senator grassley: senator blumenthal. senator feinstein. then -- senator feinstein: if i through the chair could ask a question of senator flake. does your amendment include continuing the investigation during this period of time? senator flake: if i could respond. there is no amendment. i am simply stating the discussion that we had between us all is that i would hope and i think we had some agreement before that the democrats who have been, i think, justifiablely uncomfortable moving ahead, could publicly, in an effort to bring this country together, say that we would feel better. i'm not expecting them to vote yes, but not to complain that an f.b.i. investigation has not occurred. and i -- this is what i'm trying to do. this country is being ripped apart here, and we got to make sure that we do due diligence. i think this committee has done a good job, but i do think we can have a short pause and make sure that the f.b.i. can investigate. my understanding is that some of us would have to, and i'm prepared to do it, make a request to the w

senator hatch: well, i think one of our senators, one of our better senators in the u.s. senate, did do exactly that, and he is a democrat, as a matter of fact, one of the fairest people and i think one of the best new people in the whole senate. this is a statement that was made on the floor of the senate in this record by my distinguished colleague, senator lieberman, a man i have a great deal of respect for. senator lieberman's staff conducted a survey of various women who have worked for you over the years. he was concerned. he has been a supporter of yours, and he was one who asked for this delay so that this could be looked into because he was concerned, too. but as a result of the survey, senator lieberman made the following statement: he said, "i have contacted associates, women who worked with judge thomas during his time at the department of education and eeoc, and in the calls that i and my staff have made there has been universal support for judge thomas and a clear indication by all of the women we spoke to that there was never, certainly not a case of sexual

senator hatch: well, i think one of our senators, one of our better senators in the u.s. senate, did do exactly that, and he is a democrat, as a matter of fact, one of the fairest people and i think one of the best new people in the whole senate. this is a statement that was made on the floor of the senate in this record by my distinguished colleague, senator lieberman, a man i have a great deal of respect for. senator lieberman's staff conducted a survey of various women who have worked for you over the years. he was concerned. he has been a supporter of yours, and he was one who asked for this delay so that this could be looked into because he was concerned, too. but as a result of the survey, senator lieberman made the following statement: he said, "i have contacted associates, women who worked with judge thomas during his time at the department of education and eeoc, and in the calls that i and my staff have made there has been universal support for judge thomas and a clear indication by all of the women we spoke to that there was never, certainly not a case of sexual

[shouting] >> i'll call the senator wenders order on my left senator, given particularly vulnerable. senator carr. senator carr, , i just asked yo. senator gallagher. >> thank you, mr. president. can the minister confirm that at this point leadership fellow of vote of a joint party that audible malcolm turnbull would not be prime minister? >> i remind -- order. on my last question time is generally -- if you take up your own time senator gallacher, you will be aware of standing orders that questions should not use hypotheticals. i will call the minister to address the parts of the question if she wishes to, but questions remain a question time -- senators should keep that in mind. send to mckinsey. >> thank you, mr. president. senator gallacher through you, mr. president, the coalition is made up of two separate parties. [shouting] -- nearly 100 years old -- >> order on my left. and for nearly 100 years -- >> order -- the liberal party has been in existence we don't vote on the leadership matters and we never have. we never will because we are two separate parties and that is how it should b

all i have said to senator flake is that i would advocate for the position he took but i don't control that. senator? >> mr. chairman. >> yes, senator klobuchar. >> there are other senators, as well who may be interested in this negotiation on the republican side. and there's not really a set agreement here. all of us already said we were voting no. it is simply senator flake working with all of us to say for the good of the senate and the good of the court, the american people deserve to have the facts followed up on. and i really appreciate his willingness to do that. and that is what this is about. this is simply about -- and by the way, if senator mcconnell wants to go forward in light of that and we still have several senators that haven't said how they're voting on this nominee, i actually think this is very important what just happened right now. so it doesn't have to have an agreement. it is one senator who is standing up. >> senator cornyn. >> mr. chairman, i just want to express my appreciation to senator flake for allowing this process to move forward. there's some difference of opinion among us as to what exactly the fbi

really salacious at times yesterday. >> we are getting indications that senator coons from delaware has pulled senator flake, senator flake is good friends with senator coons. there may be a change here. since that time they've had a discussion on the side, you can kind of see people gathered in the corner of the room. senator coons has come back into the committee room and has been whispering to senator feinstein, senator durbin. about what, we don't know. one of the assumptions was that democrats are really pushing for this delay for at least a week to let the fbi back into the investigation. are they talking about that? we don't know. senator flake is now back in the room and now this vote is seven, 8 minutes till eight and senator grassley is pretty time oriented when he said 1:30. >> harris: let me ask you about senator amy klobuchar from minnesota, because she laid it out like the former prosecutor we know her to be in terms of why you would want that fbi investigation to even happen now. and speaking to a delay. if democrats haven't been able to get a delay, we saw yesterday, what about yesterday would aid th

senator gallagher? senator carr. senator gallagher. i just asked you, senator gallagher -- >> thank you, mr. esident. can the minister confirm that -- had been a vote of a joint party room, the honorable malcolm turnbull would not be prime inister. >> order. if you take up your own time. senator gallagher, you will be aware of standing orders. not hypotheticals. i will call the minister to ask the part of the question she wishes to. the questions for the remainder of question time, senators should keep that in mind. senator mckenzie? >> thank you, mr. president. the coalition is made up of two separate parties. -- 100 years old. >> order. >> and for nearly 100 years, the 45 odd years, the liberal party. we don't vote on the leadership matter. we never have. we never will because we are two separate parties and that is how it should be. >> there is one figure in particular who was central to the prime minister's hopes of holding on to the job. the finance minister. a leading conservative within the government. he stuck by malcolm turnbull, at least at the start of we can. -- of the week. >> th

senator matt mccarthy. >> senator! i don't want to start yelling. i will if necessary, senator. senator, still a final upplementary question. >> after five years of dysfunction. after adjourning the house of representatives to avoid public crutiny. and without a prime minister or a functioning government, will the national party join labor in calling for an election to allow the australian people to elect a unctioning government? >> order. order. senator collins? senator collins? enator o'neil. >> i will not, mr. president. there are some great reasons for that. the reason we would never support the other side is -- we would not accept the sort of utterances of five years of dysfunctional government. talk about the million people who have got a job. >> order. senator, take your seat. senator, if i'm calling senators to order i expect them to at least heed it the second time i do it. one of your colleagues is on his you'red i'm certain that interested. >> i suffer from a condition called sensitive ear syndrome and this is becoming a workplace health and safety issue with the pitch

senator grassley: senator feinstein? senator feinstein: i would support that motion. i think we need this investigation. i sort of misunderstood, senator flake what you are doing, i thought it included a one-week investigation, so i would like to support the motion. for that investigation. >> mr. chairman. senator grassley: we will take turns. senator? >> i love this committee but we are not the majority leader. senator flake has made clear what it would take him to be comfortable on a final passage vote. it doesn't matter what we say here, it will be up to senator schumer and mcconnell. >> it is completely up to them. >> mr. chairman. >> he has made himself a very clear. senator grassley: senator leahy. senator leahy: i want to make sure, because this is somewhat unprecedented, but i do agree with the senator from arizona that we should have the investigation. so my understanding is that during the week that that is taking place, there will be no action on the floor of the united states senate on this nomination, is that correct? senator grassley: i cannot say -- >> l

that wouldn't make much sense. >> senator klobuchar -- >> well, senator coons and senator flake have been working together on this for quite awhile and a number of us have been urging them along. but this was kind of a surprise to all of us, senator flake has expressed including in his speech yesterday his about the divide in this country that is being exacerbated by what's happening here. and, of course, we have been asking over and over again for follow-up on the evidence. and so senator flake is basically saying to his leadership, i want to see this additional investigation before i vote for this nominee. and if he is joined by one or two other republicans in that request, then they would be the have the votes unless the investigation occurred. and it's that simple. >> is anybody else committed? >> i don't know. you'll have to ask them. it is one week given -- one week is what senator flake was interested in. and you can do a lot if you have the whole fbi looking at things in one week. >> did senator flake bring this idea to the democrats or did the. >> you'll have to talk to him a

senate does. senator grassley: senator coons. senator coons: thank you, mr. chairman. yesterday was an important and a difficult day. a long day for dr. ford, for judge kavanaugh, for the senate judiciary committee, for our nation. and i will say briefly at the outset that before yesterday began i prayed. i prayed for dr. ford and her family. i prayed for judge kavanaugh. i prayed for our chairman and ranking member. i prayed for our president. i prayed for all who would watch yesterday, who were victims of sexual assault, and i prayed for all who would watch yesterday uncertain whether we could conduct ourselves respectfully. i must say after everything i have heard, i am struck that in the twitter fueled smash mouth politics of our day we must ask ourselves, what about our conduct? what about our conduct here would encourage anyone to come forward with credible allegations of sexual assault to seek a nomination to a federal court or other position of trust or to serve here? and as a result, i tonight will pray for our nation. the burden on this committee was to addres

totally been shown just yet, but there have been a number of democratic governors, senate —— senators, democratic governors, senateemocratic governors, senate —— senators, excuse me, in republican states, who may have in pressured to vote for kava naugh states, who may have in pressured to vote for kavanaugh before yesterday's hearings who have now become comfortable in saying they are not actually going to vote for kavanaugh's are not actually going to vote for kava naugh's confirmation. are not actually going to vote for kavanaugh's confirmation. does senator flake become some kind of hero to be left as a result of all this? i think he becomes a hero to the left if he eventually votes no. he eventually voted for the process in making this compromise in delaying the hearing for a week. if he turns around and then votes no, he turns around and then votes no, he probably wouldn't become a hero to the left. but this was definitely an important step in favour of process. lots of the attention is likely going to focus on the two moderate women senators, lisa matkowski of alaska and susan collins of maine. they are als

i don't want to hurt -- senator biden: senator, let me -- senator hatch: i am not senator hatch: let me finish. senator biden: no, i will not. senator hatch: yes, you will. yes, you will. senator biden: let me just make one -- you are entitled to use the statement under the rule. no one, the chair cannot stop you from using the statement. senator hatch: well, mr. chairman, how can it be admissible to everybody? everybody in this country is going to see it. senator simpson: mr. chairman, how can she request confidentiality at this point, when she said she -- senator biden: i can answer that question. professor hill saysthat she -- hill says that she wants to tell her story. she did not release the statement, she says, and she wants her story told by her. because we have given the opportunity to the judge to speak first, if he so chose, and he has. she wants to be able to present her thus-far unreleased statement in her own words. she will not have spoken to publicly, when she comes and addresses the committee. now, why don't we get on with this process? senator thurmond: mr. chairman,

senate rule. i did not violate a senate rule. i will pause. there is no senate rule that i violated because there's no senate rule that accounts for this process. and i say to a chairman that i respect, that i believe has been fair and good to me, i will say that i did willingly violate the chair's rule on the committee confidential process. i take full responsibility for violating that, sir. and i violated it because i sincerely believe that the public deserves to know this nominee's record. this particular case, his record on issues of race and the law. and i could not understand and i violated this rule knowingly why these issues should be withheld from the public. i appreciate the comments of my colleagues. this is about the closest i'll probably ever have in my life to an i am spartacus moment, my colleagues have they accept the responsibility. there are various charges made against me by my colleague from texas. i don't know if they were political bluster or sincere feelings. if what he said was sincere, there actually are senate rules governing the behavi

chairman, may i read the senator rule 295, standing rules of the senate? any senator, officer or employee of the senate who shall disclose the secret or confidential business or proceedings of the senate, including the business and proceedings of the committees, subcommittees and offices of the senate, shall be liable if a senator to suffer expulsion from the body and if an officer or employee to dismissal from the service of the senate and to punishment or contempt. >> bring it. >> bring it on. >> i would correct the senator's statement there is no rule. there is clearly a rule that applies. >> then apply and bring the charges. >> all of us are ready to face that rule on the bogus designation of committee confidential. just because there is a senate rule doesn't mean it can be misapplied or misconstrued or misused. i think even the threat raised by one of my colleagues here is unfortunate. that is a kind way of putting it with all due respect. i would make one other point. we're dealing with a lifetime appointment. nothing we do here is more serious than confirming a

senator grassley: senator graham. senator graham: am i the last person? senator grassley: but don't forget, we are going to hear from the nominee and his introducers before you can go home and go to bed. senator graham: ok, thank you. [laughter] i was going to ask you to take me to dinner but that's not going to happen. senator grassley: you know the answer to that. senator graham: that's right. so to my colleagues, i look forward to working with you. we have a different view here. i think you have to be blind as to what's going on here. have you heard of justice breyer? do you know him? you can't say anything, i guess. where did he come from? he was ted kennedy's senate judiciary person. where do you think republicans are going to go find a judge? the whole argument is, you can be a conservative republican president but you got to nominate a liberal to be fair to the country. that's absurd. where do you think ruth bader ginsburg came from? general counsel of the aclu. wonderful person. what groups do y'all pick from? this is shaping up to be the hypocrisy

what can senators do on each side of the aisle tomorrow to avoid this national train wreck? is the biggest mistake the filibuster? senator kaine? senator kaine: i think senators need to approach all the witnesses with respect. and i say all the witnesses. i don't think this is just a matter for judge kavanaugh and dr. ford. if we're going to be respectful of the seriousness of the allegations, i think you have to hear from ms. ramirez and ms. swetnick, you need to subpoena mark judge to come. and there may be other witnesses as well. the most respectful thing to do s treat people with respect. remember, our children are watching. if an allegation of serious sexual assault gets swept under the rug, it will make it harder for people who are suffering sexual assault to come out and seek help. let's hear from everybody. do the f.b.i. investigation that should be done, do it in a respectful manner. that's what a deliberative body like the senate should do. >> mr. stewart. mr. stewart: if the senate treated each other and other members the way that they are treating judge kavanaugh, they would all be in jail for getting counseling. 268 charg

coons, senator whitehouse, senator hirono, senator blumenthal, now senator feinstein, i hope they will bring charges against us. and i'm ready to accept the full responsibility for what i have done, the consequences for what i've done. and i stand by the publics right to have access to this document and know this nominees views on issues that are so profoundly important, like race in the law, torture and other issues. >> mr. chairman, may i make -- may i read the senate rule 29 -5, steny was of the senate for benefit of all senators? any senator, officer or employee of the senate who shall disclose the secret or confidential business or proceedings of the senate including the business proceedings of the committee's come subcommittees and offices of the senate shall be liable if a senator to suffer expulsion from the body and if an officer or employee to dismissal from the service of the senate and to punishment for contempt. >> bring it on. >> i would correct the sender cr statement that there is the rule. there's clearly a rule that applies. >> then apply the rule and bring

please read senate rule 295 to the benefit of all senators. any senator officer employee of thehe senate who shall disclose the or confidential business or proceedings of the senate including the business and proceedings of the committee or subcommittee or the offices of the senate shall beng liable if a senator suffers expulsion from the body and an officer or employee's dismissal and the punishment for contempt. ivi would correct the senators rule there clearly is a rule that applies. >> then bring the charges. >> all of us are ready to face that rule on the bogus designation of committee confidential. just because there is a senate rule doesn't mean it can be misapplied or misconstrued boat even the threat by even one of my colleagues here is unfortunate and that is a kind way to put it with all due respect. we are dealing here with a lifetime appointment. nothing we do here is morene serious than confirming a justice of the united states of cream court let the american people appreciate we are here with the most solemn responsibility fall proof just a

senator mcconnell. i talked to senator schumer. i talked to senator durbin. i talked to everybody, including the presiding officer, everybody on our committee. so we made great progress, and i want to thank again the people, starting with senator leahy, senator mcconnell, senator schumer, senator durbin, that really helped this come about. i want to take a second and thank some of the staff of the defense subcommittee. brian potts and eric rainch and long with senators blunt, durbin, murray, for their work on these bills that are eminent here today. this is a good start with us. we're not there yet, mr. president, but we're getting there. and if we keep on the road, keep the trains running, we're going to make the appropriations committee work again. thank you very much. the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. president, i thank the distinguished senior senator from alabama. before i start, i should note we have votes scheduled for 12:00. i may go a little bit over that, so i ask consent that i be allowed to finish my whole statement. t

senator from arizona on the judiciary committee, jeff flake. you also have new republican senator jon kyl, actually a former united states senator appointed recently to fill john mccain's seat. jon kyl had been working as basically brett kavanagh's guide through the senate confirmation process as a friend of all the republican senators. any indication whether senator jon kyl or senator jeff flake were involved in the selection of an arizona local prosecutor to come 2000 miles to washington to do this job? >> you know, lawrence, there is no indication yet, but we're still reporting this story right now. and, you know, the senator that you mentioned certainly have played a key role in this overall process. as you mention, senator kyle was basically kavanagh's guide, attended meetings with him on capitol hill with senators. and jeff flake of arizona is a key swing vote in this nomination process.

senate approved eight u.s. district court judicial nominees. live coverage of the senate when they're back in session here on c-span2. also today the senate judiciary committee has been meeting on supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. after the hearings are complete, the committee will vote on confirmation and send its recommendation to the full senate. >> frankly, when i walked into thes room, how that would work. and it worked great in terms of the reaction i got and also in terms of, i think, the real world results. the way i thought about it is if i make a difference even for one clerk or one student, it's worth it -- >> o sure. >> and i've kept it up year after year. i also teach at harvard law school, and i'm proud of the results. i think, i think it's made, you know, again, a small difference, but it's one person at a time, one clerk at a time, one student at a time. andne i think hopefully by talkg about it in this forum, i can efforts of that nature which are really just recruiting efforts and explanation for many of the students at law schools or first generation profession aals and don't have the america -- professionals and d

senator -- >> and then we also have senator whitehouse, but i want to let him comment. >> senator grassley, may i be recognized after senator whitehouse? >> mr. chairman, thank you. i was disappointed to see last night that some of our colleagues are unwilling or unable to conduct themselves in this hearing, with regular order and in accordance with the rules of the committee and the rules of the senate. i know last night some of our colleagues even tried to cross-examine the nominee about documents, but refused to let him even read them. members of the senate and members of congress generally are privy to sensitive information, including classified information on occasion. and were expected to protect that information for all of the obvious reasons. and it's inappropriate to raise these in an open session before the committee. and i think our colleagues understand that. but nevertheless, decided to go ahead, anyway. so i just think it's important that we remind one another that there are clear rules about the discussion of confidential material. and that there can be consequences to the v

senator john ky kyle. he is a man without comparable peer. with nearly two decades experience in the senate serving alongside john mccain senator kyle is the paired to hit the ground running. over the last few months senator kyle has been working closely with white house on the senate confirmation of president donald trump's nominee to the us supreme court, brett kavanaugh. now, senator kyle can cast a vote for cavanaugh's confirmation. senator kyle is a beacon of integrity and highly regarded by people on both sides of the aisle. they are able to work across party lines to get results. there is a reason you considered one of the senators in the country because he was. he's an expert on the matters facing arizona. water, land use, and issues facing our native american communities. i want someone who will enter and lead on those conversations. for those reasons i've asked senator john kyle to step forward once again in the spirit of service and to aid our state and serve in the seat vacated by arizona most beloved adopted s son, john mccain. people automatically assume that this appointment will serve through 2020. i have not been able to get that

senator burr: senator lankford. senator lankford: i want to follow-up on a statement that senator king was mentioning as well as about deep fakes. that's something i've spoken to both of you about before in the past. it is a challenge for us and i would just reiterate some of the things he was saying publicly. when it's the possibility and now the opportunity to be able to create video that looks strikingly real but none of it is actually real, all of it is computer generated, there's a very different day for video sharing in the days ahead. i know as y'all have attacked issues like child pornography and other things on your platforms in the past, you'll aggressively go after these things. we're telling you we're counting on it because americans typically can trust what they see and suddenly in video they can no longer trust what they see because the opportunity to be able to create video that's entirely different than anything in reality has now actually come. so i appreciate your engagement on that. i want to talk to you

it was also senator lisa murkowski, senator collins, senator joe manchin. basically, every undecided senator that republican leaders need to move to completion, they didn't have because of what senator flake did. and that means for at least a week, even though they will start the process tomorrow on the floor, the senate is going to be frozen in wait for the fbi. >> all right, phil mattingly on capitol hill. with all the latest. and while phil's story was going on, we got a comment -- an official statement from the senate judiciary committee. let me read it. it says the senate judiciary committee will request that the trump administration instruct the fbi to conduct a supplemental fbi background investigation with respect to the nomination of judge brett kavanaugh to be an associate justice in the supreme court. the supplemental background investigation would be limited to current, credible allegations against the nominee and must be completed no later than one week from today. we're trying to find out what current, credible allegations means. my guess, and

host: one of the things that anyone who watches the senate knows is that senators do not like to be deprived. how blindsided was senatorssley, chairman of the senate judiciary committee, and senator mcconnell, majority leader of the senate, when flake made the announcement he would not vote for the nomination on the floor unless he had a one-week delay and investigation? guest: it was amazing to watch 1:30, when they were supposed to come in and it looked like they were going to push the nomination through and the drama had already happened. circumspect,retty he doesn't display a lot of emotion other than occasionally irritation. when they came in, he essentially gaveled in, and he said senator flake has something to say, flake said his peace, and it was amazing, none of the sensors could figure out what the next move was. -- none of the senators could figure out what the next move was. they didn't know what he was demanding. some of the democratic senators thought flake was going to propose an amendment that would a week delay for an fbi investigation, but instead he voted to approve the motion to advance him out of t

senator klobachar come back. but senator flake doesn't come back. they're whispering. ey're talking to senator feinstein. all the aides are excitedly starting to chat. and we are like what is going on? this just went on for a while. 1:30 came whichas when the committee was supposed to vote. they weren't voting. there were only four senators of 21 senators. and all of a sudden flake came out and said what he did. robert: they wanted to forward with a vote. geoff: i can tell you there's a sense of dread about what this week might hold. time, the passage of time has never been on the side of this confirmation. first, republicans wanted him seated in time for the october 1st start of the new supreme court term. heey wanted to have him confirmed beforeid terms. but there's this thought that the public perception of him could change negative over time. well, before's thursday's hearing there wer more ericans who did not support kavanaugh's nomination than did support him t according an nbc news "wall street journal" poll. there's this thought that there could be more accusers that come forward, there could be m

senate rule. dy not violate a senate rule. i will pause, i will pause. there is no senate rule that i violated, because there's no senate rule that accounts for this process. and i say to a chairman that i respect, that i believe has been fair, and good to me, i will say that i did willingly violate the chair's rule on the committee confidential process. i take full responsibility for violating that, sir. and i violate it because i sincerely believe that the public deserves to know this nominee's record. and in this particular case, his record on issues of race and the law. and i could not understand, and i violated this rule knowingly, why these issues should be withheld from the public. now i appreciate the comments of my colleagues this is about the closest i'll probably ever have in my life to an "i am spartacus" moment there were various charges made against me by my colleague from texas. i don't know if they were political bluster. or sincere feelings. if what he said was sincere, there actually are senate rules governing the behavior of senators. if he feels that i,

arizona governor doug ducey announced that former senator john kyle would temporarily fill the setat of te late senator john mccain. was in the senate from 1995-23 said he was committed to serving until january of next year. a special election will be to happen in 20 to find a permanent successor to fill the remainder of senator mccain's term. from the arizona state capitol in phoenix, this is 15 minutes. gov. ducey: we have just concluded a very difficult week for our state and our country. john mccain was an american hero and we were very blessed to have him as our senator. we're all aware of the size of the void john mccain leaves. our prayers and our heart remain with cindy mccain and the entire mccain family and we will continue to celebrate the life of john mccain. i want to start off by saying that we all hoped today would never come. but it has come. i realize what an important decision this is and that there is no replacing senator john mccain. but the law requires me to do it, and the people of arizona deserve representation in the u.s. senate. it's the decision that i made with careful and thoughtful deliberation. can ima

senate's action. the senator for oklahoma. mr. lankford: i have requests for meetings during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. i ask unanimous consent the senate stand in recess until 4:00 this afternoon. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. president, today i filed a lawsuit related to a violation of the separation of powers. our constitution lays out a very clear framework in which the president of the united states nominates and the senate proceeds to review the record of an individual in order to determine if that individual is of fit character to serve. this strategy came as our founders struggled with how to enable staff to fill key positions in the executive branch and key positions in the judiciary. and it's something that hamilton wrote about extensively in his "federalist papers." number 76 was written in 1788 as a letter to the people of the state of new york. and in it he addressed this separation of powers at length. he said that the founders had considered giving the assembly, that is a large group, the ability to choose those

it's a privilege to work with senator collins, senator stabenow, senator cassidy. senator mccaskill was just on this floor to get this done. i appreciate your attention, madam president, to this important piece of legislation. i look forward to voting to support it and getting it passed today and getting it down to the president for his signature. thank thank you, madam president. i yield the floor. i suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: a senator: madam president, i ask the quorum call be dispensed with. the presiding officer: the senator from washington. without objection. well -- ms. cantwell: i thank my colleagues for working so hard to pass this legislation dealing with the opioid. from port angeles to spokane, i guarantee i've heard about this problem, seen how the communities are struggling and this is the very help they've been asking for. they want new tools, better solutions ndz they want us for join the fight against drug manufacturers who push this out to communities when they should be -- sho

question that senator cruz wants to do the best for america, and he does so at great sacrifice to his family and his kids. and so i thank you, senator cruz, for your public service. senatorruz: thank you. and you know, i agree with those sentiments. i would express the very same sentiments back at congressman o'rourke. you are right, being a dad to young kids is hard. i know the sacrifice you are putting in. my girls, every day, it is hard. there are a lot of tears and there are a lot of tears in your household too, i am sure. that is a single hardest part of doing this. let me say beyond that. think congressman o'rourke is passionate, energetic. he believes in what he is fighting for. very much the same sentiments. last year, i did three debates with bernie sanders. and i expressed in all three debates that bernie sanders believes in what he is fighting for. he believes in socialism. i think what he is fighting for doesn't work, but i think you are absolutely sincere, like bernie, you believe in expanding government and higher taxes. and i commend you for fighting for what you believe. and as you noted, we disagree on the outcome, but you are fighting for the principles

senator. >> mr. chairman. >> senator klobuchar. >> mr. chairman, there are other senators well who may be interested in this negotiation on the republican side, and there's not really a set agreement here. all of us had already said we were voting no. it is simply senator flake working with all of us to say for the good of the senate and the good of the court, the american people deserve to have the facts followed up on. and i really appreciate his willingness to do that. and that is what this is about. this is simply about -- and, by the way, if senator mcconnell wants to go forward in light of that and we still have several senators that haven't said how they're voting on this nominee, i actually think this is very important what just happened right now. so it doesn't have to have an agreement. it is one senator who is standing up. >> senator. >> mr. chairman, i just want to express my appreciation to senator florida for allowing this process to move forward. there's some difference of opinion among us as to what exactly the fbi investigation would consist of. some of us

senator. thank you. >> senator: excellent, glad to hear it. >> before i call on senator -- >> dana: basketballill be played. senator ted cruz wrapping up his questions, we'll take a quick break and be right back with more action. oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are

senator klobuchar? can you tell us what just happened? what happened -- >> senator coons and senator flake have been working together on for for quite a while. a number of us have been urging them along and but this was kind of a surprise to all of us. senator flake has expressed, including in his speech yesterday his concern about the divide in this country that is being exacerbated by what is happening here and of course we have been asking over and over again for follow-ups on the evidence. and so senator flake is basechy saying to his leadership, i want to see this additional investigation before i vote for this nominee. and if he is joined by one or two other republicans, in that request, then they wouldn't have the vote unless the investigation occurs. is that simple. >> is anybody else committed? >> you have to ask them. [shouting questions] >> one week, given, is what senator flake was interested in. and you can do a lot, if you have the whole fbi looking at things in one week. >> did senator flake bring this idea to the democrats? are democrats -- >> you should talk to senat

leahy new, senator feinstein, senator grassley, or senator hatch. it is a different committee. it is committee we have created with changes and roles. if we are going to say to our people back home that we are committed to civility, we have to prove it. we have to stick by basic rules that give the minority a voice. i think what was done this morning sadly is a step in the wrong direction. i have a motion for a subpoena that i will withhold until ranking members make statements. senator leahy: the senior senator from texas is back in the room, i want to correct some things he said about elena kagan. we got 99% from a democratic administration. the followed a letter from me as chairman and jeff sessions as ranking member, we agreed on that jointly. republicans, democrats joined together. the 1%, we were shown with that was and agreed to it. those are the facts. we had all of the records. considerably more than we ever had before. a democrat was chair of this committee, the democratic administration, we got all the records that republicans and democrat

senator leahy. iwant thinkjeff has made himself very clear. senator leahy. i want to make sure because this is sort of unprecedented. i agree with the senatoron. so my understanding is during the week that that is taking place, there will be no action on the floor of the united states senate. on this nomination. is that correct?|j cannot nomination. is that correct?” cannot say that... i cannot make that commitment for the leadership. ican that commitment for the leadership. i can only say that i would only be comfortable moving forward on the floor, i will move it out of committee, but i will only be comfortable moving on the floor until the fbi has done more investigation than they have already. it might not take them a week. i understand that some of these witnesses may not want to discuss anything further, but i think we owe them due diligence. just a minute. all i have said to senator flake is that i would advocate for the position he took, but i do not control that. senator. mrchairman. but i do not control that. senator. mr chairman. there but i do not control that. senator. mrchairman. there are but i do not control that. senator. m

i would think that presuming there are other senators who are backing senator flake such as senator collins not 51 votes or 50 votes to move the nomination through and that means senator conneu through and that means senator connell will go to the president and say please give these people they wa nt say please give these people they want limited to a week and that is how we get the nominee three and that president will reluctantly agree. a week is not long, was at a concessionary timeframe put forward do you think? i think he could not presumably asked for more time and have that in the republican caucus, the republicans are under pressure from their base to vote the nominee out, they believe the nominee has been subjected to unjustified personal character assassination and again, politics is often the art of compromise and a week is probably the most the republican establishment can tell their base the investigation will go on for and not have a voter revolt. in reaction to the motion from jeff flake and believe one of the senators made the comment for the good of the senate and the good

rule 29.5, the standing rules of the senate, the vented dough-like benefit of all senators? and a senatorofficer, or employee of a son who shall disclose the secret or confidential business proceedings of the senate, including the proceedings of the committees, subcommittees, and offices of the senate, shall ber exposure from the body, and dismissal from the service of the senate and punishment for contempt. >> bring it. >> i would correct the senator's statement that there is a row. there is clearly a row. >> then bring the charges. >> all of us are ready to face that rule on the bogus designation of committee confidential. just because there is a senate rule doesn't mean it can be misapplied or misconstrued, or misused. i think even the threat raised by one of my colleagues here is unfortunate. that is a kind way of putting it, with all due respect. i would just make one other point. we are dealing here with a lifetime appointment. nothing we do here is more serious. confirming a justice on the united states supreme court. let the american people appreciate that we are here in the most

senate rather than hung from a tree. [applause] you should have seen the faces of some of those senators. senator biden. some of the senators that did not expect this man to courageously confront what they were trying to do. i didn't get a chance but i bet there would have been somewhat spots. [laughter] long - - wet spots. clarence thomas was confirmed to the supreme court of the united states and year after year are not out of revenge to follow the constitution with those history books it will show because of clarence thomas' vote of time and time again, this country is a better place than it would have been otherwise. [applause] now two years later. bill clinton june of 1993 nominates justice ginsburg. she was a lawyer, an official of the american civil liberties union. her name was on briefs, documents, memos promoting policies that in many cases, 80 percent of the american people would disagree with. she comes up before the united states senate just a couple years before they tried to do too clarence thomas what are the republican senators say wait. she is outside the mainstream. and then with a bun

yes or no down the line. >> yes, senator. >> yes, senator. >> yes, senator. >> yes, senator. >> yes, senator. >> thank you. now, mr. enright and mr. tribble, google dominates the operating system. as such they're tasked that kids on both of the apps comply with copa. both platforms were found to have apps in their children and family sections that mi positay potentially violate copa. what precautions do your companies take in either the app store or google play store, respectively? >> m mr. enright, mr. tribble? >> thank you, senator, and i appreciate you drawing attention to this important issue. protecting children on line is important to google. in connection with the app store, we actually created the families design program to help recognize applications we directed. we require that people who submit apps to the app store recognize if their apps are suitable for children, and that they apply to the requirements for children. if we find out they violated those requirements, then they are removed from the play store. >> do you agree that the studies show there are major violations

senator jeff flake. and so senator jeff flake in the last hours cut a deal with his deal with chris coons for a week long fbi investigation if the republicans want senatort it's going to take very interesting because neither of those men makes the decision about what happens in the senate. that would be senate majority leader mitch mcconnell. he may capitulate because they need jeff flake's vote. let's bring in chief white house correspondent john roberts. we heard from the president in breaking news fashion just moments ago because he was talking from inside the white house with the leader of chile. now john roberts, you can bring us the latest. you're outside the white house. >> yeah. and the president and the white house still trying to figure out exactly what is going to happen here and how they should proceed there is vote counting going on obviously in the senate if you can lose jeff flake but have lisa murkowski and senator collins going on still gets you tie break with the vice president. i have seen reports out we have not confirmed this just yet seeing reports on the way to the capitol, his is murkowski one of the swing votes here says she sup

senate has never been able to do so under senator kaine. he's in automatic known to everything the president proposes. a 355 navy senator kaine voted not. senator kaine voted no. he votes not against the president out of spite, he's still hurting from 2016. we have no room for that. he's been voting now against the president, now against you, now against for genia and that is why on november 6, i'm asked you to vote no to senator kaine. thank you much. >> and inclusive and innovative people. it's not just an expression of what i tried to do but it's an expression of what i deserve from virginians. that's how i've led all along, that's how i've led in the senate getting bill after bill passed. they think it's nothing to build the ship. he things it's nothing to expand career and technical education. but virginians think it's something. when it stewart says take virginia back, virginians don't want to go back. there's nothing in the rearview mirror that looks better to virginia than what we can see in the windshield going forward. if you will support me and continues to support me, i will continue to work for that virginia that works for a

senate command. they testify before the senate this week. before the senate this week. i before the senate this week. e before the senate this week. d before the senate this week. >>> the meeting will come to order. senator reed and i agree on something we've talked about for a long period of time, and that is we'll have a meeting that starts at 9:30, 10:00, 10:30. we're going to start. it's my experience in the past when i had several years of sharing the environment with the committee, once the members knew we were starting on time, they get here on time. everybody is busy, we understand that. anyway, we are -- first of all, we want, again, to make our statement. the love that we had for john mccain, the years that we served under him in this committee, we will miss him sorely but it's something we have great memories and will stay with us forever. we meet today to review the nomination of john abrams, combined forces command, u.s. forces career and vice admiral craig fowler to be commander of united states southern command. we know today would not be possible without