right now. look at me when i'm talking to you. you're telling me that my assault doesn't matter. >> do you think that he's telling the truth? no, do you think that he's telling the truth to the country? >> you have power and so many women are powerless. >> good morning and welcome to "a.m. joy." less than one hour after that powerful moment when two survivors of sexual assault confronted senator jeff flake in an elevator over his support of brett kavanaugh, and by the way we will be joined by one of those women later in the show, flake kind of shocked the world, revising the pledge that he made just hours before to vote yes on brett kavanaugh's supreme court nomination. huddling with two of his democratic colleagues, senators amy klobuchar and chris coons and joining democratic calls for an fbi investigation before any kavanaugh vote in the full senate. >> this is what i'm trying to do. this country is being ripped apart here and we've got to do

due diligence. i think this committee has done a good job, but i do think that we can have a short pause and make sure that the fbi can investigate. >> the investigation that flake requested into credible sexual misconduct allegations against kavanaugh is now under way. the white house has said it will be, quote, limited in scope and completed in less than one week. but on that scope question, it's not entirely clear what that means. will the investigation be confined to the allegations from dr. christine blasey ford? or will it include the allegations made by any of the other women who have accused brett kavanaugh of sexual misconduct? michael avenatti, who by now should be very familiar to you, represents a woman who could potentially be interviewed by the fbi as a witness. julie swetnick claims she witnessed kavanaugh participating in sexual misconduct when he was a high school student at georgetown prep tore school in the 1980s.

the allegations are disturbing, alleging gang rape of women who had been rendered disoriented by alcohol. to be clear, she has not accused kavanaugh of any crimes against her and kavanaugh has strongly denied the allegations. joining me now is michael avenatti, attorney for julie swetnick. michael, first of all, good morning. >> good morning. >> so let's talk about your client's allegations. she submitted a sworn affidavit which you originally wanted to result in her being questioned by the committee. that didn't happen. but has she been contacted by or contacted the fbi to be part of this reopened investigation? >> not yet, joy. you know, we've been asking for a full fbi investigation now for days. we want my client to be called by the fbi. she wants to sit down with fbi agents, to tell her story, to tell them the facts and the circumstances that she witnessed, to tell them what happened to her, and we're

waiting for the fbi to contact her. now, i was pleased to see what happened yesterday afternoon, that the committee vote proceeded. however, there's a one-week delay. but i want to tell you this, i'm very concerned about this scope question. when i hear people throw around things like, well, the fbi is going to investigate credible allegations, well, hold on a minute. the fbi is supposed to determine what's credible or not. if they don't get a chance or if they're told not to speak to certain individuals, then how can they determine whether an allegation is credible or not. so i'm hopeful for this investigation is going to be thorough, i'm hopeful that it is going to include my client's allegations, which, as you stated, were made in a sworn declaration under oath. they absolutely should interview my client. i'm hopeful that all the facts are going to be known ultimately to the american people. but if the fbi does not meet with my client or question her,

then i think that's going to call into question who told the fbi not to meet with her. >> so your client, to be clear, julie swetnick, is claiming that she attended parties during the 1980s when she was a high school student that included boys from georgetown prep, including mark judge and brett kavanaugh, according to julie swetnick, there were girls that were being inebriated with alcohol, rendered unconscious and then essentially run trains on, to use the colloquial term, gang raped. she said this happened to her. she's not saying michael avenatti did it -- she's not saying that brett kavanaugh did it. but michael, you have said that she's got corroborating witnesses, that these included boys that were high school and college boys. do you have names of those witnesses that you are now submitting to the fbi? >> well, we have names of a number of the witnesses, and i've spoken to a number of the witnesses and we are anxious to submit those names to the fbi. joy, i want to be clear. i urge everyone that's watching your show and everyone in america that is interested in

this issue, this confirmation, to go and actually read the three-page declaration that my client signed under penalty of perjury, because it's not just limited to this allegation of women being put through train rapes, et cetera. it's a broad -- there's a broad basis of facts and evidence that are set forth relating to aggressive conduct by brett kavanaugh when he was under the influence of alcohol towards women. and, joy, we're not alone. there are numerous media reports, numerous witnesses, that have attested to witnessing the same thing. so when you have senators on the judiciary committee that want to mock me, want to mock my client and talk about how absurd this is, they need to go back and look at the article from "the washington post" in the 1990s that described this environment at many of these prep schools. they need to look at the article in the "new yorker." they need to look at the article in "slate" magazine, all of which include numerous witnesses

that support a version of events very similar to my client. and now let me say this. if the fbi investigation is not curtailed by the white house or others, if they are permitted to do their job as they do every day in this country, brett kavanaugh will not survive this process. he will not. if they are permitted to interview witnesses that know of these allegations, there is no way that brett kavanaugh will be placed on the u.s. supreme court, nor should he. >> i'm going to bring a panel in a second but i have two quick questions for you before i bring the panel in. question number one, beth wilkinson, judge kavanaugh's lawyer, has said -- she said on cnn, she denied the allegations that your client has made against brett kavanaugh, and she said that your client could have just gone directly to the police with these allegations and still could. did these alleged crimes take

place in montgomery county, and will your client attempt to file a police report about them now? >> she may very well pursue criminal charges against the individuals involved, joy. i think as my client's story is told my by client here shortly, america is going to learn the details surrounding what happened and exactly what she did at the time. there are witnesses that she confided in contemporaneous with what transpired. so we're talking about decades ago. and confided in them about what transpired. and i think that goes to support her credibility. let me say this about miss wilkinson and her client, brett kavanaugh. i have offered that if miss wilkinson would like to cross examine my client for eight hours under oath in a videotaped deposition, i'm more than happy to make her available, provided that she'll grant me the same opportunity with her client, brett kavanaugh. in fact i'll take half the time,

joy. i'll take four hours with brett kavanaugh. brett kavanaugh is a liar. he is not credible. in fact if you look at the fox news interview, you look at his testimony before the committee, it's absolutely absurd, especially in light of the entries in the yearbook from his high school days. we all went to high school. we all know what that looked like. we all or many of us know what the prep school environment looked like in the washington, d.c., area, as evidenced by a number of these articles. brett kavanaugh is lying to the committee, he's lying to the american people, and it's just not believable. he's lied about a number of things quite honestly that he didn't need to lie about. >> michael, i'm going to ask you to stay and i'm going to bring in my panel. jill wine-banks, maya wiley, mimi rocah and karine jean-pierre. we have a power panel this morning. i want to throw it open to the table here. any responses to what the julie swetnick allegations and what they might do, how they might

play, i'm start with you, mimi, and how they might play into this fbi investigation. >> i'd like to start with a question to michael if i could, because i think it's important to clarify something. michael, you're a great lawyer and i'm sure this affidavit is worded very carefully. there's a statement in there that i've heard some people debating. she says, i think it's paragraph 13, in approximately 1982 i became the victim of one of these gang or train rapes where mark judge and brett kavanaugh were present. now, i was with you on tv the other day and you clarified that you were saying that they actually participated in that gang rape, i believe, but that isn't -- >> no. >> no? okay. then i misunderstood you so i want to clarify. >> no, that's not what i've said and i've been asked a number of questions about this paragraph 13. you know, i wish people would concentrate on many of the other paragraphs in the declaration, because they are equally damning

to brett kavanaugh. and those other paragraphs in and of themself if true would render him unable to be confirmed for the u.s. supreme court. >> i just think it's important to clarify this. this is a serious allegation and a lot of people have asked about it. >> i'm going to answer it as i've answered it the last four days. there are facts that suggest to her that he was involved. there are facts that suggest to her that he was not involved. this is not as clear cut as many might hope. people might say why is that or how is that? because she was under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs involuntarily and she does not know with great certainty exactly what happened. that's why these girls were able to be taken advantage of by these boys at these parties. that was the m.o. that was the process. that's how they went about taking advantage of these girls. but this idea that this declaration is not to be believed, we don't know whether it's to be believed. it's been submitted under penalty of perjury and we want these allegations tested

appropriately pursuant to a proper fbi investigation. >> just to be clear, i was certainly not saying that i don't believe it and i just want a clarification and your explanation makes a lot of sense to me actually. >> you know what, i want to go to maya on a question about this. the montgomery county district attorney has indicated an openness to hear a criminal complaint related to these crimes. i don't think there's a statute of limitations on rape, right? >> there's no statute of limitations on felony rape or sexual assault. >> so in theory if miss swetnick or if anyone who believes that crimes were committed against them in montgomery county were to go forward, we just saw bill cosby was convicted and sentenced to 3 to 10 years for events that took place years earlier. so in theory this could result in criminal charges? >> sure. any person who has an allegation that someone has sexually assaulted, attempted rape or raped them has the ability to go

and file a criminal complaint and that's true. if these events happened in maryland, which they did obviously in this case, obviously that is an option open to them. i think this is critically important to distinguish between what the senate judiciary committee is supposed to be doing. part of what's been so problematic about the hearing process is that -- and this also goes directly to mr. avenatti's point. the question is how credible is he and is there reason to be concerned, not whether there's evidence that would convict him of a crime, because it is about whether to seat him in a supreme court seat. so the fact that this declaration that there's a witness who says actually the conduct and behavior that he is denying is actually conduct and behavior that i myself witnessed is relevant, and i think mr. avenatti is absolutely right to draw attention to that point. the question i have because it's problematic to me that the committee has been treating it this way is it's almost like if

you can't say you actually saw him attack someone, it is not sufficient to make us question whether he should be a supreme court justice. that's a problem. that's just wrong. that's why my question for mr. avenatti is, are any of the witnesses able to corroborate that any physically violent behavior towards a woman, because although i believe it should be sufficient to actually corroborate the kind of behavior you're talking about, it seems to me that the problem with the politics here is that the committee is looking for more direct evidence so i'm just curious about the witness list in that regard. >> yes. my client and other witnesses can state unequivocally that they saw brett kavanaugh engage in inappropriate physical contact, groping, grabbing, other aggressive sexual behavior towards women personally. they will be able to attest to

that. i think it's laid out in the declaration. as well as conduct -- and this is part of my frustration, because everybody just wants to go to paragraph 13 and everybody wants to avoid the paragraphs above paragraph 13. everybody wants to focus on the train rape allegation, as if that's the only allegation in the entire declaration that matters. let's also back up and remember this. let's remember 1991. 1991 was about an allegation by anita hill of sexual harassment, and the chief focus in that hearing was the allegation of a pubic hair on a coke can and a comment by then judge thomas. that was the focus as to whether he should be put on the court for making a comment generally about a pubic hair on a coke can. now fast forward to this point in time in our history. at the height of the me too movement. we're talking about something far more important or far more extensive than a pubic hair on a coke can.

we're talking about dr. ford's testimony, we're talking about miss ramirez' allegation, we're talking about my client's allegations, we're talking about other allegations of physical inappropriate sexual contact by judge kavanaugh, which should render him unable and not able to be confirmed on the u.s. supreme court. all of these women are not making it up. they all didn't just meet at the local starbucks and have a secret meeting and conspire to derail this nomination. they're not all lying while the choir boy, brett kavanaugh, is telling the truth. it's just not possible. >> real quickly before i bring in my other panelist, michael, chuck grassley made a lot of hay about the fact that they didn't need to have an fbi investigation because the senate had its own investigators. did those investigators contact you, and did you deem, if you did have interactions with them, that to be an aggressive

potentially thorough investigation in and of itself? >> we asked for an fbi investigation. we asked for an opportunity to take a polygraph exam, if brett kavanaugh would take one. we asked for mark judge to be subpoenaed. none of thataddressed. they refused to get back to us for days. they blew us all all day monday, all day tuesday and ultimately they said after we released the declaration, well, we'd like her to meet with two investigators from the committee. now, as you know, dr. ford declined that and we declined it. the reason is because these investigators in our view were part of the majority leadership. they're not unbiased. and we want this investigation done by professionals. we want it done by members of the fbi. and in my experience, and i'm sure others on the panel will support me on this, when individuals are fabricating stories, they don't readily admit or welcome fbi agents to sit down and speak with them about those allegations because, of course, lying to an fbi agent

is a very serious offense and it's punishable by imprisonment. >> i want to go to jill wine-banks on that very point. you had the senate judiciary chairman, chuck grassley, insisting that an investigation by the majority's investigators that was not even participated in by the democrats, so the 11 senate republicans had their own investigation they said they were doing that they said was sufficient to determine these claims, but the majority were already on board to confirm kavanaugh. so is that normal? i mean it didn't seem normal in the moment, but was it normal? >> no, it isn't normal and it isn't fair. they are clearly demonstrating they had no interest in the truth. this was never a search for truth. if it was, they would have allowed other witnesses to testify. they would have allowed the fbi to investigate. they would not have set a five-minute limit on questions, which was absurd. you cannot develop evidence in a five-minute segment of

questions. they would have had the courage to do the questioning themselves and not use the show of having a woman brought in who was a sex crime prosecutor to do the questioning. >> who they yanked as soon as she started to ask -- >> all she did is asked the question that could have led to something really interesting about the july 1st where all the people that dr. blasey ford said were at the scene of the crime, all of a sudden she was silenced. this is not a search for truth. and they have already announced exactly what they are expecting the outcome to be. we're going to push this through. he's going to be confirmed. we need to hear the facts. let them confirm one way or the other who's telling the truth. let's look at ramirez. let's look at swetnick. we need to hear all of the witnesses. his college roommate said he was often drunk. we need to look at his history of drinking and whether his outburst on the day of the hearing thursday shows that he is still a mean alcoholic

because there was nothing judicial about his behavior on that day. that disqualifies him right there. >> in fact one of miss swetnick's allegations is that he was a mean drunk. >> he came off as a mean drunk. >> i have a white house question for you because you did work for the obama white house, the obama administration. the white house was -- they're the only ones who could have ordered this fbi investigation. so again, is this normal question, the fact that they delayed so long, the fact that they resisted so long having this investigation, does that say to you that the white house is wavering in terms of the credibility of kavanaugh versus ford? because suddenly this reversal and they ordered the investigation. >> i think they had no choice. they don't have the votes. kavanaugh needs 50 to get -- to be a supreme court justice and they didn't have it so honestly donald trump's hands were tied. let's not forget who donald trump is. he has 19 accusers of sexual assault, sexual misconduct, and he got away with it. he's the president of the united

states. look what he does, he stands with the men and attacks the women. he was never going to order that if his has weren't tied the way they were yesterday. >> i have one more question for michael avenatti. you're very deft at utilizing the courts as well as media. if your witnesses, if your client are not afforded the opportunity to be a part of this limited scope investigation, would they all go public? can we expect to hear from your client and your witnesses in a public setting, meaning on television, if they are not a part of this fbi probe? >> absolutely. if the republicans on the senate judiciary committee want to try to hide my clients and the witnesses from the american people so they can jam through this nomination, then we're going to take our case to the american public and we'll let them decide who's telling the truth and who's lying to them. >> we would love to talk with your client or any of those

witnesses. i'll put in my bid for that. i know you'll be looking for a venue. you're welcome to always come back here. thank you very much. my panel will be with me after the break. after the break we will also be joined by one of the women who confronted senator jeff flake on that elevator on capitol hill after he announced his support for brett kavanaugh yesterday. it was a dramatic moment, a turning point in the debate over this supreme court nomination. stay with us. ay with us

breathe freely fast, with vicks sinex. my congestion's gone. i can breathe again! ahhhh! i can breathe again! ughh! vicks sinex. breathe on. ♪ girls are not in school because of economic issues and they have to work. at the malala fund, we help girls stay in school. the malala fund invests in education champions who work in the community and pave the way so that girls can actually go to school. to have our financial partner guiding us is very important.

the fact that citi is in countries where girls are vulnerable ensures that we're able to get funds to the people that we're working with. when girls go to school, we're going to maximize their talents. we could have a solution for climate change in that girl. that girl could be the next nobel peace prize winner. ♪ when heartburn hits... fight back fast with tums smoothies. it starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue... and neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪ tum tum tum tum... smoothies... only from tums there is a chance that's the last time.

300 miles per hour, that's where i feel normal. i might be crazy but i'm not stupid. having an annuity tells me retirement is protected. annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retireyourrisk.org

on monday i stood in front of your office. i told the story of my sexual assault. i told it because i recognized the story. she's telling the truth. what you are doing is allowing someone who actually violated a woman to sit in the supreme court. this is horrible. you have children in your family. think about them. i have two children. i cannot imagine that for the next 50 years they will have to have someone in the supreme court who has been accused of violating a young girl.

what are you doing, sir? >> ava maria's impassioned confrontation with senator jeff flake was said to be one of the major turning points on friday, leading to flake's stunning reversal on a blanket yes vote. ava is one of the two protesters who confronted senator flake in that elevator yesterday and joins me now. ana maria, i'm sorry, i had your name wrong in my prompter. that moment when you and maria gallagher, your friend and fellow activist confronted jeff flake in that elevator was so wrenching, it had the entire country stopped and watched with the two of you. we couldn't really hear what senator flake was saying back to you at the time. what was he saying? >> senator flake was simply saying thank you. i need to go. i want to go. all he wanted to do was that

moment to end, that confrontation to end. maria and i had just met. maria was in the capitol for the first time. this was the first time she was telling her story, the first time she was speaking to an elected official. we had decided that if we had an opportunity to speak with him, we would make sure that he heard us. we would make sure that he felt the rage and the pain that women across the country are feeling in this moment watching the senate potentially put in the supreme court someone who is accused of violating women. >> "the washington post" piece on your story says that you actually had never told your parents about your sexual assault and that you texted your dad to tell him -- tell us what you texted your dad to tell him before this all happened. >> immediately after the interaction, the confrontation with senator flake, i realized that these might go public and

that my dad might hear from the news about my story. so i texted him and i said you're going to hear something. i want you to know that i am okay. and i had been keeping the story quiet because of the fear of causing him and causing my parents and people i love pain. and what he said to me was -- proved that my fear was correct. he said i'm sorry i was not able to protect you from it. i think a lot of us don't tell our stories because we know that not only do we feel shame and guilt, but people around us who love us also feel guilt. and i was able to tell my dad it is not your fault, it was not my fault, and i feel incredibly supported by you. >> and i think that is what has been so difficult for women to just -- whether one is a victim or a survivor of sexual assault or knows someone who is, i think

everyone at this point fall into that category, either knowing someone or being a victim, what is so painful is it takes so many people, an accumulation of so many people before women are believed. the first response is where is your proof. when you hear that question, where is the corroboration, how do you feel? >> i feel enraged. i feel like i would not -- i did not want these experience to happen to me, i did not want to have to tell the story. i don't want these to be part of my life. i do not want to be put on trial. dr. blasey ford should not be put on trial. the women who are coming across the country and tell their stories should not be put on trial. we have a culture that fundamentally doubts women in every respect. our ability to lead, our ability to exercise power, our ability to control our bodies.

brett kavanaugh represents that. he represents a culture that fundamentally does not believe that women are equal, and that's why he's so dangerous. he has expressed that in his actions as a young boy, actions that he's unwilling to take responsibility for, and he has expressed that in his politics. i think he's dangerous to the country not just because he is accused with very credible allegations of having violated several women, but he is also dangerous because the work of justice is about recognizing when harm happens, taking responsibility for that harm and beginning to repair it. if he's not able to do that in his own life, he should not be sitting in the highest court of the land. >> senator jeff flake did change his -- he didn't change his vote, he still voted judge kavanaugh out of committee, but he then did huddle with two members of the democratic side of the senate judiciary committee and decided that he would push for an fbi investigation. he's telling people that the

confrontation with you and with maria gallagher, was not the factor that changed his mind. i'm not sure how many people believe that. tou do you believe that? >> before we saw him in the elevator, he had just put out a statement that he was ready to support brett kavanaugh. i think if it had been just my story or maria's story, it would not have mattered. it's the fact that thousands of people have told their stories, thousands of people have visited his office and the offices of many senators, the fact that many of us are up in arms and taking action and taking risks and doing things that are scary, that are forcing him and the rest of the country to not only reckon with the reality of sexual violence, reckon with the voice of democracy but respond to a lot of people. >> you're very brave. a lot of people would not have jumped in and seized that moment. you and maria gallagher were

very brave and i think you captivated the entire country. thank you very much for sharing your story and thank you for being brave. >> thank you so much. >> thank you. we'll have much more on the fbi investigation of brett kavanaugh coming up on "a.m. joy." ming upr and arms of steel ♪ ♪ 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. 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 take your razor, yup. up and down, never side to side, shaquem, you got it? come on stay focused. hard work baby, it gonna pay off.

i welcome whatever the committee wants to do because i'm telling the truth. >> i want to know what you want to know. >> i'm telling the truth. >> i want to know what you want to do, judge. >> i'm innocent. i'm innocent of this charge. >> then you're prepared for an fbi investigation? >> they don't reach conclusions.

you reach the conclusions. >> no, but they do investigate questions. >> brett kavanaugh's angry scolding of democratic senators on thursday was shocking for long-time observers of the supreme court nomination process. but despite his repeated stonewalling on whether he would welcome or cooperate with an fbi investigation into the sexual misconduct allegations against him from now multiple women, he's now cooperating after donald trump was forced to give in and order the fbi to reopen the investigation into his supreme court nominee. according to the white house guidelines, a new probe will be limited in scope and completed in less than a week. so what does that mean exactly? joining me now is msnbc legal analyst paul butler, greg bro br and clint watt. i want to go to you first, greg, on this question of limiting the scope of an fbi investigation. once the fbi is tasked with investigating something, even if it's just reopening a background check, can they actually be

limited and told to only work for a week? >> that's a great question, joy. so in the normal course in light of the agreement between the fbi and the white house that governs background investigations, the white house does essentially control and guide the investigation, the depth and the duration of a background investigation. as opposed to a criminal investigation which the fbi does with no white house involvement. so that is the way it normally works. of course this is not a normal background investigation in any way. and so here if the fbi in interviewing some witnesses develops other leads and feels as though it should interview additional witnesses and the white house is seen as trying to curtail that or limit that, i think that we're going to be right back to where we were yesterday, which is many observers thinking this is not a fair, full process and that's

going to be a political problem for this nomination. >> clint watts, that is the thing. if you're saying go back and look into it, you had brett kavanaugh give a statement on friday saying throughout the process i've been interviewed by the fbi, i've done a number of background calls directly with the senate and yesterday i answered questions under oath about every topic, i've done everything they have requested and will continue to cooperate. that's fine. but if the fbi decides they want to go back and investigate something and let's say one of those questions that he answered under oath turns out to be a discrepancy between that and what he tells the fbi, could he be in trouble for that? >> yeah. this could open up essentially a totally separate investigation that would relate to perjury if it's inconsistent with other details that are out there. one of the things we've got to remember about this, this is not the crime scene investigation "law & order" type script people are used to from television. this is a background investigation so this is not going for subpoenas or evidence.

this is going and interviewing witnesses and different stories. they might be able to identify places to take an investigation forward, but it's going to be tough to do because the allegations, many of them, are decades old. so it's very difficult to bring that case, particularly if it's just witness system, and a lot of the witnesses might likely not recall anything or may not offer any evidence. they don't actually have to say anything if they don't want to. they can resist it. so this is a very different kind of investigation. i think the expectation of the public, some of the ways it's been presented so far might be misleading to them and what they think is actually going to happen. what i imagine is they'll go talk to these different witnesses. let's say there's a glaring difference between the two. it will be difficult to prove that kavanaugh was perjuring himself and giving untrue testimony. >> according to the guidelines we've learned so far, the fbi investigation is not going to come to a conclusion of any kind, they'll just turn over what their findings are to the

full senate, certain senate aides and to the white house. i want to go to you, paul, about whether or not there could be some unintended consequences negatively for some of the people involved on this witness list. let's look at who could be enter ve -- interviewed. mark judge because he was placed in the room by christine blasey ford. elizabeth rasor, christine blasey ford, deborah ramirez who says that he exposed himself to her when he was at yale. you have julie swetnick, we just spoke with her lawyer, michael avenatti. this one is the one i want to zero in on you. she says that kavanaugh engaged in sexual assault and rape that was taking place when he was around. that there were gang rapes. she didn't specifically say that kavanaugh attacked her. you also have a friend of dr. ford who said she was present at the same party and a guy named tim gaudette and other people listed on the calendar, other

friends of his. but back to the swetnick allegation for you, paul, if, for instance, this fbi investigation and her interviews and interviews with her kra corroborators, who michael avenatti says he wants to make available to the fbi, let's just say that uncovered what appeared to be crimes. could the maryland district attorney say i see crimes here and prosecute them? >> yeah, so the statute of limitations in maryland for rape is nonexistent. those cases can be brought at any time. for other crimes, say misdemeanor sexual assault, the statute would have expired. i was nodding earlier, joy, because you're right, other things always come out during these investigations. for example, judge kavanaugh's yearbook contains what appears to be crude misogynist references. things like renatte alumnus, fff

devil's triangle. at the hearing on thursday, judge kavanaugh denied that those had anything to do with sex. what the fbi will do is to go to his prep schoolmates and if he's exposed -- if judge kavanaugh is exposed to have been lying on thursday when he said it wasn't about sex, that's just not about his credibility, it's about whether he committed perjury in front of the senate. there's an open-ended question that the fbi always asks at the end of these investigations. is there anything else you think we should know about this person's character and fitness? when judge kavanaugh's yale and georgetown prep classmates answer that question, i don't think those answers are going to be helpful to his appointment. >> to go back to you on this, greg, if they're going to go back now and test the things that were said under oath by brett kavanaugh, the thing he kept saying was that his calendars, these calendars that he kept are the key to

exonerating him. would the fbi agents then go back and go through those calendars and if they find something there, could they then pursue those things as a lead, including if those calendars actually maybe contradict some of the things that he said? >> they could. i would say that as a former prosecutor, calendars that old of that type are likely to really be very useful in this type of investigation. but the agents could certainly look at those. this is a real double-edged sword i think for the nominee and for the white house and the senate committee republicans. on one hand a further investigation could essentially corroborate the judge's version of events and just put this nomination back on track toward confirmation. but on the other hand, and this is why, of course, the rips w e republicans were reluctant to reopen this and were essentially forced to by the way the hearing

played out, on the other hand this could lead to a whole series of other potential witnesses, allegations that would not be good for this confirmation. so it will be interesting to see how this develops, if the fbi is given the leeway to do a full and fair reopening of this investigation. >> go ahead, paul. >> joy, i was just going to say the fbi has a great tool that it can use. that is it can strap his honor to a polygraph. he's pledged to cooperate with the investigation. judge kavanaugh wrote an opinion in 2016 in which he said lie detectors are an appropriate tool in background investigations. on thursday he told the senate in one of his boisterous outbursts what goes around comes around. indeed it does. >> clint, you know, what people have to remember is the original fbi sort of contact with kavanaugh was for background investigation. so people not familiar with the background check system, they go back and interview people who know you, people you worked

with, things like that, in order to determine your fitness for whatever the appointment is. the anita hill situation came about because he gave an interview to the fbi and then it got leaked. so there's always this law offin intended consequences, when the people who know you talk to the fbi about you. and so i wonder again about mark judge. if he's being placed in the room and in some cases being accused himself of participating in this activity, could his interview be jeopardy for him separate from what it does to his friend, whether it helps or hurts him, that he wrote about his alcohol-fueled exploits and being wasted with somebody he called o'kavanaugh which doesn't seem helpful to his friend. but could he potentially talk to the fbi and put himself in jeopardy if the things he says open him up to further investigation? >> sure. anybody that goes in for an interview has the potential of opening some track of an investigation or something even in parallel. i mean we've talked about this

in the context of the mueller -- special counsel mueller probe, that other crimes discovered during the course of investigation often leads into entirely unintended consequences and different directions in terms of the investigation. i think what's important to know is we've been very focused in the public discussion of this on those individuals that have been named so far. but i would caution people that if they think it's just going to be those people that are enter veed, there's probably dozens of people that will be reached out to and have the fbi agents touch base with them that we don't even know about. you mentioned the anita hill situation. you're going to co-workers, colleagues, friends, neighbors, people who were witnesses here, and this will expand in a much different direction. the one thing that's different about this background investigation now is that it's focused around very specific incidents and specific individuals. this is different from a general background investigation where people turn over where they work, where they lived, who their friends were and roommates were and you go interview them.

so this is quite possible it can go in a very different direction based on those associates of these specific incidents that are there. >> thank you very much. this is really informative. paul will join us in our next hour, but greg brower and clint watts, thank you very much for your time. appreciate it. coming up in our next hour, the same lindsey graham who helped block president obama's nomination of merrick garland to the supreme court two years ago is now angrily pointing fingers at the democrats for getting in the way of brett kavanaugh's confirmation. of course he is. anaugh's confirmation of course he is ♪ the new capital one savor card. earn 4% cash back on dining and 4% on entertainment. now when you go out, you cash in. what's in your wallet?

where we're changing withs? contemporary make-overs. then, use the ultimate power handshake, the upper hander with a double palm grab. who has the upper hand now? start winning today. book now at lq.com.

ignition sequence starts. 10... 9... guidance is internal. 6... 5... 4... 3... 2... 1... ♪ iyou may be at increased riskf for pneumococcal pneumonia -a potentially serious bacterial lung disease that can disrupt your routine for weeks. in severe cases, pneumococcal pneumonia can put you in the hospital. it can hit quickly, without warning, making you miss out on what matters most. a single dose of the prevnar 13® vaccine can help protect you from pneumococcal pneumonia. prevnar 13® is approved for adults

to help prevent infections from 13 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. don't get prevnar 13® if you have had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. adults with weakened immune systems may have a lower response to the vaccine. the most common side effects were pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, limited arm movement, fatigue, headache, muscle pain, joint pain, less appetite, vomiting, fever, chills, and rash. prevention begins with prevnar 13®. ask your doctor or pharmacist about prevnar 13®. a hotel can make 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.

very excited to be co-hosting annual global citizen festival in central park this afternoon. janet jackson, the weeknd, cardi b among big stars, leveraging individual, nonprofit, governmental, corporate and other actions to bring together a group who want to end extreme poverty. the festival is the culmination of a week of advocacy events in new york including a day long summit on gender equality titled

#she is equal. joining me now, carolyn, an executive and sponsor of the gender equality initiative. so great to meet you. >> thank you very much. >> we were talking about the iron, huge irony, talk about she is equal summit. women are asserting themselves all over the world. we want equality, gender equality, girls in school. i was at a u.n. related summit about educating young women and girls around the world, kids and refugees. yet we're in this moment when women are also feeling like they are not being heard, like there is still a chorus of men saying, no, she is not equal. we are going to do what we want to do. do you feel that irony having just hosted the summit. >> that's one of the reasons we're just so proud to be part of the global citizen festival and to have been the co-host of she is equal, which was yesterday. it's so important for women's voices to be heard. in light of this week's activity and frankly this past year,

women's voices are being amplified and we think that's wonderful. >> she is equal summit was really all about inspiring action, broader collective action for gender equality. we co-hosted with global citizen, ana, ensuring women's voice and representation is positive as it should be. >> the she is equal summit, the focus, domestic, international, writes the focus? >> the focus for us from p&g is global. the summit was that as well. we had amazing speakers and amazing participants. we had katie couric and reese witherspoon talking about the role of women in media and advertising. we had michelle obama introducing a segment on girls -- by video on girls education. we had abe wambach about the importance of sports and the culture. the discussion on the role of women in advertising and media.

p&g is a big advertiser. that's a lot of how we communicate and engage with consumers. we're 100% committed to ensure that women are represented positively. that's important to us in our campaigns. face anything like a girl or how men are portrayed. we want to see men swiffering floors and changing diapers. >> or listen to women when they make credible allegations. >> listening to women. >> the thing is, it feels like we're doing all the right things cultural culturally. we're doing an initiative like she is equal, #metoo movement, we're telling women they are empowered, the women's march, doing the right things. even as you said good corporate sense, those who are good corporate citizens are saying we need to represent women better in teasing. what's the disconnect? why are we in the united states struggling to get women perceived as, listened to, treated as equal when we're the ones lecturing the rest of the world about these kinds of issues typically.

>> that's one of the reasons we need great role models and great corporate citizens and great people who are speaking out and front and center bringing these issues to light. again, that could be through an advertising campaign, it could be through policy and advocacy effort, it could be through activism. all of these are important because we have to change the expectation, set a new expectation for women and men and create a world where people see equal. we need equal representation and equal voice. >> you make excellent points, you mentioned and men. are there men involved in the campaign? >> absolutely. we had men and women on the stage yesterday advocating for she is equal. encourage people to check out the #she is equal. some great posts from yesterday. twa us a wonderful event. >> shout out to men who believe in the #she is equal. carolyn, thank you. wonderful to meet you. >> thank you. >> see you at the global citizen festival later. >> you sure will. >> stay tuned to msnbc for full

coverage of the citizens festival. i'll be there with so many msnbc friends. more after the break. o many msnc friends. more after the break and an ice plant. but we brought power to the people- redefining what that meant from one era to the next. over 90 years later we continue to build as one of the nation's largest investors in infrastructure. we don't just help power the american dream. we're part of it. this is our era. this is america's energy era. nextera energy ♪ ok here we go guys, you ready? hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. opportunity is everywhere.

♪ it's gonna be fine. it's a door... ♪ it's doing a lot of kicking down there. waiting to be opened. ♪ whatever your ambition... ♪ whatever your drive... ♪ whatever you're chasing... driver, are we almost there? we're gonna have a baby! ♪ daddy! daddy! opportunity is everywhere. ♪ all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪ 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. - anncr: as you grow older, -your brain naturally begins to change which may cause trouble with recall. - learning from him is great... when i can keep up! - anncr: thankfully, prevagen helps your brain and improves memory. - dad's got all the answers. - anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide. - she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again? - anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life.

i don't think the fbi really should be involved because they don't want to be involved. >> the fbi, john, said they really don't do that. that's not what they do. well, it would seem the fbi doesn't really do that. they have investigated -- they

have investigated about six times before, and it seems they don't do that. >> welcome back to am joy. apparently they do that. after ruling out investigation into his supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh just last week, donald trump has been forced to do just that. republican senator jeff flake and a handful of other undecided senators used their leverage on friday in a surprise turn of events to force a one-week fbi investigation before a final confirmation vote can be taken. they delayed a vote in the senate that was originally set to happen early next week. that reversal was a huge unexpected win for senate democrats who relentlessly pushed kavanaugh and berated colleagues for not calling for an fbi probe. a big risk for republicans who wanted to part in reopening an investigation. also for brett kavanaugh who now says he welcomes the investigation but repeatedly dodged the question at thursday's hearing. >> if you're very confident of

your position, and you appear to be, why aren't you also asking the fbi to investigate these claims? >> senator, i'll do whatever the committee wants. the committee investigates. it's not for me to say how to do it. just so you know, the fbi doesn't reach a conclusion. >> if there is no truth to her charges, the fbi investigation will show that. are you afraid they will not. >> the fbi does not reach -- you know that's a phony question because the fbi doesn't reach conclusions. >> calling for an fbi investigation for one week to clear or confirm some of these allegations. >> when you say a week delay, do you know how long the last 10 days have been? >> joining me now mega pam former assistant watergate special prosecutor, senior vp justice at the new school, former assistant u.s. attorney mimi rocca. senior adviser at movon.org.

cnbc editor john harwood. media matters founder david brock, national editor at accuracy in media, carrie sheffield and anita gupta, president and ceo of the leadership conference on leadership and civil rights. wow, wow, wow, i'm so impressed by my panel, i might retire right here on my show. i have to go to you first, anita. i watched kavanaugh and ford testimony at home and was riveted by it. i was quite frankly shocked. i was old enough to watch clarence thomas hearings, too. even the anger you saw from clarence thomas was nothing compared to volcanic, erupting, crying, i've never seen anything like it, what we saw brett kavanaugh do in the hearings. you were in the room, you were in the hearings, did it feel as jarring to you as it did to me? >> yes.

the room isn't that big. it may appear big on tv. the morning had been these two women going back and forth with dr. blasey ford's voice cracking. she was talking softly, adjusting the mic. the scene immediately within the first five minutes of kavanaugh walking in. he came in belligerent. he came in full of partisan venom. he was yelling, pounding his hand on the table. what you notice is suddenly the 11 republican male senators who had been totally silent in the morning also found their male rage. that room was full of male rage for the whole afternoon. it was stunning. i had to keep checking myself. i was like, this guy is going up for the united states supreme court justice position. he was not united states supreme court justice. to me when i was sitting there

for hours, he was a partisan, belligerent, political operative who felt like he was owed this position, that he was being denied it, and that he was a victim. all those male senators behind him were apologizing to him. they had not a word to say to dr. blasey ford when she was giving her truth and gut wrenching testimony this morning, working hard to please the senators. it was shocking. >> john harwood, one of the other things i was doing, i do the two screens, i was following the twitter reactions to what was going on. your feed was one that i was on a lot. you were expressing i think what i was feeling. it was shocking to listen to. you made a lot of points about the fact that the partisan nature of it was also shocking. the ranl itself was weird but the partisanness. you almost would not have been surprised if he started to say, lock her up. he went after the clintons. give me your take on watching it and whether you think that what

he did could also diminish the esteem of the supreme court. >> well, for sure, because that's not the behavior we expect from supreme court justices. let's talk a little about the broader context. we are in a permanent partisan war between the two parties, so that is expected. but they came at it from different perspectives. the republican constituency and appeal is disproportionately male. the democrats disproportionately female. they had different perspectives on the issue. republicans, republican men, tend to think this issue is unfair, that it's exaggerated, that boys will be boys. i think then within that republican constituency, and that's all that brett kavanaugh was appealing to -- he wasn't appealing to democrats -- there is a feeling that this is simply a tool rather than a real issue.

from brett kavanaugh's perspective -- and he betrayed this in a bunch of his answers, he thinks they are trying to trip me up on stuff that everybody does and out to be out of bounds. i was a boy in high school and college. i did my thing. that shouldn't count now. so when he gets questions -- remember his exchange with amy klobuchar. she said, have you ever blacked out drunk. he said, i don't know, have you? that is a suggestion that there's sort of -- i'm being prosecuted for -- i'm being accused of stuff that everybody did, and it's not right. it shouldn't count. therefore he felt he had license to be disingenuous or dishonest about some of those things, about what his yearbook entries meant. everybody knows that the stuff he was saying about renata alumni and ralph city club,

those were not straight answers. that's obvious. i think the reason is he felt it was unjust. >> just the freeze frames of his face are something that we've never seen coming out of a supreme court hearing, they all try to seem as sober and serious and every 10 seconds, they just call balls and strikes. you can almost recite what they say, stari dstari. you're a good woman. i was talking to friends with different takes. one take was this was disastrous and it's going to collapse report for the republican party among particularly independent women, horrified by snarling visage, self-pity, weeping. it almost seemed like donald trump nominated himself. i into with another strategist who said the base loved that

performance and felt like he and lindsey graham got at the unfairness that republicans feel this whole thing represented. where do you fall on that spectrum. >> i have to take issue with what john harwood said. i didn't hear a single phrase that boys will be boys but facts will be facts. at the end of the day facts are more important than feelings. i believe in due process. what happened in the hearing was a fundamental miscarriage of justice. there is zero evidence of this sort of behavior. if you look at the eyewitnesses who supposedly were in the room not only for this, dr. ford but all the others as well, every single supposed eyewitness has refutely denied -- >> hold on. that's not true. i want to make sure we don't get anything out in the public that's not true. one said she didn't remember but it would not be remarkable for her to be at a party with these people. she said she doesn't remember but believes dr. ford.

there's not a single person in the room other than mark judge who said he dependent want to testify. i didn't want anything to do with it. i wanted to make that clear. you can go on. >> what we saw, you can't look in isolation. the reason judge kavanaugh is so upset this is a pattern. john mccain who just passed away, may he rest in peace, 2008 democrats made him out to be the great satan. >> hold on. wait, wait, wait, wait, wait. i don't think democrats -- i worked on the other side of that campaign. we have two people who worked on the campaign. john pierre a much higher level to be sure. there was never a demonization of john mccain. plenty of demonization of barack obama, saying he wasn't an american, including the president of the united states who said he wasn't born here. once you say it on tv, people will believe it. i don't want you to say things that aren't true. >> john lewis -- >> are you going to accuse john

lewis of smearing someone. >> a pattern -- >> what did john lewis -- we're derailed. hold on. john lewis, you mean edmund pettus bridge john lewis. >> in 2008 someone who stirs hate. >> what does this have to do with brett kavanaugh. >> this is a pattern of smearing and personal attacks that happened against mitt romney. mitt romney is a boy scout. >> 47% of the country were deadbeats. hold on. we can't have one person talk on eight-person pablo. i need to let you stop. >> carrie is very wrong about all of it. we were in 2008. that moment at the town hall where john mccain was approached by a supporter of his, who tried to say barack obama wasn't born here, a patriot, john mccain said, no, ma'am, we're not going there. >> typest moment.

>> as someone on the campaign, we appreciated that. it was a shocking moment because it was so divisive at the time. no one has done that. you have barack obama who gave a eulogy to john mccain. >> he did. >> and talked about how john mccain wanted to go back to regular order. >> yeah. >> fast forward to where we are today. we are not in regular order. >> that's important. i want to get to that for a second. the regular order piece was a big part of the objection that democrats had to the process. you want to talk to past process i wanted to go to this. merit garland didn't get a hearing. the republicans refused to talk to him. lindsey graham did talk to him and said you ain't getting on the court. >> after saying they would support merit garland because he was a centrist, ideologue. >> one from north carolina, richard bird, said we'll keep that open four years if hillary

clinton is president. >> wasn't normal consequences. >> the u.s. senate is an election. u.s. senate according to the constitution that the advice and consent. the senate chose not to give it. >> they would not give him a hearing. i will absolutely agree with one thing, carrie, you said, it is true most of america -- watching judicial nominations and their hearings is like inside baseball with no fans. nobody cares, nobody watches, right? this is actually a very unusual one because people are actually watching. what that means is they are not necessarily sure what is the -- how it usually works and how astoundingly abnormal. we can't expect people who aren't watching. this is totally off the rails.

it is totally off the rails. merrick garland couldn't get a hearing. >> can i say one more thing. gorsuch, gorsuch went through. kamala harris. >> after republicans ended the filibuster in order to get him through. >> exactly. senator kamala harris did this thing where she compared gorsuch and kavanaugh who have almost similar trajectory. the one thing different between the two of them is sexual assault allegation. >> senator feinstein sat on for eight weeks. the judge was in her presence for an hour. she said nothing about it. this is a total miscarriage of justi justice. a forensic interview. if you actually care about sexual assault victims you do not sit on the evidence for eight weeks. >> can i say one thing sexual assault as well. i immediately got witnesses. my perpetrator was put into a

metal facility that very evening. let me tell you something also, i interviewed gretchen carlson who successfully took down roger ailes. you know what she said you need witnesses, data, it's miscarriage of justice to tell sexual assault victims that data and forensic evidence is important. >> we're not going to compare and say one person's response is superior to others. >> you just had someone on the show -- >> i'm sorry about what happened to you. everybody's response is different. everybody reacts differently. i have family members who were victims of sexual assault. >> the rule of law is the same for everyone. >> we're not going to shame christine blasey ford for the way she handled it. >> shaming them for lack of accountability. >> i want to bring jill in. we're going to bring the temperature way down. >> i don't know if you can. i'm pretty outraged right now.

>> go ahead. i'm going to let you go. >> listening to this is enraging me. listening to john harwood, i think we heard what is true, which is that there is a white male privilege rampant here, which is i'm entitled to this. i did the hard work in high school and college, and i deserve this. >> i went to yale. >> that is not the case. no one is entitled to be on the supreme court, and no one that has behaved in high school and college as he has alleged to do, no one who performed the way he did on thursday deserves to be even a judge. he showed a lack of judicial temperament i wouldn't want my case to be heard by him. i don't think anyone in america, democrat or republican, as unbiased and rage. that is what's wrong. we saw him lying. john is correct when he said renata thing, the boofing thing. all of those are ridiculous

lies. they are little. it shows who he is. he thinks he can lie his way opt this. we need a much longer than a week fbi investigation because there will certainly be leads that are developed. we need to know who all the people are throughout his life, and that what i'm looking for. >> i want to try to make sure everyone gets in. i want to play quickly for carrie, brett kavanaugh said, one of the things he said, essentially portrayed himself as a choir boy for life. he never really did anything wrong. he drank a little, he loves beer, but he never blacked out drunk. important trails of him as a drunk are not true. the drinking thing goes to whether or not he was honest with the senate, not to the allegations of sexual misconduct. here is his classmate at yale, her name is lynn brooks. she was on cnn on thursday responding to kavanaugh's characterization of himself in college. please take a listen. >> i watched the whole hearing.

a number of my yale colleagues and i were extremely disappointed in brett kavanaugh's characterization of himself and the way that he evaded his excessive drinking questions. there is no doubt in my mind that while at yale, he was a big partier, often drank to excess, and there had to be a number of nights where he does not remember. >> carrie, if brett kavanaugh was not honest about his drinking, if that is not corroborated by people who knew him, who went to school with him, would that put doubt in your mind about veracity of his other claims. >> we have dozens and dozens and dozens of people who have signed letters attesting to his good character, the fact he's a patriot, that he loves his country, the fact that lynne is

projecting and saying he may have blacked out, how does she know. can i say something? when people say -- the word beli belief, the facts. when i see women dressed up as netflix handmaiden's table, they are reflecting a dystopian society where it doesn't matter, a white male doesn't deserve justice, white male, black male, you deserve justice. you deserve equal treatment under the law. >> carrie, this is incredibly -- >> carrie, carrie, carrie, carrie, carrie, hold on. i just need to let john harwood respond. >> i just think carrie is throwing up a whole bunch of stuff. jill didn't say white men don't deserve justice. that's preposterous. >> she said he has privilege and

privilege says equal protection under the law. that is what this country is built on. >> carrie, you have to let other people talk. >> this is not reason that you're offering. i will just say myself, in terms of what the yale classmates of brett kavanaugh have said. i understand the millieu they are talking about. i was a college frat boy myself. let me tell you the principle purpose of the fraternity's social event is to get hammered. brett kavanaugh acted as if that wasn't part of his experience. it obviously was. in high school, in college. as i said earlier, i think what brett kavanaugh's view of this is, that this whole topic, this whole subject is unfair, and therefore i'm going to pretend that it's legitimate for me, it's justified for me to pretend that none of this stuff ever

happened because i don't think it's a legitimate reason to keep me off the court. but by insisting that it didn't happen, he's obviously not credible in those assertions. >> i want to bring in mimi in. you've been very patient. this i think illustrates what we're dealing with here. if you are a partisan for donald trump and for the republican party, it almost doesn't matter what brett kavanaugh says. it almost doesn't matter what brett kavanaugh may have done. the perception -- as i said i into with a republican strategist who made this clear, the perception is it's just not fair as john harwood said. going after him this way is a way to take him down because he's a republican. if you are not a partisan, then you're looking at it in a completely different way. the supreme court is not supposed to be in this zone. we get the senate is, the house is, if it's my president, it's my party. if it's not, it's not my president. that's where we are for the

country. for the court to be in this vein, to be another super house of representatives, how depressing is that. that's not a question but a statement. >> i have so many things to say but let me focus on your question. it does get back to some of the things carrie was saying. this is not a political campaign. brett kavanaugh is not running for office. you wouldn't have known that from his statement when he sat down. that is part of what's shocking, his behavior, hostility, anger, judges are allowed to have political beliefs for sure. democrats aren't going to like all the judges the republicans put up or any of them and that's fine. that's right. elections have consequences. i understand that. judges have to act impartial. they have to have the capability to be impartial just like prosecutors, just like fbi agents. i spent my career -- i prosecuted democrats and republicans happily. that's what prosecutors do. judges have to be objective.

what he did when he came out talking about the clintons and that partisan rage made people question whether he could do that. that's the most unjudicial think you can do. the second thing i will say about this whole question about entitlement and fairness. carrie, again, makes a point. he has plenty of people who say he's a good and moral person, plenty of people who say he's a good jurist, a legal scholar. all those things can be true, but he also could have committed this sexual assault. this is not a trial. at trials defendants put on character witnesses all the time. the first question on cross-examination of a character witness who says, you know, my uncle is such a great person. he did so many good deeds, the first question on cross-examination by the prosecutor is, but do you know anything about the facts of this case? were you present for any of the alleged acts? the answer is no. the prosecutor says i'm done. i sit down. because one does not negate the other. you can be a good person and do

bad things. >> can i respond to this question of partisanship. i want to bring up the example of roy moore. i said publicly on tv networks, including this one, he should not win his seat. i said this. you know who else said this, mitch mcconnell said this. roy moore was running for senate and you said i'm being a partisan. i'm not being a partisan. roy moore dated young girls. he said it himself. this is a very big difference. >> carrie, you keep equating brett kavanaugh to people running for political office, that's kind of making the point. >> no, joy, i'm equating data and evidence and witnesses. >> let me go to -- i haven't had david brock. >> a predator at shopping malls. >> roy moore used to be on the supreme court of alabama. that's the only question. >> david brock has not had a chance to speak. mitch mcconnell said roy moore should not either. a very important point to make. >> what reward shall we give to mitch mcconnell for the statement. >> showing he's been

intellectually honest. the facts do not support this assertion at this time. >> you don't have any facts to refute it. you weren't there. >> mark judge was there, and he is proactively refuting it. >> he should have testified. >> he gave a sworn statement. >> david, you were in the middle of previous, clarence thomas in 1991, actually had a lower temperature, believe it or not. you had the partisan attempt, and you were part of it, to portray anita hill as a liar. no facts supporting her claim. she had no evidence to prove it. he called it a high-tech lynching when he gave his version of the angry speech. in your view, after all we saw this week, all the spectacle, have we come to a place where this will solidify in your view republicans, carrie shelf eeld, and make them rally around. >> i think that was the

strategy. i knew brett kavanaugh. the mask fell this week in his testimony. we really saw a couple of different things. we saw, one, the raw political ambition, the raw political strategy, the rallying of those people, of his own people to his side. remember, in the fox interview, he came across as very weak, almost pathetic, pleading. so that really needed a course correction. one, you saw the raw political operative there. he had to invent -- he had a problem because he didn't have a theory of the case because he wasn't calling dr. ford a liar. he had to conjure up this notion of a conspiracy on the left. i'll tell you, joy, if there's a vast left wing conspiracy i don't know about it. i might join it. if anything here, the democrats, there's no evidence of that. the second problem he had. people asked me, you knew brett, would he be capable of something like that. i couldn't say that. i could say he's capable of getting up there and lying. what i said earlier he lied about his role in the ken starr

investigation as ken starr's hatchet man, certainly unethically leaking back then. we saw him lying about drinking. we saw him lying about sex. we saw him lying about the folks who were at the party where he insisted they refuted charges when they just said they couldn't recollect them. he has a huge credibility problem coming out of this. i do think he rallied troops to his side. there's no question about that. there's also a possibility, if this thing ends up getting derailed that it won't matter. it will be an oppressive effect on the vote for this loss. >> carrie, i'll come back, david knows brett kavanaugh personally. he came up with him through the sort of partisan world of operatives and media people. they were part of the same crew. he knows him. he says the angry political operative we saw, that is who brett kavanaugh is. do you take david brock's knowledge of him personally to

heart? >> i don't know brett kavanaugh personally, so i can't me to his character. i do know that dozens and dozens of people have said this is a man -- and also many, many women, he's been a champion for getting women as clerks opt the supreme court. he has the best record across the country. this is, again, facts. facts are more important than feeling. it's really mind boggling, the fact that david is saying that somehow he has to prove something, that the complainant -- people say this isn't a criminal prosecution, it is. >> it's not. >> she's accusing him of a crime. this is a crime. she's accusing him of a crime. >> you said facts are more important than feelings. we're going to take the temperature down and ask you do you have a single fact that would refute what dr. blasey ford said? do you have a single fact that refutes her claim? >> that our country is built on innocent until proven guilty. it's called the constitution. >> do you have a fact --

>> it's called the constitution. >> refutes her claim. >> do you have a fact, very passionate he didn't do it. the only you have is he said he didn't do it. >> she doesn't have a location where it happened. she has not filed a police report. she has not filed -- >> lots of victims of sexual abuse don't file police reports. lots of women don't. lots of men are victims. most people don't. the problem is there isn't actually anything that refutes it, but a lot of the evidence of who he was as a high school kid, that he wrote in his yearbook, kind of suggests he was at least a drinker. do you think it was better if he said, yeah, i was a drinker. >> he did. he said he likes beer. i appreciate you having me on to share perspective. >> i appreciate you coming on. i really do. >> i didn't even vote for donald trump. based on what we're seeing, it's like we're living in an or

wellian society. i fight for justice reform, i used to work for the koch brothers. it doesn't matter what your race is, gender is, you have the presumption of innocence. i see if you were a progressive on this panel and you do not believe in innocent until proven guilty, why do you think that should apply somewhere else and not in this case. i do not understand. >> his liberty is not in jeopardy. he has a lifetime great job right now on the federal circuit court. it's just whether or not he's entitled to a promotion to lifetime on the supreme court. his liberty in jeopardy. i want to give everyone final comment because we've had so much time. start with you. go. >> i want to pull back for a second. i want to say my heart goes out to victims and survivors of sexual assault, because this week was a trigger week for many people. you deserve better, we deserve better from what we experienced this week. i think that's why when dr. ford

sat down, she into for millions and millions of people. unfortunately i feel like we haven't come that ferraro from 27 years ago where professor anita hill was going through the same thing and was railroaded. >> do you feel the same way, jill? do you feel like we've made any progress? does this feel like progress to you? >> i feel like we have taken a turn away from progress and this is not a good thing. i think if he would take responsibility for his behavior in high school, that would go a long way to saying, okay, i realize i did something wrong. but what it makes me think now is that it's not only high school, it's college, it's law school and now. and we need to know the facts. facts do matter. they are the ultimate proof. why are we hiding the facts? why aren't we letting a full unimpeded fbi investigation go forward. no one-week time line, let it be full. >> lindsey graham and others have said nothing she says moves us. he's getting on the court.

>> that's what they have said. i think the point is facts do matter and the fbi investigation matters. carrie is absolutely right that facts matter. i wish that donald trump actually believed that you were innocent until proven guilty because he's certainly not evidenced that for black men and boys in this country. >> i don't think this is just about brett kavanaugh anymore. i think the reason you have so much passion going on for men and women, particularly women, but men also, is because it was the republican white male panel's reaction to these claims of trying to not have an investigation to say they don't matter that got women in particular so angry. that's why yesterday felt like a turning point to me. it felt like, at least a little bit, someone finally listened and said it does matter and we need to look at it. >> john harwood. >> i would say a couple things. first of all, it is obvious brett kavanaugh has a first rate legal mind.

he's an able judge. if i were him, and if i were legitimately falsely accused of something, i would be as outraged as he was at the committee. the merit of this fbi investigation, it may shed a little more like as to whether or not dr. ford or brett kavanaugh was right and also shed a little more light on his present day truthfulness to the judiciary committee, which is relevant to his service as a judge. >> i'm going to actually give one more word to carrie sheffield. i want to thank you for coming on this panel. it's not easy -- i used to do this on cnbc, larry kudlow, not easy to be the one person. i want to say my heart goes out to you for having survived sexual assault your self. >> thank you. i've never talked about it in a public setting. >> i can see how emotional you are. we all feel for you at this

table. we're all among friends here. we can disagree on a nomination or politics but we are sending our hearts out to you and lots of love. >> if i could end on a note we all agree on, this situation has shown the importance of evidence. as a woman, if you've experienced sexual assault, immediately tell multiple witnesses, immediately gather the evidence, immediately protect your self. then you will have truth oppose your side, you will have evidence and facts on your side. that is what we need. that's what this country is built on. >> carrie, thank you very much for being here. jill, thank you for being here. mimi rocca, great to have you in person, maya, thank you all. very much appreciate it. we're going to keep john and david, they are going to be back on later in the show. up next lindsey graham accuses democrats of doing precisely what he did to president obama's supreme court nominee a mere two years ago. this has been a morning. more "am joy" after the break. a. more "am joy" after the break. packaging for restaurants. and we've grown substantially.

so i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. and last year, i earned $36,000 in cash back. that's right, $36,000. which i used to offer health insurance to my employees. my unlimited 2% cash back is more than just a perk, it's our healthcare. can i say it? what's in your wallet? are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? 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®. the riskiest job. the consequences underwater can escalate quickly. the next thing i know, she swam off with the camera. it's like, hey, thats mine! i want to keep doing what i love. that's the retirement plan. with my annuity i know there's a guarantee.

annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retireyourrisk.org annuities can provide protected income for life. take your razor, yup. up and down, never side to side, shaquem, you got it? come on stay focused. hard work baby, it gonna pay off. until i held her. managing my type 2 diabetes wasn't my top priority. i found my tresiba® reason. now i'm doing more to lower my a1c. i take tresiba® once a day. tresiba® controls blood sugar for 24 hours for powerful a1c reduction. (woman) we'd been counting down to his retirement. it was our tresiba® reason. he needs insulin to control his high blood sugar and, at his age, he's at greater risk for low blood sugar. tresiba® releases slow and steady and works all day and night like the body's insulin. (vo) tresiba® is a long-acting insulin used to control high blood sugar in adults with diabetes.

don't use tresiba® to treat diabetic ketoacidosis, during episodes of low blood sugar, or if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. don't share needles or insulin pens. don't reuse needles. the most common side effect is low blood sugar, which may cause dizziness, sweating, confusion, and headache. check your blood sugar. low blood sugar can be serious and may be life-threatening. injection site reactions may occur. tell your prescriber about all medicines you take and all your medical conditions. taking tzds with insulins like tresiba® may cause serious side effects like heart failure. your insulin dose shouldn't be changed without asking your prescriber. get medical help right away if you have trouble breathing, fast heartbeat, extreme drowsiness, swelling of your face, tongue or throat, dizziness or confusion. (man) i found my tresiba® reason. find yours. (vo) ask your health care provider about tresiba®. covered by most commercial health insurance and medicare part d plans.

this is the most unethical sham since i've been in politics. if you really wanted to know the truth, you sure as hell wouldn't have done what you've done to this guy. boy, you want power. god, i hope you never get it. i hope the american people can see through this sham. that you knew about it and you held it. you had no intention of protecting dr. ford. none. she's as much of a victim as you are. >> okay. how ironic is it that lindsey

graham is accusing democrats of making a power play over a supreme court nominee. a mere two years ago lindsey graham supported senate majority leader mitch mcconnell's unprecedented move to block president obama's nomination of merrick garland to fill a supreme court vacancy, holding the seat open a year so the next president would fill it, in the hopes the next president would be a republican. and thus stealing a nomination from president obama. here is what graham said after meeting with merrick garland back then. >> my view is the next president should decide. how does this movie end? that we're going to let the next president decide. the nominating process. that's what i told him. i think that's right answer. it's nothing against him personally. i think he's a very capable, honest judge. but historically we don't fill the vacancies this close to an election. >> back with me, anita, as a

former member of the justice department under barack obama, how was that for you to see them accuse democrats of stealing a supreme court seat. >> throughout the entire confirmation process, there have been so many times folks were tweeting and saying, wait, what did you say about merrick garland that you are directly being hypocritical now. when lindsey graham was in the room, it was obvious to me and a lot of people he was speaking to his fellow republicans and particularly to senator flake. he was invoking and channeling donald trump and acting belligerent as well and speaking very directly to senator flake and kind of threatening him around if any republican votes against this nominee, et cetera, et cetera. just zooming out for a second, he and brett kavanaugh at every

turn resisted calling for an fbi investigation. so now there is one. everyone in the conversation is all focused on the fbi investigation. it is a very important thing to happen. it's important for survivors to know. a lot of women after seeing brett kavanaugh perform the way he did felt completely discounted and dismissed. we have to place this within the broader context of what's happening here, which is that brett kavanaugh came into that hearing that day with accusations and a lot of evidence that he had lied in his prior hearing about very important facts about what he knew when he was a staff secretary around the stolen e-mails, around his participation in the torture memos, vetting of judges and the like, and he walked into that room and performed, i think, as we've been talking about with, you know, this rage and anger that you just don't want from a supreme court justice. that is -- i'm not convinced

that folks like lindsey graham are going to review anything that is in the report in the fbi objectively. i'm worried about that. so we've got this. the fbi won't make conclusions. everyone will read it. lindsey graham before he walked into this week's hearing, we're going to listen to the lady and now we're going to vote. now this report is going to come out. let's see how much stock they give to the detailed findings the fbi is going to look at deborah ramirez allegations, julie sweat niallegations. they go back making sure they are running everything to ground. do we have faith those senate republicans who resisted every turn throughout this whole process to get to the truth, to have the decency test around this, that's why it's important for everyone to remember, this isn't just about this fbi investigation, this is about whether brett kavanaugh is fit to serve on the nation's highest

court for the rest of his life based on everything we know about this man including who he was on -- at the hearing this week. >> yeah. just it give everyone who didn't get a chance to watch the whole thing. this is a bit long but play a mash up just to anita's point. this is how republicans, including lindsey graham, reacted to what they heard in the hearings on thursday. >> this is going to destroy the ability of good people to come forward because of this crap. your high school yearbook. you have interacted with professional women all your life. not one accusation. you're supposed to be bill cosby when you're a junior and senior in high school. and all of a sudden you got over it. >> no whisper of misconduct by him in the time he's been a judge. what we have are uncorroborated,

unsubstantiated claims from his teenager years. >> this committee is running this hearing. not the white house, not don mcgahn, not even you as a nominee. >> if you want an fbi report, you can ask for it your self. i've asked for fbi reports in the past. >> eve got 35 plus days from all the time that this evidence was in the hands. recommendations were made to an outside lawyer. we could have handled this. we could have handled this conversation in private that didn't not only do crap to his family do -- i yield my time. >> stipulated there are actually legitimate questions about why dianne feinstein didn't at least question him about it when she had the opportunity and why it took so long. those are legitimate political questions to raise. to zero back in on lindsey graham. that felt callous as you are listening to it. this was lindsey graham actually in the hallway being confronted by a sexual victim on thursday. take a listen. >> senator graham, i was raped

13 years ago. i don't remember the exact date. do you believe me? >> he said, you need to go to the cops. this is if the a republican caucus that's going to listen to an fbi investigation either way. >> not at all. they showed their true colors this week, which was they don't believe and they are not going to protect sexual assault victims, and that they don't believe women. it is going to be detrimental to them as we move forward especially into november. women are not going to forget what happened thursday, they are not going to forget tomorrow and they aren't going to forget november. i do believe republicans have lost women for generations. what they did, too, was they underestimated women. what happened is the last couple of weeks, women have been coming out. they have been going to senate offices. they have been putting their bodies on the line. they have been getting arrested. they made themselves very, very clear that this process is not okay. the thing about lindsey graham

is, let's not forget he was mccain's side kick for many, many years. now he's gone fall on maga. he has sold his soul to donald trump. why, i'm sure we'll find out why at some point. it is shameful to see. because now what we saw, the clips that you just saw of him, you know, going on this rage, he's now the face of what we saw on thursday. not just brett kavanaugh but also lindsey graham. >> david brock, you as a former conserve republican, operative, didn't lindsey graham help himself? there's an argument to be made what lindsey graham also did, one of the things he said when he did his rant was, i know i'm a single white male from south carolina, and i'm told i should shut up, but i will not shut up, if that's okay, because i got here the same way everyone else did, the people in south carolina voted for me. it felt like he threw down the gauntlet for white male

republican voters and said you need to be gam vlvanized. there's an argument to be made whatever republicans lose in terms of women's vote they will gain them with enthusiasm. >> i think on the part of lindsey graham, that was phony outrage. it was staged. i think it was to do what you suggest. lindsey graham is a snake here. in 2016 he said that donald trump was a xenophobic races and he didn't vote for trump of it's one of the ig aboute eses esese biggest 180s we've seen. he wants to go into the cabinet, trying to anger the base, deep state crowd. he became a hero on sean hannity's show. basically, joy, it's really sad but dr. ford became road kill on lindsey graham's ambition here.

>> she described it as feeling like she had to throw her body in front of a train that's going where i was going anyway. that's an incredibly sad way to think about it. she became a hero to women. corrine, david, anita, thank you very much. coming up at the top of the hour, a closer look at brett kavanaugh's calendar and the role it could play in the investigation. up next more "am joy." d play in investigation. up next more "am joy." able. 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. 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. ♪ ok here we go guys, you ready? hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. opportunity is everywhere. ♪ it's gonna be fine. it's a door... ♪ it's doing a lot of kicking down there. waiting to be opened. ♪ whatever your ambition... ♪ whatever your drive... ♪ whatever you're chasing... driver, are we almost there? we're gonna have a baby! ♪ daddy! daddy! opportunity is everywhere.

♪ all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪ you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from an allergy pill? flonase relieves sneezing, itchy, watery eyes

and a runny nose, plus nasal congestion, which most pills don't. it's more complete allergy relief. flonase. endless shrimp is back at with all the shrimp you want, any way you want them. there's new sesame-ginger grilled shrimp with savory soy-ginger sauce and sprinkled with asian seasoning. and favorites like garlic shrimp scampi! but endless shrimp won't last endlessly, so hurry in.

are you planning to fire rod rosenstein? >> i'm talking to him. we've had a good talk. he said he never said it. he said he doesn't believe it. he said he has a lot of respect for me, and he was very nice, and we'll see. deputy attorney general rod rosenstein, who oversees the mueller investigation got a reprieve, but he says set to meet with the president in the near future. the report claims that rosenstein suggested wearing a wire and using the 25th amendment. they have called on rosenstein to answer that

questions in a closed-door meeting. staff writer for "the atlantaic is here with me. what do we know about this closed-door meeting. the committee to protect the president wants to know if he was trying to baker-act the president. >> they see this as leverage. this gives the house republicans all the leverage they need to call him in, go ilhim, perhaps get these memos that andy mccabe wrote, so i think we will not see him be out before the mid terms. this is a golden opportunity for the house republicans to get what they have wanted for so long and to have an skew, fell, if you talk about recording the president, rallying the troops to do that, then we have an excuse to bring you in and ask you about that. we have an excuse to ask for they mccabe memos, because it constitutes a threat to the president. i think this is too much of a

golden opportunity for them to give up, but after the mid terms, that would be a game changer. he could feel completely free to clean house. and the potential for a 5-4 court that could do a grab bag of conservative wish list items, but also about the mueller probe. this is this possible of stacking the jury with someone who has shown himself to be a partisan for you. is there anything to the idea that the white house has interest in kavanaugh, instead of amy cohen baird or someone else is because of the mueller probe? >> absolutely. this is someone who has expressed a very -- belief in a very expansive view. when he was grilled by the senators on the judiciary committee about his views, about whether a sitting president should be able to be subpoenaed, but self-pardons, he dodged. he would not answer the question. he has said that after 9/11, he was in the bush white house and

that changed his view on executive power. he thinking a sitting president should not be subjected to criminal investigations, that we should not burden a sitting president with those things and therefore they should be treated differently than a civilian. so this is someone who has a long record of saying that a president should be immune from these -- from the very things the mueller investigation is probing. something i wrote about this week which would be consequential is gamble versus usa. on its face it really has nothing to do with the mueller problem at all. it's about this man who was a convicted felon in alabama and he was pulled over for a broken taillight in 2015. he had a firearm in his car, so he was convicted on state charges. the federal government also wanted to convict him for similar or the same crimes. he said that vited his fifth amendment radio i got to avoid jeopardy.

this has come before the suppress to say can the federal government and the state charge a person with the same crime twice. this is been in the context of the mueller investigation, because many people have said the saving grace that trump could -- that could prevent trump from pardoning his associates willy nilly issedied they could be charged for the same crime on the state level, but if this comes before the court, and it will this fall and they decide that the dual sovereign doctrine should be overturned -- >> didn't senator hatch write a am i cuss brief in. >> he did. this dock continue should be overturned. so with that in mind, that could strengthen trump's pardon power exponentially, according to legal experts that i spoke to who interpreted this case. when you this he about it that way, it makes sen.

brett kavanaugh was speaking to an audience of one. it seems very clear he feels like he owes the president. that could be very dangerous. the payback could be he could make it so that robert mueller could not just pass along some of the crimes to state proarors. we've been wondering why why why kavanaugh, why not drop him? you wrote the story i wanted to talk about it gave us a potential answer. thank you. that does wrap up today's very busy, very busy show. please don't misthe special coverage of the global citizen festival with performances by janet jackson, cardi b, john legend. i'll be co-hosting our live coverage with family msnbc faces. get over there, chris haze. more "a.m. joy" coming up. "a.m. "a.m. it's time to get out of line with upmc.

at upmc, living-donor transplants put you first. so you don't die waiting. upmc does more living-donor liver transplants than any other center in the nation. find out more and get out of line today. 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. if you have moderate to thsevere rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections.

serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. 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. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira. there's nothing small about your business. with dell small business technology advisors, you get the one-on-one partnership to grow your business. the dell vostro 14 laptop. get up to 40% off on select pcs. call 877-buy-dell today. ( ♪ ) call 877-buy-dell today. not long ago, ronda started here. and then, more jobs began to appear. these techs in a lab.

this builder in a hardhat... ...the welders and electricians who do all of that. the diner staffed up 'cause they all needed lunch. teachers... doctors... jobs grew a bunch. what started with one job spread all around. because each job in energy creates many more in this town. energy lives here.

a very good day to all of you, joy reid is going to help cost the global citizen festival, and she'll be fantastic. high noon in the east, it's 9:00 a.m. out west. we have some new insight into the second thoughts that let to the decision to reopen