>> it's easy to imagine it not happening as happening. how's that for a nonanswer? >> thanks for joining us. stay with us. hope to see you back here tomorrow. jim acosta is here for wolf blitzer and starts right now. i'm jim acosta for wolf blitzer. it's 1:00 in washington. president trump speaks out about his embattled supreme court nominee, brett kavanaugh. moments ago he defended kavanaugh and blamed democrats for the turmoil surrounding his nomination. >> this is a terrible thing that took place. it's frankly a terrible thing that this information was not given to us a long time ago. months ago when they got it. instead of waiting until - everything was finish and spring it. that's what the democrats do. that's what they do. it's obstruction and resist and

whatever to you have to do. it's a process and we all feel speaking for all of the republicans, we feel we want to go through the process and give everybody a chance to say what they have to say. >> the statement is set for an extraordinary public showdown over the kavanaugh nomination, if it happens. kavanaugh and his accuser, christine blasey ford have been invited to testify on monday, but gop senate leaders say ford has not responded to the invitation. her accusation threatens to derail kavanaugh for the highest court in the land. she said a drunken kavanaugh assaulted her in a high school party in the 1980s. kavanaugh calls that false. the white house strategy is focused on bolstering his public image and defending his integrity. kaitlyn collins joins us now. kavanaugh is at the white house as we speak. we heard from the president. what more can you tell us about the white house battle plan?

it sounds as if the president is being very restrained, uncharacteristically restrained. >> she not calling out anything about the accuser and doubting her. he is channelling towards the democrats which we know from reporting has been the aides here in the west wing. their strategy over the last few days since these allegations first surfaced for the president to focus on the delay and everyone finding out about the allegations. that's what we saw from president trump in the oval office as he spoke sitting next to the polish president. another thing we heard is he has not spoken to judge brett kavanaugh since these allegations surfaced. judge kavanaugh spent over nine hours here huddling with don mcgahn, calling senators to defend himself. he is back here today and once again preparing for what is set to be a big showdown on capitol hill on monday. he still has not spoken to the

president. the president there also saying he doesn't believe the fbi should get involved in all of this. that's what democrats are calling for. senator feinstein called for a delay because she believes the fbi should be investigating this woman's claims about judge kavanaugh. the president there standing by him and defending his nominee once again, saying he has an unblemished record and he is okay with a little bit of a delay, but you heard him there at the end, saying only a little bit of a delay. he doesn't think it should go on for too long. >> we will hear from president trump at a news conference with the president of poland. he has gotten what he wants to say about the kavanaugh nomination battle. he had remarkable restraint closer to the mid-terms. is that an indication of how high the stakes are for this nomination? is this intentional on his part?

>> i do think it is and he is taking advice of his aides. how long will he continue to do so. we will see the president in a different format in the next hour than what we saw where he can ignore the questions he wants to. he doesn't have to ignore what they are shouting at him, but where he only takes two questions from the press, he is not going to be able to ignore the questions. whatever questions he gets asked, he will have to answer there in that one on one setting. it will be different. it will be interesting to is hear more from the president and if he stands by what he is doing now and if he is not doubting the woman, but focusing on the democrats for what he said is obstruction. judgeiment? >> kaitlyn collins, we will see what the president has to say in about an hour. even with all the talk, it's possible the hearing may not happen on monday. senate judiciary committee chairman chuck grassley is wait

figu ing for a yes from kavanaugh's accuser. >> has she agreed to come? >> no. we have reached out to her in the last 36 hours, three or four times by e-mail and have not heard from them. it raises the question, do they want to come to the public hearing or not? >> the other side of this, senator dianne feinstein, the ranking member of the senate judiciary committee is blast in grassley. chairman grassley today said there would be only two witnesses invited to testify at the kavanaugh hearing on sexual assault nominations, compare that to 22 at the none 91 anita hill hearing and it's impossible to take this process seriously. manu raju is live from capitol hill. manu, there is a battle going on before this hearing which is

shaping up to be a battle. what's the latest? >> that's right. behind closed doors, in mitch mcconnell's office, republicans on the committee are trying to figure out their strategy going forward. now that dr. ford, the accuser of brett kavanaugh has not confirmed whether she will attend and how they will proceed. republicans believe this hearing should still happen, but the democrats say it should be fully investigated and an fbi background check looking into this matter before the hearing. the top democrat saying this should be delayed until that takes place. all that being said, key republicans have been waiting for the hearing and we are happy to hear it because we wanted to make a decision on how to vote. in large part based on the hearing. we had a chance to catch up with lisa murkowski and lisa collins.

>> if she is not going to be part of the hearing, i think that would be a very interesting and unfortunate turn of events. >> that's very puzzling to me. i have said from the beginning that these are very serious allegations and she deserves to be heard. she is now being given an opportunity to come before the senate judiciary committee and answer questions and i really hope that she doesn't pass up that opportunity. >> the requesty is, if this implodes, how does it impact key votes? another key vote, bob corker was able to hear what he said every word from the testimony that was supposed to take place on monday. >> in light of all the pressures

that are building, it will be a difficult task for people on both sides. if it needs to be handled in a respectful manner, i think all of us are anticipating and wanting to learn from the actual hearing itself. i know i'm going out of the country this evening, but i plan to be in a place where i can see every word of it. >> still, jim, a lot of questions about exactly what happens here with what turned into quite a seen. will the uncertainty about the had hearing does take place and no word from the republican fist they are willing to delay this hearing. this is part of the delay tactics and how this fight got increasingly bitter. >> it probably will get more

bitter. manu raju. the year book is under scrutiny as he gets ready to answer the sexual assault allegation. let's bring in justice correspondent, jessica schnei r schneider. walk us through this. why is this important? >> this is the 1983 year book for the senior class. it does elude the heavy drinking culture at georgetown prep outside of d.c. in north bethesda, maryland. year book page is titled these funny guys and contains several questionable captions. do these guys beat their wives. this said prep parties raise question of legality. 100 kegs or bust. do these guys beat their wives. all signs there was a party culture at this school in the the early 80s. cnn saw this year book courtesy

of a former student who wanted to stay a nononymous and said i was important to get this year book out to the public. >> the person who contacted me wanted to make sure all the information is available to the american people. it's not meant as an indictment or attack or the person who was accusing him. the only interest is in making sure the american people have all information as well as the representatives so they can make a fully informed decision on a critical lifetime appointment to the united states supreme court. >> this anonymous georgetown prep student trying to get the year book out there and disclose as much information as possible in advance of the hearing if it goes forward. there will be a lot of questions about it. >> speaking of questions, they claim kavanaugh's friend mark judge was in the room at the time of this alleged assault and might be called to testify. his year book entries are equally interesting.

he has written a lot of things over the years. what can he say about the year book? >> they are raising questions, but he has denied that the incident ever happened and he told the weekly standard it's nuts. i never saw brett act that way. his year book entries are drawing questions here. he has entries in the year book and has this one right on his page that said quoting sir noel coward, certain women should be struck legularly, like gongs. in addition this entry in the early 80s, he wrote about the hard partying culture at georgetown prep. one was entitled wasted, tales of a gen-x drunk where he detailed extensive drinking and at one point documents a bart o kavanaugh who he documents as getting sick in a car after a night of heavy drinking. maybe this alluding to brett

kavanaugh, but that is not confirmed. mark judge writes about how his high school was swimming in alcohol and how he was shocked about the things that they got away with. obviously all of these will be points of questioning when this hearing, if it does happen on monday, but some of these entries in the year book raising questions about that hard partying culture at georgetown prep. >> likely for mark judge to testify. they want to limit it to just kavanaugh and ford, but folks are saying mark judge should say what he has to say. >> since he has been implicated by the accuser in this case. >> thank you very much. joining us live in a few moments is one of the republican senators on the judiciary committee who demanded a hearing. jeff flake is a crucial decider when it am cans to judge kavanaugh's fate. an explosive move to declassify do you means related to the russia investigation being

called an abuse of power. why this move is unprecedent and why it may backfire. after syria strikes down a war plane and who the kremlin is blaming. after syria strikes dow plane and who the kremlin is blaming. hey allergy muddlers. are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec®. it's starts working hard at hour one. and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. opportunlike here.rywhere.

and here. see? opportunity. hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. ev-er-y-where. about to be parents. it's doing a lot of kicking down there. meeting the parents. it's gonna be fine. and this driver, logging out to watch his kid hit one out of the... go dani, go! opportunity is everywhere. all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪

a drastic move from president trump who order the declassification of documents related to the russia investigation, raising concerns of a possible conflict of interest. it's selected portions of carter page's fisa application and reports of interviews with bruce ohr and all text messages related to the russia investigation from james comey, andrew mccabe, lisa page and bruce ohr.

all of those sound familiar because the president constantly bashes them on twitter. these are a handful of the sweets calling out the people. let's bring in joseph moreno. the president is requesting all of this and mueller's probe is still ongoing. how big of a deal is all of this and how appropriate is this? is this an appropriate action the president has taken. >> you used the word drastic and that's a great word. this is drastic even if there were not a significant investigation that the president is undergoing. fisa warrants have been one of the crown jewels of the justice department for many decades. they had never seen the light of day. to release the selective portion along with the other materials you mentioned in the intro, it's unprecedented. that's highly inappropriate with all going on at the same time. >> now that the president made this order, where does it go from here?

i assume they can't just all of a sudden dump this on the american people. >> it should go through this process. i hope that's what happens. there should be components of the justice department and the white house couple's office going through the colors for a number of other things. items that should not see the light of day because of implications. privacy considerations about people's names and information that might be contained in the materials. it should go through a process. that being said, the president has the ultimate authority and it's up to him as to whether or not the processes will be followed. >> walk us through the legal challenges. there is the potential that things could be leaked for maximum impact for the president's legal defense of his campaign associates and so on. i suppose that potential is there and people are going to suspect that. >> this comes down to can versus

should. should the president do this? probably not. can the president do this? he is the ultimate declassification authority. i don't see a lot of avenues for impediment of this. there might be on the privacy side. they could have a claim and i'm not sure how they stop it. we don't know what's in there. >> thank you very much for that perspective and analysis. joining us now is congressman mike quickly, a democrat on the house intelligence committee. what's your reaction of the president's order to declassify these documents. >> bottom line, the fbi had reason to believe that mr. page was becoming an agent of a foreign power, russia. four different judges signed off on that and renewals. it takes the power with what the

president is doing away. all the judges were appointed by republican presidents and by the way, this investigation didn't start because of mr. page. it started because of mr. papadopoulos. he can blame the fbi and justice all he wants, but they didn't cause the russians to approach the trump campaign or to be well received by the trump campaign. the fbi and the department of justice didn't cause mr. manafort, flynn, or cohen to commit their crimes. the fault lies squarely with the trump campaign. >> president trump vented about the russia probe, james comey, andrew mccain and strzok and lisa page on twitter. do you believe this is an abuse of power by the president? >> it's one step in the abuse of power. this president has gotten nervous recently. all investigations begin on the periphe periphery. this has gotten very close.

his only private attorney and national security adviser. his campaign chairman have all pled guilty. one implicated him. he has at least four top people close to him who are cooperating with the mueller investigation. the president's recent tale is really full of sound and fury signifying absolutely nothing, but creating a great risk for our country. the president has put his own legal security ahead of the security of the country. >> do you think this move could actually backfire for the president? some of these documents obviously may not work to his favor. many of these documents, the fbi, they obviously classified these things for a reason. >> think that's absolutely right. we have seen this happen before with the president. he has made wild accusations of spying on the campaign which were successfully rebutted.

we remember the nunez memo where the department of justice and fbi said was dangerous and reckless to release. what was in that memo amounted to absolutely nothing. i would like to think the american public and my republican colleagues will look at the president's efforts for what they are. an attempt to save himself. they absolutely prove nothing. many of us have seen the un redacted applications and the fbi acted appropriately. if they had not acted, they wouldn't have been protecting our country. >> and the white house made this announcement on the same day a supreme court nominee was facing a borage of bad headlines. do you think this was an attempt to change the narrative? are you suspicious of that? >> i think the president is constantly in a state of trying to change the narrative. if something goes wrong, he says

something else or tweets something else. so far it has worked. he has never been fully held accountable for his actions. at some point in time the american public has to understand and appreciate that the investigation of mr. kavanaugh is completely appropriate in allowing the mueller investigation is are in to protect the rule of law in our country. >> i want to ask you about a new article in the "new york times" about the president's legal team. it talks about whether or not the president's legal team has a full scope of what was said in the mueller investigation. there is part of it that we put up that said it's not clear if he has given his lawyers a full account of key events for which he is involved or during his decades during his running of the trump organization. how concerning is this, do you think? it sounds as though the

president's own legal team doesn't have the full picture of what happened. >> i think the president keeps his personal situation very close to the vest. i think what we witnessed in the last several years is the president not telling anyone anything he doesn't want to get out. i think you have seen as a result a disjointed, dysfunctional message system from the trump legal team. at this point in time, they are with the president on one thing. they are more worried about protecting the president politically and legally than they are protecting the country. >> all right, congressman. thank you very much for joining us. appreciate it. as lawmakers bicker over what is being called the hearing of a lifetime. what's the scenario if the mid-term arrives. brett kavanaugh has not yet been confirmed. the president faces reporters in a news conference as the firestorm escalates. stand by for that. baby boomers,

here's something you should know. there's a serious virus out there that 1 in 30 boomers has, yet most don't even know it. a virus that's been almost forgotten. it's hepatitis c. hep c can hide in the body for years without symptoms. left untreated it can lead to liver damage, even liver cancer. the only way to know if you have hep c is to ask your healthcare provider for the simple blood test. if you have hep c, it can be cured. for us, it's time to get tested. it's the only way to know for sure. but allstate actually helps you drive safely... with drivewise. it lets you know when you go too fast... ...and brake too hard. with feedback to help you drive safer. giving you the power to actually lower your cost.

unfortunately, it can't do anything about that. now that you know the truth... are you in good hands?

this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. president trump is standing saying he has an unblemished roert and defended him in the wake of an assault accusation. they have been invited to testify before a senate panel committee hearing on monday, but that hearing is up in the air.

let's bring in the legal analyst. joan, this is just the news in the last half hour or so. there are doubts now as to whether or not this hearing might take place. in part because the senate republicans controlling that judiciary hearings saying they haven't heard back from christine blasey ford. do you think it's too early to say hey, wait a minute. this hearing may not happen? what do you make of these developments? >> it's too early to say almost everything. think of how much unfolded just sunday when he name became known publicly when "the washington post" printed the interview with her. we had disarray and the committee was up and down and it's on and it's off. at this point we should hold our horses and see what's going to happen. the committee needs to hear from both of these individuals, professor ford and judge kavanaugh to find out what is the truth of the situation.

democrats are concerned that a hearing was scheduled that sounded like it was a good idea. apparently professor ford was not completely on board with the timing or something. something is unusual. the democratic senators themselves feel like the fbi should be involved to investigate this. we just heard president trump say the fbi shouldn't be involved. there a lot of moving pieces. what we do know, jim, is there will be no committee vote on thursday. we know that for sure. whether we are going to have a hearing next monday or not is still uncertain. they will have to have some hearing at some point. >> right. and we should mention that brett kavanaugh has said we would like to clear his name. he said that through a statement released by the white house. senator grassley has said this morning and there are other republicans in the senate saying similar things, that they would like to have this hearing

contained to just brett kavanaugh versus christine blasey ford. that leaves out this other person who has been accused in all of this. this mark judge friend of brett kavanaugh. i suppose both sides may want to have supporting witnesses to testify on behalf of each one of the individuals which does raise the specter of having a clarence thomas versus anita hill-type situation. >> that's what happened in 1991. first you heard from anita hill and then judge thomas. then you had a cast of many panels with both for and against, saying at first supporters of anita hill saying yes, we knew about this because she had talked about it in the years before the testimony about her complains against her boss at the time, clarence thomas and many women came forward reminiscent of what we have now, defending judge thomas and he

ended up being confirmed, of course on a 52-48 vote. we already see the testimonials coming out on behalf of judge kavanaugh. i don't think he right now his supporters want a full-fledged hearing. i can't imagine they want mark judge to testify given what we have read and known of their accounts of their lives drenched in alcohol. who would want that to be as a witness in any way. democrats are saying that could be a way to get what might have actually happened in that house back in 1982 or whatever it happened. >> a lot is changing minute by minute. jeff flake who was scheduled to come on said said he went into a last minute meeting and things may be changing moment by moment. we will keep you posted on that. since we brought up anita hill,

the accuser in the clarence thomas hearing in the early 90s, let's talk about this. she is weighing in on all of this. the "new york times" op-ed. she called for a neutral party to investigate brett kavanaugh and writes as judge kavanaugh stands to gain the lifetime privilege of serving on the country's highest court, he has the burden of persuasion here and that is only fair. does anita hill have a point and when do you start to bring in a neutral party that should investigate all of this. you are talking about something that could delay the proceedings for an indefinite amount of time. we don't know how long it could be delayed. they can't put that in a week. i suppose they could, but it could be very, very difficult. you are talking about further delays and that upsets the people at the white house. what do you make of this proposal from anita hill. >> she speaks from first happened experience the way she called up there.

this is the senate's responsibility to get to the bottom of this. whether the senate judiciary committee is equipped to get to the bottom of this is a serious question. right, the white house doesn't want delays. judge kavanaugh's supporters don't want delay beyond a possible hearing next week where they can air his defense to what professor ford has said. you know, the senate judiciary committee which i have been watching for many, many years, i can't think of a version they have ever had. they had their own counsel for better or worse, feeding questions and asking questions. what he is proposing is a new animal for that committee. >> for goes back to the experience she had with senators and you have senator who is went through that experience back then and will see now, gee, up wish we handled this differently. there were a lot of women in this country and i remember they were just outraged with how anita hill was treated.

>> i can say that dianne feinstein, a former san francisco mayor got her job because of that year of the woman which followed in 1992. she was elected because there was that mantra. they just don't get it. they don't get it. you see now something that is happening with the claims from christine blasey ford that so many other women are coming out, saying you know, it rings drtru because of my personal experience. you are seeing a lot of that and it may not in any way affect brett kavanaugh and maybe they shouldn't affect brett kavanaugh, but you have a similar phenomena that is above and beyond where we were at with the me too movement a week ago. >> absolutely. joan, thank you very much for coming in. appreciate it. thank you. and in moments, the president set to hold a news conference and his first chance to discuss this public hearing in a controversial move to talk about

the russia investigation. i will speak live with an american diplomat who went to north korea as they blame the u.s. for the stalemate in nuclear talks. you wouldn't accept an incomplete job from any one else. why accept it from an allergy pill? flonase relieves sneezing, itchy, watery eyes and a runny nose, plus nasal congestion, which most pills don't. it's more complete allergy relief. flonase.

get more value and get more performance. get more done when you shop kenmore at sears. now get up to 30% off appliances. plus free delivery. visit sears.com/kenmore to see how you can get more from kenmore at sears. visit sears.com/kenmore be right back. with moderate to severe crohn's disease,

i was there, just not always where i needed to be. is she alright? i hope so. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira is for people who still have symptoms of crohn's disease after trying other medications. and the majority of people on humira saw significant symptom relief and many achieved remission in as little as 4 weeks. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, remission is possible. we are the tv doctors of america, and we may not know much about medicine, but we know a lot about drama.

from scandalous romance, to ridiculous plot twists. (gasping) son? dad! we also know you can avoid drama by getting an annual check-up. so we're partnering with cigna to remind you to go see a real doctor. go, know, and take control of your health. it could save your life. doctor poses! dad! cigna. together, all the way. happening right now. north korea plasting the u.s. over a lack of progress in the nuclear talks saying the u.s. is totally to blame by stubbornly insisting on full denuclearization. president moon is in north korea

for a round of talks between the two countries. here wo me now is jeffrey feltman who went to north korea to help lay the ground work for the talks. let me ask you about this. it sounds like the negotiations have stalled out over what we were promised. i was there when the president said and they put a piece of paper in front of us that denuclearization was going to happen. where do you think things stand? >> i would look at the context of where we were a year ago. a year ago at this time we were headed into president trump's talk about total destruction of north korea and the rocket man and bringing dotard into our vocabula vocabulary. showing how much they advanced in nuclear technology. the long range missile launch was november 29th. no channels of communication and

always a chance of accidental war and always a chance of misinterpreting the other's intentions. the situation is extremely dangerous. even though right now both sides are saying hey, it's your turn, it's your turn, we are inherently in a far better situation a year ago when it looked like we were on a march to war. >> you hear from this from the white house, we are in a better place than a year ago. the president did not have to engage in the rhetoric over the past year that did bring things to the brink to some extent. north korea before the president came on board back in january of 2017, they were in a box. they were contained. it is the president whose rhetoric provoked the north koreans to some extent. i suppose you would acknowledge that. is it fair to say look how far we have come? things were spiraling out of control last year. >> jim, the progressive nuclear

test, they have done six nuclear tests and the missile launches. those were taking place before the trump administration and after the trump administration came into office. there was a clear public display by the north koreans of their defiance of security couple resolutions. that's what caused the dangerous situations. that's what caused the international unity. that was the best examples of security counsel working together. recognition of the threat to the nonproliferation regime that pyongyang was posing. when i went to north korea in december, that was the risk of accidental war. there were no lines of communication between seoul and pyongyang and washington and pyongyang. they can misread the other. there can be an incident in the northern limit line, the undefined boundary in the west sea that could have led to

something. that risk is gone. that doesn't mean the problem is solved, but the immediate risk of accidental war is gone. mar. >> the risk of accidental war may be gone, but are we where we were before singapore? did singapore accomplish anything? >> i think that singapore broke the tabu about having ongoing channels with north korea. it's unusual to start with the summit and have the working level meetings afterwards. without question, that's unusual. that's what we needed to break the tabu against having ongoing talks with the north koreans. fine, there is a history here. we are all aware of the difficulty. i would say right now there is an opportunity to take the language the north koreans have used in the diplomacy with the south koreans and turn it into an opportunity. i'm skeptical.

is kim jong un committed to denuclearization? we don't know yet. given the change in his language -- >> another summit? >> that's up to the president to decide, but i'm all for using diplomacy and trying to set up working groups to flush out what does denuclearization mean? his language has changed. >> okay. jeff, thank you very much. appreciate that. we will have to see. at this point it does appear to be a stalemate, but an important expert on this. thank you. democrats demanding other witnesses be called to the hearing featuring brett kavanaugh and his accuser. who may be on that short list? the president's news conference as kavanaugh spends his second day huddled in the white house. that is seconds away. stay with us. hey allergy muddlers.

are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec®. it's starts working hard at hour one. and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. when we switched our auto and home insurance. with liberty, we could afford a real babysitter instead of your brother. hey! oh, that's my robe. is it? when you switch to liberty mutual, you could save $782 on auto and home insurance. and still get great coverage for you and your family. call for a free quote today. you could save $782. liberty mutual insurance. liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ opportunlike here.rywhere. and here. see? opportunity. hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. ev-er-y-where. about to be parents. it's doing a lot of kicking down there. meeting the parents. it's gonna be fine.

and this driver, logging out to watch his kid hit one out of the... go dani, go! opportunity is everywhere. all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪

and his on tore ri historic possibly coming up. monday brett kavanaugh is expected to answer questions about an alleged sexual assault, his accuser also invited, but she has not accepted yet. joining me now, chris cillizza. we should say we don't even know if the hearing is going to happen. but if christine blasey ford is there, what do you make of that and who else could potentially testify in all of this? >> first, you're right, ford no indication yet that she is coming. but i would assume given her attorney has said that she is willing to testify publicly, we assume that she will be there monday or at some point. but who else? now, chuck grassley has said just two witnesses.

kavanaugh and norford. but that is mark judd, a friend kavanaugh's who allegedly was in the room to witness all of this. now, he says he doesn't recall. lindsey graham has said we don't need to hear from him. not sure that makes a lot of sense given that three people are available to talk, why not have all three. and we don't know -- >> pretty colorful character. >> absolutely. and again, this is not somebody who couldn't be there, this is somebody they are not choosing to ask yet. yet. now, in the "washington post" story where they broke down this story where blasey ford spoke, they have notes from her therapist in which the incident is described similarly although the therapist wrote down four men were in the room as opposed to two. kavanaugh's name is not used. but the "post" got a look at this. the question is could this person shed more light because

blasey ford said she said two, it was four. she said she wrote it down wrong, et cetera, et cetera. another person that could shine some light. and i think that we do have a conflict here. these are quotes from very recently. this is lindsey graham, it should be done immediately so the process can continue as scheduled. remember, we were supposed to have a vote thursday. let's go to the next orrin hatch, same thing. we want to get it done. and here is 2016, the confirmation process will be deferred until after the election season is over. that decision has nothing to do with the identity of the nominee. the nominee was merrick garland who was barack obama's pick. and let's do one more. mitch mcconnell talking about this -- skip that. but mcconnell said the same thing. 293 days between the day barack obama nominated him and the day that nomination was fully

dropped. >> brett kavanaugh has not waited nearly as long. >> they are on tough ground as it relates to we need to get it done as soon as possible. >> all right. chris, thank you very much. at any point president trump will hold a news conference and take questions from reporters as we learn more details about the allegations against his supreme court nominee and the woman accusing him of sexual assault. [stomach gurgles] ♪when you have nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea... girl, pepto ultra coating will treat your stomach right. nausea, heartburn, indigestion, upset stomach, diarrhea.♪ try new pepto with ultra coating.

you're watching cnn. i'm brooke baldwin. thank you for being with me. the president is set to speak to reporters in a joint news conference with the leader of poland. we are expecting to hear more from him about the turmoil now playing out of course with his supreme court nominee. today the president responded for the very first time to the new extraordinary public reckoning that judge kavanaugh is now facing. kavanaugh who just days ago was on a smooth track for confirmation is now expected to undergo a make or break congressional hearing in six days. at this hour, despite opposition from democrats, just one other witness has been invited to speak. christine blasey ford, the research psychologist who says kavanaugh physically and