Speaking Truth to Power - Anita Hill [61]
There was no follow-up to the interview. The next time I heard from Agent Luton was in the spring of 1992, when he called to get a reference for a law student who had applied for a position with the FBI. “Is a reference from me going to hurt or help the student given the fact that you contradicted my hearing testimony?” I felt compelled to ask. Luton said that the agency took into account all of the references it sought out. He added, almost condescendingly, “I told you that the process wasn’t going to be easy.” I had not expected it to be easy, but I certainly had not expected the FBI to become actively involved in the harm that was done.
On Tuesday FBI agents visited Susan Hoerchner at her home in Whittier, California. Their conversation lasted approximately one hour, and she told them what she remembered of my account to her of my experience. She never heard from the FBI again either.
I continued to get what I characterized as the “runaround” from Harriet Grant of Biden’s staff. “No, I did not promise to circulate your statement with the FBI report,” she said when I called to ask if that had been done. “No, I can’t tell you how your statement was handled,” she added.
My frustration was mounting, but so was my resolve. I called two friends, Sonia Jarvis and Kim Taylor, to ask whether they knew someone on the committee staff who could give me some information. I tracked Sonia down in California, where she was attending a Stanford alumni weekend. She and Kim, another law school classmate teaching at Stanford, suggested I talk to Charles Ogletree, who was at the same function.
Charles Ogletree is a professor at Harvard Law School with an outstanding reputation for his skills and integrity. He had worked in D.C. for ten years in the public defender’s office, trying criminal cases. We spoke, and I gave him the substance of my concern that my statement had been mishandled. Though I did not know it, Ogletree passed the information to Laurence Tribe, a Harvard colleague, one of the country’s leading authorities on constitutional law and an adviser to Biden. Nor did I know that on September 27 Tribe contacted Biden staffer Ron Klain to impress upon him the seriousness of my charges. “A group of women law professors on the West Coast are concerned about the statement,” Tribe is reported to have told Biden. Again unknown to me, the senator responded by delivering my statement to all of the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee.
Senator Paul Simon telephoned me after reading the statement and the FBI report. “You cannot maintain confidentiality if the information is circulated to the entire Senate. It is bound to get to the press,” Simon informed me. At this point I had no idea what measures had been taken to investigate my claim. And I could not trust the press to handle the matter properly, since I had no idea what information might be available. And still no one on the committee advised me of what was happening or had happened with my statement.
That same day the committee voted on Thomas’ nomination. Seven members favored the nominee. Seven voted against him. But by a vote of 13–1, The committee voted to send the name forward for full Senate consideration, to take place on October 8.
Days passed and I heard nothing. I did not know about the exchange between Tribe and Biden. I did not know which of the senators, aside from Senator Simon, or their staff members had the FBI report or my statement. I assumed the committee had abandoned the matter, and I was angry. All along, I had been skeptical, expecting very little from the process and feeling powerless to demand more. Sue Ross and I put the matter to rest—nothing more would be done and I would never know just what had happened.
On Thursday, October 3, Nina Totenberg