anybody else, but i didn't the these thinks. i think he put himself in a difficult position by portraying himself as a real choir boy in his interview. >> michael avenatti coming forward with what he says is a new accuser against brett kavanagh, the senate judiciary committee previewing this document that's been released and reviewing these allegations. thank you so much for joining us as we pick up "inside politics with john king." welcome to "inside politics" i'm john king. it is a major breaking news today. on the eve of that breaking judiciary hearing, there's new accusations against the supreme court nominee brett kavanagh, the woman, julie swetnik. she's represented by michael avenat avenatti. sarah, walk us through this new

sworn deposition. >> she has sent this on through her attorney michael avenatti, to the judiciary committee who has said they have received it. her name is julie swetnik. she has made some claims against brett kavanagh. she says this happened between 1980 and 1981. she says that her friend mark judge and she attend eed partie where there was very heavy drinking and inappropriate behavior your on the part of brett kavanagh and mark judge. she's associated working with the federal government, that she has a public trust, u.s. department of treasury clearance, a u.s. mint clearance and an irs clearance. let us get to the allegations that she is making and that she has sent on in a sworn statement to the judiciary committee. she says that she attended well

over 100 house parties between 1981 and 1983 where mark judge and brett kavanagh, the supreme court nominee were present. she says that the party were in the area, they occurred every weekend during the school year. she says that she herself witnessed brett kavanagh drink excessively, and engage in highly inappropriate conduct, including being overly greg with girls and not taking no for an answer. she says she witnessed brett kavanagh at many of these parties engaging in physically abusive behaviors, grinding against girls and attempting to remove or shift girls clothing to expose private body parts. she also talks about him humiliating and embarrassing girls. she often witnessed brett kavanagh speak with demeaning

terms about women. she called him a mean drunk. she called him a liar, after he did his interview with fox news, where he talked about his behavior, during his time in high school, saying he did not engage in anything of the sort. we have not heard from brett kavanagh, to be fair we have reached out, and we are hoping to get statement or reaction from him. this is the third woman who has come forward, but the first woman who has come forward and signed a declaration, a sworn statement, and sent that on to the judiciary committee, she makes very clear that there were some other incidents that happened, that were far more egregio egregious, she does not say she witnessed it herself, but she goes on to some very disturbing allegations against brett kavanagh and mark judge. and she also has said that she was a victim of gang rape, although she does not say that brett kavanagh or that mark judge were directly involved in

that. but she certainly is making some very strong allegations here, and again, she has sent that along to the judiciary committee, now we will have to wait and see what happens, her attorney michael avenatti making it very clear that they want an fbi investigation immediately, not only involving her, but the other women who have come forward. ms. ramirez and ms. blasey ford, she wants to be a part of that, she wants to sit godown with th fbi and she thinks that an fbi investigation is the way to go. >> sarah, thank you for your continued reporting and come back to us if anything comes in throughout the hour and the course of the day. this hearing is scheduled for tomorrow. the chairman has already said this hearing will be for christine blasey ford, not for debra raermirez, the second wom

and now there is a third woman. and now the broader question, that they can still justify that this is going to be christine blasey ford and brett kavanagh vote. >> it's going to be difficult to make an isolated case against christine blasey ford given this allegations. but what the republicans are doing now, they said they just got this accusation, and they're dealing with it. they have had staff level phone calls discussing exactly what happened with the accuser. they have tried to talk to the accusers, they have tried to talk to the attorneys and to brett kavanagh. and they have these statements that are made to congress, are statements that they can be prosecuted if they are lying to investigators. now what they're going to do in this case too is set up those same phone conversations, with this new accuser, as well as brett kavanagh and republicans are going to hear two divergent stories. in the other instances, they

have not smoke spoken to christ blasey ford, and they have not spoken to the other woman who says brett kavanagh expose himself to her while in college. the big question here, there are democrats who are demanding an fbi investigation into all of this, republicans have said that is not appropriate now, we need to focus on christine blasey ford going forward, and have a vote soon after. can they sustain that position going forward, is going to be the ultimate question. and they can decide whether they have the votes to do that. >> please continue reporting, everybody at the table continue reporting. i want to bring in our legal analyst paul callan into the conversation. paul, i just want to ask you, as an attorney, please let our viewers understand the d distincti distinction, people are saying this is michael avenatti. this is a sworn declaration from a woman who has a career in public service, done under oath,

submitted to the judiciary committee under oath in which she lays out these very difficult allegations. should it, does it carry extra weight? >> if it is in fact sworn and under oath, it carries the weight that a witness who lies under oath can be prosecuted for perjury. i am not clear -- you may have information i have not seen, john, as to whether this is an under oath declaration. the copy i have just says declaration. i don't see any notary stamp or i don't see any indication that he was under oath at the time she gave it. so i'm just not sure about that. but that being the case, it's still, you know, a blockbuster piece of information if it's true, because if true, it's another woman making very, very serious accusations against brett kavanagh. >> and she says in this document, she says i am aware of other witnesses that can attest to the truthfulness of each of the statements above. again, the judiciary committee

is in a tough spot. you can understand their frustrations about the timing, you can understand their frustrations that all of these allegations are coming forward after the official confirmation hearing. but you have another woman who's going to put her name on allegations that judge brett kavanagh engaged in reprehensible behavior. can the committee in your view just go forward without asking the professionals, the fbi or some law enforcement agency to at least check out the basics? >> of course this is not a criminal case. but if we were looking at this as a criminal investigation, i mean a lot of these allegations are criminal in nature or border on being criminal in nature, that investigation usually would continue before a prosecutor would make a decision about what there was a case or there was not a us can. of course we're in a congressional hearing, in which those standards do not apply. i think if this affidavit, and i'm not sure as i said that it's actually a sworn affidavit, but

we might just view it as a written statement signed by the witness. if it's true, if she backs it up with other facts, i think it's a major problem for the kavanagh nomination. >> a key point there, let's bring the conversation in the room with me here in the studio to chair shashare their reporti. manu r m this is a difficult situation in which you now have a person who's willing to take a risk, the statement is signed, i declare under personal si of perjury, the foregoing statement. it can say this, but the question is was it actually done in the presence of someone under oath. you take this at its face value. republicans are going to say

this is michael avenatti, an avowed trump critic. so there is an easy partisan reflex because of her lawyer. but what do they do with a woman who has served the united states government as an employee, with security clearances th s who's to put her name on this on the eve of this hearing. >> one of the things we have seen throughout this entire me too movement, is that accusations that start out as a single, a solitary accusation against, you know, against a mariman in power, often don't pick up the kind of steam that ultimately forces action until there is a second allegation and a third allegation and beyond. and that's what creates often the kind of overwhelming pressure that forces some action. and in this case the action would likely be at the very least a delay. and it does feel like, you know,

we don't know what the accuracy of the allegations are at this point, especially with this third accuser. but it does-it does make it difficult to understand how these senators on either side of the aisle difficult to go ahead in the face of this without some delay. >> i think what manu said is exactly right. in your terms, can they go forward with this. they can do whatever they want. and i think if the hearing proceeds tomorrow, which it's likely that it will. and republicans sense they have the votes, they will go forward with this because if the kavanagh nomination is pulled, i think republicans would rather see kavanagh voted down than pull the nomination and be perceived as caving to what they view as pressuring from democratic attacks and the result of that would be world war 3 on the right. and so i think if they sense that they can push this through and succeed politically, they will do so. >> whether they have the choice

is my question. you had a fascinating conversation with lisa murkow i murkowski, republican senator yesterday in which she was trying to walk away and she said wouldn't it be great if we actually had an investigation, this was in relation to christine blasey ford. and they were able to push off of the ramirez allegation, because she reached out to friends and she acknowledged that her memory was not crystal clear. and she needed to rebuild this and it was fuzzy. this is not fuzzy. this is a woman who says she has a crystal clear memory of more than ften occasions with mark kavanagh and mark judge, mark judge is the high school classmate of brett kavanagh who has denied the christine blasey ford allegation. this contained in the sweatnick application. nothing against ms. van gelder or to judge.

this is not under oath to the senate committee that has to decide whether to have a vote on kavanagh as early as this weekend and put him on the supreme court despite what would be a giant cloud. my question is would this get susan collins and lisa murkowski now that you have a third woman very detailed saying here it is, mr. committee, we are ready to testify under oath. >> lisa murkowski giving a lot of pressure from back home. the lieutenant governor, some groups also coming out against brett kavanagh. for different reasons, and it also comes this allegation as the president is also off the original script. the original script was don't criticize this woman, let her have her say and you heard him more recently say is this is a con job and essentially say judge kavanagh himself isn't being tough enough in defending

himself. >> in reaction to these new allegations with julie sweatknick, the president did not answer the question. the president has a 5:00 news conference, four house and what minute s from now that he asked the aides to schedule because he's not happy with the 2 -- we did not know the specifics of julie swetnik's allegations. michael avenatti was saying that he had a new client that had come forward and very soon that would be a new woman saying there was something wrong. brett kavanagh said it never happened. sorry, we're trying to get that sound for you from the fox news interview, we'll bring it to you in just a moment when we do. we have reached out to the white house for comment on judge kavanagh, we don't have it as of

yet. the president speaks tonight at 5:00, you have made a key point, this is their only chance, if you want to get a supreme court nominee confirmed before the midterm elections where there's a giant question as to whether republicans will keep their hold on the senate, brett kavanagh is your pick. will the president decide that is enough? >> we'll see what they have to say tonight, they do back away from him tonight, as avenatti said this will be a huge problem for them politically on the right. and it's not clear if any of them would get confirmation in a lame duck congress. if we take control of the senate in november. we do have to -- >> what does jeff flake do? i was outside of his office for two and a half hours this morning, waiting for him to come, he knew i was outside, and he escaped through the backdoor,

this ed he did not want to talk to reporters. he refused to comment about any of this stuff, he knows how pivotal his statement vote is. he said if you believe dr. ford, you vote no. we'll see if he decides to do that, one of three senators that are are that committee. >> a woman named julie swetnik, in a written statement in which she alleges where she attended 10 house parties where she saw him acting -- we have asked judge kavanagh for a chance, we haven't received that yet, we'll continue our reporting on this breaking news story, we'll be back in just a moment.

ok i'll admit. i didn't keep my place as clean as i would like 'cuz i'm way too busy. who's got the time to chase around down dirt, dust and hair? so now, i use heavy duty swiffer sweeper and dusters. for hard-to-reach places, duster makes it easy to clean. it captures dust in one swipe. ha! gotcha! and (new) sweeper heavy duty cloths lock away a twice as much dirt and dust. it gets stuff deep in the grooves other tools can miss. you know what? my place is a lot cleaner now. stop cleaning. start swiffering.

today's senior living communities have never been better, with amazing amenities like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars and bistros even pet care services. and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. a place for mom is a free service that pairs you with a local advisor to help you sort through your options and find a perfect place. a place for mom. you know your family we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice. back to our major breaking news story, a third woman has

now come forward to accuse the supreme court nominee, federal appeals court judge brett kavanagh of sexual misconduct some 35 years ago. her name is julie swetnick, she has filed a sworn declaration with the senate judiciary committee. we have reached out for a response from judge kavanagh and haven't heard back. but we do have the prepared testimony kavanagh was set to give tomorrow. brett kavanagh's high school days here in the washington, d.c. area. julie swetnick, the new woman to come forward alleges the same, brett kavanagh has nin his hearing tomorrow has said this, this earth to destroy my name will not drive me out. the vile threats of violence against my family will not drive me out. i am here this morning to answer these allegations and to tell

the truth. and the truth is, that i have never sexually assaulted anyone, not in high school, not in college, not ever. that blanket denial brett kavanagh submitted to the judicial committee, runs counter to this allegation that julie swetnick submitted today. i attended 100 house parties during 1981 to 1983, these parties were a common occurrence in the area during the school year. on newspaperous occasions iness withed brett kavanagh and mark judge in highly inappropriate conduct. this conduct included the fondling and grabbing of girls without their consent, so you have the flat declaration in the statement of brett kavanagh, since he submitted, he will be under oath, so there are penalty of perjury. and you have the declaration

that julie swetnick is prepared to testify to under oath. the committee has no plans to listen to anybody except dr. christine blasey ford, dr. ford. again back to the question, can they sustain that when the cavanaugh nomination was already at risk? >> and we'll see. >> it's still a major question, it's an unfolding story, they have recysted bringing in outside witnesses, republicans have made it clear that they will not listen to christine blasey ford's recommendation that they should bring in outside witnesses including mark judge, including two trauma experts, including the person who administered her polygraph exam. they said there's no reason for that. but it's going to bring more pleasure on them to consider that. i'm not getting any indication that they're going to delay tomorrow's opinion. they're going to move forward and we'll see what happens if they move forward to that friday

vote. th that's why it's so important to hear how republican senators will react if they put on the brakes. we're playing for an audience of essentially 51. >> the president has said to leave it to the senate and that has been a formula for success for him fll in. and he's gotten more involved in reeptd days, he's been more vocal about these allegations and you see him getting more aggressive in taking on the allegations against kavanagh. i think the senate knows that if it delays more, trump becomes more agitated, he gets more involved, i don't think they want that and chuck grassley is in a tremendously difficult position trying to grapple with the emerging allegations on the one hand and a restive president on the other. >> can you look the committee in the eye and say this is a woman who has done work for the

government, and has a security clearance. it does not take away from what this woman is willing to say in a sworn statement about her conduct. she deserves to be heard by someone. the question is who? can this committee have a vote without putting her under oath, without having any kind of investigation, is that fair to brett kavanagh who may become a supreme court justice, that every time he makes a decision, the supreme court just who's under a cloud of sexual assault allegations? >> the problem is it hasn't always helped. part of what at the beginning of the week, and last week, what the republicans were trying to do with president trump's help, was to sort of cast dr. ford as this sort of strange outlier that didn't comport with brett kavanagh's history, right? president trump kept saying he doesn't have a blemish on his record and they wanted to describe this as sort of out of character. the problem is now that you have

these other allegations, the allegations about what he did at college, the allegation about what he did at all these parties. it's harder for that message to sort of stick, and the president isn't changing that message, he just keeps saying this is a man with no blemish on his character as he keeps saying. >> as you read through this declaration, there are some things that julie swetnick says he firsthand witnessed and had firsthand experience. hearsay would be the technical term. how much in this is going to be done in a senate hearing room, not a court of law, but what is your take as you read through it, is the hearsay? would the fbi be helpful? could the fbi do something here? >> john, in reading through the entire document, if you look at all of swetnick's claims, very few of them involve her being

touched by or having -- as a matter of fact none of them involved her being touched by or groped or anything else by kavanagh. she's saying that she was at these wild house parties and kavanagh and mark judge were present at the parties. and she then goes on to describe a lot of horrible things that she says happened at the parties. however, she's not personally involved in kavanagh or for that matter judge touching her or being sexually involved with her personally. so, yes, in a court of law, a lot of this information would be hearsay and would be inadmissible, but this is a court of politics as you observed. and it may very well bed a missable. the thing that really surprises and shocks me. kavanagh survived six really detailed fbi checks. and in these checks they go back and interview your high school friends, your college friends, they're very, very thorough. the report is he's undergone this procedure six times, which is very hard to believe.

and the fbi will come under criticism, if they missed something as potentially as big as this. i'm not sure that swetnick alone has enough here to make this into something that will destroy cavanaugh, but certainly if you investigate and enough women from these house parties come forward and confirm these statements, it's really going to put this nomination in trouble. >> what you do have now, christine blasey ford, deborah ramirez, julie swetnick, three women who if nothing else, their testimony wildly contradicts what brett kavanagh has said about, i studied, i went to church, i prayed, i did my athletics. he says he wasn't perfect, he says he drank and he quickly segued in the fox news interview, i'm paraphrasing, but i'm a choir boy, there's no ways i could have done this. a statement from chuck schumer

is that the judiciary committee -- there are now senator schumer says multiple corroborated allegations against judge cavanaugh made under the penalty of perjury, all made under -- that's chuck schumer's view, that the hearing should be postponed until the fbi investigates all these allegations. >> can i just hop in, john, because there's some news here, chuck grassley just told reporters on the hill that they're going to move forward on tomorrow's hearings, that there's going to be no delay, tomorrow is very important. republicans still at the moment still going to put this to a vote. >> and mcconnell and more important the president of the united states is going to have a response to this.

we'll continue our breaking news coverage in just a few moments, stay with us. this isn't just any moving day.

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. the president's supreme court nominee denying that he was at 10 or more house parties where the woman julie swetnick says that brett kavanagh and

friends were grossly inappropriate in their treatment towards women. demeaning words, demeaning conduct. that is from brett kavanagh just moments ago, released by the white house, this is ridiculous, and in the twilight zone, i don't know who this is and this never happened. this is brett kavanagh's response. joining our conversations, washington attorney if you look at this declaration, it is a woman who has a history of working for the federal government, who has a history of security clearances, who is saying, and she says she's willing to say this under oath under penalty of perjury, that she was with brett kavanagh at a house party back in the 1980s, and there was grossly inappropriate behavior towards women. what happens now? >> we certainly need to do some more investigation. she brings up some very disturbing behavior and behaviors that directly contradict what brett kavanagh

said in an interview with fox news. a so they go to his ethics and his credibility. there needs to be an investigation, just like there needs to be an investigation of all of these allegations. >> conservatives were recycling some old joe biden, saying the fbi can look into this thing, but the fbi doesn't say x is right, y is wrong. but the fbi can look into these things, this is 35 years ago, what can the fbi do? >> first of all they could interview the witnesses, including mark judge who was there at the time of dr. ford's allegations. they can also interview the people she told and they can assess how to assess her disclosure of these matters. they can interview all these people who are showing up online who are making claims about brett kavanagh during his high school days. there is a lot they can do. they also have trained forensic

examiners who know how to interview victims of crime and who also are aware of some of the trauma issues of crime. >> the man at capitol hill who has a big decision to make, after consulting his leader mitch mcconnell, our congressional correspondent, which is one of the ones questioning grassley. what is the latest? >> i just spoke to chuck grassley who said he's going ahead with the hearing with brett kavanagh and dr. ford. he said it would be a disadvantage for dr.ford for that to be cancelled. and when i asked him specific by got this latest round of accusations, he said, our lawyers are on it right now. so the headline being that the hearing tomorrow still goes on and certainly his committee, as we know, are looking into this new-these new round of allegations. i want to also highlight a tense

moment that we had just moments before with senator oren hatch who was coming out of a senate committee room. and of course he was peppered with questions about these new allegations and i think it's fair to say that tempers were flaring, he at one point said shut up to the press. a lot of back and forth, he said he's of course going to look into these new allegations but needs time to digest them. all these tense moments of course just underscoring how fast moving this story is, and much to the frustration of many senators, as well that they can't seem to digest every twist and turn to this story. but the headline being that chairman grassley says tomorrow will indeed goi on. >> let's assume for the sake of conversation at this moment that this story is moving, changing very quickly every day. but assume they try to go forward with this hearing tomorrow. if that's the case, dr. blasey ford comes in, gives her

testimony. brett kavanagh is supposed to follow and give his testimony. if the republicans say that julie swetnick is not welcome, one would assume that the republican attorney would ask him about it as well. and the republicans have brought in a third peter, her name is rachel missitchell. they're bringing her in there. so this will play out without the direct testimony from the other two women, but their allegations will certainly be part of the hearing? >> yeah, i mean you imagine if you are any of the folks on that democratic side of the committee, harris, klobuchar, feinstein, these are going to be part of their questioning, during the hearing and their testimony.

so this is not just going to be a he said/she said, and that he's going to have a chance to respond to it. is not going to be the reality, i think tomorrow. >> and just more reaction coming in, from our colleague ted barre barre barrett on capitol hill. my view is the longer this nomination strings out there, the more you're going to get reckless accusations that have no basis in fact. so you're seeing republicans who are aggressively pushing this nomination, trying to dismiss these as a smear campaign, not give these people a chance to testify under oath, but say there's nothing to it. they want to move forward. the question is, though, again, whether those handful of senators will determine the vote. >> and that handful being, jeff flake on the committee, the most important because of his proximity on that committee. and murkowski, and bob corker

and the silence in the past ten days or so, ben sasse, often independent republican from nebraska is not on the committee, correct? >> he is on the committee. >> he's been very quiet in recent days, that to me from a legal perspective, put yourself in the chair of rachel mitchell tomorrow. brought in by the republicans, because they have white men on this committee, and they understand the optics of having white men challenge rachel miller. republicans will not allow as witnesses, and you have the republican leadership who basically won't allow this, saying we don't believe them. because her job is to deal with it with kavanagh, because otherwise the democrats are going to go after him aggressive. >> first let's talk about what is her job, she's a former sex offense prosecutor, but she's clearly not acting as a sex

offense prosecutor, she is as mcconnell said the republicans assistant. we don't know whether she's going to write her own questions, but she's coming in on behalf of the republicans, standing in the shoes of the republicans on the committee. to that end, i think she's ignoring this. the hearing tomorrow is only about dr. ford. as long as there's follow-up hearings with regard to these other women. >> right now the republican plan is not to two that, the plan is to have a hearing in the judiciary committee tomorrow, to have a vote on friday, one day later and bring the senate in over the weekend and start the clock on a final confirmation vote, and if the democrats use all their tactics they're allowed to use, it will spill over into next week, but the senate being told, prepared for a rare saturday session. because republicans want to keep it on the fast break.

we're going to achetake a quick break, we'll be right back. ♪ ok here we go guys, you ready? hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. opportunity is everywhere. ♪ it's gonna be fine. it's a door...

♪ it's doing a lot of kicking down there. waiting to be opened. ♪ whatever your ambition... ♪ whatever your drive... ♪ whatever you're chasing... driver, are we almost there? we're gonna have a baby! ♪ daddy! daddy! opportunity is everywhere. ♪ all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪

minutes can mean the difference between life and death. proposition 11 saves lives by ensuring medical care is not delayed in an emergency. proposition 11 establishes into law the longstanding industry practice of paying emts and paramedics to remain on-call during breaks and requires they receive fema level training in active shooters and natural disasters. vote yes on 11 to ensure 911 emergency care is there when you or your love one need it. it's my job to protect as a public safety,pg&e, keeping the powerlines clear while also protecting the environment. the natural world is a beautiful thing. the work that we do helps protect it. public education is definitely a big part of our job, to teach our customers about the best type of trees

to plant around the powerlines. we want to keep the power on for our customers. we want to keep our communities safe. this is our community. this is where we live. we need to make sure that we have a beautiful place for our children to live. together, we're building a better california. will the president now stand by his supreme court nominee. now a third woman, her name is julie swetnick has come forward and filed this affidavit with the yjudiciary committee, she says she attended at least ten parties. jeff is following the president and he joins us now with some fresh reporting.

jeff, some tough news for the president, what is he going to do? >> reporter: the president has just left the united nations, he's been away from this news coverage for the last couple of hours as he's been sharing information with the u.n. security council. but i have been told that the president has been brought up to speed on all this now. we know the president is doing even more than that, john, he's been signaling in recent days, he's been unhappy with the treatment of judge kavanagh. he's holding a news conference tonight at 5:00, it's one of the reasons he's likely to respond to it even sooner, he's meeting with the japanese prime minister shinzo abe and meeting with the british prime minister as well. the president, i'm told is squarely standing behind judge kavanagh and intends to point out what he believes, and he has coined himself, it is a con game, in his words by democrats. so you can only imagine what the president is going to do by seizing on michael avenatti, and

wrapping him into all of this. but i'm told by an official traveling with the president who is firmly standing behind his nominee. and he said that senate republicans have been too respectful and he wishes they would have pushed this through a couple of weeks ago, of course that wasn't possible. everything remains an open question now, one thing that's not an open question, the president stands by his man. >> jeff, as you're speaking on tv, the president of the united states, doing as you would expect tweeting about this. the president tweeting, avenatti is a third-rate lawyer who is good at making false accusations like he did on me and he is now doing on judge kavanagh. he doesn't want us to look at his past relationships, a real low life. and now julie swetnick is not getting into -- sarah, michael avenatti has to know, yes his

client gives very specific detailed information. and now somebody who says he might run for president as a democrat, is going to be in the storm here. >> reporter: what is really significant, as you just mentioned the president tweeted about him. this by the way, is the very first time the president has used his flame or mentioned him, where he has gone after others, he has gone after stormy daniels, example, by some of the things she has said. he has never, ever once tweeted about or mentioned michael avenatti's name. this is significant that the president is now attacking michael avenatti. i had a conversation with him, it was very brief, about the sworn declaration by julie swetnick and i asked him whether or not he was going to potentially or she was going to potentially file locally, file a local police report and he said, look, we are asking for an immediate fbi investigation, she

is willing to testify before the senate judiciary committee and they are looking at than she is considering as to whether or not she is going to file in maryland, that she would file in maryland if she was going to file something in this particular case. so there you have it. but i do want to mention that it is significant for the very first time, that the president for the very first time has mentioned michael avenatti after all these months, after all this time when he's come out blasting the administration, this is the first time we're hearing from the president, using avenatti's actual name in a tweet. john? >> prove of the stakes, certainly. sara sidner, appreciate your reporting, come back when you have more. and we want to note that the senate judiciary committee said that they did speak with brett kavanagh, he plans to speak with judiciary committee staff again today. more on that in just a moment. to find a place that could bring

his son's creation to life. there were 14 emails to determine the size of the lightning bolts. and 18 texts wishing luke a very happy birthday. and when all was said and done, luke got to be a real-life superhero. and so did his dad. little things can be a big deal. that's why there's otezla. otezla is not a cream. it's a pill that treats moderate to severe plaque psoriasis differently. with otezla, 75% clearer skin is achievable. don't use if you're allergic to otezla . it may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. otezla is associated with... ...an increased risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have  a history of depression or suicidal thoughts,... ...or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur.

tell your doctor about your medicines and if you're pregnant or planning to be. otezla. show more of you. ♪ cal: we saved our money and now, we get to spend it - our way. valerie: but we worry if we have enough to last. ♪ cal: ellen, our certified financial planner™ professional, helps us manage our cash flow and plan for the unexpected. valerie: her experience and training gave us the courage to go for it. it's our "confident forever plan"... cal: ...and it's all possible with a cfp® professional. find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeaplan.org. you wouldn't accept 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.

everything was so fresh in the beginning... but that plug quickly faded. luckily there's new febreze plug. it cleans away odors and freshens for 1200 hours. breathe happy with new febreze plug.

a book that you're ready to share with the world? get published now, call for your free publisher kit today!

the president attacking julie swetnick's lawyer, michael after natty. >> reporter: brett kavanagh has spent the last few days going over, this was very small, don mcgahn and a few others. and as you know, avenatti has launched this allegation, and he's in a battle with the committee, saying the committee is not doing enough.

but we just got an email where the committee said we did start investigating this. we did ask kavanagh under oath, and even though it was anonymous, he unequivocally denied it. and then he says they're going to haver further conversations with kavanagh today. so two new pieces of reporting there. >> arrest rana, appreciate the reporting that, don't go anywhere, wolf has brettbreath beth wilkinson. that coverage continues after a quick break. have a good day. ♪ quit cable it came from the toaster. ♪ quit cable uh...

♪ quit cable now you can quit cable. switch to directv for $35 per month. rated #1 in customer satisfaction over cable. more for you quitting cable thing. that's our thing. call 1.800.directv.

another anti-wrinkle cream in no hurry to make anything happen. neutrogena® rapid wrinkle repair works in just one week. with the fastest retinol formula to visibly reduce wrinkles. neutrogena®.

hello, i'm wolf blitsder, it's 1:00 p.m. here in washington. thanks very much for joining us. we begin with breaking news, truly explosive allegations against supreme court nominee brett kavanagh, they're being made by julie swetnick, now the third woman to come forward and accuse the nominee of either sexual assault or inappropriate misconduct. in a signed declaration, sworn at the same time. swetnick now says she partied more than 10 times with kavanagh back in the early 1980s, when they were both in high school in the d.c.