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. so we are entering a five—minute

rate they are on capitol hill. this isaa rate they are on capitol hill. this is a a small senate office were testimonies being hurt by the californian psychology professor who earlier today spoke and described her memory, giving testimony, christine blasey ford, testifying to the senate committee. she has alleged that the supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in 1982 when they were high school students. he, of course, has denied that claim. so, it has been a day of impassioned testimony at the us senate in washington, dc,

as president trump's nominee for the supreme court, brett kavanaugh, repeatedly denied these allegations that he had sexually assaulted teenage girl some 30 years ago. the judge had declared that the allegations had destroyed his family and his name. the hearing hasjust concluded for a five—minute break. so far there has be several hours of testimony heard and questioning. let's begin by listening to how christine blasey ford began her testimony, describing in distressing detail the events she says occurred on that night. 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 kennedy 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 we re louder by either brett or mark once we were in the room. i was pushed on to the bed and practical on top of me. he began running his hands over my me. he began running his hands over d me. he began running his hands over my body and granted into me. i yelled, hoping someone downstairs might hear me, and i try to get away from him but his weight was heavy. groped me and tried to take off my clothes. he had a hard time because he was very immigrated and because i was wearing a 1—piece paving suit and my clothing. i believed he was going to rate —— rape me. i tried to

yelled for help. when i did, brett had 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 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. that was the initial testimony. dr ford was asked by democratic senator patrick leahy about what part of the assault she remembered most vividly. what is the strongest memory you have, the strongest memory of the

incident? something that you cannot forget. take whatever time you need. indelible in the hippocampus was their laughter. their hysterical laughter between the two. and then having fun at my expense. you never forgot that laughter. never forgot 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. well, in his opening statement, brett kavanaugh strongly denied the allegations against him. here's some of what he had to say. iam not i am not questioning that doctor

ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in someplace, 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 doctor ford and her family. the other night, ashley and my daughter eli is said their prayers and little eliza, all ten years old, said to ashley "we should pray for the woman". that's a lot of wisdom from a 10—year—old. we mean no ill will. that senate committee was made of both republican and emma kratz and

led by the chairman. the lines of questioning differed greatly. let's just listen to some very different questioning lines now. one from a democrat and the other from a republican, which demonstrate exactly how partisan this hearing has been. if you, judge kavanagh, and that this committee and to say for the sake of my reputation and family name to get to the bottom of the truth of this, i would not be an obstacle to an fbi investigation, i would hope that all members of the party would join me by saying we will abide by your shares and have that investigation. i welcome whatever the committee must be because i am telling the truth.|j wa nt because i am telling the truth.|j want to know what you want to do. because i am telling the truth.|j want to know what you want to dolj am want to know what you want to do.” am innocent. a innocent of this charge. you would welcome an fbi investigation? that is up to you.

you cannot have it both ways, judge. i welcome any kind of investigation... this thing was sprung at the last minute after being held by staff. this is not a job interview. this is field. this is going to destroy the ability of the people to come forward because of this crap. —— akrotiri. your high school yearbook. —— of this crap. —— akrotiri. your high school yearbook. — — hill. of this crap. —— akrotiri. your high school yearbook. —— hill. you have interacted with professional women or—— interacted with professional women or —— all your life, not one accusation. justice b bill cosby when you are a junior and senior in high school, and all of a sudden you got over it. —— you are supposed to be. they have now resumed. how she wa nted they have now resumed. how she wanted the president to note so that he could make a better choice. so when you and my colleagues on the other side accused us of ambushing you with false charges, i think we

all have to remember doctor ford's testimony and her courage. lenny go back to something you just set in your opening. you said you thought at your first hearing that the democrats were an embarrassment. we ask you a lot of questions in those days and which of our questions do you think was an embarrassment? i ask you about descent you had written as a judge, and amicus brief yet written as a lawyer and your knowledge of social harassment and abuse by your close friend, all valid questions. they are valid because this is a job interview for one of the most important positions of trust in this country. and earlier you agreed that this process of advice and consent is really a job interview. certainly not a criminal trial, there is certainly no entitlement for you to be confirmed to the court. 0ut credibility, candour of a nominee, things to consider in yourjob interview. i think my whole life is

subject to consideration. is that yes? credibility, character and candour, 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 candour. of course. as part of my whole life. is temperament also an important trait for us to consider? 12 years, everybody who has appeared before me in the dc circuit has praised my temperament. that is why i have collocations from the bar association... you would agree that temperament is also important factor in my decision. yes, and the public defender who testified to the committee talked about howl defender who testified to the committee talked about how i was always open—minded and howl committee talked about how i was always open—minded and how i ruled in favour of unpopular defendants.

howl in favour of unpopular defendants. how i was fair—minded. i think, universally, lawyers who have appeared... the answer is yes, i am running out of time. we only have five minutes. let me get to something else. in your fox news interview, he said us treated women with dignity and respect and that in high school you never drank so much that you couldn't remember what happened the night before. would you say the same thing about your couege? say the same thing about your college? —— college life? yes. i would like to read statements from people who knew you in college. it has been noted that james laroche said, your roommate, although he was reserved, he was a heavy drinker even by the standards at the time and became aggressive and literate when he wasn't —— belligerent when he was drunk. is your former college roommate lighting?” he was drunk. is your former college roommate lighting? i would refer to what i said in the field and redacted portion of that his relationship with the other two roommates and i will leave it at

that. you are asking about college, i got into that. you are asking about college, igot intojl that. you are asking about college, i got intojl law that. you are asking about college, i got into jl law school, that. you are asking about college, i got intojl law school, that is the number one law school in the country. — — the number one law school in the country. —— yale. i got there by busting my tail. i feel insulted as a georgetown graduate. is ranked numberone, it a georgetown graduate. is ranked number one, it doesn't mean it is number one, it doesn't mean it is numberone. —— number one, it doesn't mean it is number one. —— it is. number one, it doesn't mean it is numberone. —— it is. in number one, it doesn't mean it is number one. —— it is. in college, two things. i studied, i was in ci’oss campus two things. i studied, i was in cross campus library every night. and i played basketball for the junior varsity, i tried out for the varsity. the first day i arrived on campus we had captains walk out, i played basketball all date and as soon as the season was over in late february, i was obsessed with...” only had 23 seconds. so you were not a sloppy drunk and so your roommate was lying. i will refer you to the

redacted portion. iwill say was lying. i will refer you to the redacted portion. i will say that with my academic record, i don't usually like to talk about myself this way, but in response... i worked very hard in college, in my studies and i also played basketball, i did sports, and i also did socialise its topic i know the chairman is going to stop me, but i do have other references from people who knew you, who will say that you we re who knew you, who will say that you were not... i am sorry, mr cheerless. .. were not... i am sorry, mr cheerless... 0k, were not... i am sorry, mr cheerless. .. ok, i were not... i am sorry, mr cheerless... 0k, iwill wait were not... i am sorry, mr cheerless... ok, i will wait until we are finished. —— mr chairman. cheerless... ok, i will wait until we are finished. —— mr chairmanm was unclear that was what you were doing. i could go on. i would like to enter into the record for letters, one is dated september 18, 2018 to use. from all of the democrats on this committee. another isa democrats on this committee. another is a letter dated september 18 to the director of the fbi and counsel

to the present, signed by all of the democrats on this committee. a september 21 letter signed by chuck schumer and diane feinstein to the president, and a september 26 letter signed by all of the democrats, all requesting an fbi investigation because you did say all we have to do is ask and the implication being that if we ask, an investigation will happen and it certainly has not happened. thank you. that will be included. thank you, mr chairman, judge kavanagh, i apologise when you are going to right now. i can imagine, iwent are going to right now. i can imagine, i went to a campaign and had a lot of smear, but it pales in comparison. i think one thing, 1.i would like to make from the onset, if we go back and review how this committee process has worked, we have a lot of work to do. have had members take it on themselves to

release committee confidential documents, instead of respecting the process. we have had an allegation held in nearly seven weeks that would have given us plenty of time to investigate, and then when we finally got the information, i invite everybody can particularly the american public, there is an investigation going on. a lot of it has been committed, there is a chronology on the website as each and every time an allegation was made, the staff followed up on it and in several of instances the democrats declined to participate. they listened in on at least one interview with you, didn't ask a single question. they wanted to find other weeds, why not ask? if you're trying to get the facts, if you try to dojob to trying to get the facts, if you try to do job to investigate. trying to get the facts, if you try to dojob to investigate. we trying to get the facts, if you try to do job to investigate. we are investigating, it is ourjob. i think in response to the ranking members question, judge kavanagh saidi members question, judge kavanagh said i am here, you are asking me questions. you know what, when the committee staff, i assume, directed

by the ranking member, says no, we will not ask questions of the judge when he wanted to clear his good name. what are you really after? you may not be after the truth, maybe you are, maybe you are after executing some sort of political agenda. maybe it is a mix of its topic at the epping treated unfairly andi topic at the epping treated unfairly and i am amazed that after 32 hours of testimony, one in half hours i sat, that none of these questions came up when it was all fully known. loitered up, as a matter of of fact. —— lawyered. i go back to the record this morning, i think i heard doctor ford say that she wasn't aware of the fact that we said we had come to california, we would make it confidential, we would completely deposed and ask any questions you wa nt deposed and ask any questions you want to. i think i heard her say she wasn't aware of that. i do know if

that came of council or council neglected to tell her. the fact of the matter is, that offer was out there. we were moving heaven and earth and moving the scheduled to get to the truth. we are doing an investigation. we are doing our level best. i hope that the american people watching this will go out to the senate judiciary website and ta ke the senate judiciary website and take a look at this chronology. take a look at the lack of investigation on the part of the people who want the investigation! doesn't make a lot of sense. every opportunity you had to go and questioned a witness, at every opportunity we had to find more truth, to find more facts, we have done it. is documented. we have sworn statement. we are doing our job, we are doing the committee work. judge kavanaugh, i am... judge kavanaugh, iam... i judge kavanaugh, i am... i also have to say that i believe you're the first major target of a new strategy that's developed here, and i think

you're right, i think it'sjust basically attack, attack, attack. it's not advising consent, its search and destroy. 0ne it's not advising consent, its search and destroy. one of 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 of these red herrings has already acquired a url for the nextjudge they're going to attack. the url is right here, they've already purchased it, they're ready to go. this is the playbook, this is the way we're going to run this committee from this day forward? take a look at it, i'll make sure we get it out on our website. we've always got another stop anotherjudge who hasn't been nominated for anotherjudge stop anotherjudge who hasn't been nominated for another judge from stop anotherjudge who hasn't been nominated for anotherjudge from the same people mobilising people to attack you. there are some people here who may sincerely have concerns. i would tell you to pound the table with your ranking member and the leadership on your side to say," why didn't we ask questions? why didn't we listen in and

deferred? why why didn't we listen in and deferred ? why didn't why didn't we listen in and deferred? why didn't we do our part of the investigation while this leader did everything he could to accommodate doctor ford and to run down every single lead that's been presented to us? weeks after it was known to the minority. i look forward to supporting your confirmation. i believe that you're going to be on the bench. you know, as senator korn said, these are allegations that can be pursued through the courts if they actually rise to a level where they can be prosecuted and everyone on the other side of this bias know that's not going to happen. judge kavanaugh, you drink on weekdays as well in high school, not just weekends? weekdays? yes, sir. i would say that's rare. during the school year? the calendars you provided. in the summer after a football workout. you drank on

weekdays, yes or no, sir? in the summer, when we went over to timu pot is house on thejuly the first, yes. the july the first, when you refer to skis, you are referring to bewskies? i need to explain in context. you say you drag on weekdays, that's all i'm looking for. to the next question, i want you to state it, you said on the record that you never in your life after drinking heavily after throwing up, you said you had a weak stomach, you never had any gaps in memories, neverfor deregulation about what happened. is that correct —— 40 about what happened. is that correct —— a0 recollection. about what happened. is that correct -- 40 recollection. that's what i said. you said this past two weeks has been a two—week effort calculated and orchestrated as a political hit —— 40 recollection. are clasie's efforts to come forward

to give the testimony sheet have been part of an august rated political hit? —— doctor ford's efforts. —— orchestrated political hit. she wanted confidentiality. her confidentiality was blown by the actions of this committee. let's be clear, you have problems with the senators up here and how we conducted it, but you're not saying in anyway that she's a political pawn, political operative. you have sympathy for her, she's talking about a sexual assault, is that correct? i said all allegations should be taken seriously, you should be taken seriously, you should listen to both sides. my family has no ill will towards her. did you ask that she never came forward ? did you ask that she never came forward? senator, i did not do this. that's not my question, sir, try to a nswer that's not my question, sir, try to answer my question, do you wish she never came forward? the witnesses

who were there say it didn't happen. do you wish that she just remained silent then? the witnesses who were there say it didn't happen. all allegations should be taken seriously. even in the final days before a vote, if someone has a credible allegation of experience they held for a long time, that person should be allowed to come forward , person should be allowed to come forward, and, as she said, it was her civic duty, are you questioning that? she came forward. you have a lot of political animus, you have stated it clearly to my colleagues and i, what i want to get to the bottom of, you do not see her specifically as part of an orchestrated a bit, she is not part ofa orchestrated a bit, she is not part of a political event? i don't know her, we bear no ill will to her, she wa nted her, we bear no ill will to her, she wanted confidentiality.” understand, she came forward, your family has gone through hell, as has herfamily. she family has gone through hell, as has her family. she sat here and she told her truth and she made... you made the allegation that she was

co—ordinating, i don't think she was co—ordinating. co—ordinating, i don't think she was co-ordinating. i did not say that. you said others were making a co—ordinated effort. she was not doing this for political efforts. in 2012, when she talked about this to her therapist, she was not co—ordinating when she made revelations to her husband. she did not co—ordinate in 2013, 2016, 2017, before you were nominated when she revealed it was you with three different people that sexually assaulted her. that was in co—ordination. assaulted her. that was in co-ordination. all the witnesses that were there said it didn't happen. miss kiser, her longtime friend, said that she never saw me ata friend, said that she never saw me at a party with her. she said that she did not remember the night in question, that supports what you said, but she says that she believes doctor ford. and so my colleague, lindsey graham, who i respect and have admiration for and has been a partner of mine, he said voting no

would legitimise the most is this cruel thing in american politics. do you think people who believe doctor ford are legitimising despicable things? —— most despicable thing. do you think we are engaging in something despicable if we are believing her? i would say listen to both sides before you make a bottom—line conclusion. that is fair. i have ten seconds left, sir, you can answer after i finish, that is their. listen to both sides, this is not about one side being despicable and the other side being despicable and the other side not —— fair. i will finish my question, then you can answer, she gave credible, meaningful testimony, a woman who had the courage to come forward and tell her truth. that's what i'm asking, she is not a political pawn, she is not orchestrating, she is not part of the clinton's' efforts to get revenge, she the clinton's' efforts to get revenge, she came the clinton's' efforts to get revenge, she came here with

corroborating efforts to tell her truth. —— lintons'. corroborating efforts to tell her truth. -- lintons'. the evidence is not cooperated at the time. the witnesses that were there say it did not happen —— clintons‘. judge kavanaugh, you and yourfamily have been treated incredibly poorly by senate democrats and by the media. when i say also doctor ford and her family have media. when i say also doctor ford and herfamily have been media. when i say also doctor ford and her family have been treated incredibly poorly by senate democrats and the media. you've both seen your democrats and the media. you've both seen your good democrats and the media. you've both seen your good name democrats and the media. you've both seen your good name is dragged through the mud. this has been sadly one of the most shameful chapters in the history of the us senate —— good names. thank you for a lifetime of public service. i would say watching your mother's pained face has been heart—wrenching as she has seen her son's character dragged through the mud after not only your lifetime of public service, but her lifetime of

public service, but her lifetime of public service, but her lifetime of public service as well. i know as a father, there's been nothing more painful to you and talking to your daughters and explaining these attacks that the media is airing. i also believe, though, 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 fax, and that is the charge of this committee. now, there have been three different sets of allegations that have dominated the media —— and fa cts . that have dominated the media —— and facts. i think it's important to note that two of those sets of allegations had so little corroborate that even the new york times, which is no conservative outlet, refused to report on them because they could find no bases in them. it was striking in this entire hearing that not a single democrat in this committee asked about two

sets of those allegations. miss ramires's allegations and the allegations of the client of mr avenatti. not a single democrat. i don't know if they were too embarrassed that mr avenatti's allegations were so scandalous that the ranking member admitted his client's most scandalous accusations of you as a criminal mastermind essentially only to those scandalous accusations from her statement. this hearing has focused rightly so on the allegations doctor ford presented. let me say, i think the committee did the right thing in giving doctor ford a full and fair opportunity to tell her story. that's what we needed to do when these allegations became public. and these allegations became public. and the committee treated her with respect, as we should. i do not believe senate democrats have 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 look at what else you know when you have conflicting testimony, we know doctor ford identified three 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's explicit to a fair—minded factfinder. in addition, you've walked through before this committee your calendars from the time. i would say, you're a much more organised teenager than i was, and 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 onjuly the 30th, and for 60 days, that was 60 days ago, the ranking member did not refer it to the fbi for an investigation. the ranking member did not refer it to a full committee for investigation. this committee could have investigated those claims ina could have investigated those claims in a confidential way that respected doctor ford's privacy, and some of the more significant testimony we heard this morning, as doctor ford told this committee that the only people to whom she gave her letter we re people to whom she gave her letter were 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

who could have released that letter we re who could have released that letter were either the ranking member or her staff or the democratic member of congress, because doctor ford told this committee those were the only people that had. that is not a fair process, and we should look to the facts, not in on this innuendo and slander. mrchairman, iask mr chairman, i ask for a point of personal privilege to respond. precede. let me be clear, i did not hide doctor ford's allegations. —— precede. i didn't hold her story, she asked to keep it confidential andl she asked to keep it confidential and i kept it confidential as she asked. she apparently was stalked by the press, felt that what happened, she was forced to come forward and her greatest fear was realised. 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, allthe witnesses would be interviewed, however that has not happened. while the majority has reached out to several people, they did not notify me all 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, who asked that it be held confidential, and a held it confidential until she decided that she would come forward. mr chairman, would the ranking member answer her question please? ifi can. i have a respect for senator finds time, we

have worked together on many topics andi have worked together on many topics and i believe what you havejust said. can you tell us that your staff did not leak it? well! don't believe my staff would leak it. i have not asked that question directly but i do not believe they would. hal in the world could it get in the hands of the press? the essar is no. the staff did not. —— the air so. —— the answer. pardon me? jennifer reminds me, i have asked her before that it. well somebody leaked it, if it wasn't you. i am telling you, i did not. i was asked to keep it confidential andl was asked to keep it confidential and i am criticised for that too. could i ask the chairman of question? does the committee have a process, if there is an allegation any nominee, to assess that allegation in a confidential forum, rather than in the public, since doctor ford requested that it be

ke pt doctor ford requested that it be kept confidential, is there a process for the committee to consider confidential allegations? the answer is yes. senator pointed out the document that we have done all the things along the lines of your appointments. what would you have done if onjuly your appointments. what would you have done if on july 30, your appointments. what would you have done if onjuly 30, the ranking member raised this allegation? we would have done like we have done with every background, let's say fbi report, that comes from the white house, for the nominee, and then subsequent to that, because maybe the fbi got done with it three months ago, we go through the fbi or information comes to us, then we have our investigators in a bipartisan way to both republican and democrats, follow—up on whatever those questions are all those problems that have to be worked out. so bipartisan investigators could have investigate this two months ago and it could have been heard in a

potential setting without doctor ford's name or judge potential setting without doctor ford's name orjudge kavanagh's name being dragged through the mud. through one of the two conversations that we had, democrats didn't participate except for those one or two, they didn't ask any russians. bank you. —— questions. two, they didn't ask any russians. bank you. -- questions. may i respond? —— bank you. it is my understanding that her story was leaked before the k in public. —— thank you. she had testified that she spoke to her friends about it and it is most likely that that is how the story leaked. —— before it became public. but it did not leak from us, i assure you that. i am a little confused, i thought only the member of the house and senator feinstein and her lawyers got the letter. so, her friend she might have talked about it, couldn't leak the letter,

theyjust had a verbal conversation, on the she gave them a copy of the letter. senator, i don't think the letter. senator, i don't think the letter was ever leaked. how did the press no to contact her that her complaint? apparently she testified here this morning that she had talked to friends about it. and the press had talked to her. judge, since there was reference to the problems, the legitimate problems and a change of lifestyle that doctor ford had, if you want some time to say the impact on your family, i would time to say the impact on your family, iwould be time to say the impact on your family, i would be glad to hear you. if you don't want to talk about it, thatis if you don't want to talk about it, that is ok. i have talked about that. senator harris. thank you. judge kavanagh, have you taken a professionally administered holographic test, as it relates to

this issue? no, i will do holographic test, as it relates to this issue? no, iwill do whatever the committee wants. those are not admissible in federal court but i will do whatever the committee wa nts. will do whatever the committee wants. —— polygraph. will do whatever the committee wants. -- polygraph. so you have not taken one? right. all the women who have made sworn allegations, have called for a an independent fbi investigations into the claims you been asked why this hearing by four different members, at least eight times today. earlier this week on national television, whether you would call for the white house to authorise an fbi investigation. each time you have declined to do so. you know, i know you do, that the fbi is an know, i know you do, that the fbi is c know, i know you do, that the fbi is an agency of men and women who are sworn and trained law enforcement. who, in the course of conducting background investigations on nominees for the supreme court of the united states and others, are

charged with conducting those background investigations because they are sworn law enforcement and they are sworn law enforcement and they have the expertise and the ability and history of doing that. i will ask you one last time, are you willing to ask the white house to authorise the fbi to investigate the claims that have been made against you? i will do whatever the committee wants. i have heard you say that, i have not heard you answer a very specific question that has been asked, which is in our you willing to ask the white house to conduct an investigation by the fbi to get to what have you believe is the bottom of the allegations that have been levied against you? the fbi would gather witness statements, do you have the witness statements? either want to debate with you how they do their business, i am 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 re ce nt before we were aware of these most recent allegations that. are you willing to ask the white house to do it, yes or no, then we can move on. six background investigations over 26 years lexus as it relates to the recent allegations. the witness testimonies before you, no witness who was there supports that i was there. i will take that as a no. yes that in your opening statement that you characterise these allegations asa you characterise these allegations as a conspiracy directed against you. i will point out that justice neil course sitch was dominated by this president, he was promoted by this president, he was promoted by this body last year, you both attended georgetown crap, both attended georgetown crap, both attended prestigious law schools, clwyd for justice kennedy, attended prestigious law schools, clwyd forjustice kennedy, you're both circuitjudges, you are both 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 is 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, look at miss kaiser's statement. 0k. do you agree that it is possible for men to both the friends with someone and and treat other women badly? men to both the friends with someone and and treat other women badly7m course. but the point i have been emphasising, that is if you go back to age 14 fernee, you will find people. —— for me. notjust a few people, many friends who i have been

with, some of them women, who have talked about me their whole life, it isa talked about me their whole life, it is a consistent pattern the whole 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 we went to events together. that is who i am. what they said, the people who worked with me in the bush white house, the women there, look at what sarah day said, look at what the law quirks. i have sent all law quirks to the supreme court than any otherjudge in the country. i only have a few seconds left, i will ask you a direct question. did you watch doctor ford's testimony?” direct question. did you watch doctor ford's testimony? i did not.

i plan doctor ford's testimony? i did not. iplan to, doctor ford's testimony? i did not. i plan to, but i did not. iwas preparing my. —— minus. —— mine. 0ur our last minutes will be senator fla ke our last minutes will be senator flake one minute and senator kennedy or minutes. thank you mr chairman. when doctor ford keyboard 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 did and i appreciate that. she came at great difficulty for her, and offered compelling testimony. you have come and done the same. i am sorry for what has happened to you and your family, i what has happened to you and your family, lam what has happened to you and your family, i am sorry for what has happened to her. this is not a good process, but it is all we have got. i would urge my colleagues to recognise that in the end, we are 21 very imperfect senators primed to do our best to provide advice and consent. in the end, there is likely to be as much doubt a certainty

going out of this room today and as we make decisions going forward, i hope that people will recognise that in the rhetoric that we use and the language that we use going forward, that we will recognise that there is doubt, we will never move beyond that. and just have a little humility on that front. thank you. thank you senator flake. senator kennedy. i am sorry, judge, for what you and your family have been through. and i am sorry for what doctor ford and her family have been through. it could have been avoided. do you believe in god?” through. it could have been avoided. do you believe in god? i do. i'm going to give you a last

opportunity. right here, right in front of god and country. i want you to look me in the eye. are doctor ford's allegations true? they are not accurate as to be. i do not question that she might have been sexually assaulted at some point her life by someone, some place. but as to me, i have never done this, never done this to her or to anyone else. i have talked to you about what i was doing that summer of 1982, but i am telling you i have never done this to anyone, including her. and mrs ramirez's allegations about you true? those are not. —— are. none of the witnesses in the room support that. if that would have happened, that would have been the talk of campus in our freshman dorm.

the new york times reported as recently as last week, she was calling other classmates seeking to, well i would not characterise it, but calling classmates last week and it seemed very, i willjust stop there. it is not true. it is not true. and this week nick's allegations about you true? those are not true. that know who she is. never met her. there is a letter released within two hours of that breaking yesterday of 60 people who knew me, men and women, who in their words, said it was nonsense. the whole thing, totally ridiculous. none of these allegations are true? correct. no doubt in your mind? zero. 100% certain. not even a

scintilla? you zero. 100% certain. not even a scintilla ? you swear to zero. 100% certain. not even a scintilla? you swear to god?” zero. 100% certain. not even a scintilla? you swear to god? i swear to god. that is all i have, judge. judge kavanagh, thank you very much. hearing adjourned. studio: there you go, testimony has been heard from supreme court nominee justice brett kavanaugh, been heard from supreme court nomineejustice brett kavanaugh, and christine blasey ford. she started just after lunchtime, uk time. went on for some four —4.5 hours and it has now concluded. it was a senate hearing being held at capitol hill. we're going to discuss this further in our papers review. before that, let's have a look at some of the front pages and then we will have the discussion with my guest tonight.