>> a republican senator stuns hi party and stalls the nomination of supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. i'm robert costa, welcome to "washington week"." >> i think it would be proper to delay the floor vote for up to but not more than one week to ask the f.b.i. to do that investigation. it would be short and limited in scope. robert: aramatic twist for supreme court nominee brett kavanaich. repu senator jeff flake votes yes to advance the judge's nomination but it comes with a condition that shook washingtonn in a instant. a call to delay the final confirmationote one week to allow the f.b.i. to probe sexual assault nominations against kavanaugh. >> i wil only be comfortable moving on the floor until the

f.b.i. has done more investigation than they have already. i understand that some of these witnesses may not want to discuss anything further. but i think we're -- we owe them due diligence. robe: the move comes one day after both kavanaugh and hisis accuser, cne blasey ford testified before the senate judiciary committee. this whole two-week effort has been a polical hit fueled with pent-up anger about president trump and the 2016 election, revenge on behalf of the clintons. to believe he was goi rape me. i tried to yell for help. it was hard for me t breathe. and i thought that brett was accidentally going to kill me. robert: both this accused and the accuser noted the moment and it's cost. >> my family and my name have been totally and permanently ystroyed. >> m family and i have been the target of constant harassment

and death and i've been called the most vial and hateful names aginable. robert: we report ons t historic week, next. announcer: this is "shington week"." funding is provid by -- newman's own foundation, donating allrofits to charity. ku and patricia ewi committed to bridging culture differences nities. om the excellence in journalism foundation, the corporation for public broadcasting, and by contributions to your pbs station from viewers like you. thank you. once again from washington, moderatoos robert. robert: good evening. an unexpected move by republican senator jeff flake has pumped the brakes on g.o.p. plans to

quickly confirm supreme court avnominee brettaugh. the retiring lawmaker announced friday morning that he wouor su kavanaugh's confirmation, but hours later, he said his vote to passhe nomination out of the senate judiciary committee had a caveat. if republicans wanted h support on a final floor vote, the f.b.i. needed to further probe the sexual assault allegations facing kavanaugh including dr. christine blasey ford's allegation that he assauld her while they were teenagers in the early 1980's. flake's decision effectively ended senate majority leader mitch mcconnell's plans of moving to a vote in the coming days as other senators sigled eir support. and it came afirey exchanges on thursday between kavanaugh and democratic senators. >> jud kavanaugh will you support an f.b.i. investigation right now? >> i will do whatever the

committee wan to -- >> personally, do you think that's the best thing for us to do you want to answer? robert: joining me tonight seung min kim of "the washington post." geoff bennett of the nbc news. mark landler of "new york times." and molly ball of "time" magazine. seung min, thank you for joining us. what drove this decision by senator flake, a decision that surprised hisle cues, surprised the country? >> i think what was so stark today is just this rapid change of momentu for the nomination which revolved around senator flake. senator flake issued a statement that he would take a yes. he had taken the night to digest this reting testimony from dr.

ford and judge kavanaugh. he made it clear he had notade up hisind. he was showing so much kepticism about where he would land. he said whatever i decide and whatever we decide there's going to be a much doubt as there is certainty. so when he issued that statement, i was a little surprised that it was early. it was interesting and we figure, wow, that gives us the extra momentum that kavanaugh to needove forward with this nomination and advances out of the judiciary committee onke th committee vote. and then several other things happened. first, we saw that dramatic confrontation with two women who were loudly and tearfully telling him to stand with victims of sexual assaul playing right on tv. robert: let's take a look at that for a second. do we havehat video? >> nobody believes me! i didn'tel anyone, and you're telling all women that they don't matter. that they should justqu stay t

because if they tell you what happened to them, you're going to ignore them. that's whatappened to me. and that's what you're telling all of the women inlo america! at me. you're telling me that itn' do matter. robert: intense as we've seen. >> it was heartrehing to watch. and then senator flake made his way to the committee. as theebate went going on, he looked very much as he did during the testimony yesterday, he looked tortured and pained. what was really senator chris kunz. they go to the prayer breakfast together. they travel to africa together and in their respective roles. he had implored republicans toc along to at least figure out a middle way to at least get some sort of an f.b.i. investigation. at that moment, after he spoke, we expected senator flake toea

it was his turn. but he didn't. he moved on to someone else. he got up and walked over to senatorunz and senator amy klobachar and gestured him to go to the back room. heads up,ee guys, those t went to the back. robert: something's happening. >> something seems to be happening. and this rlly -- and it was held just up in the air so much. like, we don't know what theywe talking about. you know, senator kunz and back.r klobachar come but senator flake doesn't come back. they're whispering. tthey're talking senator feinstein. all the aides are excitedlyar ng to chat. and we are like what is going on? this just went on for a while. 1:30 came which was when the committee was supposed to vote. they weren't voting. there were only four senators of 21 senators. and all of sudden flake came out and said what he did. robert: they wanted to move

forward with a vote. geoff: i can tell you there's a sense of dread about what this week might hold. time, the passage of time has never been onhe side of this confirmation. first, republicans wanted him seated in time for the october 1st start of the new supreme court term. they wanted to have him confirmed before t. mid ter but there's this thought that the public perception of him could change negativ over time. well, before's thursday's hearing there were more americans who didot support kavanaugh's nomination than did support him accordingo an nbc news "wall street journal" poll. there's this thought that there could be more accusers that come forward, there could be more people that call into question ofng the tthat kavanaugh said in his hearing. according to president trump, he's still bullish. there's not people around him that he's spit balling other names asnt replace but it comes down to what happens between now and next friday. robert: mark was there at the

news conference where the republican called out democrats. >> it's at' disgrace wha going on. the good news is the public is very smart and ty get it. it's a con game.ey th're playing the con game. this is a con game. just a con game. robert: con game in new york, yet, a different message on friday. the white house seems to say today, this nomination could be saved. let the senate do its wk. >> extremely restrained response from president trump, no h twee. whwas asked about it in the oval office iug t he nswered with extraordinary restraint in a week where he showed little restraint. early in the week when kavanaugh was robotic and 'em passioned, he clearly loved the anger and

the defiance. partisane relished th tone that he took with the senators, the democratic senators. he tweeted, this is why i nominated this guy. but now in the wake of this last 11th hour switch, i think the white house's calculation is, we don't want to upset thispr ess. maybe we're pretty close to getting where we want to be. so i think the pre very restrained and is determined not to be provocative. >> it's got to be tough for him, molly. flake has been quite the foil. what have you made of flake's decision? is this a retiring senator doing his own thing? ak he actually trying to check the box to sure the nomination goes through? what's the read? >> well, y know, say what you will about jeff flake, he's a very earnest man. he's styled himself as the conscious of the senate in a way that annoys both party es. he's loyal enough for the republicans to like him. but then for the never trumpers

he doesn't stand up for trump enough but he's tooco ervative. he's retiring because of his opposition to the president. he wrote a whole book and will be in new hampshire on monday -- robert: is this part of t 2020 gambit? >> i have no idea. he hasn't ruled it out. if he did that, i think he would. once hates to give politicians credit for any kind of earnest motives. if he did that he feels someone should sp up and do it. he is really profoundly aseung min said profoundly disturbed by some of the tngs going on. he's driven as much -- he talked about the victims that he talked to and the women in the elevator. he's driven just as much by his concerns about norms and process and bringing the country together. that was what he talked about in his statement announcing this

move was if we continue on this rush partisan basis, we're just further dividing the coury. th one-week delay san opportunity to make hit the a more bipartisan process. >> he said when he walked into the senate meeting today, he saw democrats yelling at republicans, republicans yelling at democrats. some democrats leaving the meeting early. he thought this one-week delay was the one area of compromise. it's interesting. in a current political moment color bud tribalism this is this was the day that inst.utionalists really w people that believe in the institution and the process that runs them -- this was theay -- >> you heard democrats annoyed with the democrats on the committee emphasizing process and emphasizing the f.b.i. investigation, pleading with their republican colleagues, playing on this institutional motivation rather than confronting kavanaugh more frontly with dr. blasey ford's testimony. but that appears to be a gambit

that worked. robert: we're talking about the tgambitt worked. is it where the votes could stand a week from now if the f.b.i. proceeds. could some redtate democrats say that they're going to vote on kavanaugh, could they maybe change their minds? >> that'ses inting we ttarted wi influential votes and we end with flake,li c and murkowski. it's important to know that we don't know what the f.b.i. is going to find. he's gone through sixun backg checks. there are various public service position. could be that the f.b.i. finds nothing and gives cover to folks like flake and folks like murkski and collins who full heartedly support him at the owh day. robert: will they bring up mark judge one of the allegeds witnes of this incident? >> mr. judge indicated that he would be willing to talk as long

as the talks were done confidentially. one person i would watch is actually senator joe donnelly because he announced earlier at today e would oppose judge kavanaugh which was very surprising. he was one of the three red state kavanaugh who is backed neil gorsuch. we thought he would be very likely to support judge kavanaugh even as these allegations broke. but if you read his stement, his statement didn't mention for example, concerns that judgeug kavawould be a deciding vote to overturn protectio in the affordable care act which is what democrats talked about. he was concerned that there was no.i f investigation, that have looked into tse allegations i don't think he's going to change his mind, butd t woe something to watch. robert: geoff? geoff: heheeached outer this investigation should be limited in scope, what that really means. we ask.b the. the f.b.i. directed us back to the white house. sb -- so if the white house

takes the lead of jeff flake that would suggest that only the ackizations the ones from blasey ford will be investigated. the oth two, we'll haveo see from there. >> the investigation would cover "current credible allegations." i asked them. so what does that mean? just dr. ford t other two and the other one? i haven't heard yet robert: the nation was transfixed. but by the riveting testimony of blasey ford and kavanaugh. >> i believed he was going to rain me. -- raped me. i tried to yell f help. this is what terrified the most. this has had the most impacting part of my life. i thought that brett was accidentally going to kill me. >> i'm not questioning that dr. ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in soml

e, at some time. but i have never done this. i am innocent of this chge. robert: so different than that fox news interview. you had judge kavanaugh almost red in the face, indignant, brought back them inries of justice thomas of his confirmation hearings in 199 was the white house urging kavanaugh to take this approach on thursday? >> thete house wanted him to be a fighter. and they wanted him to show defiance. and that's what they go.at interesting about that performance though is that by ing so nakedly partisan by dredging up the clintons, by using terms like a political hit job, i think that judge kavanaugh has raised other questions that go beyond the scope of the sexual misconduct allegations. they go to questions of if he is confirmed, what kind of emotional and psychological baggage will he bring into the

supreme court? it's often said that clarence thomas was radicalized by that confirmation hearing in his term as theupme court justice. the other question is, what is justice kavanaugh's position going to be on cases that come before the court brought by progressive groups or democrats? he has shown himself perhaps unlike any previous supreme court nominee to back partisan fighter, a partisan warrior. that might have worked in solidifying his position, in fact, perhaps inalvaging his nomination with the republicans on that committee.o but it a raises some broader questions about his suitability, his temperament, were he to take a seat. >> that's a great point. in the zero sum political game, they say that performance is what gave republicans -- real-time we saw this with lindsey graham. they dispensed what the republic --

>> rachel mchell -- from arizona. >> and they decided to speak up in his report. today we saw the political center of gravity shift backo jeff flake. and so now they have leverage and the whole thi has just shifted. robert: molly, i want to ask you about this republica anger. during the hearing, kavanaugh didn't hold back his anger and neither did lindsey graham. >> this confirmation process has become a national disgrace. the constitution gives the senate an important role in the confirmation process. but you haveeplaced advice and consent with search and destroy. >> this is not a job interview. this is hell. this is going to destroy the ability o good people t come forward because of thisra your high school year book.

you have interacted with professial women all your life, not one accusation. you're supposed to be bl cosby when you're a junior and senor in high scol. an all of a sudden you got over it. -- and all of a sudden you got over it. robert: during dr. ford's l mitchell ac question after question. and then the republican theory just came out. what does that tell us? >> first ofll, you can't blame the republicans for being mad. there are so many questions about the w this was handled by the democratic minority. and we have not gotten good answer for the really strange way that this ended up coming out, why fenatornstein had this information, sat on itth a when it was after the point where it should have probably been broached some way even confidently never shared it with her colleagues or with the majority on the committee. and then it comes out in some kind of leak which there are

questions about. and then this whole set o events. whether that's a conspiracy or incompetence, you can't blame the republicans for being a madt that series of events. whether the allegation isn't true. we should get to the bottom of these allegations or believe dr. blasey ford. but you did have this outpouofng anger by the republicans and by judge kavanaugh in a wth 's very unexpected. i think people expected him to be much more like the controlled and even-tempered person that he tried to be in that fox new interview. and a lot of republicans did end up cheering at the end of the day feeling like he was being authentic in a way that he hadn't befor and in a way that they could identify with. but the upshot of it all is that it was a tremendsly ugly an angry and partisan spectacle and it's hard to imagine that this

doesn't erode public trust in the supreme court in the long-term. and that is somethinghat was already declining and that's something that hurts the institutio of the supreme court because the court can't do its job in aredible way ifeople in this country don't have confidence in it as a constitution that is not merely political. robert: already talks -- there are talks that after she spoke that maybe he would have to withdrawal, she gave such a strong showing. >> that's exactly right were able to catch republican senators who had to listen to her testimony in person and asked, what did you make of it? we had senatorrrin hatch saying i don't find her uncredible. senator joh cornyn said similar things. they wanted to hear from judge tkavanaugh. you sense republicans feeling, wow, she is believable. she is credible. t changed e tone j

after judge kavanaugh delivered his fiery remarks. he wrote ever word of it himself. robert: no help from the white house. >> no help. it was him and his former law clerk to put tt openi statement together. and then you also saw the momentum shift, at least among republicans shift back into judge kavanaugh's favor. and as -- as he finished hist testimonyout 6:00, 7:00 last night, you saw all the comments from republicans backing up and defending judge kavanaugh not only from the committee as they were leaving he room and talking to roberters but also the stream of statements coming in from all the other republicans not on thi committee aff their support for judge kavanaugh. >> i mean, just toouake i of the calculus of party politics for a moment, there es were other s of judge kavanaugh that i don't think came out well in that particularly in q the portion of his appearance when he made

-- threw charges but questions about drinking habits back at senators who were asking him when he asked senator klobachar when she described that she testified that her father struggled with alcoholism. i think showed a side of judge kavanaugh that is too neatly the privilege of entitlement that some people were spinning about him i doin that while it all made sense a may hav indeed saved his nominationhere's a cost to the way he presented himself. robert: i want to come back to yourer "time" c story. this is more about left vs. right more than the political pointsle we saw a visceral discussion of gender issues, ell this itics as week. >> yeah, and it's, you know,

al fst absurdlyting that this would be the consuming controversy right befor this midterm election. in an election psych that already for a year and a half now, almost two years has been centeredun a women's rage, women's anger, women's doire t make their voices heard and stop being silent about things that have suffered for years, women's buried pain and women'sit inab to tell their own story. hhat's been the text of our politics althot's been driving ever aspect of our polics and i believe will be the deciding factor of the mid terms but of our ereire cul there has been this revelation m what was behind the mask of all of these who were deciding what shows got produced on television and in hollywood, the men who were making th decisions about what laws got introduced in the senate or how decisions got made in the united states supreme court. and so for so many women, it's

been an incredible awakening, and this debate just brought ost vivid anymore the way imaginable. and that's i think you saw such an outpouring of emotion all across the country around dr. blasey ford's testimony. robert: it was a day where i got so few e mails. everyone w just watching it. a powerful moment in this country. we'll s what happens nex week. we have to leave it there. our conversation will continue online on the "washington week" extra. we wil a talkut the reaction president trump received this week from world leaders at the unitions when he promoted his america first agenda. you can findt t later tonight onrg pbsashingtonweek. i'm robert costa, thanks for joining us. ♪

oning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy.visit ncicap.org] announcer: funding for "washington week" is provided by newman's own foundation, donating all profits from newman's own food products to charity and nourishing the common good. the ethics and excellence in journalism foundation, ku and patricia ewing committed to bridging cultural differences in our communities. theub corporation forc broadcasting and by contributions to your pbs statio from viewers like you. thank you. umental music)

♪ (woman #1) the shadow of world war two loom long. there was a desperate need to rebuild bomb damaged towns and cities, because above all, people wanted a safe place to live and to bring upeir fami. in the 1950's, the government was under pressure to build new homes and started an ambitious building program. the time to look forward had come at last, and the british wanted everything around em to reflect that sense of optimism. inations, living rooms and kitchens came bright new materials. man-made fabrics and labor-saving devices. for the post-war generation of homeowners, domesticity had never been more comfortable.