where all this action is going on. remember, this show is always fair and balanced, we are not the destroy trump media. this is an important week for the country. we'll help you stay with us. let not your heart be troubled. laura ingraham, you've invaded our territory in washington, d.c., today. she's next. >> laura: hannity, why are you on the roof? is that the cooler place to be? you and martha are on the roof and we are just in our loamy studio. >> sean: slow down! there is actually a huge party going on over there, they were playing earth wind and fire. you complain you don't go to singapore, helsinki, you complain you are not on the roof, why all the whining? you sound like a liberal. >> laura: that kind of dance that these middle-aged guys do when earth, wind, and fire comes on -- it was a great show tonight. >> sean: that is what you call that dance, yep. >> laura: great show tonight. all right, everybody. welcome to "the ingraham angle." i'm laura ingraham back in washington on a very important

news night. tonight's show, we will reveal exactly how the left is working to delegitimize the supreme court nominee and why the kavanaugh nominee is so important to the future of the republican party, the court itself, the country, and yes committee our family. plus, breaking reports tonight on the fate of rod rosenstein. congressman jim jordan has something to say about it all. he'll be with me later in the hour. but first, the lessons of the kavanaugh battle. that is the focus of tonight's "angle." the president gave republicans a master class in retaliating against the tactics of the left today. undoubtably weary of watching the daily smear storm buffeting a supreme court nominee, brett kavanaugh, president trump decided it was time to do what he does best, fight back. >> the democrats are playing a con game. a con game. they know it's a con game.

they know he's high quality. and they wink at each other. they are winking. they know it's a con game. >> laura: donald trump is never going to be content to hang back and play defense when he sees his agenda in jeopardy. he tried that a little bit a few days last week when this piece of an allegation was dropped and he won praise for being measured and presidential. that is nice but meanwhile his nominee was under massive left-wing assault. as republicans on the committee were bending over backwards to accommodate the accuser's demands for delays and various conditions. well, trump is back and not a moment too soon. >> is a shame that you can do this to a person's life. i will tell you, maybe even more important, who is going to want to go before this system to be a supreme court judge or to be a judge or to even be a politician? >> laura: that's a great point. you notice how he boils it all down to a stark set of facts?

facts that can be understood by all americans. he's unafraid -- when everyone else is telling them don't do it, don't do it -- when necessary, to counterpunch. >> 36 years ago, nobody ever knew about it, nobody ever heard about it, and now a new charge comes up, and she said, it might not be him. it could have been him, maybe not. she admits that she was drunk. she admits time lapses. there were time lapses. >> laura: and he's taking the same approach on the world stage. at the u.n. today, at the global elites shifted in their chairs uncomfortably, he delivered a fiercely pro-american, pro-sovereignty message. >> we will never surrender america's sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable global bureaucracy. america is governed by americans. we reject the ideology of

globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism. >> laura: he is defiant. he's an apologetic parade clear. we need more, not less of that today. i want to get back to kavanaugh because last week with trump on the sidelines, senate republicans walked right into the trap set by the left-wing smear squad. so folks like senator flake, collins, and markowski, they felt pressured to give into the me too militants, forcing senate judiciary chair chuck grassley to postpone last thursday's kavanaugh vote. when the democrats, though, were given an end, they took a mile, and they began to slowly take te confirmation process hostage. what did republicans good for all of their cooperation and sensitivity? an extended, vicious. >> i've heard many, many predators say and refute allegations. >> she has nothing to gain and everything to lose, that he was

a drunken, almost rapist. >> they are willing to put someone on the supreme court someone who may very well be a predator. >> laura: a mob like circus in the hallways of the senate offices, and to now anti-kavanaugh nasties are targeting and trying to humiliate republican senators when they are out in public. open [chanting "we believe survivors"] >> laura: i think most americans bristle at this stuff. these uncivil tactics and slimy spheres against good people i think are exposing just how radicalized, how contemptible some strains of today's democratic party has become. but i think there is something

positive that has emerged in all of this. republicans are beginning to see what they are capable of actually accomplishing when they work together. without the interparty fights, the warfare, they can actually do a good deal of good. i am told that president george w. bush is making calls on kavanaugh's behalf. it was very encouraging to see mcconnell stand firm. >> justice matters. evidence matters. facts matter. vague, unsubstantiated, and uncorroborated allegations of 30 plus-year-old misconduct, where all the supposed witnesses either totally deny it can't confirm it, is nowhere near grounds to nullify someone's career or destroy their good

name. >> laura: amen. and it's about time all republicans called this out, what they have done to brett kavanaugh for what it is. it's a total disgrace. but the democrats come of course, conveniently look the other way when their heroes are accused of rape, abuse of interns, and even when they leave a woman to die in 5 feet of water. brett kavanaugh, with no criminal record, and no pattern of abusive conduct, must be destroyed at all cost. a larger view may not know that texas senate candidate beto o'rourke, the new darling of the left, actually has a criminal record, including a dwi a dwi end of burglary arrest but no big deal. [laughs] okay. come on. at least he condemned what happened to ted cruz last night. that was nice. negotiating with terrorists. we hear that it's always a bad idea. almost always. by doing so, what do you get? you get more terrorism.

it is good that the g.o.p. has not given into this rapid mob mentality because to do so would have only emboldened the worst instincts of the left. senator grassley decision to schedule the kavanaugh committee vote this friday in the morning is another positive development tonight. if the g.o.p. continues to fight for fairness and justice in the way that trump has on issue after issue, we may not only see a justice kavanaugh, we may just hold the majority come november. and that's "the angle" ." joining me in reaction from a florida attorney general pam bondi in new york and he with me outside, chairman of the american conservative union, matt schlapp, and democratic strategist and university of maryland professor jason nichols. jason, take it away. >> i think there are a couple of things that you said that were really important. number one, that the president definitely fights for his agenda but he doesn't always buy for

the american people. and that is a big problem. i think also there is precedent for doing a full investigation. there is no reason to rush this process. i 100% believe in due process, laura. i believe that brett kavanaugh deserves 100% to be able to clear his name if he is not guilty of these crimes. >> laura: how does he clear his name? >> he gets a full investigation so one day when his daughters go on google this, they can see our father was not guilty -- >> laura: oh, really? that's what they're going to guilty? when we google various conservative names, including my come of the nastiest, nasty things come up. that is why i don't google anymore. there is no clearing your name. that is the old ray donovan line -- where do i go to get my reputation back? that is what he famously said. he was cleared. he never really did get his reputation back. hold on. we got to go. >> i think we actually will settle this at the ballot box. i completely agree with what you

said in your opener. that has all become intertwined. you have republicans around this country that are distrustful of what their party will do when it comes to a fight. i agree with you, they are standing firm, chuck grassley, mitch mcconnell, they are doing the right thing. i actually think the republicans realize, if they boggle, if they bungled us, if they dropped the ball when it comes to kavanaugh, there will be a meltdown in november. i think these are public and senators understand, this is the time to stick together, keep your promise, and get it done, or the republicans will have a revolt. >> laura: the base will be in revolt. i they set it on my radio show. they said it to us in tweets. if the republicans cannot get brett kavanaugh through, pam bondi, a bush guy, who is about as middle-of-the-road as a juror, fair, respected, then who will they get here? he was the consensus pick for republicans. he wasn't a couple other people that were on the list who are considered more conservative, he

was a bush guy. so bush is picking up the phone, and he's calling people and saying, guys, this is ridiculous, what has happened to him. pam, i want to play for you something that john clune, deborah ramirez is second to kearney said today with i think it was on anderson cooper. let's watch. >> if there is no fbi investigation, and it was just a matter of submitting testimony and evidence to the senate judiciary committee, two committee investigators, that is not something you recommend to your client? >> i wouldn't recommend you do that, no. that kind of cross examination be a replacement for a meaningful investigation. >> laura: pam, you are a state attorney general. if you care about getting the facts out, it's a little late in the game to be entering third and fourth witnesses. your thoughts on what his concern is, though? >> at the 11th hour, it's ridiculous.

as laura said, i've been a prosecutor since my early 20s. good try, jason, on a dearly due process. the rule of law is being unraveled if they get away with this. it's about the presumption of innocence. ramirez, there was nothing to even confirm her story. she can't even confirm that it's brett kavanaugh. this is a good man and thank goodness he has a strong wife and it's a shame that his daughters even have to endure this. really, it's on to a new low for all of us to have to listen to this, this good man. i know him, matt, you know how much better than i, laura, you've known him. and to serve in public office, when it sinks to the slow, to serve your country, and give back these measures attacks, it's despicable. >> laura: jason, i want to go back to this idea of what you do in college. you are a professor. kids in your classes go out of the weekends, have fun, yet? >> sure. >> laura: they probably drink a little bit, probably under 21.

>> sure. >> laura: do you think 30 years from now, when they are for a big drop, and the military, maybe they go to a ceo of some company, that one person with no cooperation should be able to stop one of your students from getting a job? do you think that would be fair, you have to prove your innocence? >> what's fair, if they are accused of sexually assaulting somebody, that there is an investigation, and that is all the people are asking. >> laura: one person -- >> laura, there is more than one person! >> laura: no, no, no -- >> no, it's not! there's a whole lot of shaming of ramirez because, oh, she was drunk. first of all, 50% of sexual assaults involve alcohol. >> laura: i'm not shaming anyone. >> there is more than one person. >> laura: i'm not shaming anyone. i have no doubt that something did happen. probably to both of them. i have no reason not to believe that. but what i will say is that any man, a brother, he has been a

father, a cousin, this could happen to any man in the united states. of course there are sexual assaults. there is no due process -- due process isn't having to prove your innocence. that is innocent until you are proven guilty. that is not the standard. >> i want to law enforcement to do an investigation. >> he said six fbi flow background checks. half of his life, he said the fbi checking everything about him. when they do those background investigations, paycheck everyone in your past life. they want to make sure there is nothing serious that will compromise your ability to do the job. that has all been done and the fact, joe biden said it during the clarence thomas hearings. the fbi simply gives us what she says and what he says, and at the end of the day, we will learn nothing more if the fbi spends one more minute on it. >> a three-day investigation is going to cause a problem? that's what happened with anita hill. there was a three-day investigation -- then give it to them! speak it with us in its job, on

the confirmation hearing, 12 lawyers from both parties. >> laura: the idea that people interested in getting out the truth here, this is an all out smear of a good man. i'm not saying you do. i'm just saying this process is not geared toward finding the truth. how many of us could figure out, what did i do 36 years ago? >> juanita broaddrick -- the right rings her up every 5 minutes. that is 45 years old. i cannot believe -- >> do not go after her. >> laura: by the way, the cosby -- she was left off. >> i agree! >> laura: panel, i want to respond to this. there was a guest on cnn today talking about the comparison between bill cosby and kavanaugh. let's watch. >> this is a monumental defining moment this week, when you have someone like cosby going to

prison and then in the same breath having kavanaugh possibly going to the highest court in the land, and so anyone that's defending kavanaugh could not in the same breath now apply this. >> laura: pam, take it away on that. >> i can't believe that they would even use those two names in the same sentence. bill cosby is an accused rapist. brett kavanaugh has devoted his entire life to serving others and the rule of law. they are attempting to destroy a good man. this case does not warrant any investigation, none whatsoever. there is no corroboration. that is why the fbi won't look at it. there is nothing there, as matt said, he's gone through six fbi background checks. if anyone can come forward -- jason, if someone tried to save us about you, it would be disgusting and despicable. there is no cooperation at all. >> then why not bring in mark judge, why not bring in people -- i'm not --

>> there is nothing to go forward. nothing left at all. >> laura: i think the democrats better watch out. if they want to go down this road for every nominee, -- >> bring it on. >> laura: tables will be turned on you better be worried about what you did in eighth grade. you cannot put every man in the target zone. it's not fair. real victims of sexual assault have also spoken out against this, saying it hurts our cause. so it plays both ways. passion is a very high on this issue. fantastic panel, as always, gentlemen and pam, thanks so much. and a later stall tactic by the democrats, they are bristling at the republican suggestion that n christine blase ford this thursday. republicans are firing back. >> by hiring an outside attorney, this will turn into a trial of dr. ford being conducted by someone they have hired. >> we want this hearing to be handled very professionally, not a political sideshow, like you

saw put on by the democrats when they were questioning judge kavanaugh. >> laura: joining the now on why this could be the right move for the g.o.p., former sex crimes prosecutor, nicole debord. nicole, "the washington post" is reporting that rachel mitchell, a sex crimes prosecutor, could well be selected to question dr. ford. now why could this be actually a good idea in your opinion given what is at stake here? >> by not have someone who is familiar with the issues any types of cases asking questions that people have been trained over the years in handling these cases to anticipate? that way everyone will have the answers to whatever questions they may think of as it relates to this issue during the hearing, as opposed to after. hey, why didn't we ask this, why didn't we ask god? by bringing in an expert to know is the kind of questions that come up in these cases, we will know it at the hearing. >> laura: each senator only gets 5 minutes. by what they want to be used for time trying to figure out

which direction to go win, win crimes prosecutor can see the signs of trauma. it is very curious to me by the democrats, many of them who have already declared this a crime, wouldn't want to someone who prosecutes these crimes to do the questioning. it's almost as if they want a visual of the men interrogating a victim or an alleged victim. by the way, a letter for michael bromwich, who was ford's lawyer, one of his lawyers, said "this is not a criminal trial for which the involvement of an experienced sex crimes prosecutor would be appropriate, neither dr. ford or judge kavanaugh is on trial. the goal should be to develop the relevant facts, and i'll try a case." your reaction to that, nicole? >> how better to develop the relevant facts and to have somebody who tries these cases all the time, asking the questions that people who want to hear will be interested? it can't be a mistake to have someone who handles these cases regularly ask the types of questions that you would experience in court. now i recognize that this is not

a criminal trial. but it is an allegation of a serious nature. at the kind of allegation that this particular proposed questionnaire has asked and has asked questions about on many occasions. so to me it seems like a no-brainer. have someone of the experience as opposed to someone who really knows about politics more than they know about these types of trials ask ask the questions. >> laura: if everybody wants to take it out of the political realm, great. i think it's a great idea. thank you so much, nicole prayed up next, who is funding the prog washington? they want to take down brett kavanaugh. but who's putting the money up? a "the ingraham angle" investigation followed by a woman who actually came to d.c. after she got an email from one of these groups. she is with us. stay right there. well, with your finances that is. we had nothing to do with that tie. voya. helping you to and through retirement.

♪ >> laura: okay, who is exactly behind promoting these occupations and protests against judge kavanaugh? we have an "ingraham angle" investigation for you tonight. the women's march up and at the forefront of the anti-trump movement, as we all know, and are taking the lead now, stating just today, just "we are organizing in a tactful, and on arrest, direct action to make sure that the senate knows that we believe christine and demand that they voted no on his confirmation. the women's march group counts planned parenthood and national resources defense council as their premier partners. both groups have actively opposed kavanaugh since he was announced. those groups take on significance because of their association with george soros. according to an extensive study by the media research center, 100 of the 544 women's march partners have received a total

of 246 -- of my reading this right -- 246 million, 637,000, $217 from george soros. an antique kavanaugh protest from georgia who learned of the protest from a woman's march email, along with the contributing editor of the spectator, jeffrey lord, and president of citizens united. great to have you all on tonight. this is a big week for washington and the court and i am so glad you came on tonight. walk us through how you found out what was happening here. >> i have always been an advocate. so through advocating and volunteering with the women's march and other organizations, not just the women's march, you get the emails, you get the updates, you find out what is going on, and so when i found out that they were going to be here in washington, d.c., i came

from georgia. >> laura: so you just came on your own time, you are staying in a hotel? >> i'm staying at a hotel. >> i'm not a paid protester. >> laura: when you come here, do you get -- do get instructions, where to go? i know a lot of people are ironed, get saint stephen's church, not too far from here. the meet up places, how does that work? >> there's meetings and trainings that let you know what to do, what not to do. things like that. so it's very organized, and it's very good to be with everyone. >> laura: what you do for a living when you're not doing this? >> i'm retired, i'm a veteran. >> laura: fantastic. what a brett kavanaugh do not like? what do you know about him? >> i don't have anything personally against him. i just think this is a bad look for america. i think that he has not been forthcoming. i don't believe that we need

another clarence thomas situation on the highest -- >> laura: i clerked for clarence thomas. if you knew him, he would love him. he's a great person. >> i'm pretty sure he is a great guy. >> laura: i'm going to convince triana. by the time the end of the segment, i'm convincing you because triana is too cool. she has 12 kids she's raised with her husband, eight boys -- >> eight boys, focal girls. >> they should take care of her hotel. >> laura: what the heck? take care of triana. >> i didn't know -- >> laura: i think they got a little help for the hotel room. >> george soros, it's not surprising. george soros paid for the fake dossier. glenn simpson and fusion gps. so he's connected throughout all of the left-wing activities in this country and around the world. it doesn't surprise me. what i would like to see, maybe a little consistency from these protesters. maybe they can go out and talk about cory booker as a grover or

maybe they can talk about keith ellison battering his girlfriend or may be senator carper from delaware who beat his wife, maybe we can have a conversation that's a lot bigger than just some unfounded, quite honestly, with no evidence, to back it up, no corroboration, no witnesses, against brett kavanaugh. these same democratic senators are saying that he is guilty until proven innocent. that is not how we are supposed to do this. >> laura: some of the criminal justice.that is being done from a president trump is moving on this issue, i think they are actually making interesting coalitions with minority groups and others, who normally don't look at the republican party in a very charitable way. but part of what is bringing them together is this idea that prosecutors are overzealous and are convicting people who really don't have a shot that either defending themselves or convicting them before they have really had an opportunity to put on the kind of evidence they need to. so it's interesting these groups

are turning on -- >> there's a backlash coming. >> laura: hold on one second. jeffrey lord, you have experience in this because of your work in another judicial confirmation that involved a similar type of swarm. tell us about it. >> yes, yes. my best friend from college's judge de brooke smith, now the third circuit chief judge, circuit court of appeals. he was the reagan chief court of the western district in 2001 part when president bush 43 picked them to go to the third circuit, and they did exactly what they did to robert bork and what they are doing here. the thing you have to always gauge, the group behind the scene, for example, one senator had 21 of his 28 questions submitted to judge smith that i tracked down where word for word in some cases, from internal memos that we got a hold of from

one of these interest groups. they are very, very powerful. and there were 27 of them who arranged -- you orchestrated against judge smith, and they give stories to the press, "the washington post," published, they do all of these kind of things. it's a real serious problem. what we are seeing here are democratic senators basically, what you can see, the groups behind these democratic senators that are pulling the strings, which they are doing. george soros is a matter of fact. for one of those groups in 2002. >> laura: open society foundation has eight enormous amount of money. a huge amount of money. they can spend it anyway they want. if they want to give money to planned parenthood planned parenthood, national resource defense council, women's march, he can do it. we are the republicans. the republicans have to have their own groups. >> we are. we are outgunned. they have a very dedicated, george soros -- >> laura: they want to rock this photo the midterms.

>> elections to have consequences, and we need to make sure that our people turn out a november. >> laura: triana, last word to you -- it might be signed already backfiring. triana, what do you hope to accomplish with your time here? >> i hope to accomplish that he receives a "no" vote. i understand you say poor brett but what about dr. ford? what about ms. ramirez -- >> she will get her opportunity on thursday. >> that is all we are asking for, that an accurate fbi investigation be conducted, mr. kavanaugh has not been forthcoming -- >> laura: what you mean he's not been forthcoming? >> for example, he's not been forthcoming with everything about his past. >> laura: he's been in public service for almost three decade decades. >> six back on. >> that's a problem. >> laura: that's a problem? >> if you are a judge, wouldn't you want to see the evidence?

what did you want to hear all sides? >> laura: do you know what you are doing 36 years ago? i don't know what the heck i was doing. >> i actually do. i know what i was doing 36 years ago. i was a child model for a company -- >> laura: but if someone comes along and said, you did this, you are a child model, you did this and you are like, i know, i didn't. no one is corroborating the person accusing you. where to go to get your good name back? you don't go anywhere. >> by candy asked investigation in order to clear his name? >> that's not the fbi's job. we learned that from clarence thomas. that video by joe biden. >> i don't know him. i just think we need to take a polygraph, due in fbi -- >> laura: polygraphs aren't admissible in court. ahead, a former fbi official it reacts to the idea that triana is putting forth that the agency could somehow get to the charges

against cavett operators at realistic and could that have a really happen? more than three decades ago? was frank luntz tells us why the democrats tactics might be backfiring. stay there.

♪ >> laura: the kavanaugh accusations lacking all corroboration were purported to have taken place over 35 years ago. yet still the calls for the fbi involvement continue. i wonder what prominent democrats say former vice presidents were saying that during the clarence thomas hearings? >> if the next person that refers to an fbi report as being worth anything, obviously doesnt understand anything. fbi explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion. period.

period. the reason why we cannot rely on the fbi report, you wouldn't like it if we did. because it is inconclusive? >> laura: "period, period." don't we just love biden. the gift that keeps on giving. please run in 2020. here to react, former assistant director of the fbi new york. bill, we have all been having fun with those tapes today. it was back on tape back then. but it is a talking point of the activists, they get their sheets of talking points, bullet point, bullet point, "all we want is an fbi investigation." bill, what is the truth about what the fbi could do here? >> laura, it's so crazy. i just don't understand, everybody wants an fbi investigation. an investigation of what? a criminal investigation? you want the fbi to stick their nose into someplace where they have absolutely no jurisdiction? there is no predicate offense for the fbi to look at? that doesn't make any sense.

now is there any -- nobody is going to deny that maybe something happened to ford and i don't want to be de minimis of that. but let's face it, there's nothing for the fbi to look at from a forensic point of view. there has been no allegation, there has been no complaint filed by dr. ford locally where the fbi could go back and look at these reports and see what's in there. nothing they can do. >> laura: bill, but clearly senator gillibrand knows a lot more about investigating then you do. let's watch. >> a fox news interview is not the same as an fbi interview. if he's willing to talk to fox news about his views, i don't understand why he's willing to talk to the fbi. they can do a proper investigation. he said over and over again, he wants a fair hearing. well, a fair hearing means you have an fbi that investigates the facts. >> laura: bill, take it over

final thoughts. >> anybody that is allegedly educated deadheads work themselves themselves into the position to be in the senate can have such an inane assumption is crazy. i don't understand what they are saying and they don't understand the complexity of what has to be done if something like this. >> laura: bill, as a talking point. >> laura, the investigation should be at the despicable, horrible, unethical performance of senator diane knotts of einstein. this is ridiculous what she wants done. she held that the letter for, what, 45 days? then rejected it in such a way to make it look like it would support her point of view. she offed for ford, who she promised to maintain her anonymity, because it was her own agenda. >> laura: bill, thank you so much. i want an investigation of who leaked that letter. who got that out? well, it's not her office, oh,

really? that's investigate that. shall we? welcome i think you so much for the conventional wisdom is that this kavanaugh fight must hurt the g.o.p. with suburban romans and the midterms but as advocates? let's begin pulling the group frank luntz. how is this all playing out across the country? >> everyone is paying attention to it. in the process moving forward, the session on thursday, i have a higher percentage who say they are extremely or very interested that any issue since donald trump was elected. everyone is going to be watching. i actually hear that it's possible she won't show up on thursday. >> laura: i'm betting she doesn't show up. >> something to consider. women are paying attention to it. the key for republicans, it was marked for them to go to outside counsel. it was marked for them to have a woman asking the questions because you knew that the democrats were going to demonize whatever the republicans did. that said, the g.o.p. has to be careful about what they say and how they say it. >> laura: they won't say anything because there is going to be an outside prosecutor. now the democrats are complaining about that. regarding polling, might, at

some point, doesn't it appear to be obvious that this entire thing was drawing out in order for ronan and mayor and michael avenatti and the accusers squad came in and try to find other people who were allegedly in some way harmed by brett kavanaugh, isn't that kind of becoming obvious to people? speak about the democrats didn't realize that that the close of this goes to the election, the more likely the republican base and says, i hate this, i'm going to vote, i'm going to participate. i actually think if they manage to the vote to the middle or end of october, the democrats will lose a seat or two because of it, because every trauma folder will vote. >> laura: the favorability of the republican party is the highest it's been, 45%, 44% democrats. as of the economy, good part of this? >> i just finished a survey, i found the republican numbers to be within two points of the democrats i thought it was wrong. so something is happening out

there. i will give one explanation. donald trump is talking about issues that nobody talks about. i'll give you an example. prescription drugs, prescription drug companies. trump is actually saying that he is going to hold the companies accountable for how much they charge the american people. when is the last time the g.o.p. had the guts to say that these medication cost too much and the prescription drug companies -- >> laura: marketers don't like that. >> he standing up to china. we have an amazing economy right now, now, unemployment at record lows, more money in people's pockets. >> laura: he last of the u.n. kind of but he handled it really well. it was a great moment for trump. the fact that the elites at the u.n. are sneering at him and shifting in their seats, i don't think that sits well with the american public. i think they stand up for the president when the global elites sneer at him. they sneered at reagan. >> must balance this. the democrats are still more interested in the election, still more likely to vote. republicans still faces an uphill battle to keep the house. >> laura: is it possible that

kavanaugh gets on the court, that encourages republicans, gets them more excited about turning out? speak of the later the vote comes, the more excited they g.o.p. comes. >> laura: very interesting. it might cut against when people want to come get him on the court fast but drag it out. frank, thank you so much. breaking news on the fate of rod rosenstein. congressman jim jordan is here next on that. stay there. dave's dream car.

of course he prefers the pearl white to the cherry red. but you can't fit three kids and a dog who's prone to car sickness in a sports car.

yeah, dave's had to compromise a lot lately. but not when it comes to cutting the cord. fubo gives him all the sports he needs as well as all the shows his family loves. don't compromise. get over 100 channels plus showtime and cloud dvr included. visit fubotv.com ♪ >> laura: a lot of news tonight. what a difference 24 hours can make. reports tonight that we may not have seen the last of rod rosenstein. the deputy attorney general was apparently ready to quit yesterday but was worried about trump going after him and today sources are telling "the wall street journal" and "the washington post" that he will survive at least until after the midterms. if he is indeed a stink about my next guest wants front of congress before the week is out. jordan you know, congressman jim jordan. your reaction to these reports?

we have another piece of news that we will talk about in a moment as well. >> here's what i know. you got the guy who in effect is running the department of justice who in front of subordinates is talking about recording the commander in chie chief. that is never supposed -- do we really want that to happen in the united states of america? the same guy who fired comey, the same guy who hired mueller, the same guy who signed the third fisa renewal, the same guy who threatened the house intelligence committee staffer in the same guy who's made it difficult to get the documents we need, is now inside meeting, according to "the new york times," threatening to actually record -- >> laura: a joke. >> i don't care. >> laura: they say to set up for the president, fire him and it will be a -- >> what we are saying is, you need to come in front of the judiciary committee and answer the questions, the america people need to know what took place. who was in that meeting? andy mccabe, lisa page, peter strzok? who else was there? we need to talk to those people as well.

this is the kind of thing that, again, when you are running the justice department, which is what rod rosenstein is in effect doing, you can't be making statements like that, even if you are joking around. i want to know who was in the room and what took place. >> laura: there's another report tonight that trey gowdy and bob goodlatte from oversight judiciary have invited greta lynch, former attorney general, sally yates, former acting attorney general, and i think one of the person -- jim comey -- to come back to testify to on capitol hill. they sent out letters. >> i think it will take more than an invitation. it will take a subpoena. to be when they are not going to roll up and say what you need? i want susan rice back. i want her on capitol hill. i want the unmasking. >> we know next week, jim baker, former chief counsel at the fbi was demoted and left the fbi. the former chief counsel will be in for a deposition. that's important next wednesday and in a couple weeks, and in

october 19th, we have nellie ohr. >> laura: wu, nellie. >> wife of top doses official brew are. >> laura: the first time. >> that is important as well. it may take subpoenas for them to be there so we can get the questions that we need answered. >> laura: this is what adam schiff on msnbc said last night about the g.o.p. basically you, and the rule of law, let's watch. >> right now we need to be sounding the alarm. we need to be calling out the republican members of congress who have been all too timid and at times complicit with the president's attacks on the rule of law. the speaker at the senate leader cannot possibly claim anymore if they ever could, that the prospect of interfering with the special counsel is theoretical. it's real. >> laura: focusing on the special counsel deal. they are all worried about protecting the special counsel. they are worried about protecting the rule of law but they are worried about the

special counsel. >> rule of law? are liberal took place. the clinton campaign paid for the dossier, dress it up to a secret court, to get a warrant to go spy on a fellow citizen associated with the trump campaign. using an opposition party document to spy on the other party. he is talking about we are infringing or hurting the rule of law? that is why we are focused on this. the kind of thing that took place there should never have it in this country and we know that it did. that is why we need rod rosenstein to answer questions about all of us. that is why we need lynch, comey, all these people -- >> laura: simpson has also been invited apparently, according to the political reporting bright >> i think we n said something that is not square with what bruce ohr told us in his deposition. i think he has some real concerns. he should be in front of us. >> laura: jim jordan, we'll be following this very closely. thanks for the update. up next, my message to all you parents about the terrible lessons that this kavanaugh mess is teaching our children. (woman) learned to play an instrument.

learned a second language. applied to college. applied for a loan. started a business. started a blog. shared a picture. shared a moment. turn your wish list into a checklist. learn more. do more. share more. at home, with internet essentials.

♪ >> laura: among the many ill effects of the kavanaugh saga are the twisted lessons that some young people might glean from it. among them: men are presumed guilty when accused by woman. >> do you believe judge kavanaugh does preserve a presumption of innocence are not? >> we are not in a court of law. we are actually in a court of credibility at this point. >> laura: number two. boys should fear or even avoid close relationships with girls or young women in high school and in college. >> i think there's lots of questionable things that went on -- i think there's a lot of people that would be interested in protecting graduates of george john pratt. >> laura: if you are man, no matter how hard you work, how

much you succeed, how devoted you are to equality, uncorroborated allegations can derail your next job or your next promotion. >> the easiest pathway here for republicans and four kavanaugh is for him to withdraw. don't take this controversy to a court that he holds so dearly come with highest court in the land, withdraw, have trump nominate somebody. >> laura: and finally, character access a nation is justified so long as it serves the laughs and. >> if they go through a senate hearing at the becomes a circus, they push it through, he passes, he seated on the supreme court, there will become as we said last week, an asterisk next to his name as long as he is there. >> laura: actually, the asterisk will be next to the names of one's respected journalists who degraded the reputation to defame a good man. it's up to each of us to defend our sons, brothers, and your husband's to make sure that a

travesty like this does not happen again. and remember, women can be wrongly accused as well. we'll be right back with my response to jimmy kimmel's sleazy kavanaugh commentary.

the closer you get to home, the more you know the commute is worth it. you and that john deere tractor, you can keep dreaming up projects all the way home. it's a longer drive, but just like a john deere, it's worth it.

>> laura: time now for the last bite. ♪ on last nights "nights "jimmy kimmel live," the committee and offered this trenchant analysis of the kavanaugh fight. >> i think there's a compromise here. hear me out on this. so kavanaugh gets confirmed to the supreme court, okay. in return, we get to cut that pesky penis of his off in front of everyone. >> shannon: i suppose he could take the boy under the mantra but you can take the mandrel out of the boy. he seems to have a real obsession here. >> this game show was because

gus was in my pants. i've stuffed something in my pants and you are allowed to feel around the outside of the pants. you have ten seconds to then guess what is in my pants. are you ready? such... go. >> laura: at least we know it jimmy's favorite line is. do you get the joke? [laughs] that is all the time we have left. shannon bream and the "fox news @ night" team takes it from here. >> shannon: thank you very much. we begin with a fox news alert. friday, that is on the senate judiciary committee said it is time for a vote for the supreme court nominee judge brett kavanaugh. one day after his accuser are set to testify in front of the senate and the world. we have all angles covered tonight. white house spokesperson is here, so is erica second from planned parenthood. plus "the federalist" society cofounder david mcintosh and mollie hemingway weigh in. the u.n. blasted president trump in a speech where he it rejects