interviews where i am trying to get him to answer questions about what was said in the committee and he doesn t want to violate committee confidentiality. so he s very good at delivering an answer. he doesn t violate the committee confidentiality. they don t call him shifty schiff for nothing. that s right. i m kidding. if there is anyone who can do a tooth pulling interview with grace and charm, it s you, lawrence. and i chose that you will get to the bottom of what the wife of clarence thomas, at the elections and, i said then. we will try. i will try with congressman schiff. and i saw your discussion of it, alex, and i am going to try i have a different take, and i am prepared to be talked out of this by professor weisman, he s
these confirmation hearings work today. do you see any signs of this changing in light of this latest indication here, this letter that s come to at least the senator s attention by dianne feinstein based on the e-mails, the memos that were introduced during the course of this hearing against committee confidentiality? are things likely to change, do you think in. barry made a good point about the politicization of this process. you would think that confirming somebody to the highest court of land where the law that s promulgated from that court is stuff that is bound and binds all of us as precedent is pretty important, i think, for even the average joe. but i don t think they re necessarily going to make any of those changes anytime soon because there s never going to be an agreement between the republicans and the democrats. there are parallels with the anita hill issue. we also know, david, that even joe biden later on said, look, i m remiss that i didn t actually follow up more
designation of documents as committee confidential. i offered to work with the chair. he refused. judiciary democrats sent the chairman a letter on august 28th, restating the objection to the chair s designation of the documents as committee confidential and requesting public release. as i have looked a eed at the documents that are committee confidential, they do not affect any of the usual standards that would deny committee confidentiality. mr. chairman, i think that s a problem. i think we re entitled to all records. and i think the public is entitled to all records. that are appropriate and do not put forward personal information or information that otherwise should not be disclosed.
committee confidential. i offered to work with the chair, he refused. judiciary democrats sent to the chairman a letter on august 28th restating the objection to the chair s designation of the documents as committee confidential. in requesting public release. as i have looked as the documents that are committee confidential, they do not affect any of the usual standards that would deny committee confidentiality. mr. chairman, i think that is a problem. i think we are entitled to all records, and i think the public is entitled to all records. they are appropriate and do not put forward personal information or information that otherwise should not be disclosed. so, i do think we have a
remember the things done by somebody who i think on both sides of the aisle we would both agree is one of the most egregious breaches of committee confidentiality, manny miranda stole material from here, stole it to send it to you and others at the white house. you have no recollection of that? i obviously recall the e-mails or have seen the e-mails, but your question your larger question was did that raise a red flag, and i ve answered that no. well, i when you were in the kwhiet house was it your job