>> it was good to be with you. as bill is slowly making his way back to this coverage. >> we think and forest coverage down there, it's been excellent and we wish for his safe return, "outnumbered" starts now. >> harris: fox news alert, high drama on capitol hill. supreme court nominee judge brett kavanaugh and his accuser have been invited to testify publicly before the senate judiciary committee on monday. as the panel delays the vote now on the confirmation of president trump's high court pick. you're watching "outnumbered." i'm harris faulkner. here today, melissa francis. fox news contributor lisa boothe. former state department spokesperson marie harf and joining us in the center seat, former utah congressman and fox news contributor jason chaffetz, also author of the new book the deep state. how an army of bureaucrats protected barack obama and is

working to destroy donald trump, and that hit shelves today. it's tuesday when jason's book is about to drop. >> jason: is my first book ever. i can't wait to give one to marie. >> harris: she says he brought us a copy. >> marie: i will email him my thoughts. >> melissa: this is going to be a fun show. >> harris: i guess we better get started because the anticipation is killing me. judge brett kavanaugh attending meetings of the white house for the second straight day now. and he says he's ready to go before congress and clear his name after new claims of sexual assault focusing on an incident that happened allegedly nearly 30 years ago. his accuser is christine blasey afford. if we are still waiting for confirmation that she will accept the invitation from the senate judiciary committee to tell her story, she has yet to do so we are told. yesterday president trump said

the process should play out, but standing behind his nominee. >> he is one of the great intellects and one of the finest people that anybody has known. you look at his references, i've never seen anything quite like it. so they'll go through that process and we will get it done. if it takes a little delay, it will take a little delay. it shouldn't certainly be very much. >> harris: now said democrats are accusing republicans of rushing to have these new hearings without a full investigation. peter doocy life for us on the hill. >> we have learned that the judiciary committee staff has reached out to a lawyer representing kavanaugh's attorney christine blasey afford multiple times and so far, they received radio silence about the invitation to come testify on monday. if the hearing does happen as planned next monday morning, perhaps paying closer attention

will be the republican lawmakers who remain undecided, we just caught up with one of them, lisa murkowski from alaska. she told us i think what we need to do, what we all need to do is not speculate on how she will perform. whether she will be credible or whether he will be credible in his responses i think we should allow for the committee to assemble for the individuals to be heard and in fairness we should make our determination. another undecided republican senator susan collins just told us about an idea that she thinks could quiet claims of the senate judiciary committees republicans which are entirely men are the right people to be asking questions about this matter. collins says may be the opposing counsel for kavanaugh and his accuser both women could start out with a questioning before moving on to lawmaker inquiries. but democrats are not satisfied with any kind of questions that lack information provided by a fresh fbi background check. chuck schumer the minority leader in the senate just did this on the floor of the senate, said we have two diametrically opposed stories, professor ford

is telling the truth. but if you don't want the hearing to be just a he said, she said affair, an independent investigation and a background check by the fbi is essential. however, the fbi is now saying that they did their job already. they got this letter filled with accusations about judge kavanaugh and when they did, the fbi forwarded this letter to the white house counsel's office, the allegation does not involve any potential federal crime, the fbi's role in such matters as to provide information for the use of decision-makers. but republican senator tim scott was just asked in the hallway a few minutes ago if his support of kevin ike a change of these allegations are proven true and he said of course. so he is preparing for next monday's hearing at the white house and has no room for error. >> harris: just real quickly because this is something new. dianne feinstein says she wants more people at that hearing. just getting that note now from the senator's office. look at this look like, with the

source another delay or what you hear in? >> we heard yesterday from texas senator that he would be satisfactory just to hear kavanaugh's side of the story, but the senate rules to allow hearing like this for cooperating witnesses on either side so that somebody could potentially backup each side that counts with something they thought they heard at the time. there does seem to be a great appetite on both sides of the aisle just to get as much information as possible out there adhering. the difference between the two sides would be the republicans want to get it all out there right now, they want to have that hearing on monday and then they want to vote next week on kavanaugh where is the democrats want to delay the hearing, delay a vote until a full fbi background check has been redone and not something that could take weeks or months. >> harris: thank you very much for taking that story, we

appreciate it. jason chaffetz on the couch now, would you make of it all? >> jason: i think the democrats from the onset has said they will go to any lengths to make sure they delay and defeat this nomination. this doesn't strike me as a big choreographed, nevertheless if she has an allegation and she wants to air it out which is not totally in the clear yet, the idea that she won't return the calls from the judiciary committee, that is not accepting a monday hearing date, i worry that here we have such an important appointment, we had months in the making for the fbi and everybody to do their job and yet the democrats chose not to share this information with the fbi, they chose not to share this with the rest of the committee even other members and at some point, you have to look at the pattern of behavior in a pattern of behavior for judge kavanaugh is one of accomplishment and being an upstanding citizen and he's got decades to point to where he is been a responsible person.

>> harris: because i've seen some who were not, i want to be careful to shoes my words very carefully because as alleged victim, anyone could understand why she wouldn't want to be put in that spotlight. the last couple of days, always seen as the loops of them of amida hill on capitol hill and what that was like with some of the same group of men who were still on the hill now. it's a tough go round i would imagine, i'm not in your shoes on the hill as a former congressman, that's a tough position to be in. >> jason: there's a way to do that. she doesn't want to have a public hearing, there's a way to either with committee staff for even with some members. the closed-door hearing. it's more difficult and less she can request that. this is such a public issue. >> harris: are you concerned about this becoming a circus if they both sit down. >> jason: we are already past the circus. >> harris: if they start talking about stuff on air in the middle of the day. >> jason: want to be as sensitive as they camped at the same time, it does feel a bit

choreographed. all over social media was scrubbed, she met with an attorney, last night senator graham rang up an important point, if she didn't want this to come out, didn't want to be publicly testifying, that was the original story, then why did you get an attorney and why did she take a polygraph test, but her social media can scrubbed? >> melissa: maybe she got pressure to that point, we don't know the story. i would say that i don't think testifying questioning behind closed doors will do the trick at this point. >> harris: is it a trick to get to the truth or what politically will go forward? >> melissa: the trick is to understand the truth and that if there's one thing from sitting on his couch during this hour of the day is that we see a lot of those hearings capitol hill and while they may not have that moment that gotcha moment, you get a sense for who the person is as they answer the question. for example, the two women that were on martha's show last night i thought came across as honest and not contrived and

compelling. i think if we see her sit down and we see judge kavanaugh sit down, everybody can make up their mind. >> harris: we know that sometimes is more about the histrionics and the pomp and circumstance and that actually doesn't get us closer to the truth, why do we all need to see it? like at the people that we've elected and tries to go do this job on the senate judiciary committee get that done behind closed doors? >> marie: and then release the transcript to the public. >> melissa: we want is he in a black and white for ourselves, i think you have to hear the tone of someone's voice. >> harris: what part does the public play is what i'm asking. >> melissa: is whether or not you believe them. >> lisa: how do you get to the truth that she didn't remember key details because i have been 36 years ago and she doesn't know how that she got there, didn't know who where she was or which month it was. i did get to the details when she can't even remember those key details which to me raises

questions about the veracity of the most critical claims she is raging which is what allegedly happened. so i have questions here which is how do you get to the bottom of it if she doesn't even remember the details of what frustrates me about two era is that her life is in the only one who is hanging in the balance right now, so is judge kavanaugh so we better get this right when you have democrats like kirsten gillibrand who say that women will actually die if judge kavanaugh is confirmed, when democrats were against president tom's nominee before he was even named, when there was obstruction from the beginning, when democrats tried to filibuster kavanaugh's hearings, how do you ever get to the truth when that is where one side of this is coming from in the mainstream media which is basically just an extension of the democratic party? >> harris: to your making a better point for me and that is what environment do you think somebody who normally isn't on national television is going to better be able to drill down and help you get to the truth? one of that is fraught with people trying to find their seats that's a crowded in there

or pump crowded area where the professionals will sit down? we have prosecutors on the judiciary committee that are very good on both sides of the aisle. i'm just wondering with that better be served up to just leave it up to what feeling do you get? >> marie: it is going to be very hard in that hearing on monday to determine what actually happened at this party 36 years ago. we probably never going to know if he was there if this happene happened. but what the senate will do as they will listen to her story and they will listen to his and they will consider this as part of the larger package of evidence they are considering as they decide whether or not to vote for him. clarence thomas confronted his confuse her and he was confirmed so there's a process. he deserves to be listened to. >> harris: we know the fbi has given its material even though we didn't have much evidence and it reportedly to the white house. we also know the statue of limitations ran out on the so democrats are sincere in

pressing for justice, where will they be it for instance the name gets pulled? >> jason: if they were sincere about doing this, they would've turned over the information when they received it. >> marie: don't question the sincerity of democrats wanting a woman to be heard. wanted to hear the story of christine. >> lisa: democrat said women will die of judge kavanaugh's confirm. >> jason: i will tell you as a chairman of the oversight committee, we had alleged victims of sexual abuse, sexual assault and we really defaulted to that woman or the man, every once in a while but the woman do you want to do this in public, do you want to do this behind closed doors and inevitably they wanted to get their story out but not everybody wanted to have 100 cameras blasted out on national television and sometimes we let professional staff from both sides of the aisle to a transcribed interview and that

seems to be a better format. i'm just saying it's an option. >> melissa: it would if politicians were going to be political but we all know that everybody on both sides are going to vote along party lines and i really doubt the sincerit sincerity. i think they know whether they want this judge or not for myself, completely open mind, i want to see for myself. i think you can tell when someone sits there and if she's brave enough to go, she deserves to be hurt, let's them both. >> harris: what melissa is saying is where voters might be ahead of the midterm and not heads out on monday. what a great discussion. didn't solve anything. they use words like angry, furious, volcanic. what a revealing new surveys as about how the network news media, some of them portray the president. we will debate it. plus, the firestorm over the president ordering the release of documents related to the

early stages of the russian investigation. what exactly is being released and whether democrats claim that it threatens national security are overblown. stay close. they are just getting started.

while i was in the navy,

i decided that i wanted to go for electrical engineering and you need to go to college for that. if i didn't have internet in the home i would have to give up more time with my kids. which is the main reason i left the military. everybody wants more for their kids, but i feel like with my kids, they measurably get more than i ever got. and i get to do that. i get to provide that for them. >> melissa: fox news alert, expecting the polish president of the white house.

the polish leaders first official visit to washington comes just over a year after president tom's historic visit to warsaw and as poland is asking the pentagon to permanently base u.s. troops in poland as a deterrent to russian aggression. in we will hear from the president during his oval office meeting with the polish president that is likely this hour and then the president will later hold a joint news conference where both are expecting to be asked about the kavanaugh nomination, new china tariff, and a whole lot more. you will see right here live what happens. fox news alert, on another topic, the president may be asked about his meetings today. his decision to order the declassification of documents related to the russian investigation, republicans believe this information could shed shed light on allegations of bias in the justice department and the fbi. they include a portion of a

secret surveillance warrant, application on former truck campaign aide carter page. and all those text messages related to the russian investigation from several current and former fbi and justice department officials. including former fbi director james comey. key democrats calling the move and abuse of power and saying it endangers national security. but how's intel chair devin nunes called those concerns overblown. here he is with laura ingraham last night. >> is laughable that they're saying this is going to somehow endanger national security. this is all transparency from the american people, this is all the information that the american people will need to see because for two years, we've been force-feeding this russia kool-aid to the american people so much that was that they have the media involved with it, the poor american people, i feel bad for some of these people who are part of this resistance movement who actually believe that the

president is under control by the russians. >> melissa: chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge has more from washington. >> in the last hour, we have learned a new information at fox news about the tick-tock of how this process will work. a source close to that process told us the right outcome of the intelligence agencies are taking these records that they will order to be declassified and they're doing their own review so they can come up with recommendations about what needs to be redacted in terms of protecting the sources and methods. i'm told that once i review processes over, a reporter memo will be sent to the white house with those recommendations for redaction, a fancy way of saying some parts of the records would still be blacked out but ultimately, it is the president who has the ultimate declassification authority, he can accept these recommendations for redaction's, he can accept some of them were he simply accept him to the mall and just ask for all of the records to be released to the public with no

reductions whatsoever. we've also learned is this has divided along political lines in terms of the support for this decision, what we heard from the ranking democrat adam schiff is that he called this an abuse of power. he's also said that he believes fbi and justice department leadership have reservations and that he described it as a redline to be crossed if these records were fully declassified without any redaction's. so we are getting a sense of the process now. the government officials remain reluctant to talk about a timeline. their best guesstimate at this point is that some records may be available within a matter of days but they also caution that we are dealing with the federal government that does move awfully slowly. >> melissa: catherine herridge, thank you so much. a great reporting is always and i just want to mention to our audience that we use on the bottom of your screen with the arrival of polish president as well as his first lady and you see there, president trump and

the first lady greeting the two of them, they are going to go inside. it was going to be what we call a pool spray in the oval office. we may get some sound from that. if we do, we will play it for you. the meeting is going to play out and then at some point, there is going to be a joint press conference as we told you before the break. there is no doubt they will be a lot of questions flying back and forth during all of that so you won't miss admitting out of it, there they are going inside. this bring it back out to the couch now as we talk about the declassification of these documents that so many have called for for so long. let me ask you a technical question first. has anyone seen all of them together, everything he is talking about? is there one person that knows exactly what is about to come out? >> jason: what has been seen as by the inspector general and we do know that we have. press reports of a grand jury being convened, you do know that mr. uber who was the u.s. attorney in utah is somehow

involved. if you do know that some people have been fired and dismissed. so the totality of all of it but i don't know if any one person can consume all of that but the president has directed this and i'm almost fascinated by the response from now we will take it under consideration. the president has directed this and unless they come up in short order with a specific name that needs to be redacted, i think that should be reviewed by both parties, the leadership, devin nunes and adam schiff and if they can agree but otherwise, you watch the clock is ticking and i guarantee, two or three or four weeks from now, still won't have them all. >> melissa: he has ultimate say in the end over what is and is not redacted. i wonder, they've been calling for this for so long, so many people come as is his october surprise? is he just been waiting? >> marie: there also reports that there are some people in the white house who don't think he should release these because they are not uniformly positive for the president.

what concerns me is that he seems to be selectively picking out pages he wants declassified. >> melissa: you just said that if we do look bad for him. >> marie: i'm not sure exactly what he's doing it. we should be careful about assuming it will be positive for the president. i think the president. put them all out, but what i'm saying is we want pages 17 through 21 that we want x, y, and z. as there are as you said tens of thousands of pages and if we really want accountability, put it all out. i don't think the president should just say i want these three pages which i think support me. >> jason: any text that has to do with this ought to be out there. space is i think he is selectively picking things that might help him. >> harris: here's where i think the democrat argument really falls down. >> jason: every democrat might have a saying we don't want to have this out. the one that's what the democrats argument falls down for the most part, not everybody

across the board, senator blumenthal last night on another network was talking about exactly what you were saying, methods and everything. but the thing is, you can have it both ways. they are oppositional. either you put it all out or you don't. >> marie: you can put them all out while protecting the names. i think you can put them out in that way. i also want to make sure that by releasing these documents it in no way inhibits the mueller investigation from doing its work. >> harris: i don't think we can know that because we don't know what they have. >> lisa: is like this would be a good time for the congressman to hold up his book. but you just wrote that's out today, the deep state. for people saying that they are worried about is impacting the mueller investigation raises more questions about the mueller investigation for me because why would more truth and transparency affect the

investigation? >> melissa: why don't you address that? >> marie: i think mueller has all of these and has seen all of them. i don't think more accountability will hurt that investigation. i think that mueller is still going through the process, other people might be interviewed, other people might be charge, other people might be brought in for questioning but i don't know and they might be. if you put this into the public domain, that could take jury pools, it could take people who are not to be investigated or questioned. i just want to make sure that it doesn't do anything to hurt the mueller investigation. >> harris: why is it when things are leaking. >> lisa: them talking about the american people. >> harris: the argument wasn't made we better just stop leaking everything and i'm guessing and i don't know from both sides of the aisle that this is happening on the hill. it >> jason: what we have documented as the expected general documenting these people within the federal bureau of investigation leaking on purpose to propel the political agenda.

that's why we're doing this oversight, that's why it's imperative to get all this information out there because it's actually going to show that the highest echelon of the federal bureau of investigation was using the police powers that we gave them as the american people to me and ablate a election. >> melissa: every interview ends with why hasn't the president to classify these and now we know because it was going to be in october surprise of their ego. the supreme showdown, we will see on capitol hill and the battle to confirm judge brett kavanaugh to the nation's high court. after sexual abuse allegations against him are made public. the controversy strikingly similar to the 1991 clarence thomas hearing where anita hill made abuse accusations against the nominee but how will kavanaugh's confirmation played out in the wake of the me too movement? we are going to debate that one. >> he has just been such a stand-up guy full of integrity. i admire him.

he never exhibited to me or anyone else that i know with anything, treated no one with disrespect. once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2,

or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®. ♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you. when mit rocked our world.ailed we called usaa. and they greeted me as they always do. sergeant baker, how are you? they took care of everything a to z. having insurance is something everyone needs, but having usaa- now that's a privilege.

what does help for heart fait looks like this. entresto is a heart failure pill that helped keep people alive and out of the hospital. don't take entresto if pregnant; it can cause harm or death to an unborn baby. don't take entresto with an ace inhibitor or aliskiren, or if you've had angioedema with an ace or arb. the most serious side effects are angioedema,

low blood pressure, kidney problems, or high blood potassium. ask your doctor about entresto. ♪ the beat goes on. yeah! >> lisa: back to our top story, the judiciary committee planning a monday public hearing to hear from brett kavanaugh and his accuser, she has not yet accepted the committees invite and senator orrin hatch says there is a meeting in their office to be or what to do if she does not accept the invite. and in the wake of her accusations, more than 200 former female classmates assigned a letter supporting her writing "we believe her and are grateful that she came forward to tell her story." but 65 other women have signed a separate letter supporting kavanaugh's character. one of those women speaking out last night on the story, take a listen. >> he was nothing but kind and polite and respectful. i've known him since high school, i dated him briefly in college and we remained close friends ever since.

>> lisa: is kavanaugh's confirmation looms, parallels are being drawn to a summer situation involving anita hill and then supreme court nominee clarence tom is back 1991. thomas was ultimately confirmed to the high court despite hills allegations against him. now the committee's ranking democrat dianne feinstein is releasing this statement saying "in 1991, five days after anita hills allegations, the judiciary committee held three days of controversial hearings. the fbi and white house are failing to take even those basic steps to investigate this matter. we must not repeat the mistakes of the past and rush the process before we were able to gather more information. if so obviously there's a lot of different areas to go here with this, but looking back to clarence thomas confirmation hearing, what can we learn from history and how that was

conducted moving forward with a separate situation? what are some of the things that we can learn and how to handle this? >> jason: found it interesting that senator feinstein is saying this to the appropriate thing and have the investigation have a background but she was in charge of that process and she had the opportunity in july to start that process. we talk a lot about how will this affect the midterms connect what it really affects as the court in its ability to do its job and it goes back into session october 1st. and you've got to look at the totality of this person's life, if she has something to say, let her say it and then make a judgment. but it doesn't mean that republicans should just acquiesce and just say will give you the number one thing that you want, democrats and that is to delay this further so that we can't see somebody by october october 1st. >> lisa: so if mrs. ford chooses to not participate in a hearing proposed potentially for monday, where do republicans go from there? how you handle this moving

forward? >> marie: i think that would be challenging. her attorney said she is willing to fade i think if there are no other accusations against judge kavanaugh and we haven't heard any, if this is just sort of one woman and they hear his side, i think he will probably still confirmed. that's the sense i get. i think she will show up on monday. she said she wants to, she didn't want to be public originally, just wanted to be anonymous and so we will see. we'll see if republicans decide to appoint someone to question her. a lot of them are talking about the fact now that they are all men on the judiciary committee, it might be helpful politically and otherwise to have perhaps a woman, a female attorney to be the one doing the questioning. if there's a lot of time between now and monday. there's a lot that's going to be a lot of moving parts here. >> melissa: that is a good idea if you had a female attorney who came out for a professional attorney that everybody agreed maybe doesn't have to be a woman but somebody who came out into the questioning and just kind of sat there.

i don't blame her if she got cold feet. it has to be terrifying for regular human being to sit up there. it's one thing for politicians for television people, is different to be out there if you are just a regular human being and all of a sudden you're going to sit there in front of the cameras and face that kind of scrutiny. it has to be terrifying even if she thought she was going to and now she's backed out. but the only way to get to the bottom of this i think is to hear her speak, hear him speak, everybody tried to be civil and less listen. >> marie: if he pulls his nomination, a lot of democrats believe trump will nominate someone more conservative and someone younger like amy barrett and so. to be what i thought that was on >> marie: exactly, so there are a lot of democrats saying. so there are democrats saying to each other. >> harris: we start to start listening to some of the other women in the constellation, so you mention that letter that was

sent to chairman grassley, we are the women who served with brett kavanaugh the white house staff positions during president george w. bush's administration. the west wing is a small place. in the hours are long, the pressure is intense. you get to know your colleagues in those conditions and if brett kavanaugh can we got to know a brilliant lawyer, a thoughtful friend, and a man of high integrity. and then how long you have to scroll to get all those women's names in there. there are women who were speaking today and i keep hearing there are no women involved and there are so many men. and there are on the judiciary committee still both sides of the aisle, more democrats who were women but still a lot of men. the point in all of this whether you get a female attorney or not, there were other female voices that are out there and it may not be in concert with those who are pressing for the so-called truth in this, democrats and i think we all want exactly the same truth, whatever it is. but there are politics involved. if phyllis wasn't all the women.

that letter went out to feinstein and grassley. and i don't see it everywhere and i think those voices are important too. >> lisa: we are going to have to ended there but another interesting conversation we are going to be talking about this in the coming days. the trade war between the united states and china has escalating once again as china retaliates for the president's latest heroes. how could this impact the midterm election? we're going to discuss it, just a right there. no matter who rides point, there are over 10,000 allstate agents riding sweep. call one today. are you in good hands? now that we have your attention... capri sun has four updated drinks. now with only the good stuff.

do you know how to use those? nope. get those kids some capri sun!

>> harris: is breaking news inside the white house, we knew when the president met with the president of poland inside the oval office for that traditional photo op that there might be some questions about the president's way and in fact, those questions we are told just moments ago were about the

confirmation process for judge brett kavanaugh to the high court. the president takes two or three questions. if we are waiting for the pool and as you know from watching this hour and after so much breaking news of the sour at that is the pool that will come out with the exact video and we will play it out at that point where he begins talking about kavanaugh. if we are told the president praises his supreme court pick and goes after democrats and specifically dianne feinstein democratic sender. so has that comes to us and we'll play it out live right here on out numbered. >> melissa: another fox news alert, china investigating the latest round of tariffs, announcing a rate on the u.s. products after a president issued a new round on tariffs on $200 billion worth of chinese goods. the white house saying a 10% tax will go into effect next monday and will rise to 25% by the end

of the year affecting the thousands of goods from luggage to seafood. has china's retaliation is bound to cause short-term economic pain here. what has national trade council director peter navarro says it's time to hold china accountable. >> this is the time for china to be held accountable for its nonmarket economy behavior, for its cheating going forward, we can't have a healthy global economy if one of the biggest economies is basically a predator. >> melissa: i'll ask you this, the president tweeted china has openly stated they are actively trying to impact and change our election attacking our farmers and ranchers, industrial workers because they are loyal to me. what china doesn't understand is that these people are great patriots and fully understand what's going on. >> jason: the reason we have a donald trump who became president trump is in large part because of this issue. you had blue-collar democrats

who went the president's way, they were tired of what's happened over the last few decades on both sides the aisle, they wanted to try something new. the president is taking a very tough negotiating stance and i think he is willing to pull the trigger and say let's go to zero but if you're not going to go to zero, then we are certainly going to make it even and we are going to make sure that we put america first. it's a winning message, it's tough to go through in in the short-term, but long-term dividends i think is what the president is playing for the american people are supportive of that. >> melissa: does the progress that we see with mexico make it easier to go through this process? >> harris: i would couple that with the progress that we may be sitting with north korea. how much is all of that play a part? >> jason: i think absolutely the north korea solution does require the chinese to come along and that is intricately involved but you also see is making progress in europe and as you see the world coming together and striking these new deals with president trump, it puts more pressure on china,

their economy, their stock market, the suffering over there in china come as an optimal time to do it when we are having such an economic boom. >> marie: there are no new deals. there's talk of deals, outlines lines of potential deals but there are no new deals in the tariffs that donald trump has put in place are adversely impacting people across this country. so economically, i'm not an economist but from those i trust, they believe that tariffs are not good for our economy and politically, we are 49 days ahead of the midterms, they were key states that are already impacted by these tariffs, goods will cost more. you say it's is a short-term pain, 49 days is short-term and there are some of these places in the senate and the house republicans are trying to hold on. >> jason: that the democratic problem is they're always playing for those short-term political thing. they're always going to make long-term progress and he's challenging them by saying let's go to zero. >> marie: there is no new deal, they haven't sent it to congress, they haven't gotten approval for it.

>> melissa: let me ask you a point to build on marie's because if she is saying that this is going to cause a lot of pain in the midterms and this is hurting america and hurting the election, he must really believe in a strategy to get to zero. that's a pretty big sacrifice for something that's not very political. politicians generally cave to make the next but work out. sorry, jason. we all want to keep our job so it must be pretty committed to this. >> harris: i'm going to have to break in with breaking news here. always do. the oval office, we are getting ready to get that life play out now at the president of the united states meeting with poland's president. it's the white house spray inside the oval office and we understood that he just took questions as i mentioned moments ago on the confirmation process of judge kavanaugh. dianne feinstein calling for more witnesses, for the delay is, versus people supporting kavanaugh.

>> president trump: i think it's a great question, frankly. we are looking to get this done as quickly as possible. he is a truly outstanding person as you know, he's got an unleveraged record. they say terrible things that took place and include a terrible thing that this information wasn't given to us a long time ago, months ago when they got it. they could've done that instead of waiting until everything was finished and then all of a sudden spring it but that's with the democrats do. that's what they do. it's obstruction, resist, whatever you have to do. but all of that being said, it's a process that we all feel speaking for all of the republicans we feel that we want to go through this process we want to give everybody a chance to say what they have to say. so we have time available, we will delay the process until it is finished out. i can tell you this meant that

kavanaugh is anxious to do it. i don't know about the other party. the judge kavanaugh is very anxious to do it and a delay is certainly acceptable. we want to get to the bottom of everything. we want everybody to be able to speak up and to speak out. the fact is, that should've been done a long time ago and when senator feinstein had judge kavanaugh in her office for a long time, she never even mentioned this and that was a long time ago. never even mentioned it so why would you bring this up when he is sitting in her office for a pretty extended period of time. so it's unfortunate, he is an incredible man, and incredible intellect, he will make an incredible supreme court justice, but we feel that we want to go through a process and we want to hear both sides. i don't think the fbi really

should be involved because they don't want to be involved. if they wanted to be, i would certainly do that but as you know, is not really their thing. i think politically speaking, the senators will do a very good job. they're going to open it up and they will do a very good job. very important. security in poland to me, almost as important as it is to this man. i can't say as. but i hope -- is very important to me. extremely important, the very special people, very special country, a very brave country. i think one of my best moments was making that speech in polan poland. people like me and i like them. they're very, very exceptional people. the security of poland is very important to me and important to our country.

we are going to see. we want transparency. what i want is i want total transparency. this is a witch hunt. republicans are seeing it, the democrats know it's a witch hunt to but they don't want to admit it because that's not good politics for them but it's a terrible witch hunt and is hurt our country and the things that have been found over the last couple of weeks about text messages back and forth are a disgrace to our nation and i want transparency and so does everybody else, congressional committees came to me and they wanted this they didn't based on the request, but i think it's a good thing because we should open it up for people to see. thank you very much, everybody. specifically, i haven't wanted to. i think it's something he will do very well.

specifically, i have wanted to speak to judge kavanaugh because i knew someone would ask the same question that you asked me, have you spoken to judge kavanaugh. specifically, i feel it be a good thing not to. he can handle himself better than anybody. he's a very outstanding man. thank you. i'm totally supporting him yes. i would say few people that i've ever seen that have ever known, and i know people of great success have been so outstanding as judge kavanaugh. i don't want to say that. to be say that in a couple of days but not now. thank you very much. >> harris: as you catch the last words there from the president of the united states throughout that shouting, he said specifically i have not spoken with brett kavanaugh so i can say that i haven't spoken with him because he can totally handle this himself, then asked

do you support kavanaugh and he said i'm totally supportive. your thoughts. he threw the president is very supportive of his nominee. and they still think you going to become justice kavanaugh, and the question is going to be whether or not this person shows up at the hearing, are there additional witnesses that will be brought in under the senate rules, who is going to do the questioning because there is the ability for senators to appoint somebody to actually do the questioning for them which might be a smarter way to do it from the senate, but a lot is going to play out between now and monday, that's for sure. >> marie: it feels like i have no idea what's going to happen with the story in the next five days, six days. but it seems like republicans are nervous enough about people like jeff flake and susan collins and lisa murkowski that they feel like the process is an important one to hear from her and to hear from him. and that's important to do and if she shows up, they will hear both sides and as you said, if nothing else comes out, they

will have to make a decision based on everything they've heard about judge kavanaugh throughout this entire process. so i'm glad they have scheduled a hearing. i will be curious if there were other witnesses. he mentioned a letter for women supporting kavanaugh, there's also the letter from women supporting the accuser, so there's a lot of letters now out there. the senate actually i think is doing something right here. >> harris: is not a shocker because ms. ford went through her local congresswoman who then went to dianne feinstein's of this has had some time to kind of form along the way and so we have reports of democrats now, women in congress and on the hill in general who want to show up to this hearing. i'm reading about that. moments ago, senator orrin hatch said in a meeting in mcconnell's office is about what happens if ford does not show that monday hearing. so we're waiting to see what that meeting will be like today as well. you had some thoughts about that. >> jason: orrin hatch has been through this many, many times.

he is one of the most seasoned person in bringing nominees through this process in very difficult ways and senator hatch has that perspective. nevertheless, it's a fascinating question, does she or does she not testify? that she want to go out addition i want to go out to the fact that she doesn't want to go out and talk to the judiciary committee is really a head-scratcher. >> melissa: is not a head-scratcher because it looks like it would be horrible. i would volunteer for that if you're a regular person. if she has these stories to tell and she's brave enough to do it, let's all listen to it. she doesn't show up, it doesn't mean she was lying. it could mean that, but it could also mean that she just doesn't want to go through this horrible spectacle but at the same time, i don't think any of us can judge one way or the other without hearing it from each of them and politicians here behind closed door and they vote, we're going to all think they were political about it. they've been known to do that. >> lisa: the concert also is when you start from a point where democrats were against the

nominee before he was even named, how do you have any sort of fair hearing and how is judge kavanaugh going to be met with any sort of on his lens? >> harris: around and round we go with breaking news, stay tuned. there's little rest for a single dad,

and back pain made it hard to sleep and get up on time. then i found aleve pm. the only one to combine a safe sleep aid, plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. i'm back. aleve pm for a better am. the lexus ls 500 & ls 500 h. ♪ take advantage of great offers on the 2018 ls 500. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

>> melissa: thank you to jason chaffetz, your book drops today. you have the evidence to quote back to those deniers. >> jason: eight and a half years, eight and a half months

putting this book together. this is exactly the book you need. >> melissa: we will meet back here and fight about it. at noon eastern, maybe tomorrow. here's harris. >> harris: you just saw it playing out live, president trump saying he still supports his supreme court choice amid new sexual misconduct allegations, and he went after democrats for their handling of the situation. saying judge brett kavanaugh's "outstanding" and is anxious to hear his name. he and his accuser have been invited to testify before lawmakers on monday. still waiting to hear from her, we will see what happens. the president also criticized democrats for how they handled the entire situation. >> it's a terrible thing that this information wasn't given to us months ago and they got it,