[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 159 (Wednesday, September 26, 2018)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6313-S6314]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                     Nomination of Brett Kavanaugh

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, tomorrow morning, the Senate and the 
American people will hear from Judge Brett Kavanaugh and Dr. Christine 
Blasey Ford under oath. We will hear sworn testimony from both of them 
regarding the allegation of 30-plus-year-old misconduct that Dr. Ford 
has raised.
  It goes without saying, but it bears repeating: Sexual assault is 
completely abhorrent. Everyone deserves to be safe. So I am glad Dr. 
Ford will be heard.
  I would like to particularly thank Chairman Grassley, who worked 
tirelessly to establish a fair process and a secure, comfortable 
setting for this to take place. He gave Dr. Ford the opportunity to 
testify in public or in private or to speak with investigators who 
would meet her anywhere she wished or to conduct the entire interview 
by phone. He has brought a patient professionalism to this process--one 
that stands in stark contrast to those on the other side of the aisle 
who self-describe as ``Spartacus'' and play to the television cameras. 
Dr. Ford will be heard, thanks to Chairman Grassley and despite the 
irresponsibility of Senate Democrats, who ignored her allegation for 
weeks and then discarded her request for confidentiality and leaked it 
to the press.
  Let me walk you through this again. The ranking Democrat on the 
Judiciary Committee received a letter from Dr. Ford all the way back in 
July in which she stated her allegation and asked for confidentiality. 
That was in July. The committee's thorough review of Judge Kavanaugh 
was just getting started. There was ample time to vet this allegation 
in a serious and bipartisan manner that would have maintained 
confidentiality and honored Dr. Ford's request for privacy.
  All the Democrats needed to do was go through proper channels and 
share the information with their Republican colleagues so the committee 
could tackle it together, but that is not what Senate Democrats did. 
This is the Democratic caucus whose leader, my friend the senior 
Senator from New York, said just hours after Judge Kavanaugh was 
nominated that he would ``oppose him with everything I've got.'' This 
was just hours after the nomination. This is the Democratic caucus of 
which several Members preemptively announced fill-in-the-blank 
opposition to any nominee before

[[Page S6314]]

Judge Kavanaugh had even been named. This is the Democratic caucus that 
spent all summer searching for reasons to delay, delay, delay this 
nomination. This was because there were not enough documents, because 
there were too many documents, because of unrelated headlines--you name 
it.

  No, these Democratic colleagues did not treat Dr. Ford or her 
allegation with the seriousness and discretion she deserved. 
Apparently, they took no meaningful action for weeks with respect to 
her claim. Then, finally, at the eleventh hour, when its introduction 
was virtually certain to introduce further delay, they got it to the 
press. So much for Dr. Ford's request for confidentiality, I guess.
  What lessons can we draw from all of this? If you write to the Senate 
Democrats in complete confidence about an extremely sensitive matter, 
you will soon wind up a household name. If you are a public servant 
whose confirmation those on the far left happen to oppose because they 
dislike the fact that you will interpret the law and the Constitution 
according to what they mean rather than what those on the far left wish 
they would mean, they will not hesitate to weaponize uncorroborated 
allegations and drag your name and your family right through the mud. 
That is what these guys will do to you--uncorroborated allegations, 
which Judge Kavanaugh has denied repeatedly in the strongest terms in 
public and to the Senate investigators, all under penalty of felony.
  Let's not forget that Dr. Ford's account identifies three other 
supposed witnesses, and each of these individuals has denied 
participation in or recollection of any such event--also under penalty 
of felony in all cases. One of the alleged witnesses is a longtime 
friend of Dr. Ford's. She has stated not only that she does not recall 
any such party but that she doesn't even know Judge Kavanaugh. No 
corroboration. No supporting evidence before us. Just Dr. Ford's 
allegation.
  By any normal standard of American justice, this is nowhere near 
enough to destroy someone's reputation or nullify one's career, but 
some of our colleagues are trying to move the goalposts.
  The junior Senator from Delaware asserted recently on television that 
it is Judge Kavanaugh who bears the burden of disproving these 
allegations. Let me say that again. The junior Senator from Delaware 
said Judge Kavanaugh bears the burden of disproving these allegations. 
Guilty until proven innocent--in our country?
  Similarly, the junior Senator from Hawaii has implied that Judge 
Kavanaugh does not deserve a presumption of innocence. The junior 
Senator from Hawaii has said that Judge Kavanaugh does not deserve a 
presumption of innocence because she does not agree with his judicial 
philosophy.
  Just yesterday, the Democratic leader said that because we aren't in 
a criminal courtroom, ``there's no presumption of innocence or guilt 
here when you have a nominee before you.'' In America, somebody is 
saying that? Well, it will not surprise you to know the Democrats 
haven't always taken that position.
  Back in 1991, when our friend Senator Joe Biden was chairman of the 
Judiciary Committee, he had this to say to Judge Clarence Thomas when 
the committee was evaluating an allegation against him.
  Joe Biden said:

       The presumption is with you. With me, the presumption is 
     with you, and in my opinion it should be with you until all 
     the evidence is in and people make a judgment.

  That was the chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Joe Biden, during 
the Clarence Thomas proceeding.
  My colleagues would do well to remember this commonsense principle. 
After all, this is America. Every American understands the presumption 
of innocence.
  I am glad that Chairman Grassley, his staff, and committee 
investigators have worked so hard to clean up this mess and put 
together a fair process. I am encouraged by the committee's choice of 
Rachel Mitchell, a career prosecutor with decades of experience in 
sensitive investigations, who was recognized with an award by Arizona's 
then-Democratic Governor, Janet Napolitano, to lend expertise to this 
important process.
  It is time for Senators to hear from both Dr. Ford and Judge 
Kavanaugh under oath. Tomorrow, we will do just that. Then it will be 
time to vote.