senator hatch mr. chairman, with : unanimous consent, i would introduce into the record at this point excerpts from judge thomas' telephone logs from 1983 to 1991, if i could. chairman: without objection. these are the same excerpts that we have had. hatch: these are the same ones that you have had. now, judge thomas, are you familiar with these? judge thomas: i have seen those logs, senator. sen. hatch: do you recall any of : the telephone conversations with professor hill reflected by these particular messages? judge thomas: i do, senator. senator hatch for instance, on : january 31, according to these logsand i think i have got them correct, i am quite sureon july 31, 1984, at 11:30 a.m., a message from anita hill, "just called to say hello, sorry she didn't get to see you last week." is that -- last week." is that accurate? judge thomas: yes, that was i think one instance when she had come to town, either on personal business or because of her job, and my schedule conflicted with any opportunity to

senator hatch mr. chairman, with : unanimous consent, i would introduce into the record at this point excerpts from judge thomas' telephone logs from 1983 to 1991, if i could. chairman: without objection. these are the same excerpts that we have had. hatch: these are the same ones that you have had. now, judge thomas, are you familiar with these? judge thomas: i have seen those logs, senator. sen. hatch: do you recall any of : the telephone conversations with professor hill reflected by these particular messages? judge thomas: i do, senator. senator hatch for instance, on : january 31, according to these logsand i think i have got them correct, i am quite sureon july 31, 1984, at 11:30 a.m., a message from anita hill, "just called to say hello, sorry she didn't get to see you last week." is that -- last week." is that accurate? judge thomas: yes, that was i think one instance when she had come to town, either on personal business or because of her job, and my schedule conflicted with any opportunity to

hatch: i object to the recess. a substantial majority of the senate frankly asked us to get to the bottom of this. the public deserves to know one way or the other. and the public is going to know if i have anything to say about it. our colleagues demanded it. they didn't ask us to just find out so much that the witness will allow us to ask. ofave no intention pillorying or maligning professor hill. i feel sorry for both of these people. both of them are going to come out of this with less than a reputation. it's pathetic and it wouldn't have happened, let me finish, if i could, if somebody on this hadittee or their staff had beforeesty and integrity the vote to raise this issue and ask an executive session, saying this has to be brought up. nobody did. and somebody on this committee or their staff, and i'm outraged anit, leaked that report, fbi report that we all know should never be disclosed to the public because of the materials that generally are in them. they take it down as it is given. it has got raw stuff

it's true now, but orin hatch won't say it now. now, when these two old men of the senate, orin hatch and chuck grassly, lie to us now they lie as if they don't know that the video still exists. they lie as if they don't know there's a congressional record of every word they've ever spoken on the committee floor. they believed an investigation that only lasted a few days was the appropriate thing to do in response to anita hill's accusations. and now they're saying there's no reason to do that before hearing dr. ford's testimony. this means it's being issued with malice. chuck grassly won't even give her what he thought was appropriate for anita hill. before he then abused anita hill. he personally did in that hearing. and we saw what they did to anita hill. we saw what those republican senators did to anita hill when she came into their hearing room. dr. ford says brett kavanaugh sexually assaulted her, tried to rape her, she believes. brett kavanaugh says nothing like that ever happened. one of them, one of those two people wants

what orrin hatch is saying now is a lie. back then orrin hatch didn't want senate staffers to do an investigation. no, no not senate staffers. he said he wanted real, appropriate non-senate staffers. and you're going to find out why that's a very good idea to have real appropriate non-senate staffers do the investigation. just a moment from now because we found out today and last night what the republican senate staffers on the judiciary committee are trying to do and what they're trying to do to dr. ford. orrin hatch is still on that committee and republicans are terrified tonight, rightly so, that orrin hatch will be allowed to ask questions of a woman accuser on the senate judiciary committee once again. they're terrified how that will look, and they should be. but dr. ford and her lawyers seem to want to the american people to see the senate judiciary committee for what it is. and it's not just the senators but it is the republican staff of the judiciary committee. and he noted he'd been interviewed this week by the repu

small window hatch chiles and great on the grill. when you buy them, he wants to make sure they have the beautiful green color with all the stems attached. check that there is no tracking . we can see through the chili. stir them and enjoy them in two or three days. they've been around for a couple of weeks. like i said, in 2-3 weeks, they are going to be gone, and that's not a good thing. hatch chiles, a little bit of olive oil, salt and pepper. oh, it's a beautiful thing. i'm tony and always remember to eat fresh and stay healthy. >> do some barbecuing today. but some chilies on the grill. >> some veggie options out there. >> the portobellos can get a little old. shake it up a little bit. >> steak. you don't eat steak. >> we don't. >> i love steak. >> we are going to try to hatch chiles now. >> enjoy your labor day. >> yes, whatever your ♪ >> liam: it might...go...all the way down! >> steffy: [ chuckles ] >> liam: fever's gone. >> steffy: [ gasps ] oh, that's so good. >> liam: right? >> steffy: oh, thanks to her daddy. >> liam: mm,

orrin hatch, orrin hatch and chuck grassley, okay, they're old school whatever you want to call it, yesterdaypeless. but i don't think the newer members want to ruin their whole careers having a yea next to this nomination. do you? >> no, they're going to have a lot more trouble than they have bargained for. and i think there are two things. one, you saw today how they completely flipped. 24 hours ago they were not going -- they were going to go forward with and have the vote on thursday. that changed precisely because you have senators like flake and like bob corker coming forward. the second thing is, you're right, as soon as this woman gets up there as a real person, you'll notice kavanagh refers to it as the accuser, but a real person before them who is presenting her story in a credible, emotional fashion. i don't know if the republicans are going to have the nerve to beat up on her the way they beat up on anita hill. >> yamiche, i'm glad we have mostly women on tonight. i think young women have experienced this kind of things with guys who have been drink not. i think they know this guy

in 27 years orin hatch has learned absolutely nothing. on monday we'll find out what the rest of the senate has learned. leading off our discussion now, ron klain, former chief of staff to joe biden, and most importantly tonight he was also the chief council for the senate judiciary committee during the clarence thomas, anita hill hearings. and lisa graves is with us also a former chief counsel for nominations for the democrats on the senate judiciary committee and was a deputy assistant attorney general in the department of justice. and ron, let's start with you. i know you've been thinking about those days 27 years ago, and those of us who were watching from the outside couldn't quite believe what we were seeing. what one of the reasons for it it seems to me is the committee like all the rest of the committees in the senate have never quite figured out how do you decide in that room whether an accuser has reached an adequate standard of proof. >> that's right, lawrence. and look, back then robert seabird, the great dean of the senate, g

>> senator hatch: the protesters. i can stand the senator on any committee making a fool of themselves, i kind of enjoy that from time to time. but there is no reason for some of these protesters that try to disrupt a formal hearing as important as that one was. >> martha: let me ask you about this moment. and coming back from the break, judge cavanaugh was confronted by the father of a student who was killed at parkland, and he didn't shake his hand. and this is getting a ton of attention on social media and is being called a snub by a judge kavanaugh. >> i don't think judge kavanaugh saw him because he would not have snub him. he is one of the most gracious, kind, warm and affectionate guys that i've seen since i've been on the united states senate. so he just didn't notice that i guess. >> martha: just to be fair, and the picture we are showing, he's looking over to him and he sees him standing there. security swept and pretty quickly given the feeling in the room i guess. >> senator hatch: while i didn't see that

make clear, senator hatch did not break the rules, he set a precedent. to make a point of order about your motion. rule four of the committee reads as follows. to bring a objection boat without a further debate, a rollcall shall be taken and debate shall be terminated if the motion to bring the matter to a vote without further debate passes with 11 votes in the affirmative, one of which must be cast by the minority. you are calling for us to end debate on the nomination of brett kavanaugh. basedrassley: braced -- on the president set by chairman hatch. >> unity vote of -- you need the 11 votes and one member from the minority. sen. grassley: the answer to your question is no we don't and we have checked with the senate parliamentarian. >> mr. chairman. sen. grassley: are you ready to call the roll? call the roll. [voting] sen. grassley: senator. >> i would like to ask if it is within the rules that we hold over all that we hold of the nominees on the calendar today. i should say the nominees except for. sen. grassley: we have a quorum so they will be hol

senator hatch has said she's mixed up. and for anita hill, he held up a copy of "the exorcist," saying her account of what clarence thomas said was taken from a fiction. so this idea of trying to diminish the importance of a woman's experience, unfortunately for some on the committee, there's no progress. i think it is crucial that the country see our elected representatives interact with this witness. the idea of hiring outside counsel, a woman, to question her, this is not the kind of leadership we expect. >> now, just a second, though, because they're saying that that is in part to be sensitive to her, knowing that the republicans on the panel are all male. >> well, i'm not know a lot of sensitive men and there may be some of those sensitivities on the committee. what i'm concerned about is this is an effort to cover over deficits that they may perceive. there are sensitive men, and i think the country should see what our elected representatives do in this situation. and outsourcing that very sensitive responsibility, i

it is not the one that senator leahy new, senator feinstein, senator grassley, or senator hatch. it is a different committee. it is committee we have created with changes and roles. if we are going to say to our people back home that we are committed to civility, we have to prove it. we have to stick by basic rules that give the minority a voice. i think what was done this morning sadly is a step in the wrong direction. i have a motion for a subpoena that i will withhold until ranking members make statements. senator leahy: the senior senator from texas is back in the room, i want to correct some things he said about elena kagan. we got 99% from a democratic administration. the followed a letter from me as chairman and jeff sessions as ranking member, we agreed on that jointly. republicans, democrats joined together. the 1%, we were shown with that was and agreed to it. those are the facts. we had all of the records. considerably more than we ever had before. a democrat was chair of this committee, the democratic administration, we got all the records that republicans and democra

. >> senator orrin hatch of utah spoke directly to and about brett kavanaugh. what has he had to say about this. >> you played a little bit of that at the top of the show. let's lay it out again for viewers. take a look. >> do you think this in any way is going derail his nomination? >> no. it's a straight shooting honest guy. i think when people listen to him, they'll know that he's all right. >> and do you think that any of these claims are legitimate? >> no, i don't. i think this woman, whoever she is, is mixed up. >> so you heard him say there they he thinks she's mixed up. we are told off camera brett kavanaugh in his call are orrin hatch denied being at the party. we have details about ford about the party, its location, et cetera. that's a pretty remarkable claim. we are going reach out to dr. ford's lawyer to see what more we may be able to learn from this and also we are following up with other senators to see if he's making the same claim with them, ali. >> let's go back to jeff bennet at the white house. the president just commented on his nominee. w

orrin hatch is off.- over at cnn a little while ago, our people chad pergram called their office this is what senator hatch's office is saying quoting now senator hatch spoke to judge kavanaugh earlier and judge kavanaugh continued to categorically deny dr. ford's allegations. he told senator hatch he was not at the party or any party like the one that she describes. and that dr. ford, who acknowledged to the "the washington post" that she did not remember some key details of the incident may be mistaking him for someone else. that from orrin hatch. so as republican try to figure out what to do regarding a hearing. jeff flake of arizona, republican of arizona retiring but one of the republican members of the judiciary committee says look, i'm not comfortable with a yes vote until there is a hearing of some sort there are 11 republicans and 10 democrats. he wouldn't pass through the senate judiciary committee. so there is that matter. it could go straight to the floor. is this live? no, that's september 4

hatch to the east away from the d.r. requester's property. so there is a 5-foot setback between where our roof deck begins and where the property line is. on the other thing i wanted to mention was we had the option of doing this as an over-the-counter permit with the city. the only reason that we are going down the intake path is because there's a privacy sense that would not be allowed over-the-counter process. but we wanted to be transparent about what we are doing and yet this has taken such a long time that we feel like there's nothing else we can do with the design to make it have less impact on the neighbor. thank you. >> president hillis: thank you so now it is time for public comment in support of the project. >> time. >> president hillis: you have three minutes. >> all right. again, my name is dorian stone. we own 60 clifford terrace. we are the adjacent home on the other side of tom and delays at 50 clifford terrace. you will see in two weeks that they submitted against the work we are proposing. i think, a co

it is not the center tell you knew, senator feinstein, senator grassley or senator hatch. it's a committee with greater with the changes of rules. if we are truly going to say to our people back home who committed to civility and we are committed to bipartisanship, we ought to prove it. we ought to stick by basic rules that give the minority of voice. i do think what we've done this morning said it is a step in the wrong direction. i have a motion for sipping which i will withhold until ranking member has made her opening statement. >> tragic mr. chairman, if i cot have one minute. >> senator leahy. >> now that the senior editor from texas is back in the room, i do want -- elena kagan. we got 99% from a democratic administration. 99% of a record. that involved a letter from the as chairman and jeff sessions as ranking member. we agreed on that. we jointly, republicans and democrats joined together on the 1% we were shown what that was and we agreed to it. those are the facts. so we had all the records. considering considerably more tr had before. a democrat was chair, was

oren hatch sent lawyers who work for him on the judiciary committee into the bowels of the d.c. libraries to come up with passages from ""the exorcist" that he claimed anita hill had blame ris plagiarized from. it was really a disgusting display of the lowest political tactics. just hearing senator hatch say "that woman" almost sent chills down my spine, and it makes you have to think, yes, we're now in the so-called me too moment. we have 23 women -- senators now -- there were only two back in 1991 during the hill/thomas hearings. but these hearings, if they happen on monday, you know, a huge test for the senate judiciary committee and whether, you know, they can have a fair process. anita hill herself has called for a fair process and a thorough investigation, but the judiciary committee is not an investigative body. it is a political body. and while the president may be somewhat restrained in his approach so far, there are conservative republicans who are determined to do whatever it takes to muscle through this judicial confirmation for brett kavanaugh, and i really -- i wor

but you just played that interview with senator hatch a few minutes ago, who is suggesting that she wasixed up in her recollection, and, you know, maybe has the wrong guy. and he is making that statement before hearing her testimony under oath. >> let me play that. we were going to play that in a second, but since you brought it up, guys? actually, everyone, stick around. we're going to take a quick break. i want to get to that senator orrin hatch point that maeve was about to get to on izhis recent conversation judge kavanaugh and where he says he was that night. we'll be right back. directly to investors. and now we have zero account fees for brokerage accounts. at fidelity, those zeros really add up. ♪ maybe i'll win, saved by zero ♪ at fidelity, those zeros really add up. ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ ♪ just say the words ♪ and we'll beat the birds down to acapulco bay ♪ ♪ it's perfect for a flying honeymoon they say ♪ ♪ come fly with me ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ ♪ come fly with me ♪ let's fly, let's fly away ♪ sharper vision, without limits. days that go from sun up to sun down

hatch, president pro tempore. the presiding officer: under the previous order, the leadership time is reserved. mrs. ernst: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa.

>> i don't know where senator hatch even gets the idea that she is mixed up. perhaps it's because he erroneously said that judge kavanagh said that he was not even at this party when actually what judge kavanagh said was that he couldn't remember. and so i'm very disappointed that there are those on the committee who continue to not believe women who come forward. it is not easy. since time immemorial, these things have occurred, sexual assault, sexual harassment. this is why women don't come forward because of the kinds of things and character assassination and their credibility is attacked. and i don't want other women who are -- who have experienced these kinds of things to look at what's happening and say, this is why i'm not coming forward. >> there are no women on the republican side of the judiciary committee. do you trust your all-male colleagues on the republican side to conduct this in the fashion that you think is appropriate? >> i would hope that -- this is an issue that is so important that the men in the committee should be just as concerned. thi

senator hatch? >> mr. chairman -- >> do you need a break? >> in chairman mr. chairman -- >> let me say for the record we have asked. you said nobody has asked the fbi. i actually have. i think others have and i think that the issue is part of what an fbi report does is to investigate and seek either corroborating or exculpatory evidence. it's not so much the conclusion that it draws as the breadth of the evidence that is sought out through the investigation and the difference between what somebody might say to an fbi agent when they're being examined, and for instance mr. judge's letter signed by his lawyer sent in. it's just a different thing. and i believe still that this is the first background investigation in the history of background investigations that hasn't been re-opened when new credible derogatory information was raised about the subject, about the nominee. so, you know, i just -- i didn't want to let the point you made stand without referencing what we had tried to do. >> pardon me, but i'll just add to the point you made. the letter was sent to t

today republican senator orrin hatch issued this statement. to allow judge kavanaugh's confirmation to be stalled because of an 11th hour accusation that democrats did not see fit to raise for over a month. the claims are wholly unverifiable and come at the tail end of a process that was already marred by ugly innuendo, dishonesty, and the nastiest form of our politics. the american people deserve much better from the senate as an institution. and that is essentially the same defense that orrin hatch offered for clarence thomas, who faced accusations from anita hill after -- after his confirmation hearing was over. but because there are no time limits on how long the confirmation process can take, the senate judiciary committee then reopened the clarence thomas hearings and heard from anita hill, after which clarence thomas was then confirmed by the senate, 52-48. before anita hill testified, clarence thomas was probably on his way to getting at least 80 votes in favor of his confirmation in the senate. the senate judiciary committee has the s

since the financial crisis companies have battened down the hatches, they have battened down the hatchese stockpiled cash. bigas debt is cheap stock prices have escalated. there is a lot more confidence in the bottom —— because debt is cheap. in the first half of 2018 we have seen 17,000 deals made. that is a record for the last decade. it is from the comcast sky deal, a massive acquisition, tidby mining sector, to the luxury industry. so across the board —— tedi mining industry. tomorrow interest rates may go up in the us and it becomes more expensive. as well we are seeing the american companies on the march, as it were. lots of european countries getting snapped up. for american companies, big american companies, they have massively benefited from they have massively benefited from the trumpet —— donald trump tax reforms. they see this as a golden opportunity to look at what is going on in europe and what is looking attractive. that is right. the tax reforms that were brought in in december have given us companies a bit of a sugar rush, really. they have to pay less in tax and that ha

and i suspected had i suspected something untoward i would have talked to judge govenz or senator hatch. that's all 100% true. >> that's what i already said. but did mr. miranda ever provide you with highly specific information regarding what i or other democratic senators were planning in the future to ask certain judicial nominees? >> well, one of the things we would do as a white house is on judicial nominations, i'm coming to your answer, i will explain, to meet up here this happens on both times all the time with teams up here about okay the judicial nominees are coming up, how are we going to get them through? here's a hearing coming up. during those meetings, of course, it would be discussed, well, i think here's what senator leahy will be interested in. it's very common, i'm sure in president obama's administration within they had similar meetings, they would have meetings and say, i think this is what senator graham will be interested in. that's what you do in meetings with so highly specific, would i think,i i'm not sure what you a getting at -- >> i have been here over 40 yea

i would have talked to senator hatch. that is all 100% true. >> and that is what i had already said. but did mr. miranda ever provide you with highly specific information regarding what i or other democratic senators were planning in the future to ask certain judicial nominees? >> well, one of the things we would do as a white house is on judicial nominations, and i'm coming to your answer, but i want to explain, is to meet up here and this happens on both sides all the time with teams up here about, okay, judicial nominees are coming up, how do we get them through, here is a hearing coming up. and during those meetings, of course it would be discussed, well, i think here's what senator leahy will be interested in. that is very common. i'm sure in president obama's administration when they had similar meetings, they would probably have meetings and say i think this is what senator graham will be interested in. that's what you do in meetings with -- so highly specific, i'm not sure what you're getting at by highly specific

hatch, when told about the donald trump tweet, orrin hatch, ally of the president, had a shocked or confused expression. that's perfect his own aides who confirmed this, said i don't know anything about that. he said there is no doubt that the response or that the hurricane itself was a tragedy. >> the other thing about this, and all that is really important is we are not just talking about the president saying things that are counterfactual and have been pre-fact checked to be wrong by tamara but the president diminishing the severity of a hurricane that happened a year ago that was extremely devastating in puerto rico on the eve of an extremely potentially devastating hurricane. people are deciding to stay in those areas, maybe they don't believe things are that bad and the president is saying the official estimate here is overcooked. it wasn't actually that bad and basically the government lied to you about these things. and that's a pretty significant thing for a president to say less than 24 hours before this next landfall. >> or that democrats made up these numbers. he alleged that as

oren hatch is pretending tonight there's some kind of schedule, there's some kind of thing that prevents them from reopening any of this on the senate judiciary committee and that is simply not true. there's no time limit. they could take the rest of the year if they wanted to, but you're going to hear a lot of that, about, you know, it is over and time is up. time is never up on the confirmation process. >> and, you know, with professor anita hill personally weighing in on this today. >> yes. >> saying she has personally experienced what happens when these things are weaponized against the accuser and there ought to be a way for people to approach the senate when they have personal information that is relevant to an important nominee. that still has not been fixed since her time there. it is an incredibly important point you are making, one precedent that was set by her allegations against clarence thomas which, again, she never expected to become public either. she never expected to have her name associated with those allegations, but she made them. it reopened the confirmation process

. >> it's not just to take eggs away, it's because i want all the eggs to hatch. >> it's all in the statef preserving as many eggs as possible so he can protect them, incubate them and hatch as many as possible. we don't see him take the eggs away completely and we also don't see him getting bit. >> that's like a constrictor bcc it is acting more like the biting ones. >> it's just something to laugh abo about. >> that's captain rookie. he knows what he's doing. >> see it next right this minute. and still to come, he's like you know what -- >> why the impromptu duet comes with an incredible twist. >> that is so cool. >> plus the ultimate game day snack. >> yeah, buddy. >> out of what, though? >> the 7 ingredients that are sure to have you cheering. >> wow. new d-con. so d-licious mice risk their lives for it. now 10 times tastier to mice than the lead competitor. mice love it to death. i saw my leg did not look right. i landed. i was just finishing a ride. i felt this awful pain in my chest. i had a pe blood clot in my lung. i was scared. i had a dvt blood clot. having one really puts you

i want you to listen to senator orrin hatch talking about then supreme court nominee clarence thomas back in '91 and what he currently has said about judge kavanaugh this week. >> everybody who has worked with clarence thomas or knows clarence thomas or has a relationship socially with clarence thomas knows he is a good man. everybody. except this one woman. >> he is a very strong decent man. >> and you believe him? >> yeah, i sure do. >> you believe the beingaccuser all? >> i think she is mistaken. i think she is mistaken something. but i don't know. i mean, i don't know her. >> 27 years later, the world has changed. but have lawmakers. let's start there. alice is a republican strategist, maria democratic strategist. i've been looking forward to this conversation. and maria, i want to begin with you, anita hill went back to that phrase they just don't get it. referring to the male senators at the time and dealing with her sexual harassment case. that was '91. this is 2018. do you think get it today? >> absolutely not. look, what i thought when you just played that clip of senator ha

. >> senator hatch. >> well, thank you, mr. chairman. appreciate the way you've conducted these hearings despite these irresponsible outbursts. that's hard to believe. judge kvapil that you, i'd like to commend you for how you have conducted yourself the past few days. you have displayed the level headedness that many of your friends say exist. your friends and foreign colleagues have described in their letters to this committee, i wish you could say the same about everyone who has attended the hearing or conveyed it or covered did on social media, but i can't. i'm deeply concerned about the theatrics we've seen these last two days. i've been on this committee for 42 years, longer than any other person except senator leahy. i'm the former chairman. never have i seen the constant interruptions we witnessed at this hearing. confirmation hearings are supposed to be an opportunity for the american people to hear from the nominee. unfortunately, it seems that some on the political left have decided to try to turn this hearing into a circus. n

and republican orrin hatch's office said that he told senator hatch that he was not a party like theibes and the doctor ford who acknowledged to the "the washington post" over the weekend that she did not remember key details about the incident may be mistaking him for someone else. that's kavanaugh's version as told to orrin hatch. dianne feinstein has known about an anonymous allegation along these lines since july and had not said anything until late last week which is something president trump jumped on today. >> he's an outstanding intellect, outstanding judge respected by everybody, never had even a little blemish on his record. the fbi has i think gone through the process six times with him over the years where he went to higher and higher positions. judge kavanaugh spent quite a bit of time with senator feinstein and it wasn't even brought up at that meeting and she had this information. >> a key republican swing vote on all of this, susan collins also said she's wondering why the original anonymous letter from dr. ford was not dealt with sooner. but she end of the republican

and what oren hatch says he was told by brett kavanaugh over the phone. why are they so notable to you? >> well, what strikes me about what hatch said about the first word lacking the context, but in that context it is a little bit worrisome because brett kavanaugh seems to be saying that he was not at the particular party. now, this is 35 years ago. there is no reason for him to remember any party if nothing happened at it. were i cross examining someone like that, i would make a little bit of traction with that which is you're saying you don't know this person and yet you are able to say you weren't at this particular occasion. that seems troubling. >> well, we should noete that will be a public hearing of the accuser's account here and a public hearing of brett kavanaugh's account and that's part of the function of this, right, that both sides need to be heard here. thanks very much. >> thanks for the reporting, guys. >>> all right. ahead for us, are you willing to pay more for pretty much everything you get from china? the trump administration is bank

here is orrin hatch back in 1991 talking about anita hill.elieve everything that she said. and i myself don't want to call her a liar. but as an old trial lawyer, i have seen witnesses just like that who believe every word they say and every word is absolutely wrong and we've proven it wrong and they still believe it. >> and here is orrin hatch this week. >> do you think that any of these claims are legitimate? >> no, i don't. i think -- i think this woman, whoever she is, is mixed up. and i can't speak for her. all i can say is, no, i don't. i know the -- i know the judge very, very well. i know how honest he is and how straightforward he is. i know how he stands up for what he believes and what is right and frankly if you were going to believe anybody, you'd believe him. >> so we start with the premise that the republicans don't believe here and the "wall street journal" echoing, she's mistaken. and then what happens to her on the stand if she does appear. >> i think people are misreading this. times have changed and there is the me-too mov

you heard senator hatch talk about how maybe she was mixed up. yesterday you had trump's terrible, terrible tweets asking why she didn't report when she was 15 years old. so you know she's going to go into a situation with the intent to attack her credibility, paint her as either crazy or someone who is obsessed with brett kavanaugh. it is terrible, and i am grateful for her for continuing to say that she is coming forward, for showing up next week, and for doing it. it matters not just to her, all survivors are watching how she is treated in this moment, and women generally are watching. >> lisa, build on what fatima said there. those who would be critical of the language and tone used then and now would say, oh, that's part of male privilege. folks may not know they're doing that? >> well, richard i think that's right but i think in some ways it's deeper than that. i think it's clear that senator grassley and hatch are out of touch. i think senator grassley was first elected to public office when eisenhower was president. they haven't learned t

senator orrin hatch has said that he thinks the president is mistaken about what happened to her and tweeted, the fbi does not do investigations like this. the responsibility falls to us. the president has gone so far as to say the fbi has said they don't want to investigate. this keeping them honest, that's not the case. nor is it true that the fbi does not do investigations like this. what they do not do is choose investigations based on want. nor do they draw conclusions or make recommendations. as for a new back ground investigation, all it takes is to ask for one which is press sighly what it was with judge thomas. to then president george w. bush who then ordered the fbi to look into them. one committee member then and now was senator orrin hatch had this to say back then. >> i have to say, chairman biden, and the ranking member thurman, when they heard about this the first time, they immediately ordered this fbi investigation which was a very right thing to do. they did what every other chairman and ranking member have done in the past. and the investigation was done and it wa

. >> it was done in 2003 by chairman hatch. >> that's when he broke the rules on debate and everybody realized he had broken the rules. the fact is that you're saying you're going to set a time and you may not intend to do this but you could talk right up to the time of that and nobody republican or democrat wouldbe allowed to speak . wouldn't it make a lot more sense to set this state, allow debate and then go ahead and break the rules as senator hatch did but at least give everybody a chance to speak. right now you're setting a procedure which could easily block members of this committee from being able to speech. so much has been hitting hidden about judge kavanaugh already. records have been hidden, things that he's done, the statements he made about the stolen property by the republican staff member manny miranda. so much has been hidden, at least show the american people in the united states senate all voices can be heard. >> ,senator. >> i want center role, he set a precedent. >> point of order about your motion. rule four of the committee reads as follows. if there's objection

. >> and orrin hatch thinks the world of brett ckavanaugh -- and that is essentially the same defense that orrin hatch offered for clarence thomas, who faced accusations from afinita hill after it was over, there are no time limits on the process can take the senate judiciary committee reopened the clarence thomas hearings and heard from anita hill after which clarence thomas was then confirmed by the senate 52-48. before anita hill testified clarence thomas was on his way to getting at least 80 votes in favor of his confirmation in the senate. the senate judiciary committee has the same option now the committee can slow down the process and reopen the confirmation hearing if judge kavanaughese accuser changes her mind and reveal herself publicly and testify about what she said in a confidential letter what brett kavanaugh did to her when they were in high school. the "new york times" and the "new yorker" reveals more, they report, in the letter the woman alleged that during an encounter at a party, kavanaugh held her down and that he attempted to force himself on her. she claimed in

. ( laughter ) anand orrin hatch told her how e felt about the testimony. >> and have you found dr. ford credible, sir? have you found dr. ford credible? >> well, it's too early to say. i don't think she's un-credible. i think she's an attractive, good witness, but it's way early. >> what do you mean by attractive sir? >> oh, in other words, she's pleasing. ( audience reacts ) >> stephen: (as hatch) "let me be clearer. i'm saying, this one pleases me. have her washed and brought to my tent. i'm sorry for the ambiguity." ( laughter ) republicans were reacting in real-time to ford's testimony, like south carolina senator and man who's acting all natural while he's peeing in the pool, lindsey graham. ( laughter ) oh, lindsey! lindsey was furious about what he was seeing, and had this message for his fellow lawmakers. >> to my republican colleagues, if you can, ignore everything in this record, looking at allegation that's 35 years old, that's uncertain for time, place, date and no corroboration, if that's enough for you, god help us all as republicans. because this happens to us, it ne

you had some thoughts about that. >> jason: orrin hatch has been through this many, many times. seasoned person in bringing nominees through this process in very difficult ways and senator hatch has that perspective. nevertheless, it's a fascinating question, does she or does she not testify? that she want to go out addition i want to go out to the fact that she doesn't want to go out and talk to the judiciary committee is really a head-scratcher. >> melissa: is not a head-scratcher because it looks like it would be horrible. i would volunteer for that if you're a regular person. if she has these stories to tell and she's brave enough to do it, let's all listen to it. she doesn't show up, it doesn't mean she was lying. it could mean that, but it could also mean that she just doesn't want to go through this horrible spectacle but at the same time, i don't think any of us can judge one way or the other without hearing it from each of them and politicians here behind closed door and they vote, we're going to all think they were political about it. they've been known to do that. >>

and you know that from just recent news history when rob porter, another hatch staffer, former hatch staffer, was facing a denial of his background investigation, security clearance because of allegations that he had hit his spouse. that's certainly not a matter that involves a crime that the fbi would ordinarily investigate, but it's the type of matter the fbi does investigate as part of determining what the record reflects about someone's suitability for public trust in public office. this is essential the type of matter the fbi could gather information about, gather it independently and neutrally and provide that information, the full set of information about this matter to the senate and that's what should happen. >> and, lisa, i just want to back you up on this. as a staff director of two committees, environment of public works and finance, i saw these fbi reports. i saw what they do. i saw what kind of evaluations they make and what kind of help they try to give specifically to the chairman. they do not leave things to guesswork. they do not just present aimen yu of collected d

one committee member then and now was senator orrin hatch who had this to say back then. >> i have to say chairman biden and the ranking member thurmond, when they heard about this the first time they immediately ordered this fbi investigation which was a very right thing to do, it's an the appropriate thing to do. they did what every other chairman and ranking member have done in the past. and the investigation was done and it was a good investigation. >> now, keeping them honest, that is the same orrin hatch who now says it's not the fbi job to do what he once praised this many for doing. whether that inconsistency makes a difference is for you to decide. on another republican objection, no judgment call is required. only a look at the dplarmdly the complaint raised bid lindsey graham and others that bringing in the fbi is a delaying is tactic. the hill comparison system telling. the investigation took just three days which doesn't mean the fbi or other investigators could complete an investigation this time in a short period of time but it is what happened in the past. >> for more,