pages of documents from judge kavanaugh s time on the executive branch. this was more pages of such documents done the last five supreme court nominees combined. in short, it was almost thorough thorough and transparent confirmation process. i m going to put the rest of my statement in the record because i m sure a lot of people are irritated right now, and i will let them express that irritatio irritation. i will call on senator feinstein and then put the rest of my statement in the record. thank you, mr. chairman. i m very disappointed that we are here today voting on this nomination, especially in light of the testimony that we heard just yesterday. my republican colleagues spend their time at the hearing focused exclusively on policy and partisanship. the majority argued that the sexual assault dr. ford experienced was nothing more
senator is the only person i know who has read it. i ran for president, and i got 1%, so i i have my time to be president. didn t go very far, and i lost. i ran out of adjectives to describe how i felt about the campaign. well, he won, i lost. he s president. i will try to help him where i can. say no when i must, and the election is over for me. i would like to tell him that he had a choice to make for the supreme court vacancy of justice kennedy. for somebody who is supposedly crazy and there is chaos everywhere, he did a good job here. why the difference between a neil gorsuch and kennedy? excuse me, kavanaugh.
2018. it reminds me, in 1987, i was a young speechwriter in the reagan administrator. i remember watching that. we that was kind of our first introduction into this whole process. and i had read a lot of what he had written. obviously, unbelievable intellect, but it was at that point that i really is, and maybe i was just idealistic, that so much of it was just performance. he didn t look to be a nice person. he didn t have the right demeanor. he is one of the smartest judges and judicial writers in the history of legal understanding. and he didn t make it on the court. then fast-forward to 1991, when i was about to clerk for judge thomas. seeing what he went through, hope again, a leaked allegation, turning the entire process into
angry. he had rage. he cut off female senators, he was dismissive of the process. ramming through that confirmation bill. bill: you saw a man who was fighting for his life and fighting for his family. i saw a man who walked in yesterday with his wife and son listen, if you re going to burn down my house, i m going to burn down yours as well. it was pointed, and many have suggested that supreme court nominees do not get political. his commentary was clearly directed at democrats for what he has gone through for the last several weeks. we went into that hearing saying he s going to have to push back, and then when he did, everybody said is that too much? where s the line? so which way is that? i think that the processes under scrutiny because look at what senate democrats could have done, okay? when senator feinstein gets the
you ve got to keep them off the court because they are going to be pro-choice vote. they hate guns. on and on and on. and i try to go back to what we use to do. voted against a burg. you will never convince me it was because he agreed with her philosophy. i think i saw and heard a qualified person. hollings voted for scalia. at the same is true. 96 and 97 votes. most of the nominees never had a hearing. always just assumed that they are qualified, that they are going to go forward. elections do matter. when it comes to president trum president trump, elections do matter. now, about the law. and to my friends who have been prosecutors. i have been a prosecutor,