dr. kim: my father was a refugee from north korea. david: did you feel discrimination? dr. kim: the people were screaming at us. david: you met and harvard medical school. dr. kim: we talked about the nature of responsibility to the rest of the world. david: you lead a protest against the world bank and said it should be shut down. do you have any regrets? dr. kim: i am glad we lost that argument. >> would you fix your tie, please? david: well, people wouldn't recognize me if my tie was fixed, but ok. just leave it this way. alright. ♪ david: i don't consider myself a journalist. and nobody else would consider myself a journalist. i began to take on the life of being an interviewer even though i have a day job of running a private equity firm. how do you define leadership? what is it that makes somebody tick? you became the president of dartmouth in 2009. you were there for a couple of years. you are trained as a medical doctor and a social anthropologist. you have no finance background.

dr. kim: my father was a refugee from north korea. david: did you feel discrimination because you are korean? dr. kim: the people were literally screaming at us. david: you met at harvard medical school paul farmer. dr. kim: we began talking about what is the nature of your responsibility to the rest of the world. david: you lead a protest against the world bank and said it should be shut down. do you have any regrets? dr. kim: i want to say to everyone here i am very glad we lost that argument. [laughter] >> would you fix your tie, please? david: well, people wouldn't recognize me if my tie was fixed, but ok. just leave it this way. alright. ♪ david: i don't consider myself a journalist. and nobody else would consider myself a journalist. i began to take on the life of being an interviewer even though i have a day job of running a private equity firm. how do you define leadership? what is it that makes somebody tick? you became the president of dartmouth, i think, in 2009. you were there

dr. ford, the washington post reported in their september 16 article that you did show them therapist notes. is that incorrect? i don't remember physically showing her a note. perhaps my counsel did. i don't remember physically showing her my copy of the note, but i just don't remember, i'm sorry. i have retrieved a physical copy of those medical records. >> thank you. >> you also attended individual therapy. did you show any of those notes to the reporter from the washington post? >> again, i don't remember if i showed her something i summarized or if i just spoke about it, or if she saw it in my counsel's office. i certainly spoke with her about the 2013 record with the individual therapist. notrett kavanaugh's name is in those notes, correct? in reading the washington post article, it mentions that the incident that we are here about contributed to anxiety and ptsd problems with which you have struggled. contributed, is that mean that there are other things that happened that have also

dr. ross bunch and dr. -- dr. ralph bunch and dr. martin luther king jr.. and helped private meetings private meals here in this room at this table, on this china, for three days and two nights, as they discussed the planning of the summer to montgomery march. dr. bunch, during that point in his life, was ailing, and to give you a little bit of a background why dr. bunch traveled to selma to meet with dr. king. of course, dr. bunch received the nobel peace prize in 1950 for brokering the peace agreement between israel and palestine. dr. king received his in 1954. but, my mother finish cordova high school in washington dc, and during her high school years she lived two doors down from dr. bunch. my mother and his daughter, joan bunch, were best friends in high school. so there was a connection. joan bunch called my mother one day and say, jean, is martin luther king jr. living in your home? and my mother said, yes, joan. and she said, my father wants very much to come and talk to him about this upcoming march. and my mother assured her that, if dr. bunch cam

dr. ford and judge kavanaugh full and fair opportunity to lay out their views. i will say unfortunately the conduct of our democratic colleagues, it's been clear that this has been all about politics. all about delaying this confirmation until after the election. hoping that they win the senate in the election and then keeping this supreme court seat vacant until 2021. every member before the committee started said they opposed judge kavanaugh before a single thing started. not only that, this allegation, the ranking member of this committee had it in writing on july 30th. if that had been reported, this committee has a process to investigate. it is confidential and the fbi could have participated back on july 30th. that we could have had a hearing that is closed, that is not drags either of these individuals through the mud. that's the way the process should have worked. the testimony yesterday from dr. ford is that the only people who had copies of the letter were herself, her lawyers,

these are people that dr. ford identified as witnesses to the assault that she claims judge kavanaugh perpetrated. yet thes witnesses she identifid said they have no knowledge of such an event. we also need to remember the context in which all of this is occurring. 65 women who went to high school with judge kavanaugh have written a letter saying he has always behaved honorably toward them and treating them with respect. but that doesn't mean that dr. ford is not entitled to be heard. quite the contrary. she has a story to tell, and as the father of two daughters myself, i want to hear that story. i want to compare it to judge kavanaugh's unequivocal denial and judge for myself the reliability of each. as a former judge myself for 13 years, and attorney general for four, i think that doing anything less would be shirking my duty. we owe dr. ford our time, our attention and our best efforts at discerning t the truth. that means her claims will be tested, examined, and new information perhaps will be brought to

the republicans refused an investigation of the charges are dr. ford. dr.ford has called for the fbi to investigate her wrong charges. they refused. if they truly believed that there was no evidence, no witness to back up the charges of dr. ford, would they have obviously caught the fbi and said do your job. find what she can and we are confident that the end that judge kavanaugh will be exonerated. but they haven't. and despite all the calls for fairness, fairness over and over again for senator mcconnell, fairness would dictate that a nonpartisan investigative group like the fbi looked into this matter, can come to conclusions whatever they may be. i listened to senator mcconnell said this morning. justice matters are at evidence matters he said. fact matters i might add. an fbi investigation matters, too because it would get to the bottom of all three of those things and yet the white house summoned the president, senator mcconnell and republicans have resisted this fbi investigation despite dr. ford asking for it. as far as the presumption i listened th

dr. christine blasey ford. every one of us, i think, were riveted and powerfully impressed by her truth. we heard her provide details in that story that can be corroborated and other facts that can be uncovered. senator blumenthal: if we hear from other witnesses who have very relevant, important knowledge about what happened to her. on that evening in that room. the third person allegedly in the room was mark judge. evidently he has never been interviewed by the f.b.i. he has never been questioned by any member of our committee. he has never submitted a the tailed account of what he knows. -- a detailed account of what he knows. so i move, mr. chairman, that we have him before this committee as a witness. he could be interviewed beforehand on a burn basis. i recognize that he has submitted -- on a bipartisan basis. i recognize that he has submitted a cursory six-sentence letter not even signed by him, it's from his attorney. and i believe we have a responsibility to subpoena at the very

dr. ford said were also at the party. these staples were provided to us under penalty of felony by lying -- if you lie to congress. as soon as my team learned the names of three potential witnesses, we reached out requesting an interview. in response all three submitted statements to us denying any knowledge of the gathering, dr. ford described. if we had calls with them we would have invited the minority to join. any time we received any information regarding judge kavanaugh we've sought to immediately follow through and investigate. dr. ford's letter for weeks and the staff told us that they believed it is, quote, highly inappropriate to have these follow-up calls before the fbi finishes its investigation, end quote, even though the fbi had completed its background information when we followed up with judge kavanaugh after we received dr. ford's allegations, the ranking member staff joined us, even though these calls are usually done on a bipartisan basis. they joined other calls with t

dr. engel: he was a gentleman. a person who came up with traditional american values of being part of the elite. when we think about the term -- that really describes george bush. and person who was born well off, had the best education, the best training, and spent his entire life trying to work in public service to give more back. youreally was a gentleman do not see much in american politics. brian: where did start? dr. engel: with his mother. a person who constantly told him, your responsibility was to give back. she always stressed that the team was more important than the individual, which was very important. he was into athletics throughout his life. no matter how many times he would say, mom, here is how i did, she would say, but how did team do? i think that imbues a sense of the broader success being more important than the individual. inan: his dad was born columbus ohio. how did he get to the northeast? >> he was from ohio, from a manufacturing family. he made the switch of th

dr. ford and judge kavanaugh have been through a terrible couple weeks. they and their families have received file threats. what they have endured ought to be considered by all of us as unacceptable and a poor reflection on the state of civility in our democracy. so i want to apologize to you both for the way you have been treated, and i intend, hopefully, for today's hearing to be safe, comfortable and dignified to both of our witnesses. i hope my colleagues will join me in this effort of the show of civility. with that said i lament that this hearing, how this hearing has come about. on july 9, 2018, the president announced judge kavanaugh's nomination to serve on the supreme court. judge kavanaugh has served on the most important federal. appellate court for 12 years. before that he held some of the most sensitive positions in the federal government. the president added judge kavanaugh to his shortlist of supreme court more than nine months ago in november 2017. as part of judge kavana

dr. ford asked for confidentiality. that's what i did. we all know that if i referred her allegations to the fbi, when she would not come forward, there would have been nothing to do. the fbi would have had an anonymous allegation with no name, no contact information and no way to follow up. in addition, dr. ford's allegations were referred to the fbi on september 12th, over two weeks ago. if the president and the republican majority had asked for the fbi to do an investigation at that time, like we asked, it would likely be finished by now. most importantly, when judge kavanaugh talked to republicans repeatedly, none of us have spoken to or questioned mark judge, patrick smyth, leland keyser. none of us approached james roche, lynne or chris. not one senator, as far as i know, has had the opportunity, from, opportunity to or question deborah ramirez or julie swetnick. my colleagues are right, we should not rush to judgment. it's not fair to assume judge kavanaugh is guilty without gather

dr. ford's lawyers have asked for one more day to make that decision. and there's no conceivable reason why they can't give her that one more day, but these are people who are fighting over wednesday instead of thursday next week, as if that makes any difference. >> and again what they're using to bolster their argument is we don't want to delay anymore, we want it to be wednesday and not thursday. and we want to go. we want to do this. and if you say no, we will vote on this lifetime appointment to the supreme court without ever hearing this allegation, without hearing from the accuser or any witnesses or anybody who might be able to cooperate or deny this story. that doesn't seem like a very strong place from which to push from the senate republican side, but that's where we are. >> yeah, and they try to use normal juris prudential norms like the accuser goes first and then the person who's defending himself goes second, which is norm in jurisprudence. but every other norm in jurisprude

bottom line, dr. ford had nothing to gain by doing this, nothing and still has nothing to gain, but then there is one overriding fact here which senator mcconnell continues to ignore. let me take you back in history. 27 years ago was the clarence thomas hearing, i was in the house at the time, but i read about it and followed it like most americans did. the very day that the senate judiciary committee chairman joe biden received the letter from anita hill charging sexuality misconduct by clarence thomas, that same day chairman biden sent the letter to the president george w. bush white house, to the white house council c boyden gray. and c boyden gray that very same day ordered the federal bureau of investigation to investigate the charges by anita hill. there have been a lot of comments whether that investigation was adequate or preemptory, and following comments whether the hearing was adequate and preemptory. the instinct of the george w. bush white house, investigate it. don't assume it's true, do

dr. ford, with nothing to feign, as stepped -- dr. ford, with nothing to gain, has stepped forward and told her story. she has subjected her family and her fame. on the same token, judge kavanaugh is entitled to tell his story. and i hope he will. he will have to explain to this committee why he didn't call for a federal bureau of investigation effort on his own behalf to establish the facts, the evidence, the witnesses, if there were any. he didn't. and that is a fact. we also know that this charge that senator mcconnell made that senator schumer made up his mind on the kavanaugh nomination early is true in some respects. senator schumer announced his position on this nomination early. but if you've been listening to the speeches given by senator mcconnell on the floor from the start, you certainly know where his vote has been. he says he's looking forward to hearing the testimony on thursday. well, clearly he's made up his mind before he hears that testimony. so to fault senator schumer for taking a position on this nomination early

dr. ford and judge kavanaugh full and fair opportunity to lay out their views. and i will say unfortunately, the conduct of our democratic colleagues, it's been clear that this has been all about politics, all about delaying this confirmation until after the election hoping that they win the senate in the election and then keeping the supreme court seat vacant until 2021. every democratic member of this committee before the confirmation hearing started said they opposed judge kavanaugh, before a single thing started. and not only that, this allegation, the ranking member of this committee had it in writing on july 30th. if on july 30th that had been reported to the committee chairman, this committee has a process to investigate it, a process to investigate it that is confidential, that the fbi could've participated in investigating starting back on july 30th. that we could've had a hearing lead is closed, that is not dragging either of these individuals through the mud. that's the way thi

dr. blasey ford graduated from have signed a letter in support of her saying there grateful she came forward. with alexiskk goldstein, who attended the high school dr. blasey ford did, and is spearheading the letter. we will also speak with professor barbara ransby, who adnched a black feminist campaign in 1991 in support of anita hill called "african american women in defense of ourselves." this came after hill was questioned by an all-male, all-white senate judiciary committee about her allegations clarence thomas sexually harassed her. determine trying to whether you are telling , i have got toot determine what your motivation might be. woman?u a scorned amy: we will also speak with jodi jacobson, the editor in chief of rewire. alall of that and more, coming . wewelcome to democracy now!,!, democracynow.org, the war and peace report. i'm amy goodman. the top democrat on the senate judiciary committee, dianne feinstein, is calling for the immediate postponement of the nomination proceed

so dr. ford will be heard, thank, to chairman grassley and despite the irresponsibility of senate democrats who ignored her allegation for weeks and then discarded her request for confidentiality and leaked it to the press. so let me walk through this again. the ranking democrat on the judiciary committee received a letter from dr. ford all the way back in july in which she stated her allegation and asked for confidentiality. mr. president, that was in july. the committee's thorough review of judge kavanaugh was just getting started. there was ample time to vet this allegation in a serious and bipartisan manner that would have maintained confidentiality and honored dr. ford's request for privacy. all the democrats needed to do was go through proper channels, share the information with their republican colleagues so the committee could tackle it together. but that's not what senate democrats did. this is the democratic caucus whose leader, my friend, the senior senator from new york, said jus

dr. christine blasey ford the woman who accused supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh of sexual assault at a high school party when they were both in their teens in early 12980's, hello, everyone, welcome to america's news headquarters, i'm arthel neville. eric: hello, arthel, i'm eric sean, the committee's chairman senator chuck grassley granting extension for the deadline. for dr. ford to make that decision until later on today. this is as drama unfolds and story continues to take twist and turns, here is mike pence speaking about the confirmation earlier in washington. >> the president and i are confident that senate republicans will manage this confirmation properly with the upmost respect for all concern and i believe that judge brett kavanaugh will soon be justice brett kavanaugh. eric: meanwhile the nation's capitol buzzing after deputy attorney general rod rosenstein reportedly according to new york times discussed wearing a wire on president trump recording conversations and also

dr. christine blasey ford. in fact, as you said, she described under oath now the accusation that she has now made against judge brett kavanaugh. democrats on the committee are supporting her. >> let me tell you why i believe you. not only because of the prior consistent statements and the polygraph test. you have been very honest about what you cannot remember. reporter: senator dick durbin wanted to know exactly, wanted to clarify exactly, exactly what she remembered about that night. listen. >> dr. ford, with what degree of certainty do you believe brett kavanaugh assaulted you? >> 100%. reporter: republicans have given their time to a female career attorney, rachel mitchell, asking those questions. she focused on big things ford could not remember like exactly what date this happened, where the house was, what city it was in in maryland. she mentioned bethesda and chevy chase, two large cities in a suburb of washington, d.c., and how she got home. the lawyer also zeroed in on politics

third, dr. ford has said this event occurred at a house near columbia country club, which is at the corner of connecticut avenue and the east west highway in c

dr. christine blasey ford has arrived here on capitol hill to make her testimony not only before the senate judiciary committee but before the american people. in her opening statement, she has said she's terrified but that she believes she's there to tell the truth. she also says that it is not her responsibility to weigh in on whether judge kavanaugh should be appointed to the supreme court. she says that is up for the senate to decide. but if you look at her more than 2,000-word opening statement, it's chilling in the detail that she describes in this alleged assault by brett kavanaugh when they were in high school, at two different schools. brett kavanaugh at georgetown prep and dr. ford, who was then at an all-girls school. as you see this smaller hearing room, this is in dirksen 226. it was chosen because dr. ford and those who are working with her said they didn't want all the cameras in there. so there are only three cameras inside this room, what we call pool cameras. only seven

dr. ford were also at the party, these statements were provided to us under penalty of felony by -- if you lie to congress as soon as my team learned the names of these three potential witnesses, we immediately reached out to them, requesting an interview in response all three submitted statements to us denying any knowledge of the gathering dr. ford described. if we had calls with them, we would have invited the minority to join. every time we've received any minformation regarding judge we've sought to immediately follow through and investigate. stafffo told us it is, quote, highly inappropriate to have the follow-up calls before the fbi finishes its investigation, end quote, even though the fbi had completed its background information. when we followed up with judge kavanaugh after we received dr. ford's allegations, the ranking member staff didn't join us even though these calls are usually done on a bipartisan basis. they joined other calls with the judge but they didn't participate

if we want to show dr. ford respect, we give her the respect of having her case heard and the evidence looked at. i look at it as what are you hiding? what would it hurt? if judge kavanaugh is so sure that he has this corroborating evidence and what this calendar means and what these things mean, then what is he afraid of if we just spend one week looking at the evidence? what i have heard today just adds to this. when i heard the sanctimonious talk about some kind of political strategy, well, i'll give you exhibit a, merrick garland. who was delayed for nearly ten months. you talk about a nominee getting off the floor when all we're asking for is one week for an investigation. and you kept merrick garland away from this committee for ten months. that's not even a comparison. that was a strategy yesterday. and boy, was it a strategy. and i sure hope that some of the senators who have not yet made a decision, who are not on this committee, will look at the evidence and look at what happened and see it for th

dr. ford asked for confidentiality. and that's what i did. we all know that if i had referred her allegations to the fbi, when she would not come forward, there would have been nothing to do. the fbi would have had an anonymous allegation with no name, no contact information, and no way to follow up. in addition, dr. ford's allegations were referred to the fbi on september 12th, over two weeks ago. if the president and the republican majority had asked for the fbi to do an investigation at that time, like we asked, it would likely be finished by now. and most importantly, when judge kavanaugh has talked to republicans repeatedly, none of us have spoken to or questioned mark judge, patrick smyth, leland keyser, or the polygraph examiner. none of us have talked to or questioned james roach, lynn brooks, liz swisher, tom cane, or chris dudley. not one senator, as far as i know, has had the opportunity to or question deborah ramirez or julie swetnick. my colleagues are right that we should no

ford, mr ayres and denied the allegations by dr ford, mrayres and —— denied the allegations by dr fordes and —— mr mears... denied the allegations by dr ford, mr ayres and -- mr mears. .. yes. all three of these women have asked the fbi to investigate their claims. i listened carefully to what you said, your concern is evident and clear, and if you're very confident of your position, and you appeared to be, why are you not also asking the fbi to investigate these claims? senator, i will do whatever the committee wants. i wanted a hearing today after the allegation came up. i wanted to be here that day. instead, ten days past where all this nonsense is coming out, i'm in gains, i'm in votes in rhode island, i'm in colorado, i decided all over the place. these things are printed and run breathlessly by cable news. i wanted a hearing next day. my family has been destroyed by this, senator, destroyed. and whatever the committee decides, i'm all in. i'm all in immediately. and the terrible and hard part of this is, when we get in allegation, we are not in a position to prove it or disprove

dr. ford and judge brett kavanaugh. >> and their families. >> this is politics. we said that the republicans are saying this is the democrats pushing this. they could have brought this up months ago, and then on the flip side, the democrats say, remember marry garland, that is politics as well. >> and i think squarely this falls with the white house. if there wasn't enough due diligence on the background of this nominee, that will fall on the white house. and it could swing back on the trump administration itself. >> there is dianne feinstein and senator grassily awaiting at rifle of judge brett kavanaugh to begin his testimony. we want to bring in jessie gary with more on this. >> we're going to take a pause. he is actually at a rally here in the bay area cross the country. we saw this as we were watching the testimony in washington. people holding rallies saying we have seen dr. ford. so here we are, we're going to take a pause and taking you back to this live coverage here as we see th

dr. kim: he was. we were together in a more informal setting. he said that was one of the best ploys to get a job i have ever seen. david: did you feel intimidated when you didn't have this kind of background? dr. kim: i felt humbled about it. we have people here in the audience. many of them taught me a lot about how the world bank works. i felt like learning finance and learning macroeconomics is going to be a huge challenge for me. for the previous presidents coming in, learning development must of been an even bigger challenge. i felt like i knew about what development was like. then i really worked hard to learn the other things that i needed to learn when i got here. david: when you show up at a meeting and you tell people you are the president of the world bank, do their eyes open wider? dr. kim: it depends on where you are. in washington, they'll ask you if you have a branch in alexandria. some places you are externally well-known and other places you are not well known at all. da

dr. christine blasey ford and judge kavanaugh. thanks, of course, to dr. ford and judge kavanaugh for accepting our committee's invitation to testify and also thank them for their volunteering to testify before we even invite it. both dr. ford and judge kavanaugh have been through a terrible couple weeks. they and their families have received vile threats. what they have endured ought to be considered by all of us as unacceptable and a poor reflection on the state of civility in our democracy. so i want to apologize to you both for the way you've been treated and i intend hopefully for today's hearing to be safe, comfortable, and dignified for both of our witnesses. i hope my colleagues will join me in that is effort of a show of civility. with that said, i'll lament this hearing -- how this hearing has come about. on july the 9th, 2018, the president announced judge kavanaugh's nomination to serve on the supreme court. judge kavanaugh has served on the most important federal appellate co

yesterday we heard from dr. dr. christine blasey ford who spoke with genuine and raw emotional power about being sexually assaulted by brett kavanaugh. even though it was more than 30 years ago, her memory of the assault was clear and vivid. this kind of recall is typical of sexual assault survivors. she was sin veer and authentic. she was 100% credible, and i believe her. by contrast, brett kavanaugh came to this committee and refused to give us straight answers. he would not call for an f.b.i. investigation. he repeatedly stated that the other people who were at the gathering where dr. ford was attacked had, to quote him, rebutted her testimony. that is not true. his alleged accomplice in the attack, mark judge, claimed he didn't remember, a far cry from rebutting her statement. he claimed he didn't remember, refused to testify and then went into hiding. patrick smyth and leland keyser said they simply don't remember. again, hardly a rebuttal. as dr. ford said yesterday, quote, i don't expect p.j. and leland would

charles: dr. kavanaugh mentioned that very fact during this opening statement. >> this has destroyed my family and my good name. a good name built up through decades of very hard work and public service at the highest levels of the american government. this whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit. charles: you are a seasoned trial attorney. it felt like to tammy's point, two different sort of approaches here. obviously we understood the dynamics and history going into this, what the republicans were trying to avoid with the outside prosecutor and litigator. but the tone shifted dramatically. what do you make of the wait has gone so far. >> it was two different hearings. the hearing in the morning was far collegial. but you see judge kavanaugh with righteous ager in the afternoon. but i think sometimes that anger was overcoming his ability to answer the questions. what i tell the witness is answer the question, then explain. many times i refused to answer, especia

dr. ford and judge kavanaugh full and fair opportunity to lay out their views. i will say unfortunately, the conduct of the democratic colleagues, et has been clear that this is all about politics, and all about delaying this confirmation until after the election, hoping that they win the senate in the election and keeping this supreme court seat vacant until 2021. every democratic member of the committee said they opposed judge kavanaugh before a single thing started and not only that, this allegation, the ranking member of this committee had nit writing on july 309, and if that had been reported to the committee chairman, this committee has a process to investigate it and a process to investigate that is confidential and the fbi could have participated investigating starting back on july 30th that we could have had a hearing that is closed, and that is not dragging either of these individuals through the mud. that is the way this process should have worked. the testimony yesterday from

>> no. >> dr. ford described a small gathering of people at a suburban maryland home in the summer of 1982. she said that mark judge, p.j. smyth andleland ingam were also present as well as an unknown male and that the people were drinking to varying degrees. were you ever at ang gathe that fits that description? >> no. as i've said in my opening statements -- openingstatement. >> dr. ford described an incident where she was alone in a room with you and mark judge. have you ever been alone in a room with dr. ford and mark judge? >> no. >> dr. forded descrn incident where you were grinding your genals on her. have you ever ground or rubbed your genitals against dr. ford? >> no. >> dr. ford descred an incident where you covered her mouth with your hand. have you ever cover dr. ford's mouth with your hand? >> no. >> dr. ford described ande in where you tried to remove her clothes. have you ever tried toemove her clothes? >> no. >> referring back to the definition of sexual behavior that i have given y

dr. ford or her family, but i swear today under oath before the senate and the nation, before my family and god, i am innocent of this charge. charge. >> we are live at the dirksen senate office building on capitol hill where the senate judiciary committee are meeting to vote on brett kavanaugh's supreme court nomination. the committee's vote goes to the full senate as a recommendation for or against the confirmation. the 21-person committee consists of 11 republicans and 10 democrats. senate majority leader mitch mcconnell plans to hold a vote to move forward on the confirmation tomorrow, saturday, which sets up a second possible procedural vote on monday and final confirmation vote tuesday. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conv

dr. christine blasey ford. her voice cracking, but detailing her allegation of sexual assault against supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. >> it was hard for me to brthe, and i thought that brett was accidentally going to kill me. >> dr. ford, with what degree of certainty do you believe brett kavanaugh assaulted you? kavanaugh, his defiant denial with flashes of anger and high emotion, at times in tears. >> i've never sexually assaulted anyone. not in high school, not in college, not ever. this confirmation process has and offices, campuses and trains and planes, riveted by every momen boiling over. >> this is the most unethical sham since i've been in politics. >> tonight we have reaction from the halls of congress, from the senators, with the supreme court nomination hanging in the balance, and from the white house where the president was watching after a day for the history books. were any minds changed, and what happens now? >> this is "nbc nightly news" with lester holt. >>> good

after dr. ford's identity became public, my staff contacted all she saiddividuals attended the 19 82 party described in "the washington post" article. judge kavanaugh emile is omitted to an interview under penalty of immediately- submitted to an interview under penalty of felony. the democratic staff was invited to participate and could have asked any questions they wanted to, but they declined. which leads me then to wonder, if they are really concerned with going to the truth, why wouldn't you want to talk to the accused? the process and procedure is what the committee always does when we receive allegations of wrongdoing. my staff reached out to other individuals allegedly at the party. all three submitted statements to the senate under penalty of felony, denying any knowledge of the events described by dr. ford. ms.ford's lifelong friend keiser stated she does not know judge kavanaugh and does not recall ever attending a party with him. my staff made repeated requests to interview dr. ford

dr. ford publicly accused me of committee wrongdoing at an event more than 36 years ago when we were both in high school. i denied the allegation immediately, categorically and unequivocally. all four people allegedly at the event, including dr. ford's longtime friend, ms. keyser, have said they recall no such event. our longtime friend ms. keyser said underpaid of the family that she does not know me and does not believe she ever saw me at a party ever. here's the quote from ms. kaisers attorney letter. quote, simply put, ms. keyser does not know mr. kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present with our without dr. ford, end quote. think about that fact. the day after the allegation appeared, i told this committee that i wanted to hearing as soon as possible to clear my name. i i demanded a hearing for the very next day. unfortunately, it took the committee ten days to get to this hearing. in those ten long days, as was predictable, and