under penalty of felony. so i just want to conclude with that. senator feinstein on august 20? judge kavanaugh: that is my understanding of the date. what was established earlier during testimony was that the staff of the ranking member a law dr. ford to retain sometime between july 30 and august 7. i wanted you to clarify, in the meeting you had two weeks or more later, this issue was not raised with you? judge kavanaugh: the issue was not raised. >> thank you, the issue was not raised. >> we will take a five-minute break right now.

we are taking on another break there as the senate judiciary committee continues to hear testimony from the supreme court nominee, brett kavanaugh. we have always -- we have already heard from his accuser, christine blasey ford, giving what is widely regarded as a credible terrible -- testimony. whereas judge kavanaugh has been quite angry and emotional din announcing entire process as being something of a farce. and saying that it has been pretty outrageous that he has he could to wait over defend himself. a lot of the comments has been around whether an fbi investigation would be appropriate or helpful at this point. brett kavanaugh has not answered as to whether he would encourage or be opened having an fbi investigation but saying he would do whatever the senate

judiciary committee wanthem to do. >> that is interesting. the senators have been asking for an fbi investigation into all of the allegations. from senatorheard collins and others as to why judge kavanaugh's friend has not been subpoenaed so far. this is an interesting timing unfold. to develop and we know this will be a key issue going into the midterm election. wednesdayeleased shows that supreme court appointments ranks as one of the top voting issues of essentially equal to health care and the strength of the economy. this will play into what happens on november 6. -- it has beenas a very interesting day. an extraordinary day. not just in terms of the emotional reaction from judge kavanaugh but also lindsey graham saying the entire thing

has been a sham and that the senators should not vote -- if the senators were not to vote for judge kavanaugh come it would be a bad thing. let us get to kevin cirilli. different sets of testimonies and moods we have gotten from the accuser, professor ford, and judge kavanaugh. testimonyut wrenching here on capitol hill. judge brett kavanaugh fighting for his job and reputation after some telling testimony from dr. christine blasey ford. professor who is accusing him of sexual misconduct. it has been interesting to watch in particular the last hour as well as the senators we are anticipating hearing from in the next half hour. to hear republicans stopped using rachel mitchell. they relied on her to question dr. ford. some republican sources argued

that they thought it would be a better political optic message in terms of having her ask the questions of dr. ford instead of 11 white republican senators. there is five minutes of allocated time. even some senators who don't usually take the microphone defending judge kavanaugh. and democrats asking why they should not have an fbi investigation. and slow down the process. no further talk about slowing down the process. >> you have had a very long day. i think the first time i spoke to you was about six hours ago. that was during the time when we ford.testimony from ms. how effective the lady has judge kavanaugh projected hurt allegations -- her allegations? kevin: judge kavanaugh has completely denied the allegations entirely saying he

never committed any of the allegations going against him. there was a telling moment and i have been texting with sources who are quite frankly split on this about whether or not he ultimately confirmed. one source close to the administration who had heard dr. ford's testimony say that this source was freethinking the calculus -- was rethinking the calculus of whether judge kavanaugh will get confirmed. it is a big question mark here inside the halls of congress. democratic senators who will be coming up in terms of questioning judge kavanaugh including senator perot know who ono from hawaii. and then senators cory bookie and kamala harris from new jersey and california respectively.

look out for them. senatore, look for kennedy, a senator from louisiana who has been in line with this administration and very outspoken and echoing the sentiments of lindsey graham. the white house reaction -- during dr. ford's testimony earlier today, the white house that theome feelers president would not be meeting with rod rosenstein. he did not want to distract from what was going on in the hearing. d that was taken as a sign that he was taking dr. ford's testimony seriously as he reiterated yesterday. note that sarah sanders tweeted the statement of support for senator lindsey graham, a republican from south carolina after he delivered what one republican source just told me was a full-fledged defense of judge kavanaugh trying to

provide some sort of political cover for the swing votes in all of this. all of this would signal that this is still very much going to be brought to some type of vote as senator mick -- as senator mitch mcconnell said despite the backdrop of one of the most remarkable hearings in the short-term history, since i have been here on capitol hill. it is clearly not over. looks like a long evening ahead. everyone involved. we are hearing reports that the president is still standing behind brett kavanaugh. kevin: that is really the consensus right now. yesterday at the 81 minute press conference when the president was in your following the united nations general assembly meeting, he said he was open to really anything. and it gets interesting here in terms of the calendar. should the president ultimately

withdraw his support for judge kavanaugh who has that he is not going to withdraw, the next name on the shortlist is judge amy comey berry and she is perceived as being much more conservative on a host of issues including marriage equality as well as women's rights issues. she was on the short list to replace judge scalia. cut you off to because the hearing is resuming. i am sure you want to listen in as well. judge kavanaugh facing another round of questions from the senate judiciary committee. was you who attacked her. she explained how she came forth and struggled with her decision. how she wanted the president to know so that he could make a better choice. when you and my colleagues on of other side accused us ambushing you with false charges, i think we have to

remember dr. ford's testimony and her kurds. let me go back to something you said in the opening. the democrats were an embarrassment at the first hearing. we ask you a lot of questions. which of our questions do you think were an embarrassment? i asked you about an amicus brief you wrote about a lawyer. and your knowledge of sexual assault. all valid questions in that sitting. valid because this is a job interview for one of the most important positions of trust in this country. earlier, you agreed that this process of advice and consent is really a job interview. not a criminal trial. and there is no entitlement for you to be confirmed to the supreme court. credibility, character, and candor of a nominee are for us to consider. judge kavanaugh: my whole life

is subject to consideration. >> is that yes? -- those are traits that would be of interest to us as we consider putting you for life on the highest court in the country. credibility and candor. judge kavanaugh: of course. traittemperament also a we should consider? judge kavanaugh: my judicial temperament has been praised. i have a high rating from the american borrow cc should. >> you would agree that temperament is an important factor? judge kavanaugh: yes, and a public defender that defended to ie committee talked about how was always open-minded and how i ruled in favor of unpopular defendants. and how i was fair-minded. universally, lawyers that have appeared before the d.c. -- >> the answer is yes.

we only have five minutes. in your fox news interview you said that you "always treated ."men with dignity and respect and that in high school you never "drank so much that you could not remember what happened the night before." would you say the same thing about your college life? judge kavanaugh: yes. >> i would like to read to statements from people that you knew in college. judge kavanaugh: may i say something? >> your roommate said -- although brett was reserved, he was a heavy drinker. and he became aggressive and belligerent when he was drunk. is your former college roommate line? ying?e judge kavanaugh: i would refer you to the redacted portion of his statemen. you asked me about college. law school.ale

the number one law school in the country. i have no -- i had no connections there. ranked number one. it does not mean it is number one. two things. i was in cross campus library every night. and i played basketball for the junior varsity. i tried out for the varsity. the first day i arrived on campus. we had captains' workouts and i played basketball every day. the season went through late february. i was obsessed -- >> ila have 23 seconds. -- i only have 23 seconds. you were not a sloppy drunk so your roommate was lying. judge kavanaugh: look at my academic record.

i don't usually like to talk about myself this way but in response -- i worked very hard in college in my studies and i also played basketball. and i also socialized. >> i know the chairman is going to stop me but i do have some other references from people who knew you who said you were not the -- i'm sorry, mr. chairman. i will wait, ok, until we finish because i just want to enter some letters into the record. >> if i was not clear, that is what we are doing. >> i could go on. mr. chair, i would like to enter into the record four letters. one is dated to you from all of the democrats on the committee. another is a letter dated september 18 to christopher wray , the director of the fbi. signed by all of the democrats on this committee.

and a letter from september 21 signed by chuck schumer and dianne feinstein to the president and a september 20 six letter signed by all of the democrats on this committee all requesting an fbi investigation because you did say all we have to do is ask and the implication being that if we ask for an investigation it will happen and it has certainly not happened. >> without objection, that will be included. you.ank judge kavanaugh, thank you again for being here and i apologize for what you are going through right now. i cannot imagine -- i went through a campaign and had a lot of smears but it does not compare to what you have had to deal with. one think him a 1.i would like to make from the onset. if we go back and review how this committee processes its work, we have a lot of work to do. we have had members take it on themselves to release confidential documents instead of respecting the process. we have had an allegation held

for nearly seven weeks that would have given us plenty of time to investigate and then when we finally got the information, i invite everyone particularly the american public, there is an investigation going on and a lot of it has been documented. there is a chronology on the website that says each time there was an allegation made, the staff followed up on that. sadly, in several instances, the democrats declined to participate. they listened on one interview but did not ask any questions. if they wanted other leaks, why not ask. if you are really trying to get to the facts. we are investigating. it is our job. i think in response to the ranking member's question, that judge kavanaugh said i am here. you are asking me questions. you know what? when the committee staff, i the rankingted by member, says we are not going to

ask questions of judge kavanaugh when he wanted to come in and clear his good name, what are you really after? you're not after the truth. maybe you are. maybe you are after a political agenda. maybe there is a mixture of both. but i think you have been treated unfairly. and i am amazed. that 32 hours of testimony none of these questions came up when it was all fully known. as a matter of fact. i also want to go back to the comments from this morning. i think i heard, and we can go back to the record if someone disagrees with me. sayink i heard dr. ford that she was not aware of the fact that we said we would come to california, make it confidential, completely depots and ask any -- depose and ask any questions that we wanted to. if counselre

neglected to tell her but the fact of the matter is that that offer was out there. we were moving heaven and earth and the schedule to get to the truth. we are doing an investigation. i hope the american people who are watching this will go out to the senate judiciary website and take a look at the chronology. take a look at the lack of investigation on the part of the people that want the investigation. it does not make a lot of sense. every opportunity you had to go and question a witness. every opportunity that we have had to find more truth, more facts, we have done it. it is documented. we have sworn statements. we are doing our job. we are doing the committee work. i also have to, say you are the first major target of a new strategy that has developed here and i think you are right. i think it is basically attack,

attack, not to advise and consent. search and destroy is what it is. one of the groups, out there attacking you and trying to agree fodder and all of these red herrings has already required a url for the next judge they are going to attack. they have already purchased it. this is the playbook. this is the way we are going to run this committee from this way forward? take a look at it. i will be sure to put it out on the website. we already have the purchase of a url for the next judge. this thing people that are attacking you. there are some people here that sincerely have concerns. i would say to you to pound the table to say --why did we not ask questions? why did we not listen in? why did we not do our part of the investigation while this

later -- leader did everything we could to accommodate dr. ford and run down everything will be presented to us. weeks after it was known to the minority. to supporting your confirmation. i believe that you were going to be on the bench. the senator said, these are allegations that can be pursued through the courts if they rise to a level that they can be prosecuted and everyone on the other side of this dais knows that will not happen. >> senator booker. weekdays as well as weekends? judge kavanaugh: i would say that was rare. during the school year? >> on the calendar is that you provided. judge kavanaugh: in the summer after a football workout. >> yes, or no? judge kavanaugh: in the summer

when we went over to timmy's house on july 1, i would indicate yes. -- thatjuly reference july 1 reference. wsky? that is all i was looking for. weekdays. next question. record you said that you never in your life, after drinking heavily to the point of throwing up, that you never had any gaps or losses in memory ever. never a foggy recollection. judge kavanaugh: that is what i said. haidi: you also said -- >> you also said that in the last two weeks, it has been an effort tabulated and orchestrated as a political hit. are you saying that dr. ford's efforts to come forward and prepare for the difficult testimony that she gave today,

to travel the washington, d.c. to tell us about her experience have all been part of a political hit? said kavanaugh: i have that my family has no ill will toward dr. ford. she wanted confidentially of the. -- she wanted confidentiality. >> you have problems with the senators that are here and how we conducted it but you are not saying in any way that she is a political pawn or operative. you have sympathy for her. she is talking about a sexual assault. judge kavanaugh: i said all allegation should be taken seriously. and i have no ill will toward her. >> do you wish she had never come forward? judge kavanaugh: i did not do this. >> please answer the question. do you wish he had never come forward? judge kavanaugh: the witnesses who were there say it never happened. >> do you wish she had remained

silent? judge kavanaugh: all allegations should be taken seriously. >> even if it is in the final days, if someone has a credible allegation that they have held for a long time, that should -- that person should be allowed to come forward. you're not questioning her sense of duty. i know you have a lot of political animus. towards my colleagues and i on this panel. i am trying to get to the bottom of -- you do not see her specifically as part of an orchestrated -- judge kavanaugh: i do not know her. bear no no ill -- we ill will toward her. >> she came forward. hellamily has come through . and your family has gone through hell. you made the allegation that she was coordinating this. judge kavanaugh: i did not say that. >> you said others were making a

coordinated -- she was not doing this for political efforts. in 2012 when she talked to her therapist about this attack. when she made painful revelations to her husband. she did not coordinate in 2000 13, 2016, 2017. of course she was even nominated. that was not coordination. judge kavanaugh: all of the witnesses who were there say it did not happen. ms. kaiser is her longtime friend. >> and ms. kaiser has a clearly that she does not remember that night in question which supports what you said but she also said she believes dr. ford. my colleague lindsey graham who i respect and have admiration of said voting no would be legitimizing the most despicable thing in american politics.

do you think that people that believe dr. ford are legitimizing despicable things? do you think that somehow we are engaging in something despicable? idge kavanaugh: senator, would say listen to both sides before you make a bottom-line conclusion. and look -- >> that is fair. i have 10 seconds. that is fair. listen to both sides. this is not about one side being dismissed -- despicable and the other side not. credible, meaningful testimony. a woman that had the courage to come forward and tell her truth. and that is what i am asking. pawn. not a political she is a woman who came here with corroborating evidence to tell her tooth. is that a question? judge kavanaugh: just one thing,

mr. chairman. the evidence is not core operated. -- the evidence is not corroborated. the witnesses that were there -- and youor, your family have not been treated fairly. and dr. ford and her family have been treated incredibly poorly. you have seen both of your good names dragged through the mud. and this has been sadly one of the most shameful chapters in the history of the united states senate. let me say to you and your family, thank you for a lifetime of public service. i will say watching your mother's pained face has been heart-wrenching. as she has seen her son's character dragged through the mud after not only your lifetime of public service but her lifetime of public service as well. and i know as a father there has

been nothing more painful to you then talking to your daughters and explaining these attacks that the media is airing. i also believe though that the american people are fair-minded people. but the american people can set aside the partisan warfare of washington and the substance and fax. and that is the charge of this committee. there have been three different sets of allegations. that of dominated the media. i think it is important to note those had so little corroboration that even the new york times, which is no conservative outlet, refused to report on them because they could find no basis for them. and it was striking in this entire hearing that not a single democrat in this committee asked about two sets of those allegations. allegations and

the allegations of the client of mr. avenettie. his allegations were so scandalous that the ranking member omitted his client's most scandalous accusations of you as a criminal mastermind. omitted those scandalous accusations from her statement. focused,ing has rightly so, on the allegations dr. ford presented. and let me say that i think the committee did a right thing by giving dr. ford a full and fair opportunity to tell her story. that is what we needed to do when these allegations became public. and the committee treated her with respect as we should. i do not believe senate democrats have treated you with respect. what do we know? we know that her testimony and your testimony are in conflict.

a fair-minded assessor of facts would look to what else do we know when we have conflicting testimony. we know that dr. ford identified three fact witnesses who she said of served what occurred. all three of those witnesses have stated on the record under penalty of perjury that they do not recall what she is alleging happening. they have not only not corroborated her charges but they have explicitly refuted those charges. that is specific. addition, we have walked through before this committee your calendars from the time -- and i will say that you were a much more organized teenager than i was and many of us were, that it was a compelling recitation of night by night i night where you were in the summer of 1982. that is yet another contemporaneous piece of fact to

assess what happened. and we also know that the democrats on this committee engaged in a profoundly unfair process. the ranking member had these allegations on july 30. ago,or 60 days, 60 days the ranking member did not refer it to the fbi for an investigation or to the full committee for an investigation. this committee could have investigated those claims in a confidential way that respected dr. ford's privacy. and some the most significant testimony we heard this morning was dr. ford told this committee that the only people to home she gave her letter were her ,ttorneys, the ranking member and her member of congress. and she stated that she and her attorneys did not release the letter which means the only people that could've released that letter were either the ranking member and her staff and

the democratic member of congress because dr. ford told this committee that that was -- those were the only people that had the letter. that is not a fair process. we should look to the facts and not anonymous innuendo and slander. gentleman, i asked for a , i asked for a point of personal privilege to respond. mr. chairman, let me be clear. i did not hide dr. ford's allegations. i did not leak her story. she asked me to hold it confidential and i kept it confidential as she asked. stalkedrently was by the press and felt she was forced to come forward and her as realized.r w she has been harassed. she has had death threats. she has had to flee her home. and the investigation that the republican majority is heralding

is nothing that i know about other than a partisan practice. normally, all of the witnesses would be interviewed. however, that has not happened. while the majority has reached out to several people, they did not notify me or my staff that they were doing this. and so, to argue that we would not participate but not tell us what they were up to is somewhat disingenuous. i was given some information by a woman who was very much afraid, who asked it be held confidential. and i held it confidential until she decided that she would come forward. >> mr. chairman, with the ranking member answer a question, please? >> if i can. >> i have great respect for senator feinstein. we have worked together on many topics and i believe what you said.

can you tell us that your staff did not leak it? >> i do not believe that my staff would have leaked that. >> do you know that? >> the answer is no. staff orou asked your other staff members on this senate judiciary committee? , jennifer reminds me that i have asked her before about it. >> somebody leaked it if it were not euro. >> i did not. i am telling you. i was asked to keep it confidential. and i am criticized for that too. mr. chairman, could i ask the chairman a question? does the committee have a process if there is an allegation against a nomination to assess that allegation in a confidential forum rather than in the public. is there a process for the committee for considering

confidential allegations? and thenswer is yes senator pointed out the document that i put out to show all of the things that we have done. >> what would you have done if on july 30, the ranking member had raised this allegation with you? >> we would have done what we have done. or fbiery background report that comes from the white house for the nominee. and subsequent to that, because maybe the fbi got done with it three months ago, we go through the fbi or information comes to us. and then we have our investigators in a bipartisan way, with republicans and democrats, follow up on whatever those questions or problems that have to be worked out. >> bipartisan investigators could have investigated this two months ago and it could've been heard in a confidential setting without dr. ford's name or judge

kavanaugh's name being dragged through the mud. >> yes, and except for one or two conversations that we had with the judge, the democrats did not participate. except one or two and they did not ask any questions. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman, may i respond? it is my understanding that her story was leaked before the letter became public. and she testified that she had spoken to her friends about it and it is most likely that that is how the story leaked. and she had been asked by press. but, it did not leak from us. i am sure you are that. >> mr. chairman, i am confused. i thought only the member of the house and senator feinstein and her lawyers had the letter. so, the friends she may have talked to about that could not have leaked the letter if they just had a verbal conversation unless she gave them a copy of

the letter. -- senator, i do not think the letter was never late. >> how did the press note to contact her about her complaint? >> she testified this morning that she had talked to friends about it and that the press had talked to her. sinceator, or judge, there was a reference to the problems, the legitimate problems and the change of lifestyle that dr. ford had come if you want some time to say the impact on your family, i would be glad to hear you. if you do not want to talk about it, that is ok. judge kavanaugh: i think i have talked about that. >> ok, then senator harris. have you taken a professionally administered polygraph test as it relates to this issue? but i wouldugh: no,

do whatever the committee would like to they are not admissible in federal court. they are not reliable. as you know. >> you'll not taken one. all three of the women who have made allegations against you have called for an independent fbi investigation into the claims. you have been asked by four different members eight times today and also earlier this week on national television whether you would call for the white house to authorized an fbi investigation. each time you have declined to do so. do, you know, i know you that the fbi is an agency of men and women who are sworn and trained law-enforcement. cu in the course of conducting background investigations on nominees for the supreme court of the united states and others are churched with conducting those background investigations

because they are sworn -- with conducting those back on investigations because they are sworn law enforcement. i will ask you one last time. are you willing to ask the white house to authorize the fbi to investigate the claim set up and made against you? judge kavanaugh: i will do whatever the committee wants. but have heard you say that i am not heard you answer the specific question asked. which is -- are you willing to ask the white house to conduct an investigation by the fbi to get to whatever you believe is the bottom of the allegations that have been levied against you? wouldkavanaugh: the fbi gather witness statements. you have -- i don't want to debate with you how they do their business. i am just asking, are you willing to ask the white house to conduct such an investigation. as you are aware, the fbi did conduct a background investigation into you before we

were aware of these most recent allegations. are you willing to ask at the white house, yes or no? sixe kavanaugh: i have had background investigations over 26 years. >> this is regarding the recent allegations. judge kavanaugh: no witness that was there supports -- >> i will take that as a no and we can move on. you characterized these allegations as a conspiracy directed against you. i will point out to you that justice neil gorsuch was nominated by this president. he was considered by this body just last year. i did a rough analysis of both of you. you both attended georgetown prep. very prestigious law schools. you both clerked for justice kennedy. you are both circuit judges. you were both nominated to the supreme court. at are both questioned by --

about your record. the only difference is that you have been accused of sexual assault. how do you reconcile your statement about a conspiracy against you with the treatment of someone who was before this body not very long ago? judge kavanaugh: i explained that in my opening statement, senator. look at the evidence here. the calendars. the witness statements. look at miss kaiser's statement. >> ok. and then, do you agree that it is possible for men to both be friends with some women and treat other women badly? bute kavanaugh: of course the point i have been emphasizing is if you go back to age 14 for me, you will find people, and not just people, but lots of people who i have been friends with, some who have -- some who are in this room today.

who have talked about my friendships with them throughout my life. a consistent pattern. 65 women who knew me more than 35 years ago signed a letter supporting me after the allegation was made because they know me. and they were with me. and we grew up together. we talked on the phone together and we went to events together. that is who i am. what they have said. the people that worked with me in the bush white house. the women there. look at what sarah day said. clerks -- i the law have sent more women law clerks to the supreme court than any other federal judge in the question. >> i only have a few seconds left. did you watch dr. ford's testimony? judge kavanaugh: i did not. i plan to. i plan to but i did not. i was preparing mine. >> our last five minutes will be

senator flake, one minute. and senator kennedy, four minutes. you, mr. chairman. when dr. ford came forward with her account i immediately said that she should be heard and i asked the chairman to delay the vote that we had scheduled. and the chairman did and i appreciate that. and she came at great difficulty for her and offered compelling testimony. you have come and done the same. i am sorry for what has happened to you and your family as i am happy -- as i am sad about what has happened to her. this is a process and it is all we have. i urge my colleagues that in the 21 imperfect senators trying our best to provide advice. and in the end, there is likely to be much doubt and uncertainty.

as we make decisions going forward, i hope people will recognize that. and the rhetoric that we use and the language we use going forward -- that we will recognize that. that there is doubt. we will never move beyond that. and just have a little humility on that front. so, thank you. >> senator kennedy. senator kennedy: i am sorry, judge, for what you and your family has been through and i am sorry for what dr. ford and her family have been through. this could have been avoided. do you believe in god? judge kavanaugh: i do. >> i'm going to give you a last opportunity. from -- in front of

god and country. i want you to look me in the eye. truer. ford's allegations -- are dr. ford's allegations true? judge kavanaugh: they are not accurate as to me. i have never done this. never. her or to this to anyone else. i have talked to you about what i was doing that summer of 1982 but i am telling you that i have never done this to anyone including her. >> are ms. ramirez's allegations true about you? judge kavanaugh: they are not. none of the witnesses in the room support that. if that had happened, that would've been the talk of campus in our freshman dorm. the new york times reported as recently as last week that she

was calling other classmates seeking -- i will not characterize it but calling classmates last week and seemed -- from mr. allegations true?lient judge kavanaugh: they are not true. totally ridiculous. >> none of these allegations are true? judge kavanaugh: none of these -- none of these are true.

>> do you swear to god? judge kavanaugh: i swear to god. >> judge kavanaugh, thank you very much. meeting adjourned. >> after what has been a full they of extraordinary testimony from brett kavanaugh, finishing up there with the last of the questions directed at him from the senate judiciary committee, and earlier of coarse we heard from his accuser on the allegations of sexual assault from christine blasey ford. also giving her side of the story. we are seeing now the hearing process concluded. foro believe that the vote the senate judiciary committee on his nomination could still be going ahead as early as friday morning which would set up for a vote on the senate floor as early as next week. let us get straight to kevin cirilli.

along with the rest of us, he has been listening. senator flake from arizona saying that there will be much doubt as there is certainty. kevin: it was a gripping testimony. and all day long affair. and what really was one of the most profound hearings that i have covered in the past several years. dr. ford went first. testimonyd compelling for nearly four hours. she was questioned by democrats, each of them came to her support. she was also questioned why a prosecutor, rachel mitchell who republicans gave their time to during the committee hearing instead of questioning her themselves. following that gripping testimony, we heard from judge brett kavanaugh who offered another emotional testimony completely denying all of the charges against him. from here, it goes to a committee vote unless that is reversed.

tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m. after the committee vote, it comes to a procedural -- to a procedure in the senate that will last for several days. the vote is anticipated as early as this weekend or in the first half of next week. lisa murkowski, susan collins, jeff flake, the republican from arizona. they are key votes. and bob corker and senator shelley, the senator from west virginia. in the backdrop of the me too movement. it also comes at a time in which -- just ahead of the midterm elections in which republicans are trying to make the case as our democrats to suburban, working-class women and the allegations that the core of this hearing set in an upper-middle-class suburban area. in a tweet from

president trump as the hearing wrapped up. president trump saying -- judge kavanaugh showed america exactly why i nominated him. his testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting. the search industry strategy from the democrats has been disgraceful. this effort to delay and obstruct the sonnet must be -- the senate must be stopped. nextuestion is, what is now that the president wants the vote to happen? >> we heard from kevin that there are a number of different options that the republicans have on the table. theywill have to decide if want to move ahead with the procedural vote as early as tomorrow or take more time to engage where various republicans are and decide whether or not this vote will be able to be successful at the committee level and then in the broader senate.

they are going to have to talk to one another, talk to their republican colleagues to find out the vote count currently. whether they need to whip up more votes. it is a tight margin in the senate. that will determine where this goes. we just saw the tweet to from the president. he was a wild card at one point in the day to stand by his nominee. now we see he is fully engaged. he will try to make sure that the rest of the senate is fully engaged and he wants the vote to happen as quickly as possible but the senate leaders will have to make sure they have the votes before they proceed. >> right now, we have viewers in asia waking up to this hearing and trying to digest everything happening here in the u.s. hours. why would this matter to the rest of the world? how could this affect the political landscape in the united states? >> this is the crucial swing vote on the supreme court.

the supreme court in recent years has ruled on a number of issues including domestic issues as well as foreign policy. the travel ban which band travel travel of people from a number of different countries. this is the highest court in the u.s. that has global implications. the seat is important because it is seen as a swing vote on those very tight votes where you might have five justices going one way and four going the other way. judge kavanaugh if confirmed would be the swing vote. swinging the court in a more conservative direction and that might lead to some groundbreaking rulings on everything from abortion to immigration to labor. there are a number of different issues that could come before the court and this knockout drag out fight is part of the reason why the politics around this has been so fraught. >> thank you forgiving some

context to this extraordinary story. the vote of the senate judiciary committee will not take place tomorrow morning. from texas confirming that the vote will go ahead. we know after that that would set up for a senate floor vote as early as next week. also in the last few minutes, president trump reiterating his support for brett kavanaugh sing his testimony today demonstrates why he nominated him in the first place. let us get away from that story .hich has ripped the nation another story we are tracking is tesla is back in the headlines for all of the wrong reasons. plunging in late trade after being accused -- after accusing elon musk of misleading investors. theceo though says that

accusation is unjustified. let us go to don giles who joins us now from san francisco. talk us through this case. iswhat they are asking for penalties so they can impose a fine on tesla and or elon musk asking fore also himn that would prevent from serving as an officer of the company for a period of time. you'll remember that they recently slapped elizabeth her infamousn company and that was for 10 years. a pretty hefty penalty. no telling exactly what they will ask for four elon musk. theimplications for company. anytime you have a leader accused of wrongdoing, that can have a very serious impact on how the company is being run and

he is the visionary behind the company. you asked about the case against him. they wrapped it up quickly. they said in a press conference -- look, we were finished. we had everything we needed to know. a narrow number of tweets that had a profound impact on the price of tesla's stock. they gathered the information that they needed and they came to the conclusion that when he that funding was secured for a buyout at $4.20 a share, that he did not have the funding that he should have and he was reckless in his manipulation of the stock price. and that investors were harmed at the expense of his wanting to go after the shorts. he has talked a lot about wanting to burn the shorts. these are people that borrow and then trade tesla stock.

bedding that it will the -- betting that it will decline. he wanted to find a way to get back at them. this tweetd he made and it was reckless and he manipulated the stock and he had no justification to make the claim that he did. >> the irony is that he probably does have to take the company private if he wants to stay in place. does this make his position untenable? >> well, it reinforces first of all that the company needs to bring leadership around him and there is a big crisis of management around a lot of people leaving. they really need to ulster him him andg -- bolster bring people around him. someone needs to take this company into the future. >> wasn't there a criminal investigation from the

department of justice? thatoomberg has reported the investigation is ongoing. it would involve criminal penalties. i do not have an update for you. i don't think we know where that stands. it is possible that they will be emboldened by what the sec has said. on the other hand, you could look at it and say -- this will suffice. the kindly represents of punishment that needs to be inflected on tesla -- inflicted on tesla and elon musk. >> tom, thank you so much. the drama continues. that was tom giles from san francisco. we -- they will release an interim report later today. hearings began in march. the royal commission has

released a string of scandals involving the biggest banks from the country. has this commission changed the banking sector? >> yes, it has and that is even before we have seen the report which is one of the most hotly anticipated events in australia especially in financial circles for the year. what we have seen is a torrent of wrongdoing exposed and the public reaction to it has begun to force change. what we have seen is that most of the banks are starting to get rid of their wealth management businesses. where the majority of the heart tugging scandals have occurred. a clampdown on conduct as well. and all of the banks are reinforcing to their staff the need to do the right thing. there are changing staff incentives. downgrading the importance of sales. you might say relatively small things but things that they hope will be able to enable them to move forward. >> what has been the financial

cost so far? >> we can look at this in a couple of ways. the cost to investors for example -- since january, the beginning of 40 billion being wiped off the market value. it is a huge hit for investors to take. banksthemselves -- -- a huge amount of money has been spent on lawyers as well as customer remuneration. one bank has announced they may be taking a further hit to this year's earnings. it is starting to bite. >> emily, thank you for that. aussie banks are something to be watching today. that is just about it for daybreak all still year. let us look at trading in new zealand. we will get you a look at that.

0.1% higher -- higher in terms of kiwi stocks. risk aversion trade is happening again as we get the divergence policy between the fed and the rba. this is bloomberg. ♪ xfinity mobile is a new wireless network

designed to save you money. even when you've got serious binging to do. wherever your phone takes you, your wireless bill is about to cost a whole lot less. use less data with a network that has the most wifi hotspots where you need them and the best 4g lte everywhere else. saving you hundreds of dollars a year. and ask how you get xfinity mobile included with your internet. plus, get $300 back when you buy a new smartphone. xfinity mobile. it's simple. easy. awesome. click, call or visit a store today.

haidi: a very good morning. asia's major markets an hour away from the open. in bloomberg's headquarters in hong kong. haidi: welcome to "daybreak: asia." our top stories -- asian-pacific markets gain as the fed repeats the dollar is strong, the u.s. dollar jumping to a two-week high. elon musk accused of misleading investors. the sec says he