but first we must addressed and we begin tonight with the democrats blatant attempt to derail the kavanaugh confirmation. the first scheduled both in the senate have now been delayed. one week from tonight or today i ve actually, the senate judiciary committee will hold an open question and judge kavanaugh will be there in order to address what is a 36-year-old sexual misconduct allegations from his teenage years. his accuser has also been asked to testify. no word of confirmation if she will be at the lack of hearing. this comes after dianne feinstein out of the blueth released a cryptic statement last week about an anonymousfe individual who is now accusingg brett kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. when they were both in high school, and like 1982 but they don t know the exact year. that s a charge he categorically denied. keep in mind, dianne feinstein, and all her fellow democrats, they have had this information since july.erer but she didn t ask judge kavanaugh about the allegation
go unchallenged. so here s what i m going to do, and it s not that complicated. it s a 36-year-old allegation, serious allegation and everyone needs to be heard but also people need to defendio themselves. i m going to look at what she said about brett kavanaugh in high school and compare that to everything else i know about brett kavanaugh including his denial and i will make the decision. and here s what i want your audience to know. if ms. ford never intended to come forward or never planned to come forward, why did she pay for a polygraph in august andde why did she hire a lawyer in august if she never intended to do what she is doing? hannity: that s a poignant point in an interesting question. and who paid for it? as she agreed to be interviewed? she s welcome to come. we are having a hearing monday, she can come if she likes but if she doesn t want to she doesn t have to. l kavanaugh can come and i think he will.
the united states. and if you are looking at the judicial philosophy is over 300 published opinions. from that standpoint inr this day and a time, and i understand this. allegation has been made, judge kavanaugh is going to respond and that s the appropriate way. the accuser will have her time as well and that should be an h orderly and appropriate process. and i think what senator graham said is correct. and if you look at the history of robert bork and clarence thomas, i think it gives people more reason to pause. and i don t think nobody was there. nobody knows. what if it s only resolved that this woman makes the allegation, the person that was supposedlyak in the room says no and the judge says no, there s nothing else in his career that marks a blemish on his character, and he is the perfect gentleman by the
we will vote on wednesday. all i can say is that i ve been a prosecutor, judge and defense counsel all of my life until i got into politics. this case could not go before a criminal court because it s too old and no lawyer would bring it as a civil suit because it s too hard to prove. the question for the senate, is there really enough evidence here given the nature of the allegation, how old it is in the uncertain nature of it, to deny this man who has lived an incredible life of a promotion to the supreme court. and if it was this bad why did not the democrats challenged judge kavanaugh when he was sitting right there in front of them. hannity: why don t you answer that, why didn t they bring it forward? i think it s part of a pattern. they can t beat him on the law so they are trying to destroy hisor life. if the conservative had added a tape of a liberal nominee to the court where that they take the words and turn them upside down,
how did a hillary clinton david, bought and paid for russian dossier become the foundational materials or bulk of information to get a fisa warrant? how did they withhold that information to the judge? does that mean they committed fraud on the judge and on the fisa court? never mind that it was overwhelming in the beginning, and they tried to go after that guy in the middle of the screen? absolutely. any material omission or withholding of information from the fisa court violated those constitutional rules. i think now we are headed toward the first step in writing thesee wrongs to the american people. declassification is key, and let s be very clear because it s shameful that we are hearing protest station for members of congress about the declassification. every american should demand full transparency and that is what the president is providingd and this is his spartacus