fbi on september 12th, over two weeks ago. if the president and the republican majority had asked for the fbi to do an investigation at that time, like we asked, it would likely be finished by now. most importantly, when judge kavanaugh talked to republicans repeatedly, none of us have spoken to or questioned mark judge, patrick smyth, leland keyser. none of us approached james roche, lynne or chris. not one senator, as far as i know, has had the opportunity, from, opportunity to or question deborah ramirez or julie swetnick. my colleagues are right, we should not rush to judgment.
objections, but it has only come to our attention here in the last several days. probably the last two weeks. it has been 60 days since dr. ford s letter, since the letter was made public. then we ve had some comments about why we didn t investigate ramirez. when i learned of ms. ramirez s allegations, i acted immediately to investigate them, unlike our democratic colleagues, some of whom sat on her story and apparently conducted their own private investigation rather than shared with the committee. mr. chairman, excuse me for interrupting, but could we have order? welcome of the order would be that we go back and forth. apparently, we are going to have
over two weeks ago. if the president ends the republican majority had asked for the fbi to an investigation at that time like we asked, it would likely be finished by now. and most importantly, one judge kavanaugh house talked to to republicans repeatedly, none of us have spoken to her? judge, patrick smith, leland keyser, or the polygraph examiner. none of us have talked to or questioned lynn brooks, liz swisher, or chris dudley. it not one senator, as far as i know, have had the opportunity to question deborah ramirez or julie swetnick. my colleagues all right. we should not rush to judgment, and it s not fair to assume judge kavanaugh is guilty
forth. apparently you can have two republicans speak and one democrat. is that what that s what absolutely. after i get done, i m not giving an opening statement. i m explaining, as a chairman ought to explain the work of the committee to people who don t seem to understand it. i ll call on senator hatch when i m done, then you senator leahy. when i learned of miss ramirez s allegations, i acted immediately to investigate them, unlike our democratic colleagues some of who sat on her story and conducted their own private investigation rather than share it with the chairman. i first learned of her allegations when they became public in the article new yorker publishes late sunday evening, september 23rd. my staff immediately contacted her asking when she was available for an interview with committee investigators. the next afternoon, monday, september 24, council responded
without gathering the information, but it s equally unfair to have heard from a credible, poise, and a brave witness and simply ignore what we heard and move forward immediately. i don t know deborah ramirez. i don t know whether her allegations are credible. i don t know julie swetnick. i don t know whether her allegations are credible. but i do you know this. it dr. ford provided credible, powerful testimony that deserves to be considered and not dismissed as a partisan smear campaign, which it was not. in my opening statement yesterday, i talked about the differences between the #metoo and the year of the woman. i highlighted the differences. sexual assault and harassment. i started out by saying i hoped