, that i helped create anti-immigrant movement in the united states of america. and in the democratic caucus and the democratic party and in many areas and spaces -- economic business spaces, educational spaces, but most importantly in this political space, a genuine support for immigration reform. >> join us for our conversations with bill shuster and luis gutierrez saturday at 10:00 on c-span and c-span.org and listen on the free c-span radio app. friday on the c-span networks . at 9:00 on c-span, the house returns for a bill dealing with tax cuts for small businesses. at c-span2, the senate judiciary committee holding a meeting to vote on the brett kavanaugh nomination to the supreme court. at 2:00 the senate returns for

general speeches. general speeches. ,"ming up, "washington journal we will take your calls and comments on yesterday's hearing on the brett kavanaugh nomination to be a associate justice on the supreme courtn. [video clip] >> dr. ford, with what degree of certainty do you believe brett kavanaugh assaulted you? dr. ford: 100%. >> i am not questioning that dr. ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in someplace at some time, but i have never done this to her or to anyone. ♪ host: good morning. after 8 hours of testimony from judge kavanaugh and professor ford, here are the headlines in the national papers this morning. a final vote has been set for tuesday. all eyes this morning on 6

senators from these states, north dakota, maine, alaska, indiana, west virginia, and arizona. we want to know this morning from all of you, did the hearing yesterday change your mind? democrats, 202-748-8000. republicans, 202-748-8001. .nd independent, 202-748-8002 join us on twitter @cspanwj or go to facebook --facebook.com/cspan. senate judiciary committee is gathering together in the same room they were yesterday at 9:30 a.m. eastern time to have a vote this morning on judge kavanaugh's nomination to the supreme court. our coverage on c-span 2, c-span.org, or listen with the free c-span radio app.

the makeup is 11 republicans and democrats. senator jeff flake, who is still undecided, is the senator to watch and how he will vote. he met behind closed doors with his colleagues and remains undecided. the other senators when this comes up for a final vote, there will be procedure votes on saturday, monday, the final vote on tuesday. the other senators to watch, republicans. senator susan collins of maine and lisa murkowski of alaska along with jeff flake, who is retiring. moderate democrats up for reelection, there is joe donnelly of indiana. heidi heitkamp of north dakota. and joe manchin of west virginia. the senate, 51 republicans, 49 democrats and independents. the nomination of judge kavanaugh can only lose one gop if all the democrats vote against him.

that would set up a 50-50 tie with vice president mike pence breaking it. what do all of you think? let's go to jan in -- let's go to tennessee. man put on.act that i cannot say his name. of fakingan act crying and drinking water. he reminded me of me a long time ago when i was drinking, before i got my life together. god knows in heaven what will happen to us if we put that liar up there. with all of that. the way he talked, the way he was asking, you can look at his face and tell he was lying. host: why do you think that? because of his body language,

for you? that is what it was? caller: i tell you, please, listen to me. host: i am listening. caller: a long time ago, when i used to drink, i did the same thing he did and it came back to me and it hurt. i apologized to my family members for the way i acted with i was drinking. that woman said he put his hand over her mouth. i know, i have been through that. i told folks when i was a teenager and guess what happened to me? me.randmother whooped he sat up there, we put this man on this bench. he is going to retaliate against everything that comes up for women. the other night when he was on tv, he cut his wife off, would not let her answer. we do not need him and lindsey -- lastly, they need to

be out. the world is looking at what happened yesterday. many other women is coming. he doesn't want an fbi investigation. if that was made now, i would say bring the fbi in. host: breaking last night, the american bar association saying they think the senate should inquiry, urging an fbi into judge kavanaugh. they endorsed judge kavanaugh. after the 8 hours of testimony, saying the senate should delay with an, go ahead investigation, and then go forward. the republicans, slated to go to the four -- florida for procedural votes on saturday. a final vote on tuesday. randy in louisiana, independent.

did the hearing change your mind? caller: thank you for taking my call. .hat was really interesting they got her to ask for an fbi investigation and it finally hit backat the ball would be -- all that is is a scam. thrown underbeen the bus. the man has been investigating -- investigated by the fbi and apparently he is a good guy.

there are things i don't agree with trump. i tell you what, people like the bush's and the obama's -- they are doing a great job trying to tear this man down. host: the president yesterday was not pleased with how the beginning of the hearing went, hearing from judge ford -- according to those close to the white house that the president monitoredam initially proceedings on cable news as they flew back to washington. this is in the washington post, save for a few muted grumbles that ford was lying, the flight was largely quiet. ford came offhat as compelling and credible and began talking as if kavanaugh's

nomination would fail and wondered if the white house should pull him from consideration while others urged a backup plan. the female attorney, republican -- atrs brought in from exactly 3:10 p.m., the curtain opened on the second act, kavanaugh was sworn in and like that, the mood inside the white bleak tofted from abolish. the nomination process -- as the nomination process went on, president trump publicly and privately stressed mounting frustration with mcconnell, calling mcconnell at least twice on thursday. it goes on to say trump's options are limited, white house and capitol hill aides say the collins, jeffator flake, lisa murkowski, joe

manchin, not easily swayed i the president. at least some of these members have received calls by george w. bush in recent days. , a republican, go ahead. caller: i really enjoy "washington journal," c-span is good coverage trying to be middle of the road. --comment is about -- i 100% i 100% believe judge kavanaugh and the effort he had to struggle through clearing his name about this, the democrats are really contemptible about this whole process. senator dianne feinstein is the weakest of them all because she had the privilege as ranking member to get her ducks in a row and she did not do it. also, it's very contemptible for dick durbin to do what he did in

the face of judge kavanaugh, and honorable judge, and i am from illinois and i am very disappointed with senator durbin and also senator blumenthal is off-track completely. he is a person that does not at all andility senator lindsey graham, he is a -- i want to say give me kavanaugh or give me death. host: let's go to that moment you referenced, this exchange between democratic senator dick durbin and judge kavanaugh yesterday. [video clip] >> just say this. if you, judge kavanaugh, turned cgann in this committee and said for the sake of my reputation and -- i will not be an obstacle to an fbi investigation, i would hope all the members in the committee would join me and say we abide

by your wishes and have that investigation. whatever the committee wants to do because i am telling the truth. >> i want to know what you want to do, judge. >> i am innocent of this charge. >> then you are for an investigation? >> they don't reach conclusions. i welcome any kind of investigation. at the lastung minute by health -- by being held by staff. i called for a hearing immediately. >> if there is no truth to her charges, the fbi investigation will show that. are you afraid they might not? >> the fbi does not reach conclusions pretty you know that is a phony question because the fbi doesn't reach conclusions, they just provide the 302 so i can explain to people who don't know what that is, they do what you are doing, ask questions and

type a report. host: yesterday's exchange between senator get urban and judge kavanaugh -- senator dick durbin and judge kavanaugh. if you missed any of it, you can go to our website, c-span.org. pamela in maryland, we are asking this morning, did this hearing change your mind? caller: absolutely not. as a matter of fact, i 1000% believe her now more than ever. the reason is because dr. ford has everything to lose. kavanaugh came out in the afternoon and was very belligerent, came out yelling. side of the judge a lot of people in that room had probably never seen. a lot of people want to say she is lying. how did she come up with the names of pj, mark judge?

kavanaugh made a statement that paths did did not -- not cross. how did she know those specific people when they will went to an all boys school? this -- serial rate rapists repeat this. we have had three women come out an fbiy refused to have investigation. if you want your name cleared, why wouldn't you want the fbi to investigate? the last thing i want to say is abusers and rapists and sexual aggressors do not necessarily look like ted bundy and charles manson, they wear suits and occupy the white house. they have flushed funds and they are in -- slush funds and they are in congress and they violate little boys and little girls. she absolutely was telling the truth. host: the wall street editorial bird confirm brett cap -- board

confirmed brett kavanaugh. if he was angry at times, imagine how you would feel if you were so accused and work innocent, as he says he is. aing line would mean he is sociopath. if you are found to be lying, he would be impeached and prosecuted. nothing in his long life and record portrays the behavior he is accused of against women. james, frederick -- fredericksburg, virginia. independent. caller: thank you for taking my call. it is just like a souffle. when a souffle has fallen, you really cannot have a great souffle. while i believe, quite possibly, the judge was telling the truth and quite possibly the lady was terribly confused in so many different arenas, i believe she will become outrageously rich with the book she will write.

everybody says, what did she have to gain? she has a tremendous amount again, millions and millions of dollars worth of free publicity. she could have a gofundme page and probably make $1 million this week alone. judge kavanaugh, his reputation has been completely diminished -- just a cornucopia of misery from all the people in the united states. you cannot have so many chefs in a kitchen. host: go back to the point you were starting to make in the beginning? caller: a souffle. once it falls, the souffle can never be right again. while kavanaugh may be completely innocent -- i have always been 1 -- i don't emphatically say something. you is my believe because should never say this is the way it is because you could be

wrong. the souffle will never be right again. he should not be a supreme court they will impeach him. the greatest thing that took place yesterday. ift could be good about this you wanted something to be good, from this point forward we can go back and look at hillary clinton and judge her in the same fashion we judged kavanaugh along with bill clinton and bring out these women who said clinton raped them. if we scrutinize them as much as we have done kavanaugh, this will be a fabulous thing for our nation to bring out those who have completely diminished the moral and ethical stance of our nation. on myraam going to go in new jersey, republican. caller: good morning and thank .ou for taking my call

i want to say it was very emotional. i was in tears to watch judge kavanaugh and his wife in the background. she was very emotional. ie parents were emotional and do not believe these allegations. orhad -- i believe it was 60 65 women who signed a letter of good standing. what an incredible person and i thought it was a hit job by the democrats because they do not want trump to be able to nominate another supreme court justice. as far as dr. ford, she seemed very confused. she was not credible. i believe something did happen to her, but judge kavanaugh was

not responsible and this was all a setup. as far as senator feinstein, she had a very poor excuse -- i don't know who leaked this information and she was not credible whatsoever. as far as the senators on the democratic side, did not treat judge kavanaugh with the respect that he deserved and i do not think dr. ford whatsoever. this was a last-minute hit job and as far as have a knotty -- avenatti and the other so-called accusers, part of a grand scheme design. byas so touched and moved judge kavanaugh. host: what about the other moments of judge kavanaugh's

testimony? the washington post editorial criticizes him this morning onlyg americans could watch with sadness. if he is the victim of some terrible case of mistaken identity, mr. cavanaugh's anger kavdentify up -- mr. anaugh's anger is understandable, but -- caller: i totally agree this is a partisan hit a job and -- hit job and it's all because trump of you owe and the election. trump won the-- election. they do not want him to succeed in any manner whatsoever. they do not want him to choose people for the supreme court of that are qualified and i thought

that was brilliant that he came out and said that. that was the washington post. host: editorial. caller: i don't read the washington post. that is the lefty washington post. i like c-span, by the way. i think you guys are really terrific because you allow the various people of different parties, etc., to share their opinion. the washington post, that jeff --host: jeff bezos. caller: he has a problem. you know what it is? i stick with my conservative outlets and i do turn to say the other outlets to see what they are saying for like two minutes because i cannot take it. i consider myself a conservative

, more so than a republican because i want the republicans to follow president trump's agenda and so on. i want to add one more thing. senator lindsey graham, o my gosh, that was the statement of the century. god bless him. he was so amazing, so amazing, so amazing. host: i am going to get in some other voices. greg in stafford, virginia, independent. caller: good morning. i am an independent person and i never voted for trump, never voted for clinton. i voted for mr. johnson because i did not believe in trump. i think he is crazy and i have a clearance. what she had done, i would have been the -- put in jail. i watched all the hearings yesterday. i am really concerned about

senator feinstein. she had the report in july and she sat on it. it was a political farce. concerned --really really thought the allegations ford reportedrs. it to her congresswoman in mid july. you could have filed a complaint to the maryland court. the statute of limitations has not run out. not do thathey did is no court, no prosecutor in maryland would prosecute that because they have no corroboration. she has no corroboration other than what she hears. i believe it is a political farce. i do believe something happened to mrs. ford. i am really concerned about mr. do aaugh not wanting to polygraph or submit to an fbi

report investigation, but this is a political -- tearing this country apart. the president has the right to pick and choose, select a nomination. elections have consequences. he has a right. democrats are just delaying. . they didn't allow this woman to go to the maryland court because not have -- it would even been put in the court. host: last night, later on in the hearing as it was getting close to wrapping up, republican texas senators ted cruz and john cornyn asked senator feinstein about the letter and who leaked it. take a look at this exchange. [video clip] was given some information by a woman who was very much afraid, who asked that it be

held confidential and i held it confidential until she decided that she would come forward. >> would the ranking member answer a question, please? >> if i can. >> i have great respect for senator feinstein, we have worked together on many topics and i believe what you just said. can you tell us your staff did not leak it? >> i don't believe my staff would leak it. i have not asked that question directly. >> how in the world did that get in the hands of the press? >> the answer is no. the staff did not. >> have you asked your staff? >> i just did. pardon me? jennifer reminds me i have asked her before about it. and that is true. >> somebody leaked it if it was not you. i am telling you -- i did not.

i was asked to keep it confidential and i am criticized for that, too. host: we are getting your reaction on this friday morning after the 8 hours of testimony. before -- with supreme court's nominee brett kavanaugh and professor christine blasey ford. did it change your mind? the president tweeting out yesterday afternoon "judge kavanaugh showed america exactly why i nominated him, his testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting. democrats search and destroy strategy is disgraceful. the senate must vote." from senators, amy klobuchar tweeting out, now the american bar association, who rated the judge qualified and the rating was touted today by supporters just called for a vote delay to complete the background information.

senator bob corker, i plan to vote to confirm judge brett kavanaugh. doug jones, the new senator from alabama, who was not in the senate when they voted on neil gorsuch to the court wrote this. i have called for complete disclosure of all documents, subpoena mark judge, postpone the vote. dr. ford was credible and courageous. what message will we send to our daughters and sons, let alone sexual assault victims? the message i will send is this, i vote no. senator menendez, i am more confident than ever than judge -- that judge kavanaugh is not fit to serve on the supreme court and dr. christine blasey ford is not only to be believed, but she is a hero. senator mcconnell last night saying i will probably vote to confirm judge kavanaugh. the majority leader after today's committee vote, even if they do not favorably vote judge

kavanaugh out of the committee, plans to bring his nomination to the senate floor for a procedural vote on saturday at noon followed by another procedural vote on monday and setting up a final vote on tuesday. as we said, there are 6 senators to watch. three republicans, three democrats. they can only lose one of the republicans on your screen if no and i woulday set up a 50-50 tie for the vice president to break. harriet, what do you think? caller: good morning, greta. outrageous about the and extreme presidential powers kavanaugh the leaves in. that is what trump is after because he believes that will put him above the right to

pardon himself and family members because mueller is getting close to him and he knows they are guilty. that is why he will not choose another name on the shortlist because they are very qualified. the others don't believe in those extreme and outrageous presidential powers trump is after. thank you. host: kyle, minneapolis, a republican. it is your turn. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i wanted to say before the hearing yesterday afternoon, i was of the belief that the women were telling the truth. after watching the hearing, i have come to believe that all of these stories are fabricated. i found some of the questions being asked absolutely ridiculous, including some of the questions about stuff in his yearbook from high school. different quotes he had. different slang words and if people from my catholic high

school -- host: we are going to go on to david. west virginia, independent. caller: yes, ma'am. i found it less credible when the information came out about -- the false information about -- delay because she would not fly to washington, d.c. and she did not know they were reaching out to get with her, the staff in california and there is information coming out of they had her hidden in delaware so the staff could have reached the california -- they could not have reached her. she said she did not know they were trying to reach out. i am sure she was reading newspapers, watching cnn. it is clear they were trying to keep this two weeks in the news so opinion journalists could

beat this to death and try to slander the judge and run this through the news so that if and , it was ever testified a possibility they could get that one or two votes to bring him down. he was fighting for anybody in the future that wants to be nominated as a federal judge or -- of the supreme court. he was fighting not just for him and his family, but for anybody in the future. thank you. host: glenn greenwald for the pointept tweets out this "that for moisture accusations before, not after kavanaugh was chosen single-handedly destroyed any attempt to depict her as acting with partisan motives or bad faith of any time. absent that, the gop would have spent the day maligning her and

they could not because of this, referring to the letter she sent was sent before kavanaugh was .icked by the president after her credibility, some have mentioned that this morning. take a look at this exchange that senator dianne feinstein had with the professor yesterday. [video clip] >> i want to ask you one question about the attack itself . you were very clear about the attack, being pushed into the room. you say you don't know quite by whom, but that it was brett kavanaugh that covered your mouth to prevent you from screening and then you -- screaming and then you escaped. how are you so sure it was he? the same way i am sure i am talking to you right now, basic justy functions and, also,

the level of norepinephrine and -- in the brain that encodes related so the trauma experience is locked where as other details drift. >> what you are telling us is this could not be a case of mistaken identity? >> absolutely not. host: that was early on in the testimony by professor ford yesterday with the ranking member dianne feinstein asking her that question. others have pointed to this moment in the hearing where rachel mitchell, who was the investigative counsel for the republicans of the judiciary committee hired to ask the questions of professor ford, take a look at this moment. >> may i ask, how did you get to washington? >> in an airplane. >> i ask that because it has

been reported by the press that you would not submit to an interview with the committee because of your fear of flying. is that true? >> i was willing -- hoping they would come to me, but i realized that was an unrealistic request. >> it would have been a quicker trip for me. was certainly what i was hoping, to avoid having to get on an airplane, but i eventually was able to get up the gumption with the help of friends and get on the plane. >> when you were here in the mid-atlantic area back in august, end of july, august, how did you get here? >> also by airplane. i come here once a year during the summer to visit my family. i am sorry, not here, i go to delaware. >> in fact, you fly fairly frequently for your hobbies and

you have had to fly for work, is that true? >> correct, unfortunately. >> you were a consulting statistician in sydney, australia, is that correct? >> i have never been to australia. the office i work for has a facility in australia and i work in sydney, -- i work in california. >> you listed the interest of travel and in parenthesis put "hawaii, costa rica, south pacific islands, and french polynesia." have you been to all of those places? >> correct. >> by airplane. includeour interests oceanography. it you travel by air to those interests? >> correct. easily for me to travel going that direction when it is a vacation. >> yesterday's testimony by professor ford.

we are getting her reaction to what she said to the senators and what judge kavanaugh told them. his denials of any sexual assault against professor ford or anyone else. they were before the senate -- now theommittee senate judiciary committee comes --ether, 11 democrats and 10 our coverage on c-span 2, c-span.org, or the free c-span radio app. people will be watching how senator jeff flake, republican of arizona, votes today in committee. if he votes no, the nomination is not voted out favorably, that will not stop the republicans from bringing his nomination to the floor, which majority leader mitch mcconnell plans to do saturday for procedural votes. that day, monday, and a final vote on tuesday. let's go to tom in los angeles.

good morning to you. caller: good morning and thank you for c-span. one of the things i would like to point out -- this entire practiced,lanned, choreographed to put up a woman to be a victim. they practice on victim's him. what happened to the royal majority? it ceased to exist. i think, basically, you have an extremely bright, intelligent, and decent guy who will do his iary best, maybe another scal would be too much to ask. we need to be honest and the democratic party in california has always done whatever they wanted. they always had to have a victim because people will set a motion over fact. this man is a great guy and i am

so disappointed. i was thinking about senator feinstein. she has been my fight -- senator for years and a decent gal. i believe the democratic party created this lady, created all the information, and they are the ones that leaked the press. i don't think they want her in california. they want to hang her out to dry because the have a very liberal guy and it demonstrates why we need to adhere to the laws created in this country. the congress took 10 years to carefully craft a constitution. this man we are protecting -- i ginsburg and judge i believe it was -- i am not sure if it was kagan or sotomayor, are very unhappy with what has occurred and the country deserves better.

i would really like to thank you guys for allowing someone and there is other people -- to give their opinions and maybe people will listen to us. we need protections from the democrats. at this point, they are no longer our friends. host: tom is a republican. we will go to another tom who is an independent in tennessee. caller: i want to thank you for c-span. i have been watching for decades. i was off last night and i watched both sides of the hearing. both testimonies. i may the one of the few people whose mind was changed. that is why i called in. i used to be a republican, started out my voting for ronald reagan. i now like bernie, got turned off by the iraq war. that is where i am on the

independent. the reason i say that is because i get my news from npr, never watch fox and i guess i lean pretty liberal. i had already prejudged judge --anaugh when mr. ivan a-day avenatti came out with the gang rape thing, i pretty much bought it hook, line, and sinker. my attention was pretty riveted when i watched judge kavanaugh's riveting -- opening statement and i watched all dr. ford's testimony. unlike your last caller, that come from california who is a republican and thinks the democrats are the enemy, etc., i do not think dr. ford is some sort of put up person. i totally believe her. like judge kavanaugh said, i believe she was attacked by someone at some time.

there is just enough doubt in my mind from watching judge kavanaugh last night, i have --ends, intelligent friends a professor friend of mine that thinks kavanaugh is a sociopath and already thought he was a rapist. jury,d was if i was on a i would probably hang the jury if 11 other people thought kavanaugh was guilty based on the evidence. i would say no and one thing i learned from the testimony is that the lady friend of dr. ford, who dr. ford thinks was in the house -- i think her name as leland kaiser, has given sworn statement in writing that she did not know kavanaugh and was never at a party with kavanaugh. that alone is evident. for everyonery

involved and i really value fairness. i happen to be christian and i feel guilty i have prejudged this man. a man, i cannot imagine how i would -- something from 36 years ago. there is no doubt in my mind that he is not the heinous villain he has -- is made out to be. votebeing said, i did not for donald trump. i lost a lot of respect for dianne feinstein during all of this. i think all of this could've been handled outside of view to respect dr. ford's wishes and i just think it has really been a new low. thank you for taking my call. host: ok. america magazine tweets out this. while we previously endorsed of the nomination of judge

kavanaugh on the basis of his legal -- it is clear the nomination should be withdrawn. in madison,eith wisconsin, independent. hi, keith. caller: good morning. there is absolutely, positively no doubt in my mind that judge kavanaugh attempted to rape professor ford. just watched his body language when he was being questioned by senator durbin, talk about a deer in the -- he was squirming in that chair. i wish there was a button on my remote control to turn on the body language because, holy cow, he got him and he is guilty. i have no doubt he was participating in gang rapes.

this guy is a total sociopath. host: what evidence do you have? caller: did you watch the hearing? did you see him squirm in the chair when durbin was questioning him? guilty asolutely sand. you are watching it now, turn down the body -- the volume and watch his body language. it is so obvious he is guilty. what does ford have to gain by lying about it? is she going to get a check by george soros? give me a break. from georgecheck soros? i am so sick of these ignorant right-wingers calling in. they are calling and they come over from fox news and bring their garbage with them. they are rubbish. they are liars. host: did you support the

nomination of judge kavanaugh before yesterday? caller: i never had an opinion. i did have an opinion, i read some of his decisions. i researched the guy. -- he is a sexist pig, too. in minneapolis, republican. good morning, you are on the air. caller: yes, good morning. there is one thing -- maybe several things they did not ask this lady that was a prosecutor did not ask mrs. ford. she did not ask how long she knew kavanaugh before this incident or had she ever seen talked to himer before. she never asked that and that is unknown. that is one big thing why i

don't believe her. could you play that joseph biden -- when he was chairman of the committee, the judicial fbiittee, he said the doesn't solve anything, they just question everybody. this one question they asked ,bout a federal investigation it is a federal investigation. what do they think they are? cory booker, i would not vote for him for dog catcher because he is snotty, insulting. all the democrats were insulting and snotty, just like the last democrat on the line. i would not vote for any of them for dog catcher that were on that committee. they were very insulting. host: you are referring to 1991 hearings with anita hill and clarence thomas when joe biden was the chairman of the

judiciary committee, is that is right? caller: yes, and he was talking about the fbi and all these democrats that were on yesterday all met behind closed doors and decided to hit him with fbi, fbi, every one of them went on the fbi. it was absolutely insulting. and is our viewers want to watch that hearing, you can go to our website, c-span.org. we also aired portions of that hearing, including the opening statements of anita hill and clarence thomas. questioning of those two as well from 27 years ago. in ohio, a democrat. .aller: hi host: go ahead. caller: first and foremost, i would like to say the only

firewall against the nomination is the senators. you have to call your senators, be angry all you want, call your senators. this is the main reason i am calling, i find it funny how republican senators and chairman grassley are more concerned with this allegation came to them of sexual assault, attempted rape, rather than the actual sexual assault. i don't know about you, but i am a stay at home mom, so i was glued to the tv all day and all i kept hearing from prosecutor mitchell -- the republican senators to cowardly to ask their own questions through prosecutor mitchell, all focused on diminishing her credibility. they all focused on the before and after, hardly any questions about the actual incident. i will say one more thing. i was molested when i was 8 by

the pastor of my church. all you people vouching for his good character, let me tell you, predators spend a lifetime cultivating a good type persona so when and if the abuse comes out, they will have you in your corner defending them. i am going to say this -- i said that was my last thing, but i will say this. since everyone is too nice to say it, women -- especially conservative women, if you are defending this, you should be ashamed of yourself. at what point do we value, the women -- at what point do they take -- host: all right. the moment that some of you mentioned from yesterday's hearing, the opposite opinion of that color came from -- caller came from senator lindsey graham where he believed was a sham.

show you that moment because at the end, he turns his attention to his republican colleagues. turning his eyes down the day is toward senator jeff flake, who is on that committee and undecided. here is what he had to say. [video clip] >> what you want to do is destroy this guy's life, hold the seat opened, and hope you win in 2020. you said that. not me. you have nothing to apologize for. when you see sotomayor and taken saying that lindsay said -- because i voted for them. i would never do to them what you did to this guy. this is the most unethical sham since i have been in politics and if you really wanted to know the truth, you sure as hell would not have done what you had done to this guy. are you a gang rapist? >> no. >> i cannot imagine what you and

your family have gone through. boy you all want power. i hope you never get it. i hope the american people can see through this sham. that you knew about it and you held it. you had no intention of protecting dr. ford. she is as much of a victim as you are. i hate to say it because these have been my friends. let me tell you when it comes to this, you are looking for a fair process, you came to the wrong town at the wrong time, my friend. host: senator lindsey graham went on to say this and is quoted in the wall street , "to myeditorial board republican colleagues, if you vote no, you are legitimizing the most despicable thing i have seen in my time in politics. it is no secret america's polarized politics is running off the rails." lindsey graham's final moment may be that he threw the break. republican caller, steve, we are

getting all your thoughts. it did this hearing change her mind? caller: yes -- hello? host: you are on the air. wonderingwas just about her story. she said she could not fly, but she flies all over the world. knows saying she does not where it happened. unless they went into some house.r's and the third, when she was locked in a bathroom, she could hurt people -- hear people talking downstairs. why didn't she call for help? thank you. host: harold, a democrat in illinois. good morning. caller: good morning, c-span. i am glad to listen to all the comments this morning. it shows how divisive we are on this. i watched the whole show

yesterday and that is exactly what it was, a show. of stuck toat kind me the worst is how they kept saying the fbi don't come to conclusions. it seems like when local police have a problem, they call in the fbi. they send the fbi to other countries to look into things. all of a sudden, those people don't have no answers. i think those people have enough answers to send you to prison. trump is looking at an investigation from the fbi to impeach him. i think, down in the fbi -- downing the fbi's ability was not the right way to go. host: ok. daniel in tennessee, independent. what do you think? caller: thank you for taking my call. my main problem -- i was undecided at first. i am still undecided. there is a lot of rushing to

conclusion based on republican -- political party. it is supposed to be an independent body on the supreme court. and the president is nominating based on party. there is more information needed to know what the truth of the matter. the undecided senators have a lot of power here because the majority party will -- they have been trying to rush it in. extension propose an and i am sure they could do that because they want him in. watch on c-span 2 this morning, nine: 30 when the committee comes in to see how onator jeff flake will vote a committee -- whether or not he will vote -- report favorably the nomination to the senate from the senate judiciary

committee at 9:30 a.m. eastern time on c-span 2, c-span.org, or the radio at. even if senator flake votes no, mitch mcconnell will bring it to the floor on saturday and start the clock. there will be a procedural vote and if it passes, it will go to monday with another procedural vote and a final vote on tuesday. let's go to maryland, republican. shirley,ood morning -- good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for having me on. i don't necessarily want to comment on the he said, she said. i think that is unproductive. what i find is if republicans really wanted to bridge this gap , there are other people on the list they could have chosen than kavanaugh, especially with the protests. i hear a lot of them saying that

democrats simply want to deny trump having a supreme court pick. i think there are other picks he could have had. they could have crossed that lotge to kind of moderate a of the political divide we have had in this country. i am really disappointed with how the republicans have treated their colleagues across the aisle. i think they have been very vehement and it is very surprising they feel that sexuality isn't something that can be brought up when, certainly, with clinton, it was and they weredea very fond of bringing up. i guess the democrats as well. ie in whitehall, pennsylvania, democrat. hello. caller: i am fine. i am nervous, so please bear with me.

the calendar he produced on the date of july 1, it had the three men she named in her assault, that were present. the urban dictionary -- if anybody wants to find out a couple of terms, i wasn't sure about some of the terms used on that july 1 date. devilsthem were triangle, which, according to the urban dictionary has nothing whatsoever to do with drinking. it involves two men and a woman. the other one was barfing or boffing and it has two meanings. either it is -- anal sex or rectum alcohol in your to get high faster. there are two things he lied about. it's easy to look it up, look it up, urban dictionary. -- so glad the

american bar association has come out. to lindsey graham, john mccain is spinning in his grave. i cannot believe how this man has changed for you all of a sudden he is the best friend of this president had so many -- and had so many things to say about this president before he was elected and now the president talks about how democrats are laughing. peoplesident and his will be laughing in the white house when this man is confirmed because i am sure republicans will push him through a matter what. host: how did you feel about judge kavanaugh's nomination before all of these allegations came out? caller: i had looked at the group -- i knew he was going to get the chance to put someone on and he is the one i wanted him to pick. i told my sister, i am a democrat. that's the other thing. all these investigations and the

catholic priests, and they are digging them up. believe me, i went to catholic school in some things went down that shouldn't. but this man is going to be a lifetime appointment to this supreme court. why? about they are worried losing the senate, but if they were doing what was right, they wouldn't be worried about losing the senate, would they? he supported kavanaugh because he's a catholic? caller: not just because he's a catholic, because i believed a lot of the things they were saying about him. i'm not antiabortion and i'm not pro-abortion. there are things that should be done to curtail some of the abortions that go one. but this whole situation with everything else that has come up , and i believe the woman. i'm sorry, i do believe her. host: what did you find credible about professor ford? caller: i found credible the

fact that what she said that stuck with her more than anything was their laughter. their laughter. that she was 100% sure. the other thing was, she came out with this information, this letter, before he was even picked. she wanted to let someone know that he shouldn't even be considered. she said there were other people that could do this. it wasn't that she was against putting a republican on the supreme court. that's baloney. it's that she didn't want this man considered to be put there. if there's any question about one -- i'me is, sorry, he came from a rich background, only child. i'm sure he did a lot of the things that he thought were fine for him to do. the group of kids he hung out with. just -- please. let someone look into this a little further. let the fbi investigate. there should be no qualms about

having this done. pennsylvania, talking about professor ford and what she remembers. that is exactly what senator patrick leahy asked her yesterday. >> let's go back to the incident. what is the strongest memory you memory of thet incident? something that you cannot forget? take whatever time you need. >> indelible in the hagel campus -- indelible in the hippocampus was the uproarious laughter between the two, and then having fun at my expense. >> you've never forgotten that laughter? you've never forgotten them laughing at you? >> they were laughing with each other. >> you were the object of the

laughter? dr. blasey ford: i was underneath one of them while the two last. two friends having a really good time with one another. >> let me enter into the record the statement by the national task force in domestic violence. a letter from 20 members of the house of representatives urging the committee to use nts trauma and -- to question dr. ford. in light of another hundred 16 members of the house asking to delay -- is at times criticized for what she does not remember from 36 years ago, but we have numerous experts from the u.s. ,rmy and school of behavior

that lapses in memory are y consistent with the severe trauma and stress of assault, and i request that the entered. dr. ford, it is concluded this -- you do remember what happened. >> i do. ford yesterday before the judiciary committee, and this from the judge's opening statement. the dr.ot questioning ford may not have been sexually assaulted by some person in someplace at some time, but i have never done this to her or .o anyone it's not who i am, not who i was. i am innocent of this charge. i intend no ill will to dr. ford

and her family. the other night, ashley and my daughter, liza, said their prayers. all of 10 years old, little l said to ashley, we should pray for the woman. a lot of wisdom from a 10-year-old. we mean no ill will. host: judge kavanaugh yesterday followed professor ford in her testimony. full day of questions and statements by the two and senators of the judiciary committee. republicans went behind closed doors to talk about when and how they would vote. this morning, i is a run -- eyes n these senators.

susan collins, jeff flake, lisa murkowski. democrats are watching joe donnelly and heidi heitkamp and joe manchin. all three voted for neil gorsuch, the president's last pic for the supreme court. they are also up for reelection in tough battles in november. the republicans that we showed they willot said how vote. they remain undecided. senator jeff flake will cast his first vote this morning in the senate judiciary committee at 9:30 a.m., eastern time. we will have coverage on c-span2, c-span.org, or you can listen along on our radio app. then the nomination goes to the floor for procedural votes saturday and monday. final vote slated for tuesday. last night, breaking, the american bar association, which gave judge kavanaugh high ratings, says the vote should be

delayed until there can be an fbi investigation. we are asking all of you for today's washington journal, what do you think about the hearing yesterday? independentfornia, . caller: i was on the fence before i watched the hearings. after watching it, i thought there were a few points in there that really changed my mind. i was watching the way rachel ford.ll was attacking she took everything apart. actually -- rape victim for not knowing the time or situation and how she escaped. this has been in her psyche for the rest of her life. points,uple of its own when i saw kavanaugh go in there and give his opening speech, i was impressed. like, let's go.

pressure,e's under schooled by the democratic party and asked to take a polygraph test, he started squirming. i've seen a guy run a 40 yard -- in the time it took him to answer. and this guy is a judge. he's good at talking to people. but he's awful under the microscope. when i watched this guy squirm like this, he would not pass an fbi investigation. jobhis guy was going for a and i was interviewing him and he squirmed in his seat when i asked him a question like that, i guarantee i wouldn't hire him. it was amazing. her people to watch this and not take those points out, they are stuck on the points of, i'm a republican or democrat. i'm an independent, i've never voted straight ticket in my life.

what about usa today, their view? she says, he denies. let's slow down and get more facts. fbier: that's what the polygraph test, or just their interview would do. they don't make a decision. they are just getting facts together and congress will make the decision to do that. to ao rush this guy in lifetime appointment, we just took down bill cosby. everybody looked at this guy like he was still in the top echelon of people standards. look at them now. look at al franken. he put his hands in a picture over someone's breasts, and he never broke, but played like he was. i've seen a little kid in elementary school say they were going to shoot a teacher with, i think, a pellet gun? a high school student with accusations like that. he goes to college and he's not

held to a standard? wake up, please. host: anthony, pennsylvania, republican. caller: good morning, thanks for taking my call. open-minded republican. dr. ford. they said that she did her polygraph. was that done by the fbi? were there any background checks? didn't hear anything, watching any of the new stations talk about that. the second part is, long life as ahood friend, worked coworker, both automotive technicians. got a job for the fbi. fbid two interviews with agents on his character. one from childhood and one from being a coworker. has had this done six times. it just blows my mind that nothing of this came out with

all the background checks. that is just my opinion. thanks for letting everyone else have their opinion. host: janet, democrat, illinois. your turn, good morning. caller: hi. in, always independent. if this happened when merrick garland would have been in an interview, i would have taken it the same way. i always look at just the facts in front of me. but i was sexually assaulted myself. definitelyhe was assaulted, i totally believe her. .t's easy to forget he's a standing judge. he is a circuit court judge. you just think of him as a man.

be then he's going to top level, where you can't go any farther, it is frightening. it's not something that people think about, when -- he didn't have the clearness. i've never seen somebody so privileged and whiny. well, we shouldn't be doing this to me [mockingly]. well she doesn't need to get involved. she wasn't complaining, [mockingly] they shouldn't question me. she wasn't doing that. i don't understand why he was so whiny. if he really wanted the facts to get out there, then you say, you know what? i want to clear my name. i want the fbi to talk to everyone who was there. she has names on the calendar.

were different circles, she didn't go to his school. it was a boy's school. who has beenbody sexually assaulted, how was it to watch yesterday for you? caller: very difficult. .t is all right there again it is very easy when you see somebody who has been sexually assaulted, it is all right there . you know the signs of somebody who is faking it and who isn't. host: what are they? caller: you can tell who's genuine. you can tell who isn't. mm. i was assaulted in 1986 and 1987, from date rape.

to cometoo frightened forward. i would not have the courage that this woman had. i don't know how she did this, because it is something that frightens me to this day. if someone is truly in such a ,ituation, it will be known years to come. i hear my neighbors fight, and if it is a certain kind of fight , the hair will stand up on the back of your neck. me ort know if it is just all sexual assault -- you can tell that there's a difference in the fighting. you know, and just watching

people's body language, you have to learn to watch people's body language. if you've been sexually assaulted. you get really good at watching people's body language, so you are safer. you need to be safe. you need to make sure. you are scared of everything, then. you are scared of your own shadow. host: why were you afraid to come forward? threatened that if i came forward, he would hurt my family and my friends. and i never did. he became a police officer. and ith assault people was not able to protect anybody because i was too afraid to come forward. [crying] my own family didn't fully believe me until this.

my mother finally believes me. my mother thought, you know, you were just a little slut. crap was getting the beaten out of me and being raped. but back then, date rape wasn't something that -- cops didn't even believe you. i didn't want to wind up in a ditch or -- i've jumped out of a moving vehicle. i've done crazy stuff to try to -- d when you are surrounded by 50 people and they don't do know that no one cares. so it is amazing that when someone punches you in the stomach and no one does

anything. you know that no one cares. it is the same. she just experienced exactly what i've gone through, and it is very difficult. i've cried a lot in the past week. it's brought a lot back. but it's frightening. it's very frightening to think that this man will shape our laws for years to come, and we ,lready have clarence thomas who, that was really frightening because i was recovering at that explain tick,g to you know, my husband at the time, why i was flipping out. it's frightening. illinois. in

go to crystal lake, independent, janet. kind of mixed emotions about it because i'm basically a republican, so i kind of cited him -- sided with him for a while. i thought her testimony sounded ok, but after a while, i started to think. when she was upstairs and ran into the bathroom, she had enough time to kind of mentally pull herself together a little bit and think that she could hear the voices, the stumbling down the stairs. she could hear the other people downstairs, mumbling, talking, whatever. whenobody ever asked her, she was coming down the stairs to get out of the house, calculating how to get out of the house, why didn't she grabbed her girlfriend, and no matter what, if that girl was in the middle of those boys, why would she not have grabbed her and gone, we've got

to get out of this house. don't ask any questions, i'll tell you later. she left her girlfriend in that with, say, four boys that she didn't know, other than the two she knows that supposedly jumped her. othere doesn't know the two weren't jumping her other girlfriend. why would she not have just grabbed her girlfriend? host: is it possible that she was scared? caller: absolutely! thought they same thing. she is scared, but would you leave your girlfriend there? she still got it together enough to hear what is going on downstairs, mumbling. when she walked out of the house, why wouldn't she have gone to the next door neighbor, scared or not? and said my girlfriend is in there and she could possibly be raped.

they keep calling this thing rate. he was on top of her. gote was, when she finally off, why wouldn't she have grabbed her girlfriend's arm and just ran out? if she could run out for yourself, she was willing to let her girlfriend stay there? when women want to talk about protecting other women, what was she doing? scared or not? there's been a lot of women who have been in almost the same situation or a little bit different. but i've been in situations before where people have gotten way too aggressive. i would have grabbed my friend, no matter what. and just said don't grab your purse, don't grab anything, we'll run out. host: janet, before yesterday's was your opinion of judge kavanaugh? actually, i was very open and i wanted to be very open. think if you talk

to a lot of women, i think there's a lot of women who have been put in the situation where they are either close to that or more severe, and i think a lot of women kind of step back and happened orhis could've happened, and i'm going to run away from situations like that. where you kind of don't even put yourself in those positions or are more aware that there are a lot of bad people in this world, that it could happen. not necessarily that it is him, but there's a lot of people where you say, i had better be more leery of situations. you can always be naive, and close to and of come situation like that, you start to learn to back off and say, the whole world is not the nicest people. guys and girls. guys that go after little boys or men or teenagers, or even women that go after women. look at that poor girl that got

kidnapped, whatever her name was from utah. that actually helped and perpetuated that situation. all these people have to start coming down. i think one of these all situations should be a huge teaching moment. or how you feel about either one of these people, the situation tould now be, i'm going train my little girl, my little boy, my teenage kids, to say this is a problem with all of society. priests, people in politics. people everywhere. you have to turn to say, what can we do as a society to start to say, this needs to be taught? how do you get away? just like, don't smoke kind of killed the smoking industry. now which should be, don't get involved in situations. but the don't should be teaching

people. host: we've heard your point, i want to go to jennifer in south carolina, republican. did you watch yesterday? did anything change your mind? caller: i watched the whole hearing. i am a republican woman and i do have an open mind. one thing i noticed. she said that her and her friends would go to these houses . during the day, she called it a gathering. , but she saider later in the evening, these gatherings would turn into parties where the boys would drink more. she would not be there due to her curfew. she stated, she was describing the incident and said

the night of the incident. was she there during the day or at night? i'm 55 years old. i have three close friends. i remember their homes. i remember the layout of their homes. i remember how i would usually get to the homes. whitehouse, what a joke to listen to him going through this guy's, trying to find the golden egg that judge kavanaugh is a rapist. it was a joke. i don't believe he had done that to her. and i hope he gets voted in. thank you, c-span. vote, as we understand it, is slated for tuesday. the final vote, tuesday. there are procedural votes that have to happen before then, because of the way the senate

works. those will take place saturday and monday. morning, in this one hour, the senate judiciary committee will get back together. democrats,ans, 10 voting on the nomination. how they report it to the full senate is up in the air because of senator jeff flake, republican from arizona. huddled with his fellow republicans, susan collins of maine and lisa , along with alaska democratic senator joe manchin of west virginia last night, before meeting with his other gop colleague's. here's a quote from roll call. there's talk, we're still talking. there's no decision made on anything. there's concerns people have and we will try to close the loop. that is senator manchin.

the west virginia democrat remained undecided on kavanaugh's nomination. republicans can only lose one of their colleagues in this vote because of the 51-49 majority. that is if all the democrats vote against judge brett kavanaugh. there are three democrats. those are the republicans, but there are three democrats who are undecided, who are in states in reelection battles in november that are close. donnelly, heidi heitkamp, manchin.- so you'll have to see how the vote plays out. there will be a test vote saturday, noon. c-span2, our coverage of the senate. today, that vote in the senate judiciary committee. senator bill nelson, democrat from florida, saying i will vote no.

he was not expected to vote yes, but he's tweeting that out this morning. let's hear from sean in baltimore, independent. hello, how is it going. i was i want to say that for kavanaugh. i'm independent. i do not like trump, but i have to admit that his pick for the ,upreme court, i was for him and for gorsuch. i was for kavanaugh until yesterday. i'm currently a police officer. in one for 10 years. when i've responded to calls for sexual assault where a woman or teenage girl was claiming that a , andsexually assaulted her the guy was like, hey, these accusations are false, i did not do that. to be investigated. they say, look. bring me down to the police station.

through myto look phone and investigate me, because i did not do this. i say that to say that i did not see that from kavanaugh yesterday. when dick durbin was talking to him, his body language, his , hey, whatt me know are you trying to hide? like i said, i was for kavanaugh. i'm not a trump supporter but i liked kavanaugh until i saw that. because when i interrogate ,uspects and they act like that they are somewhat guilty in my eyes. why would an innocent man not want to clear his name? and also let me say, i think the republicans are not doing him any favors. i always thought that. if he is so innocent, if he didn't do anything, you don't really have to do an fbi investigation. just bring in the other witnesses. if so many people can disprove

allegations, just investigate. slow this vote down and let kavanaugh prove his innocence and show how the democrats are so crazy. just show how it say "left-wing conspiracy." that,ey don't want to do they want to rush it in. i was disturbed. dick durbin asked them, in so many words, if he would not mind being investigated by the fbi. kavanaugh did not answer. he flat out did not answer for a few minutes. let me tell you, that is a telltale sign of somebody trying to get their answer together. if he was genuine, he would've said yes. go ahead, investigate me. instead, he sat there and stalled. point.ou are making that a couple of others have made that point. let's watch the moment.

>> let's say this. turned judge kavanaugh, to don mcgahn and this committee and say, for the sake of my reputation and family name and to get to the bottom of the truth of this, i will not be an obstacle to an fbi investigation. i would hope all the members of the committee would abide by your wishes and have that investigation. >> i welcome whatever the committee wants to do because i'm telling the truth. >> i want to know what you want to do. >> i'm innocent of this charge. >> are you prepared for an fbi investigation? judge kavanaugh: they don't reach conclusions. >> you can't have it both ways. welcome --augh: i this was sprung on me at the last minute after being held by staff. you know. i called for a hearing immediately. to herhere is no truth

charges, the fbi investigation will show that. are you afraid that they might not? judge kavanaugh: the fbi does not reach conclusions. you know that is a phony question. the fbi doesn't reach conclusions, they just provide the 302's. to explain to people who don't know, they just go and do what you are doing. ask questions and type of a report. they don't reach the bottom line. host: that moment between senator dick durbin, when it was his five minutes to ask questions of judge kavanaugh. each senator getting five minutes for questions from both professor ford and judge kavanaugh. the republicans, when professor ford went before them, had a special victims prosecutor from maricopa county, arizona, rachel mitchell, ask questions of professor ford. they took back their five minutes after lindsey graham delivered his statement before judge kavanaugh and was critical

of democrats. judge kavanaugh also critical of democrats in his opening statement for how this nomination is playing out. here's that moment. >> the behavior of several of the democratic members of this committee and my hearing two weeks ago was an embarrassment. but at least it was just a good old-fashioned attempt at borkin g. those efforts didn't work. when i did at least ok enough at the hearings that it looked like i might actually get confirmed, a new tactic was needed. some of you were lying in wait and had it ready. this first allegation was held in secret for weeks by a democratic member of this committee and by staff. it would be needed only if you couldn't take me out on the merits. when it was needed, this allegation was unleashed and publicly deployed over dr.

ford's wishes. then, as no doubt was expected, if not planned, came a long series of false, last-minute smears designed to scare me and drive me out of the process before any hearing occurred. crazy stuff. gangs. illegitimate children. fights on boats in rhode island. all nonsense, reported breathlessly, and often uncritically by the media. this has destroyed my family and my good name. a good name built up through decades of very hard work and public service at the highest levels of the american government. effort hastwo-week been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up

anger about president trump and .he 2016 election fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record. revenge on behalf of the clintons. millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups. circus.a the consequences will extend long past my nomination. the consequences will be with us for decades. host: judge kavanaugh testifying yesterday before the senators. it was a full day of questions and statements by judge and professor ford. our coverage can be found on c-span.org and it continues today with the senate judiciary committee casting their votes at 9:30 a.m. eastern time. turn to c-span2 to watch that. eyes are on center jeff flake

who is still undecided. there are 10 democrats on that committee. if he votes no, then it's 10-10. that does not stop the majority, who can still bring his nomination to the floor, then it will be eyes on center susan collins at lisa murkowski. republicans can only lose one of their colleagues if all the democrats vote no. there are eyes on some moderate democrats up for reelection. -- senatorelly itkamp,y, senator hahe and senator manchin. think, have your minds been changed? anne in clinton, maryland. democrat. caller: i'd like to commend dr. ford for what she did yesterday. it took a lot of courage to do what she did.

after i heard her speak and saw thisain, the fact that lady has lost almost everything. her life has been destroyed. i don't see any way that kavanaugh has -- i hated the way they treated that woman. no person, male, female, black, white, whatever, should be treated in the manner that lindsey graham and those republicans did to that lady. disrespectful and showed nothing but contempt. host: how did they show contempt? when they were the ones asking the questions. all, they leftf the lady that was supposed to be , question her, and they stepped back and did nothing. when kavanaugh came on, they had nothing but praise and everything for him. i feel like that was disrespectful and contempt. over top ofng people.

he didn't answer any questions. he didn't answer a single one. he just kept on saying that he's done this and done that. i don't care what he's done and don't care, but i don't want anyone on the supreme court making decisions like that on my life for my family. and i'll go a little bit off of this and say something that a lot of people in this country don't know. if you do the statistics and look at the facts, 85% of white americans are run some kind of public assistance or welfare or whatever. the second thing i want to say , disability,urity medicare, medicaid, affordable health, housing, you had better think the democrats. from that is anne maryland. riveted by testimony, they know people were watching on airplanes, on buses, in bars, in schools.

they also note along with the new yorker and usa today, your phone calls. the phone calls made to c-span yesterday. testimonyon ford's and that people cried in airplane seats, called in to c-span to tell their own stories of sexual assault. we are taking your calls again this morning. the next step of this nomination .rocess senate judiciary vote at 9:30 a.m., eastern time. have your minds changed. rodney, myrtle beach. independent. testimony,atched the and at first, i was leaning towards ford. i can only imagine what that poor lady has been through. i've also listened to kavanaugh and can only imagine what him

and his family have been through. in the end, i started leaning more towards kavanaugh, simply because of dianne feinstein and her trying to defend her actions. i'm starting to wonder if it isn't political grandstanding. now i woke up this morning and i'm even more confused on exactly what i saw yesterday. what a circus. host: what would you do if you were a senator? surer: you know, i'm not that we will ever really get to the bottom of this issue. ford and i want to believe kavanaugh. i'm very confused. my question is, and i have one an fbi, why wasn't investigation started at the beginning? met with kavanaugh diane feinstein's staff or her,

wasn't told that they already told miss ford that a lawyer had been recommended to her? why were they keeping that a secret from him? during this meeting, were they hoping he might let the cat out of the bag? why was there not an investigation to begin with? why did she not simply go to the police? on this are no terms kind of action in a court of law and it can be charged, why did she not simply go to the police, and they would have done a total investigation? i'm on the fence. host: rodney in south carolina. the white house took questions from reporters in the driveway. >> let's be clear. it's not just he said/she said. she has given her account, but his account is also consistent with three other sworn statements that have been undered to the committee penalty of felony. i think those can't be

discounted. there is no other independent evidence or corroboration of her account. this is a system of due process, innocent before proven guilty. we've gone through a pretty extensive investigation with the senate and we think his account is both compelling and backed up. >> does the president find her to be credible? asked, he finds judge kavanaugh to be powerful in his testimony yesterday. >> are you confident that you have the votes? >> we are confident that we will get there. >> do you have assurances? >> i don't have assurances, but i'm confident. raj shah from the white house this morning. it goes to the floor on saturday if it passes that float. that procedural vote.

monday is another one, then tuesday, the final vote. the editorial board of the new york times writes this morning why esther kavanaugh was not believable -- why mr. kavanaugh was not believable. he writes that what goes around comes around. the partisan -- his open contempt for the democrats in the committee also raised further questions about his own fair mindedness and served as a reminder of his decades as a republican warrior who would take no prisoners. his biggest problem was not his demeanor, but his credibility, which has been called into question on multiple issues over the decades and has been an issue again throughout the confirmation process. the editorial ends by saying, there's no reason the committee needs to hold his boat before a proper investigation. mr. judge and other possible witnesses can be called to testify under oath. the senate and american people need to know the truth, or as close an approximation as

possible before deciding whether judge kavanaugh should get a lifetime seat on the highest court. make acommittee will not more serious effort, the only choice for senators seeking to protect the credibility of the supreme court will be to vote no. nicolas, maryland, republican. my comment is that senator booker used twice, the phrase, she told her truth. what does "her" truth mean? does that mean she made a mistake in identifying this person and truly believes it was him but wasn't? my second comment is that i do believe the republicans made a mistake in not screening mark judge and calling him as a witness. host: why is that? caller: because he is a witness to the event, he should be involved. host: what about the argument a statement to the

committee and that he doesn't remember the incident? caller: i think he should still have been there. ok, nicholas in maryland. linda, florida, democrats. caller: good morning. crying.l i observed frat boys like this do something horrible to a woman , and it got buried, and they moved away. this is what happens to rich, wealthy boys like him. gets get buried -- things buried. and they just keep doing, moving up the food chain like now. i do not think he should be a

supreme court judge. and i don't think he'll be fair to any democrat ever again. thank you. we'll go to morton, new york. michael is an independent. caller: good morning. because a couple of your callers -- i've forgotten my intention. , you know whatk it stands for? she said i don't care. well, if you don't care, how can you have a good opinion? triangle, the woman said to go to urban dictionary. that was 1982, 35 years ago. rolfing.ng with it means throwing up. even before kavanaugh's name came up, any person for scotus

, these democrats had t-shirts on with no name, saying i don't approve of trump's pick. before he even had one. the fbi got called in, they would do the same thing. they would say three witnesses did not agree with her here she is the only one who stands for this. they all handled the perjury of said, that this didn't happen. even her best friend said this didn't happen. and it's not she said/he said, said.she said/they lastly, when mr. obama became president obama, he goes, elections have consequences. you didn't see any republican acting like this. not even one time. whoever left the left is the ones who cause problems in colleges, what are they called, antifa?

conservatives are trying to be decent and have a discussion. everyone can have opinions, but not their own facts. ago,r three colorcallers she said i don't care. if you don't care what facts are -- then you just strike out. host: some of you watching yesterday may have noticed over the right shoulder of judge kavanaugh and professor ford a familiar face. alyssa milano was in the room yesterday during the testimony for the entire eight hours. the washington post says the need to activist -- the me too reporters she was attending the hearing as a guest of senator dianne feinstein, the senate's top democrat, during which brett kavanaugh and a

woman accusing him of sexual assault both testified. the room was small compared to the hearing room that judge kavanaugh was in for the first four days of his nomination. this room, and you can see over his shoulder, alyssa milano in the back row. the row ahead of her has michael bromwich, one of the lawyers for professor ford over judge kavanaugh's left shoulder. the congresswoman, carolyn maloney. come early tofer reserve a seat. there were four seats for members of congress, none for the public. there was an overflow room for the public to watch. there were some 47 seats total in this room yesterday for people to sit and listen to judge kavanaugh and professor ford. from maryland, republican. my name is gary johnson,

and i basically watched the both, everything that happened in yesterday's hearing. several things that struck me about mrs. ford's testimony that basically gave a little bit of, to me, that her story was not quite right. one was in the case of the polygraph. asked herl basically a question about the polygraph, she stated, how did you arrive to come to the polygraph? oh, i flew there from my home in ,alifornia to go to rehobeth and i was on my way to new hampshire and i was there to attend the funeral of my

grandmother that day, or the next day. gaveeaction that rachel when she stated that that polygraph was actually given on that day, her mouth dropped open and her eyes got wide. i have actually been a contractor and has gone through polygraphs for my job. , whenhonestly tell you you go to these things, you trauma ofe no prior anything in your life. when you go to that. because the results of the polygraph are severely affected and not accurately recorded. and that goes back to the statement that was actually made , that when miss ford made her statement, she stated that i was there. supposed to be for a few hours, and it turned out to be five hours. because she said several hours,

and she was doing a lot of crying and was emotionally distraught. the only two questions that basically came up, that she supposedly passed in the polygraph, if you go by what her attorneys are basically saying, was the fact that, to a written statement that was actually written, that she stated that that statement was correct. when you read the statement, it coherentt is not even as to what the allegations work. up iscond thing that came that towards the very end, he was asked, when you gave the letter, initially, and how she got into feinstein's office, and to whether or not it was supposed to be kept confidential. and she said yes. and she didn't want nobody to

get this letter. the obligation to start the federal investigation, if that is what the democrats wanted at that time, which they did not want at the time. now, kavanaugh has had six fbi investigations throughout his whole career. once again, being a contractor for the federal government, they go back and talk to everybody in your neighborhood. your friends. who mayk to your people not have a disagreement with you , to find out every little inch of everything about your life before they even give you permission to basically come to work there. host: i've got a leave it there. you mention rachel mitchell. i want to go to this political article about the huddle of republicans after the hearing last night.

that in theorts full gop conference meeting, murkowski, collins, and slate offered no signal of where they would land. , the lawyerell retained by the senate gop, wrote down her analysis of the butimony to republicans, did not advise them how to vote. she told them that as a prosecutor, she would not charge kavanaugh or even pursue a search warrant, according to a person briefed on the meeting. let's go to austin, mississippi, democrat. caller: i'm on the line, can you hear me? host: yes we can. i taught school in junior high and college in chicago at 10 years in las vegas, and i would like to first fbi.ss the warrant on the anyone who knows anything about the fbi agrees, there is a gathering of information,

supplied to -- these people trying to make like the fbi is judge and jury. they are fact-finding and that is the way it goes. let me tell you about this rate case. i had a 17-year-old girl that was a senior in chicago in the 80's, around the same time, 1985. her biological father was having sex with her, and her biological mother was in denial. and tradegoes to l station at midnight to keep her biological father from molesting her. i found out about it as she was still 17. she did not tell me that her biological father was raping her. she said that he was attempting to rape her. after she reached her 18th birthday, she finally admitted to me and the principal that her

biological father was raping her on a continuous basis, her biological mother was in denial. we tried to get her in this program early to get her away from her biological father. there are many cases that in my teaching of 45 years where teenagers participate in these kinds of events. , based on mylieve teaching for 45 years, that he drank more than beer. host: some other news this end today'sore we washington journal, the house coming in at 9:00 a.m. the house yesterday passed tax legislation. two house bills thursday and expected to pass the third today. expand vote would addrement savings -- would tax breaks for startups. among other items, the

retirement bill would allow individuals to contribute as much as 2500 dollars per year of after-tax money into a new type of universal savings account where the money could be grown tax-free and used for non-retirement purposes. the largest, most controversial bill is expected to pass today by a vote similar to the split on the first round of tax cuts in december. all democrats and 12 republicans, mostly from high tax states, concerned about the deduction on state and local taxes. deductionger standard in child tax credits, expanding the state tax exemption, lowering individual tax rates, the cap on the state and local tax deduction, and a 20% break for businesses such as partnerships. they will be gaveling in at 9:00 a.m. eastern time. on ron rosenstein and his relationship with the president, the meeting they were supposed to have yesterday was delayed.

this morning, we are learning from mark meadows on twitter, vocal critic of the deputy attorney general, the leadership has agreed to call rosenstein before congress for a hearing with our panel so he can explain his alleged comments on wiring the president as well as other inconsistent statements. if mr. rosenstein fails to show up, we will subpoena him. says there'se -- no such thing as a closed, private hearing. the gop cannot be left alone in a room with the attorney general. they went on stop until their attempt to undermine the investigation is complete. more to come on that story. let's go to chris in kansas city, missouri. i think the american people are putting too much and two teenagers who have been drinking at parties. when i was 17, i used to hear

that the boys in my high school used to talk about pulling trains on these girls at these drinking parties. that being said, i think that brett kavanaugh and ford are both telling the truth. i think the reason brett kavanaugh has been denying this is because he was drunk. he was drunk when he was walking up the stairs, and he just randomly pushed the closest female to him. host: you don't think that's a big deal? caller: what i'm saying is he was drunk and he randomly pushed the closest female to him to that bedroom, got on top of her like he was going to, then she got out. as the reason he says he doesn't remember because he was drunk. the question i have about miss ford. walking she remembers up the stairs. she says she remembers walking into the bedroom, the bed being on the right. she says she remembers pushing him off, walking down the stairs and hearing them laughing. how is it that she remembers all

of that but not how she got home? i think they all were drinking. but i don't think you should try to rationalize the character of a 17-year-old who has been drinking. you should pretty much try to look at his life of the last 15 to 20 years. the teenagers make mistakes all the time, and he didn't rape her. he didn't penetrate her. i just think that you can't really characterize somebody as a 16 what they did or 17-year-old person who's been drinking. host: cleveland ohio, republican. mark? wrong -- have the cleveland ohio, republican? >> i am, speaking now. host: apologies, go ahead. caller: thank you for taking my call. a couple of quick things. i wanted to comment on a comment

that you made, greta, pertaining to when the republicans took back their five minutes from the special counsel. it was actually after dick durbin was questioning judge kavanaugh. as many statements have been made this morning, from a lot of the colors, he got very nervous when did your been asked him -- when dick durbin asked him about another fbi investigation. immediately after that, senator grassley made the comment that it was not nobody's decision but the committee. host: right. caller: as soon as grassley finished his comments stating that, he went erect lee -- went directly to senator graham. it seemed like it was planned.

he went directly, said senator graham, and that was when he unleashed. , then theyoint on never, ever let the special counsel speak again. so it was actually before senator graham speaks that they didn't allow the special counsel. so it seems like they were just -- they had lost were they were just that thewas special counsel wasn't doing them any more good, the republicans. host: we will leave it there because the house is gaveling in early this morning. thank you all for your calls and participating this morning. we will bring you to the house for our gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house of representatives. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2018] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

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 28, 2018. i hereby appoint the honorable ted poe to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, paul d. ryan, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of mercy, thank you for giving us another day. may the words of ezekiel stir our