nominee. so it is just, it is a preliminary hurdle. every republican agreed to it as part of this deal. and the democrats were fine with going along with it, because they do not want to come on saturday and work either. host: thank you so much. we will be watching for your tweets, even on the weekend, at alexander bolton, and also on the hill.com. thank you. alex: thank you for having me.

>> i want to respond to comments made about leading the investigation. it has been said this committee has changed its procedure, this is the first time it has conducted its business in this way. the fbi does its investigation and delivers it on to the white house which passes it on to the committee.

that is the report this committee receives from the fbi. it is said president bush reopened the fbi investigation when anita hill -- if i am wrong, my understanding is when you as a chairman found out about the information, that information also went to the fbi. perhaps it was the ranking member who gave the letter to the fbi. the fbi was given that information, is that correct? >> that is correct. it is sent to the white house in the usual way they do, that they consider it closed. >> first of all, the full letter unredacted was given to the fbi, does,e fbi did what it and i do not know exactly what they did the anita hill case, but what it normally does which is to reopen it, evaluate the letter, and then again i

understand the fbi closed it and sent the information to the white house as they did with the previous report before this allegation came up. is that correct? the only thing i can verify is the fbi did with they would they then -- and i do not know what that was, they probably would keep their own internal stuff to themselves, but they sent a cover letter to the white house saying the issue is closed. >> the fbi did look at this in its background check activities, then resent and updated -- an updated information to the white house, which they forwarded to us. in the process followed in the committee was followed again. i believe immediately the chairman opened up an

investigation by this committee. that also is customary practice and has been stated yesterday, but i will restate again, our committee investigative staff which is extensive and well trained has legal authorities similar to the type that fbi agents do, such that when they induct their investigations, the people who are interviewed, and those who are reached out to buy the committee are under penalty of a felony that can result in five years imprisonment if they do not respond honestly and correctly to the questions. everyone of the witnesses identified has been reached out to. some comments have been, they did not actually submit deposition, or some kind of court process, or something like that.

the argument that the policy was not followed as it was in the past, that is critical. yesterday, we received hours and hours of testimony from two witnesses, and both of them frankly made very strong cases. this committee is under the need to evaluate the testimony given, and determine how it will judge or rule on the obligation this committee has to give advice and consent.

in the content, i came away believing that there had in fact been a sexual assault in dr. 's past. , where,ot clear when and all of the circumstances, but there is no doubt in my mind that she truthfully testified, that she had had a sexual assault, had been assaulted sexually in her past. carefullytened very to judge kavanaugh as he testified, and i felt the testimony he gave was also honest. he gave, i thought, very strong testimony that he was not there. and so, this committee has to task of whaticult burden of proof applies, what

standard does it apply in exercising the advice and consent that it gives, and that is a difficult thing that each one of us individually needs to face and deal with. feel that the evidence that judge kavanaugh was there that night. i believe his testimony i believe dr. ford's testimony about the sexual assault. because of that i will vote yesterday to move the nomination forward to the floor. >> mr. chairman, this has been obviously my first process, my merst time through a supre court nomination process. i fought for years to be on this

committee, it was the one i wanted to be on in 2013, i made you aware of that as the braking member. it has been an incredible experience, a lifetime trip to be part of this committee. i have a lot of respect for you. me forhave criticized the affection i have had for you. andhave been a partner, there is something about the senior members of this committee, you all, senator hatch, yourself senator grassley, senator leahy, senator feinstein, you have been anchors in this institution to a time where the comity was deeper and greater, and have resisted in ,any ways that i find admirable the drift toward tribalism in our country in this institution. when a supreme court vacancy

happens, i was one of those individuals that did not wait long before i announced my intentions to vote against judge kavanaugh. sir, i did it for sincerely and deeply held release, i did it person i felt this was a that had made it clear that the by thelist prepared federalist society and heritage foundation that this was a guy who spoke directly toward a view of presidential power, presidential immunities, that in this perilous time where the president is subject of a criminal investigation, that he was going to protect that president, and said as much. to make sure the president is above the law and accountability. and sir, i have learned a lot. i am one of the guys on the side of the aisle, when my colleagues speak, i listen, i try to give

them my full attention, and i do not always agree, but i have learned a lot from my colleagues. in my friendships on the other side of the aisle, my sincere friendships, i have texted back .nd forth, i respect them and i fought hard during this process. i have given it everything i have got, i learned that going back to being a football player, that between the whistles you fight as hard as you can for what you believe. if you want to call that partisanship, fine. i have been exuberant in my beliefs, and i have learned a lot through this process. some of my comments have been referenced numerous times, and i that i have not been as

precise, and allowed my comments to be mischaracterized. i do not blame the people who mischaracterized my comments, i take responsibility and learn to be more precise. i talked to the issues and my values as much as i can. i travel around this country calling for comity. ofking the dignity republicans and democrats, and recognize as much as i can. i say patriotism is love of country, and you cannot love your country unless you love all the men and women. the goodness and decency of republicans and democrats in this country is self-evident, and we demonize each other in exemplar ofbe an trying to get our dialogue to rise to something different, to be a country that sees we need each other, there is no democrat or republican way to success, there is only an american way. sir, you know, and i hope, i

, thesaid to you personally way in which i fight, i mean you no insult, but i said before and i say now, dr. ford'd charges came up, i say sincerely, the way i thought this process was was a sham. we were evaluating someone for the highest court in the land, while seeing such a small part of his relevant work product. i did not understand how so much of his writing, approximately 90% of his relative work product was not seen by this committee, and controlled by a process that was so broken and partisan. then i violated the rules you put forward in this committee, willfully and knowingly, and accepting the consequences of that. and i did so because the documents he withheld from the public, i felt the public had the right to know. they were not classified.

we disagreed with that, and i lock horns with people across the aisle, and even after all that i was grateful for the comity. the person i knocked horns with the most was told i am talk to hate the sin and love the sinner. i love being on this committee, i love it. this is where i wanted to be. i wanted to be on a committee that dealt with issues of justice in this country, because i feel when we swear and note to liberty and justice for all, i do not think we are there yet is a country. and i have to say now, as i am sitting here, that i deeply somehowhis idea that when dr. ford came forward, that this dealt with partisanship. debate in thise

committee, and in this country from raw partisanship to something much deeper. i have such respect for the ranking members, and i was in the room when we discussed literally hours after i was made aware the letter existed about what her motivations were. it was a private room, and forgive me for speaking out of turn, if the ranking member believes i am, but her entire sense of decency and honor had nothing to do with politics. politics was not mentioned. her entire concerns were about the dignity and humanity and respect for dr. ford. the conversation we had was about the best way to handle the information presented to all of us. been in numerous caucus meetings where politics has not been discussed.

is some ofen done the most eloquent speeches i have heard in our caucus meetings from my colleagues about issues of sexual assault. i heard colleagues read letters that had been written not like a democrat or republican, but i americans concerned about this issue. this is not a partisan moment for our country. back in the early 1990's i was a student during the anita hill-clarence thomas hearings. and i think there are people on both sides of the aisle that that was dealt with wrong, the process did not merit the dignity and decency of the folks involved, or of the issue of sexual harassment. yet that involve multiple hearings, that involve multiple witnesses, that involved an fbi investigation, and yet we still criticize that process. now, we are here today and we

have fallen even far short of what i believed was an inadequate process. sir, this is not about partisanship. a lot of folks are trying to , whether she was flying to california or not, whether the letter was authorized or released or not, what the processor or not, that seems to be stripping away the of dr. of ms. forde, ford to come before this committee willingly, even under circumstances that she set herself were not her wishes. she asked for an fbi investigation, she asked for more witnesses. she was not given what she asked for and she still came here and set before this committee. what did she say, sir? when someone has courage to speak to one of the most powerful bodies in the land,

what did she say? she shared a raw and visceral profoundly a incredible testimony with this committee and the world, and she was believable. i believe her. she told us of her memory, using words like seared into her memory, speaking to bring -- she spokea way of uproarious laughter of brett kavanaugh and mark judge, being , hand over the mouth, fearing for her life, and terrified of being raped or exit only killed. committee by this what level of certainty, this was not, i do not know, she said i am 100% certain it is judge kavanaugh.

experience sexual violence, it was seared into her memory, she said 100%. that is credible because she knew him, she interacted with him socially before he attacked her. she did not need to pick him up out of the line of teenagers. testimony incredible does not stand on its own, it is bolstered by significant corroboration. , 2013, 2014, 2016 she spoke of it, she told it to five people long before judge kavanaugh was nominated to the supreme court. she told multiple people she had been sexually assaulted as a teenager. in some instances she identified him specifically by name. describedshe her attacker as a federal judge.

each of these individuals provided sworn statements. we could have called those individuals to testify that this was not what i heard, a coordinated attack, something to do with the clintons and all the other allegations. this was something that in the early years had talked about brett kavanaugh assaulting her. it is not some politically attack, this is consistent with her statements that have been operating, consistent with what we know about other people who have undergone sexual attacks. be on the corroboration of outside witnesses, dr. ford's account is corroborated by independent fax, fax them a not opinions corroborated by independent facts, facts, not opinions. it is corroborated in judge kavanaugh's on calendar, as we have seen. judge kavanaugh documented a

gathering that included mark judge, and a reference to alcohol. dr. ford testified that shortly after the assault around six to eight weeks later, in her estimation, she ran into mark judge at a local grocery store, and he seemed uncomfortable to see her. in his book, "wasted", mark judge described working at a local grocery store in 1982. it is all consistent. circumstances surrounding her coming forward to this committee also support her. she made contact with elected representatives before judge kavanaugh was even nominated. this is not some political hit job. before he was even nominated, she came forward with this testimony. she submitted to a lengthy, intrusive emotional polygraph record.

we did not call for polygraph records so we can question them. the report concluded she was truthful. now, part of the committee's record. an reported they called for fbi investigation into her claims, fully understanding that a false statement could subject her to criminal penalties. we all know what it means when you get a call from a committee staffer versus when you get a call from the fbi. lying to them is a felony. that is a powerful difference investigationtee and an fbi agent interviewing people, chasing after facts, pulling on the loose thread in judge kavanaugh's record. she came forward publicly, despite knowing she would face harsh public scrutiny, rents,

relentless invasions of privacy, that her life would be forever altered. the effectrd about on judge kavanaugh that is real and not exaggerated, but the effect on her as well, and what she had to submit to buy coming forward and making that courageous testimony. judge kavanaugh stands in stark contrast to dr. ford's testimony. judge kavanaugh has everything to lose if these allegations are investigated and proven true, everything to lose. that is why i think he does not want a full investigation. he has given numerous opportunities time and time again to call for an fbi investigation, an independent investigation to clear his name, he has refused to do so. if i was in the balance and accused of things that i knew were lies, i would be demanding every bit of evidentiary investigation possible, not just

the fbi, i would be calling for independent investigators, i would be calling on every loose thread. he has refused to call this committee to hear testimony from witnesses that can corroborate doctor's.or the with claims regarding his reading habits in college and beyond have uncontradicted by so many people. en totatements have prov not be true. his freshman college roommate said he was frequently incoherently drunk. he became aggressive and drunk.erent when tru his friend who he referred to numerous times, says it is not credible for him to say he has no memory lapses when he drank

to excess. brooks whon, lynn said she did not want to come forward, another friend from yale, she is a republican, she did not want to come forward, but last night after hearing his testimony, she was so offended by his lies, this is id,t his friend from yale sa there is no doubt in my mind he was a big party year, often drink to excess, and there have to be a number of nights he does not remember. i was a witness the night he was in his fraternity and someone drunk.g he was ridiculous and saying dumb things. i can say there is no way he remember that night. this is a registered republican who did not want to become forward until he heard the lies of judge kavanaugh.

brooks said there were multiple emails and texts circling among her classmates about how kavanaugh was lying to the senate judiciary committee in his testimony. that was from a republican who did not want to come forward until she witnessed those lines. judge kavanaugh mischaracterizes three other people dr. ford -- he told us as his exonerating evidence, kept mentioning three names over and over again. he said four people who knew dr. ford, that dr. ford said were present where she was sexually assaulted, said it did not happen. that is untrue. mark judge said, i have no memory of this. this is not, this did not happen. leland kaiser said through an attorney no recollection of

being at a party where kavanaugh was present. that was not, it did not happen. leland kaiser has said she believes dr. ford. deniedy person who has the events have taken place and said it did not happen is judge kavanaugh. so now, this is the real point, sir -- i would like to finish, sir. may i finish? want to asky: ok, i you a question, you have gone 17 minutes. i have three other people who want to speak. sen. booker: i'm going to close my comments soon, i would like to finish. i will let whoever speak speak. you are the chairman. sen. grassley: go ahead, sir. booker: this nation now is watching, not in a partisan way.

we saw one republican who knows kavanaugh is so offended, these are americans watching to see what this body will do. this is not about politics or partisanship. i will forever remember what dr. ford said when she came before us, she said she was performing her civic duty, she was not trying to destroy a man. she was a courageous hero look woman telling the truth about sexual harassment. this was what was done to me, she said. many of my colleagues found dr. ford credible, but to confirm judge kavanaugh, you have to say not only that you do not believe you wereford, but that so certain this did not happen that you are willing to force a vote now without any further investigation. sheest it means you think was confused, that she does not know what happened to her. even though yesterday she told us she remembers brett kavanaugh

covering her mouth, seared into her memory, expressing fear that he might accident we kill her. 2012,ld us details from 2013, 2016, 2017, with therapist, and to her husband. this is where we are, this is not a partisan moment. we do not have to have this vote today. we can correct mistakes from the past in this nation. there are millions of people, men and women, survivors of sexual assault watching this body of powerful people, and what will happen. this toxic culture, this pernicious patriarchy in this country has to stop. it is real in this country, and people are suffering, and they are watching this body right now. children abused watching what religiouseople and

institutions sweep it aside and deny attack. people in corporations or news media outlets who were abused and harassed for years, and they, their testimony and truth were swept aside, belittled, vilified, they were followed by investigators. millions are watching this body, and how we act. will we brush aside a credible witness's testimony, we belittle testimony, will we listen? will we believe? in the united states of america right now, there are dark corners of our culture. the center for disease control reports one out of every three american women, one out of three experiencemen will some sort of sexual violence.

men, 60% of them go unreported. there are those watching this group of powerful people, how will we deal with a privileged man? a seat on the supreme court is not an entitlement just because he went to yale law school or was captain of the basket will team, this, the supreme court is not an entitlement. mr. chairman, this is not a court of law, we are not saying he is guilty of what he said. the question is, do we know delay this, or are we going to rush someone onto the supreme court with a cloud over him? believe we will say to women across this country, to mend across this country, and i am going to finish -- sen. grassley: i think that is a good place to stop.

booker: i will stop with this, out of respect to you, i cannot sit here, as we look back at a dark moment in the same way we look back at the neede anita hill hearing. we should not rush aside her comments or belittle her testimony. we should listen to her and listen to women and thoroughly investigate this before moving forward to any other thing. to diminish the truth, to diminish the issue of sexual harassment, and to again relegate ourselves to what i believe is a dark element of our society area with that, i will leave. sen. grassley: senator kennedy.

sen. kennedy: in my judgment there are no winners in this. all i saw were two people in pain. dr. ford and judge kavanaugh perspective.red , happened 40ened years ago, and that is just the fact. i do not know what happened to dr. ford. evernot know if we will know what happened to dr. ford.

i do believe something very, very bad happened to dr. ford. and i am very sorry. judgedo not believe that brett kavanaugh was involved. and that is why i will support his nomination. something thatut i am a little more certain of. and i will be brief, mr. chairman. this has been a grotesque

carnival, and intergalactic freak show. as far as i am concerned, congress has hit rock bottom, and started to dig. this character assassination has damaged dr. ford, judge kavanaugh, and their families directly. it could have been avoided. talked abouttein this earlier, and she is right.

how we treat women in america does matter. country for creepy men, or or young middle-aged men, but this is no country at all in my opinion, at least not the country i want to process.without due both the accuser and the accused is entitled to respect and yes, due process. leaked dr.on who , to the person who

,reached dr. ford's anonymity and to the person who did not tell her she could have avoided this by testifying privately in her home in california. .ou know who you are you should bow your head in shame, in my opinion, and you should hide your head in a bag every day for the rest of your natural life. and you also ought to read something. i do not know if you believe in , butor you read the bible there is wisdom in a passage,

whether you read the bible or believing god or not. 16:26refer you to matthew profited, is a person for what is a person profited if and hes the whole world loses his soul. chairman. mr. you yielded your time. part of my time to senator booker, do i have any left? sen. grassley: you may proceed. sen. kennedy: i yield my time to

him. >> i appreciate that graciousness, and i hope it is a sign that we will rebuild across the aisle. yesterday, there were words spoken, and we know in families ,hat words are spoken in anger thatometimes in the moment we later walked back. those words yesterday from members across the aisle to the side wereo this extraordinary, and i know they would save some of our words to them were on the same level. we have worked together, traveled together, we have a responsibility together to do

the business of the united states senate, and mr. chairman, i know you may not agree with me, but in the spirit of working together, a delay in this vote would be appropriate. i am here to make a last appeal that we avoid a rush to judgment . we have great respect for your position. the session yesterday was a job interview. a job interview for a position unlike any other. i have extreme reverence for the supreme court. i have spent most of my career , and my belief is this decision on how to vote,

and i will vote no, is among the most important i will make as a united states senator. united states of america deserves not just a good nominee , but the best person for the job. the person we saw come forward yesterday was filled with such anger and animus, such that i cannot accept that he would be in impartial and objective justice on the united states supreme court. to describe members of this committee as a left-wing conspiracy, to threaten, literally to threaten united states senators, i simply cannot accept. interviewing, judge

kavanaugh for a position, a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. he cannot be removed except he willimpeachment, and be there for decades to come. i made no secret of my opposition to him based on his out of the mainstream views and judicial philosophy. goal to chip away if not overturn roe v. wade, the guaranteed to allow women to decide when and whether they become pregnant and have children, the decision by millions of americans to mary the person they love, consumer rights, worker rights, the powers of the president which i think would be an imperial presidency if he becomes a justice on the supreme court. yesterday, my opposition solidified because of

temperament and fitness, which i believe he lacks. screed that hee , his viewsd gave us me,l are disqualifying for but his character and fitness ought to be a reason for everyone to vote no. yesterday of an entirely different character and temperament, a woman who told us in steady and helpful terms, a story that was deeply painful for her, and she has endured threats and public assassination, character assassination, public shaming,

that no one should have to suffer. my heart goes out to her as well as to judge kavanaugh's family. his comments have no place in our public discourse. she has every reason to remain silent, and no incentive personally to come forward except to do a public service for the nation, as she stated. and her story was powerful, compelling, personal. i believe her. i have to disbelieve and angry and defiant man whose story simply does not hold up. he claimed the fbi had already investigated him because they did a background check six times. the fbi never investigated dr.

ford's allegations. investigatedes deborah ramirez or julie swetnik. those remain to be done. the aba issued a statement supporting an fbi investigation into judge kavanaugh. according to one of our colleagues, the ada has a gold standard rating -- aba has a gold standard rating. the committee a person who was innocent would want the fbi to investigate their claims and clear their name. judge kavanaugh refused to make that request. dr. blasey ford did so.

the question is, what is he hiding western mark what is the administration concealing? thoseve we not received millions of pages of documents that remain hidden? kavanaugh not taken a polygraph? he says they are not reliable. and that the polygraph dr. ford subjected herself to was meaningless. she passed it. judge on the d.c. circuit, judge kavanaugh ruled that they are in fact meaningful. he wrote, quote, law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses and terminal defendants. refusing to take a polygraph, judge kavanaugh has failed that test. judge kavanaugh claims all four witnesses dr. ford identified at the party, has said the sexual

assault did not happen. only one person has said the sexual assault did not happen, brett kavanaugh. the other three partygoers dr. ford identified say they do not remember the incident. that is a big difference. do not recall is different than it did not happen. , dr. ford named, has publicly stated that she ford.es dr. blasey judge kavanaugh tried to give himself an outline and make it sound like he did not train on a weeknight. his own calendar which he provided as evidence contradicts that statement. hearing, judge kavanaugh admitted one of the

entries on his calendar from a thursday signified he went to a friend's house to drink. he said repeatedly he had never in his life drank so much that he could not remember. numerous people who spent considerable time with him during the hearing in high school, during his high school, college years confirm that he frequently drank to excess, and sometimes became belligerent. finally, judge kavanaugh claims that he has always treated women with dignity and respect, his words. he and his high school friend ined one of my constituents the yearbook pages saying they were her alumnus. reducing her to a sexual conquest. that is no way to treat women

with dignity and respect, in attested to the pain that it has caused her. believe that us these brave, courageous sexual assault survivors have come vastrd as part of a conspiracy, how insulting to them. -- to they are ponds work say they are pawns or puppets. they are brave, courageous, independent women who have stepped forward. i want to say in conclusion to for you, iamerica hope this will be a teaching moment.

i want to enter into the record the story of a number of whose pain, of mine sadness, shame, self-doubt among guilt, fear are powerfully attested to in the statements. they are the heroes here. --i want to say to her son, you should be proud of your mother. you should be proud. -- is a profile encourage profile in courage, and her name will be in the history books.

she will be remembered as some who stepped forward to speak i am proud to say i ford, and iblasey hope her sons and husband are as proud of her as they should be. pose the, i will nominee, and i will step out. sen. grassley: we will stand at ease until the fall of the gavel.

[chatter]

him him him him him

him

>> for the members that just came in, we are at ease until the fall of the gavel. everyone but senators sass and

-- have spoken. we continue to stand at ease. >> mr. chairman, given what is happening in the anteroom, if more team -- time is needed, a few more minutes, it would be easy to push it back. we made a decision to vote at 1:30 p.m., if there is some reason to change it, we can change it. i am not even going to get into discussion about that right now. >> fair enough.

senator grassley: i recess the meeting until the fall of the gavel. we are going to take action over the motion before us. we have to make sure that we have a quorum. [counting quietly]

senator grassley: as a point of personal privilege i will call on senator flake to speak. normally, we would start the vote right now, but as a point of personal privilege i will call on senator flake. senator flake: thank you. i have been talking with people on the other side, we have had conversations ongoing for a while with regard to making sure that we do due diligence here.

i think it would be proper to delay the floor vote for up to but not more than one week, in order to let the fbi continue to do an investigation, limited in time and a scope to the current allegations that are there. and to no more than one week. i will vote to advance the bill to the floor with that understanding. and i have spoken to other members who are on my side of the aisle that support this as well, but that is my position. i think that we ought to do what we can to make sure that we do all due diligence with the nomination this important. and i want to say that this committee has acted properly, and the chairman has bent over backwards to do investigations from this committee and to delay

this vote in this committee for a week, so that judge -- so that miss ford, dr. ford could be heard. and she was yesterday. so that is without agreement, i will vote to advance it to the floor. wait one second. can diane speak? >> can we have a description? senator grassley: we are voting on the motion to report the nomination to the floor. call the roll. >> that is not my understanding of what mr. chairman -- let the senator explain. senator flake: that is my understanding. if democrats is good speak to it, chris or you, as we spoke

about before, the democrats would endorse a one-week fbi investigation, limited in time and the scope. senator grassley: since you are the deciding vote, we will vote and if there is discussion we will go do that after the vote. call the roll. [roll call] >> on the nominee, no. >> no. >> no. >> on the nominee, no. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> aye. senator grassley: the nominee will be reported -- >> may i be recognized? senator grassley: yes.

>> i want to thank senator flake and thank you for giving us the time today to have a conversation. a number of my colleagues have asked for a one-week delay in order that there might be an fbi investigation on what allegations are currently before this committee. i respect senator flake's view that in his opinion it was best to respect your having given dr. ford the time to be heard yesterday and advance the nominee to the floor, but it is my hope we can work together on a bipartisan basis to pursue an fbi investigation within the next week, not for the purpose of delay, but for the purpose of investigating further either the allegations made by dr. ford or others with a goal towards demonstrating a bipartisan commitment to diligently investigating these allegations. thank you. senator grassley: senator feinstein? senator feinstein: i would

support that motion. i think we need this investigation. i sort of misunderstood, senator flake what you are doing, i thought it included a one-week investigation, so i would like to support the motion. for that investigation. >> mr. chairman. senator grassley: we will take turns. senator? >> i love this committee but we are not the majority leader. senator flake has made clear what it would take him to be comfortable on a final passage vote. it doesn't matter what we say here, it will be up to senator schumer and mcconnell. >> it is completely up to them. >> mr. chairman. >> he has made himself a very clear. senator grassley: senator leahy. senator leahy: i want to make sure, because this is somewhat unprecedented, but i do agree with the senator from arizona that we should have the investigation.

so my understanding is that during the week that that is taking place, there will be no action on the floor of the united states senate on this nomination, is that correct? senator grassley: i cannot say -- >> let me say again, i cannot make that choice for the leadership, i can only say i would be comfortable moving forward on the floor, i will only be comfortable moving on the floor until the fbi has done more investigation than they have already. it may not take them a week. i understand some of the witnesses may not want to discuss things further, but i think we owe them due diligence. >> mr. chairman. senator grassley: just a minute. all i is said to senator flake is i would advocate for the position he took, but i do not control that. senator? yes, senator?

>> there are other senators as well who may be interested in this negotiation on the republican side. and there is not a set agreement. we already said we were voting, no. it is senator flake saying for the good of the senate and for the court, for the american people, they deserve to have the facts followed up on. i appreciate his willingness to do that and that is what this is about. it is simply about -- by the way, if senator mcconnell wants to go forward in light of that, and we have several senators who have said -- who have not said who they -- how they are voting, this does not need an agreement, it is one senator standing up. >> mr. chairman, i want to express my appreciation to senator flake for allowing the process to move forward.

there is difference of opinion on what exactly the fbi investigation would consist of. some of us think that it has been concluded and supplemented by this committee's investigation, others disagree, but i respect the fact that not only senator flake advocated to give dr. ford a chance to appear before the committee, which was the right thing to do, but also that he has allowed this process to move forward subject to further discussions about what the fbi may or may not be able to come up with. but certainly he maintains his right to cast his vote as he sees fit, and maintain significant leverage that way, but i appreciate his support for a full and fair hearing for dr. ford and judge kavanaugh, as well as his willingness to allow this to go forward subject to his request. >> mr. chairman? senator grassley: i think i will

call on senator feinstein. then -- couldi threw the chair ask a question of senator flake -- does your amendment include continuing the investigation during this period of time? >> if i could respond, there is no amendment. i am stating, and the discussion we had between all of us, is i would hope, and i think we had agreement before, that the democrats who have been, i think justifiably uncomfortable moving ahead, could publicly, in an effort to bring this country together, say that we would feel better -- i am not expecting them to vote yes, but not to complain that an fbi investigation has not occurred. and that is what i am trying to do. this country is being ripped apart. and we have to make sure that we do due diligence. i think the committee has done a good job, but i do think we can

have a short pause and make sure that the fbi can investigate. my understanding is some of us would have to -- i am prepared to do it -- make a request to ask of the fbi to do that investigation. it would be short and limited in scope to the current allegations that have been made. but i would just encourage the democrats who we talked to to endorse that kind of thing, then we can move on. >> mr. chairman? senator grassley: because of the two hour rule we are adjourned. >> what? senator grassley: the two hour rule. >> did we come in at noon? senator grassley: we did. the two hour rule. we had to get this all done by 2:00 p.m.

>> is it done or did you cut off the vote? senator grassley: we did not have a motion. this is all a gentleman's and women's agreement. but i am committed -- >> let him say what he is committed to. senator grassley: no? [chatter]

>> here is a look at the schedule this morning. "washington journal" starts shortly featuring your calls and guess talking about the nomination of brett kavanaugh to the supreme court. at 10 :00 a.m., speeches from the united nations general assembly leading off with president trump, followed by is really prime minister netanyahu and the palestinian president.

fictionuest on in-depth edition. our live call-in program. with her most recent book "the secret port." her other novels include "people ." the book watch in-depth fiction addition with author geraldine brooks live sunday from noon until 3:00 p.m. on book tv and be sure to watch in-depth fiction edition .ith author jodi picot on book tv on c-span2. weekend on american history tv on c-span3, tonight, at 8:00 p.m. eastern on lectures in history, brandeis university professor abigail cooper talks about african-americans during the reconstruction period. sunday at four clock p.m. eastern on