Page 33 - Debbie Ramirez News Today : Breaking News, Live Updates & Top Stories | Vimarsana

>> i'm going to stick with you longer as we wait for them to come out of the doors. here's a bit from chuck grassley, what he said, he did not read the document himself. he was briefed by staff on this. he said there's nothing in it that we didn't already know. these uncorroborated accusations have been unequivocally and repeatedly rejected by judge kavanaugh, and neither the judiciary committee nor the fbi could locate any third party who can attest to any of the allegations. on this key point, manu, i'm very interested to hear what dianne feinstein says when she comes out. >> yeah. i think w...

Leeann, we know that the fbi investigation has taken five days. that's how long it took to be completed. there are questions about the scope and who they talked to. they spoke with nine individuals. you feel there should have been more? >> ten individuals were contacted. they spoke to nine. you don't have to submit to an interview if you don't want to. these were related to kavanaugh and ramirez during their time at yale, people who lived in these suites and reached out to the fbi but they were not spoken to and there was a new one this morning that came out in the new yorker, kenneth appold, ...

Nomination. >> but that's not -- >> she's talking, for crying out loud. >> there was never any public assault allegations. that is very, very important in sexual assault and sexual harassment cases. whether you have corroboration, whether you told someone about this prior to it becoming public, and she has given the name of six people who she told prior to it becoming public, and the fbi chose not to use it. and the reason this matters is because senators are using this talking point. there's no corroborating evidence. but, in fact, there are corroborating witnesses who should be talked to by ...

We've heard that they believe the outcome will be favorable to the white house. here is raj shah a short time ago. >> we are fully confident, after reviewing this information, senators will be comfortable voting yes. >> only nine people -- why should senators up on capitol hill feel this was an all-encompassing process, that everything that should have been -- >> should have been, right? what critics want is a never-ending fishing expedition into high school drinking. that's not what the senators requested or where this investigation's scope went. it went to serious allegations and it tried to...

Should be made public? >> good afternoon, ana. yes, it should be made public, but it should be a much bigger report. it's concerning that they would limit the scope of their investigation. and the fact that the white house had limited the scope of the investigation to me represents a consciousness of guilt, a fear of what they would find if they had heard from other potential witnesses provided by debbie ramirez, of what they would found if they had interviewed judge kavanaugh and dr. ford. >> why do you think they would have found something differently? >> well, certainly dr. ford and debbie ...