record from here. my friends from... record from arizona emphasise yesterday we have before us today to human beings, dr ford and judge kavanaugh. .. before us today to human beings, dr ford and judge kavanaugh. .. you're watching bbc world news america. supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh supreme court nominee brett kava naugh has supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh has been testifying about charges made earlier today by christine blasey ford that he sexually assaulted her in high school. he's been vehemently denied the accusation and we can rejoin the hearing now in progress. judge kavanaugh has been a great federaljudge in the second highest court in the nation. he has earned a reputation for decency. his clerks love him. his students, he teaches in law school, 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 are talking today about judge kavanaugh's conduct in high school! and even then, as a freshman

in college, serious allegations have been raised, ifjudge kavanaugh committed sexual assault, he should not serve on the supreme court, we all agree with that. but the circus atmosphere that has been created since by democratic colleagues for asked league dr ford's allegations to the media two weeks ago, after sitting on them for six weeks, i might add, that 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 not being treated as national news. porn star lawyers with facially and caught —— implausible claims are driving the news sites. i hate to say this, but this is worse, i didn't think this could get worse. this is worse than clarence thomas, ididn't this is worse than clarence thomas, i didn't think you could get worse than that. this is a national

disgrace, the way you are being treated. and in the middle of it all, we have judge treated. and in the middle of it all, we havejudge kavanaugh, a man who until two weeks ago was a pillar of the legal communities. there has been no whisper of misconduct about him by the time —— in the time he has been a judge. what we have are uncorroborated, unsubstantiated claims from his teenage years! claims that every alleged eyewitness has either denied or failed claims that every alleged eyewitness has either denied orfailed to corroborate. i do not mean to minimise the seriousness of the claims. they have been serious claims, but the search for truth has to involve more than their assertions. by dr ford, judge kavanaugh assertions. by dr ford, judge kava naugh deserves assertions. by dr ford, judge kavanaugh deserves fair assertions. by dr ford, judge kava naugh deserves fair treatment. he was an immature high school or, so were we he was an immature high school or, so were we all. he wrote or said stupid things, but that does not make him a sexual predator. i understand the desire of my collea g u es understand the desire of my colleagues test tear down this man

and he cause, i do understand. but let's be honest about the lack of fa cts , let's be honest about the lack of facts, guilt by association is wrong, immaturity does not equal criminality. you cannot drink in high school or college, that does not make him guilty of every terrible thing that he has been accused of. a lifetime of respect and equal treatment of to mean something when assessing allegations that are flatly inconsistent with the course of a person's entire aduu the course of a person's entire adult life. to those comments, i would just look to ask you a few questions, if i can, and if you can be assured in your desk sure in your a nswe i’s , be assured in your desk sure in your answers, he would get me through them, about how this process has unfolded. when did you first learned of dr ford's edge —— accusations against you? a week ago on sunday, when the washington post posted the story. did the ranking member raises allegations in your one—on—one meeting with her last month? she did

not. did she raise them at your meeting 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 collea g u es did the ranking member or any of her colleagues raise them in the 1300 questions that were submitted to you following the hearing? no. when was a first time that the ranking member asked you about these allegations? today. when did you first hear of miss ramirez‘s accusations? today. when did you first hear of miss ramirez's accusations? in the la st miss ramirez's accusations? in the last period since then, in the new yorker story. did the ranking member 01’ yorker story. did the ranking member orany of yorker story. did the ranking member or any of her staff ask you about mr miraz‘s allegations before they were lea ked miraz‘s allegations before they were leaked to the press? no. when was the first time that the ranking member or any of her colleagues or staff ask you about mr miraz‘s

accusations? today. i think it is a disgrace. judge kavanaugh, today's hearing is about dr ford's serious allegations about sexual assault. you have on a quick dash unequivocably denied those claims, but we're here today to assess her credibility and yours. and in our previous vigorous exchanges, i found that your answers at times vigorously defended, but other times struck me as evasive and not credible a key issues. it is against the bat —— that backdrop that i am seeking to assess your ability today. he said in your opening, the rule of law means taking allegations seriously, and i agree with that. it brings me nojoy to question seriously, and i agree with that. it brings me no joy to question you seriously, and i agree with that. it brings me nojoy to question you on these topics today, but i think they're serious and worthy of our attention. if i can, let me return toa attention. if i can, let me return to a line of questioning that my colleague was on before. it was

about whether you have ever gotten aggressive while drinking, or forgotten that evening after drinking? those are two different questions. i've already answered the second one, this is the first. i think the answer to that is basically no, i don't really know what you mean by that. what are you talking about? i don't mean it that way, but... note is the basic answer, unless you are talking about something i'm unaware about —— no. the reason i'm asking, we had a brief period of time to wait outside evidence, i'lljoin brief period of time to wait outside evidence, i'll join my brief period of time to wait outside evidence, i'lljoin my colleagues in saying that i wish we had more evidence in front of us today to wait. do you remember liz swisher, a couege wait. do you remember liz swisher, a college classmate of yours from yale? to your first point about outside evidence, all four witnesses said... i'm trying to get this

question. i know, you made a point that i want to emphasise. all four witnesses that were allegedly at the event has said it did not happen, including dr ford's long—time friend, miss kaiser, who said...m markjudge were here to question, we would cook assess his credibility. let me get through this. liz swisher isa let me get through this. liz swisher is a college classmate who is now a medical doctor. i'm quoting from a re ce nt medical doctor. i'm quoting from a recent interview she gave, she said "brett recent interview she gave, she said " brett kava naugh recent interview she gave, she said "brett kavanaugh drank more than a lot of people, he would end up slurring his words, stumbling, it is not credible for him to say he has had no memory lapses in an icy drink to excess. i know because i drink with him." how should we assess that? she then goes on, if you kept reading, saying she cannot point to any specific instances like that. the quote that jumped any specific instances like that. the quote thatjumped out to me was that you are a sloppy drunk because she drink with you. i do not think

thatis she drink with you. i do not think that is a fair characterisation. and chris dudley is quoted in the article, and i would prefer to you and chris dudley said, i spent more time with chris dudley in college thanjust time with chris dudley in college than just about anyone. i would refer —— than just about anyone. i would refer — — you than just about anyone. i would refer —— you do what he said. than just about anyone. i would refer -- you do what he said. i'm sure you know a college classmate described you as a relatively shy, but when you drink you could be aggressive or belligerent, and your roommate, as you have discussed with senator, said you're freakily drunk. and that roommate, that was freshman year. there was contention between us and a third person. you should look at the redacted portion of the transcript about him, and you should assess his credibility with that in mind. put yourself in our shoes if you can, i know that is asking you a lot in this setting. but suppose you had gone through a process to select someone had gone through a process to select someone for an incredibly important job in position, you had a lot of

qualified candidates, and as you finish the hiring process, you learn ofa finish the hiring process, you learn of a credible allegation that, if true, would be disqualifying. would you either take a step back and conduct a thorough investigation, or move different canada ? conduct a thorough investigation, or move different canada? 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 toa resolve these allegations by moving to a different nominee? all four witnesses who alleged to be at the event said it did not happen on including dr ford's long—time friend, miss kaiser, who said that she did not know me and does not re call she did not know me and does not recall ever being at a party with me with or without dr ford. what i have struggled with, judge kavanaugh, is the absence of 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 , 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... sir, my reputation... i am calling for an fbi investigation for one week to clear or confirm these allegations. you see a week delay, you know how long the last ten days have been? probably an attorney, but judge thomas... he had a four—day delay. everyday has been a lifetime. and you know, yet... it has been investigated, and all four witnesses say it did not happen. they have said under her —— bounty of felony, andi said under her —— bounty of felony, and i produced my calendars which show important evidence. the last ten days, is for a hearing today

after the allegations. before i call on senator leahy, i want to emphasise something here. talking about doing something without enough time. we have 45 days betweenjuly 30 and september 13, i believe it is. when we could have been investigating this. and in regard to this candidate, if you take the average of 65—70 days between the time that a person who is announced by the president and the senate votes on it is about 65—70 days, and here we are at about 85—90 days. so there is plenty of time but in on this nomination. >> wendy:, i have one other thing i wa nt to >> wendy:, i have one other thing i want to do. everybody else has been putting letters in the record. i have a letter from 65 women who knew

judge kavanaugh between the years 1979-83, the judge kavanaugh between the years 1979—83, the years he attended georgetown prep high school. these women wrote to the committee because they knowjudge kavanaugh, and they know that the allegations raised by dr ford are completely and totally inconsistent with his character. these 65 women know him through social events and church, many have remained close friends with him. here is what they say partly quoting the letter. " through more than 35 yea rs we have the letter. " through more than 35 years we have known him, bret has stood out for his friendship, character and integrity. he has a lwa ys 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, judge kavanaugh has a lwa ys day. in closing, judge kavanaugh has always been a good person." judge kavanaugh, you have been cooperative at every stage of this investigation. both the background investigation. both the background investigation and this investigation, is that correct? is

also correct that you yourself do not control the fbi or when it conducts an investigation? you are a nominee, not tasked with the job of deciding who or how in the best conduct an investigation. that is correct at every moment when either we we re correct at every moment when either we were prior... when we have asked you questions, you have been attentive and responsive, is that not right? that is correct, throughout my career. not right? that is correct, throughout my careerlj not right? that is correct, throughout my career. i have collea g u es throughout my career. i have colleagues today repeatedly ask for an fbi investigation. and there are some ironies in this, ironies that are 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 ago before anyone else did. they have the ability and 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've been handled in such a way that did not turn this into a

circus, one that has turned your life upside down, and the life of dr ford and family upside down. i consider this much —— most u nfortu nate, consider this much —— most unfortunate, given 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, and investigation over which you have no ability to control, you have no authority to call for, while calling foran authority to call for, while calling for an investigation, were in the middle of a conversation that involves questions to you. so is my democratic colleagues if you have questions forjudge kavanaugh, ask him! he is right here, if that is really what you want is the truth, asking 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 investigation, and when we have a committee investigations and hearings with live witnesses, they would talk about that, 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 their 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 ourformer chairman of 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 the process. here's what he said. 0ver —— "the next person it refers to an fbi report being worth anything doesn't understand anything. the fbi exquisitely