trying very much to come off as meek, innocent but believable.
    I was waiting for the tears, the outpouring passion and determination of her statement she was making.
    Nothing.
    She wanted this to remain confidential. Ok, I get that. But when you say confidential, back it.
    You don't enter a room full of people, with the one person who knows your situation, then go to another, in confidence, telling your tale.
    Then write ANOTHER, stating your story, mail it to your government rep., then, oh, I want this kept confidential…

  • Lisa Donnell Post author

    She has no idea how much damage she has caused. Personal gain, name in the news, her book she will no doubt write, etc.
    She has children.
    They are going to pay the price of her behavior.
    The Kavanaugh family, the children, will be saying prayers for them and for you. In spite of your acts, they will have a great life and future. That is my hope.

  • patti jesinoski Post author

    Don't believe you Feinstein. You have no integrity.

  • moofushu Post author

    Chuck Grassley and Orrin Hatch where both old when they were on the Anita Hill Committee hearing. Its clear their ideas and mentality is rooted in the past. This congress needs a lot of new blood fast to save the country form stale old ideas.

  • Rami Altaki Post author

    Blasey … Lieeeeeeerrrrrr

  • Fitzgerald Post author

    Okay, FBI…. Ms Mitchell gave you a perfect radius of the vicinity of where the reported party took place. With only five named attendees at the party, it should take only a few days to research which of those five had homes in that radius. From there, just see if any of the homes match Ms Ford’s description. If any do, then she is more credible. If not, then we know she is making all this up. However, something tells me her recollection will then be that someone had broken into someone else’s house and held the party.

  • Mike pancetta Post author

    lot of girl power in this hearing. you go girl

  • Gigi M Post author

    Because the display of this lunatic disgusting liar, many women who have been really assaulted will be doubted. So sad and such a disservice to soooo many women and men. Shame on DEMOCRATS.
    They used a crazy woman as a kamikaze for their political agenda. Not only she does not remember anything from the past, but she does not remember when she took a polygraph test although so important for her protection, how it was performed, who pays for her lawyers etc etc.but she for sure remembers Kavanaugh on top of her. LOL

  • Gigi M Post author

    I used to live in Illinois. The disgusting demonrats determined me to move to Texas.

  • Gigi M Post author

    1) No one goes to practice diving in pool at the club and then leaves wearing the wet swimsuit. Anyone after a practice, takes a shower and changes into regular street clothing, not into another dry swimsuit.
    What would be the purpose of that going to a party ?

  • mjs1231 Post author

    Cspan created by the american people. Not some social corporate cliche

  • TheInstigator Post author

    Ford seems like she is lying.

  • Dad Of8kids Post author

    It reminds me of the movie Braveheart…."She isn't right…in the head"

  • Mr. Murphy89 Post author

    Why do you dummies still believing in political parties?🤔

  • dolly earl Post author

    she's a bold faced Liar!!omg you don't fool me poor little bitch

  • SHARON I AM Post author

    Ms. Ford's polygraph test is UNLAWFUL. Ms Ford is on anxiety disorder medication which alter the polygraphers results. If someone has a anxiety disorder and is NOT on medication they will fail the test. The anxiety disorder will show on the test. 2. If a person is on anxiety disorder medication while taking the test they will PASS the polygraphers test results. The test will alter their heart rate and blood pressure them RELAXING so they will PASS the polygraphers test. It is against the United States Army Criminal investigation command EFFECTIVE 21 February. If a person with anxiety disorder is allowed to take a polygraphers in America by law it is MANDATORY that the person attending physician give a written authorization as to what medications and when they are prescribed. The polygraphers are illlegal without the treating physician written authorization. Examinee Suitability United States Army Criminal investigation command EFFECTIVE 21 February. Section 8:12 Polgraphb Examinee 3.41 3.4.2. To give ANY persons a polgrapg on anxiety medications is UNCONSTITUNAL NOT LEAGAL. THEREFORE, Congress must NOT accept the polgraph test results. Her attorney should be brought up on fraud charges and he should be disbarred and the photographer should also be brought up on fraud charges and his license taken away indefinite. 😇

  • Russell Urie Post author

    Crimes of a sexual nature, even when having occurred in the recent past, are difficult to collect evidence for, and are challenging to prosecute. To my understanding, for every 1000 rapes, only 11 cases will be referred to a prosecutor. Now, I know she isn't alleging a rape, but if rape is that hard to even attempt to prosecute, how much harder is it to produce substantial evidence of assault. Let alone one which occurred many years ago.

    As to her emotions, everyone responds differently to trauma and intense media scrutiny. Criticizing her emotions or her memory from decades ago are no means of measuring the truthfulness of her claims.

    https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system

  • S955US84 Post author

    The hair falling over her face, the squeaky little girl voice, the shifty eyes and those 1980s glasses – yikes what a mess – and what is the consequence of her unsubstantiated allegations?
    The ACCUSER must be held to the same scrutiny as the man she is accusing.

  • Blue Claws Post author

    Only 40 minutes in and already the proceedings have devolved into throwing shade at political parties using this allegation as an excuse for the abuse. More comment to come as I watch and listen…

    At the first break and no opinion formed so far that is based on any facts. Dr. Ford could be telling the truth, lying, or be remembering incorrectly. It seems to be a hearsay case so far. The only thing I question so far is her statement that she is 100% sure her assailant was judge Kavanaugh. I understand that trauma details can be extreme in that they are either vividly clear or pushed aside and forgotten. My question so far is after being pushed from behind and assaulted so quickly, it seems, how she could be that sure. On the other hand, the abscence of an FBI investigation and the use of a prosecutor seems suspect. Continuing to watch and listen.

    At middle intermission break. As for the hearing, it seems to be the same as it began. I would be interested if Dr. Ford's therapist had notes from 2012 or what the time was when Dr. Ford gave Kavanaugh's name. If that name is written down from that session and passes scrutiny regarding its authenticity, that would be compelling evidence against judge Kavanaugh. Dr. Ford did mention though, her therapist probably didn't record those details, but focused on how it affected her. So no new facts yet, but Dr. Ford seemed genuine. However we are all innocent unless proven guilty, and there has been no proof presented yet nor supportive testimony of fact or perspective. It will be interesting to see and hear judge Kavanaugh speak to the Senate. I have heard much of his previous Senate sessions and he seemed to conduct himself quite well and with intelligence.

    Finishing up judge Kavanaugh's opening statement. So far he has cited examples and external vouches of character, he has brought to light the irregular and extraneous vetting and investigating he has already undergone, and cited examples of work and service with emphasis on how it characterises him. Will continue to watch, but thus far the chances of judge Kavanaugh being guilty of this allegation seems remote.

  • Spread Love...Life is short. Post author

    Is she wearing a wedding band??

  • Tsumaranai30 Post author

    I am amazed that so many people might speak ill of a person who is asking for nothing more than for her experience to be considered when deciding on whether or not to confirm a person to one of the highest positions in our judiciary system. Have we become so indifferent to the authority and trust that is inherent in those positions? Kavanaugh conducted himself very poorly and though many might defend him because of what he is "going through," as a supreme court justice, one must be capable of coping with such stress so that sound and unbiased decisions can be made. Regardless of how long ago this incident occurred, the man who is being interviewed has shown himself to be incapable of maintaining his composure when under pressure. I do not wish such an individual to be given authority over our constitutional rights.

  • Swollen1 Post author

    1:04:00 I do NOT support the harassment of Ford. BUT having said that, if you try to singlehandedly thwart a government process with unverifiable claims about an incident almost 4 decades ago then you damn well should be prepared for backlash.

  • Acm Hunter Post author

    Am I the only one who came here to try to get a better sense of the evidence for or against Mr. kavanaugh and not to flame the comments.

  • NemoM22 Locust Post author

    This is just an observation but I see that Republicans are way more active in the comments then democrats right now

  • mama bear Post author

    Ok so…if Ford only had a GED and or no job then she wouldn't be credible? Intersting. So in order for a sex assault victim to be credible she needs to be highly educated and high income. If not fuck you you are a liar. Wait…so it doesn't matter if she is highly educated and high income? She is a liar anyway? ( that my first comment. As an obnoxious female American I'm sure there will be more. Paused to comment at 35 09

  • mama bear Post author

    I'm getting a lawyer this week. Because I did come forward. I was humiliated and berated and still in danger and still being abused at all levels by the ex and the court system. I have been assaulted by a female judge and all the people in charge have been puppets to an abuser and reinforce his behavior for over 20 years. The trauma me and my children have gone through is ireppreable harm. And I came forward without money or a lawyer because I have no ability to pay for a lawyer. But he did. Good ole family law where you can get away with anything because you have money. So women and children are being exploited and abused legally. The abuse never ended it just changed theater. So I wonder will a lawyer …constitutional and more step up for me and my kids? Other women? Or is it just about money? Freedom and pursuit of happiness liberty! Has a price tag. This country…this entire globe is suffocating the life blood force….women and children…morality…you all killed it! You sordid people in charge! You! The judges and law makers! You have broke the law ….in all spirit and written! The laws you made! The men who commit these sordid crimes and the women who protect them! How much longer? How much longer do you have to continue in this murder of the innocence? Of the weak among you? You have all fallen from Grace. And blood is on your hands. All the judges and the ones who are in charge I have no pity for you. When the mob calls for your head! I will be silent. I will condone it in my silence. I will close my windows and doors and all your cries will fall deaf upon my ears. But I pray the lord will be swift to relieve your pain and may god help your souls. The only mercy I can pray for.

  • ShWeJaPa Post author

    49:14, I am here today not because I want to be.

  • Kenneth Hyden Post author

    liar

  • dodge10P1N Post author

    Wtf about the guy in the background at the beginning? Hes got to know hes right in the line of a camera. Soooo distracting.

  • Edward Brady Post author

    Vanita Gupta is the background. One of the worst all time employees of the DOJ. Hopefully she will never be near the levers of power again. Radical. Evil.

  • Andrew Scott Post author

    Enjoy jail crazy haired cat lady! Fix your freakin hair!

    #Nutjob

  • Mark Dunn Post author

    Happen to catch McLean the friend she coached, walk in with her at 18:03? Handler? What exactly happened to Ford that they are so worried about protecting?

  • Eduardo Bueno Post author

    Blasey should go to jail along with the Democrats involved in this sham and smear campaign. Innocent until proven guilty and the media swam in crap against this principle along with a Feinstein the Wicked Witch of the Left.

  • Rose Colombo Post author

    Coincidence? Christine Blasey's Best Friend, lawyer and former FBI agent allegedly wrote the letter sent to congress stating it was Ford's "civic duty" to testify – and Ford stating under oath that it is her "civil duty" to testify against Judge Brett Kavanaugh. You decide – www.rose4justice.com

  • Lita Gutierrez Post author

    Actually this woman sounds like she's from a UPC church. Am I right Lisa Spann?

  • iamfree Post author

    Everyone who can needs to save this video, archive it. This is evidence. Watch what happens to each of Prof Ford's drinks.

  • Roger Gaudet Post author

    Well if he gets in, good luck getting any justice in the wreckage of the once great USA

  • bigpardner Post author

    That is McLean at 18:03?

  • LoverOfQueenAndBeaver Post author

    The bitch should be gang-raped this time for real. Her sultry cunt is apparently yearning for it, given how obsessively she has been fantasizing about it the whole time

  • Mind Vagrant Post author

    The FBI is a joke. They flopped majorly in preventing the Parkland shooting. And this is a fact. And this fact should be alarming to the left who are now relying on the same bureau to investigate Kavanaugh. Hahaha. What a fucking joke this country is. #walkaway #InvestigateTheFBI

  • P. N. Post author

    After watching both Ford and Kavanaugh being questions it is very notable that Ford was apologized to and supported by each member. Kavanaugh was not given the same respect and fairness.
    Hard to believe that members were not already opinoned to believe Ford.
    I listened to one person say Ford should not be treated or questioned as a guilty person.
    Why not?
    An accuser is simply that, an accuser. Legally should be questioned equally as tough as the accused will be. Otherwise you are hand holding the accuser and while attacking the accused.
    Being accused is NOT necessarily guilty.

  • Phlogistan Jones Post author

    NOTE: at 18:04 the prominent entrance of Monica Lee McLean. Career FBI/DOJ layer and public mouthpiece. Lifelong associate of Christine Ford who even moved to California with her. Monica Lee McLean was the individual who Christine Ford coached on her entrance polygraph exam for the FBI and who assisted in the construction of the false accusations put forth in the letter that Christine Ford manufactured with her help in in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware when she spent four days there. The FBI sham was setup from the get-go. Perhaps all involved on that side should get a thorough investigation into their acts of perjury.

  • Bucc Brickyard Post author

    @1:05:17 she committed perjury by admitting to watching TV during the week after her name was made public the Senate constantly was on the news telling her that they would come to California that they would fly her to Washington or they would meet her anywhere at any time to get her story but she did not want to talk to the Senate if she had she would have been interrogated and the truth would have been known. They perfectly timed the release of her name and the stall tactics to not travel the Washington or meet with them in any way. there's so many holes in this story it's a joke.

  • Bucc Brickyard Post author

    And then again there's always the fact that she escaped from the upstairs and ran down to the outside and got away but left her best friend in there with two rapist without calling the police or any help to rescue her.
    What a great friend she was.

  • P. N. Post author

    2 questions in the polygraph? why?
    As the polygraph expert used said, Protect the (supposed) victim and their feelings.
    Bet the accused isn't treated the same although at that point they are simply accused. Something that is also horrendous if truly innocent.

    Polygraph test is supposed to check the truthfulness of an answer. not on what actually happens but rather what the person believes to be true. Big Difference.
    I point this out because when a person many years later is remembering through therapy, the facts can become distorted but can be believed by the person as true.

    The mind is a strange part of our anatomy. Brainwashing is a recognized issue and although I am not saying that is the case here, it shows how memories can be
    swayed…but believed.

    I believe polygraphs are unreliable and I believe '' psychological experts' are not infallible and can be wrong.
    (most of their testimonies are based on opinion, often not even agreeing when more than one expert is used).
    It has been proven many times 'eyewitness's' are not reliable and make mistakes.

    This is why I believe FACTS and EVIDENCE should be the determining factor when judging a case.

    ********* A MUST WATCH https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOxUVBrXtzk **********

    Accused of rape by a fellow student, Brian Banks accepted a plea deal and went to prison on his 18th birthday. Years later he was exonerated with the help of the California Innocence Project.
    He accepted the plea deal on advise of his lawyer as he could not prove his innocence.
    He spent 5 years in prison and another 5 years on parole and as a registered sex offender.
    Let me point out this was a case that drew immediate attention and charges, not after 10, 20 or even 30 years where evidence, witnesses and accusations become tainted.
    The accuser after 10 years finally admitted she lied.

    Was she ever convicted of a crime over this. NO

    This is a prime example of why it's not right to simply 'Listen and believe'.

    Makes you wonder how many men are in jail are innocent. Your life should not be a legal roll of the dice that makes forces you to take a plea deal.

    Lets NOT make this a racial issue. It could happen and probably has happened to many men, white or black.

    Until the girls mother got involved and sued (and won a huge payday), there was no apparent reason the girl called their consensual sex, rape.
    Lack of motive by an accuser does not prove anything.

    I write to point out that making conclusions in public media based on how a person speaks, how they look, how truthful they come across is a gross injustice to both the accuser
    and the accused. I have read some really powerful hurtful things said on social media based on just these things and it is so wrong.
    We need to think out what we say and believe otherwise we continue to destroy a person based simply on bias and unjustified beliefs in a manner that can NEVER be reversed.

    Put yourself in BOTH positions, Accuser and Accused. Is this how you would want to be treated.

  • LaDonna Nelson Post author

    Kavanaugh is a asswhole and should go to jail for life rot in there you price of shit

  • BadOmen Post author

    Objectively I have a few issues with both sides here:

    1) There are far to many discrepancies in Dr. Ford's opening/testimony
    2) Dr. Ford's statement did not sound or feel genuine as per her hair placement, forced vocal "sadness", (seeming) lack of real emotion, verbiage, teenager-like cadence, and overall glazed-over facial expressions.
    3) Almost 4 decades, regardless of statutes of limitations, is far to long for an accusation to sit at idle.
    4) Dr. Ford did not release this "accusation" until just after Brett's nomination from POTUS

    5) I don't think he conducted himself or spoke appropriately at many times throughout (his speech at times is childish)
    6) I do not trust the consistent dodging of questions
    7) I do not trust the resistance to FBI involvement by Kavanaugh

    8) The Democrats are really honing in on the drinking far too much
    9) The Democrats are grasping at far too many straws (a high school yearbook? seriously?)
    10) The Republicans are spending too much time bashing the Democrats rather than providing appropriate questions.

    Full disclosure, I believe Kavanaugh is innocent

  • I AM 2ND Post author

    Ford the accuser. Just that! For gain.

  • Kingdom Hearts 3d Union x project Post author

    1:56:11

  • Maria Silva Post author

    Manufactured….operatives….deepstate pawn …

  • Jean Hawaii Post author

    Klobechar several times: "Why don't you just ask the President to open a FBI investigation?"… FBI, huhh? Now she wants to be President?

  • Not Christine Blasey Ford Post author

    Do I look credible to you?

  • Dan Tayler Post author

    CHRISTINE IS A TOTAL CUNT!🍎

  • Dan Tayler Post author

    🍎TRUMP 2020

  • Dan Tayler Post author

    Democrats or cancer… which is worse?… mmmm?🥺

  • Dan Tayler Post author

    CHRISTINE MADE IT ALL UP….. has Trump derangement syndrome.🧠

  • Dan Tayler Post author

    IF MY DOG LOOKED LIKE CHRISTINE I’D SHAVE ITS ASS AND TEACH IT TO WALK BACKWARDS 🤣

  • Dan Tayler Post author

    🍎🍎UGLIEST WOMAN EVER🍎🍎

  • G M Post author

    Christine Blasey Ford is a LYING, LEFTIST WITCH!

  • Robert G. Post author

    She was caught lying once already by Mitchell.she said they could hear them talking in another room or downstairs and when Mitchell said how do you know she said I assumed it. So she lied by saying she heard it when she didn't hear anything. This woman lies with ease or she's completely deluded.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *