inconsistent with the weight of the evidence obtained during our investigation. we find the explanations around specific allegations to be contrived. it says the governor's blanket denials and lack of recollection as to specific incidents stood in contrast to the strength and corroboration of the complainants as well as the individuals who offered experiences of the governor's conduct. my question is did what we heard from the governor change anything in terms of your interpretation of all of this? >> this is an important point that you draw out. when you hear the attorney general, when you hear the independent investigators talking about credibility and who they believe, that's not just based on gut instinct. that's a prosecutortorial stacking up of the evidence and deciding who does the evidence