attack on your agenda maybe it's ndur agenda that needs a makeover. not our independent judiciary. when you are this willing to launchch unhinged personal attas you reveal a whole lot more about your own radicalism and about the many women in your target. this is my commitment, mr. president. and the commitment of all my republican colleagues. as long as we remain in the senate we will fight to preserve our fair and independent judiciary. >> last year, we on theew judiciary committee conducted an incredibly thorough review of our nominee to the supreme court of the united states. we dug into justice kavanaugh's personal and professional life

and discussed concerns openly in front of the public. allegations were raised against the justice but none could be cooperated or verified. i know because i had a team of dozens of lawyers and investigators chasing down each allegation that we received. my team spoke to 45 individuals and took 25 written statements. now, anyone can review the 414 page investigation summary report that i released last november. we laid out the information we received including some of the ugliest of claims. in the endhe there was no credie evidence to support any of the allegations. brett kavanaugh then was duly

confirmed to the supreme court by this body as prescribed in the constitution. now, fast forward to this past weekend. the issues i and a lot of other members of the senate are being asked about thisn very day. it just if there's nothing else going on in this town but you dig up something that happened one year ago. "the new york times" published a book excerpt about justice kavanaugh's younger days that is fueled a fresh rumor from someone who's friends claim contacted senators on the committee. that person, mr. stiers, did not reach out to provide information to the committee majority.

apparently he also did not provide information to these writers. it's only on thet word of two anonymous sources that his name and accusation comes up in this story in "the new york times". again, my office never received anything from esther stier or ms. unnamed friends and we never received an allegation about brett kavanaugh the one referenced in the report over this weekend. after interviewing eight people related to the ramirez allegations not once was mr. stiers name mentioned. i had -- had my staff received a

substantive allegations or had he approach me or my staff we would have attempted to take a statement and interview him. but the alleged victim, who also did not speak to these writers, apparently does not recall the incident. that's a point that "the new york times" failed to include in its initial coverage. now, it happens for accountability there's that is the cornerstone of democracy. i welcome scrutiny of my work and i frequently refer to reporters and journalists as the police of our democratic system. but today i am reminded of a very old adage, who will watch the watchmen? this week sends report includes embarrassing irresponsible missteps.

mistakes that weren't serious self reflection. one year ago after the interviews with dozens of people the new york times cannot even cooperate the allegations laid out byou this ramirez and declid to report on it. with nothing but a year of time and another interview with ramirez herself the paper thought those unverified claims were suddenly worth printing. no more cooperation. no more verification. coming only days before the release of the author's book, i can't help but wonder if the timing has something to do with

mae decision to run the story. maybe sell more books. they also lead out what commentators are now calling new allegations. let me be clear, this is not an allegation. it's barely a thirdhand rumor. these writers, can you believe this? these writers do not even speak to the man who they claim originally recounted this rumor. what is left is only layers and layers of decades old hearsay. no more cooperation, no more verification, not even anything from the accuser himself. nothing most importantly, nothing from the person who was allegedly involved.

now the most shameful piece of this episode is that it took more than a full day after publication for the editors to intervenean and to provide critical context. the editor's note added to the story last night reads quote, the book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall does not recall the incident.le let me quote again. she does not recall the incident. that is the alleged victim. that is the opposite of cooperationrr and verification t in the legal world this sort of thing is called exculpatory

information. when it's not laid bare to provide greater context it creates a serious credibility problem. in this case "the new york times" withheld crucial facts that undercut its own reporting. we now have have an uncorroborated accusation rooted only in unnamed sources with no direct knowledge of the event and that the alleged victim does not even remember. you know about "the new york times" and they say there is their slogan is the only print what is fit to print.

i just described the situation of on collaboration rooted in an unnamed source with no direct knowledge of this event and that the alleged victim does not even remember. i will get back to the slogan of the newspaper but when did this stuff i described become something fit to print by the supposed american paper of record. the sad consequences of this article are a misinformed public and a greater divide in our own discourse and a deeper lack of faith in our news media. i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. >> c-span is back in des moines, iowa this saturday for life campaign 2020 coverage of the polk county democrat annual

steak beginning at 2:00 p.m. eastern were eating presidential candidates will take the state for speeches with lots of polk county iowa state live on c-span, it is .org or listen live on the goat using the free c-span radio app. >> our c-span campaign 2020 bus team is traveling across the country visiting key battleground states in the 2020 presidential race asking voters what issues they want presidential candidates to address during the campaign. >> i think a pressing issue i'd like to see candidates talk about his health care because there's a lack of healthcare in the country right now and i think affordable healthcare and some people aren't going as far as i would like to go into the details of how they plan to handle that your general ideas but i like policy a lot and we'll see where that goes. >> i would like for the candidates to say how we will re- normalize ourselves

[inaudible] also, were cooperating -- >> i would like to know each candidates idea on nuclear energy and the reinvestment of the technology in every state in the country and i would like to know if they believe sustainable, reliable and put the investment into our nation. >> concerned about the climate crisis and safety legislation and those are two essential things that have to be addressed by the election next year. i wish they would be addressed by congress before that but it does not appear that will move on that and also we need to try to get back to enforcing the constitution that our whoever

becomes president should obey the ammonia lens clause and should conduct business with integrity and should not ridicule minorities or handicap people or aged or anyone else and we need to restore integrity and we need to restore a sense of service to all the people. >> voices from the campaign trail part of c-span's battleground states tour. ♪ >> campaign 2020 watch live coverage of the presidential candidates on the campaign trail and make up your own mind. c-span's campaign 2020. your unfiltered view of politics. >> live tuesday on c-span.

>> for 40 years c-span has been providing america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court in public policy events from washington dc and around the country. you can make up your own mind. credit by cable in 1979 c-span is brought to you by your local or cable or satellite provider. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> we like to welcome a new face to "the communicators". it's jerry mcnerney, democrat from california. a member of the energy and commerce committee as well as cochair of the artificial intelligence caucus but congressman, welcome to "the communicators" and thank you for being here. >> pleasure to be here. >> host: i want to start with the issue in the news this week and that the state attorneys general investigating