ms. swetnick was never interviewed by the fbi. she was ignored. she was silenced then and she was shamed. it's outrageous the way she was treated. republicans have also claimed other individuals dr. ford identified to do gathered where she was assaulted had refeutd her testimony. well that's just false. these individuals stated publicly they did not recall the event. dr. ford told the judiciary committee that's not surprising. . s as it was a unremarkable party because nothing remarkable happened to them that evening. but yet one yeof these individuals has said publicly that she believes dr. ford. after reviewing the fbi's report this morning within minutes republican senators claim there's a lack of corroborating evidence for any of these allegations. and d despite the numerous restrictions they placed on this investigation, that claim is simply not true. but a fact for developing -- corroborating evidence is a thorough investigation. that's basic. and this investigation falls far short. it's a disservice to drr ms. swetnick. and it's a further d

ms. swetnick, he portrayed those as revenge on behalf of the clintons. frankly, judge kavanaugh's testimonyet was better suited fr fox news than a confirmation hearing for the august united states supreme court. but that that's in character judge kavanaugh's long history of working for the most partisan legal causes; ken starr, bush v. gore, all the myriad controversies of the bush era. it would be one thing if judge kavanaugh discarded his partisan feelings once he donned the black robes of a jurist. unfortunately, he's been on the bench for many years, and thursday's hearing revealed that his bitter t partisan resentmens still lurk right below the surface. it should give us all pause to consider what it means to elevate such a partisan world view to supreme court, whether it be a democratic or republican partisan view. where rulings must be made on the legale merits, not, not on the side of a yiel which most -- of the aisle which most benefits. and then the great itself issue against judge kavanaugh, the one that really bothers most people, his credibi

ms. swetnick, he portrayed those as revenge on behalf of the clintons. frankly, judge kavanaugh's testimony was better suited for fox news that the confirmation hearing to be on the nice state supreme court. but that is in charge with judge kavanaugh's long history of working for the most partisan legal causes, ten start, bush v gore, all the myriad controversies of the bush era -- ken starr. it would be the judge have discarded his feelings once he donned the black robes of the jews. unfortunately he's been on the bench for many years and two thursday soon revealed that is bitter partisan resentments still lurk right below the surface. it should give us all pause to consider what means to elevate such a partisan worldview to the supreme court, with the democratic or republican partisan view. where buildings must be made on the legal merits, not, not on the side of the aisle which most benefits. and then the greatest issue against judge kavanaugh, the one that really bothers most people, his credibility. easy telling the truth? that supersedes all the ot

ms. swetnick. this individual had no knowledge of the alleged incident, but instead wanted to describe the alleged sexual preferences of ms. swetnick. according to the national task force to end sexual and domestic violence, one of the most nonpartisan and respected voices on capitol hill, this shameless attempt to smear a victim violates the rape shield law. look what happened. on one hand you have the president of the united states in a rally trying to shame the victim who, of wowser, is a -- of course, is a woman. then we have, on the other hand, ms. swetnick who was never interviewed by the f.b.i., she was ignored, she was silenced, and then, to follow the routine of this administration, she was shamed. it's outrageous that she was treated this way. they also claimed to gather where she was assaulted have refuted her testimony. these republicans know that's just false. those individuals stated publicly they do not recall the event. doctor ford told the judiciary committee this is not surprising

. >> laura: you claim richard that ms swetnick threatened you after you broke up with you. what types of threats? >> she called me many times and i was -- told i will never ever see my in born child. and that i'm going to kill you guys. >> laura: she said she was going the kill you? >> yes and that scared me a little bit. >> laura: you said you threatened -- she threatened you and your baby. >> i meant the unborn child at that time. i was not married at that time. >> laura: did she everd discuss with you in your relationship the issue of sexual assault or did she mention ever having been sexually assaulted? >> never, never once did she mention that to me and we used to talk about everything. >> laura: did she had a political background. was she interested in politics? >> not that i know of. she always wanted to be the center of attention and she also was -- if anyone knows julie -- and everything that came out of her mouth was exaggeration and she never mentioned that to me at all i was surprised to hear this and actually i was surprised to see her making these accusations

swetnick's allegations. none of them could, quite the contrary. i don't know whether ms. pawn or not, the fbi will find out. i don't know michael avenatti, based on my relationship with him through the committee, he clearly has a casual relationship with the truth. and it appears to me that he will do the right thing, but only when constantly supervised and cornered like a rat. >> tucker: and so what you are saying if i'm interpreting this correctly as there is no evidence that these ten gang rapes took place, that which julie swetnick said she was present for. so this will be the one case in my memory where someone actually gets punished for lying to a congressional committee under oath? >> and this is serious because we want people who are victims of sexual violence to come forward. but if someone comes forward and it lies about, that undermines the legitimacy of the allegations that are valid. and at one point when it was clear that there were no clock, corroborating witnesses, mr. avenatti alleged he had a witness and would present a sworn statement but would not tell

ms. swetnick's statement was schmitted, the committee has to make a referral of all three people to the justicetment and ask for a criminal investigation because that is the way you deter people from making false allegations during confirmation processes. these people were all seeking -- ford was seeking a psychological repose. the problem with her story, it doesn't fit together at all. lou: and there are so many questions. and questions that weren't asked by the republicans or the democrats. the democrats of kavanaugh, the republicans of ford. it's just the most bizarre set of hearings that i could imagine for the supreme court. >> and lou we don't stop with those, just those three. we also have to refer the lawyers. because according to ms. ford, her two lawyers didn't tell murtha grassley offered to talk to her anytime anywhere. that was a violation of the professional rules of responsibility. and i think he ought to be referred, don't you, if he brought in this ridiculous wrns? lou: mwitness. lou: he seems unworthy of much but worthy of information. thanks so much. thank you both for being

ms. swetnick, no one corroborated those. she has walked back from those. asked, like mark judge come about that were asked said in no way did it happen. we have no confirmation of any of these terrible allegations and the judge's unequivocal denial it ever happened under penalty of felony. >> greg: how can he not be disbarred? >> i think the way ms. katz, the lawyer ms. feinstein recommended for dr. ford and mr. avenatti and others have not distinguished himself by their conduct and the appropriate form for them to be reviewed is through the bar association, through the ethics committee. they have disciplinary authority and they can discipline or potentially disbarred people. >> dana: one last question from juan williams. >> juan: senator cornyn, you are a dignified guy. i like you a lot. you are on a brawl here on "the five." let's start the brawl. >> dana: we only have a minute. >> juan: politicization of the supreme court, i would hope it would concern you. but you refused to look at merrick garland. he said he wouldn't consider it. now you are in a sit

ms. swetnick threatened you after you broke up with her. what types of threats threats are you alleging? >> she basically called me many times and said you will never, ever see your unborn child alive. and i'm just going to go over there, i'm going to kill you guys. >> laura: she said she was going to kill you? >> yes. and that has told me a little bit. >> laura: well, you told politico originally, richard, that she threatened your family and your baby. >> correct. >> laura: but you mentally unborn child, is that right? >> i meant the unborn child. i was not married at the time when this happened. >> laura: did she ever discussed with you in your seven year relationship, from 1994-2001, the issue of sexual assault, or did she mention ever having been sexually assaulted? >> never, never once she mention that to me. just to talk about everything, she never once mentioned that at all. >> laura: did she have a political background? was she interested in politics? >> not that i know of. you know, she was always wanting to be the center of attent

ms. swetnick may have deliberately conspired to the provide false statements to congress.s avenatti could be disbarred. trial attorney and legal analyst misty meyers. great to have you. >> thank you, trish. at 8:00 instead of 2. we've got to go out to dinner afterwards. [laughter] trish: you're saying he should be disbarred. you really have a lot of questions, you think this is a bad guy who did a bad thing? >> i think that if this is true, if he conspired with a client to lie for the purpose of obstructing a congressional investigation, that is absolutely would be sent immediately to the ethics committee, and there would be very little question that there would be repercussions. trish: so is he going to say, oh, no, no, no, this is what she told me, and i was doing my job as her attorney. >> he does have that sworn affidavit that. [applause] swet -- that ms. swet nick did sign, but damage oj is saying -- doj is saying it wasn't just avenatti, they conspired to tell these false statements to congress to obstruct a congressional investigation. and that will come down to the

ms. swetnick. he portrayed those as revenge on behalf of the clintons. frankly, judge kavanaugh's testimony was better suited for fox news than a confirmation hearing for the august united states supreme court. but that's in character with judge kavanaugh's long history of working for the most partisan legal causes. ken starr, bush v. gore, all the myriad controversies of the bush era. it would be one thing if judge kavanaugh discarded his partisan feelings once he donned the black robes of the jurist. unfortunately, he's been on the bench for many years, and to thursday's hearing revealed his bitter partisan resentments still lurk right below the surface. it should give us all pause to consider what it means to elevate such a partisan world view to the supreme court, whether it be a democrat or a republican partisan view. when rulings must be made on the legal merits, not, not on the side of the aisle which most benefits. and then the greatest issue against judge kavanaugh. the one that really bothers most people, his credibility. is he telling the trut

ms. swetnick for the first time. that's right here on "the beat." the other big issue is testimony from kavanaugh's friends, like mark judge, who has spoken to the fbi, as well as their credibility. new reports that his former girlfriend says she wants to speak with the fbi but hasn't gotten much of a substantive response. the fbi can talk to these people around the main parties as well. nbc reporting kavanaugh's team tried to talk to some of them, encouraging accounts that would back him up. another college classmate alleges that he would get aggressive while drinking. so a lot of different accounts swirling around. we begin with senator richard blumenthal, a democrat from connecticut. he signed a letter today listing about two dozen witnesses that they believe the fbi should interview. i'm also joined by former democratic senator carol mosley braun, she won her seat in 1992. she was also the third woman efficient to serve on the senate judiciary committee. senator blumenthal, when you look at the direction we're going here when the president said

ms. swetnick who claimed there were gang rapes.another network yesterday and totally changed her story in a number of huge, meaningful ways. and mcconnell pointed out -- >> yet everybody is giving her a chance for her to speak. >> and she did. >> bill: red solo cups doing what? >> she said she was aware of them spiking the punch. now she says they were near the punch. she said there were gang rapes at the party. maybe there were and he was there and maybe he did it but i'm not sure. >> bill: mcconnell's point it was entered into the record >> by senator feinstein and before the hearing with dr. ford on thursday on wednesday this avenatti bomb gets dropped and the democrats reacted with an official letter calling kavanaugh to withdraw based on a story they knew nothing about and the more we learn it was a ludicrous story. >> bill: bombshell, throwing ice. >> i know senator mcconnell does not like these stories. i know that on page 6 in the "new york post" and tabloids love these stories. we don't know how much of this is true or not

ms. swetnick ever met or socialized with judge kavanaugh. avenatti is considering a potential run in 2020. >> i'm getting more serious by the week because people are encouraging me to do it. >> reporter: comments he made this week will likely rile some of his supporters. he said the nominee in 2020 better be a white male because, quote, when you have a white male making the arguments, they carry more weight. >> i don't think there's anything wrong with calling out people that look like me for not doing enough to defend women and minorities and people of color and i'm going to continue to do that. >> reporter: the justice department has not said whether or not it will pursue this. if it does, avenatti will likely try to paint it as a politically motivated investigation. many republicans believe it is kavanaugh who is the true victim here and would like to see this referral pursued. >> will be interesting, thank you. >>> "the new york times" reports that google has quietly protected at least three male executives from sexual misconduct claims

ms. swetnick's allegations, but ultimately i do think that when somebody is coming before the united statesenate and they want to be a supreme court judge they ought to tell the truth. if they're lying that's something that is disqualifying. >> do you think he told the truth to your committee? >> i have very grave doubts at this point, but that's one of the reasons we so badly wanted an investigation so we could get to the truth of that rather than have to deal with surmise or suspicion. >> one of the things you're seeing from brett kavanaugh's defenders is that if he did, in fact, not tell the truth about those entries in his high school yearbook, even about this incident at a bar in yale in 1985, it was about things long ago, about relatively trivial matters. how do you respond to that? >> yeah, i think if these things really are trivial and it's a minor, you know, miscue if you will, if you are looking at a perjury case, you would require that the lie be material, same with a false statement case. so tiny little slip-ups, i don't think are the issue. but if he's lying about something sig

ms. swetnick threatened to kill his unborn child and never once did she mention kavanaugh. it appears republicans have had enough. mitch mcconnell says they will be a vote on friday. just wait until you hear what president trump had to say about all of this at a big jampacked rally in tennessee tonight. there is something to look forward to! "varney & co." is about to begin. >> week call him -- for 15 years as the attorney general of connecticut, he went around telling war stories. he was never in vietnam, it was a lie! and then he is up they are saying, we want the truth! from judge kavanaugh. >> you heard it. the president slamming richard blumenthal of connecticut at the big rally in tennessee last night. i will have more on that later in the show. now listen to what the president said about democrats and the stock markets. >> a democratic takeover of congress will plunge our country into gridlock and chaos.and take away all that i've heard in the last 20 months. >> and think of this, the stock market at record levels, now the highest, will drop. now we have market watch

ms. swetnick saw her allegations, one of them is dead, the other has no recollection and the other two were not at the party and look at brett kavanaugh and reputation and how the public, the jury of the public has already been said by all of this and been decided. >> well, the swetnick is maybe the hardest to take seriously. maria: exactly. >> you're asked to believe something that's almost impossible to believe that she witnessed ongoing violent crimes and no one ever said anything and she kept showing up at the parties until she was victimized too. it's just -- maria: why did you keep going back? >> so many questions about that one and but -- it's interesting, you know, you would think that if the point of this inquiry was to find out exactly what happened or did not happen between professor ford and brett kavanaugh, why is there so much attention now on peripheral issues, the fact that he embraced beer in words in college, why does -- is that now the focus of media inquiry? maria: at one point she threw ice at somebody in the bar. is this all they have, that he threw ice at somebody in

ms. swetnick, dagen, because that interview was something to talk about.e were inconsistencies in the interview with the statement that she put out when these allegations were first revealed by her attorney, michael avenatti. maria: mr. avenatti. dagen: i encourage you to watch the whole thing if we're going to play just one clip of it, because it is very clear that she can't get her story straight and there are major inconsistencies in her story, from her first breath in this interview. i will point this out. nbc news was unable to independently corroborate julie swetnick's claims, has not spoken with anyone who says they saw swetnick at parties with brett kavanaugh. swetnick provided nbc news with the names of four friends who she said went to the parties with her. one of them is dead. two of them did not respond to requests. and a fourth said he didn't remember swetnick and didn't think he socialized with her. so there are -- this is the same woman that richard blumenthal came out and said wow, gut punch revelation, that all the democrats on the senate

ms. ramirez and miss swetnick are wrong? >> that is emphatically what i'm saying. i'm innocent of this charge. >> and you're prepared for a fbi investigation? >> they don't reach conclusions, you reach the conclusions. >> you're saying there's never been a case where you drank so much that you didn't remember what happened the night before or part of what happened? >> you're asking about blackout, i don't know, have you? >> that was ten days ago. the republican senator deb fisher is with me from nebraska. how are you on a saturday? it feels like a health care weekend vote. it feels a little bit like repeal and replace although that happened at 2:30 in the morning. how do you feel today. >> things are pretty calm in the capitol building and people are doing their work. i've been in my office looking at constituent mail and things. about 3:30 it's my understanding is when the vote could take place at this point. bill: have you shared your last thoughts on the floor of the senate already? >> i have, about 10:30. bill: what was your address, your message? >> you know,

ms. ramirez's allegations? >> today. "the this comes as washington post" reports the slightly expanded investigation will look into allegations by a third kavanaugh accuser, julie swetnick, who said she observed kavanaugh at high school parties in the 1980's joining efforts to inebriate girls so they could be gang raped. recently resurfaced 1983 yearbooks from georgetown prep show students bragging about the use of "killer q's" during beach week -- a possible reference to quaaludes, the sedative bill cosby used to drug women in order to rape them. amy: now a group of alumni from brett kavanaugh's all-male school high school has issued a call for fellow graduates to come forward if they have information about any sexual assaults possibly committed by the supreme court nominee, saying in a petition -- "please do not remain silent, even if speaking out comes at some personal cost." in a minute, we will be joined by one of those alumni, but first i want to turn to comments of judge kavanaugh made about georgetown prep. he was speaking at catholic university's columbus school of law in 2015. >> fortunately, we had a good saying that we of held firm to to this day as the dean

ms. ramirez, and we'll see what the fbi finds. >> sean: is now been expanded out. the president said -- >> no, it's not. this is a request by the senate. nobody -- >> sean: swetnick>> no, nobody asked for that. not one democrat asked for that. the senators and questions do not feel that was necessary. it's an accusation that makes no sense. so let me go over it again. the doctor ford witnesses, mark judge, leland, and pj. mr. mraz. that is at. do it within a week. report back to the senate, and we'll move forward. >> sean: nbc news ran this interview. not only was one person -- the other person said they never heard of her. she literally changed the story. she was saying there they were systematically almost every weekend, those were her words -- >> i can take care of this in 30 seconds. what reasonable person would go to a party, witness drugging and women, gang raping of women and go back nine more times and never tell anybody. >> sean: she said tonight, i didn't see that he put the drugs in the punch but he was near the punch. why does nbc run this? >> nbc -- they have been a coconspirator in the destruction of kavanaugh from my point of view. there was an ano