SEN. TED CRUZ, R-TEXAS

SEN. JEFF FLAKE, R-ARIZ.

SEN. THOM TILLIS, R-N.C.

SEN. BEN SASSE, R-NEB.

SEN. MICHAEL D. CRAPO, R-IDAHO

SEN. JOHN KENNEDY, R-LA.

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN, D-CALIF., RANKING MEMBER

SEN. PATRICK J. LEAHY, D-VT.

SEN. RICHARD J. DURBIN, D-ILL.

SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, D-R.I.

SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR, D-MINN.

AD

SEN. CHRIS COONS, D-DEL.

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, D-CONN.

SEN. MAZIE K. HIRONO, D-HAWAII

SEN. CORY BOOKER, D-N.J.

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS, D-CALIF.

RACHEL MITCHELL, STAFF COUNSEL

AD

WITNESSES:

CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD, KAVANAUGH ACCUSER

MICHAEL BROMWICH, ATTORNEY FOR MS. FORD

JUDGE BRETT M. KAVANAUGH, NOMINATED TO BE AN ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF

THE SUPREME COURT

[*]

GRASSLEY: This morning we continue our hearing on the nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to serve as associate justice on our Supreme Court. We will hear from two witnesses, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Kavanaugh. Thanks, of course, to Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh for accepting our committee’s invitation to testify and also thank them for their volunteering to testify before we even invited.

AD

GRASSLEY: Both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh have been through a terrible couple weeks. They and their families have received vile threats. What they have endured ought to be considered by all of us as unacceptable and a poor reflection on the state of civility in our democracy.

AD

So I want to apologize to you both for the way you’ve been treated. And I intend, hopefully, for today’s hearing to be safe, comfortable and dignified for both of our witnesses. I hope my colleagues will join me in this effort of a show of civility.

With that said, I lament that this hearing — how this hearing has come about.

On July the 9th, 2018, the president announced Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to serve on the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh has served on the most important federal appellate court for 12 years. Before that, he held some of the most sensitive positions in the federal government. The president added Judge Kavanaugh to his short list of Supreme Court more than nine months ago, in November 2017.

AD

GRASSLEY: As part of judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court, the FBI conducted its sixth full field background investigation of Judge Kavanaugh since 1993, 25 years ago. Nowhere in any of these six FBI reports, which committee investigators have reviewed on a bipartisan basis, was there a whiff of any issue — any issue at all related in any way to inappropriate sexual behavior.

AD

Dr. Ford first raised her allegations in a secret letter to the ranking member nearly two months ago in July. This letter was secret from July 30th, September 13th to — no, July 30th until September 13th when I first heard about it.

The ranking member took no action. The letter wasn’t shared with me or colleagues or my staff. These allegations could have been investigated in a way that maintained the confidentiality that Dr. Ford requested.

AD

Before his hearing, Judge Kavanaugh met privately with 65 senators, including the ranking member. But the ranking member didn’t ask Judge Kavanaugh about the allegations when she met with him privately in August.

The Senate Judiciary Committee held its four-day public hearing from September 4th to September 7th. Judge Kavanaugh testified for more than 32 hours in public. We held a closed session for members to ask sensitive on that — on the last evening, which the ranking member did not attend.

AD

Judge Kavanaugh answered nearly 1,300 written questions submitted by senators after the hearing, more than all prior Supreme Court nominees.

Throughout this period, we did not know about the ranking member’s secret evidence.

AD

Then, only at an 11th hour, on the eve of Judge Kavanaugh’s confirmation vote, did the ranking member refer the allegations to the FBI. And then, sadly, the allegations were leaked to the press. And that’s where Dr. Ford was mistreated.

This is a shameful way to treat our witness, who insisted on confidentiality, and — and, of course, Judge Kavanaugh, who has had to address these allegations in the midst of a media circus.

When I received Dr. Ford’s letter on September the 13th, my staff and I recognized the seriousness of these allegations and immediately began our committee’s investigation, consistent with the way the committee has handled such allegations in the past.

AD

AD

Every step of the way the Democratic side refused to participate in what should have been a bipartisan investigation. And as far as I know on all of our judgeships throughout at least the last four years — or three years, that’s been the way it’s been handled.

After Dr. Ford’s identity became public, my staff contacted all the individuals she said attended the 1982 party described in the Washington Post article.

Judge Kavanaugh immediately submitted to an interview under penalty of felony for any knowingly false statements. He denied the allegations categorically.

GRASSLEY: Democratic staff was invited to participate and could have asked any questions they wanted to, but they declined. Which leads me then to wonder: If they’re really concerned with going to the truth, why wouldn’t you want to talk to the accused?

AD

AD

The process and procedure is what the committee always does when we receive allegations of wrongdoing.

My staff reached out to other individuals allegedly at the party: Mark Judge, Patrick Smyth, Leland Keyser. All three submitted statements to the Senate under — under penalty of felony, denying any knowledge of the events described by Dr. Ford.

Dr. Ford’s lifelong friend, Dr. — Miss Keyser, stated she doesn’t know Judge Kavanaugh and doesn’t recall ever attending a party with him.

My staff made repeated requests to interview Dr. Ford during the past 11 days, even volunteering to fly to California to take her testimony, but her attorneys refused to prevent — present her allegations to Congress. I never — I nevertheless honored her request for a public hearing, so Dr. Ford today has the opportunity to prevent (sic) her allegations under oath.

AD

AD

As you can see, the Judiciary Committee was able to conduct thorough investigations into allegation — thorough investigations into allegations.

Some of my colleagues, consistent with their stated desires to obstruct Kavanaugh’s nomination by any means precisely — by any means necessary, pushed for FBI investigations into the allegations. But I have no authority to force the executive branch agency to conduct an investigation into a matter it considers to be closed. Moreover, once the allegations become — became public, it was easy to identify all the alleged witnesses and conduct our own investigations.

Contrary to what the public has been led to believe, the FBI doesn’t perform any credibility assessments or verify the truth of any events in these background investigations.

I’ll quote then-Chairman Joe Biden during Justice Thomas’ confirmation hearing. This is what Senator Biden said, quote, “The next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything obviously doesn’t understand anything. The FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion, period. They say he — he said, she said, they said, period. So when people wave an FBI report before you, understand, they do not — they do not — they do not reach conclusions. They do not make recommendations,” end of Senator Biden’s quote.

AD

The FBI provided us with the allegations. Now it’s up to the Senate to assess their credibility. Which brings us to this very time.

I look forward to a fair and respectful hearing. That’s what we promised Dr. Ford.

Some of my colleagues have complained about the fact that an expert on this side is — investigating sex crimes will be questioning the witness. I see no basis for complaint other than just playing politics.

GRASSLEY: The testimony we will hear today concerns allegations of sexual assault; very serious allegations. This is an incredibly complex and sensitive subject to discuss. It is not an easy one to discuss. That is why the senators on this side of the dais believe an expert who has deep experience and training in interviewing victims of sexual assault and investigating sexual assault alleged — allegations should be asking questions.

This will be in stark contrast to the grandstanding and chaos that we saw from the other side during the previous four days in this hearing process.

I can think of no one better equipped to question the witnesses than Rachel Mitchell. Ms. Mitchell is a career prosecutor, civil servant, with decades of experience investigating and prosecuting sex crimes. She has dedicated her career to seeking justice for survivors of sex-related felonies.

Most recently, Rachel was a division chief of the Special Victims Division, Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, which prosecutes sex crimes and family violence.

Then-Democratic Senator — Governor Janet Napolitano previously recognized her as the outstanding Arizona sexual assault prosecutor of the year. And she has spent years instructing prosecutors, detectives and child protection workers on how to properly interview victims of sexual assault and abuse.

With her aid, I look forward to a fair and productive hearing.

I understand that there are two other public allegations. Today’s hearing was scheduled to — in close consultation with Dr. Ford’s attorneys, and her testimony will be the subject of this hearing.

We’ve been trying to investigate other allegations. At this time, we have not had cooperation from attorneys representing other clients, and they have made no attempt to substantiate their claims.

My staff has tried to secure testimony and evidence from attorneys for both Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick. My staff made eight requests — yes, eight requests — for evidence from attorneys for Ms. — Ms. Ramirez, and six requests for evidence for (sic) attorneys for Ms. Swetnick. Neither attorney has made their clients available for interview. The committee can’t do an investigation if attorneys are stonewalling.

I hope you all understand that we have attempted to seek additional information, as we do a lot of times when there are holes in what we call the B.I. reports.

Additionally, all the witnesses should know — by — when I say “all the witnesses,” I mean Dr. Ford and I mean Judge Kavanaugh — all the witnesses should know that they have the right under Senate Rule 26.5 to ask that the committee go into closed session if a question requires an answer that is a clear invasion of their right to privacy.

If either Dr. Ford or Judge Kavanaugh feel that Senate Rule 26.5 ought to be involved, they should simply say so.

Senator Feinstein?

FEINSTEIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

I’ll make just a brief comment on your references to me.

Yes, I did receive a letter from Dr. Ford. It was conveyed to me by a member of Congress, Anna Eshoo.

The next day, I called Dr. Ford. We spoke on the phone. She reiterated that she wanted this held confidential. And I held it confidential, up to a point where the witness was willing to come forward.

FEINSTEIN: And I think as I make my remarks, perhaps you’ll see why. Because how women are treated in the United States, with this kind of concern, is really wanting a lot of reform. And I’ll get to that for a minute.

But in the meantime, good morning, Dr. Ford. Thank you for coming forward and being willing to share your story with us. I know this wasn’t easy for you.

But before you get to your testimony — and the chairman chose not to do this — I think it’s important to make sure you’re properly introduced. And I have to…

GRASSLEY: By the way, I was going to introduce her. But if you want to introduce her, I’ll be glad to have you do that.

But I want you to know, I didn’t forget to do it, because I would do that just as she was about to speak.

FEINSTEIN: Thank you.

I have to say, when I saw your C.V., I was extremely impressed. You have a bachelor’s degree from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; two master’s degrees, one from Stanford and one from Pepperdine; and a Ph.D. from the University of Southern California, better known to Senator Harris and I as USC.

You are a professor affiliated with both Stanford University and Palo Alto University. You have published over 65 peer-reviewed articles and have received numerous awards for your work and research.

And as if that were not enough, you are a wife, a mother of two sons and a constituent from California.

So I am very grateful to you for your strength and your bravery in coming forward. I know it’s hard.

But before I turn it over, I want to say something about what is to be discussed today and where we are as a country.

Sexual violence is a serious problem and one that largely goes unseen. In the United States it’s estimated by the Centers for Disease Control one in three women and one in six men will experience some form of sexual violence in their lifetime.

According to the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, 60 percent of sexual assaults go unreported. In addition, when survivors do report their assaults, it’s often years later due to the trauma they suffered and fearing their stories will not be believed.

Last week I received a letter from a 60-year-old California constituent who told me that she survived an attempted rape at age 17. She described as being terrified and embarrassed. She never told a soul until much later in life. The assault stayed with her for 43 years.

I think it’s important to remember these realities as we hear from Dr. Ford about her experience.

There’s been a great deal of public discussion about the #MeToo movement today versus the Year of the Woman almost 27 years ago. But while young women are standing up and saying “No more,” our institutions have not progressed in how they treat women who come forward. Too often, women’s memories and credibility come under assault. In essence, they are put on trial and forced to defend themselves, and often revictimized in the process.

FEINSTEIN: Twenty-seven years ago, I was walking through an airport when I saw a large group of people gathered around a TV to listen to Anita Hill tell her story. What I saw was an attractive woman in a blue suit before an all-male Judiciary Committee, speaking of her experience of sexual harassment. She was treated badly, accused of lying, attacked, and her credibility put to the test throughout the process.

Today, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford has come forward to tell her story of being assaulted and fearing for her life when she was a teenager.

Initially, as I said, Dr. Ford did not want to make her story public. Then within 36 hours of coming forward, Republicans scheduled a hearing without talking to her or even inviting her to testify. She was told she had to show up for the — or the committee would move forward with a vote. It took a public outcry for the — from the majority — excuse me — for the majority to back down and give her even a few days to come before the committee.

Republicans also scheduled this hearing with Dr. Ford without having her allegations investigated by the FBI. In 1991, Anita Hill’s allegations were reviewed by the FBI, as is the normal process and squarely within its jurisdiction. However, despite repeated requests, President Trump and the Republicans have refused to take this routine step and direct the FBI to conduct an impartial investigation. This would clearly be the best way to ensure a fair process to both Judge Kavanaugh and to Dr. Ford.

In 1991, the Senate heard from 22 witnesses over three days. Today, while rejecting an FBI investigation, Republicans are refusing to hear testimony from any other witness, including Mark Judge, who Dr. Ford identified as being in the room when the attack took place. And we believe Judge should be subpoenaed so the committee can hear from him directly.

Republicans have also refused to call anyone who could speak to the evidence that would support or refute Dr. Ford’s claim, and not one witness who could address credibility and character of either Ford or Kavanaugh has been called.

What I find most inexcusable is this rush to judgment, the unwillingness to take these kinds of allegations at face value and look at them for what they are: a real question of character for someone who is asking for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court.

In 1991, Republicans belittled Professor Hill’s experience, saying, and I quote, “It won’t make a bit of difference in the outcome,” end quote, and the burden of proof was on Professor Hill.

Today our Republican colleagues are saying, “This is a hiccup,” “Dr. Ford is mixed up,” and declaring, “I’ll listen to the lady, but we’re going to bring this to a close.”

What’s worse, many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have also made it clear that no matter what happens today, the Senate will plow right through and ensure Judge Kavanaugh would be elevated within a week.

FEINSTEIN: In fact, on Tuesday, the majority went ahead and scheduled a vote on the nomination before we heard one word of testimony regarding allegations of sexual assault and misconduct by Brett Kavanaugh. Republican leadership even told senators they should plan to be in over this weekend so the nomination can be pushed through without delay.

This is, despite the fact, that in the last few days two more women have come forward with their own serious allegations of sexual assault involving Brett Kavanaugh.

This past Sunday, we’ve learned about Debbie Ramirez, who was a student at Yale with Brett Kavanaugh. She, too, did not want to come forward, but after being approached by reporters, she told her story. She was at a college party where Kavanaugh exposed himself to her. She recalls pushing him away and then seeing him laughing and pulling his pants up.

Then yesterday, June (sic) Swetnick came forward to say that she had experiences of being at house parties with Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge. She recounted seeing Kavanaugh engage, and I quote, “in abusive and physically aggressive behavior toward girls,” end quote, including attempts to, quote, “remove or shift girls clothing,” end quote. Not taking, quote, “no for an answer,” grabbing girls, quote “without their consent,” end quote, and targeting, quote, “particular girls so that they could be taken advantage of,” end quote.

Each of these stories are troubling on their own and each of these allegations should be investigated by the FBI. All three women have said they would like the FBI to investigate; please do so. All three have said they have other witnesses and evidence to corroborate their accounts. And yet Republicans continue to blindly push forward.

So today we’re moving forward with a hearing and being asked to assess the credibility of Brett Kavanaugh.

He’s made several statements about how his focus was on school, basketball, service projects, and going to church. He declared that he, quote, “never,” end quote, drank so much he couldn’t remember what happened, and he has, quote, “always treated women with dignity and respect,” end quote.

And while he has made these declarations, more and more people have come forward challenging his characterization of events and behaviors.

James Roche, his freshman roommate at Yale, stated Kavanaugh was, and I quote again, “frequently incoherently drunk,” end quote, and that was when, quote, “he became aggressive and belligerent,” end quote, when he was drunk.

Liz Swisher, a friend of his from Yale, said, and I quote, “There’s no medical way I can say that he was blacked out, but it’s not credible for him to say that he had no memory lapses in the nights that he drank to excess,” end quote.

Lynne Brookes, a college classmate, said the picture Kavanaugh is trying to paint doesn’t match her memories of him, and I quote, “He’s trying to paint himself as some kind of choirboy. You can’t lie your way onto the Supreme Court, and with that statement out he’s gone too far. It’s about the integrity of the institution,” end quote.

FEINSTEIN: Ultimately, members and ladies and gentlemen, I really think that’s the point. We’re here to decide whether to evaluate (sic) this nominee to the most prestigious court in our country. It’s about the integrity of that institution and the integrity of this institution.

The entire country is watching how we handle these allegations. I hope the majority changes their tactics, opens their mind and seriously reflects on why we are here. We are here for one reason: to determine whether Judge Kavanaugh should be elevated to one of the most powerful positions in our country.

This is not a trial of Dr. Ford, it’s a job interview for Judge Kavanaugh. Is Brett Kavanaugh who we want on the most prestigious court in our country? Is he the best we can do?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

GRASSLEY: I’m sorry you brought up about the unsubstantiated allegations of other people, because we’re here for the sole purpose of listening to Dr. Ford. And we’ll consider other issues other times.

I would like to have you rise so I can swear you.

Now you — do you swear that the testimony that you’re about to give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you God?

FORD: (OFF-MIKE)

GRASSLEY: Thank you very much. Please be seated.

And before you give your statement, I want to say that — to everybody that she has asked for — any time you ask for a break, you get a break. Any time there’s something that you need you don’t have, just ask us. And you can have as much time for your opening statement as you want.

And — and just generally let us know if there’s any issues.

Proceed, please.

FORD: Thank you, Senator Grassley. I think after I read my opening statement, I anticipate needing some caffeine, if that is available.

GRASSLEY: OK.

Can you pull the microphone just a little bit closer to you, please? Can the whole box go a little bit closer?

(UNKNOWN): That’s what I’m trying, Senator. No.

GRASSLEY: OK, well, then — then…

FORD: I’ll lean forward.

GRASSLEY: Thank you. Thank you.

FORD: Is this good?

GRASSLEY: Yeah.

FORD: OK.

Thank you, Chairman Grassley and Ranking Member Feinstein, members of the committee. My name is Christine Blasey Ford. I am a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine. I won’t detail my educational background since it has already been summarized. I have been married to Russell Ford since 2002 and we have two children.

I am here today not because I want to be. I am terrified. I am here because I believe it is my civic duty to tell you what happened to me while Brett Kavanaugh and I were in high school.

I have described the events publicly before. I summarized them in my letter to Ranking Member Feinstein and again in a letter to Chairman Grassley.

I understand and appreciate the importance of your hearing from me directly about what happened to me and the impact that it has had on my life and on my family.

I grew up in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. I attended the Holton-Arms School in Bethesda, Maryland, from 1978 to 1984. Holton-Arms is an all-girls school that opened in 1901.

FORD: During my time at this school, girls at Holton-Arms frequently met and became friendly with boys from all-boys schools in the area, including the Landon School, Georgetown Prep, Gonzaga High School, as well as our country clubs and other places where kids and families socialized. This is how I met Brett Kavanaugh, the boy who sexually assaulted me.

During my freshman and sophomore school years, when I was 14 and 15 years old, my group of friends intersected with Brett and his friends for a short period of time. I had been friendly with a classmate of Brett’s for a short time during my freshman and sophomore year, and it was through that connection that I attended a number of parties that Brett also attended. We did not know each other well, but I knew him and he knew me.

In the summer of 1982, like most summers, I spent most every day at the Columbia Country Club in Chevy Chase, Maryland, swimming and practicing diving.

One evening that summer, after a day of diving at the club, I attended a small gathering at a house in the Bethesda area. There were four boys I remember specifically being there: Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, a boy named P.J., and one other boy whose name I cannot recall. I also remember my friend Leland attending.

I do not remember all of the details of how that gathering came together, but like many that summer, it was almost surely a spur-of-the-moment gathering.

I truly wish I could be more helpful with more detailed answers to all of the questions that have and will be asked about how I got to the party and where it took place and so forth. I don’t have all the answers, and I don’t remember as much as I would like to.

But the details that — about that night that bring me here today are the ones I will never forget. They have been seared into my memory, and have haunted me episodically as an adult.

When I got to the small gathering, people were drinking beer in a small living room/family room-type area on the first floor of the house. I drank one beer. Brett and Mark were visibly drunk.

Early in the evening, I went up a very narrow set of stairs leading from the living room to a second floor to use the restroom. When I got to the top of the stairs, I was pushed from behind into a bedroom across from the bathroom. I couldn’t see who pushed me. Brett and Mark came into the bedroom and locked the door behind them.

There was music playing in the bedroom. It was turned up louder by either Brett or Mark once we were in the room.

I was pushed onto the bed, and Brett got on top of me. He began running his hands over my body and grinding into me. I yelled, hoping that someone downstairs might hear me, and I tried to get away from him, but his weight was heavy.

Brett groped me and tried to take off my clothes. He had a hard time, because he was very inebriated, and because I was wearing a one-piece bathing suit underneath my clothing.

I believed he was going to rape me.

I tried to yell for help. When I did, Brett put his hand over my mouth to stop me from yelling. This is what terrified me the most, and has had the most lasting impact on my life. It was hard for me to breathe, and I thought that Brett was accidentally going to kill me.

FORD: Both Brett and Mark were drunkenly laughing during the attack. They seemed to be having a very good time.

Mark seemed ambivalent, at times urging Brett on and at times telling him to stop. A couple of times, I made eye contact with Mark and thought he might try to help me, but he did not.

During this assault, Mark came over and jumped on the bed twice while Brett was on top of me. And the last time that he did this, we toppled over and Brett was no longer on top of me. I was able to get up and run out of the room.

Directly across from the bedroom was a small bathroom. I ran inside the bathroom and locked the door. I waited until I heard Brett and Mark leave the bedroom, laughing and loudly walk down the narrow stairway, pinballing off the walls on the way down.

I waited, and when I did not hear them come back up the stairs, I left the bathroom, went down the same stairwell through the living room, and left the house.

I remember being on the street and feeling this enormous sense of relief that I had escaped that house and that Brett and Mark were not coming outside after me.

Brett’s assault on me drastically altered my life. For a very long time, I was too afraid and ashamed to tell anyone these details. I did not want to tell my parents that I, at age 15, was in a house without any parents present, drinking beer with boys.

I convinced myself that because Brett did not rape me, I should just move on and just pretend that it didn’t happen.

Over the years, I told very, very few friends that I had this traumatic experience. I told my husband before we were married that I had experienced a sexual assault. I had never told the details to anyone — the specific details — until May 2012, during a couples counseling session.

The reason this came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed a very extensive, very long remodel of our home and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand.

In explaining why I wanted a second front door, I began to describe the assault in detail. I recall saying that the boy who assaulted me could someday be on the U.S. Supreme Court, and spoke a bit about his background at an elitist all-boys school in Bethesda, Maryland. My husband recalls that I named my attacker as Brett Kavanaugh.

After that May 2012 therapy session, I did my best to ignore the memories of the assault, because recounting them caused me to relive the experience, and caused panic and anxiety.

Occasionally, I would discuss the assault in an individual therapy session, but talking about it caused more reliving of the trauma, so I tried not to think about it or discuss it. But over the years, I went through periods where I thought about the attack.

I had confided in some close friends that I had had an experience with sexual assault. Occasionally, I stated that my assailant was a prominent lawyer or judge, but I did not use his name.

FORD: I do not recall each person I spoke to about Brett’s assault. And some friends have reminded me of these conversations since the publication of the Washington Post story on September 16th, 2018. But until July 2018, I had never named Mr. Kavanaugh as my attacker outside of therapy.

This changed in early July 2018. I saw press reports stating that Brett Kavanaugh was on the shortlist of a list of very well-qualified Supreme Court nominees. I thought it was my civic duty to relay the information I had about Mr. Kavanaugh’s conduct so that those considering his nomination would know about this assault.

On July 6th, I had a sense of urgency to relay the information to the Senate and the president as soon as possible, before a nominee was selected. I did not know how, specifically, to do this.

I called my congressional representative and let her receptionist know that someone on the president’s shortlist had attacked me. I also sent a message to the encrypted Washington Post confidential tip line. I did not use my name, but I provided the names of Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge. I stated that Mr. Kavanaugh had assaulted me in the 1980s in Maryland.

This was an extremely hard thing for me to do, but I felt that I couldn’t not do it.

Over the next two days, I told a couple of close friends on the beach in Aptos, California, that Mr. Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted me. I was very conflicted as to whether to speak out.

On July 9th, I received a return phone call from the office of Congresswoman Anna Eshoo after Mr. Kavanaugh had become the nominee. I met with her staff on July 18th and with her on July 20th, describing the assault and discussing my fears about coming forward.

Later, we discussed the possibility of sending a letter to Ranking Member Feinstein, who is one of my state senators, describing what occurred. My understanding is that Representative Eshoo’s office delivered a copy of my letter to Senator Feinstein’s office on July 30th.

The letter included my name, but also a request that it be kept confidential. My hope was that providing the information confidentially would be sufficient to allow the Senate to consider Mr. Kavanaugh’s serious misconduct without having to make myself, my family or anyone’s family vulnerable to the personal attacks and invasions of privacy that we have faced since my name became public.

In a letter dated August 31st, Senator Feinstein wrote that she would not share the letter without my explicit consent, and I appreciated this commitment. Sexual assault victims should be able to decide for themselves when and whether their private experience is made public.

As the hearing date got closer, I struggled with a terrible choice: Do I share the facts with the Senate and put myself and my family in the public spotlight, or do I preserve our privacy and allow the Senate to make its decision without knowing the full truth of his past behaviors?

I agonized daily with this decision throughout August and September 2018. The sense of duty that originally motivated me to reach out confidentially to The Washington Post and to Anna Eshoo’s office when there was still a list of extremely qualified candidates — and to Senator Feinstein — was always there, but my fears of the consequences of speaking out started to exponentially increase.

FORD: During August 2018, the press reported that Mr. Kavanaugh’s confirmation was virtually certain. Persons painted him as a champion of women’s rights and empowerment. And I believed that if I came forward, my single voice would be drowned out by a chorus of powerful supporters.

By the time of the confirmation hearings, I had resigned myself to remaining quiet and letting the committee and the Senate make their decision without knowing what Mr. Kavanaugh had done to me.

Once the press started reporting on the existence of the letter I had sent to Senator Feinstein, I faced mounting pressure. Reporters appeared at my home and at my workplace, demanding information about the letter in the presence of my graduate students. They called my bosses and co-workers, and left me many messages, making it clear that my name would inevitably be released to the media.

I decided to speak out publicly to a journalist who had originally responded to the tip I had sent to the Washington Post and who had gained my trust. It was important for me to describe the details of the assault in my own words.

Since September 16th, the date of the Washington Post’s story, I have experienced an outpouring of support from people in every state of this country. Thousands and thousands of people who have had their lives dramatically altered by sexual violence have reached out to share their experience and have thanked me for coming forward. We have received tremendous support from our friends and our community.

At the same time, my greatest fears have been realized and the reality has been far worse than what I expected. My family and I have been the target of constant harassment and death threats, and I have been called the most vile and hateful names imaginable. These messages, while far fewer than the expressions of support, have been terrifying and have rocked me to my core.

People have posted my personal information and that of my parents online on the Internet. This has resulted in additional e-mails, calls and threats.

My family and I were forced to move out of our home. Since September 16th, my family and I have been visiting in various secure locales, at times separated and at times together, with the help of security guards.

This past Tuesday evening, my work e-mail was hacked and messages were sent out trying to recant my description of the sexual assault.

Apart from the assault itself, these past couple of weeks have been the hardest of my life. I’ve had to relive this trauma in front of the world. And I’ve seen my life picked apart by people on television, on Twitter, other social media, other media and in this body, who have never met me or spoken with me.

I have been accused of acting out of partisan political motives. Those who say that do not know me. I’m an independent person and I am no one’s pawn.

My motivation in coming forward was to be helpful and to provide facts about how Mr. Kavanaugh’s actions have damaged my life, so that you could take into a serious consideration as you make your decision about how to proceed.

FORD: It is not my responsibility to determine whether Mr. Kavanaugh deserves to sit on the Supreme Court. My responsibility is to tell you the truth.

I understand that a professional prosecutor has been hired to ask me questions, and I’m committed to doing my very best to answer them. I have never been questioned by a prosecutor, and I will do my best.

At the same time, because the committee members will be judging my credibility, I do hope to be able to engage directly with each of you.

And at this point, I will do my best to answer your questions, and would request some caffeine.

(UNKNOWN): A Coke or something?

FORD: That sounds good. That would be great. Thanks.

GRASSLEY: Thank you.

FORD: Thank you.

GRASSLEY: Thank you very much.

Before I use my five minutes of questioning, I thought that I’d — I’d try to remind my colleagues — and in this case, Ms. Mitchell as well — that the five minutes, the way I traditionally have done, if you ask a question before your time runs out, and even though you go over your time, as long as you aren’t filibustering, I’ll let you ask your question.

And I’m going to make sure that both Dr. Ford and — Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh — as chairman of the committee, I know that they’re going to get a chance to answer the questions fully beyond that five minutes. But when that — when either Dr. Ford or Judge Kavanaugh gets done, then we immediately go to the next person. So I hope that — that that will be done in a — and Dr. — Dr. Ford, I’m told that you want a break right now, and if you do, that’s fine.

FORD: I’m OK. I got the coffee. Thank you very much. I think I can proceed and sip on the coffee.

GRASSLEY: No — nobody can mix up my coffee right, so I…

(LAUGHTER)

So you’re pretty fortunate.

So now, with that, Ms. Mitchell, you have my five minutes to ask questions.

MITCHELL: Good morning, Dr. Ford.

FORD: Hi.

MITCHELL: We haven’t met. My name is Rachel Mitchell.

FORD: Nice to meet you.

MITCHELL: I just wanted to tell you the — the first thing that struck me from your statement this morning was that you are terrified, and I just wanted to let you know I’m very sorry. That’s not right.

I know this is stressful, and so I would like to set forth some guidelines that maybe will alleviate that a little bit.

If I ask you a question that you don’t understand, please ask me to clarify it or ask it in a different way.

When I ask questions, sometimes I’ll refer back to other information you’ve provided. If I do that and I get it wrong, please correct me.

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: I’m not going to ask you to guess. I know it was a long time ago. If you do estimate, please let me know that you’re estimating, OK?

FORD: Fair.

MITCHELL: OK.

We’ve put before you — and I’m sure you have copies of them anyway — five pieces of information, and I wanted to go over them.

The first is a screenshot of a WhatsApp texting between you and somebody at the Washington Post. Do you have that in front of you?

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: The first two texts were sent by you on July 6th. Is that correct?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: And then the last one sent by you was on July 10th?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: OK. Are those three comments accurate?

FORD: I will read them.

(UNKNOWN): Take your time.

FORD: Yes.

(UNKNOWN): Take your time.

FORD: So, there’s one correction.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: I’ve misused the word “bystander” as an adjective.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: “Bystander” means someone that is looking at an assault, and — and the person named P.J. was not technically a bystander. I was writing very quickly with a sense of urgency.

So I would not call him a bystander. He was downstairs and, you know, what I remember of him was he was a — a tall and very nice person. I didn’t know him well. But that he was downstairs, not anywhere near the event.

MITCHELL: OK. Thank you…

FORD: I’d like to take that word out, if it’s possible.

MITCHELL: OK. Thank you for clarifying that.

The second is the letter that you wrote to Senator Feinstein, dated the — July 30th of this year.

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: Did you write the letter yourself?

FORD: I did.

MITCHELL: And I — since it’s dated July 30th, did you write it on that date?

FORD: I believe so. I — it sounds right. I was in Rehoboth, Delaware, at the time. I could look into my calendar and try to figure that out. It seemed…

MITCHELL: Was it written on or about that date?

FORD: Yes, yes. I traveled, I think, the 26th of July to Rehoboth, Delaware. So that makes sense, because I wrote it from there.

MITCHELL: Is the letter accurate?

FORD: I’ll take a minute to read it.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: I — I can read fast.

(UNKNOWN): Take your time.

FORD: OK.

OK, so I have three areas that I’d like to address.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: In the second paragraph, where it says this — “the assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home”…

MITCHELL: Yes?

FORD: … “at a gathering that included me and four others,” I can’t guarantee that there weren’t a few other people there, but they are not in my purview of my memory.

MITCHELL: Would it be fair to say there were at least four others?

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: OK.

What’s the second correction?

FORD: Oh, OK. The next sentence begins with “Kavanaugh physically pushed me into the bedroom,” I would say I can’t promise that Mark Judge didn’t assist with that. I don’t know. I was pushed from behind, so I don’t want to put that solely on him.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: OK.

GRASSLEY: Ms. Mitchell, I don’t know whether this is fair for me to interrupt, but I want to keep people within five minutes. Is that a — is that a major problem for you in the middle of a question?

Because I don’t — we’ve got to — I’ve got to treat everybody the same.

MITCHELL: I understand that.

GRASSLEY: Can I go to Senator Feinstein, or you…

MITCHELL: Yes, sir. I — I’m sorry, I didn’t see the light was red. Please do.

GRASSLEY: OK.

MITCHELL: Please do.

GRASSLEY: Senator Feinstein?

FEINSTEIN: FORD: I didn’t get to…

(CROSSTALK)

(UNKNOWN): So we’re going to come back to that.

FORD: Oh, OK. I…

(UNKNOWN): … when she comes back (ph)…

FORD: I see.

(UNKNOWN): … just making…

(CROSSTALK)

FORD: I see. OK.

FEINSTEIN: Fast (ph).

FORD: OK.

(UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE)

FORD: OK.

GRASSLEY: For the benefit of Dr. Ford, I think she’ll continue that after the five minutes here.

FORD: Thank you. OK.

FEINSTEIN: Mr. Chairman, I’d like to begin by putting some letters in the record.

GRASSLEY: Without objection, so ordered. But if you want to tell me…

FEINSTEIN: 140 letters from friends and neighbors of the witness and a thousand female physicians across the country. That’s what the letters are.

I want to thank you very much for your testimony. I know how very, very hard it is.

Why — why have you held it to yourself all these years? As you look back, can you indicate what the reasons are?

FORD: Well, I haven’t held it all these years. I did disclose it in the — in the confines of therapy, where I felt like it was an appropriate place to cope with the sequelae of the event.

FEINSTEIN: Well, can you tell us what impact the events had on you?

FORD: Well, I think that the sequelae of sexual assault varies by person, so for me personally, anxiety, phobia and PTSD-like symptoms are the types of things that I’ve been coping with. So, more specifically, claustrophobia, panic and that type of thing.

FEINSTEIN: Is that the reason for the second door — front door…

FORD: Correct.

FEINSTEIN: … is claustrophobia?

FORD: Correct. It doesn’t — our house does not look aesthetically pleasing from the curb.

FEINSTEIN: I see. And do you have that second front door?

FORD: Yes.

FEINSTEIN: It’s…

FORD: It — it now is a place to host Google interns. Because we live near Google, so we get to have — other students can live there.

FEINSTEIN: Can you tell us, is there any other way this has affected your life?

FORD: The primary impact was in the initial four years after the event.

I struggled academically. I struggled very much in Chapel Hill and in college. When I was 17 and went off to college, I had a very hard time, more so than others, forming new friendships and especially friendships with boys, and I had academic problems.

FEINSTEIN: What were the — when — when we spoke and it became very clear how deeply you felt about this and the need that you wanted to remain confidential, can you talk a little bit about that?

FORD: Yes.

So, I was watching carefully throughout the summer — well, my original intent, I just want to remind was to communicate with everyone when there was still a list of candidates who all seemed to be, just from my perspective, from what I could read, equally qualified. And I was in a hurry to try to get the information forward but didn’t quite know how to do that.

However, once he was selected and it seemed like he was popular and it was a sure vote, I was calculating daily the risk/benefit for me of coming forward, and wondering whether I would just be jumping in front of a train that was headed to where it was headed anyway and that I would just be personally annihilated.

FEINSTEIN: How did you decide to come forward?

FORD: Ultimately because reporters were sitting outside my home and trying to talk to my dog through the window to calm the dog down, and a reporter appeared in my graduate classroom and I mistook her for a student, and she came up to ask me a question, and I thought she was a student and it turned out that she was a reporter.

So at that point, I felt like enough was enough. People were calling my colleagues at Stanford and leaving messages on their voicemails and on their e-mail, saying that they knew my name. Clearly, people knew my address because they were out in front of my house.

And it just — the mounting pressure, it seemed like it was time to just…

FEINSTEIN: I want…

FORD: … say what I needed to say.

FEINSTEIN: I’m sorry.

I want to ask you one question about the attack itself.

You were very clear about the attack. Being pushed into the room, you say you don’t know quite by whom, but that it was Brett Kavanaugh that covered your mouth to prevent you from screaming, and then you escaped. How are you so sure that it was he?

FORD: The same way that I’m sure that I’m talking to you right now. It’s — just basic memory functions. And also just the level of norepinephrine and epinephrine in the brain that, sort of, as you know, encodes — that neurotransmitter encodes memories into the hippocampus. And so, the trauma-related experience, then, is kind of locked there, whereas other details kind of drift.

FEINSTEIN: So what you are telling us is this could not be a case of mistaken identity?

FORD: Absolutely not.

FEINSTEIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

GRASSLEY: Ms. Mitchell, for Senator — for Senator Hatch.

MITCHELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

When we were stopped, you were going to tell us a third correction that you wanted to make on that statement — or, I’m sorry, the letter to Senator Feinstein.

FORD: It’s — it wasn’t a correction, but I wanted to comment on it, since we were looking at this letter, that I did see Mark Judge once at the Potomac Village Safeway after the time of the attack. And it would be helpful with anyone’s resources if — to figure out when he worked there, if people are wanting more details from me about when the attack occurred. If we could find out when he worked there, then I could provide a more detailed timeline as to when the attack occurred.

MITCHELL: OK.

And that — that is — so, that is not a correction in your statement?

FORD: It’s just — no.

MITCHELL: OK.

You also wrote out a handwritten statement for the polygrapher when you took your polygraph test, is that correct?

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: OK.

And I — I see corrections on that where you crossed out, so I will go on to The Washington Post article that was…

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: … originally published on September 16th of this year.

FORD: And should I just not look at this for accuracy, or we’re just going to leave that be?

MITCHELL: We may…

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: … come back to it…

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: … if you need to refer to it.

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: On The Washington Post article, did you submit to an interview by a reporter with The Washington Post for that article to be written?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: OK.

And then finally, was the statement that you provided this morning — I assume that, to the best of your recollection, that that was accurate?

FORD: That this whole article is accurate?

MITCHELL: No, no. The statement that you made this morning.

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: OK.

I want to talk to you about the day that this happened leading up to the gathering.

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: In your statement this morning, have you told us everything that you remember about the day leading up to that?

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: Let me ask just a few questions to make sure that you’ve thought of everything, OK?

You indicated that you were at the country club swimming that day.

FORD: That’s my best estimate of how this could have happened.

MITCHELL: OK.

And when you say “best estimate,” is that based on the fact that you said you went there pretty much every day?

FORD: (OFF-MIKE)

MITCHELL: Is that a yes?

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: OK.

Do you recall prior to getting there — so I’m — I’m only talking about up to the gathering — had you had anything to drink?

FORD: Not at all.

MITCHELL: Were you on any sort of medication?

FORD: None.

MITCHELL: Do you recall knowing before you went who was going to be at that gathering?

FORD: I recall that — expecting that Mark Judge and Leland would be at that gathering.

MITCHELL: OK.

Do you recall an expectation that Brett Kavanaugh would be there?

FORD: I don’t recall whether or not I expected that.

MITCHELL: OK.

Now let’s talk about the gathering up from the time you arrived until right when you went up the stairs, just that period of time, OK?

What was the atmosphere like at the gathering?

FORD: Mr. Kavanaugh and Mr. Judge were extremely inebriated, they had clearly been drinking prior. And the other people at the party were not. The living room was…

MITCHELL: Can I ask you just to follow up on that?

When you said it was clear that they had been drinking prior, do you mean prior to the time you had gotten there or prior to the time they had arrived?

FORD: Prior to the time that they arrived. I don’t recall who arrived first, though, whether it was me or them.

MITCHELL: OK, please continue.

FORD: OK.

So I recall that the — I could — I can sketch a floor plan. I recall that it was a sparsely furnished, fairly modest living room.

And it was not really a party like the news has made it sound. It was not. It was just a gathering that I assumed was going to lead to a party later on that those boys would attend, because they tended to have parties later at night than I was allowed to stay out.

So it was kind of a pre-gathering.

MITCHELL: Was it loud?

FORD: No, not in the living room.

MITCHELL: Besides the music that you’ve described that was playing in the bedroom, was there any other music or television or anything like that that was adding?

FORD: No.

MITCHELL: OK. So there wasn’t a stereo playing downstairs?

FORD: No.

MITCHELL: OK.

GRASSLEY: Senator Leahy?

LEAHY: Dr. Ford, thank you for being here.

Mr. Chairman, you know, the — the way to make this inquiry truly credible is to do what we’ve always done when new information about a nominee comes to light. To use your words this morning, you want to reach the truth. The easy way to do that: ask the FBI to investigate. This is what we’ve always done. Let them investigate, report back to us. The same applies to the serious allegations made by Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick.

Let’s have a nonpartisan, professional investigation and then take the time to have these witnesses testify.

Chairman, you and I were both here 27 years ago. At that time, the Senate failed Anita Hill. I said I believed her.

But I’m concerned that we’re doing a lot less for these three women today. That’s my personal view.

LEAHY: Dr. Ford, no matter what happens with this hearing today, no matter what happens to this nomination, I know, and I hear from so many in my own state of Vermont, there are millions of victims and survivors out there who have been inspired by your courage. I am.

Bravery is contagious. Indeed, that’s the driving force behind the MeToo movement. And you sharing your story is going to have a lasting, positive impact on so many survivors in our country. We owe you a debt of gratitude for that, Doctor.

Now, some senators have suggested you were simply mixed up about who assaulted you. An ally of Judge Kavanaugh in the White House even promoted a wild theory about a Kavanaugh look-alike. You immediately rejected that theory, as did the innocent man who’d been called that look-alike. In fact, he sent a letter to this committee forcefully rejecting this absurd theory.

I ask consent to enter that in the record.

GRASSLEY: Without objection, so ordered.

LEAHY: Now, how did you know Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge? And is it possible that you had mixed them up with somebody else?

FORD: No, it is not.

And the person that was blamed for the incident is actually the person who introduced me to them originally. So he was a member of Columbia Country Club. And I don’t want to talk about him because I think it’s unfair, but he is the person that — that introduced me to them.

LEAHY: But you — you would not mix up somebody else with Brett Kavanaugh, is that correct?

FORD: Correct.

LEAHY: Or Mark Judge.

FORD: Correct.

LEAHY: Well, then, let’s go back to the incident.

What is the strongest memory you have, the strongest memory of the incident, something that you cannot forget? Take whatever time you need.

FORD: Indelible in the hippocampus is the laughter, the laugh — the uproarious laughter between the two, and their having fun at my expense.

LEAHY: You’ve never forgotten that laughter. You’ve never forgotten them laughing at you.

FORD: They were laughing with each other.

LEAHY: And you were the object of the laughter?

FORD: I was, you know, underneath one of them while the two laughed, two friend — two friends having a really good time with one another.

LEAHY: Let me enter into the record a statement by the National Task Force to End Domestic Violence…

GRASSLEY: Without objection, so ordered.

LEAHY: … and a letter from 24 members of the House of Representatives, urging the committee to use the NTF’s trauma-informed approach in questioning Dr. Ford…

GRASSLEY: Without objection, so ordered.

LEAHY: … and a letter from another 116 members of the House asking to delay until all this has been heard.

GRASSLEY: Without objection, so ordered.

LEAHY: And Dr. Ford has at times been criticized for what she doesn’t remember from 36 years ago. But we have numerous experts, including a study by the U.S. Army Military Police School of Behavioral Sciences Education, that lapses of memory are wholly consistent with severe trauma and stressful assault. And I’d ask consent that be entered.

GRASSLEY: Without objection, so ordered.

LEAHY: And, Dr. Ford, I’d just conclude with this: You do remember what happened, do you not?

FORD: Very much so.

LEAHY: Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

GRASSLEY: Now, Ms. Mitchell for Senator Graham.

And then it’s my understanding that — that that’s where you’d like to take a break.

FORD: Does that work for you? Does that work for you, as well?

GRASSLEY: Well, we — we’re here to accommodate you…

FORD: Oh, thank you.

GRASSLEY: … not you accommodate us.

FORD: I — I — I’m used to being collegial, so.

GRASSLEY: OK, go ahead.

(LAUGHTER)

Ms. Mitchell, for Senator Graham.

MITCHELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

You told Senator Feinstein in your letter that you and four others were present. You’ve corrected that today to say it was at least four others.

When you were interviewed by The Washington Post, you said that there were four boys present at the party. And then in your polygraph statement, you said there were four boys and two girls.

When you say “two girls,” was that you and another or was that two other girls?

FORD: That was me and one other girl.

MITCHELL: And that other girl’s name?

FORD: Leland.

MITCHELL: Leland Keyser now?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: OK.

So then would it be fair to say at least P.J., Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, Leland Ingham — at the time — and yourself were present, and possibly others?

FORD: And one — one other boy. So there were four — there were four boys. I just don’t know the name of the other boy, so.

MITCHELL: Have you been contacted by anybody saying, “Hey, I was at that party, too”?

FORD: No, I haven’t talked with anyone from that party.

MITCHELL: OK.

Now, you’ve — you’ve been detailed about what happened once you got up the stairs. And so, I don’t need to go through that again.

FORD: (OFF-MIKE)

MITCHELL: I’m sorry, go ahead.

FORD: You know, oh wait, I’m sorry.

I just realized that I said something that was inaccurate. I said I hadn’t spoken with anyone from the party since that. I have spoken with Leland.

MITCHELL: OK. Thank you for correcting that. I appreciate that.

FORD: Yes, thank you.

MITCHELL: You’ve gone into detail about what happened once you went up the stairs. So I don’t feel like it’s necessary to go over those things again.

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: OK?

FORD: Thank you.

MITCHELL: Have you told us everything that you do remember about it?

FORD: I believe so. But if there are other questions I will — I can attempt to answer them.

MITCHELL: OK.

You said that the music was solely coming from that room, is that correct?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: OK.

And it was turned up once the three of you were inside that room, is that correct?

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: OK.

At some point, do you recall it being turned down?

FORD: I don’t remember if it was turned down once I was leaving the house. I don’t remember.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: Likely, since I could hear them walking down the stairs very clearly from the bathroom.

MITCHELL: OK.

And the bathroom was…

FORD: I’m sorry (ph).

MITCHELL: … door was closed when you heard this, is that correct?

FORD: I could hear them very clearly hitting the walls…

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: … going down the stairwell.

MITCHELL: In fact, in your letter, you said that they went down the stairs and they were talking with other people…

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: … in the house.

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: Were you able to hear that conversation?

FORD: I was not able to hear that conversation. But I was aware that they were downstairs and that I would have to walk past them to get out of the house.

MITCHELL: OK.

Now, let me make sure we’re on the same page. Were you not able to hear the conversation, or not able to understand the conversation?

FORD: I couldn’t hear the conversation. I was upstairs.

MITCHELL: OK.

How do you know there was a conversation?

FORD: I’m just assuming, since it was a social gathering, people were talking. I don’t know.

MITCHELL: OK.

In your letter, you…

FORD: I could hear them talking as they went down the stairwell, they were laughing, and…

MITCHELL: OK.

In your letter you wrote, “Both loudly stumbled down the stairwell, at which point other persons at the house were talking with them.” Does that ring a bell?

FORD: Yes. I had to walk past everyone to leave the house, so…

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: I’m not…

MITCHELL: In your letter…

FORD: Maybe I’m not understanding. I’m sorry.

MITCHELL: OK.

Your next sentence — let me try to clarify this. After you said “other persons at the house were talking with them,” the letter goes on with the very next sentence, “I exited the bathroom, ran outside of the house and went home.”

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: OK.

You said that you do not remember how you got home, is that correct?

FORD: I do not remember…

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: … other than I did not drive home.

MITCHELL: OK.

I’m going to show you, if somebody could provide to you, a map of the various peoples’ houses at the time. And if you could verify that this is where you were living at the time.

FORD: Where I was living at the time?

MITCHELL: Yes.

FORD: OK. OK.

HARRIS: Mr. Chairman, do we have a copy of these documents?

GRASSLEY: You do not have a copy (OFF-MIKE) you want one, we can get you one.

HARRIS: Yes, before the questions begin, so we can follow the testimony.

(CORRECTED COPY – CORRECTS “BY” to “MY”)

GRASSLEY: OK. My staff says that we should not provide the copy.

(UNKNOWN): No, we will provide the copy.

GRASSLEY: Oh.

(LAUGHTER)

(UNKNOWN): Will provide the copy.

GRASSLEY: Well, speak plainly with me, please.

HARRIS: Sure. I’d like to see what she’s looking at.

(LAUGHTER)

GRASSLEY: Yeah.

You have another 30 seconds now because I was rudely interrupted.

MITCHELL: OK.

Mr. Chairman, Senator Harris, we do have a — a blown-up copy of this for the members to view, if that’s helpful.

FORD: OK, I’m going to put check marks next to homes that I can confirm are the correct locations, and then an X or a question mark when I don’t know where these people live.

MITCHELL: I’m only asking you to confirm if that map accurately shows where you were living at the time.

FORD: Where I lived at the time.

So I can’t see the street name, but I’m happy to refer to the address or the neighborhood.

MITCHELL: OK, could you tell us that?

FORD: Yes. It’s River Falls.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: It’s near the — like — what is the place called? The Naval Research Center on Clara Barton Parkway.

MITCHELL: OK, was that a house or an apartment?

FORD: It was my parents’ home.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: All right. OK.

GRASSLEY: Senator Durbin?

DURBIN: Mr. Chairman, I ask consent to enter into the record letters of support for Dr. Ford from her classmates at Holton-Arms school, 1,200 alumni of the school, 195 of your colleagues, students and mentors, 1,400 women who — and men who attended D.C. schools, and 50 members of the Yale Law School faculty who are calling for a full FBI investigation. I ask consent to enter these into the record.

GRASSLEY: Without objection, so ordered.

DURBIN: Dr. Ford, as difficult as this experience must be, I want you to know your courage in coming forward has given countless Americans the strength to face their own life-shattering past and to begin to heal their wounds. By example, you have brought many families into an honest and sometimes painful dialogue that should have occurred a long time ago.

I’m sorry for what this has done to you and your family. No one, no one should face harassment, death threats and disparaging comments by cheap-shot politicians simply for telling the truth.

But you and your family should know that for every scurrilous charge and every pathetic tweet, there have been thousands of Americans, women and men, who believe you, support you and thank you for your courage.

Watching your experience, it’s no wonder that many sexual assault survivors hide their past and spend their lives suffering in pained silence.

You had absolutely nothing to gain by bringing these facts to the Senate Judiciary Committee. The fact that you are testifying here today, terrified though you may be, the fact that you have called for an FBI investigation of this incident, the fact that you are prepared to name both Judge Kavanaugh and eyewitness Mark Judge stands in sharp contrast to the obstruction we’ve seen on the other side.

DURBIN: The FBI should have investigated your charges as they did in the Anita Hill hearing, but they did not. Mark Judge should be subpoenaed from his Bethany Beach hideaway and required to testify under oath, but he has not.

Judge Kavanaugh, if he truly believes there is no evidence, no witnesses that can prove your case, should be joining us in demanding a thorough FBI investigation, but he is not.

Today, you come before this committee and before this nation alone. I know you’re joined by counsel and family.

The prosecutor on the Republican side will continue to ask questions to test your memory and veracity. After spending decades trying to forget that awful night, it’s no wonder your recollection is less than perfect.

A polished liar can create a seamless story, but a trauma survivor cannot be expected to remember every painful detail. That’s what Senator Leahy has mentioned earlier.

One question is critical. In Judge Kavanaugh’s opening testimony, which we will hear after you leave, this is what he says: “I never had any sexual or physical encounter of any kind with Dr. Ford. I am not questioning that Dr. Ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in some place at some time.”

Last night, the Republican staff of this committee released to the media a timeline that shows that they’ve interviewed two people who claimed they were the ones who actually assaulted you. I’m asking you to address this new defense of mistaken identity directly.

Dr. Ford, with what degree of certainty do you believe Brett Kavanaugh assaulted you?

FORD: One hundred percent.

DURBIN: One hundred percent.

In the letter which you sent to Dr. — or, Senator Feinstein you wrote, “I have not knowingly seen Kavanaugh since the assault. I did see Mark Judge once at the Potomac Village Safeway where he was extremely uncomfortable in seeing me.”

Would you please describe that encounter at the Safeway with Mark Judge and what led you to believe he was uncomfortable?

FORD: Yes.

I was going to the Potomac Village Safeway — this is the one on the corner of Falls and River Road — and I was with my mother. And I was a teenager, so I wanted her to go in one door and me go in the other.

So I chose the wrong door, because the door I chose was the one where Mark Judge was — looked like he was working there and arranging the shopping carts. And I said “Hello” to him. And his face was white and very uncomfortable saying “Hello” back.

And we had previously been friendly at the times that we saw each other over the previous two years. Albeit not very many times, we had always been friendly with one another.

I wouldn’t characterize him as not friendly. He was just nervous and not really wanting to speak with me.

DURBIN: How long…

FORD: And he — he looked a little bit ill.

DURBIN: How long did this occur after the incident?

FORD: I would estimate six to eight weeks.

DURBIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

GRASSLEY: Before we take a break, I can’t let what Durbin — Senator Durbin said — by the way, he’s my friend; we work on a lot of legislation together.

But you talked about the obstruction from the other side.

I cannot let it go by what you’ve heard me say so many times, that between July 30th and September 13th, there were 45 days this committee could have been investigating this situation and her privacy would have been producted — protected. So something happened here in between, on your side, that the whole country — well, not the whole country should have known about it — no, not know about it. We should have investigated it.

We’ll take a break now for 15 minutes.

(RECESS)

GRASSLEY: 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?

FORD: Yes.

GRASSLEY: Yes, OK.

Now it is Senator Cornyn’s time, so proceed Ms. Mitchell.

MITCHELL: Thank you, Senator.

I have a blow-up here to my right of the map that was shown to you. The address that’s indicated on here as belonging to your family is what all the property tax records showed as being your address.

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: Just to put it in perspective, I’d like to show you a further-out — a zoomed-out picture, so that we can put it in perspective. So, we can show the greater Washington area. Of course, you can see the Beltway on that — the Beltway area.

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: 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 farthest point…

HARRIS: Mr. Chairman, again, we don’t have these documents.

(UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE)

HARRIS: No, we’re not. That’s 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.

GRASSLEY: She — proceed please.

MITCHELL: OK.

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 can see it’s 6.2 and, of course, 8.2 miles.

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: And you’ve described this as being near the country club, wherever this house was, is that right?

FORD: I would describe it as it’s somewhere between my house and the country club in that vicinity that’s shown in your picture. And the country club is about 20 — a 20-minute drive from my parents’ home.

MITCHELL: A 20-minute drive. And, of course, I’ve marked as the crow flies.

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: Would it be fair to say that somebody drove you somewhere, either to the party or home from the party?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: OK.

Has anyone come forward to say to you, “Hey, remember, I was the one that drove you home?”

FORD: No.

MITCHELL: OK.

In your July 6th text to The Washington Post that you looked at earlier, you said that this happened in the mid ’80s. In your letter to Senator Feinstein you said it occurred in the early ’80s.

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: In your polygraph statement you said it was high school summer in ’80s, and you actually had written in and this is one of the corrections I referred to early and then you crossed that out.

Later in your interview with The Washington Post, you were more specific. You believed it occurred in the summer of 1982 and you said at the end of your sophomore year.

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: You said the same thing I believe in your prepared statement.

How were you able to narrow down the timeframe?

FORD: 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 Safeway, then 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 I — I 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.

MITCHELL: I’d assume the legal driving age was 16.

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: OK.

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.”

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: I want to make sure I understand that. Did you already have your therapy records at that time?

FORD: I had looked at them online to see if they existed, yes.

MITCHELL: OK.

So this was something that was available to you via a computer, like a — a patient portal?

FORD: Actually, no, it was in the office of a provider.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: She helped me go through the record to locate whether I had had record of this conversation that I had remembered.

MITCHELL: Did you show a full or partial set of those marriage therapy records to The Washington Post?

FORD: I don’t remember. I remember summarizing for her what they said. So I’m not – I’m not quite sure if I actually gave her the record.

MITCHELL: OK. So it’s possible that the reporter did not see these notes.

FORD: I don’t know if she’s – I can’t recall whether she saw them directly or if I just told her what they said.

MITCHELL: Have you shown them to anyone else besides your counsel?

FORD: Just the counsel.

MITCHELL: OK. Would it be fair to say that Brett Kavanaugh’s name is not listed in those notes?

FORD: His name is not listed in those notes.

MITCHELL: Would it also be fair to say that the therapist notes that we’ve been talking about say that there were four boys in the room?

FORD: It describes the sexual assault and it says erroneously by four boys. So the therapist got the content of it wrong.

MITCHELL: And you corrected that to The Washington Post reporter, correct?

FORD: Correct.

GRASSLEY: Senator Whitehouse.

WHITEHOUSE: Thank you, chairman.

Thank you, Dr. Blasey Ford. A lot of people are proud of you today.

From a prosecutor’s 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 that circumstance 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 are willing to, and – and did, take a lie detector test. And you are willing to testify here. Here you are, subject to professional cross-examination by a prosecutor.

So you’ve 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?

(UNKNOWN): You can say something (ph).

FORD: Yes.

WHITEHOUSE: And are you aware that when the FBI begins investigating, they might find corroborative evidence and they might find exculpatory evidence?

FORD: I don’t know what exculpatory evidence…

WHITEHOUSE: Is it(ph)…

FORD: … is.

WHITEHOUSE: … not helpful to your recollection and — and — version of events. Helpful to the accused.

FORD: Understood. Yes.

WHITEHOUSE: So it could go either way.

FORD: Yes.

WHITEHOUSE: And you were (ph) still — not just willing, but insistent that the FBI should investigate your recollection and your claim?

FORD: 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.

WHITEHOUSE: And — 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 is 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 — haven’t 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 the decision to have this be, I think, the only background investigation in history to be stopped as derogatory information came forward, belongs with 13 men: the president, Director Wray of the FBI, and the 11 members of the majority of this committee.

As to the committee’s investigation, the fact that Mr. Kavanaugh’s alleged accomplice has not been subpoenaed, has not been examined and cross-examined under oath, has not been interviewed 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’s possible, I will do whatever’s in my power to make sure that your claims get a full and proper investigation and not just this.

Thank you for being here.

FORD: Thank you.

GRASSLEY: Since this issue’s come up so many times, I’d like to comment.

The New Yorker published an anonymous account of allegations, September the 14th. Two days later, Dr. Ford identified herself as the victim in a Post article, detailing her allegations.

I immediately directed my staff to investigate. September the 17th, 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 the 24th giving Dr. Ford a week to prepare her testimony and come to Washington, D.C.

On September the 17th, the committee investigative staff reached out to Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh to schedule follow-up interviews with Republican and Democrat investigators.

Judge Kavanaugh accepted the opportunity to speak to the investigators under criminal penalty. Dr. Ford declined.

In his interview on September the 17th, Judge Kavanaugh denied the allegations and requested a hearing as soon as possible. Democratic staff refused to participate in that interview.

The next day, September the 18th, committee investigative staff contacted Mark Judge requesting an interview. Committee staff also learned the identity of two other alleged partygoers and requested interviews. 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 — all 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…

KLOBUCHAR: Mr. Chairman…

GRASSLEY: … we’re responding to Dr. Ford’s request to tell her story, that’s why we’re here.

KLOBUCHAR: … Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman…

GRASSLEY: … Ms. Mitchell, go for Senator…

KLOBUCHAR: … Mr. Chairman, I just want to point out that — to support what Senator Whitehouse said, in the Anita Hill case…

DURBIN?: Can we hear from Dr. — Dr. Ford?

KLOBUCHAR: … George Bush ordered that the investigation be opened again.

GRASSLEY: Ms. Mitchell, will you proceed for — for Senator Lee?

MITCHELL: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Dr. Ford, The Washington Post reported in their September 16th article that you did show them therapist notes. Is that incorrect?

FORD: I don’t remember physically showing her a note.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: Perhaps my counsel did. I don’t — I don’t remember physically showing her my copy of the note.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: But I — I just don’t remember. I’m sorry. I have retrieved a physical copy of those medical records.

MITCHELL: OK, thank you. You also attended individual therapy. Did you show any of those notes to the reporter from The Washington Post?

FORD: 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 — I don’t know for sure, but I certainly spoke with her about the 2013 record with the individual therapist.

MITCHELL: And Brett Kavanaugh’s name is not in those notes, is that correct?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: OK. In reading The Washington Post article, it mentions that this incident that we’re here about 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?

FORD: I think that’s a great question. I think the etiology if anxiety and PTSD is multifactorial. So that was certainly a critical risk — risk that — we would call a risk factor in science, so that would be a predictor of the symptoms that I now have.

It doesn’t mean that other things that have happened in my life would have — would make it worse or better. There are other risk factors as well.

MITCHELL: So have there been other things, then, that have contributed to the anxiety and PTSD that you suffered?

FORD: Well, I think there’s, sort of, biological predispositions that everyone in here has for particular disorders. So I can’t rule out that I would have some biological predisposition to be, you know…

MITCHELL: What about…

FORD: … an anxious type person.

MITCHELL: … what about environmental?

FORD: Environmentally, not that I can think of.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: Certainly, no — nothing as striking as that event.

MITCHELL: OK. In your interview with The Washington Post, you said that you told your husband early in your marriage that you had been a victim of, and I quote, “physical abuse.” In your statement, you said that before you were married, you told him that you had experienced, quote, “a sexual assault.” Do these two things refer to the same incident?

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: And at either point on these two times, did you use any names?

FORD: No.

MITCHELL: OK.

May I ask, Dr. Ford, how did you get to Washington?

FORD: In an airplane.

MITCHELL: OK. It’s — 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 fear of flying. Is — is that true?

FORD: Well, I was willing — I was hoping that they would come to me, but then I realized that was an unrealistic request.

MITCHELL: It would’ve been a quicker trip for me.

FORD: 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 gumption with the help of some friends, and get on the plane.

MITCHELL: OK (ph). When you were here in the mid — mid-Atlantic area back in August, end of July, August, how did you get here?

FORD: Also by airplane. I come here once a year during the summer to visit my family.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: I’m sorry, not here. I go to Delaware.

MITCHELL: OK. In fact, you fly fairly frequently for your hobbies and your — you’ve had to fly for your work. Is that true?

FORD: Correct, unfortunately.

MITCHELL: You — you were a consulting biostatistician in Sydney, Australia. Is that right?

FORD: I’ve never been to Australia, but the company that I worked for is based in Australia, and they have an office in San Francisco, California.

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: I — I don’t think I’ll make it to Australia.

MITCHELL: It is long.

I also saw on your C.V. that you list the following interests of surf travel, and you, in parentheses” Hawaii, Costa Rica, South Pacific islands and French Polynesia.” Have you been all to those places?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: By airplane?

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: And your interests also include oceanography, Hawaiian and Tahitian culture. Did you travel by air as a part of those interests?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: All right. Thank you very much.

FORD: Easier for me to travel going that direction when it’s a vacation.

GRASSLEY: (OFF MIKE) Senator Klobuchar.

KLOBUCHAR: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for being here, Dr. Ford.

You know, 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’ve had to tell your story before the entire nation.

For so many years, people swept cases like yours under the rug. They’d say what happens inside a house didn’t belong in the courthouse. Well, the times have changed, so I just want to thank you for coming forward today, and for sharing your report with us.

Now, I understand that you’ve taken a polygraph test, Dr. Ford, that found that you were being truthful when you described what happened to you. Can you tell us why you decided to take that test?

FORD: I was meeting with attorneys. I was interviewing various attorneys, and the attorneys I asked if I was willing to take it, and I said absolutely. That said, it was almost as anxiety-provoking as an airplane flight.

KLOBUCHAR: OK. 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?

FORD: I feel like I could be much more helpful if I could be provided with that date through employment records or the IRS or something, any – anything that would help.

KLOBUCHAR: Thank you. I would assume that’s true.

Dr. Ford, under federal law — and I don’t expect you to know this, 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?

FORD: My therapist?

KLOBUCHAR: Yes.

FORD: My individual therapist. Correct.

KLOBUCHAR: Right 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 Kavanaugh’s name. Is that right?

FORD: Yes, I just have to slow down a minute because I might have been confusing. So there were two separate incidents…

KLOBUCHAR: Yes.

FORD: …where it’s reflected in my medical record. I had talked about it more than those two times, but therapists don’t typically write down content as much as they write down process. They usually are tracking your symptoms and not your story and the facts.

KLOBUCHAR: Yes. Right.

FORD: I just happen to have it in my record twice. So the first time is in 2012 with my husband in couples therapy with the quibbling over the remodel, and then in 2013 with my individual therapist.

KLOBUCHAR: OK, so if — if someone had actually done an investigation your husband would have been able to say that you named his name at that time?

FORD: Correct.

KLOBUCHAR: OK. I know you’ve been concerned…

FORD: 2012.

KLOBUCHAR: …with your privacy throughout the process, and you first requested that your account be kept confidential. Can you briefly tell us why?

FORD: Yes. So as I stated before, once — I was unsuccessful in getting my information to you before the candidate was chosen. My original intent was to get the information when there was still a list of other candidates available. And once that was not successful and I saw that persons were very supportive of the nominee, I tracked it…

KLOBUCHAR: OK.

FORD: …all summer and realized that when I was calculating that risk-benefit ratio that it looked like I was going to just, you know, suffer only for no reason.

KLOBUCHAR: OK. You know from my experience with memory, I remember distinctly things that happened to me in high school or happened to me in college.

FORD: Yes.

KLOBUCHAR: But I 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?

FORD: 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 uproarious laughter, and the multiple attempts to escape and the final ability to do so.

KLOBUCHAR: Thank you very much Dr. Ford.

GRASSLEY: Dr. Ford. I’m going to correct the record but it’s not something that I’m saying that you stated wrongly because you may not know the fact that when – when you said that you didn’t think it was possible for us to go to California as a committee or our investigators to go to California to talk to you, we did, in fact, offer that to you and we had the capability of doing it and we would’ve done it anywhere or anytime.

FORD: Thank you.

KLOBUCHAR: And Mr. Chairman, could I put the polygraph results on the record, please? The polygraph results in the record.

GRASSLEY: Without…

KLOBUCHAR: Is there any objection?

GRASSLEY: Oh, or — let us see the chart.

KLOBUCHAR: The polygraph? You want to all see it?

GRASSLEY: Will you hold just a minute, please?

KLOBUCHAR: I think you may have it.

GRASSLEY: Yes, can we have the underlying charts, too?

KLOBUCHAR: The underlying charts? I have the polygraph results that I would just like to put in the record. I’ll — I’ll deal with the charts after that. Could I put the polygraph tests in the record?

BROMWICH: Mr. Chairman, we were — we had proposed having the polygraph examiner testify, as you know. If that had happened, the full panoply of materials that he had supporting his examination would have been provided. You rejected that request, so what we did provide was the polygraph report, which is what the members of the committee currently have.

KLOBUCHAR: And on September 26th, Mr. Chairman, this was actually sent to your chief counsel. And I just want to share with America so that they have this report as well.

GRASSLEY: OK. We will accept, without objection, what you asked us to include but we’re also requesting and expect the other materials that I’ve just stated.

KLOBUCHAR: But Mr. Chairman, you wouldn’t allow the underlying witness who performed the polygraph test to testify, nor would you allow Mark Judge to testify. And so I would just like to point out — thank you for allowing this report in the record, but that is the reason that we don’t have the underlying information for you.

GRASSLEY: You got what you wanted, I think you’d be satisfied.

BROMWICH: Mr. Chairman…

KLOBUCHAR: I am satisfied with that. Thank you.

GRASSLEY: Senator — go ahead.

GRAHAM: When was the polygraph administered?

KLOBUCHAR: It was administered on August the 7th…

GRAHAM: When was…

KLOBUCHAR: …in 2018 and it was — the date of the report is August 10, 2018, Mr. Graham.

GRAHAM: When was it provided to the committee?

GRASSLEY: Let’s just see if we can’t do this in a more orderly way. Let’s…

KLOBUCHAR: Well, it was — I was — he was asking and I have it right here and you have it as well. It was…

GRASSLEY: We’ve accepted…

KLOBUCHAR: …September 26th.

GRASSLEY: We’ve accepted it.

KLOBUCHAR: All right.

GRASSLEY: Ms. Mitchell for Senator Cruz.

MITCHELL: Thank you. Dr. Ford, we’ve 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’d like to shift gears and discuss the last several months.

FORD: OK.

MITCHELL: In your statement, you said that on July 6th, 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 6th?

FORD: No, I did not. I did not know how to do that.

MITCHELL: OK. Prior to July 6th, had you spoken to any member of Congress? And when I say Congress, I mean the Senate or the House of Representatives or any congressional staff members about your allegations?

FORD: No.

MITCHELL: Why did you contact the Washington Post, then, on July 6th?

FORD: So, I was panicking because I knew the timeline was short for the decision and people were giving me advice on the beach. People who don’t know about the processes, but they were giving me advice.

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 an anonymous tip, go to your congressperson.”

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 congressperson, who happens to be Anna Eshoo. So I called her office and I also put in the anonymous tip to The Washington Post. And neither — unfortunately, neither got back to me in — before the selection of the nominee.

MITCHELL: You testified that Congresswoman Eshoo’s office contacted you on July 9th, is that right?

FORD: They contacted me the date that the nominee was announced, so that seems likely what…

MITCHELL: Had you talked to — about your allegations with anyone in her office before the date of July 9th?

FORD: I told the receptionist on the phone.

MITCHELL: OK. On July 10th, you texted The Washington Post again, which was really the third time, is that right? Second date, third time.

FORD: Let’s see.

(UNKNOWN): (OFF-MIKE) One moment.

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: And you texted — been advised to contact senators or New York Times, haven’t heard back from Washington Post. Who…

FORD: Yes.

MITCHELL: … advised you to contact senators or The New York Times?

FORD: Beach friends…

MITCHELL: OK.

FORD: … 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 that once I sent that encrypted text, they responded very quickly.

MITCHELL: Did you contact The New York Times?

FORD: No.

MITCHELL: OK. Why not?

FORD: 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.

MITCHELL: OK. The Washington Post texted back that someone would get in touch — get you in touch with a reporter. Did you subsequently talk to a reporter with The Washington Post?

FORD: Yes, under the encrypted app and off the record.

MITCHELL: OK. Who was that reporter?

FORD: Emma Brown.

MITCHELL: OK. The person who ultimately wrote the story on September 16th?

FORD: Correct.

MITCHELL: OK. Did you talk to any member of Congress — and, again, remember Congress includes the Senate, or the House of Representatives or any congressional staff members — about your allegations between July 10th and the July — and July 30th, which was the date of your letter to Senator Feinstein?

FORD: Yes, I met with Congresswoman Eshoo’s staff. And I think that’s July 18th, the Wednesday, and then on the Friday I met with the congresswoman herself.

MITCHELL: OK. When you met with her, did you meet with her alone or did someone come with you?

FORD: I was alone. She had a staff person.

MITCHELL: OK. What did you talk about with Congresswoman Eshoo and her staff on July 18th and the 20th?

FORD: 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 I also talked to her about fears of whether this was confidential information. And she talked about the constituent confidentiality principle.

MITCHELL: Thank you.

GRASSLEY: Senator Coons.

COONS: Thank you, Chairman Grassley. I’d like to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record five articles, including one titled “Why Sexual Assault Memories Stick,” and one entitled “Why Didn’t Kavanaugh Accuser Come Forward Earlier? Police Often Ignore Sexual Assault Allegations.”

GRASSLEY: Without objection, so ordered.

COONS: Dr. Ford, I want to begin by thanking 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’ve 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’d 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 Kavanaugh before he was nominated to the Supreme Court. Do I understand correctly that when you — when you first reached out to Congresswoman Eshoo and to the Washington Post tip line, that was when he was on the short list, but before he was nominated to the Supreme Court. Is that correct?

FORD: Correct.

COONS: And if I understood your testimony earlier, it’s that you were motivated by a sense of civic duty, and — and frankly, a hope that some other highly-qualified nominee might be picked, not out of a motivation at a late stage to have an impact on the final decision.

FORD: Correct. I thought it was very important to get the information to you, but I didn’t know how to do it while there was still a short list of candidates.

COONS: Thank you, Doctor.

According to Justice Department data, about two thirds of sexual assault survivors don’t report their assaults. Based on your experience, I’d be interested in hearing from you about this, because you bore this alone. You bore this alone for a very long time, and it’d be helpful for us to better understand the ways that that’s impacted your whole life.

FORD: Well, it’s — 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 — with the immediate impacts, the short-term impacts, I experienced, like, longer-term impacts of anxiety and relationship challenges.

COONS: Thank you for sharing that. And — and yet, you went on to get a PhD from USC. Is that correct?

FORD: Correct.

COONS: As you predicted, there was 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’ve reviewed the wide range of reactions, I’ve been really 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’d appreciate your reaction to the excuse that boys will be boys.

FORD: 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 you’re a full — when your brain is fully-developed, and you have better coping skills that you’ve developed.

COONS: You know, 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 the survival mode that we go into in experiencing trauma. Is that your experience, and is that something you can help the layperson understand?

FORD: 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 adrenaline and cortisol and norepinephrine and — credit that a little bit for my ability to get out of the situation.

But also some other lucky events that occurred. That…

COONS: Well…

FORD: …allowed me to get out of the event.

COONS: Dr. Ford, we are grateful that you came through it and that you shared your account with us and the American people. And I think you’ve provided important information. I’d like to thank you for your — meeting your civic duty.

I wish we could have provided for you a more thorough hearing today. I think asking for the FBI to investigate this matter thoroughly 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 thankful for your courage, which set an import