slow this down. if you're confident in the facts you want to get them all out? >> i think they made a decision on that last week, right after dr. ford went public. they'd try to jam it. so i think they're on a path to jam it. i don't think think they'll back off of that. >> all right. that does it for this hour. "mtp daily" starts right now, katy tur in for chuck todd. >> thank you. if it's monday, we're talking about thursday. good evening. i'm katy tur in for chuck todd. welcome to "mtp daily." as if things in washington couldn't get any crazier the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein who oversees the russia investigation is staying on despite a frenzy of speculation today that he'd be

gone. both sides are scrambling to figure out what the president is going to do. a person close to the white house described the current situation among the president's allies as chaos. there were leaks that rosenstein was going to resign during a meeting at the white house today. but multiple sources tell nbc news that rosenstein wouldn't go unless the president personally fired him. which the president hasn't done. at least not yet. of course this comes after that bombshell "new york times" story claiming rosenstein suggested last year that he wear a wire in the oval office. a remark that sources tell nbc news was made sarcastically. and rosenstein has called the report factually incorrect. still, there were reports that rosenstein was expecting to be fired. but here is what mr. trump told reporters today right here in new york city. >> are you going to fire rod rosenstein? >> i'm meeting with rod rosenstein on thursday when i

get back from all of these meetings and we'll be meeting at the white house. i spoke with rod today and we'll have a meeting on thursday when i get back to the white house. >> as you heard there with rosenstein's job hanging in the balance, the president is scheduled to meet personally with him on thursday. which is a really important day because thursday is also when the president's embattled supreme court pick brett kavanaugh and the woman accusing him of sexual assault are scheduled to testify. this as another allegation -- this time from kavanaugh's college years, is surfacing. which kavanaugh also denies. moments ago, here's what the president said when asked about kavanaugh's future. >> we hope he'll be confirmed. he's a fine, fine man. a great scholar. great at everything he's ever done. and it would be sad indeed if something happened to reroute that. this is a fine man and we

certainly hope he's going to be confirmed. >> so here we have the future of the russia investigation, the future of the supreme court, and by extension the future of the trump presidency all potentially colliding later this week. we don't know what the president is going to do, but it feels like both sides are preparing for a worst case scenario. right now. ben wittes is an editor-in-chief of law fair. and a political reporter at "the new york times" and msnbc political analyst. a republican strategist. and jason johnson, politics editor at the root.com and you guessed it, an msnbc contributor. welcome to everybody. ben wittes, there are people out there who are floating the shiny object theory which is that the president and his team seeded this doubt about rosenstein, talked to reporters. told him he was coming in to

resign at the white house in order to distract from what would have been and has been a truly bad day for brett kavanaugh in terms of another allegation coming to light. >> i tend to think that gives them a little bit too much credit for strategy. the word that you used earlier was chaos. and i think that combining chaos with that kind of strategic shiny object diversion thinking is probably not right. i don't know that. but i suspect that this was more of a chaos situation than a deliberate misdirection. >> it certainly would be a dangerous game though if that's what he was doing. trying to distract or having the subject of the russian -- let me get this straight. the subject of the russia investigation firing the person who oversees the russia

investigation, to help someone he thinks might clear him of the russia investigation. it is hard to keep track of, but that's basically what could have been happening according to people that the president has a strategy here when there's bad news. >> whenever you say that something is specifically happening at this hour, part of the grand plan you're usually wrong. this is a white house that struggles to implement their own intentional grand plans on matters of great importance to them. >> why are they scheduling the rosenstein meeting which is going to be discussed and going to be analyzed in the days to come and will be looked at with great interest on thursday the same day that kavanaugh will be testifying? that to you doesn't sound intentional? >> i don't know if it's intentional or not, but it might be an issue of convenience. look, if you think you have a full hand, if they have control of the narrative of the situations, i don't think rosenstein is going to get fired by the president on thursday. i think he called his bluff

today. the president will say i don't know where this got out, blah blah blah you'll be fine. i suspect that the republicans are at least hoping to and again this is if thursday goes down the way we think it does. we don't know if ms. ramirez will be there and i right now it's a convenience. what could happen in the next 48 hours could completely change thursday's conversations. >> no doubt about that one thing is for sure, both sides believe this rosenstein news that the president getting rid of him or him resigning is a trap for obviously different reasons. let's listen to the right and the left on this. >> they want the president to fire rosenstein now. to blow up the entire kavanaugh hearings, to have republicans running for the hills. >> i have a message for the president tonight. under zero circumstances should the president fire anybody. >> if you're laying a trap for donald trump this is exactly how you do it.

>> the fact that the steps, the firing of comey, pushing out rod rosenstein, whether it's done now or later, the firing of the attorney general is apparently being contemplated after the election, these are in their cumulative form the same as the saturday night massacre and all designed for the same end. that is to give the president direct control over investigations which he may be implicated. >> it's a trap to go after trump. no a trap to go after mueller. >> well -- >> did i scare you? >> they're all out to get donald trump. that's the end of it. seriously, actually i think there's a unique opportunity for some of the senators like susan collins, like senator flake, like senator murkowski and senator corker to simply say, we will not even consider your supreme court justice pick unless you put the -- a vote to the floor that will protect the mueller investigation.

it went out of committee, something like 10-4. it could go on a vote tomorrow. they hold the keys, they can do this. we know that mitch mcconnell wants the court as his legacy. they should get this out right now. it's good politics and good policy. >> do they want to do that? is there any indication that murkowski or collins would do that? >> i don't think so. first of all, it will totally tick off the president, make him furious. what they have tried to do so far in the senate is push him off gently from the idea of firing jeff sessions or firing rod rosenstein. >> that's working out really well. >> just hope he doesn't. they're hoping he doesn't do it so they don't look bad. so far it's more or less worked out for them. so far. they're both still there. >> let's get back to roaden stein and what might be at play with the president. you have fox news saying mr. president, do not fire rosenstein, it's a trap.

if you have the democrats saying if you fire rosenstein it's a trap and you have jay sekulow arguing something different. from his own radio show today. >> if in fact rod rosenstein does end up resigning today because of his statements that he's made, i think it's clearly becomes necessary and appropriate for whoever the person put in charge of this, whoever becomes the deputy attorney general acting, i think it's really important that there be a step back taken here and a review and i think it's a review that has to be thorough and complete. basically, a time-out on this inquiry. >> i mean, that certainly would help the president. >> this is the president's private attorney trying to discuss and interfere with government affairs, government business. that's absurd and what i think part of the trap may be is the

trap of falling into obstruction. having his attorney help edge him there is insane. >> ben, should we read into it, he's saying resigning. is there a reason he's saying resign instead of fire? >> yeah, there is. i think all day today the press that was relying on the white house sources was saying that rod rosenstein is offering his resignation. has orally resigned and the press said wait a minute if he's disappearing it's because he's going to get fired. he's not resigning. so i think what you see when mr. sekulow says that is that they are -- the white house and the president's legal staff is trying to make any rosenstein departure look like a kind of voluntary thing that he did leaving with his tail between his legs after "the new york times" story on friday. and that appears to be not true. it appears to be that rod

rosenstein is not willingly leaving and that he has for now at least called their bluff and said if you're getting rid of me it's because you're firing me. so i think, you know, i think sekulow's comments are a part of a larger message that was kind of a white house spin that actually didn't work. >> for the record the white house has said that people are resigning when they have actually fired them. >> that's the scam. he caught them. he called their bluff. if you're going to fire me, you have to say it to my face. we know the president won't do that to him and that's what this was. i also think that the grand scheme of this is i think all of these guys' jobs are probably at risk after the midterms that's the truth. i think there's probably going to be a clearinghouse anyway, but i think long term, this is the part that i don't think some republicans seem to understand about the mueller investigation. as much as mueller is a thorn in their side, and he's a slow moving sort of damocles over the

entire administration t fact of the matter is while he's been on this investigation republicans have been able to spend more time doing their jobs. and if mueller is not engaging this investigation, then that means the leaking starts again. then that means every sort of individual person with an ax to grind starts to investigate this administration again. it's cleaner with mueller doing his job than before hand. i think it's in their best interest to let this guy stay there because if they keep the senate he can't be impeached anyway. >> what do you think of that? >> that's a great job. let the guy finish his job. that's what the republicans have been saying -- the sane ones, let him do his job. >> why won't they pass legislation to protect him? >> because it would be an affront to the president, start a war with the president. just remember this party and this president have a lot they're working on together despite appearances sometimes. they're about to cement a conservative hold on the nation's courts. that will last a generation. they passed a big tax cut.

there's a lot of policy coming out. there's a lot of good -- >> passed the tax cut, but that happened a year ago though. >> but it's still there. the party is getting a lot out of the trump presidency. starting a battle with the white house and sticking a thumb in the eye is -- >> except for maybe the house that will go down because donald trump has offended more independents, more women than anyone could have counted on. he has put them in almost a political death spiral if you will. that now they're worried about the senate which was almost unthinkable six months ago. that's because on things like kavanaugh like the president was being so good on friday by not talking but by late morning he had to open his mouth. donald trump does it again today. the president is not the character witness you want on an issue of sexual -- >> why -- hold on. what if the republicans -- to get on kavanaugh for one brief segment, why have the

republicans switched from being on the side of wanting to hear from somebody saying they're a victim to claiming this is all a big conspiracy? >> i think that there's a few issues at hand. i think that they wanted to have the hearing with dr. ford. but they felt that some of them felt that it kind of got moved around and they were kind of jumping through hoops for her. then you add the second accuser which no one really -- no one substantiated her comments. she's not even sure exactly what happened. and i think that also infuriated people. that this story came out. >> back to mueller, one last question to ben wittes. what is mueller thinking when he's seeing news that rosenstein might be fire, might resign, what is he thinking? is he thinking about a document dump? is he trying to protect the information he's been able to compile? what's going on with the mueller team? >> i don't know the answer to that question and if anyone claims to you shouldn't trust.

but one of the things that this serial dance about firing jeff sessions and firing rod rosenstein has given bob mueller is a lot of time. and he's got a lot of time to think about how would the environment change if jeff sessions were fired, how would the environment change if rosenstein fired. and whatever bob mueller is thinking, he's had a lot of time to prepare and figure out exactly what his actions sequence would be under any of those circumstances. i think one person who knew how he was going to play his hand today when we all thought rosenstein was not going to survive the day was bob mueller. >> i always trust someone more who's willing to say i don't know. ben wittes, thank you for joining the panel. nick, susan and jason stay with us. ahead, all eyes on thursday.

can rod rosenstein make it through? and what about brett kavanaugh? we'll ask chris koonce coming up next. gh we'll ask chris koonce coming up next your hair is so soft! did you use head and shoulders two in one? i did mom. wanna try it? yes. it intensely moisturizes your hair and scalp and keeps you flake free. manolo? look at my soft hair. i should be in the shot now too. try head and shoulders two in one. but prevagen helps your brain with an ingredient originally discovered... in jellyfish. in clinical trials, prevagen has been shown to improve short-term memory.

prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

♪ 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.

welcome back. the senate judiciary committee is already dealing with a firestorm over brett kavanaugh's nomination to the supreme court. and if rosenstein gets fired when he meets with president trump on thursday, members of the judiciary committee would be the center of that crisis too. i'm joined now by delaware

democratic senator chris coonz a member of the judiciary committee. >> yeah, we'll be most likely hearing from blasey ford and casting glances to see if that's any news from the meeting between president trump and rosenstein rod. >> there's a bombshell report that rosenstein said sarcastically of wearing a wire and using the 25th amendment to oust him. doesn't that give the president just cause to fire him? >> well, what i'm concerned about is two things here. first, rosenstein would not be the first senior official to muse about whether or not the president is fit to serve. if bob woodward's book teaches us anything, this seasoned man could find people who were

willing to share episodes large and small about the president's attention span, act to execute on basic policy -- >> but if i'm correct, rosenstein is the first to be named. >> i don't think that's the case. i think bob woodward named a number of officials who pulled draft executive orders off the president's desk in order to thwart his attempts at doing something that was unwise. let me get to the real point here. which is that protecting bob mueller the special counsel and his investigation is what matters most to me. the president may well have grounds for a conversation with rosenstein. my concern is who would come next. given that the president continues to tweet and to speak in ways that threaten or undermine the independence of the attorney general, the department of justice and the reliability with which bob mueller may be able to carry out his investigation i think all of us in the senate, republican and

democrat, should be concerned about what would happen if he were to fire rosenstein. >> you co-authored a bipartisan bill to protect mueller. have you spoken to any of the republicans who have signed on to that bill, maybe senator tillis or graham about where they stand now and whether or not they're willing to push mitch mcconnell to bring the bill to a floor vote? >> senator flake gave a floor speech i think just last week in which he called on mitch mcconnell to bring this bill up for a vote. i think it's striking that this bill that senator tillis and graham, senator booker and i introduced now well over a year ago when we were -- we were told initially when we introduced it, it would never get a hearing. it got a hearing. we were then told it wouldn't get a vote, it got a vote on the committee. and it came out with a strong 14-7. it's ready for action on the floor and i have spoken to the

cosponsors in recent weeks. i think this latest development should give all of us a more concern about the viability of robert mueller's investigation. as lindsay graham himself has said, it is in president trump's best interest to have this investigation go all the way through to completion. i think it may uncover more deeply concerning materials or facts about the possibility of collusion between russia and the trump campaign. others in the senate believe it will clear president trump. either way, it is the only way the american people can have confidence that this investigation was done thoroughly and completely. >> let's talk about brett kavanaugh and thursday. there's another allegation that has come out against kavanaugh. this one reveals in -- revealed in the new yorker. in her initial conversations with the new yorker she was reluctant to characterize the role in the alleged incident with certainty. after six days of carefully addressing her memories and consulting with her attorney, ramirez said that she felt

confident enough of her recollections. i think most of our viewers know the story of what she's claiming by now. kavanaugh has denied it. do you believe her? >> i believe both dr. ford and deborah ramirez and i think it's important that the senate judiciary committee show that 27 years after professor anita hill, another yale law graduate came forward with alarming accusations against then judge thomas that we are able to hear them. the question is whether their testimony will be persuasive to those members of the committee and of the senate who have not yet publicly made a decision about judge kavanaugh. i think for us to make that decision as a committee and a senate we should have testimony that's informed. by experts in how sexual assault and sexual violence impacts memory and a willingness to come forward and we should have the fbi doing a prompt but thorough further background investigation of both of these allegations. >> are you reviewing other

allegations against kavanaugh right now? are senator democrats aware of anything else? >> i can't speak for all senate democrats i can say myself i'm not directly aware of additional accusations. obviously, there have been other rumors. there have been some press reports but there's nothing else specifically that i know of that i'm expecting to be revealed in the next day or two. >> republicans are now calling this a big conspiracy, they're claiming democrats to do anything they can to try to take down brett kavanaugh. mitch mcconnell gave a fiery speech on the floor of the senate today. let me play a portion of that for you. >> democrats have signalled for months they'd put on whatever performance the far left special interests demanded and throw all the mud, all the mud they could manufacture. but it's not like they didn't warn us. but even by the far left's standards, this shameful,

shameful smear campaign has hit a new low. >> do you have a response to senator mcconnell? >> certainly. first, the discounting by the majority leader of the allegations brought forward by dr. ford and by deborah ramirez is a shameful smear campaign is why so many victims of sexual abuse and harassment don't come forward. they don't come forward because they're slighted, slandered, treated with disrespect. in the case of dr. ford, she and her family had to move because of harassment online and death threats. first, to just dismiss out of hand as a shameful smear campaign these allegations strike me of what's not appropriate in this setting. second, if we were interested in getting to the truth here, both parties would be recognizing that dr. ford and deborah ramirez have nothing to game. in fact, by bravely coming forward by volunteering to be interviewed by the fbi they're putting themselves at legal risk and they have already suffered some impacts for them for and their families.

it is judge kavanaugh who is seeking a lifetime appointment to the supreme court. and who i think now bears the burden of disproving these allegations rather than dr. ford and ms. ramirez who should be dismissed with slanderous accusations. >> michael avenatti has claimed he has more victims. has he reached out to the committee or have you reached out to michael avenatti? >> i have not reached out to michael avenatti. if he's got further evidence he should come forward promptly. >> and the other question, if kavanaugh is confirmed would you move ahead to try and impeach him or investigate him if democrats retake control of the senate? >> well, the senate as you know doesn't impeach it's the house that impeaches and then the senate that renders the decision one way or the other. i think it's a question for another day. but i do think the real issue that you're raising here is this. if he's confirmed and the allegations are not treated fully and fairly and

investigated, then there will be a cloud over judge kavanaugh's service on the supreme court if he's confirmed. >> certainly not a no, sir? >> that's right. i did not say no. >> just being clear. senator chris coons, thank you very much. and ahead, we have much more on the supreme uproar over brett kavanaugh as a new sexual misconduct allegation surfaces. protesters are sending a loud message to lawmakers. n to sign p for new insurance instead? for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

stay at la quinta. where we're changing with stylish make-overs. then at your next meeting, set your seat height to its maximum level. bravo, tall meeting man. start winning today. book now at lq.com "have you lost weight?" start winning today. of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle.

and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go. at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off. looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro. i saw my leg did not look right. i landed. i was just finishing a ride. i felt this awful pain in my chest. i had a pe blood clot in my lung. i was scared. i had a dvt blood clot. having one really puts you in danger of having another. my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®. to help keep me protected. xarelto® is a latest-generation blood thinner that's... proven to treat and reduce the risk of dvt or pe blood clots from happening again. in clinical studies, almost 98% of patients on xarelto® did not experience another dvt or pe. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least 6 of your body's natural blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor,

as this may increase risk of blood clots. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can... to help protect yourself from another dvt or pe. talk to your doctor about xarelto®.

welcome back. we're continuing to follow the breaking news on both ends of pennsylvania avenue today as rod rosenstein was at the white house. this was the scene playing out down the street on capitol hill. dozens of protesters opposed to judge kavanaugh's nomination were demonstrating outside the offices of flake, susan collins and others who will likely decide if kavanaugh is confirmed. the protests come days before judge kavanaugh is set to defend himself against an allegation that he sexually assaulted blasey ford when they were in high school. and then sexual misconduct allegations from another woman were made public. deborah ramirez is accusing him of misconduct when they were both at yale. kavanaugh vigorously denies both

allegations and insists today he is not withdrawing his nomination. here's what he told fox news in an interview set to air tonight. >> did you guys ever look at each other and say, i'm out, this is enough? this just isn't worth it? >> i'm not going to let false accusations drive us out of this process and, you know, we're looking for a fair process. where i can be heard and defend the -- my integrity, my life long record. my life long record of promoting dignity and equality for women started with the women who knew me when i was 14 years old. i'm not going anywhere. >> we have got more on the kavanaugh confirmation fight on the other side of the break. the other side of the break. or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage.

now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip. only when you book with expedia. ...to give you the protein you need with less of the sugar you don't. i'll take that. [cheers] 30 grams of protein and 1 gram of sugar. new ensure max protein. in two great flavors.

you can do it. we can do this. at fidelity, our online planning tools are clear and straightforward so you can plan for retirement while saving for the things you want to do today. -whoo!

well, people come out of the wood work from 36 years and 30 years ago and never mentioned it. all of a sudden, it happens. and my opinion, it's totally political. >> that was president trump reiterating his support for brett kavanaugh this morning. with me is lee ann caldwell who has been covering this story and the new allegation and the panel. lee ann, i want to start with you. we have a hearing that's set for thursday with dr. ford and judge kavanaugh. there's a new accuser. any talk about having that new accuser testify on thursday as well, any talk about delaying the hearing? what's the latest? >> hey, well, it depends on who you ask. there's a little bit of news that came out. a spokesman on the republican side said that the republicans on that committee have reached out to deborah ramirez's attorney. not necessarily about appearing on thursday, but as a

preliminary inquiry to see what she has to say. they say they haven't heard back from her attorney yet. as far as delay is concerned there's some democrats who have called for the committee to delay the hearing on thursday. senator feinstein said it should be canceled and some of the other democrats on the committee have said the same. but republicans are really digging in. we just heard moments ago from senator orrin hatch walking into the meeting in mitch mcconnell office. he called the latest allegations of ramirez phony. and so most republicans except for these critical undecided ones anyway are really coming to kavanaugh's defense at this 11th hour. >> susan, you're shaking your head at orrin hatch calling it phony, you shook your head calling it political. why? >> because this is exactly what republicans don't need and if you want to see kavanaugh go through this confirmation process, they need to shut up

and not say stupid things that's why. you not attack someone who made this complaint, who we know is going in front of the senate judiciary committee and offer testimony. that much is a done deal. why you would attack that woman i don't know. except you're the president of the united states and you like attacking women. that's what he does. at least verbally. >> where's the burden of proof here, where does it lie? a moment ago senator coons said that the burden of proof lies on judge kavanaugh to prove he's innocent. that's not the way that the legal system works. >> there's no burden of proof because it's a job interview, not a trial. if the it's a trial then the fbi should get involved. since it's a job interview which is really just people deciding do i think this person is good enough for this position or not, people lose jobs based on what they put on social media. so this idea that they want to pretend that we have to have a thorough investigation sometimes and sometimes it's -- it's

ridiculous. the senator is is going to say whatever he needs to say, but attend of the day it comes down to perception. i find it upsetting that i treat a sexual assault allegation not a trial. >> there's no playbook, or a set of rules. it is very ad hoc and entirely political. the president is right on that. it is all political. and the audiences for the claims are the public and the senators and what you see now is a series of blocking and delaying maneuvers. the point of getting the fbi involved is to get new facts into the discussion and to take some of the burden of proof or disproving off judge kavanaugh or his accusers. the point of having these testimonies, these hearings is to create new facts on which people can make a decision. but the decision will be based upon each member and the public. >> i want to ask you a question that i asked susan earlier.

i'm curious about what changed with republicans because as late as last week, most republicans were saying that they wanted to hear dr. ford out. that she should be given a chance to talk. today there's been a bit of a different tack in the way they're talking about the accusers. since ms. ramirez came out and made her accusation, republicans are calling this more of a big conspiracy on the part of the democrats, this is all political. what changed and usually when there are more accusers there's more credibility inferred on the accusations. it seemed to have switched with republicans in this scenario. why? >> yeah, it's been interesting, katy, the way that they have handled the second accusation compared to the first. they're still talking about the first accusation of dr. ford in the same way, saying she needs to be heard. this accuweathsation of debby rz

saying they could not corroborate the story after interviewing some 0 people and so they saw that there was enough here to try to denounce or to take away from some of ramirez's claims. they're also questioning the way it came out. they're questioning that it came out in the new yorker instead of through the committee or through some sort of investigation. and so they do see an opening. they see this as not as damaging as the first allegation. and the fact that they already allowed the hearing for dr. ford to move forward and they're saying, look, we're giving her her due process and giving her an opportunity to speak and so we'll see where it goes on thursday. >> do they have a point? >> no they don't. when you're talking about "the new york times" i said this before. if i get a call from the reporter, i may lie. i get a call from the fbi i'm telling the truth. so the idea that they want to use "the new york times" against ramirez or possibly use that

against dr. ford when they can bring the fbi in shows they're disingenuous about wanting a legitimate hearing. there's an easy way to solve this for everybody. and they're avoiding the most obvious way to make sure this is a fair hearing for everyone. >> but having dr. ford testifying and have other witnesses in her allegation come forward and testify under oath, i understand. but this is a woman, the second allegation is about she reached out to people seeing if they remembered it. they did not according to her. she was fuzzy on the details. didn't remember certain things, admitted they were drinking. it was a long time ago, there was nothing that collaborated what she said even by her own admission. and i think that's a lot different. when it came to dr. ford, there was a testimony versus a couple's therapy and other things along the way. this just is i think a case that does not need to go in front for a hearing. >> so the republicans are calling this a conspiracy and

the senate democrats will do anything they can to stop this nomination. if that's the case, why did the democrats not do it to neil gorsuch? >> there were no allegations that came forward on him. to pin this on the democrats is to take the burden of the republicans so it's much easier to attack the democrats than to attack the accused. as far as "the new york times" paragraph it's no more or no less than the facts ascertained by "the times" reporters and it's not a definitive statement of all available fact and the story in the new yorker had more facts. >> just one news outlet can't confirm -- >> well, in her own words she could not -- >> let me ask you a question about this. and i'm curious if you think this is a good thing or a bad thing. she says she spent several days thinking about what she remembered and what she did not remember and the accusations. she conferred with her lawyer.

she really thought about it. before she came out. some people point to that and say she spent several days looking at her memories that's kind of questionable. what was she doing? others will say, listen, if you're going to make an accusation like this, you should dwell on your memories to make sure you're correct. >> but you -- i'm sorry, you can't rely on it. it's so different than dr. ford's testimony. i mean, it couldn't be more different in how -- >> i don't know. it feels -- i'm sorry. i went to a party college and this sort of scenario happens. >> so did i. but -- >> that's the key. it's not just confirmed with your lawyers but if i'm doing this i have to ask my significant other, i have to tell other people in my life, hey, i might be coming forward with this is this okay, is this possible? here's the thing. you know, it's this moving goalpost. it was well, we don't know it

was true and then that's only one accusation, now two or three, there's somebody who can be a great supreme court justice who's a serious conservative who doesn't have any speculation in the background that's what i think ultimately -- that's what i think the republicans should do. >> but then they'd have to wait until after the midterms and that's the sticking point. leigh anne, thank you for joining us. ahead, a potential blue wave come november. potential blue we come november.

welcome back. tonight meet the midterms with six weeks to go. our new poll shows democrats have the advantage heading into the midterms. registered voters prefer a democratic controlled congress by a whopping 12 points. 52-40. the largest margin our poll has found during the trump presidency. last month it was eight points. 50 for democrats and 42 for republicans. a month before that it was six points but our poll had good news for republican as well. 61% of registered republicans said they're very interested in the midterm election. and while they still narrowly trail the democratic enthusiasm number, it's a nine point boost from last month. the republicans have to be happy that their enthusiasm is starting to catch up as the election day gets closer.

as more and more voters start turning their attention to november's elections we are going to see how the enthusiasm battle heats up. and if democrats can keep their big lead in the generic ballot. in the meantime we'll be back with more "mtp daily." - [narrator] the typical vacuum head has its limitations, 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.

are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? and fearlessly devours piles. try zyrtec®. it's starts working hard at hour one. and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®.

welcome back. it is time for "the lid." the panel is back. let's get back to that conversation we were having a moment ago about kavanaugh and whether or not -- the truth is, the allegations against kavanaugh are not as detailed, there are not as many allegations or corroborating witnesses as there are against allegations -- as there are against people who accused harvey weinstein or all of the other people that have generally fallen in the me too movement, these big, powerful men. should that mean that they are less credible and that people should take them less seriously

in this scenario? >> i don't think so. and the reason why is because it's the serial killer thing, right? are you not a murderer because it's only one person, you have to kill four or five before it's a problem? any of these accusations have to be taken into consideration. and also, his responses have been part of the problem. we talked before, it's not just an issue of not owning up, it's him claiming i don't remember any of this, i wasn't involved. but the people he's associated with, from mark judge to this organization when he was at yale, leave this guy who was in the kind of environment where this behavior happened. >> so is he guilty by association because of the people he hung out with, one wrote a book about the drunken antics of high school and the secret society he was in, in yale had a certain nickname? >> absolutely not, no. it's -- you can't damn someone because of the circumstances they were in or the people they

associated with. it's not in itself a conclusion or proof of anything. i think we should take seriously any specific allegations. i think the issue we're all having here is, again, there is no precedent or set of rules for what facts are most important in deciding supreme court placement. and we all have to decide and all the senators have to decide what we think makes for a good judge -- >> is that going to happen? are all the senators going to come up with an outline how they're going to address these things? >> no, they can't. but every senator has already decided what they think. what is is going to happen with collins or flake or corker? those are the people that i'm sure brett kavanaugh whether be speaking to on thursday. >> more you see donald trump speak and hurt kavanaugh's case, a tnl and the more time that goes by, it's going to be harder for those senators to support this nominee.

and that's why they're pushing for a vote on thursday. because this vote either has to happen thursday and push it through as ugly as it is, or withdraw. because they can't let this keep cycling -- going through the news cycle the way it is. >> to vote on thursday or a hearing? >> have the hearing and a vote and move it through. it's ugly, it's wrong, but politically, it's really their only option, unless they're willing to say he should withdraw. >> if you don't get this done this week and this becomes a debate question in the arizona senate race where you've got republican women running, if this becomes a debate question in the kentucky or tennessee state race, it becomes a problem. i don't think they're going to do that. i don't think they're going to be able to get by with this hearing on thursday, we don't know who these other people are, you're going to have a real question, if we let her in, we have to let the others in. and i suspect someone is going to call for kavanaugh to

actually just withdraw his own nomination. we have you have the governor of alaska giving murkowski cover, i think he's going to back out. >> is this a double edged sword for the gop or make an argument there is, as kellyanne conway put it today, a vast left wing conspiracy, and would that help at the polls? enthusiasm for the gop is up according to the latest poll. >> they can try, i don't think it will work. placing him on the court is so worthwhile and important to conservatives, that it is worth risking the house and the senate. because having a 5-4 majority on the court is worth losing a cycle they can get back later. this is the capstone to 40 or 50 years of activism on the right to change the composition on the right. if they lose a couple of senate seats, it's not the worst thing. >> if you don't know what nick is talking about, the federalist

will explain everything nick just said. ni thank you very much. we'll be right back. thank you very much we'll be right back. what?! -welcome. -[ gasps ] a bigger room?! -how many of you use car insurance? -oh. -well, what if i showed you this? -[ laughing ] ho-ho-ho! -wow. -it's a computer. -we compare rates to help you get the price and coverage that's right for you. -that's amazing! the only thing that would make this better is if my mom were here. what?! an unexpected ending! you wouldn't accept from any one else.here. 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.

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.

that's all for tonight. we'll be back tomorrow with more "mtp daily." but don't worry, "the beat with ari melber" starts right now. >> thank you very much. there is so much news to cover tonight. at this hour, deputy attorney general rod rosenstein is still on the job after a roller coaster day. we'll be joined by dan rather and mya wylie on that later in the show. but we begin with this fight, fast moving, over supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. donald trump's nominee now clearly in serious danger. there's been a while wind of developments. the context is clear. a second woman has come forward to accuse kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. this is a new name, deborah ramirez, telling "the new yorker" w