ford? dr. ford: based on advice from counsel i was happy to underground the polygraph test although i found it extremely stressful. than imuch longer anticipated and i felt like i told my whole life story but i endured it and it was fine. ever taken any other polygraph in your life? dr. ford: never. him that you went see a gentleman by the name of jeremiah hannifin to serve as the polygrapher. did anybody advise you on that choice? dr. ford: yes and a believe his name was jerry. >> jerry hannifin? dr. ford: yes. >> did anyone advise you on that choice? didn't choose him myself, he was just the person who came to do the polygraph test. >> he conducted the polygraph not in his office in virginia but in the hotel next to the baltimore, washington, airport. why was that location chosen? dr. ford: i had left my grandmother's funeral at fort lincoln cemetery that day and was on a tight schedule to catch manchester, to hampshire, so he came to me. >> he administered a polygraph on the day you attended

that is christine blasey ford. i express my gratitude shared by many in america for that great teaching moment yesterday. we should honor her by acting in a way that keeps faith with her honesty and bravery. thank you mr. print incident. i yelled for. >> mr. president, as the world knows by now yesterday we had another hearing on the nomination of judge brett kavanaugh to be a number member of the united states supreme court. this necessary to do so because allegation have been made by doctor blasey ford on july 30. but, because doctor ford requested confidentiality and she wanted to remain anonymous, none of this was brought to attention until sometime after the judge original confirmation hearing occurred. the judge visited with 60 plus members of the senate including the ranking member. it was never mentioned to him. no questions asked about it. contrary to her wishes doctor ford was thrust into the spotlight. she said she didn't agree to have her letter released to the press. she did not consent to having her i

ford asking ford it.as far as the presumption of innocence, i listened to senator mcconnell say that some suggested that judge kavanaugh's not entitled to that. i disagree with who ever said that. both, both dr. ford and judge kavanaugh are entitled to presumptionce of innocence. the case has to be proven. the facts have to be shown as best they can. i wanted to add something else, too. i'm troubled by what president trump said over the weekend about dr. ford's charges, suggesting it's been so long that her charges are not credible. the suggestion that if they were truly credible she would have told her parents what happened that night in that bedroom. and her parents would've reported to law enforcement, we could read the police reports. that's not n the real world that comes to this kind of sexual harassment and sexual violence. not at all. it's the reason it took 40 years and the catholic church to come forward and finally tell their story. it's the reason why many women who have been the victims never

ford. dr. ford's lifelong friend, ms. keyser, stated she doesn't know judge kavanaugh and as a recall ever attending a party with him. my staff made repeated requests to interview dr. ford during the past 11 days. volunteering to fly to california to take her testimony. but her attorneys refuse to present her allegations to congress. i never, i nevertheless, honored a request for a public hearing, so dr. ford today has the opportunity to present herc allegations under oath. as you can see, the judiciary committee was able to conduct thorough investigations into allegations. or thorough investigations into allegations. some of my colleagues consistent with their stated desires to obstruct kavanaugh the nomination by any means necessary pushed for an fbi investigation into the allegations. but i have no authority to force the executive branch agency to conduct an investigation into a map it considers to be closed. moreover, once the allegations became public, it was easy to identify all the alleged witnesses and conduct our

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 gathering t

ford's charges. ule said we are neither going to ignore or insult dr. ford. i thought that was a good standard. unfortunately, since she said that, neither the president nor many republican leaders have lived up to it. i really come to this as a member of the senate judiciary committee trying to think about the gravity of the situation and what is fair. in this situation, we have dr. ford coming forward. i've talked to many of my staffers and friends back home about her motivation. but in the does she have to gain by putting herself in her family through this? what is at the end of it for her? i can't see any positives other than the satisfaction that she is pursuing what she perceives to be true. she's exposing herself to ridicule, harassment and even my president of the united case in history that america is in danger and they have to move out of their homes or computers have been hacked. she's had to engage attorneys and get into lengthy negotiations with republicans in the senate just for a chance to come and tell her story. this woman who had a family an

it would have protected.her ford. it would have protected the nominee from the circus like and we could have gotten to the allegations. they could have ascertained lies. under this approach, created again by this failure to release the information so it could be investigated until after the hearing. under this current situation, everybody loses. i think we all recognize the basic unfairness of this process both dr. ford and judge cabinet. he did not have to be this way. the process has been patently unfair. that is why our colleagues have been insisting on a better way forwardor by returning to the process that is fair to all concerned. fairness in the dictionary definition is defined as the quality of treating people equally or in a way that is right and reasonable. another definition of impartial and just treatment or behavior owithout favoritism or discrimination. somi how are we to handle this accusation and this challenging difference of position on the part of dr. ford who said 30 x years ago this attempted assa

ford's wishes. and then -- and then as no-doubt was expected if not planned, came a long series of false, last-minute smears designed to scare me and drive me out of the process before any hearing occurred, crazy stuff, gangs, illegitimate children, fights on boats in rhode island, all nonsense reported breathlessly and often uncritically by the media. 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 fuelled with apparent pent-up anger about president trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record. revenge on behalf of the clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups. this is a circus. the consequences will extend long past my nomination. the consequences will be with us for decades. this grotesque, character assassination

ford specifically requested. it would have cost on those allegations to the judiciary committee so an investigation could have been been a more timely and confidential fashion. and then theyf could be addressd during the hearing if necessary that we had earlier this month. that's standard procedure would've treated ms. ms. ford is a real person, not as a political pawn in the would have left the democratic operatives now hired to dig up to dig up the mix. i want to say chairman grassley throughout all of this has been a generous as we would all want him to be an i want to commend him what began because he's had a very difficultun job trying to run te judiciary committee, trying to be fair to the nominee and the accuser alike when thrown in the spokes of the committee operation has created more of a circus like atmosphere than it has a sort of deliberative process in search for the truth and testing the background of the nominee, which is something allto nominees deserve. no nominee deserves to be dragged through

ford's and dr. ford's alone. i cannot rule out that the person who leaked this information had a partisan agenda. i am certain ranking member fine desi stein and her staff did not leak it. long serving honorable colleagues have of hers questioned her motives. i know since the day my democratic colleagues and i learned of these allegations, we had one consistent request. to allow the fbi to investigate them in a nonpartisan, professional, even handed manner and deliver their findings so we could reach a conclusion. ranking member feinstein sent a letter requesting such an investigation. to suggest that senate staff interviews or letters from lawyers are an adequate substitute for a fact gathering process is not credible and reflects a willful blindness to the disfuchkz of our institution. to my colleagues across the aisle. you know me. you know i try to be fair to those before us and i respect the process of those with whom i passionately disagree. if i were convinced this was nothing more than a partisan hit job

ford's hand. not in the room -- lisa murkowski and susan collins, who watched the hearing from a private office in the capitol. tonight all republican senators have been summoned to a conference meeting to talk about the way forward. those that are defending kavanaugh are pushing for a committee vote at 9:30 a.m. tomorrow morning. right now we just don't know the answer to that critical question do they have 50 votes to confirm kavanaugh. lester? >> all right, thank you. >>> at the white house, they were riveted by the testimony, president trump glued to the tv like people across the country. hallie jackson is on the north lawn. what are you hearing about reaction from inside the building behind you? >> reporter: president trump as of right now stands by his man, making that very clear in a new tweet right as the hearing wrapped up, writing, "judge kavanaugh showed america exactly why i nominated him," saying his testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting. the president slamming democrats, telli

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. 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 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 least mark judge before we move to vote. it is our constitutional duty to do everythi

ford?ut if you could compare the two. >> i will say briefly that the head of the holton-arms school did issue a statement saying they were proud of dr. blasey ford for coming forward. i was a part of occupy, someone who worked on wall street. i have first-hand knowledge of what it was like to work on wall street. i worked on wall street for seven years. in some years, i will get that is a parallel, the #metoo movement is about women and survivors in expensing sexual assault and speaking the truth about what happened to them. for me personally, it is the main parallel just about folks with personal experience coming forward and saying, here is my truth. iwould say the other parallel suppose is just people standing up and speaking their beliefs and trying to say this is how we want to build a better world, whether it is a better world that has more economic fairness or a world without sexual assault. amy: alexis goldstein, zinke so much. holton-arms school alum who is one of the women whoho s

ford. here's today's meeting of the judiciary committee. >> i have the floor and before i make my opening statement, i'd like to start off, start out today where we left off on september 13. if you remember then we were -- ng a lot of motions from can we have quiet from the audience? senator grassley: is there somebody that can signal to me that the chairs are filled and peace and have some quiet. i'd like to start out today where we left off on september 13, although this is a new meeting. ut i was anticipating a lot of motions from the minority and we did have some motions for the minority. but if you remember i said that i'll give the minority a chance to make their motions and then i was going to make a motion that we have a time certain to vote. and so i want to make that motion time certain to vote but if there is a motion from the minority i would recognize that motion first. >> mr. chairman. i'd like to make a motion to subpoena mark judge as a witness before our committee. senator

ford coming forward. i i thought long and hard and i talked to many of my staffers and friends back home about her motivation. what in the world does she have to gain by putting herself and her family through this? was at the end of it for her? i can't see any positives other than thesh satisfaction that she is pursuing what she believes to be true. she is exposing herself to ridicule, harassment, attack, even by the president of the united states in his tweets. her family is in danger and it had to move out of their homes. their computers have been hacked. she's had to engage attorneys and get into lengthy negotiations with the republicans in the senate just for a chance to come and tell her story. this woman who had a family and a life, well-respected i our colleagues and people in her community have turned it upside down. why? what is in this for dr. ford? what is she trying to achieve? .. republican leaders come to the floor and talk about her situation and he zigs and zags. one moment he sounds he's

christine blasey ford: usted Í

ford and her family. the other night ashley and my daughter liza id their prayers and little liza all of 10 years old said to ashley, we should pray for the woman. that's a lot of wisdom from a 10-year-old. >> reporter: the judge isputingcally ford's charges. >> dr. ford's allegation is not merely rrunorated. it is refuted by the heery people she says was t including by a long-time friend of hers, refuted.sh says confidently that she had o beer at the party, but she does not say how she got to the house in question or howhe got home, or whose house it was. >> reporter: and talking ais own drinking. >> i drank beer with my friends. did.ost everyone sometimes i had too many beers. sometimes others did. i liked beer. i still like beer. but i did not drink beer to the point of blacking out and i never sexual assaulted anyone. >> ms. mitchell, you have my five minutes to ask questions. >> reporter: the 11 republican senators all of them men turning over their questioning of fordo veteran sex crime prosecutor r

ford. we expect that to be the focus of his testimony today. this is a live look at the hearing room. we don't know how much longer break will go on. when the hearing resumes, the public and the nation will have chance to hear judge brett kavanaugh defend himself against these allegations. >>> political science professor -- has been with us all morning long. i saw senator lindsey graham react to this. she doesn't remember the day or the time or the house, going after her memory. senator diane finestein, how are you sure it is him? basic memory functions. is this -- she went further and said that she is 100% sure it was him. and she is so credible and it places a lot of pressure on him and the republican side of the aisle for what happens this afternoon. >> let's look at what is about to start. the outside council is going to change judge brett kavanaugh, mitchell. how does that change things. >> it allows judge brett kavanaugh to responding to usually senators are going to lay out their own

ford. following her testimony, i doubt that not one of us left the committee room doubting her credibility. i'm sure nobody doubted her credibility. but then judge kavanaugh angrily denied the allegation. i'll get to that shortly. but we should all agree that a credible allegation of sexual assault against a nominee to our nation's highest court demands that we proceed with the utmost caution. our constitutional obligation at the very least is to investigate these allegations properly. this isn't about delaying a nomination until after the election. even though we have that precedent when the republicans did that with merrick garland. this is about doing our job. this is what we're elected to do, what we're paid to do. the first step is an fbi investigation. that has always been the first step when new derogatory information comes to light about a nominee. even in one instance when the information was as minor as decades-old marijuana use. republicans still made sure we had an fbi investiga

ford now finds herself in. but it's also important to remember that every, every person has a father. many unfortunate to have brothers or sons and husbands, and we were not to make sure that all of those men that we would want to make sure all of those men are also treated with respect, and fairly. we would know rather have a women's truthful claim be a broad pennant uncorroborated accusation against a man be honored. that's fairness. dr. ford as you know is a real person and so is judge kavanaugh, flesh and blood. each of them should be treated with fairness and with dignity and with respect. it's not just one or the other, which is the false choice that many of our colleagues have suggested. we can't pick one and dismiss the other outright and claim any fairness or allegiance to our constitutional system and due process of law if we do otherwise. as michael gershon, the columnist for the "washington post" reminded us earlier this week, summer along the way this process default into one that is no longer abou

ford? >> correct. >> senator feinstein. >> judge kavanaugh, it's my understanding that you have denied the allegations by dr. ford, miss ramirez and miss swetnick, is that correct? >> yes. >> all three of these women have asked the fbi to investigate their claims. i ltened carefully to what you said. your concern is evident and clear. if you're very confident ofpoour tion and you appear to be, why aren't you also asking the fb to investigate these claims? >> senator, i'll do whatever the committee wants. i wanted a hearing the day after the allegation came up.i nted to be here that day. instead ten days past where all this nonsenses coming out, you know, that i'm in gangs, i'm ono boats in island, i'm in colorado, i'm sighted all over e place. these things are printed and run breathlessly by cable news.i nted a hearing the next day. my family has been destroyed by this, senator. destroyed. >> and i'm -- >> and whatever themi cee decides. i'm all in. >> my question is -- >> immediately. i'm

ford. the first deadline senator grassly gave to professor blasey ford to agree to his terms to testify for the senate judiciary committee was 10:00 a.m. this morning, and then he moved that deadline to 5:00 p.m. today and moved that deadline to 10:00 p.m. and each time senator grassley did that, he did it to the media first. he announced it to the media before he announced it to -- communicated directly with dr. ford's lawyers. he reached some compromises with her attorneys, but refused some of dr. ford's most important requests. senator grassly agreed to the request brett kavanaugh would not be in the room when dr. ford was testifying, but would not agree to her request that kavanaugh testify first. dr. ford requested that only senators be allowed to ask questions, but senator grassly said the committee will, quote, reserve the option to have female staff attorneys who are sensitive to the particulars of dr. ford's allegations and are experienced investigators to question both witnesses.

ford says, dr.the committee's request to provide her firsthand knowledge of brett kavanaugh's sexual misconduct next week although many aspects of the proposal you proceeded via e-mail on september 21st, 2018 at are fundamentally inconsistent with the committee's promise with fair and impartial investigation into her allegations, we are disappointed with the leaks and the bullying that have tainted the process. we are hopeful to reach agreement and later this afternoon to continue negotiations, sincerely debra, joel, your reaction? >> my reaction is they are concerned that this is going to end up being sort of a kangaroo-type hearing where there's no real facts, the fbi investigation which is standard for a nominee should be reopened to ensure that the facts are given and clearly she feels like she's been bullied, she's been pushed to testify without having background work done as is always the case with nominees. arthel: by the fbi. >> which is normal. fbi investigations for background of nominees

ford's and dr. ford's alone. and i cannot rule out that the person who leak of this information had a partisan agenda. but i am certain ranking member feinstein and her staff did not disclose dr. ford's account prior to that date because it was not theirs to share. and i think it's regrettable that long serving honorable colleagues others have question her motive. i know since the day that my democratic colleagues and i don't of these allegations we've had one consistent request, to allow the fbi to investigate them in a nonpartisan, professional evenhanded manner and deliver their findings to us so that we could reach a conclusion. that same night ranking member feinstein sent a letter requesting such an investigation. to suggest that senate staff interviews or letters from lawyers are an adequate substitute for a robust fbi fact gathering process that we might then way is not credible and reflex sadly a willful blindness to the dysfunction of our institution. to my colleagues across the aisle, you know me. you

that is christine blasey ford.i express my gratitude shared by many in america for that great teaching moment yesterday. we should honor her by acting in a way that keeps faith with her honesty and bravery. thank you mr. print incident. i yelled for. >> mr. president, as the world knows by now yesterday we had another hearing on the nomination of judge brett kavanaugh to be a number member of the united states supreme court. this necessary to do so because allegation have been made by doctor blasey

ford today. she requested that an e-mail to both of those camps saying specifically to discuss the consideration for dr. ford's potential testimony. and certainly worth also highlighting in that the conditions, that's what they're discussing on this phone call this evening, are what the sticking points has largely been over the last 48 hours, the who, what, when and where on the fact of what location would it be taking place, would it be public, would it be private, would there be other witnesses that come up here to testify or would it just be dr. ford and judge kavanaugh. those are all of the sticking points, the details that they allegedly are going to be discussing on this call, potentially still going at this hour, so we certainly will be waiting to hear what both sides say coming out of that conference call, of course, the devil here is of course in the details, the fact that these have been sticking points in the past and could remain so, so a lot could ride on how each side feels coming o

ford. and you know, one of the things that prosecutors who handle cases involving sexual assault come to know over time is that accusers are often delayed in making their accusations, and that is because victims are traumatized. they are concerned about being blamed themselves for their assault. they are concerned about being shamed and victimized again. and the concern about not being believed. so it is a very common occurrence for victims of sexual assault to delay in reporting. so i think to the extent that becomes an issue at this hearing. that should be debunked as -- it does not mean that the person is not credible. there is a logical explanation for a delay that occurs in reporting a crime of sexual assault. >> mieke, quickly before i go, i'm not saying i know which of these stories is true, but since president trump today established the standard of proof here, that there can be no doubt, there can be no doubt that brett kavanagh is telling the truth, that's the standard of proof th

ford's and dr. ford's alone. and i cannot rule out the person who leaked this information had a partisan agenda but i am certain ranking member feinstein and her staff did not disclose dr. ford's account prior to that date because it was not theirs to share and i think it is regrettable that long serving honorable colleagues of hers have questioned her motives. i know since the day that my democratic colleagues and i learned of these allegations, we have had one consistent request to allow the fbi to investigate them in a nonpartisan professional evenhanded manner and deliver their findings to us so that we could reach a conclusion. that same night, ranking member feinstein sent a letter requesting such an investigation. to suggest that senate staff interviews or letters from lawyers are in adequate substitute for a robust fbi fact gathering process is not credible and reflects sadly willful blindness to the dysfunction of our institution. to my colleagues across the aisle, you know me. even with those who we pas

ford's wishes. and then, and then as no doubt was expected, if not planned, came a long series of false last-minute smears designed to scare me and drive me out of the process before any hearing occurred. crazy stuff. gangs, illegitimate children, fights on boats in rhode island, all nonsense, reported breathlessly and often uncritically by the media. 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, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about president trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the clintons and millions of dollars in money from outside left wing opposition groups. this is a circus. the consequences will extend long past my nomination. the consequences will be with us for decades. this grotesque and coordinated character

ford is. he's going to be a he said, she said and who the senators believe more. >> let' talk about the preparations of what's been happen ng the old executive office building. what has judge brett kavanaugh been up to in that white house complex? >> we're seeing that sort of practice applied to this hearing and this issue. white house staffers questioning judge kavanaugh as if they were senators about his relationship or if there was any of any sort with christine blasey ford. trying to throw him off his game a bit to see if he can handle the pressure, to see what the best answers might be under the heat. his answers will be every bit as important as hers in terps ms o defining this episode and defining the future ocf the supreme court. he's answered some questions in a frustrated fashion which was not surprising. some cases he's drawing a line saying i won't answer. others he attempting to deflect. we'll have to see how that practice session plays out when he shows up on thursday. you can be

ford. i thought she was telling the truth but i want to set that aside to make one more point. because maybe some of my colleagues watched that hearing yesterday and didn't see it the same way i did. maybe they saw that hearing and thought dr. ford was credible and they also thought judge kavanaugh was credible. maybe they thought this is a he said-she said. i just don't know who or what to believe. mr. president, here's my message to those colleagues of mine. yesterday's hearing does not have to be the final word. there is absolutely no rush, none, zero. we have an opportunity to take a breath and slow down and let this process work the way that it is supposed to. now, the 11 republicans on the judiciary committee may have scrambled to rush this through their phase but we do not have to follow suit here in the senate. we can have the f.b.i. investigate. we can continue our own investigations. we can bring in additional relevant witnesses in the most appropriate ways or hold additional hear

ford. she stated not only that she does not recall any such party but that she doesn't even know judge kavanaugh. no corroboration, no supporting evidence before us, just dr. ford's allegation. under a normal standard of american justice, this is nowhere near enough to destroy someone's reputation or nullify their career. but for some of our colleagues, they are trying to move the goalpost. the junior senator from delaware asserted recently on television that it is judge kavanaugh who bears the burden of disproving these allegations. let me say that again. the junior senator from delaware says judge kavanaugh bears the burden of disproving these glaigz -- allegations. guilty until proven innocent in our country? similarly, the junior senator from hawaii has implied that judge kavanaugh does not deserve a presumption of innocence. the junior senator from hawaii has said that judge kavanaugh does not deserve a presumption of innocence, because she does not agree with his judicial philosophy.

that is christine blasey ford.i express my gratitude shared by many in america for that great teaching moment yesterday. we should honor her by acting in a way that keeps faith with her honesty and bravery. thank you mr. print incident. i yelled for.

no supporting evidence before u us, just doctor ford delegation. with a normal standard of american justice, nowhere near enough to destroy someone's reputation or nullify their career. but for some of our colleagues they try to move the goalpost. that judge cavanagh has that burden and let me say that again. the junior senator from delaware says bears the burden to disprove these allegations. guilty until proven innocent? in our country? similarly the junior senator from hawaii has implied judge cavanagh does not deserve a presumption of innocence. that they do not deserve a presumption of innocence. because she does not agree with his judicial philosophy. yesterday leader said in a criminal court room that there was no presumption of innocence when you have a nominee before you that democrats have not always taken a position. and back from 1991 son of the judiciary committee had this to say. but here is what he said presumption is with you. with me and in my opinion it should be you so joe biden during the clarence thomas proceedings. but my coll

ford. this comes after senator chuck grassley has reached out to her and her attorney, but has not heard back. but they have interviewed brett kavanaugh about the allegations. they have also reached out to the individual who was cited by ford in that "the washington post" piece piece about who allegedly witnessed this incident from the 1980s, that person, mark judge, has told the senate judiciary committee that he does not want to testify in public. and he said he has no recollection of this incident. now democrats on the other hand are saying that they want a full fbi background investigation looking into this before any decision to move forward with a hearing. dianne feinstein, the top democrat on the committee, who initially got this letter from kavanaugh's accuser told me earlier that there should be a delay for any hearing, untthat fbi background check is completed. but republicans do not want to move forward with the fbi background check, neither does president trump and orrin hatch,

ford? >> correct. >> senator feinstein. >> judge kavanaugh, it's my understanding that you have denied the allegations by dr. ford, miss ramirez and miss swetnick, is that correct? >> yes. >> all three of these woman 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 appear to be, why aren't you also asking the fbi to investigate these claims? >> senator, i'll do whatever the committee wants. i want ad hearing after the allegation came up. i wanted to be here that day. instead 10 days passed where all this nonsense is coming out, you know, that i'm in gangs. i'm on boats in rhode island. i'm in colorado, you know i'm sighted all over the place. these things are printed and run breathlessly by cable news. you know, i wanted a hearing the next day. my family has been destroyed by this, senator. destroyed. >> and -- >> whoever wants, whatever the committee decides. you know

ford. she wanted confidentiality. that was blown by the actions of her committee. >> your problems with the senators and how we conducted it, but you're not saying she is a political on or operative. you have sympathy for her. is that correct? >> i said all allegation should be taken seriously. my family has no ill will. >> do you wish that she never came forward? >> i did not do this. >> would you try to answer my question? do you wish she never came forward. >> the witnesses who were there say it never happened. >> you wish she remained silent? >> all allegations should be taken seriously. >> even if if it is in the final days before a vote, if someone has a credible allegation, that person should be allowed to come forward. she said it was her civic duty. you're not questioning her civic duty. >> she did come forward. >> i know you have a lot of political animus. what i'm trying to get to the bottom of is you do not see her specifically as part of an event.rated >> i do not know her but

ford and dr. ford's alone. i cannot rule out that the person who leaked this has a partisan agenda, but i am sure that ranking member feinstein and her staff did not disclose it before that date, because it is not theirs to share. and it is regrettable that the long-serving honorable colleagues of hers have questioned her motives. i know that since the day of my democratic colleagues and i learned of the allegations, we have had one consistent request to allow the fbi to investigate them in a nonpartisan, profession professional even-handed manner r and to deliver the findings to us so we could reach a conclusion. that same night ranking member feinstein sent a letter requesting such a letter. a and to suggest that the senate staff interviews or the letters from the lawyers are an adequate substitute for a robust fbi fact-gathering process that we might then weigh is not credible and reflects sadly a willful blindness to the dysfunction of the institution. to my colleagues across the aisle. you know me. you kno

ford? gripping his wife ashley's hand, judge brett kavanaugh walked past the cameras into the senate committee. >> do you afir that the testimony you're about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god? >> i do. >> reporter: then in a voice filled with anger and emotion, he proclaimed himself an innocent man. >> the day after the allegation appeared, i told this committee that i wanted a hearing as soon as possible to clear my name. 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 as i predicted, my family and my name have been totally and permanently destroyed by vicious and false additional accusations. this confirmation process has become a national disgrace. >> reporter: judge kavanaugh blamed a, quote, frenzy on the left. >> a democratic senator on this committee publicly referred to me as evil. evil. think abou

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 during the past 11 days. even volunteering to fly to california to take her testimony. but her attorneys refused to present her allegations to congress. i nevertheless honored her request for a public hearing. so dr. ford today has the opportunity to present her allegations under oath. as you can see, the judiciary committee was able to conduct throw investigations into allegations -- thoroughly investigations and allegations. some of my colleagues, consisted with our stated desire to a draw dr. cavanaugh's nomination by any means necessary, pushed for an fbi investigation into the allegations. but i have no authority to force the agency to conduct an investigation into a matter it considers to be closed. moreover, once the allegations became public, it was easy to identify all of the alleged witnesses and

ford. the hearing getting testy and kavanaugh and ford face a barrage of questions about the alleged attack that may have happened 35 years ago. heather hanson and vince coglianese. vince isn't with us yet. tammy, your assessment of what we have seen so far. tammy: it's a shame in general this is even happening. two classic americans dragged through the mud in a process that should have been a collegiate process of looking for the truth and confirming someone for the highest court in the land in the greatest country on earth. it turned into a freaking circus. it's shameful. and we know why it's happening. it's a political maneuver. in the treatment of dr. ford. i think something happened to her, i just don't think judge kavanaugh did it. she of course would be sympathetic. but the issue becomes the treatment of judge kavanaugh. you have seen her treated sometimes with kid gloves. women can take the heat of the kitchen when they are asserting their truth. judge kavanaugh, you have see the po

ford. in fact the president remains steadfast and i dare say defiant in his support of his supreme court nominee judge brett kavanaugh. in fact, today, while up in new york, at the united nations, the president doubled down on his assessment that this is all a hit job. perpetrated by the democrats mental to demean, delay and defeat his nominee. >> i think it's horrible what the democrats have done. it's a con game they are playing. they are really con artists. they are trying to convince, you know, they don't believe it themselves, okay. they know he is a high quality person. the democrats are playing a con game, c-o-n. a con game. they know it's a con game. they know he is high quality. and they wink at each other. they are winking. they know it's a con game. >> they know it's a con game says the president. by the way today on twitter, neil, he referenced the talk show giant rush limbaugh when he said that basically if the republicans fail to push this nomination over the finish line well,

ford? >> well, she's going to go into very specific detail about what she says happened to her in summer of 1982. this is, of course, a story she told "the washington post," but now she's going to be telling that story to a group of 21 senators and to the world. >> all right, gayle and john. i know you're watching this with me as well. >> it is very interesting to see her for the first time. we've only had this one picture of when she was a teenager, then the picture when she had sunglasses. we're told her husband is not in the room with her today. he stayed at home with the children. so she's seated at the table with two of her attorneys. >> yeah, her attorney is sitting next to her. we' s alyssa milano in the room, which is interesting. i'm told she was a guest of senator diane feinstein. >> but no matter how many people are in the room, when you talk to people who have had to testify, even on matters that are nowhere within the same country as the difficult ones she's about to testify on