>>> BREAKING NEWS IN OUR HOUR. THE SENATE JUDICIARY CHAIRMAN
SENATOR CHUCK GRASSLEY HAS
INVITED BOTH JUDGE KAVANAUGH AND
HIS ACCUSE TORE A PUBLIC
HEARING.
HEARING. IF YOU LOOK ON THE SCREEN, IT
SAYS PUBLIC HERRING.
IT SEEMS IN THEIR HASTE THEY DID
NOT SPELL-CHECK OR CATCH THAT IN
THE HEADLINE.
THE HEADLINE. IT’S NOT CLEAR WHAT DEMOCRATS
THINK OF THIS.
WE HEARD FROM A SENATOR WHO SAID
THIS IS TOO FAST.
THIS IS ALSO, HOWEVER, WHAT SOME
OF MS. FORD’S ALLIES SAID SHOULD
HAPPEN, A PUBLIC RECKONING UNDER
OATH FOR THE ACCUSER AND THE
ACCUSED.
ACCUSED. ANYTHING THAT DOES HAPPEN THIS
COMING MONDAY OR LATER WILL HAVE
PARALLELS TO ANITA HILL.
THAT BRINGS US TO A QUESTION WE
WANT TO PROBE TONIGHT, SHOULD
ONE ALLEGATION OF SEXUAL
MISCONDUCT PREVENT A PROMOTION
TO THE SUPREME COURT?
THAT WAS PART OF THE ISSUE
FACING CLARENCE THOMAS IN 1991.
ANITA HILL FACING OFF AGAINST A
COMMITTEE THAT WAS MADE
EXCLUSIVELY OF MALE SENATORS.
WE’RE ABOUT TO HEAR TWO
SENATORS.
SENATORS. THE FEMALE ACCUSER WAS WORRIED
ABOUT THE RISK OF STEPPING
FORWARD.
FORWARD. TODAY, WE ARE SEEING THAT PLAYED
OUT IN ALL KINDS OF ATTACKS.
THERE’S ALSO THE QUESTION
WHETHER THE ALLEGED CONDUCT CAST
DOUBT ON WHETHER THAT PERSON,
THOMAS OR KAVANAUGH, SHOULD BE
HELD BASICALLY TO A POSITION
WHERE THEY DECIDE ON THE LIFE
AND DEATH OF OTHER INDIVIDUALS.
TONIGHT, KAVANAUGH’S DEFENDERS
INSIST TO THE CONTRAST.
HILL WAS ACCUSING THOMAS OF
CONDUCT WHEN HE WAS A
33-YEAR-OLD ATTORNEY.
33-YEAR-OLD ATTORNEY. KAVANAUGH FACES ALLEGATIONS THAT
WOULD HAVE OCCURRED WHEN HE WAS
ABOUT 17, IF TRUE.
HILL’S ALLEGATIONS INVOLVED
REPEAT INSTANCES, WHEREAS, AT
THIS HOUR, AND THE STORY IS
MOVING QUICKLY, KAVANAUGH’S
DEFENDERS ARE SAYING THAT HE HAS
GONE THROUGH A VETTING AND THIS
IS A SINGLE ACCUSATION REGARDING
A SINGLE INCIDENT.
THOSE ARE THE COMPARISONS OF THE
TWO CASES.
TWO CASES. THERE’S ALSO NO DOUBT THE
ENVIRONMENT WE HAVE TODAY IS
CHANGED.
CHANGED. THIS IS FOOTAGE FROM 1991, WHEN
ELLENOR HOLMES NORTON AND OTHER
WENT LED THE PUSH SO THAT ANITA
HILL COULD EVEN BE HEARD.
>> WE SEVEN CONGRESSWOMEN WERE
SO OUTRAGED OF THE SENATE’S
HANDLING OF THE CHARGES AGAINST
CLARENCE THOMAS, THEY TRIED TO
STORM THE SENATE.
THEY DIDN’T GET IN.
>> I THINK THIS CALLS --
[ INAUDIBLE ]
>> WE SHOULD NOTE THOSE WOMEN IN
CONGRESS WERE STORMING A SENATE
JUDICIARY COMMITTEE THAT AT THE
TIME WAS MADE UP OF ALL MEN.
TODAY, THERE ARE WOMEN ON THE
COMMITTEE, AT LEAST ON THE
DEMOCRATIC SIDE.
DEMOCRATIC SIDE. THE REPUBLICAN MEMBERS OF THIS
COMMITTEE REMAIN TODAY ALL MEN.
I’M KNOW JOINED BY ELLENOR
HOLMES NORTON AND LINA
TOTENBERG.
TOTENBERG. CONGRESSWOMAN, WHAT IS THE RIGHT
PROCESS FOR ACCUSERS TO TESTIFY,
AND WHO WILL BE IMPORTANT IF
THIS GOES FORWARD MONDAY?
>> ARI, I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT
THERE WOULD BE A HEARING.
BECAUSE THE LESSONS OF ANITA
HILL AND CLARENCE THOMAS ARE NOT
THAT FAR REMOVED, AND BECAUSE IT
IS PRETTY CLEAR THAT IF THE
SENATE HAS LEARNED NOTHING, IT
IS THE REFUSAL TO HEAR AN
ACCUSATION, PARTICULARLY A
CREDIBLE ACCUSATION.
CREDIBLE ACCUSATION. THIS ONE EVEN MORE CREDIBLE,
BECAUSE THERE IS A LIE DETECTOR
TEST INVOLVED.
TEST INVOLVED. THERE IS CREDIBLE EVIDENCE THAT
THE TRAUMA LASTED FOR YEARS.
THERE WAS NO WAY THAT THEY WERE
GOING TO DENY THIS HEARING.
MY OBJECTION, ARI, IS THAT IF WE
HAVE THIS HEARING ON MONDAY, IT
WILL BE A SNAP HEARING.
WITH NO PREPARATION, AND I TELL
YOU, AS A MEMBER OF CONGRESS, WE
COULD NOT HAVE A HEARING ON THE
SIMPLEST SUBJECTS WITH AS LITTLE
NOTICE AS WE NOW ARE -- OR THE
SENATE IS NOW ASKING TO BE
GIVEN --
GIVEN -- >> WE’RE GETTING INTO THE
PROCEDURAL BASEBALL.
PROCEDURAL BASEBALL. YOU ARE SAYING THE RUSH FROM THE
REPUBLICANS IS FISHY.
AS YOU KNOW, THERE ARE PEOPLE
WHO SAY, AS THURGOOD MARSHAL
ONCE SAID, JUSTICE DELAYED IS
JUSTICE DENIED.
JUSTICE DENIED. LET’S GET ON WITH IT AND GET
THEM UNDER OATH.
>> GETTING ON WITH IT IS THE
ONLY QUESTION.
ONLY QUESTION. EVERYBODY AGREES NOW, NOBODY
DARE DENY HER THE RIGHT TO BE
HEARD.
HEARD. THE REAL QUESTION IS, CAN THE
SENATE PREPARE FOR A HEARING
WITH EVERY MEMBER PREPARED TO
ASK THE APPROPRIATE QUESTIONS IN
A FEW DAYS.
THEY HAVE A 5-4 MAJORITY IN THE
COURT NOW, ARI.
WHAT IS THE RUSH?
>> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. >> THE THING HERE IS, THE
LESSON, I THINK, OF THE CLARENCE
THOMAS AND ANITA HILL HEARINGS
WAS THAT THEY HAD HEARINGS
WITHIN THREE DAYS OF CANCELING A
VOTE BECAUSE THEY DIDN’T HAVE
THE CERTAIN VOTES.
AND THEY WENT INTO A HEARING
WITHOUT FACTS, WITHOUT HAVING’S
ASCERTAINED THE FACTS AND IT
TURNED INTO A FOCUS.
I THINK THAT WAS TO THE
DETRIMENT OF ANITA HILL, TO THE
DETRIMENT OF CLARENCE THOMAS AND
TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE SUPREME
COURT AND THE SENATE OF THE
UNITED STATES.
UNITED STATES. IF THERE’S ONE THING THEY OUGHT
TO HAVE LEARNED, IT IS TO LET
THE FBI DO THE IMMEDIATE
INVESTIGATION TO REOPEN IT AT
THE REQUEST OF THE WHITE HOUSE.
AND HAVE THE FBI DO THE
IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION, DO WHAT
THEY DO, INTERVIEW WITNESSES,
SEE IF THERE’S CORROBORATION.
THEN THE STAFF GETS A SECOND
CRACK FOR A SHORT TIME, AND THEN
BE PREPARED FOR HEARINGS.
THAT SHOULD.
THAT SHOULD. TAKE FOREVER.
TAKE FOREVER. >> LET’S PAUSE ON THE POINT
YOU’RE RAISING.
YOU’RE RAISING. YOU’RE SAYING, IF I UNDERSTAND
YOU, YOU’RE SAYING AMIDST THIS
INTENSE CONCERN ON ALL SIDES,
YOU’RE SAYING IF THERE’S ONE
CLEAR, FAIR LESSON, IT WOULD BE
THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER FOR BOTH
THE JUDGE, WHO STANDS ACCUSED AT
THIS MOMENT, AND MS. FORD, THE
ABUSER, BETTER FOR BOTH OF THEM
IN THE PROCESS TO NOT RUSH TO
MONDAY, BUT TO HAVE A FUELER
FACT FINDING TO SET UP A BETTER
HEARING?
HEARING? >> I THINK THAT’S PROBABLY
RIGHT.
RIGHT. I DON’T KNOW WHETHER YOU COULD
DO THIS IN A WEEK OR NOT.
I CERTAINLY THINK YOU PROBABLY
COULD DO IT IN TWO.
THERE IS NO REASON ON GOD’S GOOD
EARTH THAT THIS -- THERE HAS TO
BE A VOTE ON THIS NOMINEE BEFORE
THE FIRST MONDAY IN OCTOBER WHEN
THE COURT RECONVENES, BECAUSE HE
IS NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO
PARTICIPATE FULLY IN THE COURT’S
WORK INSTANTLY.
WORK INSTANTLY. THAT WILL TAKE A FEW WEEKS
BEFORE HE GETS HIS FEET ON THE
GROUND.
GROUND. AND EVEN SENATOR GRASSLEY
ADMITTED THAT TO ME IN AN
INTERVIEW I DID WITH HIM ABOUT A
WEEK AGO.
WEEK AGO. SO THERE IS NO REASON EXCEPT
THAT REPUBLICANS WANT TO GET
THIS DONE WHILE THEY THINK THEY
CAN, AND THEY’RE WORRIED ABOUT
THE ELECTION.
THE ELECTION. I THINK IT’S A LONG SHOT THAT
THE REPUBLICANS WOULD LOSE
CONTROL OF THE SENATE, BUT
THEY’RE WORRIED WHAT MIGHT ELSE
COME UP IF WE PROLONG THIS, IF
WE LET THIS GO ON TOO LONG.
BUT IF WE DON’T, THAT’S A PRICE
TO BE PAID.
AND THE PRICE IS SOMETIMES ALSO
AT THE ELECTION.
>> THE PRICE WAS WITH THE
ELECTIONS WITH ANITA HILL.
ANITA HILL, WHEN CLARENCE THOMAS
WAS UP, HE HAD POSITIVES.
BY THE WAY, KAVANAUGH HAS MAYBE
4% OF PEOPLE SAYING HE SHOULD BE
CONCERNED.
CONCERNED. BUT CLARENCE THOMAS, WHO WAS,
AFTER ALL TO REPLACE ANOTHER
AFRICAN-AMERICAN, HAD EVEN
AFRICAN-AMERICANS FOR HIM.
SO HE WENT AHEAD WITH THAT HEAD
START.
START. THERE WAS AN IMMEDIATE TURN
AROUND, AND AN IMMEDIATE REGRET,
AND WE SAW IT IN THE YEAR OF THE
WOMAN, AND THE YEAR OF THE WOMAN
PRODUCED FOUR WOMEN THAT HAVE
COME TO THE HOUSE OR THE SENATE.
WE ALREADY HAVE A WOMAN COMING
IN UPON US.
YOU PUT THIS OUT THERE AND I
THINK YOU’LL GALLOP IT INTO THE
NEXT ELECTION.
NEXT ELECTION. >> TO YOUR POINT, LOOKING AT
WHAT’S COMING DOWN THE PIKE, I
WANT TO PLAY FROM 1991 MULTIPLE
SENATORS WHO WERE, OF COURSE, I
MENTIONED AND I THINK IT’S
RELEVANT, WHO WERE ALL MALE, IN
THE WAITING, USED THEIR POSITION
TO IMPUGN AND ATTACK MS. HILL,
WHO HAS SPOKEN OUT TODAY AND
SAID SHE HOPES WE DON’T HAVE A
REPLAY OF THAT IN OUR HISTORY.
TAKE A LOOK AT THESE SENATORS
FROM 1991.
FROM 1991. >> SHE WILL BE DESTROYED AND
HARASSED AND BELITTLED.
>> THE GOOD NAME OF A GOOD MAN
HAS BEEN TARNISHED.
I DO NOT BELIEVE JUDGE THOMAS IS
CAPABLE OF THE KIND OF BEHAVIOR
PROFESSOR HILL DESCRIBED TO THIS
COMMITTEE.
COMMITTEE. AND I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT
PROFESSOR HILL IS TELLING THE
TRUTH.
TRUTH. >> IT JUST DOESN’T MAKE SENSE
THAT SHE SIMPLY TOLD HER FRIENDS
OR ACQUAINTANCES THAT SHE WAS
BEING HARASSED AT WORK, AND
THAT’S IT.
THAT’S IT. THAT’S IT.
THAT’S IT. >> THAT’S A YOUNGER SENATOR
GRASSLEY WHO NOW CHAIRS THE
COMMITTEE.
COMMITTEE. WILL IT BE DIFFERENT THIS TIME
IF THEY GO FORWARD MONDAY, DO
YOU THINK?
YOU THINK? >> I THINK IT WILL BE DIFFERENT
IN ONE SENSE.
THEY ACCUSED ANITA HILL OF
EROTIMANIA, AND ALL KINDS OF
OTHER THINGS.
OTHER THINGS. THERE ARE 23 WOMEN IN THE SENATE
TODAY, NOT TWO AS THERE WERE IN
1991.
1991. AND I THINK THAT YOU SEE EVEN
SOMEBODY MANAGED TO SIT ON THE
PRESIDENT, SO HE DIDN’T EVEN
TWEET ABOUT THIS TODAY.
SO I THINK REPUBLICANS
UNDERSTAND THAT THEY CAN’T JUST
DIS AN ALLEGATION LIKE THIS,
THAT THEY HAVE TO LOOK INTO IT.
BUT IF IT’S A FAKE LOOKING INTO
IT, PEOPLE WILL SEE THROUGH
THAT.
THAT. >> AND THIS IS A MORE SERIOUS
ALLEGATION, THE ALLEGATION HERE
IS NOT SEXUAL HARASSMENT, BUT
SEXUAL ASSAULT.
SEXUAL ASSAULT. AND THIS --
>> WHICH HER LAWYER HAS
EMPHASIZED AND WE’LL KEEP
REPORTING ON.
REPORTING ON. I’M SUPPOSED TO FIT IN A BREAK.
I WANT TO GIVE A VERY SPECIAL
THANKS TO BOTH OF YOU THAT WERE
TRAILBLAZERS ON THIS.
>> WE’RE NOT THERE YET, ARI.