Josh, Kavanagh, Brett Cavenaugh discussed on All In with Chris Hayes
There's no reason why Dr blazey Ford should be getting less due process than Anita hill got, and we all know how terribly need a hill was treated. But that's a sensually where we are right now. Josh one big struck me when the allegations for surfaces that a lot of people rush to defend. Cavenaugh not in the way he did. He said, this is not true and denied it and a bunch of you wanted to make the argument. Well, if you do something when you're seventeen, this is Ari Fleischer. Making version of that argument. Take a listen. But there's a bigger ethical issue. I want to get to here too. I wanna say this with a lot of sensitivity because he's sensitive issues, but high school behavior, how much and society should any of us be held liable today when we've lived at good life, upstanding life by all accounts. And then something that maybe is arguable issue took place in highschool. Should that deny chances later in life even for supreme court job a presidency of the United States or you name it? It was interesting, Josh. That was an argument that so many rush to. Yeah, when I think we should note that that's not the argument the Kavanagh's made possibly because it's not very good argument, but also possibly because he didn't do this and if he didn't do this, why would he need to defend his theoretical actions in high school? But I think you know, we're likely to end up in a position here regardless of the of whether there is further FBI investigation here senators, Susan Collins today raised the possibility. They could go back to the f. b. i. after there's a. Hearing on Monday if doctor testifies on Monday, but because of the nature of this allegation, thirty five years in the past, I think it's unlikely that the f. b. i. is likely to produce information that is inclusive in either direction. And so back to your point about Kavanagh's credibility, I think it's basically going to be on this committee to make an evaluation of the relative credibility of these two people, and then to make an evaluation of what to do in a situation where you're unsure whether Brett cavenaugh has done this or not. There's not a this is not like a criminal proceeding where you have a evidentiary standard set out in law where you have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. It is up to the senators discretion. How sure they have to feel about whether or not cavenaugh did this. And I think they need to do some soul-searching on that because it's very unlikely. I think that we're going to have conclusive proof either way. I think that point vanita. I mean, just seem to me that there is no escaping through process coming to a determination about fool, you believe. I think that's right if we had faith that the Republican senators were actually acting in good faith and trying to take seriously, they're all of advice and consent. But when you have a whole process where only ten percent of the documents were made available where there's been concealment throughout this entire process where they're invoking executive privilege in an unprecedented way on materials and documents that have that have no business being being hidden from the public. And from senators throughout this process, there has been, it's been nothing has been given reason to have any credibility in this process to think that senators are taking that role seriously wouldn't even eater you would oppose cavenaugh would no matter what the processes look. We were. There's no question that we were opposing having on his record and on, and I will say the process just made it all that much worse for the American public to actually not be able to fully consider the fullness of his of his background. But I will say the senators themselves have a very. They have a constitutional duty to me. And I think throughout this process and now is being thoroughly highlighted by the way that they're just trying to jam this through and enor- standard procedure. It is..