legislative business begins at noon. on the agenda, bills dealing with tax policy, including one that would make tax cuts permanent for individuals, families, and small business. the judicial committee hears testimony from christine blasey ford, who has accused brett kavanaugh of sexual assault while the two were in high school. we will show you as much of it thee can on c-span2 until senate returns to consider the nomination of lisa porter. on c-span3, we will have full coverage of that hearing with christine blasey ford and brett kavanaugh that begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern. "washingtonday on journal," we discussed the brett kavanaugh supreme court nomination with democratic

congressman steve cohen of tennessee and david rant of virginia. curtis hillals talks to us about top issues facing his state. ♪ at 10:00 this morning, most in washington, around the country, perhaps even the world will be focused on the u.s. capital. particularly on the senate side. that is where members of the judiciary committee and an outside interrogator will question brett kavanaugh and christine blasey ford. our three hours today will be largely focused on your comments about today's hearing. what do you expect to hear? what questions do you think should be asked? and do you think it will affect brett kavanaugh's chances of

receiving a lifetime appointment to the supreme court. here is how you can let us know. democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. and independent, 202-748-8002. if you want to tweet your thoughts and comments, you can do so @cspanwj and on our facebook page. you can post at facebook.com/c-span. today's hearing will be different for some of the events that will take place and the format it will take. here to walk us through it is john mcardle. viewersust want to get a sense of what will happen a little less than three hours from now in that committee hearing room for the senate judiciary committee. it is room 226. there will be 21 senators on the dais and they include 11 republicans, all men, 10 democrats, all men. all but five members of the

judiciary committee hold law degrees. one of those that doesn't is the chairman, senator chuck grassley. the committee sent out an agenda about what will take place today. the hearing, chuck grassley will dabble in at 10:00 a.m. chairman and ranking members will give their opening statements. there are no time limits and christine blasey ford will be sworn in and have the opportunity to give her opening statement. no time lannett -- limit on that either. 1ch senator will have five-minute round of questions for each witness. the questioning time will alternate between republicans and democrats. republicans -- we are expecting most of those questions to be ,ed by attorney rachel mitchell that is the outside attorney senate republicans have brought in to question mrs. ford. and we are expecting questions

of brett kavanaugh from her. after that round of questions from mrs. ford, brett kavanaugh will be sworn in. for the outside attorney, rachel mitchell, some information about her, she is a longtime prosecutor focusing on six crimes -- sex crimes. uniteads the sex crimes and worked in that office since 1993. she specializes in sex related felonies including child molestation, adult sexual assault, and cold cases. we are expecting to -- her to sit on the dais between jack grassley and orrin hatch -- chuck grassley and orrin hatch. the information for the committee is there is no estimate of when this will end today. c-span will be with you the

whole time airing this on c-span 3 throughout and until noon when the senate comes in on c-span 2. host: we will be focusing on thesefrom you during three hours, getting your thoughts on the hearing. the numbers will be on the screen and you can tweet us and post on facebook. mitch mcconnell on the floor of the senate yesterday putting the hearing in context and talking about the politics behind it. [video clip] notemocratic colleagues did treat dr. ford or her allegation with the seriousness and .iscretion she deserved apparently, they took no meaningful action with respect to her claim for weeks and then, whenly, in the 11th hour, the introduction was virtually certain to introduce further press.they got it to the

so much for dr. ford's request guess.fidentiality, i what lessons can we draw from all of this, mr. president? write to senate democrats about a sensitive atter, you will soon and up household name. and if you are a public servant whose confirmation the far left happens to oppose because they dislike the fact he will interpret the law and the constitution according to what they mean rather than what the far left wishes they would mean, --y will not weaponize to hesitate to weaponize uncorroborated claims and drag your family through the mud. allegations,d which judge kavanaugh has denied repeatedly and in public, and to senate investigators in the strongest terms all under penalty of penalty -- felony.

let's not forget dr. ford's account identifies three other suppose it witnesses and each of these individuals has denied participation in or recollection of any such event. also under penalty of penalty -- felony in all cases. one of the alleged witnesses is a long time friend of dr. ford and she stated not only does she not recall any such party, but she does not even know judge kavanaugh. no corroboration. no supporting evidence before us. just dr. ford's allegation. host: we will hear from more legislators as the morning goes on. we start with stephen pennsylvania on the republican line. good morning. caller: good morning. i feel this will be an extreme continuation of the dog and pony show we witnessed during the

first hearings and confirmation hearings, that is. this whole idea -- i grew up in that era. a little bit before, i am a little older than that. this idea with the last accuser coming forward with the lawyer who was the lawyer for stormy daniels. just because he is a lawyer does not mean he is a credible guy, it just means he went to law school and passed the bar. that there were these nothing wasties and done about it at the time is absurd to me. i grew up in a different location and a few years younger, but not a whole lot younger. host: do you think the latest accusations will become up today -- become part of today's hearings in some way, shape, or form? caller: they absolutely will be. unless the prosecutor keeps on point, but i have zero confidence chuck grassley will

keep on point. host: do you think this will affect judge kavanaugh's confirmation to the supreme court? caller: yes, i do. it will depend on his performance and how credible he i think, unfortunately, it will pass judgment -- not pass judgment, but weigh in on future considerations. who is going to want to go into the service of their country and -- or something of that nature when they are going to put their family on this entire type of witch trial.- host: that is stephen. is inside the view -- if kavanaugh comes off as invasive as he has -- evasive, he is toast.

on the line for democrats, go ahead. you,r: pleasure to talk to sir. enjoy your show. host: thank you. caller: i think people with money and power can almost get away with anything. i grew up in that same era and i know people who were raped and even friends of a friend and i think the woman is credible. i am not sure about the latest one. it she signed some declaration, so she was subject to perjury and whatnot. the women have to be heard because this stuff has been going on for a long time. what makes --host: what makes dr. ford credible in your opinion? why would she go through show, she could not

keep silent. it too long, i think, republicans pushing it through. that is all i have to say. host: keisha is next on the democrats line. caller: i finally got on your show. good morning. i am not a republican, but i do support kavanaugh. i think christine ford is a liar. i think she is not credible. host: let me ask you the previous caller's point. why would she go through all of this and take the risk if there is not truth to it? caller: i am not saying some women that don't come forward, the allegation is not true. the hearings back in 1991, i listened to that. i am legally blind, but i

listened to the hearings of anita hill. i feel like christine ford, if kavanaugh is guilty, he should not be support -- appointed to the supreme court. host: you think at this point, you believe him? i don't want to put words in your mouth, but that is what you are saying? caller: i believe him, yes. host: why so? caller: he seems like the type of guy that just wouldn't do such a thing like that. i feel like this is only hurting him and his family and it needs to stop. host: that is one of the several calls we will take throughout the morning on this hearing that will take place today. is john mcardle. some information about the room taking place. this is a different hearing room than brett kavanaugh was in earlier this month. larger6 was the

judiciary committee hearing room. lots of room for the public, for the press, for cameras. 226 is this room, there will only be three c-span cameras inside the room as well as the robotic cameras the committee controls as well. ull feed today. i want to take you inside that room. a few tweets from nate hearst showing the pictures from inside the room. there was a security sweep at 6:00. the picture, you are seeing the first three rows are all marked as being reserved for witnesses. we assume for family members and guests as well. there is 48 seats for print reporters. the wire services are closest to the front. there is the picture of the

seats and reservations for press reporters. hurst available at nathan if you want to follow him on twitter. thing about what happened yesterday, an interesting note left on the desk where christine blasey ford is going to testify. this story from rollcall calling , a note ofit encouragement. someone checking the lighting and angles in the room noticed the note, it said "good luck, senated," written on stationery. fox news following up with aides for senator chuck grassley saying he was the one who penned the no. told abc newsff that senator was not the one who penned that note. some questions about who left of the note.

the note is no longer at the desk where christine blasey ford will testify. an interesting post or -- pictured yesterday preview can check that out at rollcall.com. host: benjamin in north carolina, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. iat i have got to say is don't think one man, the president of the united states, should have the right to appoint a certain person as an important . position to the supreme court one man and 100 votes. i think the people of the united states should be the one to elect the person to the supreme ,ourt because we, the taxpayers more say inld have

what is going on in washington than we are having. host: ok. let's hear from lawrence and minnesota, independent line. caller: pedro, always good to hear your voice. it is very dangerous for people who have been sexually assaulted, which is a hideous thing. my ex was sexually assaulted, i understand, but to put him on trial as a martyr and assumed this man is guilty because of what happened in so many other cases is just dangerous. that is comment number one. comment number two, i don't understand this latest allegation by this lady saying she witnessed what is inappropriate behavior. i was not there and i cannot say. witnessing what someone calls inappropriate behavior -- if it was inappropriate, then the woman who was the recipient should be the one -- not the one who says she witnessed

inappropriate behavior. i wish everybody to remember the duke lacrosse case, in the end, the attorney general found the gentleman innocent, which is a higher threshold than just not guilty. the attorney general lost his putnse to practice and was in jail. duke university settled for a tremendous amount of money and the police officer who made allegations and colluded with the ag eventually committed suicide. host: ok. that is lawrence, st. paul, minnesota. we heard from mitch mcconnell, here is patty murray about today's hearings. [video clip] >> in this moment in the united states senate, what kind of message will be sent to women whogirls across the country are watching right now, who are

looking to see how dr. ford is being treated, whether or not ramirez, who is willing to testify under a rose, whether her story will be taken seriously or even be investigated. and grappling with what may be one of the toughest decisions of their lives should they report a sexual assault. should they try to bring a perpetrator to justice and make sure he faces the consequences he deserves? or should they keep it to themselves, worried about the ways they may be attacked or ignored or disbelieved, and tara graded -- interrogated about what they drank or wore. moment in the united states senate, what kind of message will we send to men and boys across the country who are watching right now, who will see whether women are empowered to share their experience, men

facing the consequences of their actions, and a message sent that this is not acceptable behavior in high school, in college, or anywhere else. or who will, once again, here that women can be attacked and abused and this respected and abused at ignored and attacked all over again when they share their stories. host: justin is next, green bay, wisconsin. democrats line. caller: hi. the veracity of the accusations takes a backseat to the ineptitude of the democratic party. out fromrats have been day one to remove the nomination of judge kavanaugh. i agree. don't get twisted, i think he is a horrible choice, but he is qualified. if the democrats would have

played this fair and square, his nomination would be in serious jeopardy right now. instead, senate democrats and the judicial committee grandstand it, they were auditioning for 2020 and there is no conceivable end to this judicially during -- hearing today. host: do you think judge kavanaugh's confirmation is not in jeopardy currently? caller: i believe it is not in jeopardy currently, correct. host: why so? caller: i believe it is not in jeopardy because the republican party has a simple majority in the senate. i do not believe they will get two senators to flip. there is no way that is going to happen. host: let's hear from paul in indiana, republican line. caller: hello. the way in which

you conduct c-span -- c-span is a breath of fresh air because it presents both sides and gives both sides the opportunity to speak. we are watching the devolution seen -- have host: paul, i apologize, you are breaking up a little bit. if you could find a better place to get a signal, we will go back to john mcardle and pick up your call. caller: ok. with: as you are chatting collars up there, we are monitoring tweets and the latest from the committee hearing room and what senators are saying as profiletoday's high hearing. here is one of the senators who will be at that hearing, senator john cornyn, a republican from

texas. he is talking about the third accuser against brett kavanaugh, julie swetnik. michael avenatti tweeted out none of the claims could be corroborated by the new york times -- michael avenatti declined to make her available for an interview. one other tweet that caught my eye from kiersten gillibrand, the senator from new york, somebody who championed the me too movement. if she said early this morning, "in the face of the hate that comes from the highest powers in washington, we must never stop speaking out for fairness and what is right. not now, not ever." an interesting story from reuters, comments by ruth bader ginsburg at an event yesterday for students at georgetown university. they write that justice ginsburg's support for the me

too movement -- it was at a question and answer event at georgetown university for first year law students after discussing the problem of unconscious bias that leads to gender discrimination. ginsburg said she was cheered on by the me too movement. "every woman of my vintage has not one story, but many stories. boys will be boys, just find a way to get out of it. the me too movement showed women coming together in numbers. it was one complaint and then one after another and complaints mounted so women nowadays are not silent about bad behavior. ginsburg did not mention kavanaugh or the women who have accused him of sexual misconduct at the event at georgetown. reuters out with that story. host: let's try paul in indiana again. caller: can you hear me now, pedro? host: yes, go right ahead. caller: i think we are seeing

the democratic party -- m a credit party is unable to accept when they lose power. it doesn't matter whether it goes back to reagan, iran-contra, bush. every time they seem to lose, they find a way to do something nefarious and throw everything that is out right now. trump won the election and what we have is a seditious, treasonous to taking place to remove him from office. case, they are losing control of the power. that is all they care about, the power. they are in the front of washington, d.c. and they have a power to inflict on the rest of this country, their belief structure through the supreme court. whether it is to outlaw all sorts of first amendment rights in the public square of christianity, all sorts of

different ways in which they use the courts as a trojan -- to beat up the middle of the country. here is the only way the constitution works is if we honor it. the democrats in the senate have procedures to interview kavanaugh. sit on thatoose to letter from the lady in july and at the last moment spring it on the people, what they did is soured thelmost punch bowl. host: that is paul in indiana. appreciate the call. ray in pennsylvania, independent line. hi. caller: good morning. starting to believe judge kavanaugh because of one thing, she gave a list of three people who were supposed to have been at that party. mitch mcconnell was on

television and stated those people were interviewed and signed statements under penalty of perjury that it never happened. that herthe idea attorney floated she could not be there monday because she had to drive across the country and took three days because she cannot stand to be in a plane, however, she took graduate courses in hawaii. get to hawaii by car, you have to fly. one thing i would like to see c-span do. if you are going to ask questions about believing this alongs, why don't you go and ask if they believe the five women who accused bill clinton? ask them in the same breath. bob isk, from maryland, next. independent line. caller: good morning.

thank you for all you do. i think something that is being missed here is it goes to the purpose of why she brought this information forward and why she was so hesitant and afraid to breach this information and she was counseled in pulled under the democratic wing. her mother and father filed a suit against the company for foreclosure of their home. kavanaugh mother -- kavanaugh's mother, and this is very important, dismissed the case and for years, this woman has been the and it did trying to get act at that judge. this has been in the press and their fight through legal records and it is being swept under the carpet. this is her motivation for doing this. when she brought that information forward, a democratic attorney counseled her, wrote the letter for her to send, and it got completely out of control and it has gone to

this point now where it is almost destroying the in america and democrats, i don't think they realize how they are jeopardizing their own stature in the country. that is bob in maryland. michael said the drama bills in the kavanaugh-ford saga. today's hearing is not the final act. how much a circus this hearing becomes will be a telling of the this function of the current political process. if she shows at all, let's see a hear real evidence and referencing the salem witch trials of 1692. the president while at the united nations spoke not only about judge kavanaugh, but the latest round of those coming out and accusing judge kavanaugh of things. here is the president from yesterday. [video clip] >> i cannot tell you, i have to watch tomorrow. i just heard about one a little while ago. her lawyer is a lowlife.

i cannot tell you if they are liars until i hear them. i don't know what happened today because i have in the -- been busy with japan and china and south korea and about 7 other countries, as you know. and i chaired the security council. i don't know about the person that came forward. i do know about the lawyer and you don't get much worse, bad reputation. as far as the other women are concerned, i am going to see what happens tomorrow. i will be watching, believe it or not. i am going to see what is said. it is possible they will be convincing. with all that being said, judge brett kavanaugh has been, for many years, one of the most respected people in washington. he as been on the second-highest court. .very single person knows him a lot of people know him well. those people don't believe what is going on.

i can always be convinced. i have to hear it. >> it sounds like you are saying there is a situation under which you would withdraw brett kavanaugh's nomination, is that correct? >> if i thought he was guilty of something like this, sure. i want to watch, i want to see. i am meeting with a lot of countries tomorrow, but i will, in some form, watch. i am relying on some fair and talented republican senators. if we brought george washington here and we said, we have george washington, the democrats would vote against him, just so you understand. and he could've had a bad past, who knows. he could've had some accusations made. didn't he have a couple of things in his past? george washington would be voted against 100% by schumer and the con artists. 100%. is president trump

from yesterday. that full press conference, 80 plus minutes available at c-span.org. lacey in tennessee, democrats line. hi. caller: listen, i don't understand why people don't realize why mr. trump wants that fella in there. the reason he wants him is to shut down the mother investigation -- mueller investigation. that is the reason. as far as whether the women are telling the truth or whatever, i cannot be sure of that and i don't think anybody else can unless maybe the fbi interviewed them. they should be investigated, i am sure. host: do you think judge kavanaugh is telling the truth? caller: absolutely -- i cannot say that. .e told two lies already i know of two lies the man told

when he told he did not know anything at all, whatsoever about those stolen documents and that is a boldfaced lie and can be proven. host: that was something that came up from the previous set of confirmation hearings if you want to see that at c-span.org. new york, republican line, john, go ahead. caller: good morning. how are you doing? host: i am well, thanks. caller: i am a big fan of c-span. brett kavanaugh is guilty as all hell. host: what leads you to that conclusion? caller: from the first day of watching the hearings. host: specifically what from them? caller: just by looking at him. host: ok, let's go to john mcardle. guest: just want to give viewers a sense of the room and what the scene is like on capitol hill. the room itself is empty. this is craig kaplan a couple

minutes ago with a picture of that dirksen senate office building hearing room. it will not be empty for too much longer. outside, it is busier. another tweet from nate hurst, the line stretching around the dirksen senate office building. .his is the c street entrance that is where police are having the public lineup. it's unclear where they are going to go because it doesn't appear to be any seats reserved for the public. all the seats in the room, a much smaller committee hearing room than the previous kavanaugh hearing, all the seats appear to be reserved. we will find out if they let in any members of the public. also want information about what you will be seeing and what we plan to cover today. ool for this high

profile hearing. there are three cameras in the room. we will have one camera for the witness and one camera on either side for shots of the various members as they make their statements, ask their questions. the idea is to balance coverage of the members as they are talking. all of the cameras are operated by c-span. we are not under any restrictions on where our cameras can look and where we mix the shots up. those three camera feeds are available to all the networks and those who subscribe to the pool. they can take those shots and mix them how they please. c-span is having -- planning to have a camera outside the hearing room to see any events that might take place outside the doors and there is expected standup positions

where senators can go or members --congress, if house members should note of the senate recording studio, if you are looking through the judiciary committee hearing room, they have their own remotely --trolled camera operated by if you want to watch the committee hearing room, it will be up live on c-span 3 starting at 9:45 so you can get sights and sounds and images as -- of people walking in. that is expected at 12:00 today. today devotedram to your calls and comments on this hearing featuring judge kavanaugh and professor ford. 202-748-8000 for democrats. 202-748-8001 for republicans. 202-748-8002 for independents. the new york times frames up the positioning that both sides will

take going into this hearing saying republicans are framing the hearing as a legal proceeding. innocents." other republicans argue they are not obligated to believe judge kavanaugh's accusers. democrats, by contrast, are framing the hearing as a job -- a supreme court seat is a privilege, not a right and they intend to use the hearing to raise issues about his character and truthfulness. in an effort to darken his image so voters will see him as unfit. independent line, darwin is next in jacksonville, florida. caller: good morning. god bless you and god bless c-span. i love c-span. it amazes me as i listen to the callers call in, just how

uninformed the american public is as a whole. the democrats are mad about judge garland not getting a hearing and the republicans are holding on to power by any means necessary. therefore, it is almost impossible to get to the truth. and she goes to the fbi and answers questions under oath. she takes up lie detector test, not admissible in court. to go through all the moves, nobody does that. seeybody says they want to fairness. fairness is getting to the bottom of or at least doing an investigation to see exactly what happened. not allowing another party involved in this thing not to appear before the senate to be their take is.t whether i remember, don't remember, wrote a book,

alcoholic, don't remember. whatever the case may be. this whole thing is unfair. host: let's go to david in san francisco. that lastagree with caller. they are certainly speeding up this progress -- process and it doesn't need to be. i am really concerned about corruption in all of this. people in new york city have known donald trump has organized crime for decades. every appointment he does is organize crime choice. the idea that senator grassley thiswa is fast tracking thing, he has got to be involved in organized crime if he is going to refuse to discuss ofngs like the policies kavanaugh. inm particularly interested

a ruling the supreme court made a couple years ago regarding duty to care. tot the police have no duty care. in this case, the police were watching somebody get beat up and did not put a stop to it. san: let's go to marie in francisco, california. independent line. caller: good morning. can a survivor myself, so i fully understand why it would be difficult for someone to come forward. putting that aside, with the hearing that is going to go on, i am very concerned with the fact the republicans have refused to allow the fbi to do a .ull investigation i fear that what they are doing is setting up professor ford tomorrow. when they go to vote, it appears

as if they -- as if they have already made their mind up. -- ioncerned about the way really hope those in washington would have the truth and get to the truth. host: what do you think the fbi will produce out of all of that? caller: i don't know. i really don't. i do think, in all fairness, since this is about ford and she did request of the fbi investigated this, that they be allowed to do that task. until that is done, i don't think they are really being fair to professor ford or kavanaugh. host: let's go to mike in oklahoma, republican line. caller: good morning, pedro. i would like to say c-span is fair and balanced with all you guys up there. i appreciate they got -- the job you do. i am concerned about this.

i am concerned both republicans and democrats need to sit back, take time, and understand just how important this hearing is today. irregardless of -- if you want to hearing in there or not. this is something we need to get straight. i hope the people will listen to what is said and i hope they can make up their mind today. think one hearing will satisfy all those things? caller: no, pedro, i don't. i really don't know what the answer is. i know the man has been investigated 6 times as he moved up the chain for the district. we are at this point. it is a sad day, but i hope it can be a day that people can

come together after this thing is over with. wyoming, theo to democrats line. caller: hello? host: you are on. are you there? caller: i am here. i am just debating -- host: you are going to need to turn down your television because you are getting feedback and that is going to halt the conversation. ok, we will put you on hold. joyce, houston, texas. the public in line. go ahead. -- republican line. go ahead. caller: i am basing the facts on, the democrat party said from the onset whoever trump picked, they would not confirm him and the next thing i go on. this woman did not want to come forward. it was confidential.

the next thing, it doesn't have anything to do with kavanaugh. it has to do with hatred of trump. they will hurt this man and his family to get to trump because they are angry hillary is not the president and trump is. there were so many facts thrown against trump, the google, all the cable channels. everything. all the money spent. the heads of the fbi, many of them have gotten fired because they were determined. to your pointack about this not being about judge kavanaugh. what about these allegations? what do you make of them? caller: they brought these women up -- it all goes back to they wanted to hurt trump. this woman did not want to go --

come forward. host: tony in illinois, democrats line. for c-span.k you i just have to tell the american women, you need to wake up because if you don't, now that they have all of these sex problems going on. host: what are you talking about? we will leave it at that. john mcardle, go ahead. guest: one of our callers brought up the committee vote scheduled for 9:30 tomorrow on whether to advance the kavanaugh nomination out of the judiciary committee. the next step after that is a floor vote on his confirmation, although some democrats are trying to keep that process from going forward. senator jeff merkley, one of them, the democratic senator is suing the trump administration and republican senators in what

fox notes is a last-ditch -- nothing -- one that has nothing to do with sexual misconduct allegations. is -- could effectively halt the nomination. he is alleging the trump administration is violating separation of powers by not releasing hundreds of thousands of documents related to kavanaugh's time as a lawyer, charging that this knowingly prevented senators from doing their constitutional duty to advise and consent the president by vetting kavanaugh. the article goes on to note it is likely a longshot effort, unprecedented in that there hasn't been a case to stop a vote on a supreme court nominee before. a few tweaks from merkley yesterday -- tweets from merkley yesterday. they may want to ram through or highinee come hell

water, but that is not how our constitution works. he went on to say there's a lot we don't know about kavanaugh's record because the trump administration has gone to great lengths to hide it. must intervene to prevent this process from continuing until kavanaugh's full record is available for public scrutiny. if the courts were to intervene, it would have to be soon in the wake of the schedule moving forward with today's hearing and tomorrow's committee vote. host: from new york, republican line, andy. hello. --think the party [inaudible]

i am sorry, that signal is coming in and out and it is hard to get that solid. james in ohio, independent line. hello. caller: my question is about the fact that the memories that professor ford has are recovered memories, psychoanalysis and the dismal,t those are very the percentages of those that are correct. i am wondering if any of the public knows that, that these are recovered memories, not actual memories. these are memories done through psychoanalysis. host: how much do you think that will be a part of today's hearing? hold ofi tried to get a all my representatives from ohio that was involved to see if one of them would see that question was brought up because everything that i have read about this, like i said, the

percentages of them being correct is very low, it is not high. these memories. host: when it comes to the reaction from legislators, what have you gotten from the calls you have made? caller: i talked to senator brown. i left a message. i haven't heard from him at all. i actually talked to staff member rob portman -- a staff member of rob portman's and he said he would pass that on. unfortunately, portman is not part of this. he is not in that committee. your when it comes to overall thinking as far as the two people involved, you talked about the repressed memory. does that mean you are inclined to believe judge kavanaugh? i probably doly, believe him and it is not because he is a man, necessarily

. it is because i know if i were ever brought into court and they witnesses orand no anything like that, the first thing i would tell them is no facts, no crime. judicial system and i believe it is based upon cannot just say anything. i think we are getting to a status in our country where people's lives are being ruined over allegations and i don't like that. donald ins hear from indianapolis. democrats line. good morning. caller: good morning. how are you this morning? host: fine, thank you. realr: i think this is simple. for me, it doesn't matter if the judge is lying or the lady is sense tellsy common me that somebody is lying. whoever is lying should go to jail. i think it should be an

investigation. i think they should find out who is lying to the congress. this is perjury and then they should pursue that and someone should go to jail. it doesn't matter to me if the judge is there or not because even if he does get there, there are other judges. they are not going to let this man run roughshod over the whole thing. should go to jail. i think this whole thing should be about who is lying and who is going to get locked up. that is my opinion. as it stands right now, who are you inclined to believe the most? caller: i don't know who to believe. becauseomeone is lying she is saying all this happened -- he is saying it didn't. someone is lying. host: let's go to fred in new york, republican line.

fred in new york, hi. yes, sir. i think this is going so far and the main reason it is going on is because democrats do not want a conservative man on the supreme court election. that's all it is and they are willing to do anything possible to slow this up. host: why is it about the accusations made against the judge? caller: because they are not true. ae ladies would have found it long time ago. 6 times.een vetted how many more times with a have to check his record? bill clinton got checked before he was president, he had problems and he had problems all the way through to the white house. same with jack kennedy. they didn't keep him out of being president of the united

states. these women -- it is like the caller before me said, there is no proof. morning, wehout the will be talking about this confirmation hearing set to start at 10:00 this morning and here is john mcardle with more about it. guest: told you just a moment ago about democratic efforts to pump the brakes on this confirmation process. some republicans weighing in on that topic as well. notingory from the hill that congressman walter jones, republican of north carolina republicanfirst lawmaker to call for an fbi investigation into the allegations by three women against brett kavanaugh "i think there should be an investigation by the fbi, i really do." what in the world difference would 10 days make? such an investigation could exonerate and "help kavanaugh" argued jones, who sometimes

clashed with president trump. another republican who sometimes clashed with president trump is ohio governor john kasich. here is his statement yesterday on brett kavanaugh's nomination, "given the questions and allegations and a higher standard demanded for a lifetime appointment, the senate should not rush to confirm him in the absence of a complete and thorough investigation and hearing from all parties involved. moving this nomination forward would be a mistake. in the best interest of our country and the integrity of the court, the senate needs to hold onto this confirmation without an investigation and i cannot support this nomination if they choose to move forward." that was john kasich on twitter yesterday. host: today, highlight some of the other committee members to keep an eye on during the hearing later this morning. coryhighlight senators booker and kamla harris.

"the thing democrats need to avoid at all cost is the perception that they are willing to savage this guy to ruin his reputation." the arizona wildcard is how they describe senator jeff flake of arizona. he is potentially a swing vote and he has nothing to lose announced he is not running for reelection and he was one of the republicans who called for the committee to delay the vote until ford could be heard. in new hampshire, go ahead. caller: yes, i am in new hampshire and i was a democrat for many, many years and i saw what the democrats did to the country and now i am a republican. this morning, i was pretty upset to hear the speaker of the , addressinge hassan the president on this sexual case. maggie hassan's husband, tom

, did a misconduct on allegations at the philip exeter academy. she cannot talk about sexual harassment when it is in our -- her own household. host: what do you think about today's hearing and what are you expecting from it? caller: i am hoping he is cleared of all these allegations. these women, two of them have degrees in psychology and you go to these counselors that have these- have gone through sexual issues and how are they supposed to help someone else with sexual problems if they can't even come forward -- host: apologies for that. john in massachusetts, independent line. think this is nothing more than the best example of how divided the

country is and how congress is. 6, 8 weeks ago they had this information and judge kavanaugh did not think this up. everybody on the democratic side has purposefully gamed the system and put this heatseeking missile in in such a way as to not just derail judge kavanaugh, but try to delay this whole nomination. this is another garrett marlett -- merrick garland situation and even if judge kavanaugh is cleared, they take the court, he has a cloud over him the rest of his career. that is dysfunction. i think both sides are guilty, the way they are playing this and the hypocrisy is beyond belief. host: should the president withdrawal the nomination? caller: no, i think they should see it through. i really do.

i have been married 49 years and i met my wife in high school and she is a democrat and i am independent and we said, how many things can you remember from high school? we knew a lot of the same people and went to the same parties and we cannot come up with anything. if i had been married for 30 years and had this kind of oppressive psychological dysfunction and never mentioned it to my spouse, excuse me, but i think it is too convenient. host: the editorials from the paper on today's hearings, hit pause on brett kavanaugh. leave thehe budget -- public in doubt about his honesty and character and set a lower standard for taking claims of sexual abuse seriously than the senate did 27 years ago in considering the accusations by anitalarence thomas

hill. the only reason for so much of urgency about the pollock -- about this nomination is politics. the same cannot be said for a call for a fair investigation. write if this is a new confirmation standard than we have entered a politics in which anyone can be destroyed by incendiaryng an charge even without supporting evidence. all a senator has to say is the accusation seems "credible," and a nomination can be disqualified. does notumer says this apply to judge kavanaugh because a nomination is not a criminal trial. the due process for the accused is rightly employed and standard across american public and private life. the burden of proof is on the accuser. host: robert is next in connecticut. caller: good morning.

thatands to reason kavanaugh is looking more guilty than the accusers are because to accusers are willing have the fbi investigated them. kavanaugh has kept quiet on the subject and trump pretended like he cannot order it. i think he has reservations because he has been harkening the fbi for the neck -- for the pteenth month. when they investigate this character and find out he may be a serial pedophile -- not pedophile, predator, then trump will say that is the fbi because they hate me, too. i've got enemies under every corner, every blanket, everywhere you look. host: aside from a willingness to be investigated, what have the witnesses come -- brought forward that convinces you of judge kavanaugh's guilt? caller: there is the other

gentleman in one room with professor ford, mark judge, who is hiding somewhere and the republicans won't pursue a subpoena to get him to testify to either validate or disprove the situation. they obviously are running scared because if he does come and proclaims whatever happened, good, bad, or ugly, they don't want to take that chance. host: james in tennessee, republican line. hello. caller: hello. even stevie to say wonder can see what is going on here. the fbi -- people are constantly saying the fbi should investigate. investigate what? there are no facts and witnesses . all of these allegations happened at least 36 years ago. it is just a stall tactic. democrats already announced they were not going to vote in anyone that trump picked.

they had fill in the blank names of whatever judge he picked. nowadays, another stall tactic. again, when youagain, when you i pop-up, anybody knows with his track record, this whatever witness that he had whatever was going to be skewed and somebody that wanted to just spirit of allegations that were not true. upt: the last caller brought the fact that republican did not want to bring up mark judge to testify, should he be a part of this? caller: all the witnesses said it didn't happen. they cannot find one witness that said anything about these rates, sexual abuse allegations even happened. if you don't have any fax, you

don't have any witnesses, what is the fbi going to investigate, are they just going to ask everybody in the area what happened? host: since mark judge is part of professor ford's story, should he be a part of that process? caller: yes. bring him along. i'm sure whoever comes forward, it will not shed any light on anything. the only thing that will happen is it will be the same thing, just a false allegation. no matter how you slice it, it will be truth versus a lie. i agree, if these accusers are found out to be liars, there should be penalties. to hold of a nomination, supreme court nomination, just for these last-minute stall tactics. host: we will leave it there, james. it is a little bit after 8:00,

we are less than two hours away from the start of the hearing. , your calls and comments about the hearing. you can talk about the process, what you might expect to hear, questions you may want to see asked. you may want to comment on if this ultimately will get judge kavanaugh to the supreme court or not. of the things up for discussion for the remaining two hours. to talk to the details of it is john mcardle. a i want to give viewers sense of where we are. they were seeing that live shot of the committee hearing room, about two hours ago, was swept by security. you can see the press starting to show up, a photographer there taking a picture of the seat , bretts. ford will sit kavanaugh. i want to give you a sense of what this room looks like compared to where kavanaugh

testified earlier this month in his first three days of his senate confirmation hearing. much larger room, accommodates more of the public, press, you can see the difference in size. much closer inm confines. still, there will be 21 senators at the dais, 11 republicans, all men, 10 democrats, six men, four women. will:00, chuck grassley gavel in. he and senator feinstein will offer their opening statements. then dr. ford will be sworn in and given the opportunity to give an opening statement. no time limit on her opening statement. each senator will then have won the five-minute round of questions for ms. ford. they can choose to ask the questions themselves, or as we expect, republicans will be giving their time to attorney

rachel mitchell, who's been brought into to the questioning on their part. questions,round of they will take a break. judge kavanaugh will be sworn in, give his opening statement. no time limit on his statement, and then another round of 15-minute round of questioning. same rules apply. senators can ask questions, they to anotherir time senator, or to a staff attorney. there is no estimate on the total duration of today's withng but c-span will be it in its entirety on c-span3 when in goebbels and at 10:00, you can also watch on c-span two. can listen in on c-span radio and watch on c-span.org. mary is next, south carolina. democrat line. caller: i am not a democrat, i'm

a republican. host: mary, go ahead. kavanaughthink judge should be confirmed. this is all a witch hunt all fake news, like donald trump says. anything to stop him and to stop republicans from getting a stronghold into the supreme court. they changed our constitution, these democrats. host: why is this not based on the accusations against judge kavanaugh? what do you think of those accusations, why do you think they should not be examined? caller: i don't think they are true, that's my opinion. that one lady that went under hypnosis, i have heard a lot of bad stuff about that stuff. people say so did this to you. they come to find out it was a bunch of hooey. host: dave in alabama. independent line. caller: good morning, pedro.

i have not heard anybody talk about as far as the third ex-boyfriend, had talks about how the third accuser is a liar, that he had a ,estraining order against her and that she threatened his current wife and family. host: how does all of that factor in today's hearing? me.er: it bothers how many people have been and they said avenatti released a statement where he said he was unaware of the restraining order that was placed against his current client. i think we are rushing. you think about professor ford's accusations as

she faces testimony, as well as judge kavanaugh? caller: i worry about her. as a victim, i was sexually assaulted at 15 and i was told by adults to keep my mouth shut. you know, i have a hard time with having a therapist put you under hypnosis. the power of suggestion is really key. you don't know how much she actually said versus how much the therapist doing hypnosis added to or may have suggested. experience, asr you explained it, are you inclined to believe her or not? honestly, i believe something happened to her. i just believe she is unclear to whom was in the room. my heart breaks for her. wouldly wish our culture

start teaching and empower women, if something happens, say something, and keep saying something until you get an adult . i was a teenager, she was a teenager. until you find somebody that can believe you and help you walk through the process. georgia, democrat line. you are next. it extraordinary that people are so willing to vilify these women. but when boys come forward decades later to talk about abuse by priests, they are embraced and believed. we have to look at the patriarchy that is going on in this country. we have to look and why women don't come forward. they don't comport because this is what happens, they are vilified, denied, my god child me molested and didn't tell

for 15 years. this is what happens. they get under scrutiny. why thebelievable person who has been sexually assaulted has more shame on them than the person who perpetrated that. host: is that coming from the outside, do you think, or the process that the senate judiciary committee has set up for her? is an: i don't think this investigation, i think this is a is an investigation, i think this is a cover of. i think they have done everything in their power to make sure -- [no audio] 80% of his files have been kept quiet. why do you think that is? he has so much to hide. decide professor forte's testimony, what do you think of that, the accusations she has made? caller: i believe her. why would this would put herself through this?

her life has been threatened, she has had to move. the fbi could be looking into this but they don't want to know the truth. these people don't want the truth. truth has nothing to do with this. host: charlotte, houston, texas. republican line. caller: good morning. i think it's an insult to the me to movement what they are doing. i personally feel the me too movement is something for women have truly had some instances but i think it is such an insult because this woman has come forward after 36 years, has nothing to prove that this happened and she wants to destroy this man's life. our previous caller just said that she put herself out there and look at the reaction she got not only from the

outside, death threats and the like. what do you think about her put herself through this process? think she is looking for something. don't be surprised if you see her running for something in a year or two. look with the democrats have already done. they have already said they were not going to nominate him, whoever it was, they were not going to nominate. .hen we had all the disruption if they really wanted to make a disturbance, they could have done it at one time in the court. host: as far as judge kavanaugh, do you believe him? caller: i do believe kavanaugh. you know what? two things. started at 17 years of age doing this to a woman, there will be a whole lot more after that, and there isn't. , i fear for is every single man that has been

successful, because that is who they are going after. it comes to the latest round of accusations, do you dismiss those, how do you accept them? dismiss them. this is something that has been and created by the democrats. host: that is charlotte in texas. here is john mcardle. >> one of our callers was talking about the files that have not and have been released leading up to today's hearing. more information about that reporting yesterday. this from a washington post reporter noting a letter 'ssterday from ford attorney saying under no circumstances will they hand over her medical records including therapist notes. her polygraph, we have seen plenty of reporting on that. orrin hatch responding to that -- post saying,

the therapist notes are sensitive but some will ask why they were shared with the washington post in their reporting but not with senate investigators. in terms of what has been released, the opening statements for both ms. ford and brett kavanaugh has been released, the lawyeree and ford's coming out. here are some excerpts starting with ms. ford. she will say during her opening statement that i don't want to be here but i'm terrified. i believe i should tell what happened between me and bring kavanaugh in high school. these last couple of weeks have been the hardest of my life, i have had to relive my trauma in front of the entire world and have seen my life picked apart by people on television come in the media, and have never spoken to me. my motivation in coming forward was to provide the facts of how

mr. cavanaugh's actions have damaged my life so that you can take that into consideration as you proceed. it is not my responsibility to decide whether mr. cavanaugh sits on the supreme court. my responsibility is to tell the truth. that from remarks. this from brett kavanaugh's prepared remarks, posted by the judiciary committee last night. he will say in part, i spend most of my time in high school focused on academics, sports, church, and surface but i was not perfect in those days, just as i'm not perfect today. i drive beer with my friend usually on weekends, sometimes i had too many. didetrospect, i said and things in high school that make me cringe now. what i've been accused of is far more serious and juvenile misbehavior. i never did anything remotely rep resembling what dr. ford described. he will end his statement by saying i categorically and unequivocally denied allegations against me by dr. ford theater are not questioning that dr.

ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in some place at some time but i have never done that to her or to anyone. i'm innocent of this charge. host: missouri. independent line. thank you. i agree with the lady who believes mr. cavanaugh. the last caller. her.ee with i have some friends who were assaulted and they went to the nurse and police right away. that is the right way to do it. honestly, i have to ask, what was this woman doing at parties drinking at age 15? i have a son. he is going to be in the world out there with women like her who think all they have to do is shout out, he got me, and then they can destroy a man's life? this is awful. there is no evidence, she waited 35 years to come forward.

for realit harder women who are actually, legitimately survivors. it is astounding that the democrats who will not go into and keithlinton rapes ellison of assaults, they will not go into them but they will come after a man who has the lawd his life to and helping out. he helps out at the shelters, girls basketball. if you was a predator, you would see examples of things in his life in the last 10 years. leopard do not change their spots. he is a decent guy. cynthia in california. democrat line. good morning. thank you for having me on. i just would like for americans to realize that a lot of people, when they are up for promotion,

do not receive those jobs because of their past and things they have done. this kavanaugh hearing should be bringing all of this to the forefront. i really believe the women. place,oes not get the then it is just like the rest of americans, and he can go back and be a judge. it is not like he will lose his career. i am really upset when i feel that sheer people be so sorry for him. he has obviously done something in the past for all the letters to come forward. nobody said about why they did that. it seems like there is a cover-up and he is trying to smooth this all over from his past. i don't think he should get the seat. host: beside the accusation, why do you believe the women? haver: because they don't anything to gain to come out.

obviously, all the threats happening to them, not able to be in their own home. this will affect their future, too. i just fielding are doing their best to come forward now with the me too movement and more people are able to express some of the things that have happened to them at the risk of hurting their futures. is next.bara miami, florida. independent line. just a few points. first, regarding the lie detector test. aree types of tests inherently unreliable. that is why they are not admissible in a court of law. it depends on who administers the test, time of day, how trained the administrator is, whether the person believes what they are saying is true. that is why they are not allowed in a court of law. sonsdly, i will tell my going forward, never be by yourself with any of either

gender. don't be in a group because there might be accusation of group rate. don't chat on the computer because that will be something where you are considered to be a pervert. just stay away from everyone all the time or you face something later in your life. host: when it comes to the hearing itself, where do you stand as far as who you believe or not. let's go to cindy from connecticut. republican line. morning, pedro. thank you. i just want to say, i have been a victim of harassment by a family member, but that is not the point. i never came forward with it because i considered who i was going to hurt and not to put myself in the situation where it could happen again. i was prepared to say something if it continued. that being said, what is going on here is so dangerous.

the democrats are not helping women, they are using this poor woman. the avenatti accusation just discredits ms. ford, and that hurts her, whether she is telling the truth or not. i was willing to hear her out. this is setting a bad precedent. what employer will want to hire a woman now? this will hurt our careers. they will be skeptical. they are not going to want to touch women with a 10-foot pole. you are not helping women, you are using them. host: can i ask a question? , therought up the fact idea that the avenatti accusations, the people that he brought up hurt professor ford. why is that? each accusation gets more and more outrageous when they see something is not working, it gets more crazy by the minute. that hurts her. sorry.ney is just -- i'm

if you really think about it, it's crazy. totimes this woman went parties where the stuff went on. where was her obligation to protect the girls? host: that is cindy in connecticut calling in. has a piece taking a look at outside counsel, examining the history of it, saying using an outside cancel to question witnesses it as part of the confirmation hearing even for the supreme court is most unusual but senators have made similar moves in recent decades for some of the most sensitive allegations, the watergate, keating five, whitewater. of three most notable examples were senate committees have employed outside counsel to question witnesses. while what is expected to play a thursday at the judiciary building is uncommon, it is certainly not unprecedented. he goes through some of the history of those cases and the use of outside counsel.

you can find that piece at roll call. scott is next from clearwater, florida. go ahead. scott from clearwater, florida. good morning. caller: good morning. a couple things to point out. where has this lady been all of these years? it's been a long time. also, she has these recalled memories where alcohol was used. that is pretty sketchy. is, i went to a lot of parties when i was in high school, college years. any time to work three people went into a room at a party, they were either doing drugs or there were going in to have sex. this woman went in with two men. you have to question her judgment. i don't know what she was thinking. host: that is scott in clearwater, florida.

getting your input leading up to this hearing featuring judge kavanaugh and christine ford at 10:00 on c-span two and three, carries on on c-span3 after the senate comes in. andcan watch on c-span.org also our c-span radio app is available to you. giving us information and background and other bits of information when it comes to the hearing itself is john mcardle. a trying to give viewers sense of what the scene is like on capitol hill. here is what it looks like inside the committee hearing room, dirksen 226. not too many people in there right now but outside a very crowded hallway, the second floor of the dirksen senate office building. we are hearing it is one way traffic allowed through the as police tried to control access to that much roomer room than the usual

that a hearing of this magnitude will be held in. police station at every door and elevator on the second floor of the dirksen senate office building. just a handful of photographers inside the room. i believe that is tom williams in the blue shirt, a veteran capitol hill photographer working for roll call. usually at this point in the hearing of this magnitude, there would be upwards of 50 photographers inside the room. only 48 seats inside the room for print reporters, wire of thers near the front seating for the room. unclear yet whether the public will be allowed in. it doesn't appear there are any seats being reserved for the public at this point. you were just talking about that that republicans have brought into question ms.

ford, possibly brought kavanaugh as well. politico reporting senators graham, hatch, and cornyn have not ruled out asking their own questions at the hearing today. of course, the rules of the hearing is a senator can ask their own questions, see their time to another senator, or to another committee counsel. that is the scene right now. host: west berry, -- water very, connecticut. patty. hi. caller: am i on? host: go ahead. caller: ok. i'm astounded at the women who .ave accepted what is going on thousands of men were abused by the church and did not come were excepted.ey i cannot believe all the people pre-judgments,de including the president, who is a sexual predator himself, by his own admission.

and he has supported sexual predators throughout his term of office. i am shocked that they don't accept the fact that these women were assaulted behind closed doors and are not going to have beugh information to acceptable for the republicans. i think it is outrageous that the president and the people on alreadyittee have decided the outcome of this, without hearing any of the testimony. the democratshink have decided the outcome for judge kavanaugh as well? have, butobably some i don't think as strongly as the opposite way. i think they feel confident in the women, but they are waiting to see.

this is a kangaroo court. the president didn't let people talk yesterday, it was a monologue. he just said anything. should not be outspoken on this subject because he is a predator himself. you said a kangaroo court, what is it about today's proceedings that make you think that? caller: so many people on the committee have already dismissed the women's testimony and they have said kavanaugh is a fine man. well, other fine men have been indicted. and this leads to go to a fair trial, which they are not getting. there should have been an investigation by the fbi. host: do you think outside counsel that will be used, what do you think of that being used in the hearing today? caller: i think the men should

be brave enough to do it themselves. oft: let's hear from gear all, on our independent line. caller: good morning. a couple ofy things. first of all, no means no, whether you are drunk or not. whether you're at a party or not. the second thing is i'm astounded at how the american people have already prejudged ms. ford for coming forward. there is also allegations by another four women. they may not necessarily be telling the truth, but they might also be telling the truth. i. kavanaugh, if he is lying, believe there should be an fbi investigation. it if he is found guilty, why would you want someone in that

position? host: do you think today's hearing will answer any of those questions for you? caller: i think i already know the outcome. the senators on the republican side will vote yes for him. it is unfair to the american people because they are the minority. i don't think it is an issue with the democrats. i think it is an issue with president wanting him there. somebody has to put a stop to things like that. at one point, we have to realize, the law is the law and nobody is above it. as long as mr. trump steps all over it, somebody has to come forward. the important thing here is an fbi investigation. what are they afraid of? if he is not guilty, what does he have to hide? our caller from

texas. one of those republicans on the judiciary committee, jeff flake of arizona, announced his retirement, and expressed concerns about the hearing going into today, particularly his thoughts about it on the senate floor yesterday. >> tomorrow we will have a hearing. many members of his body from both parties have already made up their minds on the record in advance of the hearing. they will presumably hear what they want to hear and disregard the rest. one is tempted to ask why even bother having the hearing? i do not know how i will assess credibility of these witnesses. these human beings on the grave matters that will be testified to. because i have not yet heard a word of their testimony. because i have -- i am not psychic, i'm not gifted with clairvoyance. given these limitations, i will

have to listen to the testimony before i make up my mind about the testimony. what i do know is that i don't believe dr. ford is part of some vast conspiracy you from start to finish to smear judge allegedh, as has been by some on the right. and i do know that i do not believe judge kavanaugh is some kind of serial sexual predator, have some have alleged on the left. i must also say that separate and apart from his nomination and the fact that pertain to it, i do not believe the claim of sexual assault is invalid because a 15-year-old girl did not promptly report the assault to authorities. as the president said just two days ago. how uninformed and uncaring do we have to be to say things like that, much less believe them? ofwe have any idea what kind message that sends, especially

to young women? to many times do we have marginalize and ignore women before we learn that important lesson? host: again, senator flake is one of those on the senate judiciary committee, one of to vote judgeeded kavanaugh out of committee. as usa today said earlier, he is one to watch, especially as it plays out today. linda in texas. democrat line. i cannot believe the double standard that some of these collars are coming in with, from the women to the men. boys can be party animals but the women are held to much higher standards. this hearing i think will turn out just like the anita hill hearing. they have already made up their minds. they have a role model at the top who has done much worse than kavanaugh.

he will be passed through and put on the bench for girl is a has to say. when they, kavanaugh, were boys they did not just engage in horseplay. they were drugging the french as as well, according to the women in her affidavit. i was sexually molested when i was 16 years old. i have only told to close friends in my life and i'm 65. if i saw some buddy coming a top office that was going to be a leader in my country, you bet i would come forward and say something about it. host: independent line, victoria in illinois. caller: good morning. i have been watching all of this very closely. hill.hed anita i don't think the congressmen have learned anything over the past several years, let alone

going back all the way to anita hill. they demonstrate they have no respect for women, and this happens to men as well. so when you make that judgment, you are making the judgment for you as well. your son, grandson, or granddaughter they come across the same thing, and they will be struck with the same quandary she had 15 years old. she was 15 years old. that doesn't just make this boys play. what he was try to do to her was sexually molest her, and she was 15 years old. it was statutory rape. it would have been statutory rape. let's look at that, 15-year-old little girl. 2015 your old is so close with her mom that she will run and tell her mom or dad what happened to her? she is ashamed.

help her tell her story now so she doesn't have to host: carry this shame to her death. host:host: john mcardle. >> all eyes on capitol hill today. i want to update you on the president's schedule. his schedule, he spent the night in new york last night, and this morning, is planning to drop by the united states mission to the u.n. to think the personnel there for accommodating his visit. then he goes back to d.c.. he will miss the first hour of the hearing until he boards air at thene and once back white house around noon, the president has nothing on his until fundraising events this evening. he said he may delay his planned meeting with deputy attorney general rob rosenstein. i would very much prefer keeping rob rosenstein, is what the president said. , thatome reports

much-anticipated meeting between the president and his deputy attorney general being talked about by counselor to the president kellyanne conway in a fox news interview today, saying the president meeting with rob rosenstein is still schedule today but if it needs to get pushed until later in the day or tomorrow maybe it will. that is from kellyanne conway. yesterday, during that wide-ranging press conference, the president was asked about that planned meeting. talking to him, we have had a good talk. he said he never said it. he said he doesn't believe it. he said he has a lot of respect for me. he was very nice. we will see. he is a member of the trump administration. the justice department. i would certainly prefer not doing that. there was no collusion, no instruction. unless you call a obstruction the fact that i fight back. i really fight back. instruction,hat of

that's fine. but there is no obstruction, no collusion. i will meet with him tomorrow. today or tomorrow and ask for a delay in the meeting. i don't want to do anything that gets in the way of this very important supreme court pick. andn't want competing hurting the decision, one way or the other. deborah in franklin, tennessee. republican line. morning. i know this will all sound crazy but i have read the story overnight about two men coming theard, saying they were ones that had this encounter, if you will, with ms. ford. this could be totally a mistaken excuse me, dr. ford. as far as the second lady, ms. ramirez, they don't know each other. go tocond one, they

school with each other, it but if you read in the transcript , fromrassley's statement when they were talking with kavanaugh, he ends up taking her to a friend of her wedding a few years later. to me, thatened person would not be taking me to a wedding. that third woman is off the rails. cnn talked about these two men coming forward. it was on fox, wall street journal, there is an article. it is in the daily mail in the u.k. already. today.n usa everything has been blown out of proportion. to be in the supreme court, it has been dragged in the modify the left. these women of the me too movement -- i am one of the

people -- but i'm not in the movement because i am just not. they are going to destroy any meaning of the me too movement. freddie in indianapolis. democrat line. caller: good morning, pedro. what i'm about to say is the first time i have ever spoken about it to anyone, and i'm sure you have a wide audience out there. man.a 67-year-old black 11, i was 10 and being molested by an older white guy. anyone of not inform what was happening to me because of the shame that it brought on. these ladies, these republican women out there who are doubting these women like ms. ford -- 35 years, not

bringing something forward -- well, i'm just not bringing something for that happen to me over 50 years ago. this is the first time i ever mentioned it to anyone. ofause of the shame, because the consequences back in those days living in florida. if i have brought it out, who wouldn't listen to me? no one. as a matter of fact, it would have caused me more problems than what it was worth maybe. now let's get back to the judge. i am a democrat. much prefer not seeing because ofdge, not anything that he has been accused of doing, but merely because his politics are not my politics. should havewoman the right to choose. it is her body, she should have that right. host: that is freddie in

indianapolis. ray in tennessee. republican line. yes, i think we need to step back and look at the big picture here. this is all a movement by the country to hijack this into socialism. if anything, they can take this and run it into the ground. oute are no republicans there in the weeds trying to find somebody to corroborate the judges point, but there is everybody on the democrat side looking everywhere to find somebody that will say anything to corroborate her part. there is no evidence at all that i can see that this lady is

telling the facts. think the senate republicans are not doing enough then to at least support judge kavanaugh in this effort? are trying to be fair, trying not to smear another human being. but you don't see that on the democratic side. they have went out and done everything they can to try to make her like -- look like she is telling the truth. .e don't ever know the truth this is a big movement by george soros and all of these liberal people to change this country. america better wake up and go and stop thisls mess right where it is at. host: that is ray in tennessee. john mcardle. mentioned earlier, efforts

by oregon democratic senator jeff merkley seeking a court a vote on to block brett kavanaugh on the basis of a lawsuit that he has filed, saying the trump administration violated the separation of powers clause by not releasing hundreds of thousands of documents related to kavanaugh's time as a lawyer in the george w. bush administration. here is the latest on that. a political white house reporter says that suit looking to block kavanaugh was just assigned to a judge who is an obama appointee, who is also handling the d.c. case against former trump campaign chair paul manafort. he said the assignment seemed slower than usual. we are tracking that case. because the clock is ticking, the judiciary has this high-profile hearing today at 10:00 and has scheduled a committee vote tomorrow morning at 9:30.

after that, it opens the door for potential floor vote on brett kavanaugh's confirmation to the supreme court. amid all of this going on, we have been monitoring tweets from senators, members of congress. here is one from brian schatz, democrat from hawaii. simply, i miss senator mccain. host: joyce is from maryland. democrat line. caller: yes, this is joyce. i am calling because this is double standard. what happened to bill cosby? it happened 30 years ago. they are saying this happened about 30 years ago. i don't believe these women are lying. thishave been carrying around for many, many years. i was assaulted. afraid to open my mouth to say something. i am proud of these women coming forward.

kavanaugh does not deserve to be a judge. if you did what he did. that is the way i feel. host: that is joyce in maryland. outside the senate, lots of action going on. rallies taking place in connection with this hearing. judicial confirmation network and others, supporting judge kavanaugh. the host of podcast relatable, one of the leading voices for millennials today, come on up. >> hello, is everyone excited to be here? i'm really excited to be here and to see kavanaugh confirmed. what i love about this moment is there are so few times in your life where you can in that time and place a this is significant. this is monumental, this is historic. this is one of those times. the cool thing is we are not

just bystanders, watching all of this happen. we are actually participating in it. we are fighting for it. the things that we are fighting for is someone who quite simply is going to stand up for the constitution. stand up for our constitutional rights and our freedoms. apparently to some people, that is really scary, the whole idea of standing up for the constitution. that is some of the action taking place outside of the senate in light of the hearings about to take place at 10:00. featuring professor christine ford and judge kavanaugh. you can watch that on c-span 2 and 3 until the simulcast, continue on on c-span 3, also you can monitor on c-span.org and the c-span radio app. we are please to be joined by members of congress talking about issues of the day. joining us from the judiciary

committee on house side, steve cohen, democrat from tennessee. give us your legal perspective on the events happening on the senate side today. well, this is a senate confirmation of a supreme court nominee. it brings together the two biggest issues in american politics, the me too movement and the issue of does the truth that her with donald trump as president? here, when claiming assault by a nominee, even though in the past , clerics have been accused and convicted, bill cosby, and others, and the issue is do you want to get to the truth? judge, the third would miss to the event, will not be there, because he has not been asked to testify, and others that could support the testimony of dr. blasey ford

have not been asked to testify. so it is a question of can you handle the truth, as jack nicholson said. host: what about the use of an outside counsel questioning these witnesses? do you think about employing that, as senate republicans have decided to do so? guest: i think it shows the fact that the senate republicans know how despicable it appears, the withraphics of the senate 10 men on the republican side questioning a woman. not only does it look bad, but they realize they don't have the ability to ask the questions in a proper fashion that would go jennaonsistent with munley behavior, senatorial behavior, and the republican base. there is a distinction there. have a legal

background. when it comes to the testimony we will hear from judge kavanaugh and professor ford, in terms of have a legal background. [no audio] that is evidentiary. shehould the therapist who went to in 2012 to see what she

dug old, what her response was, why it came up. and so should others who she has given affidavits from both confirmed she related to them in times when judge kavanaugh was up for nomination and a public figure that she diebold these memories, why she did it. host: if you were in a position to do so, what questions would you post dr. ford? her tell herd let story, let her relay whether or not she ever saw kavanaugh after her, ifid anything to she saw judge, if he said anything to her. let her express to the american public why she didn't reveal it .ublicly for this many years it will be an interesting aperture into the me too haveent, women who

suffered sexual abuse, assault, and what it takes so long for them to come forward and tell their story. host: what would you poster judge kavanaugh? how he was aggressive and belligerent when he got drunk. drinking for his problems, still has drinking problems. evidencessome of the of his roommates testimony, affidavit and aggressive, belligerent as a drug. host: does judge kavanaugh get a presumption of innocence, does professor ford it provide burden of proof? case: it is not a criminal or even a civil case, this is a job application. he is applying for the job. he has been nominated. the senate is opposed to confirm or not confirm the president's

nomination. -- i knowl government logitech 30 test are not introduce a bowl in evidence, federal employees have to take a lie detector test, polygraph to get employment. it seems like for the highest court in the land, when there is an issue of this nature, that you would ask judge kavanaugh to take a polygraph test to try to better degree of proof as to who was telling the truth. another topic, the attorney general expected to meet with the president today. the president saying even as of yesterday would prefer ron rosenstein to keep his job. what do you think about those statements, the current status of the deputy ag? guest: a ron rosenstein has done a good job, should remain at his job. i don't think he will make it to

thanksgiving, i suspect he will be fired. he stands in the way of president from having control of the mueller investigation. if the mueller investigation continues and brings out all the facts concerning his involvement financially with russian possible and other incriminating evidence that would expose him to blackmail by the russian government, interference with our elections, and he and his sons and son-in-law's possible involvement, which i think will be produced, his and ministration will go down in history as the most corrupt and administration ever in the history of our country. it will be the biggest con job, as he likes to call the investigation, probably in the world. the only way to stop that is to get rid of rosenstein and put somebody in who will stop mueller. host: if that firing takes place, what recourse or other democrats have on capitol hill? guest: hopefully, we will have the majority in january.

they will probably do destroying of evidence, do all they can in the most nefarious manner to keep the truth and the evidence produced by the mueller investigation and special counsel from the american public. office, take the majority, which we must do to protect democracy, we will have hearings. we will call on a lot of the same people that mr. mueller has called to testify and bring to light the misdeeds that have gone on during this election, 2016, and since, trying to obstruct justice. far as legislation, there was some talk about this legislation to protect robert mueller. do you think personal role in crafting some of that? conyers leftohn the congress last summer, i took over a bill that he had with walter jones of north carolina.

it was a bill to protect mother, say that there were certain standards that would have to apply for him to be terminated, for cause, and the court would have the right to oversee the firing and determine whether it was for cause and give mr. mueller the right to go to court. we brought a discharge position to have it heard in court because we had no chance to have it heard in the judiciary committee, which has not looked into the election, emoluments clause file asians, other violations that we know took place. we have 180 people to sign but you need the majority of the house. we didn't get any republicans. walter jones told me yesterday that he wanted to sign the petition, so we may have one republican. but the republicans have been afraid to act as an independent branch of government, act as a check and balance on the government. this presidency does not believe in the truth and the constraints of the constitution and will do whatever it wants without the response from the house.

the senate has acted. there have been, more or less, independent intelligence , judiciary committee has done a little bit. the house, intelligence committee, has been trying to get evidence to hand over to them to make it easier for them to stop the investigation. the judiciary committee has done nothing. cohen, democrat from tennessee, a member of the judiciary committee, talking about issues that concern the kavanaugh hearing and the deputy attorney general. thank you for your time. guest: you are welcome. thank you. host: steve is in south carolina, independent line. caller: good morning, pedro. i want to say a preferred about credibility of testimony and then something about the hearings themselves. of course, like representative

heen said, it will be a said, she said. dr. ford's credibility may be credible, but then you have some of you like swetnick come along. i knew these gang rape parties were going on so i went anyways, until i got raped. really? that will make other people's testimony seem less incredible. just a brief order about the hearings. there is nothing like a confirmation hearing to highlight the problem of partisan politics in this when senatorse are being telecast live, they are not going to miss the opportunity to further their political agenda and campaign. that takes precedent over the issue at the table. you have been there a long time, you know what goes on. those people act like they hate each other on camera but there at the congressional country club playing golf together and making backroom deals. they are friends on the outside.

swath thatt of the got trump selected. it's a big show, circus. ring act, these confirmation hearings. people need to understand. this is a lot of show here. derived, wetruth is just a know if it will be or not. host: lynn in kentucky. go ahead. to make ajust want comment. i was a victim at 11 years old, ok? do rememberyou, i where, when, and how. when you are sexually assaulted, you never forget. you never forget the details. another thing. stopt think they want to kavanaugh's confirmation because the democrats want more power. i used to be a democrat a few years ago, but after what i've been seeing, i mean, i think

it's awful what i think they are doing. have one more hour to go until this hearing starts. if you are joining us, you will -- we will hear from you for most of the hour. (202) 748-8000, democrats. (202) 748-8001, republicans. independent tweet thoughts and comments and on our facebook page. throughout the morning, we have been trying to give viewers a sense of what it is like in that room and what it is going to be like in another hour or so when the gavel comes down on this hearing. one of our producers has been up there taking notes on the scene. you can see what it looks like right now. he noted that the first three rows of the limited seating in that committee hearing room are and wed for witnesses

assume their guests as well. there were only going to be two testifying, dr. ford and brett kavanaugh. here is some information on who will be filling those rows. some friends of christine blasey flownsome of whom have across the country to support her and will be sitting in some of those limited seats. mj lee tweeting up this morning 's husband is in california with their children today. four's team has told cnn that he will not be present at the hearing. in terms of what we are working our way through, that has come out in the past 24 hours, some of that information includes 65 pages of transcribed interviews that the senate judiciary committee had with brett kavanaugh in the wake of the accusations against him.

they released those 65 pages yesterday, 20 pages from a september 27 -- september 20 interview in the wake of the blasey ford allegation and another 45 pages in the wake of the subsequent allegation on september 24. some of the reporting also about what is contained in the committee documents that were released and what the committee is saying that have done over the past few weeks. the hill noting that the judiciary committee investigators have spoken to two men this week who believe they may have been involved in the alleged sexual assault at the center of miss ford's accusations against kavanaugh. -- a submitted a sieve written statement and spoke with staff from the judiciary committee after he claims he may have been involved in the incident. he spoke with investigators on tuesday and described his recollections of his interactions with ford. on wednesday, the man provided a more in-depth written statement

and on the same day, investigator spoke over the phone with a second man who believed he should be the target of ford's allegation, not kavanaugh. the men were not identified by the committee. according to grassley's office, have not responded to a request for more information about these individuals. all of that coming out yesterday within the past 24 hours. chris murphy, a democratic senator with this tweet. there is way too much information that has come out in the past 24 hours to proceed today. this is no rush will stop let's postpone this hearing and take some time to settle down and come up with a plan to properly investigate all of it. host: calm is in houston, texas, democrat line -- tom is in houston, texas, democrat line. caller: i am a 79-year-old black male from houston, texas. i was molested by a doctor who

examined all the football players from my high school. some of these players are still alive like myself. nothing was done. we did not say anything and we did not dare to say anything because this was a powerful white man. he saw many patients but what he did to me was unarmed of special -- was unheard of. i was also molested by a white woman at 17 that i was working for. this was in the 50's. don't tell me what these guys won't do. host: let's go to georgia, independent line. caller: good morning. i have been a licensed minister for over 40 years and a thing that concerns me the most about mr. cavanaugh is this shows that early on, he had a major character flaw, and that he hid

it long enough until he started drinking and then the alcohol gave him quote unquote, courage to act on it. i believe the fbi should investigate this thoroughly and i do not believe they should vote him into the supreme court. host: a busy day on capitol hill and one of the members joining us to talk about issues of the ay from statutory hall is medal -- a member of the freedom caucus and the budget committee. guest: thank you for having me on. host: and it hundred $55 billion bill considered in the house. guest: i voted no on that one. it is basically the same number as the budget last year and the big debate from last year, we had $150 billion of tax cuts. the mainstream media went in on that about blowing up the deficit but what the media forgot to mention was that the end of that budget agreement last year, the democrats get nine senate democrats to vote

for the bill. the tax cutshen are paid for. we are now growing at 4.2% last quarter and the atlanta fed has is going at 4.6% next quarter. the tax cuts are paid for but the spending is the problem in d.c. revenue is up 4% and in virginia, the state coffers are overflowing as well but the problem is on the spending side. 8% spending going through the roof. host: part of that bill dealing .ith defense issues i voted for all of the defense spending along the way, so that is not the issue. the democrats we knew were coming in for the votes. somebody has to look out for the $21 trillion in debt on the kids.

i did a phd in economics and we are currently spending $4 trillion a year and only paying $3 trillion per year. $1 trillion deficit per year now is on the back of the kids. they will have to pay the full tax bill like everybody else and on top of that they will have to 120 -- $21 trillion plus plus $100 trillion in unfunded liabilities. that is called intergenerational theft. the bond market will correct us any day now if we don't get it straight. debt to gdp and that is getting way too high. oft: representative, part that bill includes a vehicle to keep the government open. what do you think about using bills like that to fund the government and to keep it funded? us want to keep the government-funded. that is not in question. the question is do you want to

do trillion dollar deficits every year? that is the problem. we are stealing from the kids and the press does not pay attention to that. it is easy to say yes to everything and in the short run you get instantaneous consumption but it is on the back of the kids so you have to bring up that issue on the country is going to have fundamental problems. host: there is a story in the washington post taking a look at this idea that when it comes to republicans running for reelection that the tax law is not part of that coverage, what do you think about that idea and do you think republicans are doing enough and running on the tax law as a political message? guest: we are doing our best but , you people are the exception, you give people time to have a rational dialogue. the chief economic adviser to the president said the booming economy that everybody said was impossible to years ago, the

liberal economists said let's just get used to the new normal, 2% growth is all the united states is capable of. and become like europe and lower our horizons. that is not true. we have become pro-business, we cut the taxes, capital investment is up through the roof. when you put capital in the hands of the american people, they know what to do with it. the american people want to get to work and we want to give them the tools to do that. people are more productive and wages went up and macroeconomics productivity is the same as wage growth increase. the democrats say don't look at the gdp growth numbers, those numbers are full statistics. 100 million walmart shoppers last month had surging retail sales numbers. numbers, their

optimism index is through the roof. if 100 million shoppers is not kitchen table, i don't know what is. my folks are getting $2000 back in their pocket. pelosi calls those crumbs and those are not crimes. host: we invite you on here even as on the senate side, there is that hearing expected at 10:00. what do you think about the outcome? guest: we will see. both sides need to give the evidence. we are still a nation under law and i'm sure there is an expectation of innocence until proven guilty. on the other side, the accuser has the absolute right to come forward with the evidence she has. they are going to sort through the evidence and see where that leads. host: do you think that something substantial and conclusive will come out of

today's efforts? important most substantial piece that could come out of today is the process. we are a nation under law. that has served us very well for a couple hundred years. hopefully we come out without sensationalizing it. and thematter of law process is the most important part. host: representative, thank you for your time. guest: thank you. host: we will go to mark in pennsylvania, republican line. thanks for waiting. caller: good morning. i have been watching this circus for the last two weeks. i am appalled by how little information has come out about the victim. i have done some research and found that the community she lives in is very affluent. the distance between the schools is about 40 minutes. also the distance between these other things. most of these homes have three bathrooms.

it is shocking to me that these -- that she knows this guy's last name. name, ithis guy's last is 40 minutes away, a different zip code and suddenly she has all this recollection of all this particular party but to go to the bathroom and it is upstairs in the house, why didn't you use the downstairs bathroom? i know plenty of women that have been assaulted and i have sympathy we take a woman who puts herself in a position where there are drunken young men who are going to have hookups and they know this and expect something good happened happen, we need to teach our young ladies respect for themselves and a bit of decorum. disgraceful the way they handle themselves at that school. they party deck -- they party like rock stars at that girl school -- girl's stool --

school. host: let's go to ohio, independent line. caller: blame the victim, yeah right. the american people have gotten used to liars like mr. trump. kavanaugh lied about receiving stolen documents from senator patrick leahy's files. he lied about that. now we are going to put a guy on the supreme court that lies. hatch, mcconnell, grassley, they are all liars and hypocrites. , hatched hill hearing amended an fbi investigation but now they don't need one. they held up merrick garland for a year. they are hypocrites. they need to hear the ladies and you need to get to the bottom of it. host: you are looking at some of the activity happening outside, leading up to today's hearing, a

rally in support of judge kavanaugh. host: i have been showing you scenes from around capitol hill but i also want to let you know what is happening on your television screens. you might have been seeing some new ads that have been released this week both for brett kavanaugh and opposing his confirmation to the supreme court. one of them released just by the judicial crisis network, the conservative nonprofit. it spent millions so far on ads in support of bread kavanaugh. here is their newest ad. >> the accusations against brett kavanaugh or a smear. best,e women who know him the girls who are his closest friends in high school had no choice but to stand up and say that is not the brett i know. >> brett kavanaugh is a good man who is incapable of mistreating anyone. >> he never became someone different after drinking. >> he was never out of control. >> he would be the guide to look out for other people. >> it never happened.

confirm kavanaugh. host: one other ad to show you from the group times up, the group that was founded by hollywood celebrities earlier this year to battle sexual harassment in the wake of the harvey weinstein allegations. this is their newest ad. >> dear judge kavanaugh. >> mr. cavanaugh. >> dear brett kavanaugh. >> we the people: you to withdraw your supreme court nomination. >> we will -- we call on you to withdraw that is a declaration of guilt or innocence. >> but as a declaration that the sanctity and integrity of the highest court in the land are more important than any one man or one man's ambition. >> we the people demand a supreme court justice. >> without allegations of sexual assault. >> or perjury. >> because the safety and dignity of women. >> is no longer secondary to the needs of powerful men. >> we call on you. >> history and america calls on

you. >> to withdraw immediately. >> now. >> today. >> for the good of the court and the country. >> your time, judge kavanaugh. >> is up. host: back to you. host: this is maryland, democrats lined. -- democrats line. caller: i have tried to look at the situation from a human point of view and what i think probably happened is what the accuser said happened, but i think that this man has spent his life -- i have listened to life.lot, he changed his he changed himself. i believe from what i can see, his life has been lived to make

amends for what he did and for how he got out of control. any of theheard women say that he penetrated them. insecure. was he drank to get rid of his insecurity. i would like to see him admit the truth about himself and i guarantee there is not one of us in this world who has not done something they regret and if we are good people, we make amends. but not that religious called amazing grace that says i was blind and now i see. i believe he is blind and i would like to see him tell the

him and ii forgive think the women personally, if somebody did something to you, i think that you should confront that person. talk to them first. this't like that women use to be against men or that men use it to be against women. host: this is new mexico, independent line. tony. caller: my comment is for the sake of the children because i believe something missing is just like the people that are involved in the organization that likes to molest children under the color of religion, there are five members already on the court that are part of that that have not come out and now we are trying to get a six member up there and they don't come out.

under accountability very, they are just as guilty as if they had molested the children themselves. they knew about it and were in positions of authority and anybody that supports that organization should not be on the highest. they have -- on the highest court. they have done this for 40 years. they just found out 3000 some victims? he needs to have a lie detector test done. host: we will go to john in oklahoma, republican line. caller: i think this whole thing is a farce. it is my understanding that mrs. ford has already admitted to being an alcoholic at 15 years old. she also claimed she had many sexual partners and we are talking about 215-year-olds at an underage drinking party in a bedroom. i don't believe it is true, but

what 15-year-old boy who is drunk is not going to try to feel up the class slut? host: let's go to peter in texas, democrats line. caller: how are you? host: i am good, go ahead. caller: i think what trump is doing is really bad. i have a nine-year-old daughter and i kind of look at the way that trump despises women. he does not care about women. he thinks men run everything. he really thinks we're living like in the 50's. this is not the 50's anymore. this is a different culture. i really hope they don't confirm that judge because he is really in denial. maryland, is next in republican line. .aller: good morning

i just want to address a couple things in reference to this case coming up. strange thaty feinstein has held that letter for a couple months when the information on the spy that she and also she comes up with this letter and also you don't hear the information about this china spy in the news anymore. harassmentabout the for this upcoming judge. another thing i would like to see is the slush fund for the sexual harassment in congress. i would like to get everybody's name on that slush fund and see whether somebody is on that panel.

they owe it to the american people to identify who those people were. let's get on with the business of this country. host: the president himself asked yesterday during that press conference which you can see the total of it on c-span.org. these asked if accusations of sexual misconduct against him personally affected his view of judge kavanaugh's accusers. here is what he had to say. >> you did not let me ask my question. >> you have been asking a question for 10 minutes. sit-down. >> how did those impact your opinion on the allegations -- >> it does impact my opinion because i have had a lot of false charges made against me. i am a very famous person unfortunately. i have been a famous person for a long time but i have had a lot of false charges made against me, really. just. i know friends who have had. it is. people want fame, they want money, they want whatever.

view itee it, i differently than somebody sitting at home and watching television. it has happened to me many times. i have had many false charges. i had a woman sitting in an airplane and i attacked her while people were coming onto the plane and i have the number 16 -- the number one bestseller. when you say does it affect me in terms of my thinking, with respect to judge kavanaugh, absolutely because i have had it many times. host: that was part of an 80 plus minute press conference yesterday as part of the president's visit to new york. if you go to our website at c-span.org, you can see that and also monitor today's hearing that just -- that starts in just about an hour. and c-span3 will simultaneously -- will simulcast that.

from washington state, democrats line, bill. caller: good morning. thanks for this opportunity. what a time we are having. i am going to do something that people are going to get upset about. i'm going to say none of this would be happening now if the people in this country had not of voted for donald trump. the guy is a con man and i don't blame brett kavanaugh for line because who wouldn't live when his whole reputation is on the line? that is why he is lying about this. what did the women have to gain by doing this? they were afraid to say anything about it when she was 15 years , but when this guy is about to be nominated or set in the u.s. supreme court as a justice, they decided it was their duty to step up and do something about it and i still blame the

republican voters and the people that voted for donald trump. he has fallen right down the playbook of putin and he praises the dictators of this world and craps on his allies. host: that is bill in washington state. rodney in new york, go ahead. caller: thank you for allowing me to make this call. accusation but why does it seem as if the democrats always seem to come up on the outside -- opposite side of law enforcement? we are led to believe that the fbi couldn't find this information out after six investigations? that they couldn't find out any of this? and it goes back to other areas like the gates incident or even the flag incident.

why do they always come out on the opposite side of the law? i find that strange. it is strange to me. host: christine from new york, republican line. caller: there are a few things i want to say. as far as this confirmation hearing, i think it is terrible what the democrats have done. i am not passing judgment, let all of them speak. i was abused as a 12-year-old. i never forgot one part of the incident -- of the event. i learned through life, i adjusted after it but i would never go back and press charges and ruin somebody's future. that does not mean a man should be condemned for life because when he was a teenager he might have drank, he might've jumped around or whatever.

one of we to do? hold all of our sons and daughters at any age under 18 or 20 whatever and say they are guilty for life? i have never heard of such stuff in my life. i think it is a disgrace. i think the whole hearing on kavanaugh was a disgrace and a circus from the democratic side. they behind -- they behaved horrible to him. they already said they were not going to vote for him and now we have this. it is terrible. host: that is christine in new york and here is john. guest: we have been showing you like -- host: we have been showing you live shots of the hearing room. a heavy police presence inside the hearing room. reports from our producer outside that hearing room. the press has just been let in to that hearing room but only those press with reserved seats.

there is a very limited number of seats in that hearing room and one of those feeds has been taken up by congresswoman carolyn maloney. ,here is a tweet from mj lee just for seats inside that hearing room reserved for memories of congress. had a staffery there early to secure her seat. m j leon also noting a celebrity sighting in that hearing room. alyssa milano, actress and metoo activist taking a picture inside the hearing room. another member of congress who has been very outspoken about the issue of sexual harassment on capitol hill, jackie speare, a democrat from california. her tweet this morning, between ember this is a character interview, not a criminal trial. mitchell, the outside attorney that republicans have brought into question miss treats -- miss ford,

criminal,like a kavanaugh is toast with the american people. lindsey graham is a member of the senate judiciary committee and he was on fox news this morning. a bit from that interview. lindsey graham dismissing claims made by a third woman and her lawyer, michael of a knotty -- ti.hael antonetti -- avenat he is talking about the allegations from julie swetnick. lindsey graham saying that is the most devastatingly over-the-top bad accusation that tells me all i need to know. one more tweet this morning from democratic senator jeff merkley, we talk about the lawsuit he is filing to try to have an injunction to stop the kavanaugh vote. he tweeted this morning that

these hearings are supposed to be kavanaugh's job interview but republicans are turning it into a kangaroo court show trial of dr. ford. host: florida, democrats line. caller: good morning. typical he your said, she said. sits another person in that room and possibly says inadvertently that he is the one that allowed her to get away. nationd make up and i do to put another person in the room and then the senate judiciary committee refuses to have that person come and testify? that just makes no sense unless that the judge would not testify -- mr. judge

would not testify in kavanaugh's favor. host: judy is in ohio, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i can't understand why a woman would wait 35 years to come forward. i am so tired of hearing sexual-harassment being brought up against decent people. i wonder how many men in the government could say that they hadn't done something similar. i'm sure they all have and it is time that the republicans stand some muscle.having it is terrible what they are doing to this poor man. all these militant women are just driving me nuts. it almost makes you ashamed to be a woman. i am sick of them. host: that is judy in ohio

talking about this hearing that will take place in about a half-hour. we have been showing you video and pictures from the hearing room. you can monitor it on several platforms on c-span. we are accepting your calls on it for the next half-hour. (202)-748-8000 for democrats,. (202)-748-8001 for republicans. independents. for us toumber 42 that takes the third most populated state capital in the u.s. the indy 500. joining us as part of our state capital store is the state attorney general, curtis hill. good morning. guest: good morning. host: could you talk about what you bring to the role of attorney general in a sense of what your philosophy is to the people of indiana? guest: and welcome to indiana.

as attorney general, i operate the state's largest law firm and we handle civil litigation, criminal appeals, we handle all sorts of matters in the interest of preserving the constitution for the residents of indiana. it is a great job. my background is as a criminal brings an and that added strength to the attorney general's office in understanding the dynamic of leadership and how to make decisions on a quick but thorough basis. we also have various programs we operate on the outside. we are circulating the state because of the national drug crisis that has a direct impact in indiana. my office is sponsoring and supporting chemical addiction programs, taking sure we get treatment both in jail and out of jail for those who have been incarcerated because as we know, about 75% to 80% of all people

incarcerated have some type of drug addiction or substance abuse addiction and if we can provide sufficient treatment while incarcerated along with programming following the release, we can defeat recidivism dramatically. host: when it comes to the issue of drugs, how does your state deal with the issue of medical marijuana or recreational marijuana use and does your job come into those circles? guest: it does in many respects. we have certainly seen an increase nationally in the concept of medical marijuana as well as recreational. indiana, recreational and medical marijuana have not come through but there is a debate about that. we take the position that medical marijuana is no different than recreational marijuana and we have outlined a pathway for the possibility of that aspect. oil approved by

the fda through a process of clinical trials. that is the process that we utilize in this country to demonstrate whether a particular substance has a medical necessity or inability -- or an ability to help people. tocannabis is determined have an effective use and is safe and reliable and gets fda approval, that is one thing. that is far different than just taking a substance like marijuana and saying we think it is ok, therefore we are going to simply legalize it for medical purposes. i don't think it is appropriate to have marijuana grown in the backyard is some kind of a defined medical substance versus an fda process. host: one of the things of note that many states are dealing with heading to the november elections was election security and border security and how that works for voting was.

what does indiana face heading into vote -- heading into the midterms? guest: we encourage early voting and satellite voting and recently we had a case we were involved in that left a little bit of a controversy although i think it was largely misunderstood. we had opposed the federal judge dictating which it happened because we believe that the state statute is sufficient to provide communities with the opportunity to set there on standards. in marion county, which is where indianapolis is, the commissioners in that county have unanimously determined the number of satellite voting sites. they agreed to that and that encourages more people to come out and get active and get involved. beef upcessary that we the numbers of people that get

involved in voting access and anything we can do to promote that we will continue to do. host: i read that you had to settle something with the right chair company uber and how that affected those who use that service. could you -- the ridesharing company uber and how that affected those who use that service. guest: a number of states have been working on a data breach issue with uber. data breaches are happening more and more these days. the issue is not so much having a data breach because it is going to happen to a lot of companies. the issue and that particular instance was a failure to notify people that their data had been breached, giving them an opportunity to give -- to do something about it. in this case, it was about a year before folks were able to learn there had been a data breach and that is what the issue was about. this was a matter where you saw generalon's attorneys

acting in concert to deal with that situation. there is a settlement that has been provided and indiana will receive a part of that, a fair portion of that will go back to individual uber drivers to lossesthem with any data that they experienced and the remainder will be addressed to the state. host: on the larger issue of data privacy, what is your concern for the residents of your state? from a data privacy standpoint? host: yes. guest: we are concerned about making sure that people's privacy is protected. these days, that is becoming more of a problem. we are seeing a rise in scams, telephone scams, other types of internet fraudulent activities and it is becoming more rampant. that offices are

focusing on with a great deal of attention because they're coming at us in waves that people really don't anticipate. oftentimes your phone will ring and there will be a prefix that would look like your neighborhood and these are attacks on individuals trying to gather information to disrupt their lives. itis very disconcerting and is very difficult for me as a prosecutor who is used to being able to identify the wrongdoer and secure them into the system, often times fraudulent activities are being done out of state and even off our shores. bringing people to justice is very difficult. what we try to do in our office and through ag offices around the country is try to make people aware to the nature of scams and trying to get information to folks on how to prevent certain occurrences. thatdiana, we determined the best way to stop people from ifng victims of fraud was

your phone rings and you don't recognize the number, simply don't answer the call. by not answering the call, you can do yourself a great deal of service in not providing information that could result in your victimization. preventative measures we tried to engage in to help the public help themselves. host: it is reported by newspapers and indiana that the government -- the governor is asking for your resignation. can you tell us why? guest: it is an unfortunate circumstance that has occurred. we have been the subject of accusations that were made and in this environment, but we are seeing in washington, we are fighting in the upside down world of guilty until proven innocent and the result of that in indiana is we are fighting it and it is important we fight that because we have to establish what we have and the

constitution and under the constitution, we talk about due process and the rights of the accused and the accusers. the situations we see where there are accusations and that can happen at any time but when accusations become a presumption of guilt, that turns our system completely around and upside down and unless we reverse that, we are going forward. host: you have been accused by four women of inappropriately touching them. is that correct? guest: there are allegations that exist right now in indiana that are in the hand of the special prosecutor. host: what is the status of that investigation and who is handling it? there is a special prosecutor who has been assigned and it was part of my request when his allegations came out and were publicized, because what happens with an accusation of this nature where it is put out in the public and there is a presumption of guilt is it is an

effort to place you in a box and to get out of that box, really it is important that you stand determined and the idea of truth has to determine in our time-honored traditions of court process. when that came out, i was the one who suggested this need to be reviewed by a prosecutor because of the allegations. dot was the fairest thing to for those committed accusations and also from my standpoint to provide me an opportunity to be heard as well. that process has been under way and i have been very pleased with how that process has been undertaken. that weer issue here is have to stand for the fundamental fairness that our constitution requires for anyone , whether it is a man on the street, a public official, we have to be satisfied that we have a process for establishing the truth through our justice system. hill, the indiana

attorney general joining us as part of our cities to her -- cities tour. thank you for your time. guest: have a great day. host: we want to thank our cable partners in indianapolis, indiana. stay tuned for our next stop in columbus, ohio. riley is next in new york, republican line. caller: how are you doing? host: fine, go ahead. caller: i would like to read in theng from john 8:4 bible. he says they say unto him, master this woman was taken in adultery in the very act. moses and the lord commanded us that such should be stoned. this they said tempting him that they might have to accuse him but jesus stooped down and with his finger wrote on the ground as though he heard them not.

host: he is gone. in texas,o bob independent line. caller: good morning. i want to remind everybody that judge kavanaugh has a lifetime appoint already. many of these committee members have already approved him, so he is not finding -- hiding under a bushel. representative: is the one that said peter struck -- peter struck -- should get a purple heart and that is so disgraceful i'm surprised you even have him on anymore. one last thing is on brian's on sundaye had -- night and he touched on something up that i believed in for a long time, that they are no longer journalists, there are

people who are commentators and that just seems like it is so prevalent. c-span is the only place where you can get any true information. host: that is bob in texas. host: pedro, just about 15 minutes until that hearing gathers -- dabbles in -- gavels in. hasstine blasey ford arrived and is in the dirksen building. we have been monitoring the twitter feeds of judiciary committee members. hatch tweeting out about his op-ed he wrote in the washington examiner talking about the stakes of this hearing, knowing that without corroborating evidence or witnesses, senators must establish their own threshold between ford's accusations and kavanaugh's denials. this is the democratic ranking member of the committee, dianne nine: 30, just after

this morning saying judge kavanaugh is applying for a lifetime appointment to the supreme court. today, judiciary committee and will question him about serious accusations of sexual assault against dr. ford and that is expect to to begin in about 15 minutes. those seats will be filled by 21 senators on the judiciary committee, 11 republicans, 10 democrats, six men and for women. also five members of the judiciary committee have law degrees. one of those that does not have a law degree is the chairman of the committee, chuck grassley but chuck grassley is the one who will gavel the committee in at 10:00 and then chuck grassley and dianne feinstein will make opening statements. those opening statements do not have a time limit on them and after they are finished, dr. forward will be sworn in and have the opportunity to give her opening statement. again, no time limit on her opening statement either. then the questioning will start.

each senator will have 15-minute round of questioning. they can ask the question or cede their time to a fellow senator or a staff attorney. most republicans are expected to time to rachel mitchell. after she is finished, judge kavanaugh will be sworn in, give his opening statements, no time limit on his statement and then the same round of questioning for each member of congress. there are several breaks expected to be taken and taken upon the request of each witness. there is no estimated total time duration for today's hearing. we are told it is going to end when it ends. c-span cameras will be there throughout. c-span is the tool for this

hearing, providing the feed for all the networks and all those who subscribe to the pool for the three cameras we have in the room. you can watch it all on c-span three. we're also simulcasting this hearing on c-span two until noon -- c-span2 until noon. host: kim, democrats line. i was listening and hearing all these people say how awful it is that this woman came forward after so many years. we all know how long it takes sometimes for victims of crimes to come forward. look at all those athletes in indiana and michigan that came forward. i find it hard to believe that they don't want to hear this woman speak. they need to give her the chance to speak. if she is believable, i would hope that these people would say yes, that was a believable

witness to a crime that occurred even though it was many years ago. it goes to speak to this man's character who is going to be on the court for a long time. that they want to ram this guy through, yet they took 400 days to fill judge phileas seat -- judge scalia dicky seat. they would -- judge scalia's seat. they want it both ways. they should hear what this woman has to say and if she is believable, i think judge kavanaugh should be the better man for it and admit and leave. host: that is can in new -- shire -- that is

>> and boys everywhere. it is telling american women that your voice does not matter. it is telling survivors everywhere that your experiences don't count. they are not important. and they are not to be believed. we are saying that women are worth less than a man's promotion. but is not how the world is in 2018. we cannot allow this senate to bring us back to before 1991. hear say over and over this isn't fair to judge

kavanaugh, he is entitled to due process, what about the presumption of innocence until proven guilty? dr. blasey ford has to prove her case beyond a reasonable doubt, those of the standards for a trial. so the standards of criminal justice. we are not having a trial. this is not a court. to those entitled because we are not actually seeking to convict him or put him in jail. we are seeking the truth. we are seeking facts. we are seeking just what happened. we, sensors, not staff members, not female lawyers, we senators are being asked to assess his honesty. is he an honest person? is he trustworthy? can we trust him to do the right thing for decades?

rule on women's lives for decades to come? can we trust him to do that right? this is not about whether or not he should be convicted. this is about whether he has the privilege, the privilege to serve on the highest court of the land for a lifetime. host: joseph is next in florida, republican line. caller: this man has been investigated by the fbi not once, not twice but six times. this is a thorough move to defame this man. it is a shame. he is innocent until proven guilty. there has been no corroboration by anyone. six times the fbi investigated this man. what is happening? it is a smear policy coming up. thank you for your time. host: diana from maryland, democrats line. listeninghave been

and the reason i called is i heard a caller talk about why would women come out so many years later. -- from a personal standpoint, i was the victim of abuse when i was 13 and i came out close to 30 years old. just for the women or daughters out there, i just want to call and say i came out 17 years later and because when you are 13 or 15, you don't understand the ramifications of what is going on because you are a kid. sometimes you are an adult and i'm sure these women see this man from their past, and now the can understand how they have been affected. i just wanted to say that. that is why there are no time limits. that itould like to say does not make them less credible. these types of crimes are different.

i just wanted to call in for the other women out there who are listening. it does not make you less credible because you come out 17 years later. it can take a lot of time to process these things that happen to you when you are under age and cannot comprehend what is happening or how it affects you down the road. noticed --ay have walked in the -- rachel mitchell walked in, the arizona specialist wrought in to ask questions of both judge kavanaugh and professor forward. involved in this as much as the senators, they could ask questions themselves or cede their timed other senators or miss mitchell -- their time to other senators or miss mitchell. c-span'satch that on two and three.

at can go to our website c-span.org to follow it there and also follow along on our speech -- on our c-span radio app. people are heading in as part of today's proceedings. others will be following in as well in just a few minutes. diane in new york, independent line. caller: i have a brief comment. this was the first nomination and confirmation hearing i have seen and from the onset i was struck by how much emphasis was placed on judge kavanaugh's profile as an upstanding community member and family man. i was also struck by the amount of details that were issued to support this and now i am wondering if that was a preemptive strike. reasons, to prevent

women or deter them from speaking out. that is all i have to say. hawaii,senator from they are part of the senate judiciary committee. george in new jersey, independent line. you are next. caller: does anybody else same -- saying if we can trust this guy? how can you trust lawyers? the whole process of a lawyer where they took this law and turned it into some language that only they can speak and understand and can actually even look at. .ou can even defend yourself you need a special program to go in and look at the loss. we realize we are being shut out of our own defenses and we are turning into a monopoly for these people to just make money off of? to think of this guys when you lifetime appointment to tell us how to interpret our laws? what year are we living in that

we are letting nine people dictate the law to us? host: we have talked about the president's schedule today. he is expected back at the white house from his time at the new york at the united nations general is simply meeting. he is expected back about noon today and then nothing on his schedule in the afternoon until some fund-raising events later tonight. some reporting on the president reaching out to his supreme court nominee, from cnn's jake tapper saying that both the president and vice president phoned brett kavanaugh to voice their support for him ahead of the meeting. that was the president yesterday -- up early this morning. the cbs white house correspondent has been following the president and also the judiciary committee as they have been walking in the room.

here is the statement from chairman chuck grassley, telling the press just tell the story that we are going to have a fair hearing. a few more tweets. dick durbin, a democratic member of the leadership in the room. a few tweets from dick durbin as he was entering the room. today will be an important moment for the judiciary committee and for our country. we are deciding whether a nominee should receive a lifetime nominee to the highest court in the land, a position entitled to.ee is if there are serious questions about a nominee's fitness for the office, we should give the benefit of the doubt to the american people and protect the integrity of the supreme court. there is chuck grassley walking down the hallway toward turks 226.26 -- toward derksen

judge kavanaugh participated in mock questioning. unlike his mock sessions before his first hearing, these practices have been kept to a smaller group of people. alex in wisconsin, democrats line. caller: i am calling this morning because i think the endgame of this nomination is to overturn roe versus wade and i would like to remind the religious right and christian republicans that the 10 commandments says how shalt not covet thyow shalt not neighbor's fertilized egg. host: california, republican line. caller: are you talking about me? host: yes go ahead. caller: i just wanted to call and let everybody know that there are women out there and and use these types

of things to their advantage. ago,marriage i was in long my wife used to call the cops on me and say that i was doing domestic violence when i was not and i was arrested numerous times, being innocent when they use that as a tool against you. women crying in all of this stuff, it is a fake job. our forefathers would be turning in their graves and puking about what is going on on the capitol hill now. host: that was dave in california. you are seeing senator of jeff -- ofsitting next to nebraska as part of people filtering and for today's proceedings. just about 30 seconds from now is the scheduled start of this hearing. as john has been telling you, there is no set time limit on when it will end.

you then -- you can follow it on c-span's two and three. if you go to our website, you can monitor it on c-span.org. we leave you now to go to the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's rooms, washington, d.c. september 27, 2018. i hereby appoint the honorable greg harper to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. ryan, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 8, 2018, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the