precious people on the planet. that's all for this edition of "dateline." i'm craig melvin. thanks for watching. good morning. it is 7:00 in the east, 4:00 out west. a new denial to the bombshell about deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. this morning, new talk about a secret wire and the 25th amendment and the concern about what the president could do next. >> people have been saying all night that the president now has the justification he needs to fire rod rosenstein. no, he does not. also, one more day to decide the final negotiations for brett kavanaugh's accuser over whether

she'll testify before a senate panel. the backlash after the president tries to cast doubt on the credibility of christine blasey ford. breaking news, we begin with a live picture of capitol hill where the top republican on the senate judiciary committee, in a late-night move, has granted an extension to brett kavanaugh's accuser to decide whether she will testify, saying, she should decide to we can move on, i want to hear her. the president weighing in at a rally in missouri last night, this time going after democratic senator claire mccaskill who said she was voting against judge kavanaugh. >> brett kavanaugh, fantastic man. she just announced she won't vote for him. can you believe it? and he was born -- you talk about central casting, they were

saying it ten years ago about him, he was born for the u.s. supreme court. he was born for it. and it's going to happen. it's going to happen. >> senator grassley pushed that deadline back one day. will ford likely testify? and if so, when? >> we'll have to see. there was talk of a thursday testimony and other days. however, it's important to note that i think a lot of what ford's attorneys were saying and a lot of what other critics of the president have said and critics of the republicans have said is there's been, i guess, a cavalier attitude towards ford and the idea of sexual assault in all of this. i think this is really pushing this issue at this point. i think the president's tweets yesterday, a lot of critics would have said that it shows a misunderstanding of reporting with this issue.

very sensitive at this point, but we'll really have to see how this all plays out. we'll have to see what both sides say. >> kevin, who would likely question ford? would it not be the senators and what is driving that? >> i talked to sources on the senate judiciary committee who tell me they had wanted an outside attorney to question dr. ford should she decide to testify before the senate judiciary committee. an attorney for dr. ford says absolutely not. if dr. ford is going to testify, then the senators on that committee ought to be the ones testifying. there's been some interesting back and forth in terms of negotiations for how exactly this hearing will proceed. dr. ford's attorneys say they would like to see her testify second, not first. judiciary committee saying they want to see that reversed. so there's ongoing back and forth in terms of how this all

goes. the bottom line though is that senate majority leader mitch mcconnell is suggesting privately of regardless of whether or not brett kavanaugh is confirmed by october 1st, that he would be willing to push this nomination through even after the midterms. >> here's mitch mcconnell at the values voter summit. let's take a listen. >> you've watched the fight, you've watched the tactics. but here's what i want to tell you. in the very near future, judge kavanaugh will be on the united states supreme court. so, my friends, keep the faith, don't get rattled by all of this. we're going to plow right through it and do our job. >> without hearing her side at all, does mitch mcconnell know

he has enough votes to push kavanaugh through? >> i think the votes to look at are susan collins and lisa murkowski at this point. we saw that collins pushed back against the president's tweet. so definitely a very confident statement from mitch mcconnell there, but he's trying to reassure the republican base at this point. this is an issue that republican candidates, especially the president, have campaigned on, filling more conservative judges on the court. this is a way to galvanize them ahead of the midterms. many believed kavanaugh would have gotten elected before the midterm elections. however, with this delay this could further delay a lot of excitement that conservatives had over this. this is mitch mcconnell

reassuring his base at this point. the justice department pushing back on a "new york times" report that in may of 2017 deputy attorney general rod rosenstein floated the idea of secretly recording president trump to expose the chaos in the white house, and that he also discussed recruiting cabinet members like john kelly to invoke the 25th amendment. all of this reportedly happened shortly after james comey was fired. sources say that it's unclear whether rosenstein was serious or just being sarcastic when he made the comment about wearing a wire. the justice department disputing the part about the 25th amendment saying rosenstein didn't even know john kelly at the time. president trump continuing his attacks on the justice department, although not mentioning the "new york times" report or rosenstein. >> we have great people in the department of justice.

we have great people. these are people, i really believe, you take a poll, i got to be at 95%. some real bad ones, you saw what happened at the fbi, they're all gone. there's a lingering stench, and we're going to get rid of that too. >> strong words there. nbc news reports that rosenstein said the notion of wearing a wire in a sarcastic way, not necessarily a serious option. the "new york times" reporter says it was not a flippant remark. what does it all mean? >> it's interesting to see who has come out in criticizing mr. rosenstein as a result of this bombshell "new york times" report. donald trump jr. tweeting about this story and suggesting that rosenstein, you know, that he believes this report. look, the bottom line is i don't think this is a positive development for rosenstein. he clearly has enemies within the administration who are

skeptical of how he has been conducting himself with regards to this. when you read this article, you can't help but think about the anonymous op-ed published in the "new york times." it's a similar parallel argument. that said, they've really been going after this deep state argument for some time. the republican base is in line with the president on that, the polls suggest as much. democrats say absolutely not. there are centrist republicans here who have deep concern when they hear this attack on the u.s. intelligence community and they want to see a natural conclusion to the mueller investigation. >> what is the sense here of the president's reaction? is it clear that he wants to fire rosenstein over this? and if so, what would be the political fallout? >> fox news host sean hannity kind of said, don't fire anyone

on his show last night, kind of pushing back against that. i think it's a possibility this would have floated through the president's minds. we've seen the president has launched very recent attacks on the doj. he told my colleagues at hill tv just this week that he doesn't have an attorney general, referring to jeff sessions. the president takes jeff sessions' recusal have personally in the russia probe. he's gone after rosenstein in the past. i think there's going to be a lot of people around him urging him to use caution. however, i think the president takes a lot of this quite very personally and we'll have to see how that plays out. >> thank you so much. next, the allegations against judge brett kavanaugh. a former sex crimes prosecutor addresses why a 36-year-old memory can indeed be trusted.

when my hot water heater failed it rocked our world. we called usaa. and they greeted me as they always do. sergeant baker, how are you? they took care of everything a to z. having insurance is something everyone needs, but having usaa- now that's a privilege. cohigher!ad! higher! parents aren't perfect, but then they make us kraft mac & cheese and everything's good again.

an extension for the woman accusing judge brett kavanaugh of sexual assault. late last night, senate judiciary committee chairman chuck grassley giving christine blasey ford more time to decide whether she'll testify before the panel. attorneys for ford say she spoke with the fbi on friday after receiving multiple death threats. a "washington post" article details how ford's credibility will become a central issue. d i know you spoke with multiple experts for your piece, but as a former prosecutor who says the worst is yet to come, what can ford expect going forward? >> if you testify es at a senate hearing about the assault,

you're in front of a panel of senators that they are for a very different audience. they're there not at the way of a trial but they're there to advise the senate. a lot of the senators have already come forward saying what their opinions are without ever having heard her testimony firsthand. >> many senators have said that ford may be mixed up. ford dismissed that claim. the experts you spoke with say her memory has been cloudy. what are the details that will stand out that will impact her testimony? >> the things that stood out to me were really the fact that she didn't remember a number of things. if she were making this up, it all would be coming from her mind and there wouldn't be anything she didn't know. also she said there's a third person in the room. she wouldn't create an

eyewitness to something that hasn't occurred. >> the president tweeted, kwoi e no doubt that if the attack on dr. ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local law enforcement authorities. why didn't someone call the fbi 36 years ago? >> we know that a common feature of child sex abuse is not disclosing right away. it takes children and anyone that's been victimized by this time of crime, it can take weeks, years, even decades to come forward. >> law enforcement was certainly different 36 years ago. >> yes. >> you say ford would be better off facing kavanaugh in a criminal trial instead of testifying before the senate. why is this? >> i think what it is is that a court of law offers both dr. ford and judge kavanaugh certain protections that they wouldn't see at a senate hearing.

the first is having an unbiassed jury, having a group of people who would have to listen to the firem testimony before coming to a conclusion. we have a number of senators questioning her who have already been public about what they believe is true or not true. you also have a judge who is preceding over the process to make sure there is demeanor in the courtroom and also to make sure that the rules of evidence are applied accurately and that question is relevant and admissible. >> senator orrin hatch said, the fbi does not do investigations like this. the responsibility falls on us, meaning those on the committee. but the fbi conducted an investigation into anita hill's allegations into scotus nominee clarence thomas. why is that different? >> it shouldn't be different. the fbi's job is to investigate the senate committee. their job is to advise the

senate on whether or not judge kavanaugh should be confirmed. they're not an investigative body. >> how will the me too movement play into this chemical. >> i think you saw yesterday after the president's tweet an outpouring of support for dr. ford. it's just a different time now, we hope it's a different time. >> we do hope it's a different time. thank you so much. >> thank you. well, the president's tweet yesterday challenging kavanaugh's accuser has ignite as flood of support for christine blasey ford on twitter. more than 38,000 tweets used the hashtag why i didn't report. many people explained why they chose not to reveal they had been sexual assaulted. sadly that is common place. almost two-thirds of sexual assaults in this country go unreported. rod rosenstein's future with the justice department and whether the president has the information now to fire him. the legal implications up next.

before the break, late night laughs on the battle over brett kavanaugh. chuck grassley, who says there's no need for the fbi to investigate the kavanaugh allegation. oh, so the hearing comes before the investigation just like on the classic tv show, order & law. following an accusation of sexual assault, supreme court justice nominee brett kavanaugh visited the white house today for the second day in a row. it's the first time an accused sexual assaulter had gotten into the white house without the electoral college.

you need insurance. but it's not really something you want to buy. it's not sexy. or delicious. or fun. but since you need both car and home insurance, why not bundle them with esurance and save up to 10%? which you can spend on things you really want to buy, like... well, i don't know what you'd wanna buy because i'm just a guy on your tv. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. than rheumatoid arthritis. before you and your rheumatologist move to another treatment, ask if xeljanz xr is right for you. xeljanz xr is a once-daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well enough.

it can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests, and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. don't let another morning go by without talking to your rheumatologist about xeljanz xr.

countdown to the midterms. 6 1/2 weeks to go. but actual voting for the 2018

general election has begun. new jersey begins today. south dakota, minnesota, vermont and wyoming started accepting votes yet. >> get out in 2018, because you're voting for me in 2018. you're voting for me. you're voting for me. >> president trump at a rally last night in missouri told supporters not to be complacent about the midterms. but polling by the republican party reportedly shows an overconfidence among trump followers with 57% of strong trump supporters believing the democrats don't have a chance of winning the house. but the latest average of the generic ballot gives democrats an eight-point lead. a new report claims deputy attorney general rod rosenstein discussed wearing a wire to secretly record the president and invoking the 25th amendment

to have him removed from office. the "new york times" reports the statements were made in a meeting with fbi and justice department officials one week after president trump fired james comey. now the justice department is pushing back. one justice official telling nbc news rosenstein's statement was sarcastic. rosenstein responded saying, quote, i never pursued or authorized recording the president. any suggest i ever advocated for the removal of the president is absolutely false. joining me now is danny sevales. is it legal for someone to secretly record the president based on concerns he's unfit to serve? >> the question is when is a joke not a joke? can the ag or deputy ag initiate an investigation by wearing a wire against the president. d.c. is a one-party consent

jurisdiction. virtually anyone can record anyone else as long as one party consents to the recording. on the other hand, there is substantial support for the idea that the president cannot even be investigated let alone prosecuted or indicted while he's in office. one person who took that view historically was supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. on the one hand there's an idea that you can't even investigate the president. but there's not a whole lot barring the doj from having the president investigated. and that would include wearing a wire or wiretapping if they can get a warrant and a title iii wiretap authorization. >> does this give more fuel to the president's claim about a justice department out to get him, a deep satate? >> the president has tweeted in the past that it's frustrating that he fired james comey on the recommendation of someone who is

now investigating him for that same firing. that's the president's view on the idea that he's being investigated by rosenstein. it wouldn't be a big surprise if he used this asing a justification for firing rosenstein, even though he doesn't need any particular justification. this is not a for cause job. he serves at the pleasure of the president. >> we've been hearing an unusual amount about the 25th amendment lately and this headline pushes it forward again. how difficult is it to prove a president is unfit to serve? >> it's very difficult. even rosenstein's press statement today indicates that it wasn't realistic that he was making that recommendation because it would require the par participation of so many others, including the cabinet, then it would go to congress. removing the president under the 25th amendment is a very, very difficult thing to do. the 25th amendment was enacted

in the wake of jfk and envisioned situations where the president is completely incapacitated. rosenstein's statement today reflects the view that president trump, while erratic and maybe eccentric, doesn't rise to that level, at least in rosenstein's view. >> it was predict that sied tha report on rosenstein will have a major ripple effect and could be used to shut down the mueller investigation. >> i think it would be very difficult to shut down the mueller investigation, because mueller has planted investigations in other places, such as the southern district of new york. if president trump wanted to do away with an investigation against, say, his former attorney michael cohen, he will have to fire the attorney general, the deputy attorney general, mueller. he would then have to start running down the line in the southern district of new york firing prosecutors there until

he found someone who could see fit to let go the investigation in the southern district. thanks for watching. it's now time for your business with j.j. ramberg. need a change of scenery? kayak compares hundreds of travel and airline sites so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. cheers! kayak. search one and done.

carla is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of her body. she's also taking prescription ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. carla calls it her new normal because a lot has changed,

but a lot hasn't. ask your doctor about ibrance. the #1 prescribed fda-approved oral combination treatment for hr+/her2- mbc.

she's an actress, a mom and now jennifer garner is a business star with her line of all natural baby food products. and we go back to school and learn how some teachers are tapping into a side business selling learning materials to other teachers. when it comes to running your business, we have your back with information and advice to make you a success nap's a. that's all coming up next on "your business."