we re 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 oui’ 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. over —— "the next person it refers to an fbi report being worth anything doesn't understand anything. the fbi exquisitely does not, in this or any

other case, reach a conclusion. " the reason why we cannot lie on the fbi report, you would not like it if we did because it is inconclusive, so we did because it is inconclusive, so when people waive an fbi report before you, understand they do not, they do not reach conclusions. they cannot make, as my friend points that more accurately, they do not make recommendations. in other words, the role of the fbi is to fly issues, those issues have been flagged. sadly in this case, they we re flagged. sadly in this case, they were flagged not as they should have been, not in the timing in which they should have been. therefore they should have been. therefore they could not have been addressed ina manner they could not have been addressed in a manner that would have preserved a lot more dignity for you and your family, preserved a lot more dignity for you and yourfamily, and 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 you might most profound

sympathies, and my most profound sympathies, and my most profound sympathies to dr ford and her family, as well. since we don't have enough slots, can i have a last—minute democrat minutes of senator kennedy can be recognised? we did 30 hours in public with you. did we have any private hearings with you? guess stop there he was a fun time for you. when senators could ask uncomfortable questions about potential alcoholism or scaling addictions, alcohol debts, if people floated you money? did you enjoy that time? i'm always happy to co—operate with the committee. that's terrible. were you ever asked about any sexual allegations and we had the time with you here alone. note? when the letter was written onjuly

30...a when the letter was written onjuly 30. .. a recommendation was made by the ranking member of her staff to dr ford, who i think is a victim and she has been through hell, and i am very sympathetic to her. but did the ranking member's staff make a recommendation to hire a lawyer, and she knew all that? and yet we had a hearing here with you, and none of these things were asked? but once these things were asked? but once the process was closed, what we were done meeting in public and in private, then this was sprung on you? i want to make sure i have the dates correct. we have 35 plus days from all the time that this evidence was in the hands, recommendations we re was in the hands, recommendations were made to an outside lawyer, you could've handled all this, we could've handled all this, we could've had this conversation private in a way that not only did stuff to his family... i yield my time. you try to see if he do math

over 35 days? that's the question. good afternoon, judge kavanaugh. as a federaljudge, you are aware of thejury instruction, a federaljudge, you are aware of the jury instruction, falsehoods, are you not? i am. you know it means? you can translate it to me, you can do it better than me. faults and one thing, fault in everything. meaning injury and one thing, fault in everything. meaning in jury instructions, and one thing, fault in everything. meaning injury instructions, that many prosecutors have told a jury that they can does believe the witness if they find him to be fa u lts witness if they find him to be faults in one thing. so the core of why we are here today really is credibility. the core of why we're here is an allegation from which the four witnesses present have all said

it did not happen. let me ask you about rent on a dolphin, who lives in connecticut. that's renata. she thought these yearbook statements we re thought these yearbook statements were horrible, hurtful, and sadly untrue. because renata alumni clearly implied some boast of sexual conquest. and that is the reason that you apologise to her, correct was blue that is faults ——? that you apologise to her, correct was blue that is faults --? she said she andl was blue that is faults --? she said she and i never had any sexual encounters. your question is based oi'i encounters. your question is based ona encounters. your question is based on a false quote —— premise and does great harm to her, i don't know why you are doing that, by bringing her name appear is really unfortunate. only one witness in that way... a

number of your football friends at the time as boasting of sexual conduct? as the reason i bring it up. it's false, you're implying that, look what you're bringing up right now, look what doing! don't bring her name up! ask your question. she has always been a great question whenever had any sexual interaction. by bringing this up, you arejust sexual interaction. by bringing this up, you are just dragging her through the mud. it is unnecessary. thank you, mr chairman. you have made reference, judge kavanaugh, to a sworn statement by markjudge the committee, is that correct?” a sworn statement by markjudge the committee, is that correct? i made reference to what markjudge's lawyer said to the committee. reference to what markjudge's lawyer said to the committeem reference to what markjudge's lawyer said to the committee. is not a sworn statement, is it? under penalty of felony...

a sworn statement, is it? under penalty of felony. .. is by lawyer, is six cursory inconclusive senses. are you saying that that is a substitute for an investigation by the fbi? under penalty of felony, he said that this did not happen and i never did or would have done something like that. you always want the best evidence? senator, he has said and all the witnesses present, look at miss kaiser's statement, she is... when he moved to another topic. you have testified in this committee this morning and afternoon. "this whole two—week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fuelled with a pent—up anger about president trump and the 2016 election, fear

that has been unfairly stoked about myjudicial 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 the half of a left—wing conspiracy or the clintons? senator, i said in my opening statement that she preferred confidentiality, and her confidentiality, and her confidentiality was destroyed by the actions of this committee. let me ask you this. in the speech that you gave at yale, you described "falling out of the bus onto the front steps of the yale law school at 4:45am? "

i was not talking about myself. senator, let me finish. i organised a third—year end of school party for 30 of my classmates to rent a bus to go to fenway park in boston, which isa go to fenway park in boston, which is a three—hour trek. i bought all the tickets, you and i have discussed this before. i bought all the baseball tickets, i rented the bus, i organised the whole trip and we nt bus, i organised the whole trip and 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, left field that night, actually. we we nt left field that night, actually. we went to again and got back, and we we nt went to again and got back, and we went out, a great night of friendship... i apologise for interrupting, dutch, buti friendship... i apologise for interrupting, dutch, but i need to finish the before i ask you the question. i wasn't talking... the quote ends that you tried to "piece things back together" to recall what happened that night. meaning...”

know what happened. judge, will you a nswer know what happened. judge, will you answer your question. i will finish asking the question. do it quickly. does that not imply to you that you had the piece things back together, you had to ask others what happened that night definitely not, i know exactly what happened that night, i was so happy, great camaraderie, everyone looks back fondly on the trip to fenway park, and then we went back to the crowd together, a group of classmates, and i know exactly what happened the whole night. judge, do you believe anita hill? thank you, mrchairman. you believe anita hill? thank you, mr chairman. judge kavanaugh, first i want to get into this whole question that has been battered endlessly today about the fbi

investigation process.” endlessly today about the fbi investigation process. i want to follow u p investigation process. i want to follow up on what senator leahy and senator sass have referenced. there has been a lot of talk here about needing an fbi investigation. in these processes which you have been through a number of times now when the fbi does a background check with regard to a nomination, could you quickly describe that for us, what is the fbi do? the fbi gathers statements from people who have information, they don't resolve credibility, they gather the information and the credibility to terminate, the united states senate is the ultimate fact finder. the committee here has gathered evidence. and the fbi then gives that report to the white house, if i understand it, and the white house then transfers it to the senate, is that correct? that is my understanding. and as you indicated, it has been said many times you

today, the fbi does not make judgements, 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 in an fbi report and it wa nts to information in an fbi report and 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 of how some of these witnesses that we re how some of these witnesses that were identified late in the information that we received, they we re information that we received, they were under penalty of felony. that isa were under penalty of felony. that is a felony for lying to the senate judiciary committee. and as i understand it, what happens is the senatejudiciary understand it, what happens is the senate judiciary committee, which has authority under law to conduct those kinds of investigations, follows up on the fbi reports to finish out the investigation that it wa nts finish out the investigation that it wants with regard to any information

it receives, it needs further investigation. is that your understanding of the process? that is. in this case, there has been lots of talk, and if i have time i'll get into it, but it looks like we will run out. in this case, there is concern by many that there was not so much an infant —— interest in investigations as there was in delay. i will not get that unless i have time. i want to talk about what happened in the senate committee's investigation. because as i understand it, this may be more of a question to the chairman, as soon as iwe question to the chairman, as soon as i we received information which was about 45 days after others on the committee received, we conducted an investigation, is that correct mr chairman? we began that legal senate judiciary committee investigation. yes. and that investigation devoted democrat enabled our investigators to conduct an investigation. and if

i understand correctly, the democratic members of the committee refused to participate in the investigation. yes. so we have conducted the investigation. the very kinds of things that my collea g u es very kinds of things that my colleagues on the other side are asking that we'd tell the fbi to do, this committee has the authority to do it, and this committee does it and has done it. now there may be more demands for more interviews and investigations, but when you judge kavanaugh, investigations, but when you judge kava naugh, have referenced investigations, but when you judge kavanaugh, have referenced the testimony that has come from those who were identified as being at this event, the testimony that has been received from them is information that has been received pursuant to a senate investigation committee. i think there's been a lot of back—and—forth today about not getting information or looking at this, you don't want to look into the investigation and see what happened. the reality is that this committee immediately and thoroughly investigated every witness that has been identified to us, and we have

state m e nts been identified to us, and we have statements under under penalty of felony from them. so ijust want statements under under penalty of felony from them. so i just want to conclude with that, i have 45 seconds left so i will ask you one quick question. you had a meeting with senator feinstein on you had a meeting with senator finds the on the 20th? what was established earlier here today was that the ranking member staff helped doctor ford to retain the katz law firm sometime between july 30th doctor ford to retain the katz law firm sometime betweenjuly 30th and august seventh. in the time we've had two weeks or more later, this was not raised ? had two weeks or more later, this was not raised? the issue was not raised. thank you. my time is up. we will take a five— minute raised. thank you. my time is up. we will take a five—minute break now.