Skip to main content

tv   Bloomberg Technology  Bloomberg  September 27, 2018 5:00pm-6:00pm EDT

5:00 pm
story that's not even the new york times would report. -- allegations miss ramirez and then stormy daniels's lawyer comes up with this incredible you of conduct. it is outrageous. your right to be angry. this is your chance to tell your story. i hope you have a chance to tell us everything you want to tell us. you of conduct. the burden is not on you to disprove the allegations made. system,en, under our when you accuse someone of criminal i understand this is not a trial. we i just want to make sure understood. it is hard to reconstruct what happened 36 years ago and i appreciate what you said about dr. ford, that perhaps she has had an incident at some point in
5:01 pm
her life and you are sympathetic to that. but your reputation is on the line. and i hope that people understand the gravity of the charges made against you, and what fair process looks like. talking about decency. you understand we have a constitutional duty to advise. for me, when this evidence came forward, i decided i needed to look at it and find out about it . i needed to ask you questions about it, as well as others that were involved. again, i am not going to take quite the same approach as my colleagues. just ask the
5:02 pm
president to reopen the fbi investigation? brett kavanaugh: i am here to answer your questions. our meeting together, and i appreciate how you handled the prior hearing and i have a lot of respect for you. >> thank you. all of that aside, here is the thing. you could actually just keep this open -- get this open so we can talk to witnesses. you come before us, but we have people like mark judge, who dr. ford says was a witness to this. we have a polygraph expert that my colleagues were raising issues about the polygraph. we would like to have that person come before us. i just think if we could open this up -- brett kavanaugh: mark judge has provided sworn statements saying
5:03 pm
this did not happen and that i did and never would do -- >> we would like the fbi to follow up and asking questions. we talked about past nomination processes and you talked about those. theident george bush in anita hill case opened up the fbi investigations and let questions be asked. i think it was helpful for people. was his decision reasonable? do not knowugh: i the circumstances for that. >> the circumstances where that he opened the investigation so the fbi could ask questions. he opened up the background check. brett kavanaugh: i am here to answer questions about my yearbook. >> ok. i am not going to ask about your europe -- your yearbook. most people did some drinking in
5:04 pm
high school and college and others struggle with alcoholism. my own dad struggled with alcoholism most of his life and he got in trouble for it and there were consequences. age 90 and in aa at he is sober. in his words, he was pursued by grace, that is how he got through this. in your case, you have said that you never drank so much that you did not remember what happened. yet we have heard your college roommate say that you did drink frequently. that you would sometimes be belligerent. another classmate says it is not credible for you to say you had memory lapses. drinking is one thing. brett kavanaugh: i do not think of second quote is correct. providedrst quote, i
5:05 pm
material that is still redacted with the freshman roommate. just so you know, there were three people in the room. dave white, jamie, and me. it was a contentious situation where jamie did not like dave at all. back fromite came home one weekend and jamie had moved dollars furniture out into the courtyard. >> ok. --drinking is one thing brett kavanaugh: look at the redacted portion of what i said. ok. drinking is one thing. the concern is about truthfulness. in your written testimony, you said sometimes you had too many drinks. was there ever a time when you drink so much that you could not remember what happened or part of what happened the night before?
5:06 pm
brett kavanaugh: no. . remember what happened i think you have probably had beers. never been a case where you drink so much that you'd did not remember what happened the night before or part of what happened? brett kavanaugh: you are asking blackout. i don't know, have you? >> i do not have a drinking problem. brett kavanaugh: nor do i. >> since this fbi thing it's coming up all the time, and get back to basics. anybody could ask for an fbi investigation. what the fbi does is gather information for the white house. then the file is sent to the
5:07 pm
committee for us to make an evaluation. we are capable of making our own determination about accuracy of allegations. statements put out a over a month ago clearly stating ass matter is closed as far the letter being sent to them and there is no federal crime to investigate. hope for theocrats fbi to draw any conclusions on this matter, i will remind you what joe biden said. " the next person who refers to an fbi report as being worth anything obviously does not understand anything. the fbi explicitly does not in this or in any other case reach a conclusion."
5:08 pm
wave an fbile report before you or bring it up understand they do not reach conclusions. they do not make recommendations. >> may i say further record, no one has asked the fbi or no one has. i have. i think others have. the issue is that part of what an fbi report does is investigate and seek corroborative evidence. it is not so much the conclusion it draws as it is the breadth of evidence that is sought out through the investigation and the difference between what somebody might say to an fbi agent when they are being
5:09 pm
, for instance, mr. judges letter signed from his lawyer. it is just a different thing. is theve still that this first background investigation that has not been reopened when credibleical -- information is raised about the subject. i do not want to let the point you made stand without referencing what we tried to do. >> i will add to the point you made. the letter was sent to the fbi. the fbi sent it to the white house. the letter said the case is closed. we are taking a break now, senator. we are taking a 15 minute break. >> it has been a day of explosive testimony on capitol hill. brett kavanaugh telling members
5:10 pm
of the senate judiciary committee that he did not sexually assault christine blasey ford, the california professor who has accused him of sexual assault when they were teenagers and a house party. kavanaugh telling the senators that he cannot get his good name and reputation back. guided along in a sense by republican members of the committee, especially chided hisham, who democratic colleagues for what the president, kavanaugh, and other republicans consider a democratic hit job on kavanaugh's reputation. you can see senator orrin hatch and the chairman. they are taking a break, but we will continue our coverage. we have been following this all day. kevin, i am trying to remember a time on the hill absent the
5:11 pm
anita hill hearings where we have seen more explosive testimony. kevin: i am hard-pressed to find one. they keep interrupting democrats, using their time to press judge kavanaugh on the notion of whether or not to have an fbi investigation. could church grassley aside his democratic colleagues, saying he was in charge of running this, not the chief white house counsel who is sitting there in the hearing room who briefed judge kavanaugh and helped prepare him for this hearing. within the last hour, testimony , thesenator lindsey graham republican from south carolina he used his five minutes to come to the defense of judge kavanaugh after nearly four hours of morning testimony from dr. ford, who is accusing judge kavanaugh of sexual misconduct.
5:12 pm
allegations from a high school party. a completely unusual and unorthodox senate hearing. we are not used to having this type of hearing in the halls of congress. i was just talking with a colleague in the industry and behind me in the kennedy caucus room is where the anita hill hearing was decades ago. thee senators were on judiciary -- three senators who were on the committee at the time are still on the hearing -- still on the committee, including chuck grassley. hearing thatnow the president is steadfastly behind his nominee. outn: sarah sanders tweeted praise for senator graham. the senior republican from texas
5:13 pm
also defended kavanaugh. the committee vote to move his confirmation to the senate floor is still scheduled for tomorrow morning at 9:30. what to watch coming up. each of the senators will have five minutes. it will appear republicans are backing off of the usage of the prosecutor, relying on her in part to avoid having to ask questions directly to dr. ford. now they are using their time to defend judge kavanaugh. senators,, harris from andfornia -- camilla harris the democrat from new jersey will be the final two to ask for the democrats. after the hearing, we will be looking to see what the white house puts out following it. what does president trump say or tweaked regarding -- say or
5:14 pm
tweet regarding the hearing. this was so different from what we saw during the confirmation hearings and what we saw during the fox news interview. this hearing has gripped the nation. this is something that will be dissected for decades. no question, a very memorable day here in the senate. mark: no doubt. a moment to remember. another story we have been following, the security and exchange commission regulars filed a complaint against elon musk, alleging he made false and misleading statements about plans to take the company private in august. you can see on your screen the
5:15 pm
commission is holding a press conference at this hour. funding for this proposed transaction had been secured and the only contingency remaining was a shareholder vote. the market reacted to this information and tesla stock price traded up. we allege that elon musk's statements were false and misleading. at the time he made them, he could not secure funding for the proposed transaction. we allege he had not even discussed key deal terms including price with any potential source of funding. the complaint filed earlier today in new york seeks a finding that he committed securities fraud. an injunction for civil penalties and a bar prevent -- prohibiting him from serving in the future. >> let me turn now to the allegations in the sec complaint.
5:16 pm
august 7ge that in 2018, mosque -- elon musk tweeted that he was considering private.sla funding secured. over the next year hours, he made additional statements through twitter about the transaction. the selection of the statements is in the complaint. among other things, he stated that he would ensure the prosperity of existing alleholders, that he hoped current shareholders would remain with tesla, even if it was private, and that he would create a special-purpose fund for that purpose. that no tesla investors would be forced to sell their shares, that a private tesla would be smoother and less disruptive because there were no longer be what he termed negative propaganda from short-sellers.
5:17 pm
finally, that investors support is confirmed and the only reason why it is not certain is that it is contingent on a shareholder vote. these misleading statements, none of which were cleared or reviewed by anyone at tesla, caused significant market confusion and disruption. within minutes of the first tweet, tesla's head of investor relations questioned whether the communication was legitimate. investors and journalists contacted tesla and asked if the tweaked was a joke -- tweet was a joke. had received no advanced notice and suspended trading for more than 90 minutes following the tweaked --tweet. this is further evidence of the confusion caused by his conduct. over the course of the day,
5:18 pm
investors took the statement at face value, reassured that funding had been secured. they told analysts that there was firm offer and that the offer is as firm as it gets. predictably, as seen on the tweets charts, musks impacted the volume of trading in tesla's stock. at the end of the day, the stock closed at $379 per share, up more than 6% from the price prior to the first tweet. according to the complaint, tweets wered -- misleading. he had neither secured a commitment from any source, nor
5:19 pm
confirmed investor support. in fact, while leading tessler's investors to believe he had a firm offer in hand, we allege that he had arrived at the price -- he rounded up to $420 because of the significance of marijuana culture and his belief that his girlfriend would be amused by it. he claimed that the only reason that it was not certain was also false and misleading. of going private transaction would have required the board to approve a formal proposal. presentedl had been to the board. the transactions of the
5:20 pm
transaction had not been settled nor explored. he had been told before he published the tweet that it ford be very difficult investors to remain in tesla if it was private. he later admitted there was no way for small shareholders to retain their position and tesla if it had gone private. nor had he investigated whether the transaction purportedly to be financed by a foreign fund would require regulatory approvals or be able to obtain them. despite all of these uncertainties, his messages believingestors into he was relatively certain he could take tesla private over a substantial premium, subject only to the contingency of a shareholder vote. >> this case demonstrates our
5:21 pm
commitment to holding individuals accountable. a chairman and ceo of a public company has important responsibilities to shareholders. that includes the need to be careful about the truth and accuracy of statements made to the investing public. whether the statements are made in a press release or a less formal method such as social media. before, neither nor status ofus -- let us thank the sec team that has worked tirelessly on this case. we are happy to take a couple of questions but please bear in mind that because this matter is now in litigation we are limited about what we can say. musk be able to
5:22 pm
remain as ceo will this is a genetic -- while this is adjudicated? >> pending a determination by the court, he would remain in his position unless he or the company made a different decision. >> can you talk about why you moved so quickly in this case? it seems like it is quicker than similar cases. and how serious are you about our and him from serving as a -- barring him from serving as a director? have theieve actions most impact when they are brought most closely in time to the act that brought them forth. the investigation was complete and it was time to make a charging decision, and we made one. >> does -- press are watching a live
5:23 pm
conference from the fcc. elon musk has been accused of misleading investors when he tweeted and on -- in august that he had funding to take the company private. conduct that the resulted in confusion and that the tweets were not true. we will continue to follow this story, the let's get back to the other major news story of the day on capitol hill. brett kavanaugh testified before the committee. his testimony came one hour after christine blasey ford, the accuser, also testifying before the committee. kevin, who hasby been on the hill all day. kevin, we talked a little while
5:24 pm
ago about the tensions in that room. kid you ever recall a time when it has been so of weight on capitol hill? kevin: i cannot. i have been covering capitol hill for six years. the only thing this equates to is right after the release of the access hollywood tape with president trump. that is the level of tension. i spoke with two democratic senators who are not part of the committee. iny say there is a grip terms of the testimony that has come out and what has gripped the nation's attention. i spoke briefly in the hallway with the republican senator from
5:25 pm
west virginia. she attended the same high school as dr. ford. she said she was going to her office in order to continue watching this. president trump also reportedly watching this in the white house . he started the day in new york and watched a portion of the hearing on air force one before returning to the white house. we have heard for the first time from sarah sanders. followingut a tweet the defense from senator lindsey has emerged as the top republican defender for brett kavanaugh. it will be interesting to see what the democrats say, particularly in the searing. been talking have to some lawmakers and staff. is there a sense that judge kavanaugh can survive this?
5:26 pm
kevin: all eyes will be on senator jeff flake. he has been incredibly critical of the trump administration. he is a member of the senate judiciary committee and has not yet yielded his time with heards to whether or not will use his time to question judge kavanaugh. should a vote to not move the then judge kavanaugh, for all intents and purposes, is done. mark: the vote that is coming up. next week? asin: it could be as early saturday. mitch mcconnell is trying to move this quickly. the first procedural vote will be tomorrow morning, as scheduled at 9:30 a.m. they will vote to move the nomination to a senate floor vote. in which case mitch mcconnell
5:27 pm
will go through a series of timed procedures. that vote could come as early as this weekend or the first half of next week. should there be a senate vote, expect a lot of protests in favor and against kavanaugh. mark: is there any sense of the reaction that republican members of the committee basically ceded their questions to the sex crimes prosecutor? kevin: that is a great point. really someone that has been at the forefront of this hearing and plays such a dominant part in the hearing is that prosecutor, the deputy attorney from arizona. as jeffhe same state flake. rachel mitchell has had decades of experience prosecuting sexual crimes and has deep experience.
5:28 pm
i've been told that sources who work frequently were a bit nervous and uneasy about having a 11 -- about having a 11 republican men question the victim of sexual assault. there has been bipartisan theicism about having alternating back and forth and the way the hearing was set up. mark: thank you. as you see on the screen, brett is taking the witness chair in his a -- in his defense, countering earlier testimony by christine blasey ford. let's rejoin. you are watching bloomberg.
5:29 pm
brett kavanaugh: i was asked a question before, and i responded by asking her a question. i am sorry i did that. this is a tough process. i appreciate that. i was truly just trying to get to the bottom of the evidence. i believe we do that by opening the fbi investigation and i would call it a background check instead of investigation. thank you. hatch: we are happy to have you here. friend from arizona
5:30 pm
emphasized yesterday that we have before us to human beings, human beings, dr. ford and judge kavanaugh. each of you deserve to be treated fairly and respect of respectively -- respectfully. i believe we did that with dr. ford and it is important that we treat judget we kavanaugh well now. he has been a federal judge for 12 years. he has been a great judge. he has earned a reputation for fairness and decency. clerks love him. his students love him. his colleagues love him. this man is not a monster, nor is he what has been represented here in these hearings. we are talking today about judge kavanaugh's conduct in high school. , and as a freshman
5:31 pm
in college, as well. serious allegations have been raised that judge kavanaugh committed sexual assault. if he did that, he should not serve on the supreme court. but the fear that has been created since democrats first late dr. ford's allegations to the media two weeks ago after setting them first -- after sitting on them for six weeks, has brought us no closer to the truth. anonymous letters with no name are now being treated as national news. with implausible claims are driving the news cycle. this is worst -- worse than robert couric. this is worse than clarence thomas.
5:32 pm
this is a national disgrace, the way you are being treated. in the middle of it all, we have judge kavanaugh, a man who until two weeks ago was a pillar of the legal community. there has been a whisper of misconduct the whole time he is been a judge. what we have are unsubstantiated claims from his teenage years. claims that every alledge and i witness has either denied or failed to cooperate. i do not mean to minimize the seriousness of the claims. these are serious claims that deservesh for truth fair treatment. he was an immature highschooler. said stupide or things does not make them a sexual predator.
5:33 pm
i understand the desire of my colleagues to tear down this man at any cost, but let's be fair and look at the facts. guilt by association is wrong. immaturity is not equal criminality. that he joined in high school or college does not make him guilty of every terrible thing he has an accused of. a lifetime of respect ought to mean something when assessing allegations that are inconsistent with the course of a person's adult life. with those comments, i would like to ask you a few questions. if you could be short in your answers. about how this process has been unfolded. when did you first learn about these allegations against year? brett kavanaugh: a week ago sunday. >> did the ranking member raise
5:34 pm
these allegations with you and your one-on-one meeting? brett kavanaugh: no. with a raised at the close session that followed the public hearing? brett kavanaugh: she was not there. raised in the 1300 written questions that were cemented to you following me hearing? brett kavanaugh: now. -- no. ofwhen did you first hear miss ramirez is allegations against you? the new yorker: story. member askranking about miss ramirez's allegations? brett kavanaugh: no. >> when was the first time you were asked about miss ramirez is
5:35 pm
allegations? brett kavanaugh: today. >> i think it is a disgrace. this hearing is about allegations of sexual assault. you have denied the claims. we are here to assess her credibility and yours. , i foundus exchanges that your answers vigorously defended, but at other times struck me as evasive. backdrop thatthat i am seeking to assess your credibility. you said that rule of law means taking allegations seriously. i agree with that. it brings me no joy to question you but these are serious and worthy of our attention. let me return to a line of questioning.
5:36 pm
have you ever gotten aggressive while drinking or forgotten an evening after drinking? brett kavanaugh: those are two different questions. i have already answered the second one. for the first, i would say the answer is basically no. ?hat do you mean by that >> we have had a brief time to way outside evidence. i wish we had more evidence in front of us. swisher, amber liz college classmate of yours from yale? brett kavanaugh: i'm your point about outside evidence, all for -- >> i am tried to focus on this
5:37 pm
question. brett kavanaugh: i know, but i making a point. all four witnesses who were at the event said it did not happen. if mark judge were in front of us to question, we would be able to assess his credibility. let me get this. liz swisher is a medical doctor and was a college classmate. i'm courting from a recent interview she gave. kavanaugh drank more than a lot of people. it is not credible for him to say he has no memory losses after drinking and access because i drank with him." brett kavanaugh: she goes on and says she cannot point to any specific incident. " brett was a sloppy drunk and i know because i drank with
5:38 pm
him." brett kavanaugh: i do not think that is a fair characterization. dudley, i refer you to what he said. classmate said you were shot but whinger again you could be aggressive and belligerent. a remake said you were frequently drunk. -- a roommate said you were frequently drunk. brett kavanaugh: that was a freshman roommate. there was tension between him and the third roommate. you should look at what he said in the rejected -- redacted portion. >> put yourself in our shoes for a moment. suppose you and gone through a process to select someone for an important job and position.
5:39 pm
as you are finishing the hiring process, you learn of a credible allegation that if true would be disqualifying. would you not conduct a thorough investigation or moved to a different candidate? and why not agree to a one-week pause to allow the fbi to investigate the allegations and allow you an opportunity one peopleom now to have present in front of us to assess credibility and either clear your name or resolve these allegations by moving to a different nominee? talk shownaugh: all witnesses alleged to be at the event said it did not happen, including dr. ford's longtime friend ms. kaiser who said she did not know me and does not recall ever being at a party with me. >> what i have struggled with is the absence of fair, nonpartisan process to question the various people who i think are critical
5:40 pm
to this. my concern am a should you move forward, is what it will do to the credibility of the court and how that may well hang over your service. it and i wish you would join us in calling for one week. or confirmed the allegations -- brett kavanaugh: when you say one-week delay. do you know how long the last 10 days have been? lifetime.has been a it is been investigated and all caps or witnesses say it did not happen. they have set it under penalty of felony. which produced calendars are important evidence.
5:41 pm
i asked for hearing the day after the allegation. >> before i call on senator lee, i want to emphasize something. talking about doing something without enough time, we had 45 30 andtween july september 13 when we could have been investigating this. , ifegard to this candidate you take the average of 65 to 70 days between the time that a person is announced by the president and the senate votes on it, it's about 65 to 70 days. here we are at 85 to 90 days. so there is plenty of time put in on this nomination. everyone else is been putting letters in the record. i have a letter from 65 women
5:42 pm
who knew judge kavanaugh between 1979 and 1983, when he attended georgetown prep high school. they wrote to the committee because they know judge kavanaugh and they know the allegations raised by dr. ford are inconsistent with his character. him throughen know social events and church. many have remained close friends from it -- friends with him. here's what they say. he has stood out for his friendship, character, and integrity. he is always treated women with decency and respect. that was true in high school and her mainstream now. judge kavanaugh has always been a good person." lee: you have been cooperative at every stage of this investigation. is that correct? brett kavanaugh: yes.
5:43 pm
senator lee: you do not control the fbi. you are a nominee, you're not tasked with the job of deciding how or when to conduct an investigation. when theery moment, fbi has asked questions, you have been attentive. i have colleagues today who have repeatedly asked for an fbi investigation. there is irony in this. at least one of my colleagues had access to this information many weeks before anyone else. to report they facts to the fbi, at which point they would have been investigated by the fbi. that could've been handled in a way that did not turn this into a circus.
5:44 pm
one that has turned lives upside down. givens most unfortunate, that this was entirely within the control of at least one of my democratic to do this. also, while calling repeatedly for an fbi investigation, over , whileou cannot control calling for the investigation, we're in the middle of a conversation that involves questions to you. so i asked my democratic colleagues, if you have questions, ask him. he is right here. if really what you want is the truth, ask them questions right now. if you have questions for other witnesses, or dissipate in the committee investigations that have been going on. you have not been participating. really were
5:45 pm
interested in the truth, this is what they would do. they would participate in the investigation. when we have a committee hearing with live witnesses, they would talk about that, rather than something else. if what they want is a search theyhe truth, but if what want to do is delay this until after the election, which at least one of my colleagues on the democratic side has a knowledge, that might be what they do. that mightowledged, be what they do. thomasthe clarence biden made some observations about fbi reports. person refersxt to a net vr report as being worth anything obviously does not understand anything. refers to an fbi report as
5:46 pm
worth anything obviously does not understand anything. rely onon why we cannot the fbi report, you would not like it if we did because it is inconclusive. reachi does not conclusions. they do not make recommendations. the role of the fbi is to flag issues. in this case, they were not flagged when they should have and they could not have been a dressed a manner that would have preserved a lot more dignity. instead they were held out until the final moment. i consider that unfortunate. that, on behalf of this
5:47 pm
committee, i extend to you my most profound sympathies and my profound some of these two dr. ford and her family. >> judge, we did 38 hours in public with you. did we have any private hearings with you? brett kavanaugh: yes. you,s that a fun time for when senators can ask potentially awkward questions about alcoholism, credit card debt, did you enjoy that? i am alwaysugh: happy to cooperate with committee. >> that is charitable. where you ever asked about sexual allegations? brett kavanaugh: no. >> to the ranking member re: have these allegations -- did the ranking member already have
5:48 pm
these allegations? i think dr. ford is a victim and i think she has been through hell. i am very sympathetic to her. staffd the ranking member make a recommendation to hire a lawyer and she knew all of that, and yet we had a hearing with you and none of these things were asked, but then once the fbi investigation was closed, then this was sprung on you? days from all of the time that this evidence was in the hands, recommendations were made to an outside lawyer. you could have handled all of this and we could of had this -- irsation in private yield my time.
5:49 pm
>> good afternoon. as a federal judge, you are .of [speaking latin] this means false in one thing, false in everything. that the jury can disbelieve a witness if they find him to be false in one thing. so why we are here today really is credibility. the core of why we are here is an allegation for which the four witnesses present
5:50 pm
said it did not happen. ta,let me ask you about rana who lives in connecticut. she thought these your book statements were horrible and untrue. alumi boasted of sexual conquests. that is why you apologized to her. brett kavanaugh: that is false. she and i never had any sexual interactions. your question is false. your question is based on a false premise and does great harm to her. i do not know why you are bringing this up. bringing her name appear is unfortunate. alumnus insomeone an that way, and implying what you with a number of
5:51 pm
your football friends of the time boasting about sexual --tacts brett kavanaugh: look what you are doing to her! ask you to not interrupt. you are subtracting from my time. you arevanaugh: dragging her through the mud. it is unnecessary. thank you mr. chairman. you have made reference, judge, to a sworn statement by mark judge to the committee, is that correct? brett kavanaugh: i made reference to what mark judge's lawyer sent to the committee. >> it is not a sworn statement, is it? a statement signed by his
5:52 pm
is six cursory sentences. i use saying that as a substitute for an investigation by the fbi or some interview by the fbi under oath? brett kavanaugh: under penalty of felony, he said that this kind of event never happened and that i never did or would have done something like that. >> as a federal judge, you always want the best evidence am a don't you -- evidence, don't you? brett kavanaugh: look at ms. kaiser's statement. she -- >> you testified to this this two-week effort has been a calculated and field aboutt pent-up anger about president trump in the 2000 16 election
5:53 pm
fear that has been stoked about my record. clintonsenge for the from clintons from outside left wing opposition people. it is your testimony -- is it your testimony that the motivation of the courageous woman who sat where you did a revenge onago was behalf of a left-wing conspiracy or the clintons? brett kavanaugh: i said in my opening statement that she preferred confidentiality. her confidentiality was destroyed by the actions of this committee. >> in a speech that you gave at described falling out of the bus onto the front steps a.m.le law school at 4:45
5:54 pm
-- brett kavanaugh: let me finish. end ofized a third-year school year party to rent a bus to go to fenway park in boston. andught all the tickets rented the bus. i organized the trip. we went to fenway park. we had a great time. we got back and then went out. it was a great night of friendship. i apologize for interrupting, but i need to finish the quote before i ask you your weston. the quote ends that you tried to piece things back together to recall what happened that night.
5:55 pm
-- meaning -- brett kavanaugh: i know what happened that night. >> i want to finish asking my question. you that not imply to you, had to piece things back together, you had to ask people what happened that night? i know exactly: what happened that night. it was a great night of fine. -- fine -- fun. i know exactly what happened the whole night. >> do you believe anita hill? judge kavanaugh, i want to get into the question that has been going back and forth endlessly about the fbi investigation process.
5:56 pm
i want to follow up a little on senator lee has reference in these processes, which you when the fbiough, does a background check with regard to a nomination, can you describe that for us? brett kavanaugh: the fbi gathers statements from people who have information. they do not resolve credibility. they gather information and the credibility determination is u.s. senate. gives the fbi then report to the white house, and the white house transfers it to the senate? brett kavanaugh: that is my understanding. >> as you have indicated, the
5:57 pm
fbi does not make judgments. it gives the senate committee information. at that point in time, if i understand correctly, the u.s. senate judiciary committee has if itauthorities, receives information in an fbi report that it wants to further investigate him a the senate has legal and 30 to conduct further investigation -- the senate has legal authority to conduct further investigations? these witnesses that were identified have made statements that are under penalty of felony. that is a felony for lying to the senate judiciary midi. -- committee. they follow up on the fbi reports to finish the investigation it wants with
5:58 pm
regard to information that needs further investigation. is that your understanding? brett kavanaugh: yes. , there is a lot of concern by many that there was not an interest in an fbi investigation, the interest was in delay. i want to talk about what happens in the senate committee investigation. as i understand it, as soon as we receive the information, which was 45 days after others in the committee received it, we conducted an investigation. is that correct, mr. chairman? we began the legal investigation. >> yes. >> and that investigation involved our investigators to conduct an investigation.
5:59 pm
and the democratic members of the committee refused to participate? >> yes. >> so we have conducted the investigation. things myinds of colleagues on the other side are asking that we tell the fbi to do, this committee has the authority to do it and this committee has done it. fore may be more demands more interviews and investigations, but when you have referenced the testimony that has come from those who were identified as being at the testimony that has been received from them is is information that has been received pursuant to a an investigation. there's been a lot of back-and-forth about looking into the investigation. the reality is this committee immediately investigated every
6:00 pm
witness and we have statements under penalty of felony. so i just want to conclude with that. senator feinstein on august 20? judge kavanaugh: that is my understanding of the date. what was established earlier during testimony was that the staff of the ranking member a law dr. ford to retain sometime between july 30 and august 7. i wanted you to clarify, in the meeting you had two weeks or more later, this issue was not raised with you? judge kavanaugh: the issue was not raised. >> thank you, the issue was not raised. >> we will take a five-minute b


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on