oh the new one! we'll bring out the dogs. mush! (dogs barking) the old one's just fine! we'll do anything, seriously anything, to help our customers. thanks. ally. do it right. tonight, they prepare to go before congress and the country. no matter what happens this moment will change our nation's politics. later on, roz roderosenstein.

was he being sarcastic. first, negotiation after negotiation. shifting -- the judiciary committee on thursday at 10:00 a.m. i, of course, will be there too. some of the details about this hearing have been worked out. the hearing will be open and dr. ford will testify first. democratic senators will ask questions. but important factors are so far unresolved. like how much time will be allowed for those questions. and then there's the matter of whether republican senators themselves or perhaps their staffers or an outside counsel will do the questioning. this is important in part because all the republicans on the committee are men. at the same time, judge kavanaugh is calling the allegations completely false, saying he's never done anything like what the accuser describes to her or to anyone. the white house says three people identified by dr. ford as

being at the party where all of this happened say they have no memory of either of incident or the party where it was said to have happened. and then there's the politics. there was a shift this week in tone from republicans from let's hear everyone out to full speed ahead. >> judge brett kavanaugh is a man of integrity. >> brett kavanaugh, fantastic man. >> a stunningly successful individual. >> it's going to happen. it's going to happen. >> we're going to plow right through it and do our job. >> and i believe that judge brett kavanaugh will soon be justice brett kavanaugh and take his seat on the supreme court. >> it's worth mentioning that senate democrats are still pushing for an fbi investigation before the hearing gets under way. with that, i want to welcome in my panel this evening. with me onset, political analyst and fornler chairman of the rnc, michael steele. washington correspondent and msnbc contributor, catty kay.

joining me from nashville, contributor and the author of the soul of america, mr. john mitch mitchum. thank you all for being here. i'm going to start with you, john. i want to talk about the arc of history. we have this set date and time a moment that, regardless of the outcome, seems sure to end up in our history books. that christine blasey ford is a name that we'll remember alongside anita hill, for example. i'm wondering what do you think has changed in the decades since anita hill went before the committee and what does it say about us as a country? >> well, precious little has changed since 1991. i think that the kavanaugh drama and the thomas drama are ch chapters this a story that goes back to the middle of the 1950s. it's when president eisenhower,

the first republican president in 20 years, imagine that. first republican president in 20 years appoints warren to be chief justice of the court. the warren court does remarkably historic rulings on integration. on sectarian school prayer. republicans are living to some extent with kind of cultural memory that republican presidents have not always delivered on the conservative agenda that the base believed they might deliver on. so if 1962 with the school prayer decision happened. it was a nixon appointee, harry blackman who wrote the roe decision. the first -- 1990, the first justice, that george h.w. bush appointed was david suitor seen as a stalking horse, not conservative enough.

what you're seeing with the passion of the quotations you just showed, part of what's driving trump and pence and mcconnell is this republican insistence that every seat must be ideologically pure. it goes way back, it's deep in the dna and the supreme court which for much of our history has been political, unquestionably it's political. but it's become polarized now. that's the inflection point we're seeing now. >> very interesting. some republicans on the committee have muted expectations about what may come from thursday's hearing. here's senator lindsey graham. >> doesn't know anything that dr. ford could say that would persuade you to vote against kavanaugh's nomination, honestly? >> i would listen to her. but i'm being honest with you and everybody else. what am i supposed to do? go ahead and ruin this guy's life based on an accusation, i don't know when it happened, i don't know where it happened and everybody named in regard to being there said it didn't

happen. i'm just being honest. she should come forward, she should have her say. she'll be respectfully treated. what did you expect us to do with an anonymous letter to begin with. what do you expect somebody to do with an accusation this big not verified in any way. bring it forward, i will listen. but i'm not going to play a game and tell you this will wipe out his entire life because if nothing changes it won't with me. >> so perhaps, michael steele setting aside that anybody could be entitled to a supreme court seat. he's had a distinguished life on the bench. what do you make of lindsey graham's response? >> i think long and short, every republican should keep their mouths shut between now and thursday. the better part of valor is to be quiet and say nothing. every time they do, they make the situation worse. it is very clear from the very beginning of this, this had been -- the outcome has been pre judged. if that's not true, in fact, it

is absolutely true in perception. the american people looking at this, particularly women looking at this are feeling and getting the sense that no matter how you work the machinations in the process, you use that as your excuse, your kuj 'ol, whatever you want. they're saying come thursday, the imagery of this woman sitting there in this panel of white men looking down on her and prying into an affair -- incident that happen -- >> very personal incident. >> the personal incidents given their already public statements makes for a very untenable situation. i understand that they've got to answer the question. but i think at this point it's best to say i plan to hear her out and move on. every time they open their mouth, it goes a little further south. >> catty kay, there will be a difference in that there will be four women on the panel which we didn't have before.

they're looking for anybody but their republican senators asking the questions. >> that is one of the things that changed since 1991 in anita hill and the conversation is out in the open. we have now had more women talking about incidents like this and more men being found to be guilty of incidents like this in the public and so women are believed more than they used to be. now, that doesn't mean this incident happened. it doesn't mean that brett kavanaugh is guilty. it means that the shifting since 1991 is we assume she's not telling the truth. let's give her a fair hearing because she may well be telling the truth because we know now that a lot of women have come -- because within nanoseconds, a new movement of why i didn't report this. because women are saying, actually, no, mr. president, it can happen to me. that does not mean i reported it at the time. >> based on what lindsey graham said and sort of everything we know or our knowledge of what we don't know about this, do you think there's anyway that this hearing could change the

outcome? >> it doesn't seem to me like senators on the republican side are open to having their minds changed particularly. i think that raises the issue of why we should be having an fbi investigation. i've spoken to members of the fbi who said absolutely, we could investigate this. would it be dispositive, we don't know that. but there are certainly things we could do. we could talk to judge -- mark judge. we could ask him those questions and go through her yearbook and his yearbook. there are things that could be done if we really wanted to get to the bottom of what happened and find out whether she's telling the truth, whether her memory serves her correctly or whether he is telling the truth and those steps are not being taken. let's bring in democratic member of the senate judiciary committee, senator chris coons of delaware. thanks for taking the time to be on the show tonight. >> thank you, kasie. let's start with the plan that late last week started to

crystallize where republicans senators don't seem to want to be doing a lot of the questioning directly themselves. they inted, want to bring in an outside counsel or have their staff do it. it's been -- my sources told me is because they want women asking questions of dr. ford. what's your take on this plan from the republican side? >> kasie, i think our goal as the senate judiciary committee ought to be to show that we've learned something from the decades when anita hill was questioned by the yooud committee f my republicans degrees don't think they can handle the challenge of respecting dr. ford and questioning her in an appropriate and supportive way, then perhaps they shouldn't be serving on the committee. this is the kind of role that senators shouldn't be outsourci outsourcing. if they don't like the optics of having a group of all white men on the republican side of the judiciary committee of grilling dr. ford, perhaps they should reconsider their questioning

style and consider that we could have offered to dr. ford an appropriate hearing by including an fbi background check, by inviting or compelling mark judge to testify, by bringing in the former fbi agent who administered a lie detector test to dr. ford that she passed or by calling in front of the committee expert witnesses on the dynamics of sexual assault and how it affects memory. any of those steps would have improved the quality and the even handedness of this hearing. instead, the republican majority rejected all of them. >> have you made up your mind about who you think is telling the truth here? >> i have made up my mind that i'm voting against judge cave kna kavanaugh. i focused on presidential power concerns which are well outside the mainstream. i also believe dr. ford. i think we should have a hearing where it's possible for her to have a respectful opportunity to

present her allegations. but i think there are a few members of both sides, republican and democrat, where who they believe this week will make the difference in how they vote. >> so you do think that in the case of perhaps susan collins or lisa murkowski, this hearing could make a difference to the outcome of the confirmation? >> i do. >> so the "wall street journal" editorial board put out this op-ed piece about what it seems to be a lack of due process afforded to kavanaugh by the democrats. the democratic standard for sexual assault allegations is they should be accepted as true merely for being made. the accuser is assumed to be telling the truth because the accuser is a woman. the burden is on mr. kavanaugh to prove his innocence. if he is unable to do so, he is -- this turns american justice and due process upside down. we have an outspoken advocate of dr. ford's and play how she responded to the right to the presumption of innocence during an interview she did this morning. take a look. >> i put his denial in the

context of everything that i know about him in terms of how he approaches his cases. as i said, his credibility is already very questionable. it is so important that there be at least an investigation so there's some effort at collaboration. as far as his friend, mark judge, not even testifying, that is astounding to me. >> what do you think, senator coops, is the due process obligation and sort of presumption of innocence standard that should be applied to judge kavanaugh in this case? obviously, this is not actually a criminal prosecution. >> right. it is important for all of us to remember in how we prepare ourselves for this session of the judiciary committee and how we talk about this that dr. ford is not on trial. there are, if we have reasonable estimates of the number of victims of sexual assault in the country, there would be hundreds of thousands of victims of sexual assault who will be watching these hearings closely.

if she is put on trial, it will discourage so many others from ever coming forward with their stories in other settings to challenge the conduct of other assault perpetrators, men or women. they are mostly perpetrated by men. i do think it's important that judge kavanaugh be given a fair and reasonable opportunity to bring his side of the story forward. but frankly, what would have made this into a more fair and appropriate confirmation hearing was to do what we do with all nominees for a lifetime seat on a federal court, whether the supreme court or other court, which is to have the fbi do an expanded background investigation. every single nominee who comes in front of the judiciary committee has had to clear a background check. i'll remind you, it's judge kavanaugh who is seeking a lifetime appoint. not dr. ford who is seeking to charge him in a court of law. frankly, the standard here is what senators find compelling

and what we ought to be considering is as broad a range of evidence and insight and advice from experts as is possible. >> senator, to that point, the "washington post" reports that democratic staff have been researching the broader culture of the prep academy world in which kavanaugh lived. they're reading the writings of mark judge, the kavanaugh friend who ford said was in the room. they plan to grill kavanaugh on the controversial twitter thread from ed whalen that you may have seen. i'm wondering, which line of questioning do you intend to pursue in this hearing and do you think those reported ones would be fruitful? >> i'm preparing with my team a number of different lines of questioning. you know, one of our challenges is going to be with 21 members of the judiciary committee. there's lots of different potential lines of questioning and so given that i'm not the most senior democrat, i'll have to be prepared to follow-up with additional questions depending on how other senators have

questioned. i'm concerned about judge kavanaugh's truthfulness given the ways in which he declined to answer or avoided answering a number of my direct questions. we met in my office privately first and i told him my areas of concern is jurs prudence. then i sent him a public letter telling him what i would be questioning him on the haeearin. i questioned him in his confirmation hearing and i sent him written questions in a letter of follow-up. i felt that on several critical points in particular around his extreme view of presidential power that judge kavanaugh was not forthcoming with me and did not defend a number of his more extreme positions. >> do you think he lied to you? those exchanges? >> i wouldn't put it that directly in my questioning of him. i'd say that he shaded or avoided answering or changed the subject or cited other jurists

to avoid having a direct conversation. i would have far preferred he directly defend his views. i think they can be defended but from a different perspective from mine and from a perspective that is outside the mainstream of american jurs prudence. >> senator chris coons of delaware. thank you. we'll be watching and i'm sure i'll be chasing you down the hallway with a microphone at some point this wake. >> thank you, kasie. jon meacham, i want to go to you. if you are a senator sitting on this committee, you have to be thinking about what you're going to do this week with an eye toward history. >> you know, it's the margaret j. smith principle. the republican senator from maine, susan collins, call your office. very early on, within a matter of months after joe mccarthy launched his campaign seeking communists in the government, stood up and gave a speech

called the declaration of conscience. laying out exactly what the case against mccarthy would become. only six senators joined her. mccarthy dismissed her as snow white and the six dwarves. yet four years later, it took the men four years to catch up shall the senate censures mccarthy on almost the same grounds that senator smith laid out. the thing i say to folks on few occasions when they ask. >> we ask you a lot. >> what do you want us -- it's actually effective. what i'll say is what do you want us to think about when we look at your oil portrait. they can't imagine a world where we're not staring at their portrait. that gets through the shell. this is one that people are going to think about for a long time. it's not an appropriations vote. it's not a passing piece of

legislation. this is about the character of the country. it's really down to three or four senators. that's what we're talking about here. we're talking about senator collins and murkowski and senator corker from my state who is not facing the voters again. so what they have to do is decide, is this someone they want on the supreme court in light of all these circumstances? >> jon meacham's questions to all of you. what do you want people to look at when they see your oil painting? we've got much more to come. we'll talk about how all of this could impact our elections this year and for years to come. plus, he haven't scratched the surface of the rod rosenstein story which could have its own questions in the kavanaugh confirmation. as we go to break, if a picture is worth a thousand words, take a look at this one. the associated press caption reads, senator lisa murkowski

reacts to a question from a reporter on the subway as she responds to questions about supreme court nominee, brett kavanaugh. clearly, doesn't want to be thinking about this. kasie d.c. back after this. uh. i didn't believe it. again. ♪ ooh, baby, do you know what that's worth? ♪ i want to believe it. [ claps hands ] ♪ ooh i'm not hearing the confidence. okay, hold the name your price tool. power of options based on your budget! and! ♪ we'll make heaven a place on earth ♪ yeah! oh, my angels! ♪ ooh, heaven is a place on earth ♪ [ sobs quietly ] ♪ ooh, heaven is a place on earth ♪ you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase.

need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done.

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.

welcome back. new polling suggests that the push by republicans to get kavanaugh confirmed could come at a steep political cost. our new nbc news "wall street journal" poll shows over the

past month kavanaugh's support dropped significantly among women over 50. suburban women and independents. take a look at the striking gender gap on our new generic congressional ballot. 47% of men say they want a republican-controlled congress while 44% prefer democrats in control. women, meanwhile, favor democratic control by a 25-point margin. 58-33. the "washington post" reports, quote, the moment brings into sharp relief the gulf that has emerged between the two political parties as they navigate america's cultural reckoning on sexual assault. scores of female candidates to midterm elections. by crontrast, trump's agenda an style and the fact that the gop leadership stands in lock step with him mostly, are undoing years of often painstaking work by party leaders to court more female and minority voters.

katty, kaye. this is the year of the women. they're mostly democratic women. seems like women mostly on the democratic side are set to vote against this. it seems like it's not irreparable damage but long-term damage. >> if you look at the numbers in favor of democrats over republicans amongst women, it's hard to see how a party can win long-term with that kind of a gap amongst women voters. the question is still going to be, who actually turns out in november. you can have women saying that. whether they get to the polls and the numbers we expect them to get to the polls is the question. and how many motivated by the kavanaugh hearings, by donald trump on the republican side and look at that same poll, donald trump's own approval numbers barely shifted recently. that's going to be a driving factor on the republican side too. >> i think that's exactly right. that's what a lot of republicans are counting on, quite honestly. that their turnout model is such that it will offset polls like

that. so that gap is a lot narrower. the private polling they show, it's not 22 points or 25 points. it's actually more like 10 or 15. >> it depends who actually shows up. >> based on who will actually show up. they've been dismissive for quite some time now of the sort of groundswell of movement by democratic voters. female, independent types, center left voters. on the bet that, come november, again, those voters will not show up in the numbers. i'm just not convinced of that. >> what's your take, michael, on the -- i feel like there's been a back and forth about, if kavanaugh's confirmation takes a turn for the worse this week, whether that's helpful or hurtful to the republicans in the midterm elections. some argue that well, that will mean there's no reason to vote republican if they can't get it done. on the other hand, some are arguing that's going to animate

our base because they'll care more about this judicial appointment. >> if that does not get done, they will be so ticked off. to what point? i mean, if you can't get this done, if you can't stand behind this man, a guy that we want, someone on our list, et cetera, why will we then go and show up in november and give you the reins of power to do what? there's a real potential split there with the base if that happens. which is why you hear mcconnell going full steam ahead, we're charging forward, we're pushing this through. >> if they don't get kavanaugh through, the incentive to keep the senate is that much stronger. they just cannot afford to let the democrats win the senate because then they're not going to get whoever else the president nominates as a conservative. >> that's a good point. the counter argument to that counter argument, here it is. the democrats, if this fails this week or the next few weeks, all of a sudden the senate is in

play for them and that base vote we're talking about really gets amped up and the turnout model changes. >> interesting. jon memeacham, what does histor tell us about this poll we're seeing where women are abandoning the gop in large numbers? back in 1991, we saw the first year of the woman, dianne feinstein, there was old clips this morning on the sunday shows giving a victory speech back then. is this the kind of thing that has a potentially permanent impact? what are the lessons from history in your head not in mine tell us? >> well, john tyler, tyler midterms were huge. michael is good on that. and katty is upset because they lost the empire. we can talk about that later. two things happened in the fall of 1991, that began to pre-figure eight years of

democratic rule. one were the thomas hearings and the thomas confirmation. it wasn't just the hearings but the fact that they happened. the testimony occurred and justice thomas was confirmed. that's the one. the other was the democratic race, actually i think in your native state, the senate race where harris wofford defeated richard thorn berg in a special race and two guys weren't particularly well-known ran the race on the issue of health care. it was a surprise democratic win in pennsylvania and it should have been a big flashing red light to the george h.w. bush white house, but they didn't pay a whole lot of attention. in many ways those were two of the pearl harbors for republicans heading into 1992. the two midterms, if folks are really have a slow night at home and they want to go online, i think the two that are

significant here are 1966 which was a huge check on the great society. it didn't -- it pre-figured nixon winning in '68. but the other -- the two things happened in that year. one is 1964 president johnson won in a massive landslide. he said that these were the most hopeful times since christ was born in bethlehem giving you a sense of how johnson saw himself. by 1966 -- sorry. >> exactly. >> hyperbole is not a new thing. the thing that happened very shortly thereafter, 24 months later, you had significant republican gains in the midterms, including the election of a fellow out in california named ronald reagan as governor. in 1994, though that didn't pre-figure a shift in the white house in 1996, it did begin this more tribe lis particular era. the house flipped for the first time in 40 years, massive governorships. i remember the first time i

heard someone say george w. bush was going to be president was on the night he beat ann richards, a democratic senator who said watch that space. >> so interesting. jon meacham, thank you as always going back to tyler, through the '60s. thank you. >> when we return, we'll have the latest reporting on "the new york times" bombshell on rod rosenstein that somehow hasn't detonated yesterday. the president has been quiet. the freedom caucus sort of shrugged, what is going on? we'll try to get to the bottom of it, next. and home insurance. so 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.

[kno♪king] ♪ memories. what we deliver by delivering.

that's confident. but it's not kayak confident. kayak searches hundreds of travel and airline sites to find the best flights for us. so i'm more than confident. kayak. search one and done. we are the tv doctors of america, and we may not know much about medicine, but we know a lot about drama. from scandalous romance, to ridiculous plot twists. (gasping) son? dad! we also know you can avoid drama by getting an annual check-up. so we're partnering with cigna to remind you to go see a real doctor. go, know, and take control of your health. it could save your life. doctor poses! dad! cigna. together, all the way. dad! so 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.

now to the fallout from the rod rosenstein scoop. "the new york times" reports that a week after james comey's firing, deputy attorney general rod rosenstein suggested secretly recording the president in the white house. it discussed recruiting cabinet members to invoke the 25th amendment to remove the president from office. the times said of people briefed on the events or memos written by fbi officials, including andrew mccabe. the justice department sources tell nbc news that rosenstein was joking when he discussed wearing a wire during one of the meetings. a spokeswoman told the times the same thing. other sources said rosenstein confirmed he was serious about the idea but also followed up by suggesting other fbi officials interviewing to be the new director wear a wire as well. we should point out that rosenstein has issued not one,

but two denials. the latest reads, quote, i never pursued or authorized recording the president and any suggestion that i have advocated for the removal of the president is absolutely false. joining the conversation is new york times justice department reporter katie benner. katie, thanks for being here. i want to start with you to make sure that we have our heads around exactly what we're talking about. this is a very critical period of time it seems. it's emerging as a critical period of time inside the justice department. what was the context around rosenstein's remarks? what was the pressure he was under? >> sure. you have to think back on how chaotic the justice department was in those days. jim comey was fired and rosenstein had been on the job for a couple of weeks. it was his memo about jim comey that was used as a pretext for the firing. so he was a little bit blind sided by the fact that the white house publicly said this is why we're firing jim comey even though the president had other remarks to suggest that there

were other motives. he was blind-sided by this. he felt used, he was new on the job and felt like something needed to be done both to deal with the comey firing, deal with the ongoing investigations of the fbi that related to trump and somehow bring order back to the justice department. >> the purpose of wearing the wire, i mean, as we said, nbc news is reporting said it was sarcastic. the times says it's serious. what's goal of wearing a wire? >> this is one of the open questions. we don't know exactly why he said he would do that. presumably, it would be because he wanted to go into the white house and find proof that something was amiss. that things were not being handled well or managed well. as you can see from the impromptu firing of jim comey. certainly that's not a well-managed situation and you have to wonder what's going on. we take a step back and look at the stories the times published on friday, we look at the book that came out, omarosa's book

that came out, a book, fire and fury, every single one of these accounts from completely different people and sources all say things were not being managed well. >> or maybe the wire is simply so you don't end up in james comey's shoes and it's your word against the president. >> amid the conflicting reports about whether rosenstein was joking when he suggested wearing a wire to record the president, we thought it might be useful to show all of you what it looks like when rod rosenstein tells a joke. >> i announced this new policy here in new york a few weeks ago, i explained that the term piling on refers to a football player jumping on a pile of other football players after the opponent is already -- i played football about 40 years ago. so i like that metaphor. but last night i learned that the merriam webster dictionary uses a different meaning. it describes piling on as joining other people in criticizing someone, usually in an unfair manner. i also have experience with

that. >> he does seem to stop for the punch line. so presumably others in the room would know he was intentionally making a joke. but katty kay, i found it -- i've been a little bit surprised by the lack of reaction so far from caucus members. in fact, if you watched any clips on fox news, they've actually been arguing to the president that this report is all a setup, he shouldn't do anything, he shouldn't fire anybody. so far the president hasn't made a move. >> it's quite surprising, noticeable, the number of allies of the president's who have come out, starting with sean hannity, trey gowdy, lindsey graham said hold on, take a breath. this is not a good moment to think about firing rosenstein. i don't know whether it's because the president is listening to sean hannity, but there's a strong feeling amongst conservatives this would not be a good move heading into the

midterms. for them to go through this process. >> the cynic in me can't help -- >> i like the cynical version. >> can't help but think this is all part of an ongoing strategy, not really knowing all the backgrounding on the sources for the times, but i find it curious that this narrative pops up now. the way it pops up. and there is, as everyone in this town pretty much knows, efforts being put in place right now to fire rod rosenstein along with several others once this election is over. >> ideally after. >> we know you're chomping at the bit, but like pull back a little bit. >> put that tweet in the scheduled file. >> wait until the 10th or 11th of november and then you can have at it. they still don't get that even that action after the election is going to be a big problem for republicans on the hill and for

the president. but this is the strategy. >> to be fair to the times, reporters have been working on this story for more than a year. even though the timing might seem strange right now, it's not that we were just given a file of incriminating information on rod rosenstein six weeks before the election. >> of course. katie benner, thank you so much. we'll be following your reporting and your colleagues. michael steele, katty kay thanks for being here. the last time the supreme court was -- former senator max baucus was there for the clarence thomas vote and he talks about how that chapter wo could play out again. to worry about homeowners insurance. could play out again. feeling better? i love you, pookie bear. [parrot 1] i love you, pookie bear. [parrot 2] i love you, pookie bear! [parrots] i love you, pookie bear!!!

get to know geico and see how easy homeowners and renters insurance can be. (guard) i've seen things unnatural things. these people they don't sleep... like ever. they reveal in extremes and defy limitations. these pursuits may seem unnecessary. but the scariest thing i can imagine is a world where this, doesn't exist. captured lightning in a bottle. over 260 years later as the nation's leader in energy storage we're ensuring americans have the energy they need,

whenever they need it nextera energy. man 1: this is my body of proof. woman 1: proof of less joint pain... woman 2: ...and clearer skin. woman 3: this is my body of proof. man 2: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the #1 prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. avo: humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman 6: need more proof?

woman 7: ask your rheumatologist about humira. man 1: what's your body of proof? opportunlike here.rywhere. woman 7: ask your rheumatologist about humira. and here. see? opportunity. hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. ev-er-y-where. about to be parents. it's doing a lot of kicking down there. meeting the parents. it's gonna be fine. and this driver, logging out to watch his kid hit one out of the... go dani, go! opportunity is everywhere. all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪

the coming testimony of dr. christine blasey ford and brett kavanaugh invited comparisons to the anita hill/clarence thomas hearings. both a knit hill and dr. ford are professors. they both initially resisted going public or being identified before ultimately doing so at the 11th hour. both also drew categorical denials from the supreme court nominees that they spoke out against and both of those nominees also had presidents who were willing to strongly defend them. >> this decent and honorable man has been smeared. >> this is not a man that deserves this. >> he will be confirmed. and in the end, he will get his good name back. >> he is such an outstanding man, very hard for me to imagine

that anything happened. >> but the differences are important, too. hill and thomas were both adults at the time of the alleged misconduct. dr. ford claims she was assaulted by kavanaugh in high school. ford's accusations allege a physical assault. hill's involved repeated harassment over a number of years. it was also a different era. hill leveled her allegations at a time when there were no women on the senate judiciary committee and only two women in the entire senate. while dr. ford has come ford at the height of the me too movement. with all of that in mind, let's take a look at this "today" show piece that aired on the eve of anita hill's appearance on capitol hill. >> protected by airport -- and life has clearly changed for anita hill. law professor from norman, oklahoma, has been under enormous attention ever since she charged judge thomas with sexual harassment.

friday morning she goes, as does in effect judge thomas, on trial. who is telling the truth? >> i don't think anyone wants to harm miss hill. there are a lot of inconsistencies in her statement, in her various statements and a lot of things that could be played out. but i think most of us feel sorry for her. i think she's been badly used. >> joining me now is former democratic senator max baucus of montana. he served in the senate during the confirmation of justice clarence thomas. senator baucus, great to see you again. thanks for being on the show tonight. i think i want to start. >> you bet. >> by asking you what do you remember about that time? what was it like to be in the halls of the senate? what were the conversations like? democrats actually controlled the chamber at the time and frankly, what ultimately happened didn't really age very well. >> no, it didn't. it was very awkward, obviously, and just very difficult.

anita hill made very credible charges. she's quite sympathetic and of course, judge thomas was outrageous in his -- outraged, maybe outrageous too in his responses. very uncomfortable. what really strikes me now with the similarities with today's hearing with judge kavanaugh, if the hearing is scheduled on thursday, we'll have to remember that this is not a court of law. there are virtually no rules. senators both sides of the aisle can ask any questions they want to ask virtually. some have agendas. some want to be president. there will be a huge temptation on the part of some senators to drama advertise. they know, too, that they can go so far before they cross that line. i do think that most senators will comport themselves quite well, because this is such a serious matter. having said that, unless there's some dramatic new development which we cannot now anticipate,

i think you'll find owl democrats voting against kavanaugh and all republicans voting for him on the committee. >> to pick up on that point about people running for president, i can't help but think of some of the democrats on that committee, cory booker, camilla harris who both had moments in the original hearing as well. what would you urge them not to do in this hearing? >> well, i urge them first to be very judicious, very fair because they'll be watched so closely. they should not try to grandstand. they should not try to show how smart they are or show that they're great cross-examiners of judge kavanaugh. they should be fair and ask good questions and fair questions. >> senator, this is something to go back to the anita hill comparison and your time then. there's been conversations about joe biden who was the chairman of the committee at the time, who is now openly mulling another bid for president in

2020. it said that this is something that he regrets and certainly something that might be difficult for him to grapple with if he were to launch a bid. how do you think he should approach the potential potentia and focus on what he did during the anita hill years if he does get back in the arena? >> well, i think he's needing to apologize to anita hill because he didn't let witnesses appear. understand he's made a general apology but not apologized to her personally. i think he needs to do that if he wants to be president, he probably should anyway. >> senator, what would you advice be to male senators who are going to be questioning dr. blasey ford on the republican or democratic side? >> remember that you don't know how these experiences, as many

women have faced are bottled up and they don't come forward. it's just natural for women not to come forward subjected to such a horrific experience like the one alleged here and men have to understand that. i think very few men do understand that. but they should, those on the committee when asking questions of kavanaugh or of dr. ford, but just be fair. we're here to get them the truth. did this incident occur or did it not occur? one of the two is not telling the truth and real effort here to try to determine in a fair judicious way who is and isn't telling the truth. >> senator max baucus, thanks for that. we'll talk to an attorney who helped get gorsuch and kavanaugh into the circuit court jobs. he joins us just ahead. course, . -fridge, weather. -clear skies and 75. -trash can, turn on the tv. -my pleasure.

-ice dispenser, find me a dog sitter. -okay. -and make ice. -pizza delivered. -what's happened to my son? -i think that's just what people are like now. i mean, with progressive, you can quote your insurance on just about any device. even on social media. he'll be fine. -[ laughs ] -will he? -i don't know. -will he? ♪ as moms, we send our kids out into the world, full of hope.

and we don't want something like meningitis b getting in their way. meningococcal group b disease, or meningitis b, is real. bexsero is a vaccine to help prevent meningitis b in 10-25 year olds. even if meningitis b is uncommon, that's not a chance we're willing to take. meningitis b is different from the meningitis most teens were probably vaccinated against when younger. we're getting the word out against meningitis b. our teens are getting bexsero. bexsero should not be given if you had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose. most common side effects are pain, redness or hardness at the injection site; muscle pain; fatigue; headache; nausea; and joint pain. bexsero may not protect all individuals. tell your healthcare professional if you're pregnant or if you have received any other meningitis b vaccines. ask your healthcare professional about the risks and benefits of bexsero and if vaccination with bexsero is right for your teen. moms, we can't wait. ♪

♪

♪ no matter when you retire, your income doesn't have to. see how lincoln can help ensure you still have income every month of your retirement, guaranteed, at lincolnfinancial.com. believe it or not, it's been nearly a year since we came on the air here at kasie dc and the show evolved a lot. if you and your dogs and various other pets are unavailable to be here every sunday starting after

tonight's broadcast, we'll put out a pod cast with highlights. you can listen to the best of the panels with news makers by subscribing on itunes and places you get your podcasts now. listen to them sundays, if you miss the show or mondays. any time is great. kasie dc in podcast form. when we continue we are joined by guests but first, kasie dvr. our producers watch the shows so you don't have to. we'll be right back. so you can be confident you're getting the right flight at the best price. cheers! kayak. search one and done.

but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios. fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.

i'm begging you... take gas-x.ed beneath the duvet your tossing and turning isn't restlessness, it's gas! gas-x relieves pressure, bloating and discomfort... fast! so we can all sleep easier tonight. need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done.

it looks like we'll have a dramatic face-off on capitol hill. >> dramatic historic hearing. >> the most consequential senate hearing. >> brett kavanaugh's confirmation hanging in the balance. >> everything i know about judge kavanaugh goes against in allegation. >> we have four other people that claim we have no re recollection of the event. >> i think american people expect there to be a high evidence burden. >> if you try to get a warrant based on this, you couldn't even get a warrant. sometimes people are accused of things they didn't do. >> every accuser always deserves the right to be heard. but i also think the accused needs to be heard. >> i believe her, let's put it that way. >> what in the heck did she have to gain by doing this? >> president trump was restrained on this issue on friday. >> uncharacteristic restraint. >> relative restraint. >> if the attack on dr. ford is

as bad as she says. >> charges would have been immediately filed. >> it's not something we want to do to blame the accuser. >> i would advice the president to let us handle this. >> we reached out to every republican member of the committee, none of them agreed to morning. >> we invited all ten democrats to join us and for the second week, none of them accepted. >> you must be mean. [ laughter ] welcome back. we come on the air this hour with breaking news. the new yorker magazine publis published a piece claiming sexual misconduct allegations against brett kavanaugh against yale. this is a second allegation. the woman at the center of the story is 53. and attended yale with kavanaugh. the new yorker reports that the claim dates to the 1983, '84 academic school year when kavanaugh was a freshman at yale university. the offices of at least four democratic senators received information about the allegation and at least two have begun investigating it. in a statement, kavanaugh wrote

to "the new yorker" this alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. the people that knew me then knew this did not happen and said so. this is a smear plain and simple. i look forward to testifying about the truth and defending my good name and reputation for dh character and integrity i've spent a lifetime building against these last-minute allegations. we reached out for additional comment. there is a comment in the story. joining me princeton professor eddie glaw junior and betsey wood driand former chief nominan counsel to the u.s. senate committee on the judiciary that saw confirmation and worked on proceedings for neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh. leeann caldwell doing so much reporting on the story joins me

by phone. i'll put greg on the spot here in a second. it's his first appearance here with us on kasie dc. naturally not going to be an easy everything. you and i have been working on this story all over last week and i know you have done a particularly deep dive into what the coal mitty may have been learning about this particular allegation. so what do you know about what has happened here and can you walk us through what the story is reporting, as far as the nature of this allegation? >> sure, kasie. so, yeah, nbc is looking into this, as well, several days ago and that this woman went to college. she went to under grad with kavanaugh at yale university and it was an assault from what we know and what the new yorker is reporting but it's an improper

sexual misconduct that he exposed himself. we reached out to the woman, debra ramirez this weekend and she pointed us to her attorney. her attorney has not responded yet, but she did immediately respond and point us to that. so could this put another cloud on brett kavanaugh? this is happening on the eve of his confirmation hearing or the reopening of his confconfirmati. this hearing is supposed to take place on thursday. this will be more fuel for critics and democrats that have problems for kavanaugh and his nomination. >> leeann, while i want to give our viewers a little bit more context on exactly what is being alleged here since i got the story sitting in front of me and i hope you're on your way to our burro. she talks about how she was at a party where they were playing a

drinking game where we were sitting in a circle. she tells t s "the new yorker." there were two other male students looking on at her request, "the new yorker" isn't naming them but "the new yorker" says they know who they are and a third male student exposed himself. she said i remember a penis being in front of my face. i knew that's not what i wanted even in that state of mind. she recalled remarking that's not real and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her and one encouraging her to kiss it. she said she pushed the person away and in the process touched him. ramirez who was raised catholic said she was shaken and she said i wouldn't touch one until i was married. i was embarrassed, ashamed and humiliated. she said brett was laughing and i can see his face and his hips going forward and somebody

yelled down the hall, brett kavanaugh just put his penis in front of someone's pace. sam stein, this is a different type of allegation than the one that dr. ford is making and yet, still something that constitutes sexual misconduct. >> yeah, there is a lot to process here. a few things jump out. there is an actual time or relative time and actual place in this allegation and people who are quoted as having been there. some say they believe it. some say it didn't happen. so it's somewhat different from what dr. ford is saying. the other thing that is different here and this is a small distinction but important. kavanaugh at the time was 18, not 17, which would make him a legal adult. during his confoeirmation hearings, he said he was asked a specific question, as a legal adult have you engaged in a sexual assault and maybe messing of the wording, this could be a

contradicti contradiction. overall, i mean, this is, you know, it's clearly not a good development and what i'm struck at the most is senate republican staffers according to the new yorker were told of this allegation last week and spent the week just plowing forward with this and saying repeatedly that there is nothing else out there or insinuating there is nothing else out there. i guess they don't feel like they don't have another path here but it is somewhat remarkable they have been so unequivocal in their support to this point. >> we played earlier in the show a monotaj of republicans shifting and pushing forward a little bit more aggressively and i also think if you-all in the control room might want to track down, that was questioning from the hearing and she asked kavanaugh about any sexual misconduct when he was a legal adult. we'll try to track that down. i want to go to kristen welker because we received stiemtateme on this matter.

what do we got? >> let me read you the latest statements we're getting from white house officials. the first one from raj, the alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. the people who knew me then know that this did not happen and said so. this is a smear plain and simple. i look forward to testifying on thursday about the truth and defending my good name and the reputation and character and integrity i've spent a live time building against these last-minute allegations. let me read you this second one. this 35-year-old uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the democrats designed to tear down a good man. this claim is denied by all who were said to be present and who is holding consistent with what many women and men who knew judge kavanaugh say the white house stands if i recally behind judge kavanaugh. the first one coming from judge kavanaugh. the second one from kerry and of course, raj shaw has been

coordinating communication. i want to under score what you and sam were talking about. this is a white house digging in and clearly not backing down and we've seen that increasingly in the president's public statements. last week kasie, we spent a lot of time talking about how restrained president trump was when it came to the first allegation and it changed on friday. he attacked her and suggested that the first accuser dr. ford is lying and so we wait to hear from president trump himself but these statements that we're getting from judge kavanaugh and kerry from the white house an indication i think we're going to see an administration that continues to dig in on this confirmation. this is supposed to be a big victory and the political calculations changed. >> when this first came out there were a lot of -- when dr. ford's allegation surfaced i

should say there is a lot of suggestions perhaps the white house was ready to cut and run with kavanaugh if it turned out that that was what was necessary and i think you touched on this a little bit in what you said but do you get the sense that is totally off the table and they are willing to see this all the way through or is that still a possibility? >> i think that's still a possibility and i think president trump hinted at that and again seeked a waiver. there is that one key comment he made standing out on the south lawn and said and that was the first indication he was potentially, potentially considering another direction. now that there are two

allegations. they were very deeply concerned about the first allegation by dr. ford and i've spoken to one person who said if the second person comes forward that will be problematic. they are undoubtedly processing this new information, what type of pressure will mount against the president and when he has nominees they are confident in, he decided to go in this direction, at some point he determined not to be a win for him but this is not going to be someone confirmable. there are other directions in which he can go. so i think the pressure is going to mount. we get the refesh our twresh ou feeds to see if he weighs in. >> i want to go back to leeann caldwell who joined us on the phone at the top of the hour and we have her in front of the camera and we are now ready to

report at nbc news we learned from three sources familiar about the allegation it's been reported in detail in the new yorker, leeann caldwell has been leading reporting on that. leeann, reset the table for those just joining us as everybody learns and digests this, we should be clear we're reading here on the set this story together from jane mayor of the new yorker. >> sure, kasie. this woman debbie ramirez who lives in boulder, colorado appears to be married. she went to yale under grad with kavanaugh from 1983 to 1987. and while they were at yale, kavanaugh exposed himself to her. the new yorker has more details than we were able to get at this point in our reporting.

"the new yorker" says he tried to get her to touch his penis when he exposed himself but we know democrats on capitol hill are aware of this allegation, they have been looking into it and opening, wanting to open an investigation into it. you know, ramirez, it's interesting because she's actually an advocate for victims of sexual abuse and domestic violence. she works at a nonprofit in boulder, colorado where she's a volunteer and a board member to this non-profit of women, for women who have gone through domestic violence, ramirez' sister went to yale with kavanaugh. this new allegation is going to throw it into a tail spin. he's been preparing to testify on the first allegation against

a high school student from when he was in high school, as well, so the story is getting deeper, kasie. >> leieann, stick with us. i want to go to you, greg. you're a veteran of navigating these processes and please correct me if i'm wrong. you've been way deeper in this but i've covered many of these confirmations and certainly nominations have been sunk over lesser issues than what we're seeing unfold this week. what -- take us inside the process if you want to get c kavanaugh confirmed, what are you doing tonight. >> people should know that a core function of the gnat -- senate committee and judicial philosophy for every nomination look deeply into these fbi files

that they got on each nomination. the process normally happens in a completely confidential way with just a couple staffers working to assess claims like this and if there are claims like this or other claims of behavior inconsistent with being a judge, nominees don't move forward and often nobody hears about it. somebody is not confirmed. >> it's quietly shut down. >> right. it's unfortunate i think to start with. this is began in such an open process. i really wish that when the letter first came to senator feinstein, the committee would have begun that traditional, confidential process that respects the rights of both the accused and accuser. but here is where we are now. i think that senator grassley and staff are talking with feinstein and her staff to assess these claims next. obviously, thursday cannot now just be about the claims of dr.

ford. they need to do some investigating of this matter, too. there are multiple people named being there and i'm sure they will name them and hear if this occurred. judge kavanaugh denied it. at the end they said it doesn't have a clear test to apply assessing whether or not a nominee should be disqualified. it's not beyond a reasonable doubt certainly. it's something short of that but something more also than mere allegations that are unreliable allegations sometimes. we'll have to see what comes out in the next few days. >> what do you read into the decision and forceful refusal to reopen the fbi background check? is that a situation where they simply don't want to know what the results of that might be because they didn't want to open the door to things like this? from your perspective, it seems standard operating procedure. >> there is a lot of misunderstanding what the fbi does. they don't really get to the

truth of any of these allegations. they simply surface them to be reviewed by the committee. what might have happened is that letter a couple months ago was shared with the fbi. the fbi might have sent out interviewers to interview dr. ford and the other people at the party who have given a statement to the fbi which the judiciary committee would have considered. it doesn't add anything at this point when the committee is talking to those people. >> let me get your take on this because it would add something because as you rightfully point out, this is not a criminal proceeding. this is a political proceeding and what judge kavanaugh has to do is convince enough senators these allegations are false and should vote for him. so i've been struggling with this. i feel like the only real way for him to plausibly do this and it's a very difficult path is to say open my book up again. bring in the fbi. call mark judge. have him appear as a witness. bring in these yale classmates. have them sit down.

do everything you can. leave no stone unturned because i have nothing to hide. that's the only way i see him convincing on the fence senators there is no skeletons in his closet. he is not doing that and i'm wondering is that the directive of grassley? who makes the calls? >> a lot of what happens in the proceedings has to be explained in the context of decades of poisoned wells and the process getting worse and worse and worse and i think if you're chairman grassley to go out in a process that will yield nothing new, he hears that in the context of a couple months the democrats try to disrupt and delay proceedings and he's been very patient and it's been stretched out longer and longer. >> and the question about senator feinstein in receipt of the letter for weeks. b betsey wood drivriff, this is a

audience of two, perhaps four. senator collins, senator flake, senator corker because what would cause mitch mcconnell to say to the white house hey, you have to pull this nominee is if he learns that this makes it impossible for them to vote for him. >> i think that's right and part of the reason this alligation is important is one thing republicans will say privately talking about the issue with dr. ford is when someone is alleged to have committed an attack like this, it's almost always part of a pattern and i heard republicans say part of the reason there is so much skepticism on the right of dr. ford's allegations is she was the on one raising the issue of sexual misconduct. now that there is a second allegation, isn't going to work anymore. >> speaking of patterns, we also

want to show you a tweet from michael avenatti. we don't have information about this. we're showing it to you. you probably knows who he is because he's known as stormy daniels attorney. he's saying just before the story broke quote i represent a woman with credible information regarding judge kavanaugh and mark judge. we'll demand the opportunity to present testimony and to the committee and will like-wise be demanding that judge and others be subpoenaed to testify. my client is not debra ramirez. we want to go to eddie who has been patiently waiting. i'm thrilled you're joining the table. quite an evening to be here. weigh in on what happens next here if we have go and under score nbc news does not have any reporting at the moment about what michael avenatti is claiming but potentially a third. >> well, we're going to see. i think we will see whether or

not the process is completely broken. there has been a question about the way the judiciary committee conducted its business. in someways they have kind of reduced this to he said, she said by not in someways reopening the fbi background. it's important they corroborated the story of dr. blasey ford to get folks there and give a better sense to call witnesses to get a better sense of what happened so we can get to the truth. that's what it means to take seriously the claim, not to say women should be believed because they are women but take seriously the claim she was sexual assaulted means to investigate it with some integrity. so here we have now, not only the issue around the freshman year at yale with debra ramirez and what michael avenatti is saying, they have to pump the brakes and if they don't, it raises serious alarms. i'm interested to see how people will react if they continue to

plow forward. >> still to come, we'll talk a lot more about this with the panel and we'll also look into the potential political fallout here. the wonderful steve kornacki joins us to talk about how the thomas confirmation propelled women leaders in the senate. kasie dc back after this. kayak searches hundreds of travel and airline sites to find the best flights for us. so i'm more than confident. kayak. search one and done. doespeninsula trail?he you won't find that on a map. i'll take you there. take this left. if you listen real hard you can hear the whales. oop. you hear that? (vo) our subaru outback lets us see the world. sometimes in ways we never imagined.

♪ he eats a bowl of hammers at every meal ♪ ♪ he holds your house in the palm of his hand ♪ ♪ he's your home and auto man ♪ big jim, he's got you covered ♪ ♪ great big jim, there ain't no other ♪ -so, this is covered, right? -yes, ma'am. take care of it for you right now. giddyup! hi! this is jamie. we need some help.

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. 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.

have you committed verbal or physical harassment or assault of a sexual nature. >> no. >> have you ever faced discipline or a settlement related to this? >> no. >> we want to go to the author of "the red and the blue." i highly recommend it. it will help explain to all of you how we got here today to this fight over judge brett kavanaugh because we're seeing it play in a polarized and dramatic way than ever. steve cokornacki, it looks like we're having a snowball situation with judge kavanaugh. he denies the allegation with dr. ford and this allegation from debbie ramirez. that said, i know you've been looking pretty deeply into how

this was already on track to potentially affect how women view the republican party. can you break down for us in your view of the potential consequences for the gop pushing forward with this confirmation in light of the new information? >> i think the question is sort of it remains to be seen obviously this pushes it into brand-new territory here but we seen a couple things happen already with the politics of this. already before there were any allegations before any of the sexual allegations emerged what you had was the most polarizing before allegations this was basically about the same number folks were for it as were against it and we saw last week came out a couple days ago after the first accusation that public opinion moved slightly against kavanaugh, was 34% supporting the nomination, 39% opposing it so obviously this immediately

raises the question if you throw something else into the mix here is it going to take that opposition and raise it further? because i think when you start to look at what the politics are in terms of a confirmation here, the question i keep asking myself is try to look on paper republicans in the senate have the votes of course to confirm this. if they all stick together, they can confirm this. so what would it take just politically, what would it take to scare off republican votes in the senate from this? i'm not sure a poll that shows 3 34-39, i'm not sure that's enough opposition to take a republican inclined to vote yes and say hey never mind i can't be there. if it starts to get worse, 34-38. if it starts to get worse, if it starts to open up and moves well into the 40s and gets higher than that, you get into a situation there and politics change in a way susan collins, somebody else looks at this and

says regardless of everything else just on the politics of it, i can't be for this nomination. >> well, steve, it strikes me from covering both senator the polling and politics matters, the historical nature of this moment has to weigh heavily on your mind especially if you're one of a few women senators on the republican side. >> again, that dynamic, too, again, we can only imagine we will see it of course but only imagine what is being report that dynamic is only to be magnified. in the politicians she's up for reelection. the one thing that's entered them before these accusations

emerged with a polarizing nomination the things she worries about is a conservative republican party and base in maine saying could this risk her nomination in 2020 when she's up and raises the possibility these are senators to bigger terms than immediate politics. they think in terms of legacy a and. >> i want to note in a statement two of the male classmates who ramirez allege were involved, she's telling in her telling there were two men that looked on. the wife of a third student and three additional classmates, they all disputed the accounts. we were the people closest to brett kavanaugh. we spent a great deal of time including in the dorm where this

incident took place. some of us were friends with debbie ramirez during and after her time at yale. we can see if the incident debbie alleges occurred, we would have seen or heard about it and we did not. some of us knew debbie long after yale and she never described this until brett's supreme court nomination was spending. we're the people that know the truth and we told them that we never saw or heard about this. so greg, i want to go to you on this because what's the caselation cas calculations if you're the white house, you have denials and allegations, it is a situation where you have now two people telling stories, telling their stories about what they say happened to them and no real way to kind of necessary go back and fact find after all of this time. at what point is this too much

and judge kavanaugh and his family. >> it's obviously, it's both the women making allegations and the judge particularly if he's innocent of these allegations, his family and it's terrible for the process. we're talking about political polarization and keeps getting worse and worse. it's remarkable to be in a time where half the country is eager to believe an allegation of sexual assault against a judicial nominee and half of the country is eager to disregard allegations of sexual assault. all because of what party somebody belongs to. no, we have to hear what we can about each event, talk to the witnesses, and add it up. i think it is surprising that none of this came out before and the judge has been through multiple background reviews partz of his nominations. his nomination to the d.c. circuit was controversial at the time and dragged on for years. it was in the papers. it's surprising that nobody has

came forward then. but here we are. you don't vote for the nominee. >> to this point, perhaps the different between then and the change and one person making an allegation doesn't necessarily change the status quo but often and you witnessed this before, the power has shifted. >> there is a significant amount of evidence that emerged over the last year or so since the reporting on harvey weinstein kicked this movement into gear that women who are not publicly known or famous or powerful can have a huge impact on the reputations of men they charge with this sexual misconduct. for many women and victim s vic

that's empowering and resulted in a lot of conversations. kavanaugh's supreme court nomination is again rageneratin media coverage. it pails in comparison and that could also potentially have contributed to ramirez' decision to come forward. >> i spent -- >> we should remember the why i didn't report? i was going to say i was horrified and you feel a tremendous amount of sadness. >> i want to clarify in a second. >> i will say what is interesting is we're in a weird conversation where conservatives have said that the me, too

movement is being weaponized in a way and that this is all sort of an engineered plot to try to submarine a supreme court nominee. i find that incredibly dismissive and gross and silly because not every until knnomin facing this. i will agree, you cannot 100% feel like dr. ford's allegations are accurate without knowing or being there at the time. and you can't know for 100% true brett kavanaugh's allegations are sincere. you have to understand the context here, the people are finally getting empowered to come forward and being triggered by a host of things. the element of the nomination and culture we're in. >> greg? >> i wasn't saying i was surprised she would only come

forward now if this happened. during this conif terrible fbi review that happens with every nomination where they go and talk to dozens of dozens of people that knew you for your entire life, schools, jobs, ex lovers and disgruntled business partners, often something surfaces and it's surprising that apparently no whisper of this surfaces from i heard this at yale and somebody said that. >> right. so not women need to come forward but that was never heard in circles. interesting. we'll take a break but when we come back, steve kornacki will have his confirmation to help propel a generation of women in congress. >> one more thing, never again when a woman comes forward to tell her story to a committee of the united states senate will she ever be assaulted for telling the truth.

copd makes it hard to breathe. so to breathe better, i go with anoro. ♪ go your own way copd tries to say, "go this way." i say, "i'll go my own way, with anoro." ♪ go your own way once-daily anoro contains two medicines called bronchodilators that work together to significantly improve lung function all day and all night. anoro is not for asthma. it contains a type of medicine that increases risk of death in people with asthma. the risk is unknown in copd. anoro won't replace rescue inhalers for sudden symptoms and should not be used more than once a day. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition, high blood pressure, glaucoma, prostate, bladder, or urinary problems. these may worsen with anoro. call your doctor if you have worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling,

problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain while taking anoro. ask your doctor about anoro. ♪ go your own way get your first prescription free at anoro.com. get your first prescription free 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. need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done.

and i am a certified arborist for pg&e.ughes i oversee the patrolling of trees near power lines and roots near pipes and underground infrastructure. at pg&e wherever we work, we work hard to protect the environment. getting the job done safely, so we can keep the lights on for everybody. because i live here i have a deeper connection to the community. and i want to see the community grow and thrive. every year we work with cities and schools to plant trees in our communities. so the environment is there for my kids and future generations. together, we're building a better california. i came here because of how anita hill was handled and i know committee members need to have the facts. that's why they are asking for an fbi background investigation

and i believe that would produce a much better hearing. it's serious and i hope all the members of the committee take this seriously and do this in the right way because it wasn't done in the right way with anita hill and he had a generation of women that said it's not worth it coming forward. i don't want this to be this message. >> patty marie became the first woman to represent washington state in the senate in 1992 in the wake of conconfirmation. the year of the women saw many more and the first black woman to be elected. kay bailey hutchison was elected a year later. for more on the fact toors thend now i want to go to steve kornac kornacki. steve, go. >> yeah, well, you set it up perfectly. october '91 clearance thomas hearings, he is confirmed and the backlash it is the year of the woman in '92 and what was that really defined by? it was female driven activism to

nominate candidates for office in '92 at astonishing levels in the chaos that that was unleashed by that. it was actually mainly within the democratic party. let me show you what i mean. the first earthquake in '92 the year of the woman. she won a democratic primary march '92 in illinois. she beat a two-term democratic inco income wakucumbent senator. she goes on to win the senate seat that fall. then lynn never got elected to the senate but came from nowhere to win the democratic nomination in pennsylvania in '92. pennsylvania the home of arlynn spector. he was on the committee that interrogated anita hill. she played a clip of spector and paused it and said did this make you as angry as it made me? she went nowhere and lost by a point and a half. that was an earthquake caused by

the year of the woman. boxer, feinstein ran on the backlash. both of them nominated. both nominated in june of that year in california. patty murray got nominated in september. this was an open senate seat by the way in washington state because the incumbent democrat brock adams had to leave the senate because of sexual misconduct allegations and patty murray called herself a mom in tennis shoes got nominated. so many women nominated within the democratic party not entirely but heavily with so many nominated, there was not a huge gender gap but with so many nominated, the number soared from two to six, 28-47 number of women. in fact, with six women in the senate after the '92 election, george mitchell. the majority leader held a press conference and announced we'll put in a women's bathroom for the first time. >> yeah, steve, you know, that's a great point.

it's funny. i walk by that bathroom all the time. i was quite the fight and it is -- we shouldn't -- i should stop being surprised by how many institutions are around being all male but the numbers when it triples from two to six. >> two to six, right. >> yeah, well, thankfully there are more women in the senate and both parties now. eddie i want to go to you on this because it seems as though we were already set up for something similar to happen here in 2018 and this story about judge kavanaugh regardless of how the hearing goes later on this week, if there is still going to be a hearing is poised to really set that up even more so. >> absolutely. remember we saw a lot of energy, even though the clinton campaign wasn't successful. we saw a lot of energy around that campaign and the women's march across the country where you saw mass mobilization across

mass and race and boundaries and some interesting ways pushing the envelope. something interesting about 1991 and now there was a process. that process is now completely broken in my view race is bracketed. so the gender question is. what is interesting between 1991 and now is the fund mental ground of sexism in the country hasn't been up ended if that makes sense. i've been asking myself the question particularly given the last segment about what have we learned from the me too movement? have we learned? right now we've been embroiled in adjudicating individual cases of harm, but what's the big cultural shift? since we're confronting this,

what does it mean for people to have to say, you know, take the claim seriously, right? you have folks actually trying -- having to assert, believe me. because folks don't believe that someone when they say they have been assaulted that they have actually been assaulted, that they have been raped and that your child has been harmed. so i'm trying to ask the question when will we move from these kind of individual moments to this broader cultural question of how sexism and patriot continues to over determine everything in this society and what does it mean to take dr. ford seriously. what does it mean to take debra ra mer yez s ramirez seriously? it means to take the claim seriously and to investigate it

and that's what republicans are refusing to do. >> all good questions. just ahead, we'll have betsey woodriff has new reporting. as the one who is always trapped beneath the duvet i'm begging you... take gas-x. your tossing and turning isn't restlessness, it's gas! gas-x relieves pressure, bloating and discomfort... fast! so we can all sleep easier tonight. so let's promote our falle a homecomingtravel dealame, on choicehotels.com like this. touchdown.

earn a free night when you stay just twice this fall. or, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com

so shark invented duo clean. while deep cleaning carpets, the added soft brush roll picks up large particles, gives floors a polished look, and fearlessly devours piles. duo clean technology, corded and cord-free. when the guy in frontd down the highway and fearlessly devours piles. slams on his brakes out of nowhere. you do, too, but not in time. hey, no big deal. you've got a good record and liberty mutual won't hold a grudge by raising your rates over one mistake. you hear that, karen? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges... how mature of them. for drivers with accident forgiveness liberty mutual won't raise their rates

because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ welcome back to kasie d.c., we are talking through this new "new yorker" allegation and betsy, i know you and i have been talking to republican staffers on capitol hill, what are you hearing? >> the sense that i've got talking to a couple of republicans in touch with the process, there are mixed predictions as far as what it means for kavanaugh, it would be going too far to say that republicans are overwhelmingly pessimistic. i've spoken to people who say they believe he can survive this. one criticism we should expect to hear from republicans, ton crystal clear i'm not making this argument. this is app argument we can

expect to hear there are parallels, we can expect republicans to say both of these women are represented by democratic attorneys, we can expect to say both of these women are bringing forth their allegations late in the process. republicans will say that that means the allegation should be treated with less weight we can also expect republicans to argue that it undercuts the seriousness or the gravity with which we should view these allegations because there aren't additional witnesses that can corroborate the allegations these women are making. those are the arguments i expect to materialize in the coming days and weeks, those are the arguments that you can expect to hear from kavanaugh's defenders,ky guarantee you there are conversations going on at a fevered pitch as republicans are working overtime to put together their on-the-record response to this. a lot of folks in orbit of the nomination process, the most visible outside surrogates, last i checked haven't yet gone on the record. the messaging is still being put together.

my sense is those messages are laid out or what we can expect to hear. >> i just got off the phone with senator lindsey graham, to your point said it was very suspicious that this was coming up at this particular time that was his quote. very suspicious, and he said that you've got to prove to me that he, judge kavanaugh, is not who he says he is. so we are going to have very much more reporting analysis, as all of this unfolds after the next hour here on kasie d.c., we'll be right back. i want to believe it. [ claps hands ] ♪ ooh i'm not hearing the confidence. okay, hold the name your price tool. power of options based on your budget! and! ♪ we'll make heaven a place on earth ♪ yeah! oh, my angels! ♪ ooh, heaven is a place on earth ♪ [ sobs quietly ] ♪ ooh, heaven is a place on earth ♪ that's confident.

but it's not kayak confident. kayak searches hundreds of travel and airline sites to find the best flights for us. so i'm more than confident. kayak. search one and done. we are the tv doctors of america, and we may not know much about medicine, but we know a lot about drama. from scandalous romance, to ridiculous plot twists. (gasping) son? dad! we also know you can avoid drama by getting an annual check-up. so we're partnering with cigna to remind you to go see a real doctor. go, know, and take control of your health. it could save your life. doctor poses! dad! cigna. together, all the way.

carla is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast dad! 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. ♪ c♪ crawl inside, wait by the light of the moon. ♪ applebee's to go. add a fountain drink to your next order for just 99 cents. now that's eatin' good in the neighborhood.

we actually have a lot more to come tonight. kasie d.c. going to go for another hour. special coverage of this new allegation. we're going to be talking about the breaking "new yorker" magazine story about brett kavanaugh. plus nbc news has our own reporting, our panel isn't going anywhere, neither should you. this is an insurance commercial. but let's be honest, nobody likes dealing with insurance. which is why esurance hired me, dennis quaid, as their spokesperson because apparently, i'm highly likable. see, they know it's confusing. i literally have no idea what i'm getting, dennis quaid. that's why they're making it simple, man in cafe. and more affordable. thank you, dennis quaid. you're welcome. that's a prop apple. i'd tell you more, but i only have 30 seconds. so here's a dramatic shot of their tagline

so you'll remember it. esurance. it's surprisingly painless.

so you'll remember it. breathe right strips are designed to simply when nighttime nasal congestion closes in, open your nose right back up. ♪ breathe better. sleep better. breathe right. so shark invented duo clean. while deep cleaning carpets, the added soft brush roll picks up large particles, gives floors a polished look, and fearlessly devours piles. duo clean technology, corded and cord-free. with pg&e in the sierras. and i'm an arborist and fearlessly devours piles. since the onset of the drought, more than 129 million trees have died in california. pg&e prunes and removes over a million trees every year to ensure that hazardous trees

can't impact power lines. and since the onset of the drought we've doubled our efforts. i grew up in the forests out in this area and honestly it's heartbreaking to see all these trees dying. what guides me is ensuring that the public is going to be safer and that these forests can be sustained and enjoyed by the community in the future.

♪ welcome back to kasie d.c., we have breaking news tonight surrounding supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. the "new yorker" has published a piece claiming new sexual misconduct allegations against him during his college days at yale. the woman at the center of the story, deborah ramirez, is 53, and went to school with kavanaugh, her claims date back to the 1983-84 academic year when kavanaugh was a freshman at yale. a at least four senate democrats have received information about the allegations and at least two have started to investigate in a statement kavanaugh wrote to the "new yorker," quote, this alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. the people who knew me then know that this do not happen and have said so, this is a smear, plain and simple. i look forward to testifying thursday about the truth and defending my good name. the white house issued a statement in response to the allegations in the "new yorker." they say quote this 35-year-old uncorroborated claim