>> presidentmp at odds with t his own white house and a supreme court nominee moves a step closer to nomination. m pete williams. robert costa will join us from the road. welcome to "washington week." president trump: the so-called i ance is angry because their horrible ideas have been american people and it's driving them crazy. pete: but the resistance is oirmenting from inside the trump administration according to a blistering op-ed said to be from a senior official. they said the root of problem is the president's amorality. president obama warned that a resistance inside white house, even with goodio inte, should concern all americans. president obama: the cla that

everything will turn out ok becae there are people inside the white house who secretly aren't following the president's orders, that is not a check. i'm being serious he. pete: as the president urges "the new york times" to each the writer, the white house braces for similar revelations in journalist bobewwoodward's tell-all book "fear." it quotus senior sta and cabinet ofcials talking about what he describes as a nervous breakdown of the executive brtch. we coverll, next. >> this is "washington week." funding is provided by -- >> newmanio's own found all profits to charity and nourishing the common good. koo and patricia yuen and are the you yen foundation, committed to bridging cultural differences in our. communiti

the excellence and ethics in sm journaoundation. the corporation for public ouoadcasting and by contributions to pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. >> once again, live from washington, substituting for robert costa, pete people of nbc ne pete: good evening. president trump says thee just department should investigate who wrote this week's devastatin op-ed in the "new york times." described as a senior government ofhocial. the a claimed to act with others in the administration reining in theredent's worst impulses out of a sense of diet -- duty, writing this. the bigger concern is not what mr. trump has done to the presidency but ramphat we as a nation have allowed him to do to us. on friday fmer president barack obama spoke out on the controversy, attacking hisec prsor and the state of american politics. president obama:eahe t to our democracy doesn't just come

from donald trump or the current batch of republicans in congress or too much compromise from democrats or russian hacking. the biggest threat to our democracy and indifference. pete: as the white house prepares for the releaseve of ran reporter bob woodward's tell-all book,fe: trump in the white house," which quotes current and former senior officials and cabinet members as being alarmed by the president's kick. joining me, robert costa, who's on the road. kristen welker, who's on th road. seung min kim, co correspondent at the "washington post" and ed ed political correspondent for cbs news. the president was said to be futuring over the anonymous op-ed, whi was a single source anonymously. you among us the only person who's read t woodward book. it quotes people on the record.s

how explosivehis book going to be? >> what a week for presidenttr p, to'd this report about woodward's book and to see gary cohen, his formerconomic advisor, taking documents about tradeoff the preside's desk. jim matusz, the defense secretary ignoring the president' aorders. thay later, this "new york times" op-ed by someone inside the administration in a senior role. talking to today they say this problem goes back to the transition. this administration is full of republicans who aren't really aligned with president trump or the traditional republican party and that alliance, which has lasted for about a year, someone is beginning to fray. pete: it's more about a concern about the president's governing style, sit not? >> it's about his h behavior, conduct, his alarm.

there are certain aspects in this administration that have relatively muted as the president has taken this administration in a different direction. some advisors are trying to push the president away from make quick decisions or decisions they think are totallyut of line of-- in the traditional ens. they think the president is isolated inside of this white house. dite: you covered the white house. you read this book and say wow, i had no idea? >> we had known abouthe concern around president trump. what makes this book important is that people inside are taking action and woodwardn meticulous detail, dates, scenak, he paints a b picture of people taking action repeatedly to rn in president trump. that's the difference. it's the aides and thewi dsors

and officials now stepping at times over the line to try to pull him back. pete: oukristen, covered the white house too. what wasthe president's response to barack obama picking up these themes in that >> he tried to laugh it off. he said i fell asleep watchin is speech but the reality is, this was a striking political split screen today. on the one hand you had former president obama taking on condemning prempdent tn personal terms, saying that op-ed that you were discussing with bob was not a check on the president's power and calling voters to go to the n polls just to get democrats into office but to really defeat what he casts as a dangerous rand of politics. one he said was born out of fear and divisiveness but heso attacked president trump personally. for example, he took on what happened at charlottesville saying how tough is it to call out nazis? so it's a preview to come and

one of fmer president obama's main points was he is going to be heading to areas that are not just democratic stronghold. he's going the be trying to volly independent swinrs as well. pete: before we leave this anonymous thing, how obsessed is the president with trying to find out who wrote in c iolumn? hink it's a good word for it. we are told that he resulted with volcanic anger when he firs read this is -- and now there is an effort uer way to try to find out who wrote the column. there were a list of about two dozen senior officials who said it wasn't me. in and i they're trying to determine who this is and how many people are trying to thwart or block the president. you asked bob how dissimilar to what he was damaging in the white house, ws so damaging about the op-ed is that it echoed the fundamentals of

the woodward book, which is that there are people within the ry administrationg to work against him. he has a lot of staffers who don't agree with him. pete: bob, what will the white house do? >> they're trying to figure out the pepper but they're lost, talking with some of the president's closest advisors they say they don't know what to do. the president is urging the department of justice to get involved but they know that's a maze that's not going to go anywhere. they're trying tfigure out who could be disloyal but they know that so many people have been leakg inside of this administration since january of 2007. as m people are coming out with their own lists they reall have as mu an idea in the white house as we do on this show. pete: ya current number reporter, you're a former one. do you think wewh'll ever kno wrote this? >> we might. we were reminded this week but for almost 30 myeark --

wrote "deep throat" and yet he was deep throa it may not be tomorrow, it may be years from now but i sus one day we will. one thing to keep in mind, the m senior official" could conceivably apply to as many as 4,000 confirmab positions and hired political guns across the federal government. thisld c be some deputy assistant to the assistant deputy of the commerce department, somebody from the office of management budget next door. it could be somebody in the west wing but it's possible that this is somebody that is not so senior yet gets away with that a ause in washington there's lot of title inflation. pete: if it is someub sub, sub cabinet official, wouldn't e "the new york have a lot of explaining to do? >> i think they might and the ct it remains anonymous reflects on some of ree coional republican

reaction. a lot of the senior republicans my colleagues and i talked about were dismissive of look, they need to put their names on their criticisms we can't take it seriously but i want to go back to kristen's point earlier about how the general concerns that were related, both the op-ed and the woodward book, the overall theme s not a surprise and that was not an exception for publicans.nal i was very struck by comments from is senat from nebraska this week. trump critic but he told a radio show, look, this is the same kind of message we hear from people at the white house reree times a week. that is pretty rkable that senate republicans are freely related they openly h r this seven times a week and they're used to it byow. >> a they've told us similar things off the record as well >> i also think, to your point,

pete, how obsessed is the president. some of his closest allies saying the "new york times" is not giving us any ideaf what senior official means but they'red a mering -- adhering to the very traditional sense of that term so they think this might be just a couple doz people. that's why the president lashed out trying to get pete ssions to get going on it. pete: let me ask you about what the journalistic either i said behind what the times did. normally speaking, something nonymously would never be published without some attribution. is there some resume for criticism of what the times did or are these extraordinary times for the times? >> it's going to be up to the new york times" editorial page to speak for itself but if it's not a canet-level official, if this isn't someone who's really goes close toot

it's not going to be as explosive and the president may not pay as much a political cost. the "new york times" may get questions, tough que about whether ed was saying, was the title fully explained as it really should have been n the editorial. i don't want to speculate too much because we really don't know who in person is. the white house is saying even if they never figure out who tpe on is they don't think they're going to have to pay too much of a political cost because republican voters are paying too much attention to this, they argue. this is another move to push skittish suburben independents away from the republican party in fall. te: about the obama speech, why now? >> because it'sim campaign and he has been called upon by eager democrats across the country to show up either for fundraisers or to give speeches and campaign. he'll be with senator casey. he's going this weekend to

california to hp shore up support for as many as seven democratic candidates for the house out there. democrats have to win at least seven or eight of those seats to get or the 21 in the house. they feel going doing it now for the sake of encouraging and building up democratic support but also clearly a need to speak out for what's at stake for the democracy. only he and georgeus w. as he did at the mccain memorial sp ch last weekend feel they can explain and kresse their -- express their concerns. the risk, of course, is if he overplays this, it becomes a midterm election about two presidents and not about congressional and gubernatorial candidates all acrosthe country. pete: is there concern about some places where he might do damage? >> exactly. we are already hearing some say

we welcome obama as a character, as a person in the 2018 race ane while house, a lot of the territory is favorable to the democrats, particu the districts that hillary clinton won in 2016. we've talked for the last year and a half about how difficult this sene map is for the democrats. 10 states that trump one, some in double digits in 2018. senator manson, the democrat up in novemberon't even say whether he voted for obama in o2012. bama does become a larger figure in the 2018ace, it uld become difficult for a lot of democrats. >> obama will focus on house and government races -- governor races. where the president is going is primarily sene races. >> why? >> because the hot senate races are thtates that he won. the 10 vulnerableemocrat seats are in states the president one in soasme by double

different. >>of think part hat you saw president o peter: -- obama say today is that democrats have traditionally sat on the sidelines in the midterm selection -- elections and that's part of what he's trying to change. ed's making the case you can't just get engn presidential election, this election is just as critical. pete: we tkeabout what a terrible week this was for the president but didn't he have some p numbers that came out friday? he says no matter what you may think of me, the economy is doing great. does he have a point there? robert: that's the case the white house is going to continue to make and they're urging members of congress home running -- rung for house and senate to talk about the kavaugh nomination and the economic numbers and to use the media as a foil and not maybe follow the president rhetori elly invery way but to follow the president in at leastot focusing on the

white house chaos stories that we're reporting out of the woodward book or from the "new rk times." it's going to take a steady message from republicans to break through on that but they feel confident that president trump, in his disruptive way has somehow kept a grip on the g.o. and the base with -- is with him inoll after poll even though his disapproval numbers nationally are ticking up. pete: what are the chances that the democrats could take ther househe senate? >> the house certainly looks like it's going to happen, if you believe the forecasting that's done by various organizations. cbs, nbc and others. the senate still seems to tilt towards republins just given the fact that there are so many uphill battlesn for democrats states that the president was able to win. best case for democrats, the 51-49 margin probably fli from republican to democratic control but that criers a really strg

night for democrats in a part of the country they haven't been strong in this years. pete: the only way impreach --ism peachment could happen is if democrats control out house. is that true and how much of a motivato is this? >> it's surprising to hear how much nancy pelosi has turned away about talking about the ispeachment sup. but i an issue we've seen that excites the base and we've ian soonin our polling that there is a large swath of voters o think impeachment is a valid issue but the president sees that one of his best political opportunities is to run against adversaries and a democratic house threatening impeachment is a great adversary, heelieves, for him. pete: one of the highlights for the president this week was the nomination hearing for his

second supreme court nominee, brett kavanaugh. he was peppered with questions about hisn posit the roe v. wade ruling and presidential power. and the democrats revolted over the lack of access related to his work i the george w. bush white house so how big a deal was this documt accesshing? it seemed at times this was a hearing about documents, not kavanaugh but is it going to make any difference? >> i don't think so at of the day. i do think it raises issues of transparency because effectively we're not able to see about 60% of his history and records in the george w. bush white house but setting that aside, can he still get 51 votes? after four days of the hearing, he did what he was supposed to do. basically his challenge was to do no harm. i think he largely did that. there were a couple of times

where he did get flustered under questioning. with harris of california. i don't think he saw that question with whether he had any conversations with the president's law firm. pete: he said have you ever had any conversations with ma --'s law firm and she said be careful how you answerhat. implying something you don't know. what did he say? the most evidence that senator harris us was that she had "information." so we're wondering, widt dou really know, if anything? pete: bob, do you think that anything that happened in these arings isoing to peel away any of the supportny forf the republican senators? robert: the abortion issues remains important for some bl moderate reans but the republicans are banking on red state democratsike senator joe

donnelly here in indiana who already embraced the presipnt's ition on immigration. could they now be pressured to vote for kavanaugh? even kno familiar sme wary republicans like the moderate republicans from alaska and maine and senator rand paul hat concerns about kavanaugh on the national security policy. i think they'll get them and even pull off some of the vulnerable red state democrats. peert pete : the hearings seemed especially yeasty because of the fact tt brett kavanaugh had written before he became a judge about whether the president should be beyond the reach of a civil lawsuit a or criminal trial. many of the senators wanted to ask him what about tt? does the president have to answer a subpoena? what did yf make his apses? >> i don't think he had any missteps. he was very artful at stepping around the

not saying deferent actively, for examere, when -- whe a president can pardon himself. i don't see any major stumbling block to him getting confirmed. i do think whate witnessed were these political moments, potentially the beginnings of presidential campaigns. harris and cory booker, who may have overstepped, saying ma-- ng a big issue about documents that are clear and peept: not when he first asked about hem this -- them. e next day they were. >> i don't think he had any missteps answering thorny questions. pete: cory booker said this may be the cosest i ever come to any spartacus moments. >> there are three on that committee who are openly thinking about run for president. >> who is that? .> amy of minneso she was raising a lot of

questions on behalf of her democrat colleagues about access to documents and whether this was a fair hearing. you're the court guy. pete go for it. >> i think what we're on the verge of now. we've had the warren court and th rehnquist court. we are entering the era, i would argue othe mcconnell court. the two seats that have now bn confirmed under continued trump is that mitch mcconnell held up the seat that would have gone to merrick grland. and now there are two reliably a consve justices or going to gfment mcdonnell today, to hugh hewitt, the same guy we talked about earlier said yes, this isy most significant accomplishment as a senator. and it's true. and at this point hang done that, he may have cemented legal n political and history for the next several decade.

people: one of the things that was interesting about this hearing were the continued protests -- protests. prised that chuck grassley, the chairman of the judiciary committee decide to let that happe and what difference us the -- does it make for the hearings going forward? >> i think senator grassley was pretty patnt in letting the protesters have their couple minutes of t zreeming. end of this week there were 227 arrests by capitol police of protester throughout these hearings. pete: that has to be a renycord for congressional hearing >> it is. and there were at least a dozen or two dozen today when kavanaugh wasn't even in the room to hear them. an interesting contrast i noticed about all 2 protests, if you listen to what they were otesting, they were protesting the substance of issues. abortion, gun rights, voting rights, disability rights and at time me, it was such a contrast with what the or

democratic sen were arguing which were again about documents and process and i'm wonled forget sometimes the division ou see between elected officials andat the voters and the base really care about. pete: althou you are watching the hearings on pbs or anywhere elsioon telev it was very hard to hear what they were actually saying. even though the audio e sort of brought the sound up so you could see what was going on when everyone stopped. but basically you all agree, no mid tretches. u also think that programs he was a little overprepared? we know he prepared a lot before the hearings. i had talked to some sources who were very familiar with how he had doneven 10-hour mock hearing sessions. he was doing that on a day before the confirmation hearings and there were at least wur senato played the role of

democratic senators to throw questions at him he was getting questions that he expected such as what do you think of roe vs. wade. you got the same answers over and over. pete: thank you. before we go, bob has a special announcement about next week's broadcast. robert: thanks,. peop we have a fun show next week. bob woodward, the veteran reporter, the author of "fear," coming out next tuesday, t he's goin sit down with me one-on-one on "washington week" to go through his book and talk about his method. it's going to be confinement a conversation. pete: and we can all wonder how you managed to land that interview. thanks, bob and everybody here tonight. our conversation continu on the washington week extra at pbs.org/"washington week." i'm pete williams, have a great week we're all still on and thank you very much. this was great and we're going to make a copy of this music available -- it will be in your

car ever door.you open the no cer: funding for "washington week" is provided b- ewman's own foundation, donating all profits from newman's own food products to charity and nourishing the mmon good. the either i said and excellence in journalism foundation. koo and patricia yuen for the yuen found ion, bridgin cultural differences in our communities. the cooperation for public grod casting and from cubses to y cbs station from viewers like you. you. -- pbs station f

(fanciful music) ♪ (female #1) it was the victorians who cherished the idea of home as a domestic haven. they coined the phrase, "safe as hous." ♪ and in this age of invention, homes were bursting at the seams with new gadgets, products, anconveniences. in the bedroom werodthe latest beauty prts and manufactured clothes. ile in the nursery, the toys were brand new and factory produced. the original homsweet home. but there was a problem. many of the exciting produvas and appealing inons they welcomed into their homes were not just health hazards, they were killers. and with the aid of science, i'll seek out these domeic assassins.