today, toprivileged, have with us retired supreme court justice john paul stevens. [applause] he hasn't even said anything yet. [laughter] the origins of this event are traceable to paula challif. well.er of our board as playscidentally, paula bridge with justice stevens. basis whereby he comes to be here today. thank you paula. the conversation will be modified by frank, a familiar figure to many of you. islandtarted out in long and graduated from the u.s. naval academy. navy.ved in the andn work in chicago eventually came to south florida forjoined the miami herald several years and then he moved to the palm beach post where he has been writing a local news column for -- it says 2016 ears, frank. fsu andlectures at probably does other things i don't know about. anyway. [laughter] stevens will have to lead -- leave immediately you tord, and i ask please give him some easy access of the aisle, frank has agreed to stick around if there is audience interest in doing that. no further delays. frank. >> can you hear us in the back? we might need a microphone to pass aroun

it's my distinct honor to introduce retired supreme court justice john paul stevens. he is one of the living legends of american jurisprudence. it is true. [applause] justice stevens became the 101st supreme court justice after being nominated by gerald ford in 1975, and was swiftly confirmed by the senate in a unanimous vote. [laughter] >> that's not happening anytime soon. later, while looking at his presidency, president ford remarked he was prepared to allow history's judgment on his entire term in office to be rested exclusively on his nomination of justice john paul stevens to the supreme court. justice stevens joined the court when he was 55 years old. he served for 35 years. the third longest tenure of any supreme court justice in american history. during those years, he shaped public discourse on a breathtaking of a variety of -- on a breathtaking variety of issues from guantanamo to environmental regulation. whether it was flagburning, vote counting, or george carlin's seven dirty words, justice was often full throated, and leaves us with a rich history of hi

supreme court justice john paul stevens who initially supported brett kavanaugh's confirmation changed his mind, saying kavanaugh should be disqualified based on his performance during last week's congressional hearing. if kavanaugh is losing support from someone like justice stevens what does that mean for his potential tenure on the supreme court? . >> it doesn't mean anything for his potential confirmation to the supreme court because john paul stevens doesn't have a seat in the senate. on the question of whether or not it will have an impact on his tenure on the supreme court, that remains to be seen. i'm willing to guess that the eight current members of the court are not pleased by how the has unfold bid whatever perspective they come from. every institution wants itself to be respected and honored and trusted. it's true of a news organization, true of the justice department it will be true of the supreme court and whether or not they will agree ultimately with the opinions brett kavanaugh might have, i think the idea that lots of aspersions have been cast on future member of the

everyone, please rise for a great american, a living legend in our midst, justice john paul stevens. [applause] how did i do? do you have a dissenting opinion? [laughter] hon. stevens: you made me think of something i should say. when i retired, one of the tv commentators called me a quitter. i explained that i had reasons for retiring which were the fact that when i announced my best regarded opinion in the citizens united case when the court upheld a rule of unlimited financial donations in election campaigns, a fairly long dissent. frank: i think it was 86 pages. hon. stevens: that is fairly long. i summarized it in less than that, but i had some difficulty articulating what i was trying to say. i explained that i had apparently had some kind of problem that persuaded me that i should retire. i was going to have difficulty speaking and i should quit. that was the reason why i became a quitter. from time to time, i still have problems articulating what i'm trying to say. if i do today, please forgive me. i will do my best. [applause] frank: i was going to talk about this later but s

court who have served longer on the court than john paul stevens. john paul stevens has been able to see every televised supreme court confirmation hearing in history. and he has seen enough of brett kavanaugh. a judge who he once admired. and after seeing brett kavanaugh in that hearing room last week justice stevens decided today to take his place in history as the first former supreme court justice to ever publicly oppose the confirmation of a nominated supreme court justice. and justice stevens said that he was offering his opinion today, quote, for the good of the court. leading off our discussion now lisa graves, former chief counsel for nominations for the democrats on the senate judiciary committee and a former deputy assistant attorney general. also mimi roca, an msnbc legal contributor, and ambassador wendy sherman, global contributinger. and she helped anita hill make her way through the senate process during the clarence thomas confirmation. she is author of the new book "not for the faint of heart, lessons in power, courage and persisten

if they are thinking about the things that john paul stevens talked about, obviously kavanaugh thinks he did not quite seal the deal, that thursday essentially in hindsight was not a good idea. he didn't win that day. he essentially failed. the longer i think people look at the testimony, i mean, he -- it was probably one of the most bizarre public performances we have ever seen, certainly from a judge. we obviously saw clarence thomas there almost 30 years ago, and he was angry, but he was also, you know, dignified in his presentation there, and that is something that we didn't see from judge kavanaugh on thursday. i think for a lot of people -- republicans i talked to, setting aside ford's allegations, they also felt like what about his temperament, what about this kind of ranked partisanship that he talked about during his testimony? >> which he tried to address in the op-ed, right? he is trying to go back to i can be fair and impartial, and that's one of the things that has been raised in questions by editorial boards and people not comfortable with his nomination and also by just

one former supreme court justice who initially backed kavanagh's nomination to change his mind john paul stevens now says kavanagh might not have the right temperament for the job. his performance during the hearings caused me to change my murder i think there's several. taters larry tribe among loons of those two to open professor that have ever. heard of or have written written. pieces in which they suggest that he has alienated he has. demonstrated a potential bias and unearth a potential living in cebu for the court that he would not be able to perform his fulfill responsibilities that i think there's merit in that that criticism in that the senators should really pay attention to it for the good of the court. so just how did we get here in july donald trump nominated brett kavanaugh to replace retiring supreme court justice last month accusations against kavanaugh by dr christine blazin ford surfaced in a washington post article she accused him of sexually assaulting her at a college party in the early one nine hundred eighty s. both ford and cavanaugh testified before the senate judiciary

. >> you talked about john paul stevens. there are two lines of criticism that opened up in the aftermath of kavanaugh's testimony. one was has he been truthful or perjured himself about his behavior while he was drunk, and then look at how he behaved, is he going to uphold the integrity of the court. you said the american bar association came out and said there should be a hearing, and that was difficult for kavanaugh, and then the retired justice saying he may not be for the court. >> what is unprecedented is for brett kavanaugh to campaign, which is what that op-ed is. i recommend everybody go and read the op-ed carefully. he doesn't apologize but he wrote it because he thought he had to. >> apparently it was his idea. it was not the fox news interview he was pressured into from the white house, and it was not an audience of one, but in a serious way it was his recognition that his second performance was a real problem, and there were questions of temperament and judicial independence, and that con tp u contradicted -- >>

he said the name of the clintons, his invoked politics, and that's one of the reasons we saw john paul stevens come out later saying he believes kavanaugh was not fit. he's seen incredible opposition from "the washington post," the editorial he board which has not opposed a supreme court nominee, liberal or conservative dating back to 1987 with bork. and of the justices pick, four were nom flayed by president who first -- and the slim majority of senators who said they would vote to confirm judge kavanaugh represents tens of millions fewer -- than the minority of senators who voted to reject him. will the supreme court, now mirror the country it serves? >> certainly it doesn't when you look at the makeup, but it does -- it does highlight the stakes in you're elections. in the 2016 election, there were democrats that did not feel particularly motor investigated. they did not show up to vote in large enough numbers, and you saw the marging of was so flooro. and what democrats are counting on this time ash is the lesson of the 2016 election and the prospect of republicans maintaining jersey will

supreme court justice john paul stevens called kavanaugh unfit for the post to supporters call this criticism slander and insist kavanaugh should be approved judge kavanaugh was publicly accused of a crime and his reputation and livelihood were at stake so it was only fair that his accuser have the burden to prove the consensus is that the burden was not met republican lisa murkowski said on friday she would not vote in kavanagh's favor but two other so-called swing senators signed off in support of the nominee moving capitals confirmation that much closer to the finish line i did go with a fashion heading for the day and i will take him firm judge cabinet. the us president donald trump has chaired the u.s. senate's decision to hold its final debate and vote but the outcome won't be known until all of the senators have actually cast their ballots and not a second before rosalind shorten al-jazeera capitol hill. saudi arabia says it will allow turkey to searches consulate in istanbul for the prominent. went missing three days ago after entering the consulate crown prince mohammed bin says saud

. -- john paul season -- john paul stevens had to say on this?ler: yes, i did, and i was impressed with his thoughtful insights. even though he was a lifelong timelican and i am a long democrat, i respect the man. he was a good justice. hads very disturbed the fbi such a limited investigation theren the report was were 40 people who had offered to give information. why were they not contacted? host: ok. lyndon in mississippi, a democrat. michael in pennsylvania, a republican. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. thanks for c-span. i would like to say i think this process has become a mockery. this senate confirmation has poll oren up to a character assassination, what has happened. i used to have a modicum of respect for senator feinstein, but she has shown her true colors in this and she will go out of the senate at some point. maybe not this election, as someone who has lost a lot of respect from both republicans and democrats alike. senator her, but also schumer, they have transformed this whole process into a muds

retired justice john paul stevens who previously praised kavanaugh told a florida audience after last> sponsors are expressing concern about one of the world's highest paid athletes, cristiano ronaldo after he was accused of rape. jamie yuccas has more. >> cristiano ronaldo. >> reporter: cristiano ronaldo earned more than $108 million this year from his skills on the soccer field. but his billion dollar sponsor nike said it is deeply concerned about allegations of sexual assault against him. kathryn mayorga claims the soccer star raped her in 2009 in his las vegas hotel room after they met in a night club. photos show them partying together that year. lawyer leslie stovall says it dramatically altered her life. >> depression, suicidal ideation, abuse of alcohol. >> reporter: mayorga reported the incident to police and took a medical exam, but refused to name the soccer star. she later accepted $375,000 and signed a nondisclosure agreement to keep her claims quiet. mayorga's lawyer says she has been empowered by the me too movement and is now suing for an additional $200,000. there are

senator murkowski did not mention john paul stevens in what she had to say tonight. but surely ever member of the senate knows exactly what justice stevens said yesterday because it's the first time a retired supreme court justice has ever publicly opposed the nomination of a new supreme court justice. here is some of what senator murkowski had to say. >> i have a very high bar for any nominee to the supreme court of the united states. the code of judicial conduct rule 1.2 -- this is one that many, many people in this body know. but it states that, quote, a judge act at all-times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety. and after -- after the hearing that we all watched last week, last thursday, it became clear to me or was becoming clearer that that appearance of impropriety has become unavoidable. and i've been deliberating, agonizing about what is fair. is this too unfair a burden to place on somebody that is dealing with the worst, th

next person would probably be justice john paul stevens, probably to be succeeded by another liberal, and it will be a wash. will have consistently is five strong conservative spirit scalia, alito, roberts, part,, and for the most anthony kennedy. you've got a pretty core group where the average age is about a decade younger than the average age of the liberals. we will hear from barry now, and i hope you have questions. , i gots great to be here to have my picture taken with the largest inspiration in my young daughter's life, olivia the takpig. written a wonderful book about justice scalia. to many up too late evenings last week because i couldn't put it down. ar book, in a way, poses puzzle which my book tries to answer. book thatclear in her justice scalia is a uniquely strong, outspoken voice on the court. even though he is unique in his outspokenness, he says there are five strong conservatives in that court. one of the questions is why, throughout so much of his career, he has been in dissent. since 1968, when richard nixon ran against the liberal warren court, republican presi

former supreme court justice john paul stevens isn't buying it.s a former attorney general think? michael mukasey is here next. so why not bundle them with esurance and save up to 10%? which you can spend on things you really want to buy, like... well, i don't know what you'd wanna buy because i'm just a guy on your tv. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. so let's promote our falle a homecomingtravel dealame, on choicehotels.com like this. touchdown. earn a free night when you stay just twice this fall. or, badda book. badda boom. book now at choicehotels.com minutes can mean the difference between life and death. proposition 11 saves lives by ensuring medical care is not delayed in an emergency. proposition 11 establishes into law the longstanding industry practice of paying emts and paramedics to remain on-call during breaks and requires they receive fema level training and active shooters and natural disasters. vote yes on 11 to ensure 911 emergency care is there when you or your love one need it. >>> emotions right now are raw. we know why.

of unare precedented things is that a retired supreme court juses tis, 35 years on the court, john paul stevens appointed by gerald ford last night in florida saying that while he had supported merits, and he is a republican, john paul stevens is, and he changed his mind because of the political and the belligerent approach that he took in the last hearing last week. we will play a little bit of that. >> sure. >> he is -- he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he cannot fulfill his full support. >> and he is seeing bias and nonjudicial demeanor and how much that might influence senator collins who said that she did not believe that dr. ford's accusations of sexual assault were proved by the fbi report, and that she was reassured by what brett kavanaugh told her about roe v. wade and so is she going to be influenced in the final hours or has she been influenced by his demeanor this final hearing? >> i think that senator collins has always wanted to be a yes, and that is going to tilt her no matter what. she knew from the testimony that kav

former supreme court justice john paul stevens isn't buying it.mer attorney general think? michael mukasey is here next. -computer, order pizza. -of course, daniel. -fridge, weather. -clear skies and 75. -trash can, turn on the tv. -my pleasure. -ice dispenser, find me a dog sitter. -okay. -and make ice. -pizza delivered. -what's happened to my son? -i think that's just what people are like now. i mean, with progressive, you can quote your insurance on just about any device. even on social media. he'll be fine. -[ laughs ] -will he? -i don't know. -will he? (door bell rings) it's ohey. this is amazing. with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis, are you okay? even when i was there, i never knew when my symptoms would keep us apart. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira can help get, and keep uc under control when other medications haven't worked well enough. and it helps people achieve control that lasts. so you can experience few or no symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious,

one former supreme court justice who initially backed kavanagh's nomination to change his mind john paul stevens now says kavanagh might not have the right temperament for the job. his performance during the hearings caused me to change my murder i think there's several. taters larry tribe among loons of those two to open professor that have ever. heard of or have written written. pieces in which they suggest that he has alienated he has that demonstrated a potential bias and unearth a potential living in cebu for the court that he would not be able to perform his full full responsibilities that i think has merit in that that criticism in that the senators should really pay attention to it for the good of the court. so just how did we get here in july donald trump nominated brett kavanaugh to replace retiring supreme court justice last month accusations against kavanaugh by dr christine blazin ford surfaced in a washington post article she accused him of sexually assaulting her at a college party in the early one nine hundred eighty s. both ford and cavanaugh testified before the senate judiciar

the reporter who spoke to justice john paul stevens is my guest. let's go "outfront." >>> good evening, everyone, i'm kate bolduan in for erin burnett. "outfront" tonight, the vote is set, just 16 hours away as the bitter battle over brett kavanaugh is coming to a head. and here's what senators are combing through and have been all throughout the day. 45 pages of interview summaries, 9 people interviewed, 1,600 pan pages from the fbi tip line and what was in all of those pages? it literally depends on who you ask. i know, you've heard the story before. it has become the definition of a tale of two reports. so, let's start with republicans. what did they see? >> what we know for sure is the fbi report did not corroborate any of the allegations against judge kavanaugh. >> the witnesses they have identified saying they were present at the event have all refuted their allegations, so i think that ought to settle it. >> after investigations from both the committee and the fbi, we have found nothing, absolutely nothing, to corroborate accusations against

formerjusticejohn paul stevens come down to it, the casting vote. formerjustice johnsaid, in his opinion, mr cavanaugh does not belong on the highest court. he says he is a fine federal judge but his performances during the hearings "cause me to change my mind." for many of us, i think that is what we saw there and how political and how inside the democratic party he is. and also, how angry he became —— anti the democratic party. also the involvement and the tweaking of the president. that leaves... we're going to find out tomorrow, aren't we? the final vote tomorrow. the american bar association also said he's qualified but he more scrutiny. that was last week. let's go to the guardian. you've got a special interest in this particular story. these two sharing the nobel peace prize. we had an interview today. we had an interview with him once he finished surgery because when the nobel representatives try to reach and can be connected him because he was performing what is very important surgery. this is... what i heard was a man that would notjust to talk about him, no

former justice john paul stevens. he said he changed his mind after that testimony. >> he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigancy on the court to not fulfill his duties. there is merit in that criticism. it is not healthy to get a justice to only do a part-time job. >> overnight, chairman chuck grassley's office put out an executive summary confirming the bureau interviewed ten people. democrats don't believe that went far enough. >> that's under investigation, it's a bullshit investigation. that reality is that is not a thorough investigation. >> okay. attorneys for christine blasey ford, kavanaugh's first accuser, calling the investigation a stain on the process on the fbi and our american ideal of justice. >> the president made his final push for kavanaugh at the rally in minnesota where he attacked democrats. >> their rage fueled resistance is starting to back fire at a level that nobody has ever seen before. the people of america are going to reject the democrat politics of anger an

that this may have done or may do to the reputation of the supreme court that former justice john paul stevens now says judge kavanaugh might not have the right temperament for the job. you know how to supreme court has always been political but it's important for the credibility of the court for the integrity of really our entire system of government that we be able to see them as our supreme court justices as people who do aspire to look beyond partisan fights and uphold a higher vision of the law what justice kavanagh did it his hearing last week literally threatening democratic senators saying what comes around goes around. is unprecedented unbelievable. cuse in him accusing democrats of of taking revenge for the clintons it really does politicize the court in a way that i don't think we've ever seen before and now trust in government is a more sacred thing for democrats in general they are the party that believes the government should be able to get things done whereas republicans since ronald reagan have been dining out on this idea that the government can't get anything done so in a sen

john paul stevens said that changed how he viewed kavanaugh. >> he should have been confirmed. i think his performance during the hearings caused me to change my mind. >> last night kavanaugh addressed those concerns in a "wall street journal"op-ed. writing i might have been too emotional. going forward you can count on me to be the same kind of judge in person i have been for my entire 28 year legal career. hard working and even keeled and independent and dedicateed to the constitution." some white house aides said kavanaugh was running hot. the press secretary said kavanaugh's demeanor was understandable. >> in a moment where you are being wrongfully accused, you are not defending not just yourself but the family and the entire process that allows someone to become a supreme court justice. you have every right to be emotional and be tough and fight back and defend yourself against those accusations. >> after the procedural vote this morning that set the clock running on the confirmation vote. president tru president trump praised colleagues. on the campaign trail in mint the

senator murkowski did not mention john paul stevens and what she had to say tonight. but surely every member of the senate knows exactly what justice stevens said yesterday, because it's the first time a retired supreme court justice ever publicly opposed the nomination of a new supreme court justice. here is some of what senator murkowski had to say. >> i have a very high bar for any nominee to the supreme court of the united states. the code of judicial conduct rule 1.2, this is one that many, many people in this body know, but it states that, quote, a judge act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity and impartiality of the judiciary and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety and after, after the hearing that we all watched last week, last thursday, it became clear to me or was becoming clearer that that appearance of impropriety has become unavoidable. and i have been deliberating, agonizing, about what is fair? is this too unfair a burden to place on somebody that is dealing with the worst, the mos

you have a retired supreme court justice, john paul stevens, who initially supported kavanaugh's confirmation, now saying he doesn't belong on the high court. and then you have signatures of more than 2,400 law professors who oppose his confirmation. so someone who demonstrated at his senate hearing such strong political partiality, who believes this whole thing was orchestrated by -- by, you know, a political hit, by legal or by left-wing groups. how can someone like that preserve the integrity and -- and transparency and legitimacy of the supreme court? >> let me -- let me expand that a little bit because you brought up a good point, and it's one that i've heard a lot of people talking about. an allegation does not equate to guilt. how do we go from this point on to balance listening and believing and hearing women or men who have a acceptstive allegation to make -- sensitive allegation to make, how do we balance that with utah process for an alleged perpetrator -- with due process for an alleged perpetrator? >> that's what's frustrating. people were acting as if the senate hearing was a cr

retired justice john paul stevens told a crowd that kavanaugh should not be placed on the supreme courtause he lacks the temperament for the lifetime appointment. stevens explained his changing view on the judge. >> i changed my views for reasons that have really no relationship to his intellectual ability or his record as a federal judge. he's a fine federal judge and he should have been confirmed when he was a nominee. but i think his performance during the hearings caused me to change my mind. >> hundreds of people were arrested aftercare rii carrying mass demonstration against kavanaugh. amy schumer and emily radkowski were among those arrested. orrin hatch was confronted by a group of protesters, facing their anger as he tried to brush them off while attempting to get into an elevator. >> why aren't you brave enough to talk to us and exchange with us? don't you wave your hand at me. i wave my hand at you. >> you grow up. >> how dare you talk to women that way! how dare you! [indiscernible] >> senator, do you believe women? >> speaking on the floor of the senate this week, majority

former justice, former republican and justice john paul stevens withdrew his support from kavanaugh today publicly because of the partisanship he showed in that defense. and then second, i'd be looking at questions of truthfulness. whether or not in testimony to the committee judge kavanaugh shaded the truth or was untruthful about a number of things. i frankly think when we get into details about words in his year book and what they meant, we lose the average american. but when he made definitive statements to staff attorneys or to the committee, i did know this at this point. i didn't know it at that point, i've done this before, i've never done this before, and there is evidence that puts that into question, then i think we have to have a conversation about truthfulness. so to me fitness and truthfulness sit on top of this underlying body of evidence of sexual assault allegations where after i reviewed the evidence in front of the committee today, i still have unanswered questions. >> and as you say, separate and apart from any ideological consideration. i have one last question for yo

according to a report, retired supreme court justice, john paul stevens, a lifelong republican said today that kavanaugh's performance alone should be disqualifying. tonight on the eve of that key procedural vote it all comes down to four undecided senators, heidi hidecamp announced she's a no on kavanaugh, citing doubts on the temperament, honesty and impartiality and the force on dr. ford's testimony. that leaves kavanaugh's nomination in the hands of the same four senators who forced the investigation in the first place, republicans jeff flake, susan collins, lisa murkowski and democrat joe manchin. g garrett haake joins me live from capitol hill where senator murkowski has been meeting with sexual assault survivors. >> reporter: let's go backwards. if you're a democrat right now you need joe manchin to remain a no vote here, and you need two of those three republican senators to vote no. probably the least likely in that is jeff flake. he was a yes vote as of friday morning of last week before changing his mind and calling for this investigation. susan collins left the hill a short ti

supreme court justice john paul stevens called kavanaugh unfit for the post to the supporters called this criticism slander and insist kavanaugh should be approved judge kavanaugh was publicly accused of a crime and his reputation and livelihood weren't state so it was only fair that his accuser have the burden to prove the consensus is that the burden was not met republican lisa murkowski said on friday she would not vote and kavanagh's favor but two other so-called swing senators signed off in support of the nominee moving capitals confirmation that much closer to the finish line i didn't know if i had him for the day and i will go to canned firm chad's cabin. the u.s. president donald trump has chaired the u.s. senate's just to hold its final debate and vote but the outcome won't be known until all of the senators have actually cast their ballots and not a second before rosalind shorten al-jazeera capitol hill what chance moron is a republican strategist he says this is remind americans the us political system considers people innocent until proven guilty i think after listening t

it was interesting to hear retired justice john paul stevens react to that. i want to play that sound for you and get you to react here he is. >> he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform full responsibilities. i think there's merit in that criticism. >> it's clear to me judge kavanaugh was concerned enough about this he wrote the op-ed. is that enough? or does he need to do more? >> i think that's enough. someone said to me, my answer to that is, if you had a group of people deliberately trying to destroy your reputation with accusations you know aren't true and every rumor about you is the most awful kind of accusation, you're not going to sit there calmly and take that. you will defend yourself against people deliberately trying to damage and destroy you. that's what he did. i think the fact he did that is the reason he's on the court. i think if he had sat there and taken it the people would have been very suspicious. go back to those fbi investigations. >> you say he wa

on thursday, retired supreme court justice john paul stevens told an audience of retirees in florida that though he originally supported kavanaugh, he now opposes his confirmation. >> i changed my views for reasons that have really no relationship to his intellectual ability or his record as a federal judge. he is a fine federal judge and he should have been confirmed when he was nominated. but i think his performance during the hearings caused me to change my mind. amy: the showdown over judge kavanaugh's confirmation came as thousands of protesters converged on washington, d.c., thursday, where nearly 300 people were arrested at a loud, peaceful sit-in in the atrium of the hart senate office building. among those arrested was comedian and actress amy schumer. also, a group of women confronted utah republican hatch, challenged him over his support for kavanaugh. senator hatch told the women to grow up, waving them off as he boarded an elevator in the hart building. >> why aren't you brave enough to talk to us? don't you wait your hand at me. i waive my hand at you. how do you talk t

you had a former supreme court justice, john paul stevens, literally say that the thing that made him change his mind about judge kavanaugh wasn't necessarily all the stuff that has come out, not the sexual allegations stuff, but it was precisely his temperament. so is it fair to say that chuck grassley is simply wrong, that these are all secondary issues and not significant enough? >> we've been talking about sexual assault a great deal. when judge kavanaugh went to congress to testify a second time about christine ford's allegation, he did show a side that worried professional court watchers. i come from actually working in the federal judiciary where it's not about partisanship. it's about calling balls and strikes. judges i know, we're also equally horrified. i don't think justice stevens, it was appropriate for him to speak out, just like it wasn't appropriate for kavanaugh to write that op-ed in the journal. the tweet, president trump's tweet this morning made it harder for jeff flake to vote yes. also seeing the president last night mocking the me too movement. he mocked dr. fo

supreme court justice john paul stevens called kavanaugh unfit for the post to the supporters called this criticism slander and insist kavanaugh should be approved judge kavanaugh was publicly accused of a crime and his reputation and livelihood weren't state so it was only fair that his accuser have the burden to prove the consensus is that the burden was not met republican lisa murkowski said on friday she would not vote and kavanagh's favor but two other so-called swing senators signed off in support of the nominee moving capitals confirmation that much closer to the finish line i did deal with if i hadn't from the day i will vote to canned firm chad's cabinet the us president donald trump has chaired the u.s. senate's decision to hold its final debate and vote but the outcome won't be known until all of the senators have actually cast their ballots and not a second before rosalind horton al-jazeera capitol hill what charles moran is a republican strategist he says this is reminding americans the us political system considers people innocent until proven guilty. i think after list

when you have a retired supreme court justice like john paul stevens putting out a statement like he did earlier today, which staen l essentially says he doesn't know where things stand in terms of the accusations against judge kavanaugh, but based on his performance at that pehearing, which is lot of people on both sides of the aisle, people feel that judge kavanaugh lost his cool and did not display the kind of judicial temperament one expects from a supreme court justice. and i think that this op-ed in "the wall street journal" is trying to, some extent, clean up on aisle six when it comes to questions of his judicial temperament. despite how he responded to senator klobuchar, i talked to a lot of republicans and democrats over the last several days, anderson, who just thought that was way over the top in his comments about the clintons. it just sort of came out of left field. so i do think there is a great deal of damage control going on, and perhaps they're looking at these votes right now and saying, this just may be too close to call. >> jim, do you have any idea what role the

. >>> new on thursday, a rare statement from john paul stevens who no longer thinks kavanaugh is suitable to the highest court. he pointed to the combative conduct and should think about the political bias. and he acknowledged his conduct, he wrote, i might have been too emotional at times, i know that my tone was sharp and i said a few things that i should not have said. his op-ed had apologieses, it didn't have apologies, he said: logies, he said: >>> the time is 4:34, if a majority of senators vote for judge kavanaugh this morning, a final vote on his nomination will be scheduled for tomorrow. the one complication for republicans, the republican senator steve canes of montana will not be in washington tomorrow, be in montana for the wedding his daughter. >>> and team magazine has the powerful image of dr. christine blasey-ford, her likeness was created during the testimony of and the image was by a san francisco artist. he made a list of impactful quotes and started placing them where he thought they belonged. >> when i do something like this, i try to capture the person in some way th

meanwhile, retired supreme court justice, john paul stevens who once applauded kavanaugh now says he doesn't belong on the court. saying his performance in the hearings, the temperament changed hid mind. >> all right. tonight all the drama shifts to the senate chamber where the first of two votes is set for tomorrow morning. kasie hunt is at the capitol where the future of the court and the nominee hang in balance. what can you tell us? >> reporter: we are on the eve of an historic moment for the senate. republican leaders insist they're going to hold the first vote on judge kavanaugh tomorrow morning. setting up a final confirmation on saturday. but it's friday's vote that's make or break. it's going to tell us whether or not judge kavanaugh has the votes to be confirmed. and at this hour, there are four senators who are undecided. republican susan collins, lisa murkowski, and jeff flake. they are still reviewing the fbi report and staying silent on what they plan to do. then there's the wild card. senator joe manchin. a democrat from deep red west virginia. he still doesn't know ho

that was a very serious observation by retired justice john paul stevens.est and i think the op-ed that brett kavanaugh had written was not just to the crucial senators at the center of this whole dispute, but also to judicial colleagues like retired justice stevens. yes. >> that's a fascinating perspective i have not actually heard in terms of the op-ed. with all that was in mind, i wonder what that means in terms of what a justice kavanaugh will be like on the bench. do you think this experience -- especially how he reacted, it would hard to think this experience has not impacted him. all be it, he said differentlily. does he dig in on the far right so offended by how he said he believes he was treated by democrats or does he try to prove critics wrong and position himself somehow as a moderate swing vote on the bench? >> i think first of all, kate, he will still be a reliable conservative for the right wing of the court and for president trump. i don't think he is going to change his ideology at all through this ordeal. i bet we see him writing language

supreme court justice and lifelong republican john paul stevens came out against kavanaugh.told a small crowd in bo boca raton, florida, that it's what judge kavanaugh's performance at the confirmation hearings revealed that was disqualifying for him. >> i think his performance during the hearings caused me to change my mind. >> reporter: tonight, judge kavanaugh responded to the criticism in an editorial in the "wall street journal," writing, i was very emotional last thursday, more so than i have ever been. i might have been too emotional at times. i know that my tone was sharp and i said a few things i should not have said. i hope everyone can understand that i was there as a son, husband, and dad. i testified with five people foremost in my mind, my mom, my dad, my wife, and most of all my daughters. >> the temperament issue was not at issue when the christine blasey ford hearing was held. it came up afterward. the question of whether that's relevant, it rests in the head of a very small handful of undecided senators. >> reporter: among the handful of remaining swing vot