i want tthank you very much for your testimony. i know how very, is. why -- why have you held itou why haveeld it to yourself all these years? can you indicate what the reasons are? >> i haven't held it all these years. i did disclose it in the confines of therapy where i felt like it was an appropriate place to cope with sequela of the events. an >>ou tell us what impact the events had on you? >> well, i think that the el seof sexual assault varies by person. so for me personally, anxiety, phobia, and ptsd-like symptoms are the types of things i've been coping with. more specifically, claustrophobia, panic and that type of thing. >> is that the reason for the

second door, front door is claustrophobia? >> correct. our house does not look sthetically pleasing from the curb. >>av see. do youthat second front door? >> yes. it now ia place to host google interns, because we live near goog google. >> tu tell us, is there any other way this has affected your life? >> the primary impact was inhe initial four years after the event. i struggled academically.ru i led very much in chapel hill in college when i was 17 and went off to college, i had i very har, more so than others forming new friendships and especially friendships with boys.

and i had academic problems. >> what were the -- when we spoke and it bece very clear yow deeply you felt about this and the need thawanted to remain confidential, can you tl talk a lbit about that? >> yes. so i was watching carefully throughout the summer -- my original intent, i want to t remind, wrcommunicate with everyone when there was still a list of candidates who all seemed to be just from my perspective, from what i could read, equay qualified and i was in a hurry to try to get the information forward but didn't quite know how do that, however, once he was selectednd it seemed like he was popular and it was a sure vote, i was calculating daily the risk be fit for me of coming forward and wondering whether i would just be mping in front of a

train that was head today where it was headed anyway. and i would just be personally annihilated. >> how did you decide to come forward? te ultimately, because rep were sitting outside of my home trying to talk to my dog through the window. to calm the dog down. and a reporter appeared in my graduate classroom atook her for a student and she came up to ask me a question. and i thought that she was a student. it turned out that she was a reporter. so at that point i felt enough was enough. people were calling my colleagues at stanford and icaving messages on their mails and e-mail saying they kn my name. clearly, people knew my address because they were in front of my house. the mounting pressure seemed like it was time to ju what i needed to say.

>> i want to ask you one question about the attack itself.cl you were verr about the attack, being pushed into the room. you say you don't know quite bym ut that it was brett kavanaugh that covered your mouth to prevent you from screaming and then you escaped. how are you so sure that it was he? >> the same way that i'm sure that i'm talking to you right now. so just basic memory functions. and also just the level of nor epinephrine and epinephrine in the brain that, as you know en cos s memories and transmittmp into the hippo and so the trauma-related experience is kind of locked there, whereas other details kind of drift.

>> what u're telling us is that this could not be a case of mistaken identit ch absolutely not. >> thank you, mrrman. >> miss mitchell, for senator hatch. >> thank you, mr. chairman. when we were stopped, you were going to tell us a third correction that you wanted to make on that statement or i'm sorry shall the letter to senator feinstein. >>t wasn't a correction. i wanted to comment on it since we're looking at thiletter that i did see mark juce up at a safeway after the time of the attack.he it would bful with anyone's resources if -- to figure out whehe worked there, if people are wanting more details from me about when the attack occurred. if we could find out wn he worked there, then i could provide a more detailed timeline

as to when the attack occurred. >> so that is not a correction in your statement?o. >> >> you also wrote out a handwritten statement for the calligrapher when you took your polygraph test, is that rrect? >> yes >> i see corrections where you crossed out.l so i w on to the "washington post" article that l was orig published on september 16th of this year. >> should i just not look at this for accuracy? are we going to leave -- >> we may come back to it if you need to refer to it. >> okay. >> on e "washington post" article, did you submit to an interview by a reporter with the "washington post" for that article to be written?ct >> cor >> okay. and finally, was the statement that you provided this morning,

i assume that, to the best of your recollection, that that was accurate? >> this whole article is accurate? >> no, no. the statement that you made this morning. >> yes. >> i want to talk to you about the y that this happened leading up to the gathering. >> okay. >> in your statement this morning, have you told us ha everythingyou remember about the day leading up to that? >> yes. >> let me ask just a few questions to make sure you've t thou everything, okay? you indicated that you were at the country club swimming that tiy? >> that's my best te of how this could have happened. >> okay. and when you say best estimate, is that based on the fact that you said you went there prvety much day? >> uh-huh. >> is that a yes? >> yes. >> do you recall prior to getting there -- so i'm only talkinabout up to the thering. >> okay.

>> had you had anything to drink? not at all. >> were you on any sort of medication? >> none. >> do you recall knowing before nt who was going to be at that gathering? >> i recall that -- expecting that mark judge and leland would be at that gathering. >> okay do you recall an expectation that brett kavanaugh would be there? >> ion't recall whether or n i expected that. >> let's talk about the gathering. from the time u arrived until right when you went up the stairs, just that period of time, okay? what was the atmosphere like at the gathering?r. >>avanaugh and mr. judge were extremely inebriated.

kithey had clearly been dr and other people at the party had not. >> can i ask a follow-up on that. when you said it was clear that they had been drinking prior, dp you meor to the time you had gotten there or prior to the time they had arrived? >> prior to the time that they arrived. i don't recall who arrived first, though. whether it was me or them. >> okay. >> please continue. >> okay. >> so i recall that -- i can sketch a floor plan. i recall that it was a sparsely furnished, fairly modest living room. and it was not really a party, like they made it sound. j it wt a gathering that i assumed was going to lead to a party later on, that those boys would attend because they ar attendedes later at night than i was allowed to stay out. so it was kind og.a pre-gather >> was it loud? >> no. not in the living room.

>> besides the music that you've described that was playing in the bedroom, was there any other musielevision or anything ng. that, that was ad >> no. >> so there wasn't a stereo wn playinstairs? >> no. en >>or leahy?d, >> dr. fhank you for being here. mr. chairman, you know, the way to make this inquiry truly ed le is to do what we've always done with new information about a nominee cos to light. to use your words this morning, you want to reach the truth. the easy way to do that is ask the fbi to investigates. it's what we've always done. let them investigate and report back to us. the same applies to the serious etlegations made by deborah ramirez and julie ck.

let's have a nonpart sisan pr essional investigation and then take the time to have the witnesses testify. chairman, we were both here 27 years ago. at that time the senate failed anita hill. i said i believed her. but i'm concerned that we're doing a lot less for these three women today. that's my personal view. dr. ford, no matter what happens in this hearing today, no matter what happens to this nomination, i know and i heafrom so many of my own state of vermont, there are millions of victims d rvivors out there who have been inspired by your coage. i am. riavery is contagious. indeed, that's theng force behind the me too movement. and you sharing your story is going to have a lasting, positive impact on so many survivors in our country. we owe you a debt of gratitu

for that, doct. now, some have suggested that you were simply mixed up about who assaulted you. judge kavaugh and the white house promoted a wild theory about a kavanaugh look alike. you immediately rejected that theory. as did the innocent man who had been called that look-alike. in fact, he sent a letter to c thmittee forcefully objecting that theory.er i ask to ehat into the record. >> without objection. so ordered.>> ow did you know brett kavanaugh and mark judge? is it possible that you would mix them up with somebody else? >> no, it is not. the person that was blamed for the incident is actually the person who introduced me to them originally. so he was a member of columbia country club and i don't want to talk about him because i think it's unfair. but he is the person that

introduced me them. >> but you would not mix up somebody else with bretts kavanaugh,at correct? >> correct. >> or mark judge. >> correct. >> then let's go back to the incident. what is the strongest memory you have, strongest memory of the incident? something you cannot forget. take whatever time you need. >> indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter, the uproarious laughter between the two and their having fun at my expense. >> you never forgotten that laughter? you never forgotten them inughing at you? >> they were lauwith each other. >> and you were the object of the laughter?

>> i was underneath one of them while the two laughed. two friends having a really goo time we another. >> let meighent enter into the d a statement by the national task force to end domestic violence.t >> witbjection, so ordered. >> a letter from 24 members of the house of representatives ng urhe committee to use the trauma and -- approach in questioning dr. ford. letter for another 116 members of the house asking to delay until all this has been heard. >> without objection, so ordered.r. >> andord, has at times been criticized for what she doesn't remember from 36 years ago. we have numerous experts, including a study by the u.s. army military school of behavior

sciences education that lapses of memory are wholly consistente with a btrauma and stress of assault. i would ask that be entered. >> without objection, so ordered. >> dr. ford, i conclude with this. you do remember what happened, do you not? >> very much so. mahank you. thank you, mr. cha >> now, ms. mitchell for senator graham and then it's my understanding that that's where you'd like to take a break. >> does that work for you? does that work for you as well? >> we're here to accommodate you. not to accommodate us. >> i'm used to being collegial. >> miss mitchell for senator graham. >> thank you, mr. chairman. you told senator feinstein in your letter that you and four others we present. you've corrected that today to say it was at ast four others.

when you were interviewed by the "washington post" you said that there were four boys present at the party. and then in your polygraph statement you said there wer four boys and two girls.wo when you sayirls, was that you and anotr oregon two other girls. >> that was me and one other girl. >> that other girl's name. >> leland. >> leland kaiser now? >> correct. >> then would it be fair to say at least p.j., brett kavanaugh, mark judge, leland ingram at the ti and yourself were prese and possibly others? >> and one other boy. there were four boys. i just don't know the name of the other boy. >> have you been contacted by anybody saying, hey, i was at at the arty, too? >> no, i haven't talked with anyone from that party.

>> okay. now, you've been detailed about what happened once you got up the stairs. so i don't need to go through that again. i'm sorry, go ahead. >> i just realized that i said something that was inaccurate. i said i hadn't spoken with yone from the party sinc then. i've spoken with leland. >> thank you for correcting that. i appreciate that. you've gone into detail about what happened when you went up the stairs. i don't feel it's necessary to go over those things aga. >> okay. thank you. >> have you told us everything b that you do re about it? >> i believe so. but if there are other questions, i can attempt to answer them. >> okay. you said that the music was omsolely coming from that is that correct? >> correct. >> okay. and it was turned up once the th e of you were inside that room, correct? >> yes.

at some point do you rit being turned down? >> i don't remember if it was rned down once i was leaving the house. i don't remember. >> okay. >> likely, since i could hear them walking down the stairs very clearly from the bathroom. >> okay. the bathroom door was closed when you heard this, is that correct? >> could hear them very clearly hitting the walls going down the stairwell. >> in fact, in your letter you said that they went down the stairs and they were talking about other people in the house. >> correct. >> were you able to hear that conversation? >> i was not able to hear that conversation. but i was aware that they were downstairs and that i would have to walk past them to get out of the house. >> now, let me make sure we're on the same page.we you not able to hear the conversation or not able to understand the conversation? i couldn't hear the conversation. i was upstairs. >> how do you know there was a conversation? >> i'm just assuming since it les a social gathering, pe

were talking. i don't know. i heard them talking as they went down the stairwell. they were laughing. >> in your letter, you wrote both loudly stumbled down the stairwell at which point other persons at the hse were talking with them. does that ring a bell? >> yes. i had to walk past everyone to leave the house. >> your letter -- >> not understanding, i'm sorry. >> in the next sentence. let me try to clarify this. after you said other persons in the house were talking with , the letter goes on with the next sentence, i exited the e.throom, ran outside of the house and went h d correct. >> you said that ynot remember how you got home, is that correct? >> i do not remember. other than i did not drive home. >> i'm going to show you if somebo could provide to you a

map of the variouseople's houses at the time and if you could verify if this is where you were living at the time. >> where i was living at the time? >> yes. >>. >> mr. chairman, do we have a copy of these documents? >> we do not have a copy. but i presume if you want one, i can get you one. >> before the questions begin so we can follow the testimony. my staff said we should not provide thcopy. >> no, we will provide the copy. >> speak plainly with me, please. >> you have another 30 seconds now because i was rudely interrupted. >> mr. chairman, senator harris, we dhave a blown-up copy of this for the members to view, if that's helpful. >> okay.

i'm going to put check marks next to homes that i can confirm are the correct locations and than an x or question mark when i don't know where the people live. >> i'm only asking you to confirm if it's where you lived> can't see the street name but i'm happy to refer to the address or the neighborhood. >> okay. could you tell us that. >> it's river falls.ne the -- like what is the place called. the naval research center on clara barton parkway. >> was that a house or apartment? >> it was my parents' home. >> okay. >> durbin. >> i ask consent to enter into the record letters of support for dr. ford from her classmates at holton-arms school. 1200 alumni of the school. 195 of your colleagues, students and mentors. 1400 women who -- and men who

attended d.c. schools and 50 members of theale law school faculty calling for a full fbi investigation. i ask consent to enter these into the record. >> without objection, so ordered. >> dr. ford, as difficult as this is, i want you to know that your courage in cong forward has given countless americans the strengtho face their own life-shattering past and begin to heal their wounds. by exale, you have brought many families into an honest and sometimes painful dialog that should have occurred a long time ago. i'm sorry for what this has done to you and your family. no one, no one should face harassnt, death threats and disparaging comments by cheap shot politicians simile for tellinthe truth. -- simply for tell the truth. you should know for every skur lsu charge and pathetic tweet, there are thousands of americans, women and men who believe you, support you and thank you for your courage. watching your experience, it's no wonder that many sexual assault survivors hide their

past and spend their lives suffering in silence. you have absolutely nothing to gain by bringing these facts toj the senaiciary committee. the fact that you are testifying here today terrified though you may be, the fact that you have called for an fbi investigation of this incident, the fact that you are prepared to name both judge kavanaugh and eyewitness mark judge stands co sharp rast to the obstruction we've seen on the other side.fb thshould have investigated your charges as they did in the amit nita hill hearing, but they did not. >> he was in his bethany beach hideaway and required to testify under oath. judge kavanaugh if he truly he believes's no evidence, no witnesses that can prove your case shod be joining us and demanding a thorough fbi investigation. but he has not. today you come before this

committee and before this nation alone. i know you're joined by counsel and family.th prosecutor on the republican side will continue to ask questions to test your memory and veracity. after spendingecades trying to forget that awful night, it's no wonder your recollection is less than perfect. a polished liar can create a seamless story. but a trauma survivor cannot be expected to remember every painful detail. that's what senator leahy mentioned earlier.es one on is critical. in judge kavanaugh's opening testimony, which we'll hear after you leave, this is what he says. i never had any xual or physical encounter of any kind with dr. ford. i am not questioning that dr. ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in some place at some time. last night the republican staff of this committee released to the media a timeline that shows

that they've interviewed two saople who claim they were the ones who actually ted you. i'm asking you to address this e defense of mistaken identity directly. dr. ford, with what degree of certainty do you believe brett kavanaugh assaulted you? >> 100%. >> 100%. in the letter which you sent to senator feinstein, i have not knowinglseen kavanaugh since the assault. i did see mark judge wednesday at the potomac village safeway e where he was ely uncomfortable in seeing me. would you please describe that encounter at the safeway with mark judge and what led you to believe he was uncomfortable. yes. i was going to the potomac villa village safeway. this is on falls and river road. i as with my mother and i w teenager. i wanted her to go in one door

and me go in the other. i chose the wrong door becau the door i chose was the one where mark judge was -looked like he was working there. and arranging the shopping carts. and i said hello to m. and his face was white and veryf b uncomfortable saying hello back. we had previously been friendly at the times we saw each other r he previous two years, albeit not very many times. we had always been friendly with one another. i wouldn't characterize him as not friendly. he was nervous and not wting to speak with me. he looked a little bit ill. >> how long did this occur after the indent? >> i would estimate six to eight weeks. >> thank you, mr. chairman. before we take a break, i

can't let what durbin -- senator durbin said. by the way, he's my friend. we work on a lot ogelegislation er. but you talked about the obstruction from the other sid i cannot let it go by what you've heard me say soany times that between july 30th and september 13th that were 45 days, this committee could havee investigating this situation and her privacy woul have been protected. so something happened here in between on your side thathe whole country -- not the whole country should have known --e should have investigated it. we'll take a break now for 15 minutes. we've been watching christine blasey ford for the first time under oath answering questions before the senate judiciary committee. no doubt earlyn this day, early in her testimony and questioning. people are beginning to form their own opinions about her credibility and her demeanor and

so on anso forth. as i bring on our panel, chuck todd and megan tally and savannah.g one thve noted is the format. if you've watched the previously testimony where we go from republicans to democrats and now we're seeing the questioning from a seasoned prosecutor, rachel mitchell, who was hired b by the rcans. clearly,he wants -- seems to be drying to dtrying to do a li >> i'm frustrated as a viewer. >> they're doing political questioning. i don't know if it would have been possible to say pool in together oures and give them to this prosecutor and let her get a little flow going. that's not what's happening. i'm sure it's frustrating for ec the pror and the witness too. >> she's all about the facts. she's trying to drive holes in the witness's memory. you don't remember this, you said that. it's far less effective when you can't stream a narrative. it's too choppy to follow. do

>> it does com to people's impressions of her, the witness whom we have not heard from before and how she's presenting herself and this was certainly an emotional testimony. >> it was a powerful opening statement.pl now a lot of pwant to hear how is he going to respond? >> that's the thing. you listen to christine ford. for me, the moment that will stay with me was when she described having a memory of ha being inroom and looking over at mark judge and having eye contact with him and asking herself, will he save me? and he didn't. i mean, it was just -- it was emotional. wa >> ian emotional moment. >> the question was the most vivid memory. she said the uproarious laughter and having fun at my expense. i mean, look, if she is an actress, she's really good. really good.

>> we -- from him. problematic >> we've pulled some of the sound from that. >> what is the strongest memoryo you have, est memory of the incident, something that you cannot forget? take whatever time you need. >> indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter, the uproarious laughter between the two and their having fun at my expense. >> you never forgotten that laughter? you never footten them laughing at you? >> they were laughing with each other. >> and you were the object of the laughter? >> i was underneath one of them while thtwo laughed. two friends having a really good

time with one other. >> i think one of the things that came up at the table here. rgot who brought it up. laughter is one of the things as a teenager -- >> that's what i thought. that has the hallmark of authenticity. is there anything more mortifying than having boys laugh at you. have a laugh at your expense. that's all when you're sizing up the credibility of ass, it's all of these things, it's demeanor, it's speech. yes, it's can you remember details. but it's a wholeonstellation of other things and whether or not it bears those hallmarks and the badge of truth. that's the difficulty, that's the decision that's before senators. something like that sticks with you. because i thought when he asked that, what's going to be the indelible thing, i would say ybe the hand over her mouth. no for a teenage girl, it's the idea of boys laughing at her. >> how about her description of running into mark judge, that was a powerful moment.

her saying went into the wrong door, by the way with the teenage going i'm experiencing that myself these days, i don't want to go into the same dooas you, dad. all of a sudden running into him and her description of him. it's tho little details that are giving her credibility. >> there's question still to remember, there's another side to this. about whether it was exactly as she says. whether her experience of it now, her memly lory of it matcp with how it went downment whether her memory fills in gaps she had around certain aspects of it that is more helpful to her story and more damaging to brett kavanaugh. she's a sympathetic witness and clearly believes this happened to her. does she know all these years later? you have republican senators on the other side who are blustering about and you've gotf

grassley, my s- it's a jarring juxtaposition to hear him and then her. the question is, will they believe it amounts to anything. was this a person who is misremembering or who was what we call a -- they can walk awayo sayi was this just some guy who made a bad move and she made more of it in her head. em >> the pros brett kavanaugh has said it didn't thppen at all. it leaves them i position. >> he left himself some wiggle room or i was young and drank too much, i'm sorry if something happened. i don't thk this would have reached this stage. i think it is that he se himself up to be questioned not just on his character and ac behaviorthen but whether he lied to the committee. >> we should remind folks also, she's a psychology profeor. some of her answers specifically about her memory, let's say yo she's using layman's

terms. >> it's indelible in the hippocampu hippocampus. which you started googling. >> i come back to wh chuck said, she goes the safeway a few weeks later, didn't want to go in the same room with her mom being a teenager and runs into another kid that she thinks she remembers being part of the attack.co ing to her story. i come back to the politics. the people watching th, other republicans and what are they thinking about the political impact of taking one side or another? they have to wait and see what judge kavanaugh does. they're going to be worried about -- >> in fairness got senators, i they're also probably -- they have kids that are about the same age as a lot of the -- [ overlapping talking ]. >> on this, any references as kids -- this is painful to watch as a parent of a teenager.

it is a -- i wouldn't say yes, there's politics involved and i wouldn't doubt that be very curious how he responds to this, along wi jeff flake. we've gotten words about how intently they've been ing. >> they're hearing things at idme from constituents and hearing from their their parents, their siblings or spouses. >> but their constituents so far, the republican ba does not believe her or if they believe her, they don't care. i mean, they have been fired up saying this is a democrat hit job, a democratic hit job on a nominee who they had before them for 31 hours of testimony. they had these allegations in hand, they didn't raise them. they waited until the eve. she comes forward after 36 years with gaps in her memory and another woman comes forward with no corroborating witnesses and they drop that at the last minute and the avenatti hat trick the night before. they see this as a big setup of their nominee. i've heard republicans say this may have happened to her.

the proof isn't there to convince me it's brett kavanah. it isn't enough to scurry a supreme court appointment. >> we want to go to capitol hill right nowhere they're measuring reactions from senators who have the final say whether the confirmation goes d. forw casey. >> i think that the conversation you've been havion is the right we're going to have to me -- i want to go back to the three people we've been focused on. lisa murkowski, juror jeff flake. he was listening intently. he was looking pained as the statent unfolded. i got a note from a top republican aide who id everybody needs to not rush to l as a judgment. we need to hear from judge kavanaugh. that's important. it also says it's clear that they realize that the itial

judgment of dr. ford is one of credibility and one that does not seem to bode well for judgeg kavaultimately sitting on the supreme court. everyone is at this point keeping their initial thoughts very close to the vest beyond, of course, the obvious understandings that we have of this partisanship. w i t to go back to this idea. the senators who have to make the decisionbethey're human gs, too. the decision that they make here, if they're forced to vote on this nomination is to be one that is going to define them for years to me. and if you are especially a female senator livinugh this cultural moment that we are in of me too and listening to this woman who came forward, clearly traumatized, clearly emotional as she relates this story, are you really going to stand on the senate floor and say i don't believe her, i belim? we have to hear from him first. these are the questions going

through people's minds. i can tell you there's already b trepidatiot judge kavanaugh heading into this hearing and standing here having the opportunity to have heard at least a little bit from her. i think that at this point, it is increasing, not decreasing. >> good perspective.f noneis is easy. it's about listening. they're in a break right now. we'll come back and co to listen. >> as a reminder, we've all watched one piece of this. we've watched an opening statement and introductory questiong of the witness. there's a judgment as to that. his credibility and meanor will be-sized up as well. for those who are just joining and perhaps missed it, christine blasey ford gave a prepared opening statement, one told she wrote herself. took about 20 minutes. we wanted to play you a portio of it. >> when i got to the small gathering, people were drinking beer in small living room, family room type area on the

first floor of the house. i drank one beer. brett and markunere visibly early in the evening, i went up a very narrow set of stairs leading from the living room to a second floor tomuse the rest when i got to the top of the stai, i was pushed from behi into a bedroom across from the bathroom.ul i 't see who pushed me. brett and mark came into the bedroom and locked the door behind them. there was music playing in the bedroom. it was turned up louder by either brett or mark once we were in the room. i was pushed on to the bed, then brett got on top of me. he began running his hands over my body and inding into me. r yelled hoping that someone downstairs might h. and i tried to get away from

him, but his weight was heavy. groped me and tried to take off my clothes. an had a hard time because he was very inebriatebecause i was wearing a one piece bathing suit underneath my clothing. i believed he was going to rape he. i tried to yell fo. when i did, brett put his hand over my mouth to stop me from yelling. this is what terrified me the st nd has had the most lasting impact on my wife. hard for me to breathe and i thought that brett was accidentally going to kill me. i got my driver's license. i was 15 at the me. i did not drive home from that party or to at party. and once i did have my driver's license, i liked to drive myself. >> i assume the legal driving 16 yes. s e wa

>> now, you've tked about tending therapy. in your text to the "washington post" dated 7/6, so that's the very first statement we have s om you, you put in there, "have therapy recolking about it." o make sure i understand that. did you already have your therapy records at that time? st i had looked at them online to see if they e, yes. >> okay. this was something that was available to you via a computer like a patient portal?ua >> ay, no. i was in the office of a provider. >> okay.>> he helped me go through the record to locate whether i had had record of this conversation that i had remembered. >> did you show a full or partial set of those marriage therapy records to the "washington post"? >> i don't remember. i remember summarizing for her

what they said. so i'm not quite sure if i actually gave her the record. >> okay. so it's possible that th reporter did not see these notes? >> i don't know if she -- i can't recall whether she saw them directly or if i told her what they said. e >> hu shown them to anyone else besides your counsel? >> just the counsel. >> okay. would it be fair to say that brett kavanaugh's name is not listed in those notes? >> his name is no, sir not listed in those notes. >> would it be fair to say that the therapist notes say that there were four boys in the room? >> it describes the sexual assault and it says erro fously r boys. so the therapist got the content of it wrong. >> and you corrected that to the "washington post" reporter, correct?

>> correct. >> senator wihite house? t nk you, chairman, thank you dr. blase i ford. a out of people are proud of today. from a prosecutor's eye view, one of the harde things that we have to do is to speak to somebody who has come forward withn allegation of sexual assault and let them know that p we canvide the evidence to go forward to trial. it's a hard day for the prosecutor to that. so both because making a sincere and investigative effort is an portant consolation to t victim in that circumstance. because it's what you're obliged to do professionally. sincere and thorough investigation is critical to these claims in a prosecutor's world.

it may be the most basic thing at we owe a victim or witness coming forward is to make sure thate give them a full, thorough and sincere investigation. you have met all of the standards of what i might call preliminary credibilth your initial statement you have vivid specific and detailed recollections. something prosecutors look for. your recollections are consistent with known facts. you made prior consistent statements. something else prosecutors and lawyers look for.to you are willinnd did take a lie detector test. and you're willing to testify here. here you are. subject to professional oss-examination by a prosecutor. so you've met any condition any prosecutor should expect to go foard.

yet, there has been no sincere or thorouginvestigation of your claims. you specifically ask for an fbi investigation, did you not? re yes. >> and are you ahat when the fbi begins investigating, they might find corroborative evidence and they might find exculpory evidence? >> i don't know what exculpatory evidence is. >> not helul to your recollections and version of events. . lpful to the accused. >> understood, y >> so it could go either way. >> yes. >> and you are still not just willing but insistent th the fbi should investigate your recollection and your claim? >> yes, i feel like it would -- i could more helpful if that was the case in providing some of t taihemahalspeybi sue opit

the history of background investigations has an ve igation not been pursued when new, credible, derogatory information was brought forward about the nominee or the candidate. i don't think this has ever happened in the history of fbi background investigations. maybe somebody can prove me wrong. but it's wildly unusual and out of character. and in my view, it is a grave disservice to you and i want to take this moment to apologize to you for that. and to report to anybody who might be listeninghat when somebody is willing to come forward, even under those circumstances, even having been not given the modicum of cotesy and support. you've shown yourself particularly proud in doing

that. the responsibility for the decision to have be i think the only background investigation in history to be stopped as derogatory information came forward belongs with 13 men. the president, director rey of n the fbthe 11 members of the majority of this committee. as to the committee's investigation, the fact that mrg kavas alleged accomplice has not been subpoenaed, has not been examined and cross-examined under oath, has not been owamined by the fbi tells you all you need to bout how credible this is. the bare minimum that a person who comes forward is owed is sincere and thorough investigation and you've been denied that and i will make a p persondge to you here, however long it takes, in whatever formic do it, whenever it's possible, i will do

whatever iin my power to make sure that your claims get a full and proper investigation and not just thi thank you for being here. >> thankou. >> since this issue has come u so many times, i'd like comment. the new yorker published an anonymous account onmber e imvi i immediately directed my staff to investigate. september 17th, dr. ford's we counse on several television shows requesting that her client have an opportunity e to telstory. the same day, i scheduled a g hearr monday, september 24th. giving dr. ford a week to prepare her testimony and come to washington, d.c. on september 17th, committve igative staff reached out

to dr. ford and judge kavanaugh to schedule follow-up interviews with republican, democrat investigators. judge kavanaugh accepted the opportunity to speak to the or investigunder criminal penalty. dr. ford declined. bein his interview on sept 17th, judge kavanaugh denied the allegations and requested a hearing as soon as possible. democratic staff refused to participate in that interview. the next day, september 18th, committee investigative staff contacted mark judge requesting an interview. committee staff also learned the identity of two other alleged party-goers and requested interviews.rk udge submitted a statement under penalty of felony. denying knowledge of the party described by dr. ford and states that he never saw brett at the -- in the manner described by dr. ford. and i can go on and on about that.t got to realize that what we have done in this case all of

the time you done in this case all the time you go thugh a background investigation by the fbi. then it comes to us,nd there's always some holes in it that we have to follow up on. and besides. >> mr. chairman. >> we're responding to dr. ford's request to tell her story.th 's why we're here. >> mr. chairman. >> ms. mitchell. r. >>hairman, i just want to ehpoit aiatd,t it n the an ca ll ghie,e asrgbueosh >> ms. mitchell will you proceed for senator lee. >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. ford, "the washington post" po