>> he's back, not america. it's been my greatest time. the conversation will continue. "outnumbered" starts right now. >> melissa: fox news alert for you now, big questions about the status of the number two at the justice department as a source tells fox news that deputy attorney general rod rosenstein is on his way to the white house. if this is "outnumbered" and i'm melissa francis. here today of course, harris faulkner. most of kennedy on the fox business network, kennedy. fox news contributor jessica tarlov and joining us on the couch today, the editor in chief of "the daily caller" news foundation, christopher bedford. you have picked a very busy day. let's get right to it. deputy attorney general rod rosenstein as reportedly arrived at the white house amid a "new york times" report on friday. if the article reporting that

back in may of 2017 shortly before rosenstein appointed special counsel robert mueller, the deputy attorney general suggested secretly recording president trump and discussed the possibility of removing the president from office. rosenstein has denied the report and one person who is reportedly in the room said that rosenstein was being sarcastic. just a short time ago, democratic senator kirsten gillibrand tweeting, they must step up to protect the special counsel immediately. we must pass a bipartisan bill to protect the mueller investigation. the american people deserve answers about russian interference in our democracy. chief intelligence correspondent catherine herridge is live in washington. a lot of moving parts, with the latest? >> i've just been on the phone and a contact to his family with the discussions told fox news that they did focus on the deputy attorney general and whether they felt that he was

compromised for a number of reasons and not effective in the position. the first reason is that he is a potential witness in any obstruction case by the special counsel involving the president's decision to fire the fbi director james comey in may of 2017. also, the deputy attorney general is at the heart of the size of abuse allegation allegations. he signed the final surveillance warrant for trump campaign aide carter page in june of 2017 and republicans allege that critical information was withheld by the national security court that should've been provided exculpatory evidence and these are the records at the heart of this declassification request. if i could also tell you based on my reporting that there's a a new focus among way how white house officials on the timing of some of the events in mid-may and just bear with me as i lay them out. adjust around the time that robert mueller was appointed as special counsel, he also had just interviewed to be fbi

director, to take on that job for a second time after the president fired james comey. white house officials have been trying to determine for some time what rosenstein knew about that interview process and why mueller stepped forward and how that in any way factored into his decision to appoint him as special counsel. the final issue that was highlighted by "the new york times" report is the mccabe memos. these memos that were drafted by the former deputy fbi director andrew mccabe and what we know now is the document not only the firing of comey in his conversations with the president but also conversations in mid-may where rosenstein the alleged comment about my ring and just on andrew mccabe in the last few minutes, we've obtained a statement from his spokesperson and it relates directly to the events this morning, and it reads there's nothing more important to the integrity of law enforcement and the rule of law than protecting

the investigation of special counsel mueller. if sacrifice personally and professionally to help with the investigation on the proper ports and subsequently made every effort to protect appeared to be clear, had no rule in providing any information to media stories about events following director comey's firing. if the reports of his departure are true, i am deeply concerned that it puts that investigation at risk. just on that point, we know to our reporting at fox news that there are a number of contingency plans for plan b in the event that the deputy attorney general resigned or was fired by the president and as such, to quote republican senator lindsey graham, he said very recently in the last few weeks the mueller probe is up and established and it would be not be derailed by the termination of sessions or rosenstein.

>> melissa: i heard judge andrew napolitano earlier and if i heard him correctly that he was at the white house on frida friday. talking about declassification. that was just on friday when he met with the president? >> there is some reporting, independently confirmed up but there is some reporting that there was a meeting involving the president and senior justice department officials at the end of last week sort of a cautionary meeting with the president's deputies about the impact of the classifying these fisa records. in particular, the concern of two u.s. allies who provided intelligence that helped to build that phis application, not a secret that those allies include australia and also united kingdom. but i don't independently have confirmed the timing that we all know from the president's own tweet that it was friday morning that he elected to sort of dial back the declassification of those records and hand that job over to the inspector general.

i know for my own reporting recently about the fight is a case and when that will eventually become public that there is no way the inspector general is going to release any of his findings about fisa and it would be unlikely he would release records related to that investigation prior to the midterms simply because he was highly critical of the former fbi director james comey for taking steps right before an election that many felt had influenced its outcome and the inspector general is unlikely to take the same course of action. >> melissa: is a likely relationship was improving between that and his support of kavanaugh and him being there at the hearings. it seemed like the president and rod rosenstein were getting closer. >> i can't speak to the relationship between these two men because only they can characterize that relationship but i can tell you from my reporting that there really has been a growing drumbeat of concern among the presidents advisors and members of his legal team about issues they say

conflicted out in many respects and as i said before, that had to do with the firing of james comey, he would be a witness in any obstruction case because he drafted that memo, also the phis application, he signed the final fisa. the nuts and bolts on the timing over the appointment of a special counsel robert mueller coming so close to when he was interviewed by the president to be the fbi director, how that all came about and then finally the mccabe memos which document this meeting with allegations that rosenstein has refuted but nonetheless document his behavior during what really i think has become the critical pivotal point in the rush investigation which is this mid-may and time frame of last year. >> harris: it's harris. good to see you. i want to bring up another part of our coverage here and it has to do with that "new york times" article which is kind of where we first learned and standing by their reporting even though it rod rosenstein said that he did

not talk about wearing a wire in the 25th amendment to kick the president out of the white house and so on and so forth. and just the last few minutes, secretary of state pompeo, national security advisor john bolton and u.n. ambassador nikki haley have just wrapped up their news conference. they are claiming they have never heard anyone discuss invoking the 25th amendment to remove the president from office among their cabinet members. specifically, ambassador haley, i'm not aware of any cabinet members that are talking about that, if it's completely and totally absurd. how does this play into our reporting and what we know about what's happening right now? >> is very consistent with the statement that the attorney general put out friday. i can paraphrase it for you. in effect, this was a matter seriously discussed or pursued more of what their consideration to invoking the 25th amendment to remove president from, so what we are seeing from

ambassador nikki haley as well as secretary of state mike pompeo is consistent with the statement from rosenstein that if it was said in jest or part of a discussion, this is something that was not seriously considered and move forward. however, what i would say is the defense of these comments that were first reported by "the new york times," the comments were misunderstood or that it was out of context or that it was sarcastic is a very similar to an explanation we were given when we reported back in july about alleged threats made by rosenstein targeting congressional staffers who were seeking russia records. he recalled a documented for the house general counsel and house leadership that he threatened to subpoena their emails and other records and took it as a very personal threat but the explanation from the justice department was again that it was out of context and the tone was misunderstood. this was not in the end of a serious. so people can make of those two

incidents and how they were explained away what they choose to. >> harris: at such a great example to bring forth because it actually involves at least one of the same characters that we are talking about in play today and it also speaks to what we know has been a response in the past. so people like you said can make their own judgment. that's the facts. thank you. >> melissa: let's bring it out to the couch, chris. >> christopher: what's going on today? i don't really actually by mccabe's denial here saying that he didn't do anything. a lot of the people in mccabe's circles have been accomplishing quite a bit through media leaks that their allies are doing, people who work with them are doing, colleagues are doing on their behalf. so his denial was very specific, not particularly broad, wasn't aware of anything, said he didn't personally do this in the white house then over the past week has been that this was all designed to cause trouble for the president. and might have just been the

general john kelly is of the world who don't want big disruption before the next election trying to spin it because it's hard to predict exactly what president trump is going to do here. but we were discussing this right before hand, we don't know what's happening or if he is gone, if he is been fired or resigned or if he is going to be in the job tomorrow. >> kennedy: i think it's really interesting given the uncertainty around jeff sessions job ten is really critical whoever fills that role if rod rosenstein is in fact fired or he resigns i'm really curious to see what this does with jeff sessions because he may be out of a job after the midterms and what is the department of justice going to look like with its two main players being swapped out? >> christopher: based on the people that have been floated so far. taking over the rush investigation and then met whitaker. >> jessica: we are not sure about that, looks like francisco has a conflict of interest having worked the jones day.

>> harris: i do want to talk about the difference between quitting and being replaced because what legal he has been talked about and i know we have judge napolitano coming up and we can asked specifically about this and is this president appointed senate confirmed, they call it a pas position. and if rosenstein actually quits, that's what this becomes in the president can then fill it because he could fill that position if a person dies, if a person resigns or is found to not be competent to perform their duties. if, in fact, the president fires the deputy attorney general, he cannot create that position for himself. he can say i'm going to fire you and then use this that allows me to fill the sea. it was interesting because those are the two possibilities and then what chris was alluding to that can be and i talked about previously to the show is he goes there and he gets kind of a tongue lashing and then he just appears after the midterm election. >> melissa: i want to bring in some reporting just for a

second, source familiar with the matter is telling fox news right now that rod rosenstein has not resigned and he has not been fired, he is going to be attending a previously scheduled principles committee meeting at the white house at noon in place of attorney general sessions was in the air on his way back to washington from alabama. if there were discussions over the weekend between rosenstein and of course white house chief of staff kelly about the possibility of him resigning, however a source familiar with the talks tells fox news that rosenstein did not actually offer to resign. rather, they were discussions about the possibility. >> jessica: that's interesting if you look at the axios reporting that came from jonathan swann originally where he said that rod rosenstein had given a verbal resignation to chief of staff john kelly. then that was disputed by nbc news and pete williams who is down there. so we do have a bit of a run around here. it would make more sense just when you see the amount of pressure on the president to leave the mueller investigation alone. you see public support shifting

towards that and for rod rosenstein and jeff sessions in the latest fox news poll that he wouldn't actually been firing rod rosenstein right now are necessarily welcoming a resignation to wake up from the midterm election. >> melissa: >> kennedy: he was a previously scheduled meeting, somebody blew the dog whistle. there's a reason that all those cameras are trained on the white house right now and perhaps it's because what is the one thing we are not talking about right now? we are waiting with baited breath to see what happens to rod rosenstein and to learn of his fate. we are not talking about judge brett kavanaugh. >> harris: it so interesting because you're just never afraid to go there. and that would be rather conspiratorial. >> kennedy: i don't think it's conspiratorial, just seeing how this white house is operated and how the press responds to what the white house is doing in this

white house, it always seems to thrive in chaos. >> christopher: he can change the new cycle with a snap of his fingers or with a single tweet. >> harris: is accomplishes something else to because it is also helpful if you were trying to test the waters for the timing of doing something. i don't know many people who think inside the beltway or out that i've talked with at least that jeff sessions isn't going to exit at some point. and probably after the midterms and what i was just saying is you could also look to do that with rod rosenstein if, in fact, you have on books of interest which catherine herridge copiously laid out in anyhow this "new york times" article which "the new york times" is not backing down and is kind of a he said they said type of situation in terms of whether or not rosenstein was willing to wear wire to give information to people who want to kick the president out of the white house. so if you're looking at a timing to do something, this is also accomplishing what?

the trial balloon. see how everybody reacts within my own cam. it >> kennedy: they're not reacting as negatively to rosenstein being out as session. >> harris: there not because of those conflicts of interest perhaps in other things. >> christopher: sessions own former colleagues in the senate have been getting louder and louder saying he's got to go. lindsey graham. >> harris: stage defender of sessions a year ago now, the president deserves to have somebody have his back maybe after the midterm. >> jessica: there is a conflict over the bill that senate republicans and want to vote on to protect the mueller investigation and i've seen it circulating on twitter today talking about that, rod rosenstein who is overseeing the probe is going to go and going to be replaced with someone like another more pro-trump figure what does it say that senate republicans have decided that they don't want to take this and these things are largely ceremonial but have it put's out there and they want to do everything that they can to ensure that we are protecting.

>> christopher: i think that he wants to play the chuck schumer's game but if you want to win the senate, it'll be a different conversation. >> melissa: we are going to squeeze in a break and have a lot more on his big developing story. we are watching at the white house, we will keep an eye on it and be right back. ♪ the new capital one savor card. earn 4% cash back on dining and 4% on entertainment. now when you go out, you cash in. what's in your wallet?

>> harris: we are continuing to watch the white house to see what happens when the deputy attorney general arrives, rod rosenstein is said to have said on his own behalf that he was expected to be fired. if nobody from the white house or other officials have told us that. but we do know he met with the president on friday and they have been doing some other wise business and we are watching to see what will happen when the deputy attorney general arrives. our own catherine herridge is talking about some conflicts of interest he may have with investigations that are going on right now at the justice department and there was a "new york times" article which said that he was willing to wear wire in order to collect information for igniting or executing the 25th amendment to kick the president out of the white house, he denies that. it is been an interesting morning watching to see what will happen as the white house staff and leadership john kelly of that staff come into contact

with rod rosenstein the president of the united states is here in new york for the u.n. so we did not anticipate other than by miracle that he would be there but we are covering this of course and we will bring you the news as it happens. let's bring it now fox news senior judicial analyst judge entered a model andrew napolit. i really want to pick your brain with his first question and i've been talking about the differences between rosenstein weather is today or later date actually resigning for the president firing him. can you drill down farther? >> of the president fires rosenstein, he will be disregarding the advice of many republicans, not the least of whom was mitch mcconnell who last week said please dial back on the tweets about conductor christine blasey for it and please don't disrupt the justice department because -- don't do any of this before the midterms because either of those things are going to make our job

confirming judge kavanaugh more difficult and her job trying to keep the senate in the house more difficult. on the other hand, if the president were to fire rod rosenstein or team were to resign, he is jim comey's best witness on the obstruction of justice charges because he was there when the president said come up and give me a basis to justify firing comey. here is really where i want to do it. now you make it look kosher. >> harris: so you've just given us a political side and i also want to talk about whether the president could fill this position if by not resignation. >> the justice department by a federal statute must be run by a human being who is concerned by the senate. he has removed himself from the mueller probe so the probe must be run by someone who has been confirmed by the senate.

if he leaves today, the next person in line is francisco. if he doesn't want to do this or can't do it, the next person in line, there's no one up there that i am aware of who has been confirmed by the senate so one of the two of them would have to do it. i don't think it brings about any change in the mueller investigation at old dumb at all. he has profound legal and ethical obligations to seek the evidence that he has been charged with seeking and to prosecute if he feels he has a strong enough case and if there are new bosses interfering with that. >> harris: before i pass this on quickly, what about the new deputy ag then firing robert mueller? is that possible? >> yes. of the president can fire -- can instruct rod rosenstein to fire bob mueller and the president can instruct the new deputy ag to fire bob mueller. the president will eventually

want his own deputy ag. no way the senate is going to confirm that person between now and the midterms, probably not going to confirm that person between now and the new senate coming in right after the first of the year. and they might be confirming two people and attorney general as well as the deputy attorney general. >> melissa: you say the president wants his own person in there and deputy ag but technically, rod rosenstein is his own person. because jeff sessions picked him wanting somebody who was sort of a career in the department who can kind of give them the ins and outs. >> all of that is correct. the president has this attitude about loyalty but even if you are my person, even if i major the attorney general, even if i do, the behavior manifest as loyalty as i define it, i don't like it staying there but you are quite correct, the president nominated as a senate confirmed rod rosenstein. jeff sessions suggested him

because he has been in the senate for 24 years even though he's a former prosecutor himself and he needed an old hand so to speak to be his chief operating officer at the department of justice which is what he got in rod rosenstein. >> christopher: look like i'm missing some great weather back in d.c. this guy is a rock-ribbed conservative, federalist society kind of guy, if he were to take over this job were this to be a true story, were he to be reconfirmed by the senate or is he already a political appointee and is able to do the job? >> that's a good question, thank you for it. he then becomes the then acting attorney general and the remains as solicitor general. he does not need to be reconfirmed. trunk and keep them in that position for the duration of trump's presidency or he can nominate someone else for that position pending confirmation by the senate. >> harris: judge

andrew napolitano, i'll see you next hour as well as we break down as the story moves forward, thank you very much. we'll continue to watch the white house and bring you any news out of it as it happens. the drama surrounding supreme court nominees still continuing as well. brett kavanaugh is ramping up as we learn of a second accuser while awaiting testimony thursday from the woman who made the first allegations against kavanaugh. the president called the accusations totally political. what it all means for the confirmation and what it means for the party. stay close. i know that every single time that i suit up,

there is a chance that's the last time. 300 miles per hour, that's where i feel normal. i might be crazy but i'm not stupid. having an annuity tells me retirement is protected. annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retireyourrisk.org >> harris: let's catch up on what's happening right now as we watch the white house. the deputy eternal the deputy attorney general is now in the chief of staff john kelly and we want to reiterate this because this is a source familiar with the matter telling fox news as of right now, rosenstein has nod and has not been fired.

this kicked off this morning after reports that rosenstein was on his way to the white house and he was quoted to have said that he expected to be fired. rosenstein has been a attending a previously scheduled committee meeting at the white house since about noon, so 30 minutes ago it began in place of attorney general sessions on the way back to washington from alabama. so all of the constellation of what he would be there is this idea that this "new york times" article showed and stands by their reporting "the new york times" that he was agreeing to wear wire at one point and discussed it to trigger the 25th amendment, to kick the president out of the white house. he first said that wasn't true and denies it and it's also been reported said in jest. so we are all over the story, they are in the white house

right now as the story develops. fox news alert, brett kavanaugh pushing back against new allegations casting a cloud over his nomination. another woman coming forward with allegations of sexual misconduct, her name is deborah ramirez. she went to yale with kavanaugh. she says that kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a college party decades ago. senate democrats now demanding kavanaugh's confirmation be delayed. the first accuser set to appear at hearing. kevin on releasing the statement writing "this alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. if the people who knew me then you know that this did not happen and even have said so. this is a smear, plain and simple. blaming democrats were apparently trying to derail kavanaugh's nomination, watch. >> he's not calling this a smear

campaign. this is starting to feel like a vast left-wing conspiracy. "new york times" said they interviewed dozens of people over the last couple of weeks trying to verify the second accusation and they couldn't go forward with their reporting. i do think it's very circular to have a new yorker story come out with much thinner evidence then he is used to having in his articles on the democrats saying look at this, we have to investigate. >> melissa: wrote in favor of the writer behind the new york said they were told of the incident. >> there is corroboration in excess of what's been typical of several of those articles and we accurately and fairly present any pushback. air on the conservative side. >> melissa: now adding to his defensive kavanaugh.

>> one of the single most unfair or unjust things to happen to a candidate for anything, but i am with judge kavanaugh and for people to come out of the woodwork for six years ago and 30 years ago, never mentioned it, in my opinion, that's totally political. >> melissa: chief congressional correspondent life on capitol hill with the latest. >> things are heating up here on capitol hill. it's clear a number of senate republicans believe that judge brett kavanaugh is being treated unfairly. south carolina republican senator saying what we are witnessing is the total collapse of the traditional confirmation process for supreme court nominee. being replaced by deception and wholesale character assassination. he goes on to say in my view the process needs to move forward with a hearing thursday and no

voting committee soon. he says he stands by judge kavanaugh and is looking forward to a senate vote. >> judge kavanaugh is an outstanding person and we'll see how it goes with the senate, how it goes with the vote. i think it could be a chance that it could be one of the single most unfair, unjust things to happen to a candidate for anything. >> judge kavanaugh responded to the second allegation last night saying "this alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. the people who know me know this did not happen and have said so. this is a smear, plain and simple. i look forward to testifying on thursday about the truth and defending my good name and the reputation for character and integrity you have spent a lifetime building against these last-minute allegations. that sets the stage for thursday

when the senate judiciary committee is set to hear testimony from dr. ford and judge kavanaugh will have a chance to respond. if you can expect things to be hyperpartisan and plenty of the blame game. >> rather than trying to deal with getting to the facts of the allegation, they just would rather characterize this as being totally politically motivated. if there's any group that is being very motivated politicall politically, they are stonewalling an investigation that would and should occur otherwise. >> it's only monday before the thursday hearing but you can hear the protesters already here going from senate office to senate office to say they do not want judge brett kavanaugh on the supreme court. >> melissa: this is from "the new york times" itself from peter baker, the times interview could find no one with firsthand knowledge. told ex-classmates she couldn't be certain kavanaugh was the one

who exposed himself. "the new york times" saying why they did not go with the story. >> jessica: there's been a lot of discussion that this is actually undermining dr. ford story which we've been discussing for about a week and a half and we do know that once there is a first allegation throughout the me too movement at the floodgates are open for people to be able to speak up and that went on with the harvey weinstein story most notably that once they came forward, actually more people felt comfortable going forward but if you look at the professor at harvard, he's been talking about this point debbie could see dr. ford's testimony undermined by these last-minute accusation accusations. >> melissa: six days for her to get comfortable with the idea that it was him? >> jessica: i also saw the republicans knew about this for six days, they asked for an fbi investigation, they weren't dealing with it either and we also have the woman from michael avenatti as representing and another woman at montgomery county now investigating.

so it's either three or four at this point. >> christopher: does michael avenatti still help democrats at this point? doesn't seem like he would do much to push the case. >> jessica: is not my favorite person. >> christopher: he said it was a corroborated story and "the new york times" and the new yorker said they couldn't and when he got pushed on this, she listed as a corroborating source someone who heard about it. that doesn't apply. she knows that. >> melissa: when you said you've heard about it from someone else. >> harris: so my question has to do with where is a journalistic line? we are watching the situation unfold, just saw mike emanuel on the hill reporting about the protests that are going on around the issue of judge

kavanaugh, the confirmation hearing. coming up, we are supposed to hear this thursday from both the judge and his first accuser, the one accuser, dr. ford. a system of these protests have grown in size, certainly have grown in emotion and so now you see this one man being carted out on capitol hill. we will cover the news as it happens to my point was if there was not enough journalism in the room for the time to cover the second accuser, what was the bar for the first one? i'm just asking. >> kennedy: i don't know and that's why i think it's important that we hear from dr. ford on thursday. i want to hear those allegations, and want to the specificity with which she recounts what happened to her and also the democratic senators asked about some of the other allegations and the accusers who have come forward anonymously and also in the future, there's going to be a democratic

president and there will be supreme court nominees from that of a credit president and anyone who is on that list a better goal. thinking about stupid things they did in high school in early on in college because if that's the metric, everyone is hosed. >> harris: if the accusations are true, there more than stupid. >> melissa: more on the kavanaugh controversy including a new fox on whether people believe kavanaugh or his accuser and what it could mean for the midterms. the in-laws have moved in with us.

and, our adult children are here. so, we save by using tide. which means we use less. three generations of clothes cleaned in one wash. those are moms. anybody seen my pants? nothing cleans better. put those on dad! it's got to be tide.

>> tech: so you think this chip is nothing to worry about? well at safelite, we know sooner or later every chip will crack. these friends were on a trip when their windshield got chipped. so they scheduled at safelite.com. they didn't have to change their plans or worry about a thing. i'll see you all in a little bit. and i fixed it right away with a strong repair they can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> tech: being there whenever you need us that's another safelite advantage. >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. >> harris: the confirmation of supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh was supposed to provide republicans with a boost for the upcoming election. now fox news shows most registered voters opposing his nomination who participated in the survey break it down this. even before his second accuser now has come forward with 50% saying they would vote no to confirm kavanaugh. as the worst number for

supreme court nominee and fox news polling dating back to 2005. what do you make of it? >> christopher: i'm not sure how much is going to matter in less you're talking the republicans. they have been so motivated by the supreme court and for president trump's selection and if they actually -- this should be the best case and is already over. if they had had good evidence that he was guilty of these things and withdrawn his nomination at the beginning and they made it a fight for the supreme court, saying we need to fill the seat or we are going to lose it but now with it being dragged out this way with public opinion starting to sway, the republicans are going to come out either looking weak for people in the country believe it, not a good situation for them. >> harris: were to the republicans go with this? >> kennedy: they go to a woman and is very interesting because it's funny how my friends on the left have very little foresight when it comes to resistance. if you can resist, the president

might resign, might be removed for often so that you have president pence. i understand that, but you think judge kavanaugh is a little iffy with some of his opinions and you should go back and reread some of his because she's a woman, she's got seven kids, she is beloved by christian conservatives and she could be next in line if, for some reason, this nomination is withdrawn. >> harris: can i just ask a quick, quick follow-up and it goes back to senator mitch mcconnell who told them not to do this with brett kavanaugh because of all the history and opinions on the record he thought it would be more complicated than a couple of others who he suggested. why do you think that that line of reasoning or argument wasn't? is it about kavanaugh? >> kennedy: why was he the guy? maybe the secret deal with justice kennedy, who knows. but that's one of the theories it has been floating. >> jessica: is also more

moderate than neil gorsuch. so now we're going to take the bush guy which is going to be more middle-of-the-road republicans. it didn't work out. i don't want amy comey barrett but i'm all for women getting big jobs. judge kavanaugh is accused of something very specific that we couldn't have obviously read on the resumes of these are extenuating circumstances beyond just the normal resist anybody. >> melissa: it might be the risk of putting a man up for anything right now. >> harris: on that note, we will be right back. slams on his brakes out of nowhere. you do, too, but not in time. hey, no big deal. you've got a good record and liberty mutual won't hold a grudge by raising your rates over one mistake. you hear that, karen? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges... how mature of them. for drivers with accident forgiveness liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident.

liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪

>> melissa: we want to bring you a fox news alert right now on the situation with attorney general rod rosenstein in the news that has been around him all morning now and this idea that he went to the white house to potentially either tender his resignation or be fired. this is from sarah sanders right now. at the request of deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, he and president trump have had an extended conversation to discuss the recent news story because the president is at the united nations general assembly and had full scheduled leaders from around the world, they will meet on thursday when the president returns to washington, d.c., thursday.

>> kennedy: how we are, that plays into my theory that this is all to get kavanaugh off of the front page. thursday is a dual testimony between dr. christine ford and judge brett kavanaugh where they're both going to go before the senate judiciary committee, shall go first and he'll go second. will publicly make those on the make accusations under oath that he will answer to them. this is a very dramatic day, incredibly pivotal not only for the supreme court but for judge brett kavanaugh's future career as a jurist and if this is happening, if rod rosenstein might resign, make it fired on thursday, just takes some of these away. >> christopher: was in the news that he had already been fired or resigned? either way, was kind of undercuts a lot of the reporting and i wonder how many sources were actually involved in this reporting period >> harris: that is a journalism that i'm talking about. to figure out who knew what and for people who are watching

fox news, kind of reporting it as it's happening but we are talking about the possibilities because of the article that's come out, because of the conflicts of interests that are reporting showed. but you did have some that have jumped the shark so far. >> christopher: is not a good look for reporters and i don't think jonathan swann does is but for a lot of them, the bar is ethics here, resistance here, and they're going to be able to write history classes on this in the future and how journalism changed under trump and if it can never come back. >> harris: again, always a possibility that they talk today and something comes after. >> jessica: that's what i thought was going to happen. jonathan swan has been great and a lot of things so i don't think undercut him as a reporter here has been quite clear that chief of staff john kelly is quite fond of him, seems like that's his leak. i actually thought that rosenstein would go in there and

talk to him and remain in the job. that it would be a clearing of the air because i think the president has been instructed enough times that firing jeff sessions or rod rosenstein is incredibly bad for midterm process and in november, there will be a full reevaluation. >> melissa: that could exactly be why we saw that leaked to "the new york times" at the president knows it would be unwise to fire him ahead of the midterms and there are those against the president who are leaking to "the new york times" and trying to goad him into doing it the same way. >> kennedy: speaking of leaks, if you have four different stories circulating within the white house and you see them in four different places, you can then see who was a source for which publication and this may be a way not only of creating chaos and taking kavanaugh out of line but also seeing who was leaking where. >> harris: is kind of what you are pointing to. that's fascinating. >> jessica: is set at two blocks ago those like the police

are not investigating that. so i just want to correct the record there. >> melissa: a lot out there. more "outnumbered" in just a moment. alright, i brought in new max protein ...to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't.

i'll take that. [cheers] 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. new ensure max protein. in two great flavors.

as one of the nation's largest investors in infrastructure, we don't just help power the american dream, we're part of it. this is our era. this is america's energy era. nextera energy.

this is america's energy era. of great savings and service. with such a long history, it's easy to trust geico! thank you todd. it's not just easy. it's-being-a-master-of-hypnotism easy. hey, i got your text- sleep! doug, when i snap my fingers you're going to clean my gutters. ooh i should clean your gutters! great idea. it's not just easy. it's geico easy. todd, you will go make me a frittata. >> all right. thanks for chris bedford. any final thoughts? >> a fun week. something that republicans should be focusing on what are their voter going to vote for in november? mitch mcconnell ought to barrel down on these fights. the wall on immigration, the

supreme court, give them red meat. this is an off year election. time to fight. >> not enough fighting in washington? >> not enough. >> thanks as well. we're back here at noon tomorrow. now here is harris. >> we continue the coverage of breaking news this hour. the white house is saying president trump will meet with deputy attorney general rod rosenstein on thursday when he returns to washington d.c. this amid growing questions about rosenstein's status at the justice department. we'll go "outnumbered overtime." i'm harris faulkner. a source is telling fox news rosenstein attended appro previy scheduled meeting at the white house today. this after a claim that he she guested secretly recording the president of the united states and discussed the possibility of recruiting cabinet members to invoke the 25th amendment to remove the president as