powerful men. i know that i stand with millions and millions of women and men across the country were watching the united states senate. now and they are not going to give up either. thank you, mr. president. >> these are the remarks i would have given this morning after the -- i walked out in protest. i would have given. i am in disbelief that we are here today voting on brett kavanaugh. outrageous does not to begin to describe. yesterday we heard from doctor christine who spoke with genuine and raw emotional power about being sexually assaulted by brett kavanaugh. even though years ago, her

memories are clear are vivid. she was one 100% credible and i believe her. by contrast, brett kavanaugh came to this committee andee refused to give up straight answers. he was not call for an f it he clearly stated as the other people who have been gathering. the testimony, that is not true. it's alleged accomplish claimed he didn't remember. a cry from rebutting. her statement.. he claimed he didn't remember. refused to testify and then went patrick say they simply don't

remember.an hardly a rebuttal. yesterday, i don't expect them to remember this evening. it was a very unremarkable party. it was not one of their more notorious parties because nothing remarkable to them happened. in fact, even though she doesn't remember, kaiser says she believes doctor ford's account. a pattern with the judge kavanaugh, has been a calculated

political kit, fueled with pent-up anger about president trump and the 2016 election. unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the clintons and millions of dollars from outside left wing opposition groups. with that political screed, brett kavanaugh showed us who he really is. a partisan political, with an agenda. the very worried that kept him from confirmation to the circuits for three years. no words reinforce that i and many of us that he cannot be a fair and impartial judge. setting aside the clinicalti

views, the potential supreme court justice, is whether doctor ford was credible when she said that she is one 100% sure that brett kavanaugh is the person who sexually assaulted her. on the issue, brett kavanaugh admitted even without watching her testimony that doctor ford did not play a part in was not part the plot. so what we are left with is his own recognition that doctor ford has no political motive and no reason to lie. i challenge anyone who watched her testimony to claim that she did not tell us the truth. doctor ford wasn't the only woman to come forward against the nominee. two other women have provided credible accounts. but whether it is one woman or three milk women, they are letting nothing stop them.

even before the committee had a chance to hear from doctor ford, they had already scheduled today. republican colleagues are sending a message loud and clear to show us survivors should not come forward. because we are not going to listen to you. they will not be believed. their lives will be upended in the process. that's what happened to doctor ford. there was never a serious effort to get to the truth. to the men and boys in america, if you are in a position of power and influence, there were the be no consequences, it won't even prevent you from becoming a supreme court justice. yesterday accusations grew from the other side of the aisle about efforts to make up

accusations and underline judge kavanaugh's nomination. but democrats didn't need to manufacture additional reasons tto oppose his confirmation. as i have maintained before, his record them and straits a pattern of misstating the facts. he wasn't candid yesterday, he wasn't candid in his testimony to the committee when he testified in 2004 and two to thousand six. or when he testified in his confirmation hearing for this nomination in 2018. i found his lacking. for example, as we have talked about in the past, judge kavanaugh was not honest with the committee in 2004 and 2006 that he worked on in the e-mails that the white house shows that he was not honest about his

awareness. i am familiar with, he demonstrated what could only be called a deliberate miss statement of the facts. a deliberate miss statements of the fact that he represented to the united states supreme court in this case. he had to have known that what he wrote about the culture of native hawaiian was not true. sit is hearing a few weeks ago, he misstated the holding of rice and refused to correct his statement when i gave him a chance to clarify. i would say, i know what the supreme court decision is on. he totally missed stated the supreme court. they are stepping up and taking

notice. the council for native hawaiianh advancements and the alaska federation ofde native issues statement that they strongly urge to t object. they and other g groups have coe forward to explain how judge kavanaugh's views of the rights of indigenous people are deeply fraud. these are the kinds of attitudes that he expresses. i ask the for consent for the following four statements that oppose his nomination criticiz criticizes. they are from the hawaiian ivvestments, the the office of hawaiian affairs and the alaska federation of natives.ce it is deeply troubling toup hava supreme court nominee for

lifetime position who isn't candid with us about the facts or straight with us about the he did it again and that 2017 case he wrote a descent in which he misapplied the law and she did the case as if they were about consent. it was not. the case about whether a 17-year-old undocumented woman could be released from immigration custody to have an abortion did not involve the question of parental consent. but he's out there at his nomination hearing when he asked him about it and he said that was the case involving parental consent. total miss statement of the issue and the case. so in that case, this young woman has already been received a proper judicial bypass from a texas judge that a about her to make her own decisions. so that was -- had nothing to do

with requiring rental consent. that wasn't good enough for judge kavanaugh.e all views about legal issues not even president in the case. this is just one example. outcome driven approach to important cases before him. as a hearing, i also asked him about the pattern that was revealed. several of those cases, his own colleague called him out for misrepresented the fact and the law. the majority said that just kavanaugh applied the law as he wishes it to be. as he wishes it were, not as it currently is. in 2008, the majority wrote the dissent, meaning judge kavanaugh creates his own rule. they said judge kavanaugh

abandoned thet text of the applicable laws altogether. it's pretty telling when your own colleagues on the court feel so strongly about your descent that they call him out on it. when this nomination first came to the senate, i was skeptical. like the nominees descending to the lower federal court, i expect we will see a nominee hand-picked by the federal society and heritage society caring out the right wing supported by the president. it turned out to be much worse than i imagined. not only was a nominee someone who fit that description and became clear that he was someone who lacked candid, credibility and character.

at the hearing from doctor ford and brett kavanaugh and yesterday, a well respected judge,re endorsed judge kavanau. they said, while we previously endorsed the nomination of judge kavanaugh on the basis of hisat legal credential, and his representations, it is now clear that the nomination should be withdrawn. as they proceed with nominations, they will be prioritizing ames over a woman's report of assault. in addition, robert, president of american bar association, issued a letter urging that the

committee of the senate to not vote on judge kavanaugh's nomination until there is an embed fbi investigation on her assault claim. what this would not only have a lasting impact on the senate's reputation but it will also negatively affect for the american people to have inup the supreme court. i agree that kavanaugh does not have credibility, character or as we saw yesterday, a temperament. to be on the supreme court. under this kind of cloud where we can support. i cannot support this nomination. i would like to end with what i would have given.

i would like to say that my colleague, senator jeff has said that he would not be able to vote on the confirmation of judge kavanaugh without an fbi investigation. i support that. i have no idea if the republican leadership is going to allow a timeout for that kind of investigation to occur, and investigation that i and others, democratic members have been calling for for what seems like months. and of course, i would want an fbi investigation to be thorough. i do not want some kind of a peripheral investigation to give wavering. i would want an investigation by the. fbi to be thorough, to be

real, to provide us with the kind of information that we need determination and to the credibility, character of judge kavanaugh. i give the floor. >> president, the judiciary committeete had an extraordinary meeting this morning. each of us spoke at some length about our reservation to our support. or the nomination of job kavanaugh. at the end of that meeting and we were about to take oath, senator jeff, our colleague announced the decision that he would request