tv Judge Brett Kavanaugh Professor Christine Blasey Ford Testify CSPAN September 27, 2018 11:45am-12:48pm EDT
statement. >> i'm note familiar with his statement. >> come on, it is all over the news. he said candidates like judge kavanaugh knew nothing. >> i would have to trust my own opinion. which is that when -- when dr. ford said she would like the fbi to look into the details, because she has nothing to hide, she's telling the authentic and true story, i think that is powerful and i think it is been a tradition. in fact moments ago, as i was leaving a room, i heard senator leahy referring to a fact that such a follow-up background work by the fbi is standard procedure and that standard procedure is being violated. thank you very much. [ applause ]
>> you have a sense of what it looks like in the hart senate office building and now the dirksen office building and it 26 and senator merkley, democrat of oregon, referring to a federal injunction he's filed to stop a final vote on the nomination of brett kavanaugh to serve on the u.s. supreme court. the short break is just about over. christine blasey ford will be re-entering the room and another round of questioning, our live coverage continues here on the c-span networks.
[ gavel ] dr. ford, let me ask you a process question here. we were going to schedule a break for 12:05 this last break came just a little bit later. i didn't call it at the right time. we're going to have a vote at 12:40 so would it be possible for you to go from now until 12:40 without a break? >> yes. >> yeah. okay. now it is senator cornyn's time so proceed, miss mitchell. >> thank you, senator. i have a blow-up to my right of the map that was shown to you. the address that is indicated on here as belonging to your family is what all of the property tax
records show as being your address. >> okay. >> just to put it in perspective, i would like to show you a further out zoomed out picture so that we can put it into perspective. so we can show the greater washington area. you could see the beltway on that. the beltway area. >> okay. >> and then number three, if we could look at that, we drew a one-mile radius around the country club and then we calculated from the further -- >> mr. chairman, again, we don't have these documents. no we're not. that is why she showed three different documents because they depict three different things so we'd like to see all three documents, please, so we can follow along. >> proceed, please. >> okay. looking at number -- the third thing here, we calculated the distance from the closest point to your house from a mile radius
of the country club and then the farthest point, you could see it is 6.2 and 8.2 miles. and you've described this as being near the country club, wherever this house was, is that right? >> i would describe it as somewhere between my house and the country club in that vicinity that is shown in your picture. >> okay. >> and the country club is about a 20-minute drive from my parents' home. >> a 20 minute drive. and of course i've marked as the crow flies. would it be fair to say that somebody drove you somewhere, either to the party, or home from the party? >> correct. >> has anyone come forward to say to you, remember, i was the one that drove you home? >> no. >> okay. in your july 6 test to the washington post that you looked at earlier, you said this happened in the mid '80s and in
your letter to senator feinstein you said it occurred in the early '80s. >> uh-huh. >> and in your polygraph said it was high school summer in the '80s, and this is one of the corrections you referred to earlier. in the "washington post" you were more specific, you said early in 1982 in your sophomore year. how were you able to narrow down the time frame? >> i can't give the exact date and i would like to be more helpful about the date and if i knew when mark judge worked at the potomac safe way, i would be able to be more helpful in that way. so i'm just using memories of when i got my driver's license, i was 15 at the time and did not drive home from that party or to that party. and once i did have my driver's
license, i liked to drive myself. >> i assume the legal driving age was 16? >> yes. >> now you've talked about attending therapy. in your text to "the washington post" dated 7/6. so that's the very first statement we have from you. you put in there, quote, have therapy records talking about it. i want to make sure i understand that. did you already have your therapy records at that time? >> i had looked at them online to see if they existed, yes. >> okay so this was something that was available to you via a computer, like a patient portal? >> actually, no it was in the office of a provider. >> okay. >> she helped me go through the record to locate whether i had record of this conversation that i had remembered. >> did you show a full or
partial set of those marriage therapy records to "the washington post"? >> i don't remember. i remember summer rising for s who they said, do i don't know if i ever actually gave her the record. >> so it's possible the reporter did not see these notes? >> i don't know if she -- i can't recall whether she saw them directly, or if i just told her what they said. >> have you shown them to anyone else besides your counsel? >> just the counsel. >> okay. would it be fair to say that brett kavanagh's name is not listed in those notes? >> his name is not listed in those notes. >> would it also be fair to say that the therapist's notes we are talking about say that there were four boys in the room? >> it describes the sexual
assault and it says erroneously by four boys. so the therapist got the content of it wrong. >> and you corrected that to "the washington post" reporter, correct? >> correct. >> senator whitehouse? >> thank you, chairman, thank you dr. blasey ford, a lot of people are proud of you today. from a prosecutor's eye view, one of the hardest things that we have to do is to speak to somebody who's come forward with an allegation of sexual assault and let them know that we can't provide the evidence to go forward to trial. it's a hard day for the prosecutor to do that. and so both because making a sincere and thorough investigative effort is such an important consolation to the victim in those circumstances, and because it's what you're
obliged to do professionally, sincere and thorough investigation is critical to these claims in a prosecutor's world. it may be the most basic thing that we owe a victim or a witness coming forward is to make sure that we give them a full, thorough and sincere investigation. you have met all of the standards of what i might call preliminary credibility with your initial statement. you have vivid, specific and detailed recollections, something prosecutors look for. your recollections are consistent with known facts. you made prior consistent statements, something else prosecutors and lawyers look for. you were willing to and did take a lie detector test. and you were willing to testify here, here you are, subject to
professional cross-examination by a prosecutor. so you have met any condition any prosecutor could expect to go forward. and yet, there has been no sincere or thorough investigation of your claims. you specifically asked for an fbi investigation, did you not? >> yes. >> and are you aware that when the fbi begins investigating, they might find corroborative evidence and they might find exculpatory evidence? >> i don't know what exculpatory evidence. >> your version of events helpful to the accused. >> okay, yes. >> and you are still not just willing, but insistent that the
fbi should investigate your recollection and your claim? >> yes, i feel like it would -- i could be more helpful in that -- if that was the case in providing some of the details that maybe people are wanting to know about. >> and as we know, they didn't. and i submit that never, never in the history of background investigations has an investigation not been pursued when new credible, derogatory information was brought forward about the nominee or the candidate. i don't think this has ever happened in the history of fbi background investigations. maybe somebody can prove me wrong, but it's wildly unusual and out of character. and in my view, it is a grave disservice to you and i want to take this moment to apologize to
you for that and to report to anybody who might be listening, that when somebody's willing to come forward, even under those circumstances, even having been not given the modicum of courtesy and support of a proper investigation, you've shown yourself particularly proud in doing that and the responsibility for this decision being the only background investigation in history to be stopped as derogatory history became forward, is eight men, dr. wray of the fbi and eight other gentlemen. judge kavanagh's testimony has not been corroborated under oath, has not been investigated by the fbi, tells you all you need to know about how credible this performance is.
the very bare minimum that a person who comes forward is owed is sincere and thorough investigation and you've been denied that and i will make a personal pledge to you here that however long it takes, in whatever forum i can do it, whenever it is possible, i will do earning in my power to make sure that your claims get a full and proper investigation and not just this. thank you for being here. >> thank you. >> since this issue has come up so many times, i would like to comment. the new yorker published anonymous account of allegations september the 14th. two days later dr. ford identified herself as a victim in a post article, detailing her allegations. i immediately directed my staff to investigate. september 17, dr. ford's counsel went on several television shows
requesting that her client have an opportunity to tell her story. the same day i scheduled a hearing for monday, september 24th, giving dr. ford a week to prepare her testimony and come to washington, d.c. on september 17, committee investigative staff reached out to dr. ford and judge kavanagh to schedule follow kuwait int-us with -- under criminal penalty, dr. ford declined. in his interview on september 17, judge kavanagh denied the allegations and requested a hearing as soon as possible. democratic staff refused to participate in that interview. the next day, september 18th, investigative staff contacted mark judge and requested an interview. mark judge submitted a statement, under penalty of felony, denying knowledge of the
party described by dr. ford and states that he never saw brett at the -- in the manner described by dr. ford. and i can go on and on about that. but we got to realize that what we have done in this case, of all of the time you go through a background investigation by the fbi, then it comes to us. and there's always some holes in it that we have to follow up on, and besides -- >> mr. chairman. >> we're responding to dr. ford's request to tell her story, that's why we're here. >> mr. chairman -- >> ms. mitchell. >> mr. chairman, i just want to point out what senator whitehouse said, in the anita hill case. >> can we hear from dr. ford? >> george bush ordered the investigation be opened again. >> dr. mitchell, will you p proceed for senator lee?
>> thank you mr. chairman. dr. ford, "the washington post" reported in their september 16 article that you did show them 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. >> okay. >> but 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 for "the washington post"? >> again, i don't remember if i showed her, like, something that i summarized or if i just spoke about it. or if she saw it in my counsel's office. i can't -- i don't know for sure. but i certainly spoke with her about the 2013 record with the
individual therapist. >> and brett kavanagh's name is not in those notes, is that correct? >> correct. >> in reading "the washington post" article. it mentions that this incident that we're here about contrib e contributed to anxiety and ptsd problems with which you have struggled. the word contributed, does that mean that there are other things that have happened that have also contributed to anxiety and ptsd? >> i think that's a great question. i think the ideology of anxiety and ptsd is multifactoria. we consider it a risk factor, so that would attributable to the symptoms that i now have. that doesn't mean that other things that have happened in my life would make it worse or better, there are other risk factors as well.
>> so have there been other things that have contributed to the anxiety and ptsd that you suffered? >> i think there's sort of buy lod logical predispositions that everyone has for certain disorders. so i don't know if i would have the biological predisposition to anxie anxiety. >> what about environmental? >> environmental? nothing that i can think of. certainly nothing as striking as that event. >> in your interview with the w "washington post," you said you told your husband earlibefore y were married that you had experienced sexual abuse. it and later you told him that you were the victim of a sexual assault. were these the same incident? >> yes.
>> on either of these two times, did you use any names? >> no. >> may i ask, dr. ford, how did you get to washington? >> in an airplane. >> okay. i ask that because it's been reported by the press that you would not submit to an interview with the committee because of your fire of flying. is that true? >> well, i was hoping that they would come to me. but then i realized that was an unrealistic request. >> it would have been a quicker trip for me. >> yes. >> so that was certainly what i was hoping was to avoid having to get on an airplane. but i eventually was able to get up the gumpati atigumption withf some friends to get on a plane. >> when you were here back in august, end of july, august, how did you get here? >> also by airplane. i come here once a year during
the summer to visit my family. >> okay. >> i'm sorry, not here, i go to delaware. >> in fact you fly fairly frequently for your hobbies and you have had to fly for your work, is that true? >> correct, unfortunately. >> you were consulting by a sta statistician in sidney, australia, correct? >> i don't think i'll make it to australia. >> it is long. >> i also saw on your -- you in par p talked about hawaii, polynesian islands. have you been to all of those places? >> correct. >> and your interests also include oceanography and hawaiian and tahitian studies.
>> thank you for being here, dr. ford, in my old job as a prosecutor, we investigated reports like this, so it gave me a window on the types of cases that hurt women and hurt all of us. and i would always tell the women that came before us that they were going to have to tell their story before a jury box of strangers. and you have had to tell your story before the entire nation. for so many years, people swept ca cases like yours under the rug, they would say what happens inside a house didn't belong inside a courthouse. well times have changed. so i just want to thank you for coming forward to share your story with us.
i understand that you have taken a polygraph test, dr. ford, that found you were truthful when you told what happened to you. can you tell us how 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. >> and you've talked about your recollections and seeing mark judge at that safeway, if there had been an appropriate reopening of this background check and fbi interviews, would that help you find the time period if you knew when he worked at that safeway? >> i think i would find it helpful if i could be provided that date through the irs or anything. >> i assume that's true, but under federal law, but
statements made to medical professionals are considered to be more reliable, there's a federal rule of evidence about this. you told your counselor about this back in 2012, is that right? >> my therapist? >> uh-huh. >> my individual therapist, correct. >> and i understand that your husband was also present when you spoke about this incident in front of a counselor and he recalls you using judge kavanagh's name, is that right? >> yes, i just have to slow down a minute, because i might have been confusing. so there were two separate incidents where it's reflected in my medical records. i reflected about it more than those two times, but therapists typically don't write down contempt, they're typically tracking your symptoms. i just happen to have remembrances of twice, the first
time was in couple's therapy, in the quibbling over the remodel. and then in 2013 with my individual therapist. >> so if someone would have actually done the investigation, your husband would be able to say you named his name at that time? >> correct. 2012. >> i know you've been concerned with your privacy throughout the process. and you first requested that your account be kept confident 14 -- confidential, can you briefly tell us why? >> as i stated once before, 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 wo s were very supporti the nominee, i checked it all summer and realized that when i
was calculating that risk-benefit ratio, that it looked like i was going to just suffer only for no reason. >> you know, from my experience with memory, i remember distinctly things that happened to me in high school or happened to me in college, but don't exactly remember the date. i don't exactly remember the time. i sometimes may not even remember the exact place where it occurred. but i remember the interaction. and many people are focused today on what you're not able to remember about that night. i actually think you remember a lot. i'm going to phrase it a little differently. can you tell us what you don't forget about that night? >> the stairwell, 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.
the laughter, the uproarous laughter. t the attempt to escape and the final ability to do so. >> thank you, dr. ford. >> dr. ford, i want to correct the record, but it's not something i'm saying that you stated wrongly because you may not know the fact that when you said you didn't think it was possible for us to go to california as a committee or 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 we 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. is there any objection?
>> let us see the chart? >> the polygraph? you want to all see it? >> will you hold it just 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 just like to put in the record. i'll deal with the charts after that. could i put the polygraph tests in the record. >> mr. chairman, we were -- we had proposed having the polygraph examiner testify as you know. if that had happened, the full information he had supporting his examination would have been provided, you rejected that request, so what we did provide is the polygraph report which is what the members of the committee have. >> and on september 24, this was actually sent to your chief counsel. and i just want to share it with america so they have this report as well. >> we will accept without
investigati objection what you have requested to include and we also request the other materials that i have just stated. >> but mr. chairman, you wouldn't allow the polygraph examiner to testify, nor would you allow mark judge to testify. 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, so i would think you would be satisfied. >> i am satisfied. >> when was the polygraph administered? >> it was administered on august 7, 2018. and the date of the report is august 10, 2018. >> when was it provided to the committee? >> let's just see if we can't do this in a more orderly way. >> he was asking and i have it here and you have it as well. it's september 26. >> accepted. >> ms. mitchell for senator
cruz. >> thank you. >> dr. ford, we talked about the day and the night that you've described in the summer of 1982 and thank you for being willing to do that. i know it's difficult. i would like to shift gears and discuss the last several months. >> okay. >> in your statement, you said that on july 6, you had a, quote, 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 6? >> no, i did not. i did not know how to do that. >> okay. prior to july 6, had you spoken to any member of congress. and when i say congress, i mean the senate or the house of representatives or any
congressional staff members about your allegations. >> no. >> why did you contact "the washington post" on july 6? >> so i was panicking because i knew the timeline was short for the decision. and people were giving me advise. on the beach. people who don't know about the processes, but they were giving me advice. and many people told me, 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 anonymous tip. go to your congress person, and when i weighed those 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 eschew.
so i called her office and i also put in the anonymous tip to "the washington post," unfortunately, neither got back to me before the selection of the nominee. >> you testified that congresswoman eschew's office contacted you on september 9. >> they contacted me on the day that the nominee was announced. >> have you talked about anyone in her office before the date of july 9. >> i told the receptionist on the phone. >> on july 10, you texted "the washington post" again, which was really the third time, is that right? second date, third time. >> let's see. one moment. correct. >> and you texted, been advised to contact senators or "new york times." haven't heard back from
"washington post." who advised you to contact senators or the "new york times"? >> beach friends. coming up with ideas of how i could try to get to people. because people weren't responding to me very quickly. so very quickly they responded to that text, for what unknown reason. once i sent that enscricrypted they responded very quickly. >> did you contact the "new york times"? >> no. >> why not? >> i wasn't interested in pursuing the media route particularly, so i felt like one was enough, "the washington post." and i was nervous about doing that. my preference was to talk with my congressperson. >> "the washington post" 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 and off
the record. >> okay. who was that reporter? >> emma brown. >> the person who ultimately wrote the story on september 16? >> 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 10 and the july -- and july 30th, which was the date of your letter to senator feinstein? >> yes, i met with congresswoman eschew's staff and i they's july 18. the wednesday and then on 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 eschew and her
staff on july 18 and the 20th? >> i described the night of the incident. and we spent time speaking about that. and i asked her how to -- what my options were in terms of going forward and 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 principle. >> thank you. >> thank you, chairman grassley, i would like to ask for unanimous consent to submit for the record five articles, one entitled why do sexual assault memories stick. >> without objection so ordered. >> dr. ford, i want to thank you for coming to testify in front of us today. you came forward with very
serious and relevant information about a nominee for a lifetime position on our supreme court. you didn't have to and i know you have done it at great personal cost. this is a public service and i want you to know that i'm grateful to have the opportunity to hear from you directly today. i would like to just first follow up on that line of questioning ms. mitchell was following. because i think a lot of people don't realize that you chose to come forward with your concerns about judge kavanagh before he was nominated to the supreme court. do i understand correctly that when you first reached out to congresswoman eschew and to "the washington post" tip line, that was before he was nominated, is that correct? >> correct. >> and if i understood your testimony earlier, you were motivated by a sense of civic duty and frankly a hope that some other highly qualified nominee would be picked, not out of a motivation at a late stage to have an impact on the final
decision? >> correct. i thought it was very important to get the information directly to you, but i didn't know how to do it while there was still a short list of candidates. >> thank you, doctor. about two thirds of sexual assault survivors don't report their assaults. based on your experience, i would be interested in hearing from you about this, because you bore this alone. you bore this alone for a very long time. and it would be helpful for us to better understand the ways that that's impacted your whole life. >> well, it's impacted me at different stages of the development of my life. so the immediate impact was probably the worst, so the first four years, i think i described earlier a fairly disastrous first two years of undergraduate studies at university of north carolina where i was finally able to pull myself together and
then once coping with the immediate impacts, the short-term impacts, i experienced longer term impacts of anxiety and relationship challenges. >> thank you for sharing that. and yet you went on to get a phd from usc, is that correct? >> correct. >> as you predicted, there is a wide range of responses to your coming forward. some thousands of survivors have been motivated and inspired by your courage, others have been critical. and as i have reviewed the wide range of reactions, i have been troubled by the excuse offered by too many that this was a high school incident and boys will be boys. to me that's just far too low a standard for the conduct of boys and men in our country. if you would, i would appreciate your reaction to the excuse that boys will be boys. >> i can only speak for how it has impacted me greatly for the
last 36 years, even though i was 15 years old at the time and i think, you know, the younger you are when these things happen, it could possibly have worse impact than when your brain is fully developed and you have better coping skills that you have developed. >> experts have written about how it's common for sexual assault survivors to remember some facts about the experience very sharply and very clearly but not others. and that has to do with a survival mode that we go into when experiencing trauma. is that your experience and is that something you can help the lay person understand? >> yes, i was definitely experiencing the fight or flight mode, is that what you're referring to? >> yes. >> so i was definitely experiencing the surge of cortisol and norepinephrine for my ability to get out of the
situation. but also some other lucky events that occurred that allowed me to get out of the event. >> dr. ford, we are grateful that you came through it and that you shared your account with us and the american people. i think you have provided important information and i would like to thank you for meeting your civic duty. i wish we could have provided for you a more thorough hearing for you. i think asking the fbi to investigate this matter fully was not asking too much. i think asking to have the other individual involved in your assault, mark judge appear before us today was not asking too much. i'm grateful you came forward and i'm grateful for your courage that sets an important example. >> dr. ford we talked in july about you meeting with congresswoman eschew. did you talk in reality to any members of congress or congressional staff? >> i did not.
where i live, the congressman 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're going to object, mr. chairman, to any call for privileged conversation between counsel and dr. ford. >> could you validate the fact that the offer was made without her saying a word? >> is it possible for that question to be answered without violating any counsel relationships? >> can i say something? do you mind if i say something to you directly? >> yes. >> i just appreciate that offer, 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 happy to speak with you out there. but it 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 these allegations? >> no. i didn't think -- i didn't understand why i would need lawyers, actually. so i just didn't. >> 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, quote -- >> wait until she retrieves it. >> i'm just trying to look for it. >> so stop the clock, will you?
>> i found it. >> so you wanted to maintain confidentiality until we had the opportunity to speak, and you remained on vegas in the mid-atlantic until august 7, is that correct? >> the last line, is that what you're -- i'm now just catching up with you, sorry i'm a little slower. my mind is getting tired. i'm in the area if you wish to discuss. yes, i was in delaware until august 7, and from there i went to new hampshire and then back to california. >> did you talk to anybody about this letter before you sent it? >> i talked with anna eschew's office. >> okay and why did you talk to congresswomaness chew eschew ab letter? >> because they were willing to
forward it to dianne fienstein. >> did anyone help you write the letter? >> no. >> 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? >> and when was that? >> that was while i was still in delaware so before august 7. >> okay, and how many timings did you speak with senator feinstein? >> once. >> what did you talk about? >> she asked me some questions about the incident. and i answered those questions. >> and was that the extent of the conversation? >> yes, i answered the phone call. >> did you give senator feinstein or anyone else permission to release that
letter? >> not that i know of. >> between the letter date, july 30th and august the 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 7, so while you were still in delaware, did you speak with any other person about your allegations? >> i'm just trying to remember what dates that -- >> you're asking her about any lawyers that she may have spoken to? >> yes. >> yes, i interviewed lawyers, but i didn't speak to anybody personally about it. >> besides talking to lawyers who might represent you, did you
speak with anybody else about it at the time? >> i was staying at my parents at the time. >> did you talk to them about it? >> definitely not. >> did you talk to anyone else between july 30th and august 7. >> i can't remember, but i was interviewing lawyers during that period of time sitting in the car in the walmart parking lot in rehoboth, delaware. i was figuring out how to interview lawyers and how to pick one. >> you said earlier that you didn't see the need for lawyers. and now you're trying to hire them, what made you change your mind? >> it seemed like most of the individual individuals i had told, the total number was not very high, but those persons advised me at
this point to get advice about whether to push forward or to stay back. >> did they include senator eschew or senator feinstein? >> no. >> i want to push forward in acknowledging that we said we would come to california. senator blumenthal? >> thanks mr. chairman. i want to join in thanking you for being here today and just tell you i have found your testimony powerful and credible and i believe you. you're a teacher, correct? >> correct. >> 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 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 men who have survived sexual attack. and 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
your story. but also, you have been very honest about what you cannot remember. and someone composing a story can make it all come together in a seemless way. but someone who is honest, i speak from my experience as a prosecutor as well, is also 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 colleagues, senator lindsay graham in a book that he wrote in 2015 when he was describing
his own service and very distinguished naval service as a traveler. i'm not under oath. he said, quote, of his prosecutions of rape cases, i learned how much unexpected courage from a deep and hidden place it takes for a rape 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 rape victim or sexually abused child to testify against their assailant. if we agree on nothing else today, i hope on a bipartisan basis, we can agree on how much
courage it has taken for you to come forward and i think you have earned america's gratitude. >> thank you. >> now there's 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 supermarket. that's a fact that could be uncovered by an fbi investigation that would help further elucidate your account. would you like mark judge date of birth -- mark judge to be interviewed in connection with the background investigation and the serious credible allegations
that you have made? >> that would be my preference. i'm not sure it's really 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 that i could give a more specific date of the assault. >> well, 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 in my view is tantamount to a cover- cover-up. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator flake, ms. mitchell for senator flake. >> and we have heard this morning several times that you did take a polygraph and that was on august the 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 to do it.
>> were you advised to do that? >> again, you're seeming to call for communications between counsel and client. and 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 advise of the counsel, i was happy to under go the polygraph test, although i found it extremely stressful. much longer than i anticipated.
i told my whole life story, i felt like. i endured it. 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 hanophen to serve as the polygrapher. did anybody advise you on that choice? >> yes, i believe his name was jerry 67. >> jerry hanophen? >> yes. >> did anyone advise you on that choice? >> i don't understand -- yeah, 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 baltimo
baltimore-washington airport, is that right? >> correct. >> why was that location chose enfor that? >> i had left my grandmother's funeral earlier in the day and i had to catch a plane to manchester, new hampshire, so he came there which i appreciated. >> 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. >> and 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,
but 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. >> have you ever given tips or advise to somebody who was looking to take a polygraph test? >> never. >> did you pay for the polygraph yourself? >> i don't think so. >> okay. do you know who did pay for the polygraph? >> not yet, no. >> did -- you have the handwritten statement that you 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
earlier, did you flknow that th committee has requested, not only the charts from the polygraph test, or any audio or video recording of the polygraph test? >> no. >> were you audio or video recorded during that test? >> i remember a machine 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 don't know. i know he took laborious detail into explaining what he was doing, i was just kind of focused on my fear and i wasn't listening to every detail of whether it was audio or video recorded. >> well, you were in a hotel room, correct?
>> a regular hotel room with a bed and a bathroom? >> no it was in a conference room. i was sitting in a chair and he was behind me. >> did you notice any cameras in the room? >> i had a computer set up so i guess i noticed somehow that he was taping and recording me. >> so you assume you were being video and audio recorded. >> correct. >> but you don't know for sure? >> we're going to recess now for a half hour for lunch. thank you, dr. ford.
live pictures inside the senate judiciary committee, and one of the members, chris coons speaking to reporters now. >> three different people who i know have reached out from delaware who shared with me their stories of surviving sexual assault. a high school classmate, someone else who's known to me from home and someone i have known a long time. and i have heard from other senators this is also happening to their offices and to them personally. so first, it is striking how many survivors of sexual assault are watching and are choosing this moment to come forward with their accounts. and i think that speaks to what a public service is being done here by having a measured and a respectful hearing of dr. ford's allegations. >> these people have called you today? >> literally r