morning, bill hemmer, and the rest of the week as well without boat coming friday morning? >> we will have every detail for you and follow the twists and turns and we will let you know when we know, if not before. have a great day. "outnumbered" starts right now. >> harris: explosive new allegations against brett kavanaugh as a third accuser has come forward with some salacious claims. the day before his first accuser, dr. christine blasey ford, is set to testify on capitol hill. the senate judiciary committee tapping a long time sex crimes prosecutor rachel mitchell to do the questioning. this is "outnumbered" and i'm harris faulkner. here today is kennedy, former national security analyst morgan ortega's. executive in residence at american university and former ohio state senator, capri cafaro. and in the center seat today,

gopac chairman and senior strategist david avella. we say he is "outnumbered," but he brings has a game, people. good to see you. another bombshell allegations surfacing this morning against judge brett kavanaugh. stormy daniels' attorney michael avenatti michael avenatti has identified a third woman to accuse a kavanaugh of sexual misconduct saying she was present at parties and high school where boys targeted young women with drugs and alcohol to take advantage of them. this is kavanaugh's first accuser, speed 19 is due to testify in an open hearing tomorrow. that's one day before the senate judiciary committee is set to vote on the nominee. the committee has selected rachel mitchell to do the questioning tomorrow. she is the chief the special victims division of maricopa maricopa county and has extensive experience dealing with the sexual assault cases. earlier president trump praised

their handling of the cases. >> the republicans could not be nicer than the way they are handling this. they could have pushed it through two and a half weeks ago and we wouldn't be talking about it right now which is frankly what i would have preferred. he's been treated very unfairly, and then they laugh at what they are getting away with. >> democrats pulling no punches and going after republicans on their decision to have a prosecutor spearhead tomorrow's hearing and set a vote for friday. here senate minority leader chuck schumer. >> they proposed a vote before the hearing occurs. isn't that prejudgment? and they are acting when they proposed a vote before the hearing as if the conclusion was preordained and the hearing is just a nuisance. this isn't a democratic smear job as the leader so callously

and disrespectfully suggested. this is a republican rush job, and i might add, a rush job to avoid getting to the truth. >> harris: meanwhile, her attorneys have submitted signed declarations from four different people corroborating parts of their clients story they say. mike emanuel on capitol hill as the story picks up heat right before that hearing tomorrow. >> i'm told the senate judiciary committee is reviewing the latest allegation with attorney michael avenatti. he is sent in a sworn declaration from his client named julie sweat neck. he's described her as brave and honest. she's now the third accuser. now on the judge kavanaugh side of things, his site has turned in the old calendars. for example, may 1982, showing the kinds of things he was doing at the time and he did not attend a party like the one

christine blasey ford has described. he cut the grass on the third and went to his friend timmy 'party on the beach on the 22nd. >> if you are a public servant whose confirmation of our love happens to oppose because they dislike the fact that you will interpret the law law and the constitution according to what they mean, rather than with the far left wishes they would mean, they are not going to hesitate to weaponize uncorroborated allegations and drag your name and your family right through the mud. >> that's for that hearing tomorrow, republicans have hired a veteran sex crimes prosecutor from the phoenix area named rachel mitchell and that they note mitchell has been recognized in the legal community for that her experience and objectivity. the leading judiciary democrats as this will be totally different hearing for her. they have walked into a

courtroom without investigative file. they have never had a case before her where she didn't take the time to evaluate the witnesses and evidence before any trial. she's going to walk into this committee room tomorrow without that benefit because the white house and the senate republicans have refused an investigation. >> adding to the emotion, democrats are clearly irritated that chairman grassley has almost scheduled for 9:30 a.m. vote. >> harris: so david avella, as this information is coming together with the four people who purport to be able to corroborate dr. ford's story, and now this witness, according to michael avenatti, what are your thoughts? >> it speaks to what we don't know and what we do know. we don't know the outcome of this hearing tomorrow, we don't know what the judge will say and we don't know what the accuser will say. if we don't know how voters are

going to react to what the senate vote will ultimately do. what we do know, we know that michael avenatti is running for president in 2,020 and he is doing everything he can to get attention. we do know that the self-professed blue dog democrats in the senate are now lapdogs to this demand justice group that is doing everything they can to derail this nomination. the third thing we know is the democrats had no problem putting ruth bader ginsburg on the court in 42 days, they didn't have a single problem putting sonia sotomayor or on the court in 63 days and now they have the gall that the republicans are rushing this nomination through. >> let's start with michael avenatti and, the fact that he is involved in all of this, it colors this terribly from a democratic perspective. feinstein sat on this memo, and

the timing is suspicious, the timing is suspicious. but, that does not need the individuals do not have credible allegations and they deserve to be heard. and we've heard this even from republicans like lisa murkowski who said i believe yesterday that she was interested in having the second accuser, and to testify in front of the committee. so now with the new one with very serious and salacious allegations, the real question is will this individual have the opportunity to come forward. >> let's talk about the new one. these are very serious allegations. unfortunately, a couple things can be true at the same time. michael avenatti is scummy and gross. i don't know what a michael avenatti democrat looks like. i assume it's a few progressive

sociopaths, but i don't think that's too much excitement for 2,020, and and this is the disgusting process that we go to. people will want more of that. they want don't want more demagoguery, but this woman is specifically saying that not only is she at parties where women were drugged and by multiple boys, but she was also the victim of such an incident. >> then she accused kavanaugh of it who has said to martha maccallum -- >> yes, she named him in a document, a sworn document. and now it's very unfortunate that michael avenatti has placed himself at the middle of this. and that's where we are. this really changes the tenor of the conversation we are having about the two other accusers, deborah ramirez and dr. ford. she's going to testify tomorrow and when i'm curious about is

whether or not this arizona sex crimes, prosecutor is going to be able to talk to her about some of these rumors whether she knows this third accuser and if she heard the same thing about these parties that were happening while she was in high school. >> so why would that be important for christine ford to know? >> because she's on the person testifying before the senate judiciary committee. >> harris: so you think may be today her attorneys would have her come up to speed on this? the point i'm tired, trying to make is this would be two different sets of circumstances. >> then what do you do, do you have another witness come forward? >> that goes back to the delay issue, do you have a separate hearing or do you somehow throw this woman into the mix tomorrow at 9:30 a.m.? is that fair? >> you have another person come forward that's made some sort of sworn statement corroborating a story, and if so -- >> harris: i want to get morgan in here.

so we have a committee vote set on friday, not a full senate vote. it does is open the door for a listen to or look at some of these other people coming forward? and by the way, they are not all women. at least one of them is a man who has reportedly signed an affidavit in corroboration with dr. ford? >> i think we are having two conversations simultaneously. one is tactical, and the other is strategic. from a much bigger perspective, as a society we haven't quite figured out how to deal with the me too movement. in the sense that the pendulum was not here, where women were not believed and women felt like powerful men could do what they wanted. now the pendulum is all the way over here and the progressive stance is that all women must be believed in de facto, which means all men must not be believed. i think as a society there's got

to be somewhere in the middle where we give people a fair shake. that's fundamentally what our justice system was founded on and i think we are all struggling. we don't want to believe women but i think all of us who have husbands or sons or any males relative that we loved, they would also have to go through life without the benefit of the doubt either. you don't have that and then you don't have the foundations of american justice. that's a bigger thing that we are all struggling with as a society which we will solve by the end of "outnumbered" ." >> harris: right [laughs] david, let's talk about the timing of this because we saw martha maccallum sit down with judge kavanaugh and his wife a couple nights ago. how how does that play into the 11th or 12th our outpouring of people who saw her? >> david: we saw a number of women come out in support of the judge and talked last week about their working relationship with him. tomorrow's hearing will be

critical. >> harris: should we hear from those women, too? should the senate judiciary committee consider broadening this out so that we hear from people for both kavanaugh and ford? >> david: the senate has called for them both to speak so morgan talks about two different dynamics. here's an extremely important difference, this is not a court of law tomorrow, this is a court of public opinion. the senators in this committee are not psychologists, they are not experienced prosecutors of sex crimes. if we are trying to get to the bottom of, did he do it, or didn't he do it, we will be woefully short on this tomorrow coming out of this hearing. senators are qualified to make that determination. >> harris: can i ask this question too, given what we know from the past and some of the same senators were there for anita hill. isn't there the same question,

did he or didn't he, or does it matter? the polling is broken down along party lines so when the senators go home to their constituents, what they are hearing is, we want it our way, whichever way that is. and sometimes irrespective of what's going on. >> there are no subjective standards and i think that's what morgan was speaking about. but when i read this woman statement, julia sweatt nick, i out today, it's really disturbing. and there's a big difference between idiotic adolescent acts that can be perceived in a number of ways and someone who claims to be the victim of assault by multiple perpetrators. >> take all alleged to have been during high school. >> and college. high school and college. the just the mic juxtaposition is everyone that has worked with him in his professional life --

he has glowing reviews from women. we have to talk to a psychologist about this but it does seem bizarre a little, not saying i believe or disbelieve anyone but you have someone that was committing rate acts in high school or college and then went on to be a glowing, exemplary citizen for the rest of his life. >> and i think that's why having the special victims unit, the sex crimes unit from a maricopa county come in and be this arbiter. >> do you think she talked to them before yesterday? >> i think so because they need to collect evidence. because who goes into the court of law without having a background file? having the opportunity to build that kind of knowledge i think is important for her to inform her line of questioning. >> harris: i'm going to step in because senator blumenthal is speaking on this issue. let's watch.

>> with immense detail and cooperating witnesses that will come forward to. this woman, a survivor of vicious attack has everything to lose. her livelihood depends on her security clearance. if she is found by the fbi to be lying, she loses her livelihood. >> the chairman has said though, if there is a majority of members of the judiciary committee that are willing to vote as soon friday, they will go ahead and go forward with this. is there anything the democrats can do to stop that from happening? >> if my republican colleagues have any sense of morality, they will refuse to go forward on friday. they will demand an fbi investigation and in fact, the white house should do so. if judge kavanaugh is serious about clearing his name, he

should demand an fbi investigation of these detailed, precise, absolutely staggering allegations. these allegations are made under oath by a woman, a survivor, who would lose her livelihood if she is incorrect, and has presented corroborating witnesses. there is no way we could go forward with a vote, and it would defy all sense of morality for the judiciary committee to go forward with the vote this friday. there should be an fbi investigation, and then a hearing on these investigation. >> was kavanaugh lying when he said he denies these allegations? >> judge kavanaugh is untruthful, if he fails tomorrow

to acknowledge at least some of these allegations. what we have here is really a pattern of vile, predatory, sexual misconduct. there has to be an fbi investigation to uncover the truth, the facts and the evidence. the overwriting evidence here is the fbi must investigate, and rather than killing anyone a liar, rather than shaming and character assassination, there has to be an investigation to uncover facts and evidence, and then a hearing. >> you have heard the republican leaders, he said yesterday, we are going to win. cavanagh will be confirmed. what gives you any optimism that

now they will follow through on your calls for investigation or delay? >> what we have now for the first time as a sworn affidavit that specifically identifies brett cavanaugh as seemingly rating a woman who has been drugged, in a situation that ought to be absolutely repugnant to any american. this allegation is more specific in detail but also under penalt penalty. >> harris: so we are watching democrats react to this news of a third accuser against brett kavanaugh, and you see senator blumenthal talking about it. as we continue to cover the breaking news of the story we also want to add into the mix,

the hearing tomorrow of judge kavanaugh and his first accuser, dr. christine blasey ford. we will continue to cover this breaking news right here on "outnumbered," stay close.

like i said, as we have done so many times, we have had accusation after accusation and accusation, very few of them are, if any, corroborated. lawyers, if we can make the contact, get on it right away. obviously with this one, we have a contact and our lawyers are on it right now. our staff investigators, and i can't say anything until they get done. >> harris: so he has attorneys on this right now, let me tell you what this is because they can talk about the hearing on proceeding at all of that but what we have now is a sworn statement by a woman by the name

of julie swetnick. the details of this, kennedy, you and i have been pouring over. and you said something before we went to the break, you can set aside forward and you can set aside ramirez but this is complicated because in line item nine of the sworn statement, it says from this julie swetnick, i have been told that this conduct also occurred in maryland on numerous occasions. i also witnessed this behavior during "beach week." and so now we have dates. that's complicated because now for the first time, because we haven't heard from dr. ford, she know specifics that he can approach and denied. this gives him the opportunity to come out and say, this didn't happen on this date, to coordinate that with a calendar that he has already offered up.

this has the kind of specificity he can scream about from the hills and clear his name. >> david: is that the most important thing, tomorrow's hearing allows judge kavanaugh to get his record out again. >> harris: and for him to deal with actual specifics rather than, like with dr. ford we don't know what those will be. >> david: that's why the hearing is so important and why the vote should still occur as quickly as possible. >> harris: do you think this woman should be invited to talk with that sex crimes prosecutor? >> david: it sounds as if senator grassley's team is looking at that and the lawyers are looking at that. >> this entire situation is just -- i don't even know what to say and i think i share this sentiments of most americans, just absolutely baffled by it.

i'm also a social worker, someone who trained with victims of sexual violence and sexual assault, and you see something like this that is under oath that has explicit dates and -- >> you know who else was supposed to advocate for women in all of this? dianne feinstein. why in the world did she sit on this and give no one an opportunity to come forth with their fax? including and especially the nominee for supreme court. she didn't even have to mention a name if she wanted to protect that but, why in the world would anybody that was advocating for justice for men and women, because that's the position she was in. she's on the judiciary committee and it was supposed to be for everyone, all the constituents, not just the ones you share gender with.

>> the sad thing in all of this is dr. ford has been used as a political football. if you really care about her, i totally give her the benefit of the doubt. and i think that what you just said by feinstein, she could have kept her anonymity. >> harris: she sat with him privately, you know she said that. >> she could have brought up the accusation and said it, i have someone, i don't have the name. my heart goes out to doctor for tomorrow, i think she should be given the benefit of the doubt. i think it will be incredibly hard and i think it's kind of gross what they've done to her. >> the question is now what. i want to talk about that a little bit, let's say somehow this nomination goes forward and judge kavanaugh makes it out of the committee. >> there's more doubt then there

was yesterday. they are being controlled by a i was insistent that, -- >> it's critical but how at this point does judge kavanaugh become justice cavanaugh without this hanging over his head for the rest of his career. >> and i think that's a great point, so far, the weight was set at least an hour ago that the republican senators will defer their time to the woman from arizona. she's a prosecutor i believe, a lawyer. it will take their time and defer to her, not asking questions on the moment. the democrat senators have not indicated they may ask for questions, and i anticipate -- the democrat senators, they are

likely to ask about these allegations as well. >> you brought up an interesting point. we will talk whether or not about whether this third accuser will top be able to give speak giving the sworn feet accuser. accuser. she said i've seen kavanaugh drink at many of these parties and engage in aggressive behavior towards girls. i wonder if there would be some legal positioning if we were not in court for a doctor ford to pinch-hit and pass off? we will continue the breaking news following the reaction to these allegations against judge kavanaugh. additionally, a lot of other news making headlines this hour. house lawmakers are demanding rod rosenstein's inventory along with this high-stakes meeting with president trump tomorrow. will the deputy attorney general still have a job at the end of the day? stay close.

>> you can't be making statements like that even if you are joking around. i want to know what was in that room and what took place. ♪

what would it look like... ...if we listened more? could the right voice, the right set of words, bring us all just a little closer, get us to open up, even push us further? it could. if we took the time to listen.

the most inspiring minds. the most compelling stories. download audible. and listen for a change.

>> harris: fox news alert, this just came in from the white house. the deputy white house spokesperson roche shaw with a statement from judge brett kavanaugh. this is ridiculous and from the title; twilight zone. i don't know who this is and it never happened. again that's from judge brett kavanaugh brought to us by the white house spokesperson. we continue to cover the story of a third accuser now with salacious allegations against judge kavanaugh. you heard him calling it ridiculous and in the twilight zone. david? >> david: listening to blumenthal, it sounds like he wants to be the chairman for the michael avenatti for president campaign.

let each side testify, get their answers out there and let's have the senate vote up or down on brett kavanaugh for supreme court. >> harris: kennedy, how surprised are we on the eve of something like this that we would start to hear something more textured and so on and so forth on either side at this point? >> i will be honest, i did not expect this level of battery during the supreme court nomination process. i expected it before the next one because it will get so much worse if the president does in fact have another nomination for supreme court and that's what related to the balance of the supreme court long before he nominates another younger justice. so if this is bad, i don't want to see worse. this is awful. >> can i ask to because of your background and legislation for victims, so on and so forth in your home state of ohio, capri, how is it that six background

checks by the fbi missed what apparently could come out in 48 hours without an investigation which begs the question, why in the world are democrats pushing so hard for an fbi investigation it with the background checks? >> i'm scratching my head on this as well. >> i do actually think the fbi issue is a delay tactic, and i think it was steve schmidt that put this out on twitter saying there was some precedent that again, during the john power hearings, they went back. he has gone back through four or five background checks. >> let's talk about what they look for and background checks. >> i've had multiple of these fbi background checks and what will happen is, you will have to give close friends, associates and family members -- >> how many? >> i'm trying to remember, i think they go to all of your

immediate family typically and, and, -- i'm sure they would have gone to all your friends in high school and college and it would have said, did she make any statements against the u.s. government. did she attend any protests. did she have any bad habits. and in those questions, however they were them, the fbi investigator would ask about things that would be -- >> what happens with the fbi in that position where i'm just supposed to be a character witness? >> then you are lying to an fbi agent then. so these questions when you have an fbi background investigation for a security clearance, these questions are asked. if harris said, morgan was having a problem, they would say

to you, who would you go to to solve that problem? >> you can't control the part of the conversation that morgan just talked about. which gets to the point that i'm making. with not one, two, three, four, but six background checks, that widening circle, the fbi would be the only people that would know who you talk to. >> there are a lot of civilians claiming they know about federal law enforcement and i understand the fbi is having some trouble right now but someone needs to come forward and say, this is what we do, this is what we can do. and, that's become disingenuous. >> joe biden said in 1991, and i'm paraphrasing, he said fbi investigations me nothing. he essentially said he

implied -- and deliver the investigation, and the fbi would therefore not make a verdict. kavanaugh did it or didn't do it. so if the senators want investigation that's fine. >> we will continue to talk about this. so she said in line 14, i'm aware of other witnesses that attest to each of the statements i have read above. we have not read to you the most elation of them. i declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the united states of america that the foregoing is true and if correctly i have executed the declaration on this day. the breaking news continues, stay close. for the past five years, i've spoken with hundreds of families and visited senior-care communities around the country. and i've got to tell you, today's senior-living communities

are better than ever. these days, there are amazing amenities, like movie theaters, exercise rooms and swimming pools, public cafes, bars, and bistros, even pet-care services. and nobody understands your options like the advisers at a place for mom. these are local, expert advisers that will partner with you to find the perfect place and determine the right level of care, whether that's just a helping hand or full-time memory care. best of all, it's a free service. there is never any cost to you. senior living has never been better, and there's never been an easier way to get great advice. call today. a place for mom -- you know your family, we know senior living. together we'll make the right choice.

the riskiest job. the consequences underwater can escalate quickly.

the next thing i know, she swam off with the camera. it's like, hey, thats mine! i want to keep doing what i love. that's the retirement plan. with my annuity i know there's a guarantee. annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retireyourrisk.org >> harris: a fox news alert as we continue to cover the breaking news of a third accuser, a woman who has come

forth alleging sexual misconduct against judge brett kavanaugh. and it now and his words, his statement, he says, "this is ridiculous and from the twilight zone. i don't know who this is, and of this happened." as we continue our coverage now, i can also tell you because we brought a little bit of it live from the senate judiciary commission, grassley is who they are contacting out for this third accuser. what becomes problematic is, what will that hearing look like tomorrow? if you were dr. christine blasey ford, would you even show up tomorrow? we don't even know what she's alleging. this is a signed, sworn statement from a third accuser that has much more specificity. >> david: that's a great question, her team was very much in setting all the procedures for how this was going to happen, negotiating with the senate which was unprecedented, that we actually had someone

negotiate to actually get the hearing the first time, and it goes to -- and kennedy referenced this, as we go to future supreme court nominations, what will the framework be for what the process is going to be? we already know the democrats changed it once, you used to have to get 60 votes and it was changed because you had to have a simple majority. now we are changing the rules to what future supreme court nominations are going to go through and what the framework is going to be. >> what is the formal process in the senate? >> what kennedy was talking about was, how bitter and nasty was the fight. for yet another supreme court seat while that happens if president trump is in office. because again we come back to dianne feinstein. i do want to get to this point because you noticed on social media, people are drilling down now on this third

accuser statement from another woman who michael avenatti has put out on his twitter page as he represents her, and part of that alleges that his client, the third accuser of brett kavanaugh, was gang. and there are people that can corroborate some of this happening. our own martha maccallum sat down with judge kavanaugh on monday evening and that topic came up because martha asked about it. watch. >> did you ever participate in or were you ever aware of any gang rate that happened at a party that you attended? >> that's totally false and outrageous. i've never done any such thing or known about any such thing. when i was in high school, i went to an all boys catholic high school, jesuit high school

where i was focused on academics and athletics. >> harris: and some of us as the judge was talking are also remembering that interview with martha that he said over and over again -- and i think you have it on your phone if you want to share it because i think other newspapers are putting it out now. but that is from martha's interview, his refuting any of this. >> "the new york times" is saying that kavanaugh will say tomorrow, i was not perfect in high school, but sometimes i drink beer with my friends on the weekends and sometimes i had too many. i will say it's interesting that it looks like, judge kavanaugh will go forward with the hearing tomorrow whether ford shows up, or not. now that we have an accuser with very specific details and an affidavit, i think it's probably important for him now more than ever to go under oath. >> that may seem like a minor shift and some of the declarations that he has made a

come but that was a major -- it's a major shift. that really opens the door and allows a lot of doubt to come in, particularly when these accusations all rest around -- >> that same "new york times" article that morgan just referenced, a screenshot of the june 1982 calendar that judge kavanaugh is going to provide could be tweaked, in bold letters right here. >> remember clarence thomas and the categorical denial of all these accusations, and what judge kavanaugh is going to say is the exact opposite of clarence thomas. it's very different in tone and that's why it opens up so much more. unless he is saying, this is all completely false, this is a smear job, i'm a good man -- >> that is what he's been saying. >> but even when he talked talo

martha, he talked about not being perfect. you know, david, going forth in all of this, i almost want to ask you this question just as someone who knows so well the g.o.p., the chairman of gopac. what do they do now? does this become a midterm election point even if everything is shown to be, none of this is true and judge kavanaugh does make these things true, what do the members do? because they are really caught in the middle. >> the point about republicans, and moderate roman and republican, and you get a guy like michael avenatti involved, when you get the way the democrats have handled this and the way demand justice is acted, that all goes into those camps.

>> it's what susan collins thinks of all of it. whether you like it or not. >> and potentially, lisa murkowski as well. stay close, we are continuing to cover this and we've already gotten a statement directly from judge brett kavanaugh. more news as it happens. this isn't just any moving day.

this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows.

this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today.

>> harris: seconds into our commercial break moments ago, the president of the united states tweeted about this third accuser of brett kavanaug kavanaugh. michael avenatti is a third-rate lawyer who is good at making false accusations, like he did on me and like he is now doing on judge brett kavanaugh. he's just looking for attention and doesn't want people to look at his past record and relationships, a total low life. that from president trump just moments ago. you know david, what's interesting about this is, following the fox news interview with martha maccallum and judge kavanaugh, the president came out and had a much more full throated defense of kavanaugh. why do you think that was and

why is he jumping in now? at >> david: he wants his nominee on the supreme court. as we talked about, collins is a key vote and senators flake and lisa murkowski will look at that lead to. if all of a sudden republicans have the vote to pass kavanaugh to the supreme court, they will fall in line because they know the voters in their state would be disapproving of them if they voted against kavanaugh. >> harris: so you think if republicans were to lose collins and murkowski, they wouldn't lose the democrats? >> david: he would not get the democrats if the republicans put kavanaugh over the line. >> if murkowski and collins vote to confirm him, they will do the same. >> harris: capri? >> capri: i think that number one, dr. ford is showing up

because i think that third accuser gets her cover and credibility. she was out there on her own before and now she's got some backup. i think frankly, because there are so many issues out here now, so many questions, i think actually the joe manchin's of the world will take a step back and say, i'm not going to take the risk to vote for this individual. let's start from scratch rather than falling in line. >> harris: moments ago we heard from the governor of texas. do we have time to roll that? apparently we do not. here it is. this process has devolved into character assassination and destroying the reputation and lives of real people, it's not too late to change that. that is john cornyn of texas. morgan? >> morgan: i think the most important thing that will happen tomorrow is judge kavanaugh has his point to tell his story under oath. there are very specific allegations from a woman today through an affidavit and he

needs to answer them under oath. >> we have more "outnumbered" in just a moment, stay here. with more businesses starting every day, how do they plan for their financial wellness? i am very mindful of the sacrifices that i make. so i have to manage my time wisely. ♪ plan your financial life with prudential. bring your challenges.

oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of 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.

>> thanks so much to david developed for providing expertise on such a crazy day. >> happy national pancake day and national family day. >> and wash it down, sugar is

more american than even fire crackers and whiskey. we are back tomorrow at noon eastern right here on the couch. right now, here's harris faulkner with more. >> harris: a fox news alert, supreme court showdown. as if we don't have enough drama, a third accuser has come forward ahead of tomorrow's hearing. republicans are still planning the committee vote on kavanaugh friday morning, triggering outrage from democrats. i'm harris faulkner, our break breaking news coverage continues. democrats are blasting the decision by republicans to herd here the first note on judge kavanaugh friday morning. now a new bombshell has dropped. the third woman has been identified to accuse kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, saying she was present at parties in