Gregg Nunziata is a lawyer in Washington, DC, who previously served as chief nominations counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The FBI has completed a supplemental investigation into recent allegations against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, reportedly finding no troubling information. Frustrated that the bureau hasn’t helped them bring down a nomination they otherwise oppose, Democrats have pivoted to attacking the FBI — specifically, claiming that the inquiry was curtailed to prejudice the outcome by limiting the pool of interviewees.

They’re wrong: The FBI followed procedure precisely.

Indeed, the FBI followed the standard background investigation process the Senate uses for the hundreds of nominations it considers. And it’s exactly the process that Democrats were demanding only days ago.

In a letter to President Trump, Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and Judiciary Committee ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein discussed their understanding that “conducting background investigations on nominees has long been the FBI’s standard practice, and it is common for such background investigations to be reopened when new information about a nominee becomes known.”

They asked the president to “adhere to precedent and direct the FBI to immediately and thoroughly investigate [allegations against Kavanaugh] and provide a report to the Senate as soon as possible.”

Many Democrats echoed this position, in particular noting that such a follow-up investigation shouldn’t take very long. Sen. Amy Klobuchar said that she supported “a finite period for an FBI investigation, maybe a week.”

All these comments reflect the senators’ understanding of the FBI’s important, but limited, role in a background investigation.

What the bureau does do, and what it is excellent at, is compile evidence that has bearing on a nominee’s character and fitness to serve. It gathers facts and conducts interviews, both with witnesses willing to be identified by name and those who wish to remain anonymous. Agents talk to scores of people who knew the nominee at various stages of his or her life: neighbors, colleagues, former romantic partners, etc. It then compiles a file of its work, which the Senate reviews prior to making its determination on confirmation.

In rare cases, information or allegations arise after the file is complete. When this happens, the FBI may be asked to conduct an additional, supplemental investigation, narrowly targeted to those matters. That’s what the Senate requested and that’s what it got with respect to recent allegations against Kavanaugh.

This supplemental investigation adds to an already thick file. The FBI has now conducted six thorough investigations of Judge Kavanaugh, both in connection with his nomination to the Supreme Court and in prior government service. All of those investigations demonstrated the judge’s character and fitness.

The Judiciary Committee also has held a hearing to hear directly from Dr. Christine Blasey Ford at which both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh testified under oath. The committee took statements, under penalty of felony, from several individuals thought to have knowledge of recent investigations. Senators have access to an enormous trove of data and sworn testimony.

Democrats now portray the FBI supplementary investigation, which followed standard procedures they deemed essential just days ago, as a mere smokescreen. Feinstein exclaimed: “The most notable part of the report is what is not in it.” In particular, she objected that the FBI did not interview Ford, despite the fact that Ford had already testified before the committee and expressly testified that she had nothing further to add. Schumer said, “We had many fears that this was a limited process … Those fears have been realized.”

This spin can be explained in only one of two ways: Either Senate Democrats piously demanding an FBI investigation had no understanding of what such an investigation entails or, much more likely, they have been cynically playing for delays all along.

Timing is everything. This supplemental FBI investigation of new claims against Kavanaugh would’ve happened two months ago had Senate Democrats followed standard procedures and shared the letter they received from Ford, detailing her allegations against Kavanaugh, with their Republican colleagues and the FBI. (Something similar happened with respect to Anita Hill’s claims against Clarence Thomas.) Instead, they sat on the information and it was leaked at the 11th hour.

Nor can one ignore that Senate Judiciary Committee members — Republicans and Democrats alike — have access to significant investigatory capabilities on their own staff. The majority staff on the committee interviewed — under penalty of felony — individuals likely to have knowledge of claims against Kavanaugh.

Senate Democrats, meanwhile, boycotted many of these interviews. Feinstein reportedly did not even attend the portion of Kavanaugh’s hearing dedicated to what the committee considers character issues.

Now that the FBI has conducted this additional investigation, some senators have greater confidence in the record before them and will be prepared to vote to confirm him. Others, who once demanded this investigation, continue to oppose the confirmation and demean the FBI’s process. In so doing, they’ll reveal they were only after delay all along.