SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Based on my experience, the FBI should be asked to conduct a supplemental investigation into the allegations of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford. (Photo: Screenshot)
Judicial Nominee Background Investigations -- Fact vs. Fiction
We’re clarifying the FBI background process and addressing the misinformation being spread by Judge Kavanaugh’s defenders
https://medium.com/@civilrightsorg/judicial-nominee-background-investigations-f…
Sep 20, 2018
For nearly seven years, from August 2010 to January 2017, I served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy (OLP). I supervised the vetting of over 300 judicial nominees and worked closely with the FBI as they conducted background investigations and supplemental investigations of these individuals.
Based on my experience, the FBI should be asked to conduct a supplemental investigation into the allegations of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford. This post seeks to clarify the FBI background process and address the misinformation being spread by Judge Kavanaugh's defenders.
Fiction
The FBI shouldn't investigate Judge Kavanaugh based on Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations because the FBI doesn't conduct criminal investigations into nominees.
Fact
No one is calling for a federal criminal investigation of Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations. The FBI's career professionals conduct standard background investigations for every judicial nominee, and when new information comes to light, the FBI can re-open a background investigation and conduct additional witness interviews. That occurred several times during my tenure at OLP.
And as many have noted, the FBI re-opened its background investigation in 1991 when Anita Hill came forward with allegations of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas. At the time, Senator Hatch stated:
"When they heard about this the first time, they immediately ordered the FBI investigation, which was the very right thing to do. It was the appropriate thing to do. They did what every other chairman and ranking member have done in the past. And the investigation was done and it was a good investigation."
Similarly, it would be appropriate for the FBI to investigate Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations.
Fiction
It is only appropriate for the FBI to investigate allegations that are made confidentially, like Anita Hill's, because, according to Senator Grassley, the "purpose of the background investigation process is to compile information in a confidential manner" and "Dr. Ford has already made her allegations public."
Fact
That analysis is flawed. The purpose of a background investigation is for the FBI to ascertain facts and information relevant to the potential nominee's suitability and trustworthiness for government employment. The memoranda of understanding that govern FBI background investigations do not require that such investigations only address confidential allegations. Although Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations are now public, there may be witnesses who would speak to the FBI who have not spoken publicly. Some people may be more willing to be candid with the FBI than they would be in other contexts, because they are under oath.
Fiction
An FBI investigation into Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations wouldn't be helpful because the FBI doesn't make judgments about the credibility of the people they interview.
Fact
The FBI doesn't make credibility determinations, but they have career professionals with the training and investigative experience necessary to ask the right questions and solicit relevant information. Special training is particularly important when interviewing sexual assault survivors and those who may have knowledge about the allegations. Once the FBI completes its investigation, senators can make informed credibility determinations and base their own inquiries on information they received from the FBI.
Fiction
If there are questions or allegations regarding a nominee, it is the role of Senate staff -- not the FBI -- to follow up and conduct interviews with relevant witnesses.
Fact
In my experience, staff-led investigations only took place when Senate Judiciary Committee staff had questions about minor issues -- such as a past drug use discrepancy. Such matters could be resolved with a phone call between the nominee and committee counsels, and these calls always took place on a bipartisan basis with counsels for both the chair and ranking member. For more substantial issues, or where significant new information about the nominee came to light, committee staff would notify OLP as to the additional information it sought, and OLP would ask the FBI to return to the field and conduct additional witness interviews, sometimes including a new interview of the nominee.
Fiction
It is too late in the confirmation process for the FBI to conduct a follow-up investigation here.
Fact
If confirmed, Judge Kavanaugh would serve on the Supreme Court for decades. There is no need to rush the Senate's consideration, and there is no deadline for when follow-up investigations may occur. I do not consider a nominee's background investigation to be closed until a nominee is confirmed or withdrawn.
Fiction
The FBI doesn't need to investigate Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations because the FBI has conducted multiple investigations of Judge Kavanaugh over the years, and they have never uncovered allegations of sexual misconduct.
Fact
There is no statute of limitations for investigating allegations. Dr. Blasey Ford has reluctantly come forward at this time, and these new allegations must be investigated, even if they weren't part of Judge Kavanaugh's previous background reports.
Forging ahead with a hearing next week without allowing the FBI an opportunity to conduct additional interviews and collect evidence would be yet another abuse of power by the Republican majority during the Kavanaugh confirmation process. The Senate must honor survivors of sexual assault by taking their allegations seriously, respectfully, and on a nonpartisan basis. An FBI investigation is an important step in that direction. As Senator Hatch noted in 1991 when the FBI conducted an investigation into Anita Hill's allegations: "When they heard about this the first time, they immediately ordered the FBI investigation, which was the very right thing to do." It is the right thing to do today as well.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2023 Medium
Mike Zubrensky
Mike Zubrensky is chief counsel at The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. During the Obama administration, he was Deputy Assistant Attorney General and worked on judicial nominations for the Department of Justice
For nearly seven years, from August 2010 to January 2017, I served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy (OLP). I supervised the vetting of over 300 judicial nominees and worked closely with the FBI as they conducted background investigations and supplemental investigations of these individuals.
Based on my experience, the FBI should be asked to conduct a supplemental investigation into the allegations of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford. This post seeks to clarify the FBI background process and address the misinformation being spread by Judge Kavanaugh's defenders.
Fiction
The FBI shouldn't investigate Judge Kavanaugh based on Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations because the FBI doesn't conduct criminal investigations into nominees.
Fact
No one is calling for a federal criminal investigation of Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations. The FBI's career professionals conduct standard background investigations for every judicial nominee, and when new information comes to light, the FBI can re-open a background investigation and conduct additional witness interviews. That occurred several times during my tenure at OLP.
And as many have noted, the FBI re-opened its background investigation in 1991 when Anita Hill came forward with allegations of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas. At the time, Senator Hatch stated:
"When they heard about this the first time, they immediately ordered the FBI investigation, which was the very right thing to do. It was the appropriate thing to do. They did what every other chairman and ranking member have done in the past. And the investigation was done and it was a good investigation."
Similarly, it would be appropriate for the FBI to investigate Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations.
Fiction
It is only appropriate for the FBI to investigate allegations that are made confidentially, like Anita Hill's, because, according to Senator Grassley, the "purpose of the background investigation process is to compile information in a confidential manner" and "Dr. Ford has already made her allegations public."
Fact
That analysis is flawed. The purpose of a background investigation is for the FBI to ascertain facts and information relevant to the potential nominee's suitability and trustworthiness for government employment. The memoranda of understanding that govern FBI background investigations do not require that such investigations only address confidential allegations. Although Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations are now public, there may be witnesses who would speak to the FBI who have not spoken publicly. Some people may be more willing to be candid with the FBI than they would be in other contexts, because they are under oath.
Fiction
An FBI investigation into Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations wouldn't be helpful because the FBI doesn't make judgments about the credibility of the people they interview.
Fact
The FBI doesn't make credibility determinations, but they have career professionals with the training and investigative experience necessary to ask the right questions and solicit relevant information. Special training is particularly important when interviewing sexual assault survivors and those who may have knowledge about the allegations. Once the FBI completes its investigation, senators can make informed credibility determinations and base their own inquiries on information they received from the FBI.
Fiction
If there are questions or allegations regarding a nominee, it is the role of Senate staff -- not the FBI -- to follow up and conduct interviews with relevant witnesses.
Fact
In my experience, staff-led investigations only took place when Senate Judiciary Committee staff had questions about minor issues -- such as a past drug use discrepancy. Such matters could be resolved with a phone call between the nominee and committee counsels, and these calls always took place on a bipartisan basis with counsels for both the chair and ranking member. For more substantial issues, or where significant new information about the nominee came to light, committee staff would notify OLP as to the additional information it sought, and OLP would ask the FBI to return to the field and conduct additional witness interviews, sometimes including a new interview of the nominee.
Fiction
It is too late in the confirmation process for the FBI to conduct a follow-up investigation here.
Fact
If confirmed, Judge Kavanaugh would serve on the Supreme Court for decades. There is no need to rush the Senate's consideration, and there is no deadline for when follow-up investigations may occur. I do not consider a nominee's background investigation to be closed until a nominee is confirmed or withdrawn.
Fiction
The FBI doesn't need to investigate Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations because the FBI has conducted multiple investigations of Judge Kavanaugh over the years, and they have never uncovered allegations of sexual misconduct.
Fact
There is no statute of limitations for investigating allegations. Dr. Blasey Ford has reluctantly come forward at this time, and these new allegations must be investigated, even if they weren't part of Judge Kavanaugh's previous background reports.
Forging ahead with a hearing next week without allowing the FBI an opportunity to conduct additional interviews and collect evidence would be yet another abuse of power by the Republican majority during the Kavanaugh confirmation process. The Senate must honor survivors of sexual assault by taking their allegations seriously, respectfully, and on a nonpartisan basis. An FBI investigation is an important step in that direction. As Senator Hatch noted in 1991 when the FBI conducted an investigation into Anita Hill's allegations: "When they heard about this the first time, they immediately ordered the FBI investigation, which was the very right thing to do." It is the right thing to do today as well.
Mike Zubrensky
Mike Zubrensky is chief counsel at The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights. During the Obama administration, he was Deputy Assistant Attorney General and worked on judicial nominations for the Department of Justice
For nearly seven years, from August 2010 to January 2017, I served as Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the Justice Department's Office of Legal Policy (OLP). I supervised the vetting of over 300 judicial nominees and worked closely with the FBI as they conducted background investigations and supplemental investigations of these individuals.
Based on my experience, the FBI should be asked to conduct a supplemental investigation into the allegations of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh by Christine Blasey Ford. This post seeks to clarify the FBI background process and address the misinformation being spread by Judge Kavanaugh's defenders.
Fiction
The FBI shouldn't investigate Judge Kavanaugh based on Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations because the FBI doesn't conduct criminal investigations into nominees.
Fact
No one is calling for a federal criminal investigation of Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations. The FBI's career professionals conduct standard background investigations for every judicial nominee, and when new information comes to light, the FBI can re-open a background investigation and conduct additional witness interviews. That occurred several times during my tenure at OLP.
And as many have noted, the FBI re-opened its background investigation in 1991 when Anita Hill came forward with allegations of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas. At the time, Senator Hatch stated:
"When they heard about this the first time, they immediately ordered the FBI investigation, which was the very right thing to do. It was the appropriate thing to do. They did what every other chairman and ranking member have done in the past. And the investigation was done and it was a good investigation."
Similarly, it would be appropriate for the FBI to investigate Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations.
Fiction
It is only appropriate for the FBI to investigate allegations that are made confidentially, like Anita Hill's, because, according to Senator Grassley, the "purpose of the background investigation process is to compile information in a confidential manner" and "Dr. Ford has already made her allegations public."
Fact
That analysis is flawed. The purpose of a background investigation is for the FBI to ascertain facts and information relevant to the potential nominee's suitability and trustworthiness for government employment. The memoranda of understanding that govern FBI background investigations do not require that such investigations only address confidential allegations. Although Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations are now public, there may be witnesses who would speak to the FBI who have not spoken publicly. Some people may be more willing to be candid with the FBI than they would be in other contexts, because they are under oath.
Fiction
An FBI investigation into Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations wouldn't be helpful because the FBI doesn't make judgments about the credibility of the people they interview.
Fact
The FBI doesn't make credibility determinations, but they have career professionals with the training and investigative experience necessary to ask the right questions and solicit relevant information. Special training is particularly important when interviewing sexual assault survivors and those who may have knowledge about the allegations. Once the FBI completes its investigation, senators can make informed credibility determinations and base their own inquiries on information they received from the FBI.
Fiction
If there are questions or allegations regarding a nominee, it is the role of Senate staff -- not the FBI -- to follow up and conduct interviews with relevant witnesses.
Fact
In my experience, staff-led investigations only took place when Senate Judiciary Committee staff had questions about minor issues -- such as a past drug use discrepancy. Such matters could be resolved with a phone call between the nominee and committee counsels, and these calls always took place on a bipartisan basis with counsels for both the chair and ranking member. For more substantial issues, or where significant new information about the nominee came to light, committee staff would notify OLP as to the additional information it sought, and OLP would ask the FBI to return to the field and conduct additional witness interviews, sometimes including a new interview of the nominee.
Fiction
It is too late in the confirmation process for the FBI to conduct a follow-up investigation here.
Fact
If confirmed, Judge Kavanaugh would serve on the Supreme Court for decades. There is no need to rush the Senate's consideration, and there is no deadline for when follow-up investigations may occur. I do not consider a nominee's background investigation to be closed until a nominee is confirmed or withdrawn.
Fiction
The FBI doesn't need to investigate Dr. Blasey Ford's allegations because the FBI has conducted multiple investigations of Judge Kavanaugh over the years, and they have never uncovered allegations of sexual misconduct.
Fact
There is no statute of limitations for investigating allegations. Dr. Blasey Ford has reluctantly come forward at this time, and these new allegations must be investigated, even if they weren't part of Judge Kavanaugh's previous background reports.
Forging ahead with a hearing next week without allowing the FBI an opportunity to conduct additional interviews and collect evidence would be yet another abuse of power by the Republican majority during the Kavanaugh confirmation process. The Senate must honor survivors of sexual assault by taking their allegations seriously, respectfully, and on a nonpartisan basis. An FBI investigation is an important step in that direction. As Senator Hatch noted in 1991 when the FBI conducted an investigation into Anita Hill's allegations: "When they heard about this the first time, they immediately ordered the FBI investigation, which was the very right thing to do." It is the right thing to do today as well.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.