MORE
MORE ON
MORE ON THE BIGGEST MOMENT.
MOMENT.
MOMENT. >> AND HER OPENING
STATEMENTS, CHRISTINE
STATEMENTS, CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD TOLD THE
COMMITTEE SHE BELIEVED
IT WAS HER DUTY TO TELL
THEM WHAT SHE SAID
HAPPENED WHEN THEY WERE
IN HIGH SCHOOL.
IN 1982 AT A GATHERING
SHE WAS PUSHED INTO A
BEDROOM.
BEDROOM.
BEDROOM. CAPITAL AND MARKET
JUDGE -- BRETT
KAVANAUGH GROPED HER
AND TRY TO TAKE OFF HER
CLOTHES.>> I BELIEVED
HE WAS GOING TO RAPE ME.
I TRIED TO YELL FOR
HELP.
HELP.
HELP. >>
HELP. >> THIS TERRIFIED HER
THE MOST.>> I THOUGHT
HE WAS ACCIDENTALLY
GOING TO KILL ME.
BOTH BRETT AND MARK OR
LAUGHING DURING THE
ATTACK.>> SHE WAS ABLE
TO ESCAPE AND SAID SHE
NEVER TOLD ANYONE UNTIL
A CANCELING SECTION
2012.
2012.
2012. --
2012. -- COUNSELING SESSION
IN 2012.
IN 2012.
IN 2012. SHE DOES NOT REMEMBER
THE DATE OF THE
ASSAULT.>> WITH WHAT
DEGREE OF CERTAINTY DO
YOU BELIEVE BRETT
KAVANAUGH ASSAULTED
KAVANAUGH ASSAULTED YOU?
YOU?
YOU? >>
YOU? >> 100% .>> THEY CHOSE
TO HIRE RACHEL MITCHELL
TO QUESTION BOTH.
AND THE OPENING
STATEMENTS BRETT
STATEMENTS BRETT KAVANAUGH ATTEMPTED TO
CLEAR HIS NAME.>> I
HAVE NEVER SEXUALLY
ASSAULTED ANYONE.>> HE
CALLED IT A LAST MINUTE
SMEAR PICK
SMEAR PICK >> THIS WHOLE TWO-WEEK
EFFORT HAS BEEN A
CALCULATED AND
CALCULATED AND ORCHESTRATED POLITICAL
ORCHESTRATED POLITICAL HIT.>> HE DID NOT
QUESTION THAT FORD MAY
HAVE BEEN ASSAULTED BUT
SAID IT WAS NOT HIM.>>
WE MEAN NO WELL.>> SHE
CONTACTED HER
CONTACTED HER REPRESENTATIVE WHEN HE
MADE THE SHORT LIST.
SEVERAL LEADERS SAID
THEY SHOULD HAVE KNOWN
ABOUT IT SOONER.
DEMOCRATS CALLING FOR A
FULL FBI
FULL FBI
FULL FBI INVESTIGATION.>> SHE
INVESTIGATION.>> SHE COULD RECALL THE TIME.
IF SHE KNEW WHEN HE
WORKED AT THE SAFEWAY
AND HE IS HIDING OUT AT
THE BEACH HOUSE AND SHE
IS TRYING TO GET
INFORMATION.
INFORMATION. THE FBI COULD OPEN THAT
UP AT THE REQUEST OF
THE PRESIDENT OR THE
SENATORS.>> THINGS GOT
HEATED.>> THIS IS NOT A
JOB INTERVIEW.
JOB INTERVIEW. THIS IS HOW.
THIS IS GOING TO DESTROY
THE ABILITY OF GOOD
PEOPLE TO COME FORWARD
BECAUSE OF THIS CRAP.>>
IT WAS AN UNBELIEVABLE
DAY.
DAY.
DAY. WANT
DAY. WANT TO TAKE TIME TO
EXHALE AND ASK A THIRD
VOICE TO TALK ABOUT
THIS.
THIS.
THIS. THE
THIS. THE UNIVERSITY OF SAINT
THOMAS WITH A
BACKGROUND IN LAW.
I BACKGROUND WITH JUDGE
KAVANAUGH.>> YOU ARE
HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE
HEARINGS AND WHAT YOU
SAW AND A MAN THAT YOU
KNOW IN COLLEGE.>> AS A
FORMER FEDERAL
FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, WHAT WAS
YOUR TAKE?
YOUR TAKE? >> A REMARKABLE DAY.
30 YEARS FROM NOW WE
WILL BE TALKING ABOUT
IT LIKE ANITA HILL AND
CLARENCE THOMAS BECAUSE
IT HITS AT THE FAULT
LINES IN SOCIETY . IN
TERMS OF TESTIMONY,
THEY WERE REMARKABLE IN
DIFFERENT WAYS.>> HOW
SO?
SO?
SO? DR.
SO? DR. FORD WAS SO
DIFFERENT THEN BRETT
KAVANAUGH.
KAVANAUGH. WHAT DID YOU SAY?
>> STARTING WITH DR.
FORD, AS A PROSECUTOR,
THAT IS THE KIND OF
WITNESS THAT YOU HOPE
FOR.
FOR.
FOR. SHORT ANSWER AND
LEANING INTO THE
MICROPHONE SAYING
MICROPHONE SAYING CORRECT.
CORRECT.
CORRECT. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT
YOU WANT THE WITNESS TO
DO.
DO.
DO. THAT
DO. THAT IS WITH THE POLICE
OFFICER'S DO.
OFFICER'S DO. THE OTHER THING THAT
SHE DID THAT I FOUND
ADDED TO CREDIBILITY
WAS SHE WOULD OFTEN.AT
CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE
CORROBORATIVE EVIDENCE OUT THERE.
OUT THERE. YOU CAN GO FIND MARK
JUDGES SCHEDULE AT THE
SAFEWAY.
SAFEWAY.
SAFEWAY. IN TERMS OF WHAT SHE
DID, I THOUGHT SHE WAS
A VERY STRONG WITNESS.
I FOUND HER CREDIBLE
AND I WAS MOVED BY HER
TESTIMONY.>> HOW ABOUT
THE JUDGE?
THE JUDGE? >> JUDGE KAVANAUGH, HIS
TESTIMONY SEEMED LIKE
IT WAS IN.
THAT WAS CURIOUS AND
NOT SOMETHING YOU WOULD
ADVISE A WITNESS TO DO.
THE EXPRESSION OF ANGER
THAT CAME IN AGAIN AND
AGAIN IS GOING TO BE
PROBLEMATIC FOR A LOT
OF PEOPLE WHEN WHAT IS
BEING DISCUSSED IS THE
15-YEAR-OLD BEING
15-YEAR-OLD BEING SEXUALLY ASSAULTED.>>
SEXUALLY ASSAULTED.>> COULD IT BE JUSTIFYING
THAT ANGER IS AFFIRMING
THAT YOU DO NOT AGREE?
>> YES BUT THE PROBLEM
WAS THAT HE MAINTAINED
THAT STANCE OF ANGER
WHEN THEY QUESTIONS
WERE ABOUT THINGS LIKE
TIMING OF THE HEARING
OR SHOULD THEY BE
ENOUGH FBI -- AND FBI
INVESTIGATION.
INVESTIGATION. TO HAVE IT AT THE
POINTS THAT WERE NOT
ABOUT THAT UNDERMINES
THE POWER OF THE
ANGER.>> HE MENTIONED
THE FBI
THE FBI
THE FBI INVESTIGATION.>>
INVESTIGATION.>> SERIOUSLY.
SERIOUSLY. THE FBI WAS BROUGHT UP
A LOT.
A LOT.
A LOT. JUDGE KAVANAUGH RESPECTS
THE DUE PROCESS BUT
WHEN SOMEBODY ASKED HIM
ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION
AND HE REFUSED AND
WASN'T THAT GOOD OR
BAD?
BAD?
BAD? >>
BAD? >> THAT WAS BAD AND
PARTICULARLY THE SILENCE
IN RESPONSE TO DICK
DURBIN'S QUESTION.
DURBIN'S QUESTION. HE WENT AFTER THEM
REPEATEDLY AND THERE
WAS A. -- THERE WAS A
POINT WHERE HE WAS NOT
GOING TO ANSWER THE
QUESTION.>> MAYBE HE IS
THINKING THAT OR
EVIDENCE.>> I DON'T
KNOW.
KNOW.
KNOW. THE
KNOW. THE FACT IS THAT ONE
WOULD EXPECT IF YOU ARE
INNOCENT YOU WOULD WANT
AN INVESTIGATION
AN INVESTIGATION SOMEONE TO COOPERATE --
CORROBORATE WHAT YOU
ARE SAYING.
ARE SAYING. ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE
IS SO MANY BIG THINGS
FLOATING AROUND.
FLOATING AROUND. THE FBI IS GOOD AT
TALKING TO PEOPLE ON
THE OUTER CIRCLE OR
WITNESSES TO THINGS.
PARENTS AND FAMILY
MEMBERS AND IT CAN BE
QUITE TELLING.>> A NAME
THAT CAME UP MANY TIMES
IS MARKET JUDGE.
THE PERSON THAT DOCTOR
FORD IS SAYING WAS IN
THE BEDROOM.
THE BEDROOM. THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY
WITNESS TO THE SEXUAL
ASSAULT THAT SHE
CLAIMED HAPPENED.
CLAIMED HAPPENED. WE ARE NOT HEARING FROM
MARK JUDGE.
MARK JUDGE. SHOULD WE?
SHOULD WE? >> YES.
>> YES.
>> YES. ABSOLUTELY.
ABSOLUTELY. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A
BIG DIFFERENCE IF THERE
WAS A FOURTH WITNESS TO
TESTIFY AND PART OF
WHAT WE LOST TODAY AND
THIS IS GOING TO COME
OUT IN THE SUBTEXT OF
THE DISCUSSION IS THAT
WITHOUT THE FBI
INVESTIGATION, WITHOUT
INVESTIGATION, WITHOUT OTHER WITNESSES, WE DID
NOT HAVE POINTS TO HOLD
UP AGAINST THE
TESTIMONY.
TESTIMONY. IF PUT MORE FOCUS ON
DEMEANOR.
DEMEANOR.
DEMEANOR. INSTEAD OF SAYING THAT
IS CONSISTENT WITH THIS
OTHER THING BUT PEOPLE
WILL TALK ABOUT HE
SEEMED TO BE LYING OR
SHE SEEMED TO BE
LYING.>> I WANTED TO
GET TO THIS QUESTION
BECAUSE IT IS IMPORTANT
AND YOU ALL WANTED US
TO ASK.
TO ASK.
TO ASK. YOU WENT TO YALE WITH
JUDGE KAVANAUGH AND HAD
BEERS WITH JUDGE
KAVANAUGH.
KAVANAUGH. DID YOU SEE THE SAME
GUY TODAY THAT YOU KNEW
BACK THEN AND WHAT DID
YOU KNOW?
YOU KNOW?
YOU KNOW? >> I WENT TO LAW SCHOOL
. HE WENT COLLEGE AND
LAW SCHOOL AND I JUST
WENT TO LAW SCHOOL.
HE WAS GOOD GUY. I
NEVER SAW ANYTHING LIKE
THE BEHAVIOR THAT IS
ALLEGED OR HEARD ABOUT
ANYTHING THAT IS
ALLEGED.
ALLEGED.
ALLEGED. I WILL SAY THAT THE
PERSON I SAW ON
TELEVISION TODAY WAS
DIFFERENT THAN THE
PERSON THAT NOT ONLY I
KNEW THEN WHAT WHO IS --
WHOSE REPUTATION
WHOSE REPUTATION PRECEDES HIM AS BEING A
JUDGE WITH THEY COULD
DEMEANOR ON THE BENCH.
THE EXCHANGE HE HAD WITH
SENATOR KLOBUCHAR, THAT
IS NOT THE DEMEANOR WE
LOOK FOR IN JUDGES.>>
IT WAS DIFFERENT.>> YES.
THEY KIND OF -- IT IS
ODD BECAUSE PART OF
WHAT HE WAS BROUGHT
INTO TALK ABOUT WAS
ALLEGATIONS THAT HE WAS
BELLIGERENT WHEN HE WAS
A DRUNK AS A YOUNG MAN.
THE FACT IS WE SAW HIS
BELLIGERENTS.
BELLIGERENTS. FOR A LOT OF PEOPLE
THAT WILL BE
IMPEACHING.>> AREN'T
IMPEACHING.>> AREN'T YOU SEEING A MAN
CORNERED WITH HIS
FAMILY BEING DRUG
THROUGH THE MUD.
THAT WOULD BE A NATURAL
RESPONSE.>> PROBABLY.
RESPONSE.>> PROBABLY. ALTHOUGH I THINK AS
SOMEONE WHO IS SMART
AND ANALYTICAL THAT THE
BETTER ROUTE TO CLEAR
YOUR NAME WOULD BE TO
INVITE THE
INVITE THE INVESTIGATION, HAVE
INVESTIGATION, HAVE SKILLED AGENTS COME AND
DISPROVE THE CLAIMS.>>
HOW WOULD YOU ALTER THE
PROCESS TO SEEK TRUTH
BETTER BESIDES WHAT WE
SAW TODAY?
SAW TODAY? >> FIRST OF ALL, THESE
THINGS SHOULD HAVE COME
UP BEFORE THE FIRST SET
OF HEARINGS.
OF HEARINGS. THAT WAS MODELED A LOT.
CLEARLY IT WAS DR. FORD
WHO DELAYED THINGS
BECAUSE SHE DID NOT
WANT TO BE PUBLICLY
IDENTIFIED BUT ALLOWING
MORE TIME AND NOT HAVING
PARTISANSHIP.
PARTISANSHIP. QUESTIONS ARE ASKED
INSTEAD OF SPEECHES BY
THE SENATORS.>> THANK
YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND