washington journal continues. host: ken starr that with his new book, about his work as the independent counsel to the whitewater and lewinsky investigations which is been titled the memoir of the clinton investigation. you begin and end that book by thanking the people in the independent counsel office with you, one of those people was brett kavanaugh. i wonder your thoughts this morning on this hearing that will be happening on monday where we will hear from that kavanaugh and his accuser -- brett kavanaugh and his accuser. >> i don't know the accuser but i do know brett kavanaugh and i have been reaffirmed in my firm hisef in brett kavanaugh, integrity and his character by the outpouring of support from those who have known him. not just people of worked with him, the people who grew up with him, including a lot of women who say this is not the brett kavanaugh who we knew and went to school with.

i hope there will be a balance in the ultimate judgment, that we have this long and distinguished career, and this one alleged episode from high school. but i believe in brett kavanaugh and his integrity. host: we invite viewers to join in. for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, for independents (202) 748-8002. speaking of the judgment here from what we will see on monday, who has the burden of proof? is it on the accuser to prove that this happened? on brett kavanaugh to prove that it didn't? guest: i don't think it will sort out that way. i think this is an ultimate judgment by the world's greatest alliterative body. they need to go through a process and they are going -- body.st deliberative they need to go through process and then step back and render judgment. this is not a court of law, a

process of -- it is a process of what is right for the american people, and the supreme court. i hope it will be on the merits, looking at the entirety of the record. i'm very concerned about the process, i don't hear people talking about it that much. this is a very detailed process of confirmation, including the former fbiix investigator reports and all of this has come to the public light within the last six days. i think that's unfortunate, and unfair to the process. the process beld with this hearing on monday? what should be happening now? guest: i think one of the best suggestions would be for this to have a non-circus atmosphere, and the best way to do that is by having professionals, i am arguing from an profession, but very skilled lawyers, doing the questioning. obviously senators should make

statements, but if we want to get the truth, have a lawyers do it just as it was done during the watergate hearings, many years ago. host: so if details of this incident are lost to history, how do you end up deciding who to believe? guest: i don't know this will just be a credibility judgment so much as here's an episode or incident from high school. i want to emphasize that, from hice will. it's not from college, law school, or anything in the profession. nothing in the office and there's knows justin of -- a suggestion of a pattern or practice. so i'm suggesting an ultimate judgment about the character of an individual based upon his entire life. host: our first caller is kathleen, from ohio. a democrat. hard for theushed

investigation, while you let it into the clinton and his extramarital affairs. and that preceded to impeachment . so knowing or pushing back against the idea of impeachment in regard to the president. sigh question that. and i also question in regards to kavanaugh -- so i question that, and in regards to kavanaugh, the question about how the all receiving confidential letters and stolen emails and confidential letters, i question his integrity based upon that line of questioning and always voting in support of corporate interests. so why would you push for engagement with clinton? host: with gotcha question. -- we have got your question. guest: what i did not do, which was what the statue it required

me -- required me to do. the statuette that required me to pass, required me to report to the house of representatives with any substantial and credible information came to the independent counsel's attention. so i simply obeyed the statute. the investigation itself, and i think this is not understood by the american people and i lay it out in my book. my memoir called contempt. that part of the investigation, as with other parts was authorized by bill clinton's attorney general. she reviewed the evidence we had of possible perjury and other ,rimes, and she then decided the attorney general, that she needed to go to a three-judge court and say this has to be investigated. turn a blind to the possibility of the president of

the united states committing crimes. duty, and i had a duty to do as well. will saynal thing i with, in respect to impeachment, what i said in my testimony in the house judiciary committee and i described that longest day for me was essentially 12 hours seat, youead -- hot could take his referral and do anything you want, including tossing it in the trash. and i'm sure a number of people wanted to do that. but i simply said this is my duty, here it is, now this is your judgment. ,hat experience, the final part what a not saying is don't go there now. what i'm saying about the clinton experience is that we learn from our history. impeachment was not the wise way to go. dianne feinstein, who is in the news these days, was pushing for

a resolution of censure. she wanted to condemn president clinton's conduct. and not the morality of the relationship with monica, but rule ofes against the law. we believe that no one should be above the law which is one of the reasons the independent counsel was created and why we have a special counsel now in bob mueller to ensure the rule of law. last the book is out again week, contempt, a memoir of the clinton investigation. ken starr is with us to talk about it on the washington journal. douglas, in alabama, in independent. good morning. i'm very disappointed in ms. feinstein and her action that she took, sending that information to the fbi. i felt like that was very wrong of her to do. she should not of done that. she should have waited and

checked to make sure everything was appropriate on this lady's part. and that's the way everybody does, and they think the man is always wrong, and every cap -- in every case, because a woman always goes hollering the sky is falling. host: do you think dianne feinstein should have in -- conducted a pre-investigation before forwarding information? caller: she should have come before the people, before going to the fbi and going that far to try to damage him. if that had held up, the fbi could have come out and arrested him and embarrassed him. host: we've got your point. guest: one of the great things about our country and our system of law is that we believe in fairness. the supreme court frequently uses the term fundamental fairness at the core of due process. i think that's important in the

senate processes when it's engaged in fact finding and not lawmaking. i do have concerns about the process, and i think it would've been far better -- i don't know anyone who had said that it was handled well by senator feinstein, to keep this and notion confidential to share that with the committee in a timely matter, so it could be considered in a timely matter. i think the process is so order for the american people ultimately to have confidence in the ultimate fundamental fairness of the judgment. quickly, it was felix frankfurter, a great justice on the supreme court from a bygone era who wrote that the history of liberty is in large part the history of procedure.

the we think about that in criminal justice system we can understand that. we need fair process, we think of miranda rights in the light -- and the like. so too with the fairness of everyone involved, including the dignity of the supreme court. this kind of thing should be handled with a keen eye on fairness and i have concerns about the way it has been handled. but we are where we are. in georgia, a republican. good morning. caller: i was wondering why she waited so long. --hater.trump hader 40 states have voted for him and democrats have been after him from his time, this gal should have come up, she has known where he was but she hates tromso she's going to take down this good man. this is not the christian way. concern understand the

we have in this country, but as part of our sense of fairness. statutes of limitation. if you have a complaint about someone you should in fact bring it forward. but i'm not going to criticize the accuser, much less attack the accuser. it lets sort this out. as i have said, we are so let's get to the bottom of things as best as we can. my concern, and this is part of the fairness concern is that there will eventually be a judgment on the part of the senate that reflects the dignity of the senate and the supreme court of the united states, which is judging the entire record. i heard a united states senator from alabama say that he had been in the process, and he happens to be a lawyer, senator jones. he has been in the process of reviewing the entire body of

work of brett kavanaugh. that is as it should be. look at all of his judicial writings in his 12 years, look at his extrajudicial writing, his long review articles, his speeches. it's a vast body. look at his service under president bush, look at the service in the independent counsel's office, that is what a fair and mature representative democracy will day. i fear that what is unfolding right now is a mob and circus atmosphere. and i hope that wise sages in the senate, which is why we elect them every six years, we want them to take a step back, and we understand the people have strong feelings about this issue. you have expressed strong feelings, the priors caller -- expressed wrong feelings but as for the senate to step back and say this is the

right thing to do, looking at the entirety of the record. i want to say one more thing about him. i know brett kavanaugh, i worked with him, i saw him daily in the office. i did not know him in high school. i did not know him in college. i do not know him in law school. but i have known him since he was an adult professional and what you're saying seeing is an outpouring of commentary. with the people who know him who say this is completely out of character of brett kavanaugh. and that is my sense. heardemployer, i have complaints about sexual harassment, not a hint of on the parte that of brett kavanaugh. he led an exemplary life and we saw that in the confirmation hearings. i hope that exemplary life will be taken into account by the world's greatest deliberative body, the united states senate. host: tom is in connecticut, a

democrat. good morning. we lost him. in virginia, on the independent line. the reason i'm calling is because 72 years ago, i was five years old. it was the last school in the early part of june and i was card. home with my report and a boy started chasing me and i started running and iran into into an alleyan next to a church. and the boy came up to me, pushing against the wall and pulled at my panties. and when he did that i should really hard and flew across the to thediagonally

apartment building where i lived. day, i have always remembered that. and i did not tell a single adult. parent,r was my only and he told me things about how to defend myself and not have .eople to bother me but i was afraid to tell anyone because i knew my father would probably try to find out about that boy and hurt him. but the point is, i never forgot the incident. i saw the boy years later because we moved away from the neighborhood. i remembered his face, and years after that i saw him as a young man running for city council.

he was the upstanding young citizen at that time. that, at i'm making is the age of 77, i never forgot that and i was very lucky. the kid was only about nine at the time, but the point is the violation. -- it was a violation. guest: these are searing experiences in what you have just described is a horror -- and what you had just described is a horror that remains with you. i don't think anyone in this process will gainsay or doubt the importance of hearing a story and for the process of healing and the like, when these kinds of episodes are alleged. my point is very simple, the character we know, and obviously i don't know the person who is

running for the city council and your story which is very powerful. buti know brett kavanaugh, many women who have served with him, in the office, have known .im, have worked with him and have come forward in this .utpouring with solid testimony to his character. with all of the reports from the -- itt is in him letter is an unblemished record. and that record is the record that i saw where he treated every person with dignity and respect. brett kavanaugh emphatically denies this episode. he says it did not happen. your city council person situation, i respect what it is that you are saying but what i

think the public should appreciate his those of us who have known him for decades who worked with him every single day never saw any indication of a character that was anything other than upright and honest and treating everyone, including, since the focus is on this issue, especially women. i came out of his confirmation hearing that he went the extra mile when he saw the impediments to professional progress of women and we've seen these law clerks come forward and say complete dignity, complete respect and he encourages them, and hundreds of us know that i admire. >> host: what do you think of the me too movement? >> guest: it was overdue.

is a position of power, people who lost their jobs, men who took advantage of their power position and i know in the book, with all due respect to his many talents, bill clinton was never taught to come into account, someone to this day, and seeking the governorship, and president clinton is likewise being called to account for the abuse of power directed toward women by powerful men. >> host: republican, illinois, good morning. >> caller: good morning, love c-span, pleasure to talk to you, you were a terrific guy in the whitewater investigation, i'm concerned about special

counsel now, the fbi, doj, cia up to their ears in spying and tweaking and some things possibly classified. is it time to get a special counsel to investigate the investigators? >> guest: i appreciate the concern but let me say i know bob mueller, i have confidence in his integrity as they served with brett kavanaugh, and bob is a marine, had an exemplary career as has brett kavanaugh as a public servant. i believe in his integrity. i have expressed concern about senior people around him in terms of overpartisanship, i

hope they leave their partisanship at the door which is their responsibility, they have a first amendment right to believe what they want to believe believe that at the door. in terms of what we have heard which is distressing and disturbing, there are checks and balances in place and just as i say in the book the system worked, we agree with what eventually happened, whether you agree with what the senate and the house of representatives did during the clinton phase, during the clinton years, you may love the judgment, he was held accountable, it was unfolding as we speak, not just bob mueller but your specific concern about intelligence officers and the like. those investigations are underway including internally by someone i have great confidence in, michael horowitz, the inspector general of the justice department, is

totally honest, he will get to the bottom of things and he has done this, to the criminal division for possible prosecution. the cia likewise as an inspector general, but don't read about the house and senate intelligence committees and other mechanisms, was very much involved in certain issues pertaining to the investigation, so i would counsel the american people to be patients, allow the process to run, the checks and balances in washington dc. >> caller: i'm an army veteran and police officer, the rules we lived in were extremely harsh.y

and i think mister starr, i couldn't care less about president clinton but there is action and reaction. you started something that is continuing today, you will see we can't go back, you tell people about morality, you wan. to see things change a little bit. he did lie but we can put these people in congress, public office, and dennis hastert, homosexual pedophile, david but it, newt gingrich.

fairness in american life should not be in the same sentence so just hang on. once you start on this track, this is how the game is played. >> i have a different view of american society, american culture and politics. obviously politics are a bit ugly but this is not about morality i don't think. the book is not about morality, a country that believes in the constitution of american law. the principle that no one is above the law. i'm not going to comment on a

specific situation, and freedom of the president trying to the first amendment. -- the truth will come out the american people to evaluate. the truth came out in the clinton investigation. what i'm about to say is absolutely true and i demonstrated it in the book. president clinton did everything he could to keep the truth, and he encouraged others to lie whether he embarked on e process we described in the referral as abuse of power. this is the president of the united states. you mentioned twoco former speakers of the house and the united states senator. people are called to account for their actions and not long after the investigation, i was

teaching at new york s university, the cabdriver, this cabdriver is a west african country, i want to protect everybody from the country. he said mister starr, is that you? yes. in my country this never could have happened. our leaders can do anything they want, they are not called to account. that is not america.e >> host: you had time to write this book. you used to be president of daly university. >> guest: i was dismissed from baylor university. i was not fired as chancellor. i hope two, the board of regents made a determination in light of issues of sexual violence and the like, and an important law they needed, new

leadership. and that is not a criticism, just the fact i did step down voluntarily as chancellor. may i complete the thought, in summer of 2016, and i wrote about my baylor experience. and i was finishing the project in late 2016 and hillary lost the election. y the time is really right, 20 years coming up for the entire process the we are noting the

impeachment process, the president acquitted in early 1999. now or never to write the story. >> caller: >> host: irving is in las vegas, democrat. good morning. >> caller: can you hear me? >> host: yes, go ahead with your question or comment. >> caller: kenneth starr is promoting brett kavanaugh's exemplary character but the same thing can be said for ted bundy. people who knew him, even elected official. i'm not saying brett kavanaugh is ted bundy, but they didn't

know the real ted bundy. >> guest: i disagree with the comparison. we are talking about a situation where someone was carrying activity as an adult, the most heinous kinds of crimes and essentially living two lives. brett kavanaugh has been an exemplary public servant, ted bundy wasn't. he didn't hold office. he wasn't a federal judge who had gone through confirmation. a single fbi background check, the real brett cavanagh is the oneff we saw in the confirmati hearings and the real brett kavanaugh, people went to high

school with him, young women who are now mothers who have said this is not the character of brett kavanaugh. this is not who we do in high school. accepting the argument, let's look at the high school episode, all the attributes to his character even in high school, and many decades. >> host: if the charges turn out to be true should brett kavanaugh get a lifetime in the supreme court? >> guest: i'm not going to answer hypothetical question, and it won't be proven. and i denied it, he's not denying that episode happened. he is denying he is the perpetrator.

i do not want in any way to criticize or attack the accuser. and just as we ask for fairness in the justice process, we want fairness in families. let's have fairness in the process, and the allegation, and a single episode in high school, looking at the balance, the career of brett kavanaugh. >> host: republican, alabama, good morning. >> caller: i have two or three points. one point being this woman went to a therapist, i don't know for many years but several

years ago, something happened with a bunch of kids that went to therapy and they convinced these children they had been sexually molested. it was found out to be untrue, they ruined a lot of people's lives, or at least the therapist did. i'm wondering how much the therapist had today with this r being brought out, and she is a trump hater and she waits until the last minute to do anything about it. >> host: we will take those points. >> guest: one of the great processes of the past whose words i frequently invoke including to myself is lincoln's second inaugural, we all remember the gettysburg address, he appealed to the higher nature of our being, the higher angels of our being, we

want fundamental fairness and part of fairness is to make sure an individual who is the subject of accusations is treated fairly and dispassionately. so the example that you use is a real one. i'm not going to make any comparisons with the current situation but you are s absolutely right, some lives were ruined by false accusations. i have been involved for many years with a wonderful project called the innocence project. there are people on death row who were factually innocent, not a legal technicality. we want fairness in this country and that is what i am crying for here, to look again at brett kavanaugh's character and to say look at the nature and depth and range of his contribution.fa he has never been accused until

th' senate confirmation hearing came up, we talk about one dimension of that beyond this but he has led a life of complete integrity and he has absolutely firmly denied not that an episode happened with the accuser but that he was the perpetrator of any such thing, that he never acted that way and he has this entire lifetime, a cloud of witnesses rallying around him and sayinge yes, we grew up with brett, we knew him then, we know him now, this is not brett kavanaugh. >> host: republican in california, good morning. >> caller: thank you for taking my call. the last caller -- at the very end, since -- she is a disgrace and it is an embarrassment.

at the 11th hour they come out with this just to destroy his character and i totally agree with you that his character is without blemish. come on. it is such -- it is like a witchhunt. >> guest: i will not get into any characterization at all. appreciate your point of view. >> host: the timing? >> guest: i indicated there is a genuine process concern and i'm going to say i wish diane feinstein would have been fair to her fellow senators, to brett cavanagh, of course, to the supreme court, of course. she chose not to act on this information she had. she had it in july and doesn't act on it until september and act on it in a way that gives

credence to those who believe this is political. i'm not saying it is political. it gives credence to those who believe this was a last-ditch effort. i'm not saying that but this kind of process violation as i see it, failure to respect orderly process, we don't talkt about the process, we just want to focus on these allegations. >> host: what about the accuser not wanting her identity known until reports started coming out and that she was going to lose control of the story? >> guest: i respect that but if you make the information known to united states senator and it is as we say in the law reasonably foreseeable that that information would need to be assessed by the fbi and the committee or whatever, with all due respect you could have it

both ways, this is a set of allegations but by the way i prefer to remain confidential. i understand the humanity of it but i talk about the process. in washington dc we are talking the most important court in the united states of america and we have a single individual making these comments at the 11th hour and in those comments, the description of the alleged episode not being made known to the senate when the senate judiciary committee has a process.co >> host: 25 minutes to talk about "every day is extra". california, good morning. >> caller: i have a couple points to bring up. you talk about morality and different things. i don't know why you continue

on with the clintons, and a woman who his been violated which i have been violated is not easy to come out. because you wait until the 11th hour it is hard to say i was abused by somebody. take that into consideration and no therapist convinces you that you have been raped. that is completely ridiculous. the only answer to that -- >> guest: i understand that it is not easy. i'm not saying it is by any means. any violation of human dignity the dignity of the human body is a very serious matter. what we have here is brett kavanaugh saying i did not do any such thing and many people saying brett kavanaugh is not the person. the accuserr had a very interesting career. if the person did in fact have

something happen to her i understand it is not easy for her to come out as you put it but we are talking not about a individual episode but an episode that is affecting the country, the question of who is brett kavanaugh? i want to come back to the first thing because she raised the question essentially why don't i go away from the clintons? it is a part of our history. we need to know history. this is the inside story, the inside story about why we chose not to seek an indictment of hillary rodham clinton, story the needs to be told, a story about our views with respect to the disappearance, which constituted obstruction of justice as i see it, of the rose law firm billing records in little rock, arkansas

showing hillary clinton performed legal services for savings and loan's that failed, that was infected with fraud. the story needs to be told. it has never been told because we didn't bring those charges and to bring those charges because we didn't believe we had the evidence admissible in court to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that hillary committed those crimes that we believe she had committed those crimes. the n story needs to be told. you use the m word to begin with, morality. i'm not talking about morality at all. i'm talking about the rule of d law and that is what the special counsel statute is talking about and what janet reno was talking about when she said to the special division, three judges, three federal judges, starr needs to investigate whether crimes against the rule of law including perjury and obstruction of justice, were committed.o is that moral?

we are not talking about the relationship, that is something the american people needed to be reminded that what the senate was focusing on with the house of representatives is focusing on work crimes, crimes proven on bill clinton's part so that is why i felt the call to write the book. >> host: you said brett cavanagh's accuser had an interesting career, what did you mean by that? >> guest: she had field, moved to california, i found her career as i read about it a very interesting journey. not making any pejorative comment about her. it is just a different kind of career path she has followed. >> host: diane in ocean, new jersey. good morning. >> caller: i have to say i just don't know anyone else that has

been sexually harassed, or, as many times as i actually have been. but to top all of that off, if you ever experience another woman that would plan to destroy a man and lie and say that he has sexually harassed you, this woman wanted me to g along with her. she did not want, she didn't even know about the guy at the time, it was horrible, she didn't like him. or either he wasn't interested in her but he was a horrible person but i had to talk her out of doing this. all the times i have been sexually harassed even to the

point where, thank god, i managed to get out of it, at gunpoint. itis topped all of that becaus it was so wicked. >> host: thanks for sharing your story. >> guest: it is a very moving story and i regret that you had this experience, including with the relationship with your friends. but sexual harassment in the workplace is a terrible terrible thing and i think what we are seeing, this goes back to an early part of the conversation is our society has matured. what i described in the book is an atmosphere that bill clinton created that he could do essentially whatever he wanted to with women. then if someone would make an accusation, they would be vilified. i think that was a very

unfortunate part of our history. we have matured as a society so that we are taking allegations seriously and seeing people losing their jobs because of sexual harassment in the workplace. we are talking about with the brett kavanaugh situation happened in high school when hs was 17 years old according to the allegations which he has denied. i would just call it there is a danger always of mob rule. >> host: massachusetts, jeremy, independent.he >> caller: i value your opinion and wanted to get a couple quick comments from you about the case that is happening, i have been trying to follow this, not any left or right leaning.

a year into this investigation, what do you think of that, what dog. you think of donald trump releasing the f i a document, would he do that if there wasn't something in there. brett kavanaugh ends up getting booted, is he going to lose his seatg on the district court? >> guest: it is intriguing that lisa page, former fbi agent, made the statement that she did. i would counsel caution that she was one agent, an important agent but i would take that to the bank in terms of the overall investigation. let's see what happens in the investigation.

i have seen no evidence of collusion. i've seen lots of evidence of what we all know and that is russian interference. one of the contributions of bob mueller was the first indictment of the 11 russian individuals and two russian organizations, and very revealing, not a word in the indictment in the campaign. the paragraph described the following. the same day in new york city these russian organizations, funded and organized anti-trump rally and pro-trump rally and that tells us something. russians are doing everything they can, vladimir putin is doing everything he can to undermine democratic institutions so that is my view in terms of lisa page.

on the fisa documents, even though we need to protect national security interests, there are reasons for classification, given what i know and i don't know as much as many other people, the people involved in the investigation, we needs greater transparency. i would air on the side of transparency. i would presume transparency and let's allow this information, as long as we don't reveal sources and methods, that is the key. we don't want to endanger the interests of the united states including individuals who served bravely including covert positions. that is very important, that goes without saying. but beyond that we should know the truth, the truth will set us free, let's have as much transparency as possible. i welcome the classification in the national interests. >> host: whether brett cavanagh would lose -- >> guest: know.

may it not come to that but the answer is no. >> host: kathleen in pasadena, maryland. good morning. >> caller: with all do respect, i have no issues with what happened with bill clinton but you keep referring to do process as far as mister cavanagh is concerned but how about republicans dumping 43,000 documents on committees the night before the hearing was supposedon to start and no waiting for the other 100,000 documents to be reviewed and released by the library of congress. >> guest: i truly don't have a view with respect to the issues of document access and the like. i view that as an issue and trusted to the discretion of

the senate but i think there needs to be processed. a process that is an orderly one with respect to declassification of documents. a number of the documents as i understandnd them had to go through the archival review process under the law. we on the outside don't appreciate the limitations under which officers of the government are operating but the presidential records act ordains a process, let's postpone hearings for a year or two years, that is a judgment call. my own view is given what i saw, the senate judiciary committee has before it and had before it a very elaborate record of brett kavanaugh's work, this body of work was extraordinarily detailed because he has been a judge and exemplary judge for 12 years. i don't think there is lack of information that materially affected the judgment or appropriateness of brett

kavanaugh to serve.. >> host: we are with kenneth starr, author of "contempt: a memoir of the clinton investigation". we will get to as many of your call this weekend. phone lines open for democrats, republicans and independents. go ahead. >> caller: first off i'm too young to remember anything from the clinton stuff. i'm looking forward to the book. i do want to ask a question as a female and as a republican. i have experienced similar situations to what is going on with the hearings right now. two things, everyone says in the 11th hour, a lot of hearings pushed through, that they were pushed through, is it at the 11th hour a normal

hearing would be, and my other question, presidents can be impeached, supreme court justices are lifetime appointments. if a supreme court justice lies during their confirmation hearing, what are the repercussions. >> guest: let's review that what could happen. on the last day of the term he was serving, justice anthony kennedy made the announcement to the nation that he was stepping down. within a very short period of time the president, in july, nominated brett kavanaugh. and the hearings were set. the hearings were set to provide literally weeks of

opportunity to review records and the like, to do the assessment process. than the hearings were set for early september. we are talking about a 2 month plus process and all designed to have a vote and from my perspective hopefully confirming brett kavanaugh to the supreme court in time for the justice to join the court which begins its work in two weeks, monday, october 1st. it is coming right up. the senate judiciary chaired by senator grassley set a schedule. everyone knew what the schedule was in the process began. it was in july, so early on that the accuser came to senator feinstein at the 11th hour, the concern is nothing was doneit as i understand it with those allegations even though the senate judiciary committee wente into public

hearings and executive session, to review the most sensitive materials in our democracy and iia have seen fbi reports and i reports, i describe this, you do not want to be the subject of an fbi reports because anyone can say anything about you and the fbi agents will dutifully report them, these are extremely sensitive records so even in an age of transparency senators all agree regardless of politics we will review fbi files, all the allegations that may have been made in closed session and they have the discretion that we are going to have hearings on this issue or that issue and so forth and brett kavanaugh sailed through the process and

senator feinstein did not bring the information forward even in that process of executive session. that is the 11th hour nature of it. with respect to impeachment, yes. one of the messages in the book is be very careful, very cautious, house of representatives and senate, about impeachment, the american people don't like impeachment. it is an important tool to have, to hold people accountable but judges have been impeached in the past and convicted by the senate and removed from office. >> host: dave, independent, go ahead. >> caller: good morning, how is everybody in the country. a couple things if i might, much is made of the fact that this happened when brett kavanaugh was 17 years old. in some states in this country 17-year-olds can be tried as adults. i would be curious how many 17-year-olds were in front of the judge during his career

that he tried as adults. second, the comment that justice is equal in this country is complete nonsense, anyone having anything to do with the system knows that. if you are rich and powerful you're not will do the same accountability. otherwise prisons and jails would have just as many rich people as they do poor. >> guest: brett cavanagh has never been a trial judge so he hasn't had the issue you talked about. t 17-year-olds can be tried as an adult. the relevance we are talking about is the episode that is alleged was when he was 17. now decades ago. that is the fairness issue and statutes of limitation. we have laws that say if you have charges, some of these are very sensitive, you need to bring them forward. in terms of justice is equal,

that is the struggle but i totally disagree with your cynicism. look what happened to paul manafort and rick gates. i started enumerating millionaires, billionaires who find themselves caught up in the criminal justice system, so i respectfully disagree. hours is a good system. if you have a state of local system, yesterday was constitution day and mister madison warned against the kind of phenomenon you are pointing to. in federalist 10, we need a government for this vast nation because oppression will more likely occur at the local level. think of boston dog, ran the community in that sitcom. you may have had a better experience but if you don't think n rich folks get chased

after by the fbi i can tell you from my personal experience you are quite wrong. >> host: richmond, virginia, james, good morning. >> caller: my own? >> host: what is your question for kenneth starr. >> caller: my question for mister starr, if he is saying fairness and justice is a clear mirror of all things and i think it is, why is he siding inrn every explanation that brt kavanaugh is innocent of these accusations? the 65 people saying brett kavanaugh was a nice guy, the only one that is important to the whole issue is the one that seem to have forgotten what happened that night.

>> guest: i have a different perspective but you are right. i talk a lot about fairness in justice so that is what our r system is, including our political system. we do not want witnesses browbeaten, we would recoil at that, so-called mccarthy hearings from a half-century ago. as a nation we recoil at a united states senator in a position of power abusing his power. power can be abuse and we need to have checks and balances. what i'm testifying to is i know brett kavanaugh. i know him and worked with him. not that i went out with him to a washington nationals game and he was a nice guy. i worked alongside him hour after hour day after day week after week but my experience was not unique. my experience is consistent withs all those who worked

alongside him in various positions in public life. he's been living in the fishbowl of washington dc leading an exemplary life. that is the point i am trying to make. the entirety of this record, the full body of work as they say, in football, seeing who is going to get into college playoffs. watch the entire body of work and i hope we will not lose our perspective and we are getting our perspective back. and is being deliberative about this and -- >> caller: mister starr, as far as what does the mail that is

being accused of alleged acts to turn out to be false? does he have any recourse? and i would like to tell you i come from a small town back in new york and the next town was a high school football star and his girlfriend, they had consensual sex but ultimately he was charged with rape, sent to prison for ten years and was put on the national registry for sex offenders. that to me is wrong. >> guest: there is no remedy in this arena but we are seeing in college and university arena lawsuits being brought by individuals we call respondents

in the title ix area who believe their due process rights were violated when they were found guilty. are responsible and kicked out of school or sanctions and their careers ruined. we are seeing increasingly judgments being brought against colleges and universities for their violation of due process. false charges, and the remedy for him is confirmation. there is no legal remedy but false charges are something the american people should be aware of. there are lawsuits pending right now, were entirely made up. >> host: in ohio, democrat,

good morning. >> caller: you try to make the clintons look like bank robbers. they released their tax forms. number 2, susan mcdougall was on larry king, she did 18 months in prison and you cut a deal with her at any time. and she said she had sex with president clinton. >> host: we will cycle back to the book in the final minute. >> guest: susan mcdougall was convicted of serious felonies that led to the collapse on savings and loan, found in of united states district court judge. susan made these allegations. the allegations are false. with respect to the clintons and their finances. you need to read the story and

the story as i recount in my book, demonstrate to a fair-minded person that they were involved in financial crimes in little rock.ey >> host: the title of the book, "contempt: a memoir of the clinton investigation". we appreciate your time as always. >> booktv marks our 20th year of bringing you the country's top nonfiction authors and their latest books. find us every weekend on c-span20 in or online@booktv.org. c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television companies and we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court and public policy

events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable and satellite provider. >> cyber attacks with the chief officer of management and budget and the importance of it infrastructure and modernization. ♪ >> good morning. thank you for the fantastic introduction and a reason i'm thrilled to be here, one thing grant said, you are here because you get it and talking to not just acquire but talking to the evangelists and that is the reason i spend so much time with the agencies.