&a, major garrett talks about his book "mr . trump's wild ride." >> it transcends party. he is proto-partisan. bigger than partisanship because there is an emotional dynamo that these things within people -- he spins within people. he doesn't intentionally, sometimes he does not know he is doing it. influencing every aspect of american life. culture, economic, politics and in ways you detected. the way journalists interact with this ongoing story. >> sunday night at 8:00 eastern c-span's q's q&a -- &a. >> what does it mean to be american? that is issue studentcam

question. we are asking middle and high school students to answer it by producing a documentary about as additional rights, national characteristic, anything how it defines the american area. experience. we are rewarding $100,000 in total cash prizes, including a grand prize of $5,000. this year's deadline is january 20, 2019. for more information, go to our website, studentcam.org. >> kenneth starr with a new bookg. . 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 is the record that i saw unfolding when he treated every person with dignity and respect. here is the key point. brett kavanaugh and that a clean denies the episode, he says it did not happen. your city council person situation, i respect what it is you're saying. but what i think the public should appreciate is that those of us who have known him for decades and you have worked with him every single day, never saw any indication of a character that was anything other than upright, honest, and treating onryone since the focus is this issue, especially women, and i think i came out in his confirmation hearing. he went the extra mile when he saw the impediments to professional progress of women. and we have seen all of his law clerks come forward and say complete dignity, respect, and

encouragedhat, he them and help facilitate the professional opportunities for them. so what we are hearing is something to me is totally out of character to the brett kavanaugh that hundreds of us know and admire. host: what are your feelings on the me too movement? guest: it was overdue. it was about people in the position of power and when we think about the people who have lost their jobs, men who have taken advantage of their power position. and i frankly note this in the tok, with all due respect his many talents, bill clinton was never called to account. including for the possible rape of someone, who to this day said i was raped by him and not in high school. but i -- but when he was the attorney general seeking to be the governor. i think president clinton will likely be called to account for the abuse of power directed

towards women by powerful men. bob, a republican in illinois. good morning. caller: good morning. i left c-span. you did a terrific job in the , i'mwater investigation concerned about our special counsel now not doing a very good job. fbi, doj, and the cia are up to their years in spying --ears in spying and leaking. do you think it's time to get a special counsel to investigate the investigators? concern appreciate the but let me say several things. i know bob mueller, i have confidence in his integrity just as i served with brett kavanaugh. , a marine whofi

has had an exemplary career as has brett kavanaugh as a public servant. i believe in his integrity. i have expressed concerns about some of the senior people around him, in terms of their overt partisanship and i hope they are leaving their partisanship at the door. which is their responsibility. they have a right to believe whatever they want, but believe that at the door -- but leave that at the door. but some of what we have heard is distressing and disturbing, there are checks and balances in place and just as i say in the book, the system works whether you agree with what eventually happened, or what the senate or house of representatives did, during the clinton phase -- the clinton years. these checks and balances work. bill clinton was held accountable. you may not like the judgment or he may love it. but he was held accountable and

i think that's unfolding as we speak. not just bob mueller, but let's go to your specific concern about intelligence officers and the like. those investigations are underway, including internally by someone whom i have great confidence and that's michael , the inspector general at the justice department who is a career civil servant and is totally honest, very able. he will get to the bottom of things. he has the power, and he has done this, to refer matters to the criminal division of the justice department for possible prosecution. the cia likewise has an inspector general, they are on the beat but we don't read about them. finally we have a house and the senate intelligence committees and other oversight mechanisms, the senate judiciary committee was very much involved in looking at certain issues pertaining to the investigation. i would counsel the american people to be patient, although

the process to run, but the checks and balances are in place. in illinois, on the independent line. caller: i will give you a short bio on an army veteran and police officer, and the reason i brought that up is because the rules we lived under them were extremely harsh and you could be terminated for a lot less than what we see in politics. i should actually thank mr. there during the clinton hearings, i couldn't care less about president clinton but the fact is there is action and reaction and you should be proud because you started something that is continuing today. and you are going to see that we cannot go back. when you start telling people about morale at a, which is a very touchy subject that i never approach -- morality, would you

the touchy suspect -- subject than i never approach. now you want to see things change. as far as i'm concerned he lied. but we can put these people in congress, anyone in public office and put them under public oath and when they get caught lying, let me throw some names. dennis hester, homosexual pedophile, david that are, larry gingrich, those are the kind of people you want? fairness in american life should not be in the same sentence. hang on. once you start on this track, this is the game is played. guest: thank you for your the army and in law enforcement and enjoined the land of lincoln. since you are there, i obviously ofe a different view american society, american culture, and politics. obviously politics can be ugly, but this is not about morality. i don't think.

the book is not about morality. my book is about america is a country that believes in the constitution and the rule of law. and the principle that nobody is above the law. some of the names you mentioned i will not comment on any specific situation, but one of the checks and balances is the press. i'm a fervent believer in the freedom of the press, enshrined in the first amendment. come out andl americans connect says -- assess and evaluate. the truth came out during the clinton investigation. i will be harsh, but what i'm about to say is absolutely true and demonstrated in the book. president clinton did everything he could to keep the truth from coming out. we could say was about a moral issue but it wasn't. it was about whether he committed perjury and encouraged others to lie, whether he was embarked on a process that we

described in the referral as the abuse of power. that's important. this is the president of the united states. and you mentioned is co-former speakers of the house, a united formersenator -- two speakers of the house and the united states senator people are -- senator. in washington, d.c. i was teaching at the unit -- a new york university and i was on my way to get to the shuttle and the cab driver turned around and , and it turns out that this cap driver is from a west african country. starr, is that you? in my country this never could have happened. our leaders can do anything they want. they are not called to account. but that's not america. host: he said one of the reasons you wrote this book was because you had, -- because you had the

time. he used to be the president at baylor university and you no longer do? guest: i was dismissed. i was not fired as chancellor positions.a two in light of issues of sexual violence and the like, and possible violations of title ix which is an important law that they needed new leadership. as chancellor of the university because i felt i could no longer work with at the board of regents at that time. it's not a criticism, it's just the fact that i did step down voluntarily as chancellor. i was not fired for cause, we just need new leadership. thought,complete the it's the summer of 2016, i immediately said no to law firms . let me have some time, i wrote a book about my baylor experience, and it turned out to be, as my

agent said, as is a love story to baylor. and i was delighted to do this. i was finishing the project and hillary lost the election. the time is right, 20 years coming up for the entire process , that we are noting now, the in early 99process at its time. it's now or never to write this story. an hour left. irving is in las vegas. a democrat. caller: host: about half an hour left with ken starr. a democrat in las vegas, good morning. caller: good morning. can you be? host: go ahead with your question or comment.

, who isi hear ken starr kavanaugh's exemplary character, but the same thing .ould be said for ted bundy there were people who knew him, and they stood up for his even elected eve officials. i am not saying kavanaugh is ted know thet they did not real ted bundy. so, -- host: got your point, irving. all due respect, i emphatically disagree with the comparison we are talking about, a situation where a person was

caring out the most heinous crimes and living two lives. brett kavanaugh has been an exemplary public servant. ted bundy wasn't and he did not hold office and was not a federal judge that went through confirmation. ted bundy never went through, as far as i know, a single fbi background check, let alone six. the real rent kavanaugh -- brett kavanaugh is the one we saw in the hearings and has generated -- not generated, but people came up spontaneously who went to high school with him, young mothers, said this is not the character of brett kavanaugh. this is not who we knew in high school. just accepting the possibility of the argument that let's just look at the high school episode, what we are hearing is to bits to his character, even in high school.

it is a character that has continued for decades. turn out to charges be true, should he get a lifetime appointment to the supreme court? guest: i am not going to answer a hypothetical question. i do not think it can be from the stage at what we know, it is not owing to be proven. it will be her best recollection, and he is -- going the to be proven. it will be her best recollection, and he is not , heing an episode happened is denying being the perpetrator . i am not going to deny there was an accuser, but i hope there will be fairness and everyone just like we ask for fairness in the justice process. we want fairness in families. let's have fairness in the process.

about the dignity of the supreme court of the united states and the allegation, again it is an allegation, single episode in high school. people just need to look at the balance and the career of brett kavanaugh. janice, alabama, republican. good morning. caller: i have two or three points. one point being, this woman went to a therapist -- i don't know for how many years, several years ago. there was something that happened with a bunch of kids that went to therapists, and they convinced these children that they had been sexually molested. later on, it was found out to be untrue. they ruined a lot of people's lives, or at least the therapist did. i am wondering how much the

therapist did in having this being brought out. hater andrump waited till the last minute to do anything for it. host: we will take those points. guest: one of the great presidents of the past, whose words i read -- frequently invoke is lincoln and the gettysburg address. in the second inaugural, he appealed to the higher nature and angels of our being. we want fundamental fairness. art of fairness is to make sure -- part of fairness is to make sure that an individual who is ed fairly andeat dispassionate. i will not make comparisons with the current situation. you are right, 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 are factually innocent, not a legal technicality. want fairness in this country, and that is what i am crying for to look at brett kavanaugh's character and to say, look at the nature and depth and range of his contribution. ofhas never been accused this until the senate hearing up. he has let the life of integrity and has denied that not an episode didn't happen, but that he was the perpetrator of any

such thing and never acted that way. he has this entire lifetime and a cloud of witnesses rallying around him and saying yes, we we knowwith brett and him now and this is not brett kavanaugh. host: good morning. guest: thank you for taking my call. i agree with the last caller. since dianne feinstein knew about it in july, she is a disgrace and an embarrassment. at the 11th hour, they come out with this just to destroy his character. i totally agree with you that his character is without blemish. this is ridiculous. guest: i am not going to get

into any characteristic -- characterization. i appreciate your point of view. there is a genuine process concern, and i will say it, i wish senator dianne feinstein would have been fair to her fellow senators. course. kavanaugh, of to the supreme court, of course. look what has happened -- she chose not to act on this .nformation that she had she had it in july and is not act on its until september, and credencet and gives to those who believe this is political. i am not saying it is political, that it gives credence to those who believe this was a last-ditch effort. this kind of process violation, as i see it -- failure to respect orderly process, and we do not want to talk about the

process. we want to focus on the allegations. host: what about the desire of the accuser not to want to come out in july? she did not want her identity known until reports started coming out and she was concerned she would lose control of the story? guest: i respect that. if you make the information known to a united states senator in this country, it is, as we say in the law, reasonably foreseeable that information will need to be assessed by the fbi, committees on staff or what ever. all due think him with respect, you can have it both ways that here is a set of allegations and by the way, i prefer to remain confidential. i understand the humanity of it. in talking about the process, we are in washington, d.c. and talking about the most important court in the united states of america.

we have a single individual making these comments at the descriptionnd the of the alleged episode not being made known to the senate, when the senate judiciary committee has a process. host: 25 minutes left with ken starr to talk about his book (202) 748-8003 "contempt: a memoir of the clinton investigation." host: a democrat, on the line. good morning. caller: you talk about reality and different things you are doing. i do not know why you continue on with the clintons, and number two, which a woman has been violated and i have, it is not easy to come out here just as she waited until the 11th hour, it is hard to come out and say, i was abused by somebody. do you take this into consideration?

do you have any answers for that? guest: i understand it is not easy. i am not saying that it is by any means. any violation of human dignity, the dignity of the human body, is a very serious matter. what we have is brett kavanaugh saying, i did not do any such thing, and we have many people saying that kavanaugh is not the person. if the accuser, who has had an interesting career, if the person did in fact have something happened to her, i understand it is not easy for her to come out. we are not talking about an individual, we're talking about an episode that is affecting the country and raising the question of, well, who is brett have a kavanaugh?

i want to come back to her first thing because she raised the question about why don't i get away from the clintons? it is a part of our history. we need to know history. this is the inside story, melanie, about why we chose not to seek an indictment of hillary rodham clinton. that is a story that needed to be told. here is a story about our views with respect to the disappearance which constituted obstruction of documents.the rose hillary clinton supported that and it was a fraud. the story needed to be told because we did not ring charges and we didn't bring them because we did not believe we had the evidence admissible in court to

prove beyond a reasonable doubt that hillary had committed those crimes, we believe she had committed those crimes. the story needs to be told. morality, i am not talking about morality. i am talking about the rule of law. that is with the special counsel 's statute was talking about and what janet reno was talking about when she said to the three needs toudges, starr investigate whether crimes against the role of justice were committed. is that moral? of course, but we are not talking about the relationship. --y american people needed the american people need to be reminded that what the house of representatives was focusing on war crimes that were proven on bill clinton's part. that is when i felt the call to

write the book. host: you described brett kavanaugh's accuser of having an interesting career. what did you mean by that? guest: she has gone into different fields and what to california. i find her careers an interesting journey. it is a different kind of career path that she has followed. host: diane in new jersey, republican. good morning. caller: good morning. i have to say that i just don't know anyone else that has been sexually harassed as many times been.ave ok, if youthat off, have ever experienced another woman that would plan to destroy say that hee and

has sexually harassed to, this woman wanted me to go along with her, ok? -- she didn'tnt even know that i didn't like the guy at the time. she just did not like him. was not interested in her, but he was a horrible person. i had to talk her out of doing this. all the times i have been sexually harassed, even to the i didwhere, thank god manage to get out of it at gunpoint, it topped all of that because it was so we could. host: thank you for sharing your story. guest: that is very moving story, and i regret you have had this experience, including with

the relationship with your friend. sexual harassment in the workplace is a terrible thing. -- and thisseeing goes back to an early part of societyersation, is misse has matured. i described an atmosphere that bill clinton created that he could do essentially whatever he to visa-a-visa women. we are taking it seriously and people are losing their jobs because of sexual respite in the workplace. what we are talking about something that happened in high school when he was 17 years old,

according to the allegations, and wish he has denied. there is a danger always of mob rule. host: jeremy, independent, massachusetts. good morning. .uest: good morning, mr. starr i value your opinion. i wanted to get a couple quick comments from you about the case that is happening now on the independent. i have been trying to follow this without any left or right leaning. -- arestions i ask is they admitting there is no collusion i hear into this investigation, what do think of that? what do think of president trump releasing documents and texts? would we really do that if there re?n't something in the

if brett kavanaugh gets booted, will he lose his seat on the district court? guest: thank you. it iser, i think intriguing that lisa page, the former fbi agent has made the statement that she did and council cautioned that she was an important agent. i would not take that to the bank in terms of the overall investigation. let's see what happens in the investigation. that being said, i see no evidence whatever of collusion. i have seen lots of evidence of what we all know, and that is russian interference. great the contributions of robert mueller was the indictment of the russian officials and organizations. in one paragraph of the indictment, i found this

revealing and there was no word of collusion in the indictment of the campaign. it described the following, on the very same day in new york city, russian organizations funded and organized both an anti-trump rally and april trump aally -- and all the pro-trump. that is my view in terms of lisa page. on the documents, we need to protect the national security interests, and so there are reasons for classifications. given what i know, and i do not , iw as much as other people think we need greater transparency. r on the side of transparency. . would presume transparency

let's allow this information, as long as we don't reveal sources we methods, that is a key, do not want to danger the interests of the united states, including individuals who serve bravely and in dangerous, covert situations. that goes without saying. beyond that, we should know the truth, truth will set us free. what's have as much transparency as possible. i welcome declassification. host:'s third question was whether brett kavanaugh would lose his district court seat? guest: no, it may not come to that. host: in maryland, democrat. good morning. morning.ood mr. starr, with all due respect, and i have no issues with what happened to bill clinton. you are referring to do process -- due process as far as brett

kavanaugh is concerned, but how about the republican strapping 40,000 documents on the eve of where the hearing started and not waiting for the other bedred thousand documents to reviewed by the library of congress? guest: i truly don't have of you 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. i do think there needs to be process, orderly and respect to declassification of documents. a number of the documents, as i understand them, had to go to the archival review process under the law. sometimes we on the outside do respect the way

their operating. they may say let's just 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 and had before it a very elaborate record of judge kavanaugh's work. his body of work was extraordinarily detailed because he has been an exemplary judge for 12 years. i do not think there was a lack of information that materially affected the appropriateness of brett kavanaugh to serve. host: 10 or 15 minutes left with ken starr, offer of the new book "contempt: a memoir of the , clinton investigation." we will try to get to as many of your calls as we can. phone lines as they normally are. host: in virginia, a republican. go ahead. caller: first up, i am too young

to remember anything from the clinton stuff. i am looking forward to the book. guest: thank you. caller: as a female and as a republican, i have experienced similar situations to what is been going on with the hearings right now and the accuser. my question is more -- everyone is saying the 11th hour, and from my understanding, a lot of hearings have been pushed through your are being seen as being pushed through. is it the 11th hour as a normal hearing would be, or is this one being fast tracked more than normal? my other question is -- with the president -- they can be impeached and everyone says supreme court justices are lifetime appointments. if it is found that a supreme court justice lied during their confirmation hearings, is there -- what happens question mark

what are the repercussions? question,the first let's review what happened. on the last day of the term, which he was serving, justice anthony kennedy made the announcement to the nation that he was stepping down. within a very short period of july,the president, in 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. then the hearings were set for early september. we are talking about a two month plus process, all designed to have a vote, and for my perspective hopefully confirming judge kavanaugh to the supreme court, in time for the judge, justice to join the court which

begins its work in literally two weeks. it begins on monday, october 1. judiciary-- senate committees set a schedule and everyone knew what the schedule was, and the process began. it was in july, so early on, that the accuser came to senator feinstein, and the 11th our concern is, nothing was done, as i understand it, with those allegations, even though the senate judiciary committee wanted public appearance and went into executive session, as i understand it, and wanted to review the most sensitive materials in our democracy and fbi reports. i have seen fbi reports, and believe me, fbi reports you do not want to be the subject of an fbi report because anyone can say anything about you, and the

fbi agent will dutifully reported. he/she will not cross examine you. they are extremely sensitive records. even in an age of transparency, senators all agree that they will review the files, allegations that may ever have been made against someone in closed session. they have the discretion that they will have hearings on this issue or that issue. brett kavanaugh sailed through that process. senator feinstein do not bring this information forward, even in that process of executive session. that is the 11th hour nation -- nature of it. one of the messages in the book is, be very careful, very cautious in the house of representatives about impeachment. the american people do not like impeachment.

it is an important tool to have in democracies to hold people accountable. judges have been impeached and convicted by the senate and removed from office. host: south carolina, dave, go ahead. an independent. starr good morning mr. and everyone in the country. much has been made of the fact that this happened when judge kavanaugh was 17 years old. in some states, 17-year-olds can be tried as adults. i would be curious as to how many 17-year-olds were -- thised his judge judge during his career that he tried as adults. secondly, the comment that justice is equal in this country is complete nonsense. anyone who has had something to do with the system knows that. if you're rich and powerful, you are not held to the same accountability. otherwise, jails would have just as many rich people as poor. host: we will take the comments.

guest: very well. first of all, brett kavanaugh has never been a trial judge and is never had the issue you talk about. 17-year-oldsstates can be tried as adults. we are talking about the episode that was alleged was when he was .7, decades ago that is the fairness into and statutes of limitation. we have laws that say if you do have charges, and i know some charges are sensitive, you need to bring them forward. in terms of justice is equal, that is a struggle. i totally disagree, with all respect to with your cynicism. look what just happened to paul manafort. look at what happened to his partner, rick gates. i can start enumerating millionaires and billionaires who find themselves caught up in the criminal justice system. i respectfully disagree.

i think ours is a good system. if you have a state and local system, and by the way, yesterday was constitution day and mr. madison warned against the kind of phenomenon you're pointing to. in federalist 10, he said we need a vast, commercial this vast nation because of oppression will more likely occur at the local level. boss of loss called, -- that littlen community. that is what he warned about. if you do not think rich folks get chased after, i can tell you from my own personal expense you are quite wrong. host: james, democrat, virginia. good morning. guest: good morning, sir. am i on? host: what is your question for ken starr? guest: my question is, if he is saying that fairness and

injustices are a true mirror of all things, and i think it is, that mr.ou citing kavanaugh is innocent of these accusations? i mean, the 65 people that are saying that mr. kavanaugh was a nice guy, and the only one that is important to the whole issue is the one that seems to have forgotten what happened that night. guest: well, i have a different perspective, as you might imagine. you are right. i talk a lot about fairness and justice, and that is what our system, including our political system, is designed for. we do not want them browbeaten.

as a nation, we recoil at a united states senator in a position of power abusing his power. power can be abused, and we need to have checks and balances in order to prevent it. what i am testifying to, kind sir, is i know brett kavanaugh. i know him and i worked with him. it is not that i went out with him to a washington nationals game one time and he was "a nice with himorked hour-by-hour, week by week. my expense was not unique. it is consistent with all of those who have worked alongside him in his berries editions in public life. his experiences in public life. in the full body of work football and see who is going to get into the college playoff. what is the entire body of work?

i hope we will not lose our perspective, and i think we are starting to get our perspective back after the revelations of the weekend to say, let's be deliberative about this and not turn it into a circus. host: a couple final colors have been waiting a long time. augustine is in north carolina, republican. good morning. guest: good morning. mr. starr, i have a question for theas far as, what does male that is being accused of a legend acts that turn out to be false? does he have any recourse? you -- also like to tell i come from a small town back in new york.

the next town over had a high school football starr and his girlfriend. , buthad consensual sex ultimately he was charged with rape, sent to prison for 10 years, and was put on the national registry for sex offenders. that, to me, is wrong. host: answer? guest: very quickly. this is no remedy in arena. we are seeing in the college and university arena lawsuits being individuals called respondents in the title ix area who believe that their due process rights were violated when they were found guilty, are responsible, and kicked out of school or otherwise sanctioned and career substantially ruined. we are seeing increasingly judgments being brought against colleges and universities for their violation of basic due

process and fairness. false charges are in fact -- i am sorry, i failed to say in this arena for brett kavanaugh, the remedy for him is confirmation, but that is it. there is no legal remedy. false charges are something the american people should be aware of. there are lawsuits pending right now that are alleging exactly that. the charges were entirely made up. let's get things educated in a fair way. host: last call tom, ohio, democrat. good morning. guest: you try to make the clintons look like some kind of bank robbers. they did have money here they released their tax forms. mcdougal wasusan on larry king, and she said 18 months in prison and you cut a deal with her anytime if she would have said she had sex with

president clinton. host: we will let can start and there. guest: susan mcdougal was convicted of serious felonies that led to the collapse of a savings and loan in little rock, arkansas. she was found in contempt by the united states district court. susan has made these allegations, and they are false. clintons andto the their finances, i never alleged were wealthy at the time. they are, in >> creep's "washington journal" live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up wednesday morning, laura dawson and duncan wood discuss the nafta renegotiation and u.s.-canada-mexico relations. and then "the hill"