Skip to main content

tv   Inside Politics  CNN  September 27, 2018 9:00am-10:00am PDT

9:00 am
knowledge of the party described by dr. ford and states he never saw the manner described by dr. ford and i can go on and on about that, but we got to realize that we have done in this case of all the time you go through a background investigation by the fbi, then it comes to us. there is always some holes in it that we have to follow-up on. besides -- >> mr. chairman -- >> we are responding to doctor ford's request to tell her story. that's why we are here. >> mr. chairman. mr. chairman. mr. chairman. i just want to point out to support what senator whitehouse said in the anita hill case, george bush ordered that the investigation be opened again. >> miss mitchell, will you proceed for senator lee? >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. ford, "the washington post"
9:01 am
reported in their september 16th article that you did show them the therapist notes. is that incorrect? >> i don't remember physically showing her a note. perhaps my counsel did. i don't remember physically showing her my copy of the note. i just don't remember. i'm sorry. i have retrieved a physical copy of those medical records. >> okay. thank you. you also attended individual therapy. did you show any of those notes to the reporter from "the washington post"? >> again, i don't remember if i showed her something that i summarized or if i just spoke about it. or if she saw it in my counsel's office. i don't know for sure, but i certainly spoke with her about the 2013 record with the individual therapist.
9:02 am
>> and brett kavanaugh's name is not in those notes, is that correct? >> correct. >> okay. in reading "the washington post" article, it mentions that this incident that we are here about contributed to anxiety and ptsd problems with which you have struggled. the word contributed, does that mean there are other things that have happened that have also contributed to anxiety and ptsd? >> i think that's a great question. the ideology of anxiety and ptsd is multifactorial. that was certainly a critical risk that we would call it a risk factor in science. that would be's predictor of the symptoms that i now have. it doesn't mean that other things that have happened in my life would make it worse or better. there are other risk factors as
9:03 am
well. >> have there been other things that contributed to the anxiety and ptsd that you suffered? >> there is biological predispositions that everyone has for particular disorders. i can't rule out that i had a biological predisposition to be an anxious person. >> what about environmental? >> environmentally, not that i can think of. certainly nothing as striking as that event. >> okay. in your interview with "the washington post," you said that you told your husband early in your marriage that you had been a victim and i quote, "physical abuse." you said buffer were married you experienced a sexual assault. do these two things refer to the same incident. >> yes. >> at either point on those two times, did you use any names?
9:04 am
>> no. >> okay. may i ask, how did you get to washington? >> in an airplane. >> i ask that because it has been reported by the press that you would not submit to an interview with the committee because of your fear of flying. is that true? >> well, i was hoping they would come to me, but i realized that was an unrealistic request. >> it would have been a quicker trip for me. >> yes. so that was summer what i was hoping was to avoid having to get on an airplane, but i eventually was able to get up the gumption with the help of friends and get on the plane. >> when you were here in the mid-atlantic area back in august, end of july, august. how did you get here? >> also by airplane.
9:05 am
i come here once a year during the summer to visit my family. not here, i go to delaware. >> okay. in fact, you fly fairly frequently for hobbies and you had to fly for your work, is that true? >> correct, unfortunately. >> you were consulted by a statustician in australia. >> i have never been to australia, but the company is based in australia and they have an office in san francisco, california. i don't think i will make it to australia. >> it is long. >> i also saw on your cd that you list the following interest of travel and you put hawaii, costa rica, south pacific islands and french polinesia. have you been to those places? >> correct. >> by airplane? >> yes. >> it includes oceanography and tahitian culture.
9:06 am
did you travel by air? >> correct. it's easier when it's a vacation. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here, dr. ford. in my old job as a prosecutor, we investigated reports like this. it gave me a window on the types of cases that hurt women and hurt all of us. i would always tell the women that they would have to tell their story before a jury box of strangers and you had to tell your story before the entire nation. for so many years, people swept cases like yours under the rug. they'd say what happens inside a house didn't belong in the courthouse. well, the times have changed. i just want to thank you for coming forward today and for sharing your report with us. now, i understand that you have taken a polygraph test.
9:07 am
dr. ford, that found that you were being truthful when you described what happened to you. can you tell us why you decided to take that test. >> i was meeting with attorneys. i was interviewing various attorneys and the attorneys asked if i was willing to take it and i said absolutely. that said, it was almost as anxiety-provoking as an airplane flight. >> okay. and you talked about your recollections and seeing mark judge at the safeway. if there had been an appropriate reopening of the background check and fbi introduce, would that help you find the time period if you knew and he worked at the safeway. >> i feel like i could be more helpful if i were provided with the date and the irs. i felt i could help. >> under federal law and statements made to medical
9:08 am
professionals are considered to be more reliable. there is a federal rule of evidence about this. you told your counsellor about this in 2012. is that right? >> my therapist? my individual therapist, correct. >> and i understand your husband was also present when you spoke about this incident in front of a counsellor and he recalls you using judge kavanaugh's name. is that right? >> i have to slow down because i may have been confusing. there are two times where it's reflected in my record. i talked about it more than two times. they're usually tracking your symptoms and not the story and the facts. i happened to have it in my record twice. so the first time in in 2012 with my husband in couples therapy with the quibbling over the remodel.
9:09 am
then in 2013 with my individual therapist. >> so if someone had actually done an investigation, your husband would have been able to say you named his name at that time? >> correct. >> okay. >> in 2012. >> i know you are concerned with your privacy throughout the process and you requested your account be kept confidential. you can briefly tell us why? >> yes. so as i stated before, once i was unsuccessful in getting my information to you before the candidate was chosen. my original intent was to get the information when there was still a list of other candidates available. and once that was not successful, and i saw that persons were very supportive of the nominee, i tracked it all summer.
9:10 am
i realized that when i was calculating that risk-benefit ratio, it looked like i was going to just suffer only for no reason. >> from my experience with memory. i remember things that happened to me in high school or happened to me in college, but i don't exactly remember the date. i don't exactly remember the time. i sometimes may not remember the exact place where it occurred. i remember the interaction. and many people are focused today on what you are not able to remember about that night. i think you remember a lot. i will phrase it differently. you can tell us what you don't forget about that night? >> the stair well. the living room. the bedroom. the bed on the right side of the room as you walk into the room. there was a bed to the right. the bathroom in close proximity.
9:11 am
the laughter. the uproaruous laughter. and the multiple attempts to scape and the final ability to do so. >> thank you very much, dr. ford. >> dr. ford, i want to correct the record, but it's not something that you stated wrongly. you may not know the fact that when you said that you didn't think it was possible for us to go to california as a committee or our investigators to go to california to talk to you, we did, in fact, offer that to you and we had the capability of doing it and would have done it anywhere or any time. >> thank you. >> and mr. chairman, could i put the polygraph results on the record, please? the polygraph results in the record.
9:12 am
any objection? >> let us see the chart. >> the polygraph? you want to see it? >> will you hold it a minute. >> i think you may have it. >> can we have the underlying charts too? >> the underlying charts? i have the polygraph results that i would like to put in the record. i will deal with the charts after that. could i put the polygraph tests in the record? >> mr. chairman, we had proposed having the polygraph examiner testify, as you know. if that had happened, the full materials he had supporting his examination would have been provided. you rejected that request, so what we did provide was the polygraph report, which is what the members of the committee currently have. >> on september 26th, mr. chairman, this was sent to your chief counsel and i just want to share it with america so they have this report as well. >> okay. we will accept without objection what you have included, but we
9:13 am
are also requesting and expect the other materials that i just stated. >> mr. chairman, you wouldn't allow the underlying witness who performed the polygraph test to testify nor would you allow mark judge to testify. i would like to point out, thank you for allowing this report in the record, but that is the reason we don't have the underlying information for you. >> you got what you wanted and i think you would be satisfied. >> when was the polygraph administered? >> it was administered on august 7th, 2018, and the date of the report is august 10th, 2018. >> when was it provided to the committee. >> let's see if we can do this in an order leeway. >> he was asking and i have it right here. september 26th. >> we accepted it.
9:14 am
miss mitchell for senator cruz. >> thank you. dr. ford, we have talked about the day and the night that you described in the summer of 1982. thank you for being willing to do that. i know it's difficult. i'd like to shift gears and discuss the last several months. >> okay. >> in your statement, you said that on july 6th, you had a "sense of urgency to relay the information to the senate and the president." did you contact either the senate or the president on or before july 6th? >> i did not. i did not know how to do that. >> okay. prior to july 6th, had you spoken to any member of congress and when i say congress, i mean the senate or the house of
9:15 am
representatives or any congressional staff members about your allegations? >> no. >> why did you contact "the washington post" then on july 6th? >> so, i was panicking because i knew the timeline was short for the decision. and people were giving me advice on the beach. people who don't know about the processes, but they were giving me advice. people said you need to hire a lawyer and i didn't do that. i didn't understand why i would need a lawyer. somebody said call the "new york times." call "the washington post." put in an anonymous tip. go to your congress person. when i weighed the options, i felt like the best option was to try to do the civic route which is to go to my congress person who happens to be anna es choo
9:16 am
and put in the tip to "the washington post" and unfortunately neither got back to me before the selection of the nominee. >> you testified that congresswoman es choo's office contacted you on july 9th, is that right? >> they contacted me the date that the nominee was announced. that seems likely. >> had you talked about your allegations with anyone in her office before the date of july 9th? >> i told the receptionist on the phone. >> on july 10th, you texted "the washington post" again, which was really the third time, is that right? second date, third time. >> let's see. correct. >> and you texted been advised to contact senators or "new york times," haven't heard back from
9:17 am
"washington post." who advised you to contact senators or the "new york times"? >> beach friends coming up with ideas of how to try to get to people. because people were not responding to me very quickly. very quickly, they responded to that text. for an unknown reason. once i sent that encrypted text, they responded very quickly. >> did you contact the "new york times"? >> no. >> why not? >> i wasn't interested in pursuing the media route, particularly. i felt like one was enough. "the washington post." i was nervous about doing that. my preference was to talk with my congress person. >> okay. "the washington post" success texted back that someone would get you in touch with a reporter. did you subsequently talk to a reporter with "the washington post." >> yes, under the encrypted app.
9:18 am
and off the record. >> okay. who was that reporter? >> emma brown. >> okay. the person who ultimately wrote the story on september 16th? >> correct. >> okay. did you talk to any member of congress, and again, remember congress includes the senate or the house of representatives or any congressional staff members about your allegations between july 10th and july 30th, which was the date of your letter to senator fine steieinstein. >> i met with congresswoman es choo's staff on the wednesday and the friday i met with the congresswoman herself. >> okay. when you met with her, did you meet with her alone or did someone come with you? >> i was alone. she had a staff person. >> okay. what did you talk about with congresswoman es choo and her
9:19 am
staff on july 18th and 20th? >> i described the night of the incident and we spent time speaking about that. i asked her how to -- what my options were in terms of going forward. how to get that information relayed forward and also talked to her about fears of whether this was confidential information and she discussed the constituent confidentiality. >> thank you, chairman grassley. i would like to ask for consent to submit five articles. why sexual assault memories stick and why didn't kavanaugh accuser come forward earlier. >> without objection and so ordered. >> dr. ford, i want to begin by thanking you for coming to testify before us today. you came forward with serious
9:20 am
and relevant information about a nominee for a lifetime position on our supreme court. you didn't have to. i know you have done it at great personal cost. this is a public service and want you to know that i'm grateful to have the opportunity to hear from you directly today. i would like to first follow-up on that line of questioning. a lot of people don't realize that you chose to come forward with your concerns about judge kavanaugh before he was nominated to the supreme court. do i understand correctly that when you first reached out to congresswoman es choo and "the washington post" tip line was when he was on the short list, but before he was nominated to the supreme court, is that correct? >> correct. >> you were motivated by a sense of civic duty and frankly a hope that some other highly qualified nominee might be pick and not out of a motivation at a late statement to have an impact on the final decision. >> correct.
9:21 am
i felt it was very important to get the information to you, but i didn't know how to do it while there was still a short list of candidates. >> thank you, doctor. according to the justice department data, about two thirds of survivors don't report their assaults. you bore this alone. you bore this alone for a very long time. it would be helpful for us to better understand the ways that impacted your whole life. >> well, it impacted me at different stage of the development of my life. the immediate impact was probably the worst. so the first four years, i think i described earlier, a fairly disastrous first two years of under graduate studies at university of north carolina. i was finally able to pull myself together and then once
9:22 am
coping with the immediate impacts, the short-term impacts, i experienced longer term impacts of anxiety and relationship challenges. >> thank you for sharing that. yet you went on tousc? >> correct. >> as you predicted, there was a wide range of responses to your coming forward. some, thousands of survivors have been motivate and inspired by your courage and others have been critical. as i reviewed the wide range of reaction, i have been troubled by the excuse offered by too many that this was a high school incident and boys will be boys. that's far too low of a standard for conduct of boys and men in our country. i would appreciate your reaction to the excuse that boys will be boys. >> i can only speak for how it impacted me greatly for the last
9:23 am
36 years even though i was 15 years old at the time. i think the younger you are when these things happen, it could possibly have worse impacts than when your brain is fully develop and you have better coping skills that you developed. >> experts have written about how it's common for sexual assault survivors to remember some facts about the experience very sharply and clearly, but not others. that has to do with the survival mote th mode that we go into with trauma. is it that your experience and can you help the lay person understand? >> i was experiencing a fight or flight mode. is that what you are referring to? i was experiencing the surge of adrenaline and cortisol and nor epinephrine and credit that for my ability to get out of the
9:24 am
situation. some other lucky events that occurred that allowed me to get out of the event. >> we are grateful that you came through it and that you shared your account with us and the american people and i think you provided important information and i'd like to thank you for your meeting your civic duty. i wish we could have provided for you a more thorough hearing. asking the fbi to investigate this thoroughly was not asking too much. asking to have the other individual involved in your assault, mark judge, appear before us was not asking too much. i'm grateful you came forward and i'm thankful for your courage that set an important example. thank you, dr. ford. >> miss mitchell for senator hatch. >> we were talking about you meeting in july with congresswoman es choo. did you talk about your allegations with any republican member of congress or congressional staff?
9:25 am
>> i did not. where i live, the congresswoman is a democrat. >> was it communicated to you by your counsel or someone else that the committee had asked to interview you and that they offered to come out to california to do so? >> we are going to object, mr. chairman, for any call for privileged conversations between counsel and dr. ford. >> could you validate the fact that the offer was made without her saying a word? >> we are going to take turns here. >> is it possible for that question to be answered without violating any counsel relationships? >> can i say something to you directly? i just appreciate that you did offer that. i wasn't clear on what the offer was if you were going to come out to see me, i would have happily hosted you and been
9:26 am
happy to speak with you out there. it just wasn't clear to me that that was the case. >> does that take care of your question. >> yes, thank you, mr. chairman. >> proceed then. >> before july 30th, the date on your letter to senator feinstein. had you retained counsel with regard to the allegations. >> no. i didn't understand why i would need lawyers. >> a lot of people have that feeling. let's talk about the letter that you wrote on july 30th. you asked senator feinstein to maintain confidentiality, "until -- >> i'm trying to look for it. >> stop the clock, will you? >> i found it.
9:27 am
sorry. >> okay. you asked senator feinstein to we had further opportunity to speak and said you were available to speak after vacationing in the mid-atlantic august 7th, is that correct? >> the last line? i'm now catching up with you. my mind is getting a little tired. i'm available to speak further should you wish to discuss? yes, i was in delaware until august 7th. after that i went to new hampshire and back to california. >> did you talk with anybody about this letter before you sent it? >> i talked with anna es choo's office. >> okay. and why did you talk to congresswoman es choo's office? >> they were willing to hand deliver it to senator feinstein.
9:28 am
>> did anyone help you write the letter? >> no. >> after you sent your letter, did you or anyone on your behalf speak to senator feinstein personally or with any senate staffer? >> yes. i had a phone call with senator feinstein. >> when was that? >> while i was still in delaware, so before august 7th. >> how many times did you speak with senator feinstein? >> once. >> okay. what did you talk about? >> she asked me some questions about the incident. i answered those questions. >> was that the extent or the gist of the conversation? >> yes, it was a fairly brief phone call. >> did you ever give senator feinstein or anyone else the permission to release the letter? >> not that i know of, no.
9:29 am
>> okay. between the letter date, july 30th and august 7th, did you speak with any other person about your allegations? >> could you say the dates again? >> between the letter date of july 30th and august 7th, so while you were in delaware, did you speak with anyone else about your allegations? >> i'm just trying to remember what dates -- >> you are asking her -- >> stop the clock. >> you are asking her with any lawyers, correct? >> correct. >> i think correct, then. i was interviewing lawyers. speaking personally about it. >> aside from lawyers that you were seeking to hire to represent you, did you speak to anybody else about it during that period of time? >> no.
9:30 am
i was staying with my parents at the time. >> did you talk to them about it? >> definitely not. >> so would it be fair to say you retained counsel during that time period of july 30th to august 7th? >> i can't remember the exact date, but i was interviewing lawyers during that period of time sitting in the car and in the driveway and the walgreens parking lot in delaware. trying to figure out how the whole system works of interviewing lawyers and how to pick one, etc. >> you testified earlier that you didn't see the need for lawyers. now you are trying to hire them. what made you change your mind? >> it seems like most of the individuals that i had told, the total number was not very high, but the persons advised me at this point to get a lawyer for advice about whether to push
9:31 am
forward or to stay back. >> does that include congresswoman es choo and senator feinstein? >> no. >> i want to thank dr. ford for what you said about acknowledging that we had said we had come to california. senator blumenthal? >> thanks, mr. chairman. i want to join in thanking you for being here today. just tell you i have found your testimony powerful and credible and i believe you. you are a teacher, correct? >> correct. >> what you have given america an amazing teaching moment, and you may have other moments in the classroom, but you have inspired and you have enlightened america. you have inspired and given courage to women to come forward
9:32 am
as they have done to every one of our offices and many other public places. you have inspired and you have enlightened men in america to listen respectfully to women survivors and others who have survived sexual attacks. that is a profound public service, regardless of what happens with this nomination. and so the teachers of america, people of america should be really proud of what you have done. let me tell you why i believe you. not only because of the prior consistent statements and the polygraph tests and your request for an fbi investigation and your urging that this committee hear from other witnesses who could corroborate or dispute
9:33 am
your story, but also you have been very honest about what you cannot remember. someone composing a story can make it all come together in a seamless way. someone who is honest from my experience as a prosecutaor as well is candid about what she or he cannot remember. the senators on the other side of the aisle have been silent. this procedure is unprecedented in a confirmation hearing, but i want to quote one of my
9:34 am
colleagues, senator lindsey graham, in a book he wrote when describing his own service and very distinguished service as a trial lawyer. i'm not under oath. he said, of his prosecutions of rain cases, "i learned how much unexpected courage from a deep and hidden place it takes for a rain victim or sexually abused child to testify against their assailant. i learned how much courage from a deep and hidden place it takes for a rain victim or sexually abused child to testify against their assailant. if we agree on nothing else today, i hope on a bipartisan
9:35 am
basis, we can agree on how much courage it has taken for you to come forward. i think you have earned america's gratitude. now, there has been some talk about your requesting an fbi investigation and you mentioned a point, just a few minutes ago, that you could better estimate the time that you ran into mark judge if you knew the time that he was working at that super market. that's a fact that could be uncovered by an fbi investigation. that would help further your account. would you like mark judge to be interviewed in connection with the background investigation and the serious, credible
9:36 am
allegations that you have made? >> that would be my preference. i'm not sure it's up to me, but i certainly would feel like i could be more helpful to everyone if i knew the date that he worked at the safeway so i could give more specific date of the assault. >> it's not up to you, it's up to the president of the united states and his failure to ask for an fbi investigation amounts to a cover up. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator flake -- miss mitchell for senator flake. >> thank you. we heard several times that you did take a polygraph on august 7th, is that right? >> i believe so. it was the day i was flying from bwi to manchester, new hampshire. >> why did you decide to take a polygraph? >> i didn't see any reason not
9:37 am
to do it. >> were you advised to do that? >> again, you are seeming to call for communications between counsel and client. i don't think you mean to do that. if you do, she shouldn't have to answer that. >> counsel, could you let her answer the extent to which it doesn't violate the relationship between you and dr. ford? >> based on the advice of the counsel, i was happy to undergo the polygraph test, although i found it extremely stressful. much longer than i anticipated.
9:38 am
i told my whole life story, i felt like. i endured it, but it was fine. >> i understand they can be that way. have you ever taken any other polygraphs in your life? >> never. >> okay. you went to see a gentleman by the name of jeremiah hanafin to serve as the polygrapher. did anyone advise you on that choice? >> yes, i believe his name was jerry. >> jerry hanafin. >> did anyone advise you on that choice? >> i don't understand. i didn't choose him myself. he was the person that came to do the polygraph test. >> he actually conducted the polygraph not in his office in virginia, but actually at the hotel next to
9:39 am
baltimore-washington airport? >> correct. >> why was that location chosen? >> i left my grandmother's funeral at the cemetery that day and was on a tight schedule to get a plane to manchester, new hampshire. he was willing to come to me, which was appreciated. >> he administered a polygraph on the day you attended your grandmother's funeral. >> correct, or it might have been the next day. i spent the night in the hotel. i don't remember the exact day. >> have you ever had discussions with anyone besides your attorneys on how to take a polygraph? >> never. >> i don't just mean counter measures, but i mean just any sort of tips or anything like that? >> no. i was scared of the test itself.
9:40 am
i was comfortable that i could tell the information and the test would reveal whatever it was going to reveal. i didn't expect it to be as long as it was going to be, so it was a little bit stressful. >> had you given tips or advice to someone looking to take a polygraph test. >> never. >> did you pay for the polygraph yourself? >> i don't think so. >> do you know who did pay for the polygraph? >> not yet, no. >> did -- you have the handwritten statement thaw wrote out. did anyone assist you in writing that statement? >> no, but you can tell how anxious i was by the terrible handwriting. >> did you -- we touched on it
9:41 am
earlier. did you know the committee requested not only the charts from the hpolygraph test, but ay audio or video recording of the polygraph test. >> no. >> were you audio and video recorded when you were taking that test? >> okay, so i remember being hooked up to a machine like being placed on to my body and being asked a lot of questions and crying a lot. that's my primary memory of that test. i know he took laborious detail in explaining what he was going to be doing. i was just focused on what i was going to say and my fear about it. i wasn't listening to every detail, whether it was audio or video recorded. >> you were in a hotel room, right? >> correct.
9:42 am
>> regular room with the bed? >> no, it was a conference room and he was in a chair behind me. >> did you notice any cameras in the room? >> he had a computer set up. i assumed he was somehow taping and recording me. >> okay. you assumed you were being video and audio recorded. >> correct. >> but you don't know for sure. >> okay, thank you. >> we are going to recess now for a half hour for lunch. thank you, dr. ford. >> we are going to keep going -- >> yeah. this hearing has been going on for almost three hours. she comes across very credible. she is answering all of the questions. it's unclear at least to me what the special outside counsel is driving at right now in her questioning, but clearly she's got some mode. >> if i had to guess, i would
9:43 am
suggest she is trying to suggest there are political motives going on here. she asked professor blasey ford why she didn't reach out to a republican. being from palo alto, she is not represented by very many republicans, if any. she seems to suggest that her claim or lawyer's claim was an issue for thoer fher lawyer to washington. she does fly for other things like family trips and her hobbi hobbies. she doesn't like to fly, but she does it. she is trying to undermine her credibility and suggested that democrats were conspireing. i don't know that she is succeeding, but i think that's what she is trying to accomplish. i have to say i am hearing from a lot of people on social media and survivors of sexual assault
9:44 am
and harassment and people who are watching this and responding to it very emotionally. i think the cross-examination process is a difficult one for a lot of these people to watch, whether you believe brett kavanaugh or christine blasey ford. it's difficult to see. it's difficult to watch somebody with a credible story being attack and having her credibility questioned. that's part of the process, but it's difficult and it's a thankless task. >> you noticed that she started crying when she was being pressured by senator blumenthal of connecticut. i go back to her opening statement when she said i am here today not because i want to be. i am terrified. >> i think she has been terrified throughout this entire process. not of the democrats who are doing their best to compliment her and making sure she feels
9:45 am
okay, but the interesting thing to me that blumenthal did was ask about mark judge and ask the question of sort of, would you like mark judge's response? >> his testimony. >> his testimony. she said, you know, it could be helpful because he might have a memory and i might have a memory. she said, look, i'd like everyone to testify truthfully under oath because i'm telling the truth and i would like mark judge who in her telling of the story was a coconspirator in all of this. yet she wants him there. >> this is one of the questions that republicans have a difficult time answering with any specificity. why not investigate if we are trying to get to the bottom of it. one person making charges and another person denying them. there witnesses and individuals who were there that night and part of that scene at the time.
9:46 am
why not have an fbi investigation? the argument, he had six background checks does not do it when you get down to it. >> senator grassley made a separation of powers argument. this is what we do. we are going to investigate it and the white house would have to do it we can do the investigation ourselves. they had the investigation and called in kavanaugh, but the democrats said we are not taking part of that. that sort of fell flat. again, the fact is that mark judge did issue a statement saying i don't remember the party. that's not what she's getting at. if you don't remember the party, there are things that you have that could help this along. it's going to be up to mark judge to be able to come back and answer to that. >> the thing is, republicans don't want mark judge to testify for a number of reasons. one of which is they don't want
9:47 am
mark judge who is a washington, d.c. character and written about his stories of drinking in high school and a fictitious character called bart o kavanaugh. he's a horrible character witness. >> a horrible character witness and a horrible witness. the idea that -- it's pretty remarkable when you consider one of the real issues here is, was and mark judge blind drunk the night of this ka assault? you have one of them having written, not one, but two books about being a drunken high school student. how many people do that? yet one of them is. it just underlines how badly this has all gone for the kavanaugh side in this hearing so far. if we can dwell for a moment on
9:48 am
how ineffective this cross-examination has been, she is trying to turn this into csi chevy chase. what have they gotten out television other than she doesn't like to fly, but she flies anyway. so what? >> the reporting i'm getting. i haven't been on csi chevy chase yet, but i'm hoping for an invitation. the people we are talking about that we have been talking about who are the most important viewers of this, the jurors, if you will, the senators, the small number who have to make up their mind, this whole notion of, are you afraid of flying and did this affect you in a real way in trying to chip away at her credibility on the notion of clauft phobia. for those senator, who cares?
9:49 am
it is so not relevant. that is what they are harping on. it is so missing the boat. at the heart of the question, this woman and her story and whether or not she is telling the truth about what happened, not about the ramifications and the problems that it caused her down the road. that is really the key. i agree with you that it's about also trying to show her as a pawn of the democrats, but it's not going to fly and also as we are watching this, i am getting texts from republican strateg t strategists saying they are watching the key independent voters. women in particular, but men, too, slipping away the more and more. >> do you think that president trump who is watching this, we are told, is surprised at how credible professor blasey ford is and upset this process has come to this? he said the recollect day that he would have preferred that two
9:50 am
weeks ago they have a vote and not let it happen, but he said the opposite two weeks ago. he said he wanted to let it play out and hear from the woman. do you think he was repeating what he was told to say of let's hear from the woman and she deserves to be heard and he now obviously regrets it. this was his worst fear. >> in some ways, yes. this is the first time i think the public heard such a believable, credible, emotion, human story about a traumatizing experience. this woman said she experienced when she was 15. obviously from anita hill. voices and stories. this kind of concept rated story and what it's doing is encouraging other women to tell their stories. i haven't gotten text messages from some of my friends who have been watching this and telling stories about things that happened to them. these are quite frankly the
9:51 am
story stories women have told. >> on the president's favorite channel, he said two of his daughters came forward about things that happened to them that they shouldn't shared with him. though lindsey graham earlier this week said brett kavanaugh is not bill cosby. bill cosby who just a few days ago was sentenced to prison for what he did. the charges are different, but this is part of a movement and a moment in our society where women, whether you believe their stories or not, are overwhelmingly coming forward and accusing people of bad behavior. >> without a doubt, as evidenced from other people, dr. ford opened a door to that. more people using her courage whether you agree or disagree with her, that takes courage. whether you believe her or don't believe her. that is opening the door to a cultural conversation. >> you mentioned chris wallace.
9:52 am
the president checks in on us from time to time. he is hearing the same conversation we are having here from chris wallace who said it has been a disaster for brett kavanaugh. another respected voice had the same opinion. what does the president do? there are the social cultural moment issues that i think 10 or 20 years from now are more important than this one seat, but in the politics of the moment, politics know they have a problem. >> senator susan collins went to bed last night and woke up this morning saying i want to hear from mark judge. mitch mcconnell's hope was she would say okay, never mind. seriously? >> here's the thing. brett kavanaugh's interests were not represented at all. usually under the normal republicans versus democrats, they could have done repair job.
9:53 am
there is no repair being done. >> that's all on kavanaugh this afternoon. >> you have to wait and see. first of all, after lunch, will they do the same thing? they will still have her because they won't be able to shift gears, but they want to figure out a way to have his interest represented. >> lindsey graham is probably champing at the bit to do that and thinks this is a bad idea. if rachel mitchell was trying to portray him as an actist, she is from palo alto and i heard from one republican and i wrote it down, he texted me. he said kavanaugh is going to need to have more than a calendar to clear himself. >> when he comes up and he testifies and delivers his statement, we have excerpts of his statement that he flatly denies it, it will be tough for him. >> we're talked about her
9:54 am
emotional aspect. at times, we are seeing her experti expertise. the emotional side and her expertise. every once in a while, you see mitchell who is an expert is talking with another expert. two experts talking with each other. there is no senators talking about kavanaugh. >> clearly we are not prepared for either of these women to act the way they are. they didn't know what ford was going to be like. maybe they thought she wouldn't show up. she shows up with her personal and professional credentials and clearly did not anticipate the problem staggering. >> the hill is getting steeper for judge kavanaugh who deserves to be heard, but he's in an untenable position because of the way they are set up. they are trying to poke holes in her story and calling lawyers from her car in the parking lot of a store because she is afraid to talk to her parents.
9:55 am
here humanity is coming through. brett kavanaugh deserve as i fair hearing, but this is getting harder by the minute. >> she is highly educated, professor ford. ph.d. in educational psychology from the university of southern california. masters degree in clinical psychology from pepperdine university. she has got a regular degree in experimental psychology. she's an expert on the brain. at one point when she said the details about that night that bring me here today are ones i will never forget. they have been seared into my memory and haunted me episodically as an adult. >> we will take a break. stay with us. we'll be right back.
9:56 am
in april, luke's dad made 25 calls to find a place that could bring his son's creation to life. there were 14 emails to determine the size of the lightning bolts. and 18 texts wishing luke a very happy birthday. and when all was said and done, luke got to be a real-life superhero. and so did his dad.
9:57 am
now get get up to 30% off of youtop brands at sears. ♪ plus get an extra 15% off kenmore laundry. visit to see how you can get more from kenmore at sears. your digestive system has billions of bacteria but life can throw them off balance. re-align yourself with align probiotic. and try new align gummies with prebiotics and probiotics
9:58 am
to help support digestive health. i'm a fighter. always have been. when i found out i had age-related macular degeneration, amd, i wanted to fight back. my doctor and i came up with a plan. it includes preservision. only preservision areds 2 has the exact nutrient formula recommended by the national eye institute to help reduce the risk of progression of moderate to advanced amd. that's why i fight. because it's my vision. preservision. also, in a great-tasting chewable.
9:59 am
if you're waiting patiently for a liver transplant, it could cost you your life. it's time to get out of line with upmc. at upmc, living-donor transplants put you first. so you don't die waiting. upmc does more living-donor liver transplants than any other center in the nation. find out more and get out of line today. >> welcome back to our live coverage of christine blasey
10:00 am
ford's testimony before the senate judiciary committee. the woman who accuses judge brett kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her. professor ford testified that she is 100% certain it was kavanaugh who attacked her at a party when they were both teenagers. she was 17 and she was 15. an emotional ford was also asked about her strongest memory from the alleged assault. >> indelible in the hippo campus is the laughter. the uproaruous laughter between the two and their having fun it's my expense. >> you never have forgotten that laughter? them laughing at you. >> they were laughing with each other. >> you were the object of the laughter? >>


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on