penalty of felony from them. i've got 45 seconds left. i'm going to ask you a quick quo timing.ha yoa meeting with senator feinstein on august 20? >> that's my understanding. helped dr. ford t retain the law firm between july 30th and august 7th. i want to you clarify. in the y meeting that had two weeks or more later, this issue t raised. >> the issue was not raised. >> thank you. my time isup. >> we'll take a five-minute break now. we continue to watch the questioning of brett kavanaugh on this marathon dave hearings that began at 10:00 eastern

time. it is now just after 6:00 here on the east coast and there are still a numberf senators left to go. significant change for republans after yielding their questions to a prosecutor. they seem to have takenare of their own questioning. they're comfortable even if it is evenly split. whicne would mean republican vote we are the democrats to say no.

hi we've had report that she wants mark judge, shoulng't we be talo him. . does she held to cards here? they're at a very precarious moment. they can't lose anybody else. >> someone who we thought might have been on the fence nd came out with a very strong, very brief defense ofav judge kaugh by getting him to answer a lot of the questions that have been raised by democrats. that was a signal. that a tell that some of those

republicans want to get over with. >> i believe she is victim but spent so much of the time asking about w was this not raised in closed session? >> less of a defensehan an attack on the democrats. >> it seemed like a place holder. >> it does feel like republicans are getting more blcomfor the senate republicans are comfortable saying, i'm going to stand by kavanaugh because this is about the democratic party. this is about the process. they've almost changed it from making it referendum on the process. is what will be interesting there are some democrats left. a few, i think. it will be interesting to see if one of them tries to challenge their own version. say, corey booker. we could have some exchanges. >> kamala harris. they don't have a long time on spin.

they have to, he is keeping the senate. > so just four possible votes here they have of which would send it to the floor. a vote to treatment nomination. no recommendation. or against them. keep it bottled up in committee. when that happen, i think the odds are very low. it is a possibility. it would take a motion to dischae the committee and that could be filibustered. so that's the only way in which that would be an unusual and very strange wrinkle if it

happen. but it is nonetheless a possibility. it could be sent to the floor with the recommendation. >> unfavorable recommendation. i'm talking about no recommendation at all. don't vote not to send it to the floor. unleash the discharge possibility. >> if there are anyepublicans who might be waivering, they're not on the committee. the committee vote will be mor likely in favor. >> remember jeff flake's speech yesterday on the he was the one showing empathy for both judge kavanaugh and dr. ford saying they're two human beings. >> let me to go kasie hunt. what is the sense nowan republ have had a little more questioning? >> if anything, the result has hardened those of our key supporters. and i think the expense lindsay

graham, the defense of him. there is a lot of criticism as dr. ford's testimony was unfolding this morning. we saw him defend himself. i think it has hardened the relve of tho expecting to support judge kavanaugh. the question will be, and he was walking through the intricacies of what happened with the committee. that makes the central player here itthe n probably 12 hours. this committee vote is scheduled for 9:. could potentially put the brakes on it because the committee is 11 republicans and ten democrats. so a eyes are on him. they've been paying very close attention. if they do get this out of committee, favorable or not nargs way that doesn't allow it to be filibustered on the floor. there is one scenario to allow that there has been a plan to push it if you have speed ahead to the senate floor.

it is ranked number one. in college, two things. a, i studied. i was in cross campus library every night. and b, i played baskethall for junior varsity. i tried out for the varsity. the first day i arrived on campus we had captains rkouts. played basketball every day. as soon as the season was over in latery febr the workouts started again. i wasss ob. >> i only have 22 seconds. so you were not a sloppy drunk. so your roommate was lying. >> i will refer you again to the redacted portion. look at my academic record. i don't usually like to talk

about myself this way but inre onse, i worked very hard in college, in my studies. and i also played basketball. did sports. >> continuing chairman will stop me but i do have some other references from people who knew you who say that you were not the -- hold. on i'm sorry. mr. chairman -- okay. i'll wait until we finish. i wan to enter some letters into the record. could do i that? >> wasn't clear that's what we were doing. >> i couldo on. mr. chairman, i would like the enter into the record four letters. one is dated september 18,20 , to you, from all the democrats on this committee. another is a letter dated hristopher 8th to wray, the director of the fbi, and again, counsel to the president. september 21st letter, signed by

chuck schumer and dianne feinstein to the president, and a septemb 26th letter signed by all the democrats on this committee. all reqstingn fbi investigation. because you did say all we have to do is asknd the implication being if we ask, an investigation will happen and it certainly has not happened. >> without objection, that will be included. senator taylor. >> thank you. judge kavanaugh, thank you again for being here. i apologize for what you're going throug i've gone through a lot of campaigns and gone through a lot of smears b it pales in comparison to what you're having to deal with. one thing i would like to make from the onset. if we go back and review how this committee process has worked, we've got a lot to do. we've had members take it on themselves toelease committee confidential documents. instead of respecting the process. we've had an allegation held for

nearly seven weeks thatld w have given us plenty of time to investigate. and then when we finally got it, particularly the ameri public, there is an investigation going on and a lot of is it documented. there a chronology on the website that says each and every time an allegation was made, the staff follod up on it. and sadly in several instances, the democratsd decli to participate. they listed at least oneie inte with you, that didn't ask a single question. if they wanted to find other leads, why not ask? if r you'relly trying to investigate. we're investigating. it is our jo in response to the ranging members question, that judge kavanaugh said, i'm here. you'e asking questions. do you know what? when the committee staff, iec assume dd by the ranking member says no. we won't ask questions. of judge kavanaugh when he wanted to comen a clear his

name. what are you afte a you may not er the truth. maybe you're executing some sort of a political agenda. maybe mix of both. but i think you've been treated unfairly and i'm amazed after 32 hours of testimony, one and a half hours, i sat in this room. that none of these questions came up. when it was all fully known. lawyered up, as a matter of fact. wanted to go back to the comments this morning. i think i heard, and we can go backo the record if someone disagrees. i think i heard, dr. ford say that she wasn't aware of the fact that we said we would come to california. we would make it confidential. we'll completely depose and ask any questions you. want i think i heard her say she wasn't aware of that. i n't know whether thatame with counsel or whether counsel neglected to tl her. it is out.

there we were moving heaven and earth and the schedule to get to the truth. we're doiig an inveion. i hope the american people were watching this. thwill go t senate judiciary website and take a look at this chronology. take a look athe lack of investigation on the part of the people who want the invesnigation. it d make a lot of sense. every opportunity you had to go and question witness. every opportunity that we've had to find more truth, to find more facts, we've done it. it is documented. we've got sworn statements. we're doing our job. we're doing the committee work. judge kavanaugh, i also have to say, i believe you're a part of, you're the first major target of a new strategy that is developed here. and i think you're right. i think it is basically attack, attack, attack. it is not advise and itconsent.

s search and destroy. maybe one of the best evidences, one of the groups out there, you and trying to create fodder and all of these red herrings, h always acquired a url for the next judge they're going to attack. they've purchased it and t theye readgo. this is the way we'll run this committee from this point forward. take a look at it. i'll make suree get it out on the website. we've got a judge whon has b nominated. the same people tryinge mobil people to attack you. there are some people here who may sincerely have concerns. i would tell you to pound the table with the ranking member and the leadership on your side to say, why didn't we ask questions? wh did we listen and defer some why didn't w do our part of the investigation while this leader did everything he could to accommodate dr. ford and to run

down every single lead that has been presented to us? weeks after it was known to the minority. i look forward to rt spoking your nomination. these are allegation that's can be pursued through courts. everybody knows that won't happen. >> you drink on weekdays as well in high school. not just weekends. >>weekdays? >> yes, sir. >> i would say that'sra . are you talking about during the school >>year? on the calendars that you provided. >> in the summer after game. >> on weekdays. >> in the sum where we went t

timmy's house on july 1st. that first reference toskies. that's brewskys, right? >> if may ask the next question, sir. >> up clearly on the record. i want you to restate it. that you never in your life after drinking heavily to the point of throwing d up, u said you had a weak stomach. you said you never had any losses. never any gaps in memory. is that correct? yes or no? >> tt's what i am. >> okay. sir, you always said that this past two weeks has been a two-week effort, calculated and organize straight as a political hit. are you saying dr. ford's efforts to come forward, to prepare for the very difficult testimony s gave today torsion travel to washington, d.c. and tell us about her experience,

have been part of an orchestrated hit? are you calling her political opative? >> i've said my family has no ill will toward dr. rd. she wanted confidentiality. it was blown by the actions of this committee and it has turned had into -- >> let be clear. you have problems with the senators up here and how we conducted it. but you're not saying in any way that she is a political wn a political operative? you have sympathy for her? she is talking about a sexual assault. is that correct? >> i said all allegations should be taken seriously. you should listen to both sides. my family has no ill will toward her. do you wish she never came forward? >> senator, i do not do this. >> that's not my question. could you try on answery question, sir? >> do you wish she never came forward? >> the witnesses who were there say it didn't happen. >> do you wish she had remained silent then? >> the witnesses say it didn't

happen. all allegations should be taken seriously. >> even if it is in the final days, days before a vote, if someone has a credible allegation that they've hold to for a long time. she said it was her civic duty.t you're not qning her essential of civic duty?g i'm try to get to the bottom of, you do not see her specifically as part of an orchestrated- >> i don't know her. but i've also said that we bear no ill will toward her. she wantedconfidentiality. this could have been handled -- >> i understand.as your familyone through hell. her family has gone through hell. she sat here and told her truth. and you made the allegation that she was coordinating it. >> i did not say that. >> i'm sorry. you said others were making a

coordinated -- not her. she was not doing this for political efforts in 2012 when she tked on her therapist about the attack. she was not coordining ithen she made revelations to her husband. she did not coordinate in 2013, 16, 2017, before you were even nominated when she revealed it was you. coordination. >> all the witnesses who were there say it didn't happen. miss keyser who was her long time friend said she never saw her at a party with me. oe i'll quote that. she said she not remember the night in question. but she also says that she believes dr. ford. so my colleague, lindsey gram, whom i respect and have admiration for, he said voting no would be legitimizing the most despicable thing in americanpolitics. do you think people who believe

dr. ford are legitimizing despicable things those of us who think she is a legitimate witness. do you thi we're engaging in something despicable? >> i say listen to both sides before you make aottom line conclusion. and look at -- that is fair. >> you can answer after i finish. that is fair. listen to bothsides. this is not about one side being despicable. i'ming good to finish my question. you answer. she gave credible, meaningful testimony. a woman who had the courage t come forward and tell her truthful she is not a political pawn. not organize strating. she is not part of the clintons' efforts. she came here with corroborating evidence to tell her truth. that was a final statement. >> one thing, mr. cherairman.

the evidence was not corroborated at the time. the witsses there say it didn't happen. >> tnk you, mr. chairman. >> judge kavanaugh, you and your family have been treated incredibly poorly by senate democratsnd by the media. i think dr. ford and her family have been treated incredibly poorly by senate democrats and the media. you have both seen your good names dragged through the mud. and this has been sadly one of the most shameful chapters in the history of the united states senate. let me say to you and your family, thank you for a lifetime of public service. i will say wching your mother's pained fac has been heart-wrenching as she has seen herct son's cha dragged through the mud. after not only your life time public service but her lifetimes of publicvice as well. as a father, there's been

nothing more painful to you tha talking to your daughters and explaini these attacks. that the media isng ai i believe the american people are fair minded people. thathe americaeople can set aside the part sandal warfare of washington and look to substance and facts. and that is the charge of this committee. now, there have been three different sets of allegations that have dominated the media. think it is important to note two of those sets of allegationo have had little corroboration that even the "new york times," which iso conservativ outlet, refused to report on them because they could find no basis for them. and it was striking in this entire hearing that not a single democrat in this committee asked about two sets of those allegations. miss ramirez' allegations, and the allegations of the client of

mr. avenatti. not a singledemocrat. i don't know if they were just too embarrassed -- mr. avenatti's allegations are so scandalous that they h omitted most scandalous allegations of you as a criminal mastermind. omitted them from the statement. this hearing has focused rightly on the allegations dr. ford presented. and i think the hearing did the right they know in giving her a full and fai opportunity to tell her story. that's what we needed to do. the committee treated herith respect, as we should. i do not believe senate democrats treated with you respect. what do we know? we know that her testimony and your testimony are in conflict. a fair-minded assessor of facts

would look to what else do we know when you have conflicting testimony? we know dr. ford identifiedth e fact witnesses who she said observed what occurred. all three of those fact witnesses have stayed on the record, under penalty of perjury, that the do no recall what she is alleging happen. they have not only not corroborated her charges. they have explicitly refuted her charges. that's significant to a fair-minded fact finder. in addition, you've walked through before this committee your calendarsrom thetime. i will say, you were a much more organized teenager than i was and many of us were. but it is a compelling recitation of night by night by night where you were in the summer of 1982. that is yet anotherem coraneous piece of fact to assess what happened.

d we also know that the democrats on this committee engaged in a profoundly unfair process. the ranking member had these allegations on july 30th. for 60 ys. that was 60 days ago. the ranking member did not refer it to the fbi for an fbi. the ranking member did not refer it to the xhul committee for an investigation. this committeee could h investigated those claim in a confidential way that respected dr. ford's privacy. and some of the most significant testimony we heard this mornin as dr. ford told this committee that the only people to whomhe gave her letter were her attorneys, the ranking member, and her member of congress. and she stated that she and her attorney did not release the letter. which means the only people letter ve released that were either the ranging member and her staff or the ranking member of the congress.

because she told this comosttee were the only people who had it. that is not a fair process. we should look to the facts, not anonymous innuendo. >> cheryl, i ask for a point of personal privilege to respond. >> mr. chairman, let me be clear. i did not hide dr. ford's ti alles. i did not leak her story. she asked me to hold it confidential and i kept it confidential as she asked. she apparentl was stalked by the press, felt that what happened, she w forced to come forward ander greatest fear was realized. she has been harassed. she's had death threats and e's to flee her home. in addition, the investigation that the rublican majority is heralding is really nothing that i know about other than aan

partpractice. normally, all the witnesses would be interviewed. however, that's not happened. while thas majority reached out to several people, they did not notify or my staff that they were doing this. so to argue that we would not participate but not tell us what they were up to is disingenuous. i was given information by a woman very much afraid, who asked that it be held confidential. and i held it confidential until she decided that she would come forward. king member r answer a question, please? >> if i can. >> i have great respect for sefetor stein. we worked together on many topics and i believe what you just said. can you tell us that your staff did not leak it? >> i don't believe my staff

would leak it. i have not ask that question directly. >> do you know that?n howe world did it get in the hands of the press? >> the answer is no. the staff -- >> have you asked your staff? >> i just did. pardon me? jennifer reminds me that i've asked her before about it. >> somebody leaked it if wasn't >> i'm telling you, i did not. i mean, i was aed to keep it confidential. and i'm criticized for that, too. >> mr. chairman,ould i ask the chairman a question? does the committee have a if there is an allegation againsny nomination to address night confidential forum rather than in the public, since dr. ford be kept it be kept confidential. that?ere a process for

>> the answer is yes. and senator tillis pointed out the document that i put out to show all the things we've done along those lines.ld >> what wou have done if the ranking member raised the allegation with yo >> it would have done like w have done we ever background, or let's say, fbi report that comes from the white house, the nominee. and then subsequent tthat. maybe the fbi got done with it three months ago. we go through the fbi or information comes to us. then we have our investigato in a bipartisan way, both republican and oldemocrats,w up on whatever those questions r or those problems. >> so bipartisan investigators could have investigated thimo to hs ago and it could have been heard in a confidential setting without dr. ford's name or judge kavanaugh's name being dragged through the mud. is that correct? >> excep for one or two

conversations we had with the judge, through our investigators, democrats didn't participate except in those two. but they didn't ask any questions. >> thank you. >> mr. chairman? may i respond? >> it is my understanding that her story was leaked before the letter became public. and she testified that she had spoken to her friends about it and it is most likely that's how it leaked. that she had been asked by press. eut it did not leak from us. i ass you of that. >> mr. chairman, i'm a little confused. i thought only the member of the house and senator feinstein and her lawyers had the letter. riends she might have talked to about it couldn't like the letter if they just had a verbal conversation, unless she gave them a copy of the letter. >> senator, i don't think the

letter was ever leaked. >> how did the press know to contact her about her complaint? >> she apparently testified h this morning that she had talked on friends about it. andhe press had talked to her. >> judge, since there w reference to the problems, the legitimate problems, and the change of lifestyle that dr. fordhad, if you want some time to save the market on your family, i would be glad to hear you. >> i've talked about that. >> okay. then senator harris. >> thayou. >> judge kavanaugh, have you taken a professionally administered polygraph test as it relates to this issue? >> no. i'll do whatever the committee wants. of course, those are not admissible in federal court but

i'll do whatever they wanted. they're not admissible becauseo they're reliable. >> so you've not taken one. who l three of the women have made sworn allegations against you have called for an tidependent fbi invtion into the claims. you've been asked during the course of this hearing, by four different members, at least eight times day. and also, earlier this week on national television, whether you ould call for the white hou to authorize an fbi investigion. each timou have declined to do so. i know you know that the fbi is an agency of men andomen who are sworn and trained law enforcement. in the course of conducting ti background invtions on nominees for the supreme court of the united states and others, are charged with conducting those fwroun investigations because they are l sworn enforcement and they have

expertise, and the ability and thry hisf doing that. so i'm going to ask you one last time. are you willing to ask the white house to authorize t fbi to investigate the claims that have been made against you? >> i'll do whateve committee wants. >> and i've heard you say that. but i have not heard you answer a very specific question that has been aske which is, are you willing to ask the white house to conduct an investigation b the f to get ha rtebo wttom ovef the allegation have been levied against you? >> the f would gather witness statements. you have the witness statements. >> i don't want to debate with you h d they their business. i'm asking, are you willing to ask thehite house to conduct such an investigation? as you are aware, the fbi did conduct a background investigation into you before we were aware of these most recentl gations. so are you willing to ask the

white house to do it? it is a yes or no and then we can move on. >> six back ground investigations o y 2r6ears. >> as it relates to the recent allegations. are you willing? >> the witness testimony is before you. no witness who was there supports that i was there. >> i'm going to take a a no and we can move on. you have said in your oning statement. you characterized these allegations as a conspiracy directed against you. i'll point out to you that judge, now justice neil gorsuch was nominated by this president. bhe was consideredthis body just last year. i did a rough analysis of la sities. you both attended georgetown prep. you both attended very prestigious law schools. both clearinged forustice kennedy. you were both nominated to the supreme recourt. you oth questioned about your record. the only differences at you have been accused of sexual

assault. how do youeccile your statement about a conspiracy against with you the treatment of someoneho wasefore this body not very long ago? >> i expined tha in my opening statement, senator.de look at the ee here. the calendars, the witness statements, look at miss keyser's atements. >> do you agree it is possible for men to both be friends with some women and treat oth women badly? of course but the point i've been emphasizing, if you goack ge 14 for me, you will find people, not just people, lots of people who i've been friends with. some of whom are in this room today. starting at age 14, women. who talk about my friendships

withthem. it is a consistent pattern all the way through. 65 women who knew me more than 35 years ago signed a letter to support me after the allation was made. because they know me and they were with me. and we grew up together. we talked on the phoned togethe we went to events together. that is who i am. what they've said, what the pele who worke me in the bush white house, the women there. look at what sar day said in central main.com. look at e, what the law clerks. i have sent more women law clerks to the supreme court than any othereral judge in the country. >> i only have a few seconds left and i'll ask you a direct question. did you watch dr. ford's testimony? >> i did not. to.lan i plan to but i did not. i was prering mine. >> thank you. >> our last fivel minutes w

senator flake one minute and senator kennedy, four minutes. >> tnk you. when dr. ford came forward with her account, i immediately said that she should be heard. and asked the chairman to delay vote that we had scheduled. and the chairman did and i appreciate at she came at great difficulty for her and offeredll comg testimony.you have come and don. i for what has happened to you and your family as i'm sorry for what has happened to hers. this is not a good process but it is all we've got. i would urge my colleagues to recognize in the end, we are 21 ry imperfect senators trying to do our best to provide advice and consent. in the end, there is likely to be as much doubt as certainty ing out of this room today. and as we make decisions going forward, i hope people will recognize that.

in the rhetorichat we use, and the language we use going forward, we'll recognize that. that there is doubt.'l never move beyond that. and just to have a little humility on that front. thank you. >> thank you. senator?>> i'm sorry, judge, for what you and your family have been through. and i'm sorry for what dr. ford and her family have been through. it could have been avoided. do you believe in god? i >> do. >> i'm goingo giv you a last opportunity right here, rightonn of god and country.

i want you to look me in the eye. are dr. ford allegations true? >> they are not accurate as to me. i have not questioned that she might han sexually assaulted at some point in her high of by someone in someace. as to me, i've never done this. never. done this to her or to anyone else. and i have talked to what i was doing that summer of 1982. i'm telling you, i've never done this to anyone incding her. >> are miss ramirez' allegations about you true? >> those are not. none of the witnesses in the room suppoth . if that had happen, that would have been the talk of campus in our freshman dorm.ew "theork times" reported as recently as last week, she was

calling other classmates, seekingto, well, i won't characterize it. but callingas classmates week and it seems very -- i'll stop there. it's not true. it's not >> are miss swetnick's allegations made by mr. about you true? >> those are not true. never met her. i don't know who she is. there's a letter release within two hours of that breaking yesterday from i think 60 peoe who kne me in high school, men and women, who said, in their words, nonsense. totally, the whole thing. totally ridiculous >> none of these allegations are true. >> correct. >> no doubtn your mind. >> zero. certain. >> not even a scintill >> not even a scintilla. >> do you wear to god?

>> i swear to god. >> that's all i have. >> judge h,kavanaug thank you very much. and there you have it. tonight, the search for truth and for justice. two hearings and t starkly different stories. >> while it is not a trial, public opinion m render the final verdict. >> i drank one beer. brett and mk were visibly drunk. brett and mark came into the bedroom and locked the door behind them. i was o pushed to the bed and brett got on top of me. he beg running his hands over my body and grinding into me both brett and mark were t ey seemed o be havuning a ver good time. >> your coordinated and well funded efft t destroy guy namees andoy my family will

not drive me out. i'veever sexually assaulted anyone. not in high school, not in college, not ever. >> what do you consider to be too many beers? >> i don't know. whatever the chart says. blood alcohol chart. >> judge brett kavanaugh fierce defend himself with the supreme court seat at stake and so much more. >> for te tirs t we heard the voice ofr. christine blasey ford. she told her deeply personal story in raw and human terms. >> we begin with blayner. alexan >> reporter: an emotional, he said, she said. >> i thought brett would accidentally kill me. >> reporter: playing out for the world to see. >> we mean no ill will.

>> reporter: christine blasey ford describing a sexual assault during a p housety decades ago. identifying her attacker as brett kavanaugh. >> i believed he was going to rape me. i tried to yell for help. when i did, brett put his han over my mouth to stop me from yelling. >> reporter: she said he drunkenly attacked her as a friend watched. >> the teuproarious lau between the two and their having fun at my expense. >> reporter: kavanaugh denying it all. at some point on the ver of tears. others defiant. >> i was not at the party described by dr. ford. this confirmation process has become a nationaldi race. >> reporter: and clashing with democrats who called -- >>'m innocent. innocent. >> reporter: tensions on both sides rg the boiling point. >> you're looking for a face s.

proc you came to the wrong town at the wrong time. n >> reporte it's up to senators to decide who to believe. and hanging in the balance, a lifetime appointment to the supreme court. kavanaugh said he may be voted down but he will never quit. >> planes, trains a live streams. it captivatedha americansver they were doing wherever they were. ake a long at the social media posts. one person showing the scene inside the senate cafeteria. people glued to the. others watched on their jet blue flight. and many watched at their local bame. meann d.c. shaw's tavern was opened early to host it. head to both ford and kavanaugh testified in the hearing room

but phere wasnty of noise outside of it. people for, people against. some had shirts that said believe women and others had shirts that that, i stand with kavanaugh. news4 shows thisistory unfolding. >> reporter: inside the hart senate office building, demonstrators .chanting showing support for s.survivor this group standing with dr. ations against brett kavanaugh go back to her student days. so i'm not a alum and we're here support our fellow alum. weerant h voice to be heard. >> reporter: these current students taking the day off school to see history in the making. >> our schooleaches us to

advocate for ourselves. >> reporter: these supporters demonstrating on th sidewalk outside the hearing andga ering in the lob yes. the participants coming fromro the country. >> he cannot be the punching bag for everyone who has been hurt must have due process for everyone. >> i stand with kavanaugh. i believe him to be confirmed. i believe he'll be a good justice. >> reporter: these demonstrators walking through the dirksen office building. filling elevators. trying to g to the hearing room. being turned away saying they are not allowed on that floor. the group fled stairwells to stand in silent protest. >> this has been quite the fence only knob. the historic hearing dominated.

they were about the proceedings. it included kavanaugh, dr. ford, instein, rachel mitchell asking questions. the hearing remained a to have trending story in washington and across the cotry. >> we'll have more coverage of the high stakes hearing throughout the hourud and that in naturanalysis what happens next. you can check it out on the nbc washington page when nbc washington.com. so, a soggy day out there. a lot of rain on our radar. can't get a break, can we? >> standing by, amelia. >> we'll be dealing with rain at times but ernight into early tomorrow mornin take a look at the radar. potential for a break for a few hours. notice moisture to the west and all of tonight,e s heavy

rain is looking likely. the national weather service has ised a flood watch for just about everybody. all the counties near green. so heavy rain, falls in spots overnight when the most rain falling north and west of washington whe about an inch the. possib temperatures stay in the 50s as we continu to track rain and then we have rain throughout tomorrow morning. so everybody i dealing with wet roads. some wet roads out there for that morning commute. by tomorrow afternoon and evening, it is dry and thene sunss out. take a look at the planner for friday. showers ending at that point.so showers really early tomorrow morning. most if not allf fly is hook dry. sun throughout t day, setting the stage for a nice afternoon and a fantastic weekend.

with ch time, 70 degre plungs skies and then plenty of sunshine until the sun sets with temperatures in the throw mid 70s. 6 for a high. lowhumidity, a perfect autumn day out there. similar weather.n sund plenty of hisuns. as we start the workweek, we er start oct with the temperature around 80 degrees. we do start to warm up sxfrlt then the hultnt builds the area on tuesday with highs in the low 80s. on thursday, we'll have high temperatures around 88 degreese with sate day showers and thunderstorms. the cold frontill coo our temperatures back down. a chance for showers around wteh eratures only in the 60s and 70s throughout the day and next

weekend, it is looking fabulous withperatures around 70 degrees. we're tracking rain across the area. >> thank you. let's get back to the testimony on capitol hill. judge kavanaugh and allegations of sexual misconduct in his past. >> w depending onch side you're on, everybody is having the se kind of script. and we've had some reaction from president trump as well. >> a tweet indicates he will stick with his nominee. it reads, judge kavanaugh showed america why i nominated him. his testimonyas powerful, honest and riveting. democrats' searc and destroy strategy is disgraceful and this process has been a total sham and an effort to delay, obstruct. what happens next in e u.s.

senate? we're told senate republicans will meet tonight toalk about their strategy. if the vote goes to the judiciary committere t could be a full senate vote this weekend. the republicans are meeting tonight to figure out their strategy. >> what is that meeting about tonight? is it all about counting votes? >> iould think so. the committee likely knows its own nose count, where it stands. you get all 51 republicans to get a broader sense. they'll need all 50. the story being watched across w theld today had so many tastes of hoke favor. references to a country club, blair high school if silver spring and a party in rockville.

hard to ignore the fact the two characters in this story, or or were waingtonians. judge i was just in the safeway from last night. >> us, teenage drinking is something that is a universal theme here tnd somethingt has been the theme across generations from the 60s onward and i wonder how that will play out and if these lawmakers will be hearing from their constitu constituents. if they're taking the pulse. >> it reminds me that maryland's drinking age was buyounger. judge kavanaugh was asked, did you drink on weekdays?cu ng on this issue of teenage drinking. >> i think at one point it was younger because of the vietnam war.

>> thank you. a times they've resembled a hearing and other times a courtroom cross-examination as we've seen in tv shows. today whole country watched as christine blasey ford testified. >> it wati ri. they got their chance to speak. ford saying s was sure it was judge kavanaugh who assaulted her more than 30 years ago at that house party and kavanaugh vehemently denying the claims. not sure if these hearings have changed any minds or if will mo. pete? >> you talked earlier about how long wld it take if the kavanaugh nomination goes down. is an average of 70 days. some have been shorter,nome have b longer. guess what would take longer an fbi background investigation. that's what is missing, man people say on this one.

nce the allegations came through, you can be certain the fbi and the white house will be very, very careful. and i think that would make perhaps the process last longer before it ever ges to senate to let the white house and the fbi. so they'll be looking at the ideological make-up. what sor of court decisions has this nominee had? speeches laweview articles, the you are things that go into a white house review of a potential supreme court nonee. then there is this whole background investigation. remember, we're n talking about brett kavanaugh's court decisions today or his judicial philosophy. we're talking about his background. i think that would b a exciting factor for anybody the white house may have to turn to. >> pete williams. the senate judiciary committee set to vote whether they will recommend hit to the full senate tomorrow.

it is not clear when or if. >> there's a lot to go

tonight, we hear from christine blasey ford, detailing her allegation of sexual ul as against supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. >> it wasd harr me to breathe and i thought brett was accidently going to kill me. >> dr. ford, with what odegree of certainty you believe brett kavanaugh a you?d >> 100%. >> then judge kavanaugh, his defiant denial with flashes of anger and high emotion at times in tears. >> i've never sexual assaulted anyone.