Kavanaugh accuser's lawyer: There are multiple witnesses who should be included at hearing, doesn't say whether Ford will testify, Kavanaugh accuser's attorney: "The rush to a hearing is unnecessary", Kavanaugh accuser's attorney in new statement: Ford un

Automatic TRANSCRIPT

Support for out front comes from our friends at rocket mortgage by Quicken Loans who were excited to introduce their all new rate shield approval. If you're in the market to buy a home rate, shield approval is a real game changer. And here's why I quick and loans will lock your rate for up to ninety days while you shop. But here's the crucial part. If rates go up your rate stays the same. But if rates go down your rate also drops either way you win. It's the kind of thinking you'd expect from America's largest mortgage lender to get started. Go to rocketmortgage dot com. Slash out front podcast. People went up. It is left co and sins, and you know our NFL podcast. Simpson left go, but now there's a show you gotta look at us to. Yes, it is going to be on the Biard app every Wednesday at eight. It's going to be fun. It's going to be crazy. Out front next breaking news, Christine Blasi Ford's attorney releases a new statement just moments ago calling for more witnesses in Monday's hearing this as Republicans say, she has until Friday morning to decide whether she will testify plus, should the FBI investigate Ford's allegation or is it not their job and Trump in the storm? Ravaged Carolina's passing out hot dogs and hugs. But was it his question about his golf club that could have been most revealing? Let's go out front. Good evening. I'm Jim Shudo in for Erin Burnett tonight and out front tonight. Breaking news, showdown, Christine Blasi for the woman who has accused bread Cavagnaud of sexual assault is in a standoff tonight with Republicans, Ford's attorney just releasing a statement slamming Republican efforts to hold a hearing on Monday saying it is quote, not fair or in good faith. Adding quote, the rush to a hearing is unnecessary and contrary to the committee, discovering the truth end quote. Her attorney also leveling new demand saying that more witnesses should be included in Monday's hearing, however, a spokesman for the Republicans on the judiciary committee tells me tonight that they have received no communications from Ford or her attorney about that request. For more witnesses comes just about an hour after Republican Senator Chuck Grassley in a letter to Democrats shut down the idea of delaying the hearing, giving Ford until Friday this Friday at ten o'clock in the morning to decide whether she is going to testify on Monday even Republican senators. Susan Collins who could be a key vote on Cavanaugh says the Ford must testify. I think it's fair to judge cabin on for her not to come forward and testify. Now, Ford's lawyers have also called for an FBI investigation into the incident before any public hearing and investigation that the president makes clear. He does not support. Well, it would seem that the f. b. i. really doesn't do that. They've investigated. They've investigated about six times before and it seems that they don't do that. Sunland Safadi is out front live on Capitol Hill tonight selling, really a stunning turn of events just in the last hour. That's right. Jim, a lot of fast moving developments really speaking to how fluid this situation is even at this late hour. And I think it all boils down to the fact that both sides here are really digging in further. We heard from chairman of the Senate Judiciary committee Chuck Grassley, and he's firmly rejecting calls to delay. Monday's hearing he's firmly rejecting calls for an FBI investigation to happen before the accuser. Dr Ford shows up at that hearing potentially. He's saying, essentially, today we are pushing forward on this. He sent a letter to the Democrats on the committee that impart makes all this crystal clear saying it would be a disservice to Dr four judge Cavanaugh this committee and the American people to delay this hearing any further. And Grassley says that he has made many options. Put on the table for her to potentially testify a public, hearing a private hearing here on Capitol Hill with stuff over at her home in California. He also says in this letter that he has offered to fly staff to California or anywhere else to meet her to get her testimony. But then we are seeing her sides really digging as well in response to this letter. You noted that statement coming out from her attorneys today, essentially saying that this process is still being Russia and really blasting the committee questioning whether they're in good faith. Going about this, realizing that they believe more witnesses should be called, not just the two of them the he said, she said showdown that would've could potentially turn out to be on Monday. So all of this boils down through there is a new deadline on the table. Jim Grassley set ten AM Friday for her to make her decision. No. Will she show up or not? The next question is what next step is after that, if she doesn't show up, does the committee hearing still go on? Does vote. Essentially happen all of those still open question tonight. Big question Sunlen Safadi. Thanks very much up front. Now, David Gergen he's former presidential adviser to four presidents Laura codes, former federal prosecutor, and Greg Browder. He's former assistant director for the office of congressional affairs at the FBI David. If I could begin with you. So Christine Blasi Ford's attorney with this new statement just in the last few minutes in effect, making a new demand regarding Mondays or request we should. We should call it for more witnesses to appear at Monday's hearing. Is that a fair request? I think it'll be seen in the context of history. I'm frankly rather puzzled by the arguments have been made by the White House and by the Republicans that the FBI were those want to do. This doesn't do this sort of thing by the way would take a long long time and take us through the summer and so forth. And and there there shouldn't be any with us in nineteen Ninety-one. When Anita hill came forward with her allegations against Clarence Thomas, the allegations were sent to the White House. And the White House of George president. George H W Bush a Republican call toll directed the FBI to do a background investigation. The FBI Dan did background investigation. It took three days three days and Anita hill was allowed to have some witnesses not enough. She had a big argument about not enough. So the president all runs the other way, fairness under president. George H W Bush was to do a background, get all the facts on the table and doing so it. It just seems strange. That was nine hundred ninety. One. It was almost almost two decades ago, twenty seven years and look how far we've come with women's rights in our interesting of women's rights in San. And now we're going to give less due process to to Dr four. Then we gave to Anita hill less process. And I just sort of stunning to me Laura, as you watch this experienced prosecutor yourself, what do you see pushing this? You see the political calendar pushing this refers to when the supreme court sits again, a lot of key decisions there. And of course you have midterm elections coming up with the outcome in the Senate, uncertain. Those two points are exactly what's driving this. It's certainly not as empathy or as a fact-finding mission on behalf of the Senate Judiciary committee. It is the looming deadline at the Tober I or arguments knowing that there are supreme court cases on the docket right now that if you do not have judge Cavanaugh on the bench to shift that conservative ideology to be in the majority that liberal decisions as our so called called will actually remain. It'll be every day he's not on the court is said to be victory against those who are counting. Against conservative revolutions on the court number one number two, yes. The midterms are a factor, and this reminds people painstakingly that although there are many lawyers who sit on the Senate Judiciary committee, it is not a court of law. Their our mission is not to be a fact finding body as evidenced by the fact that they think they can fast-track Justice. Listen, if this were something as trivial, perhaps as Justice cavenaugh often used the letter c. to spell his name as opposed to a k. they would order a supplemental background to figure out the bankruptcy proceedings or eightman happened, or criminal history arrest warrants, or do you think that we're every issue they would cross there is in dot, they're t- if this was an issue of somebody alleging homicide for God forbid, they would also dot their is and cross their TS. The fact that a sexual assault allegation does not find itself on that spectrum tells you that the motivation could not possibly be about truth binding. It's more about fast track. Of course, with the FBI and you work closely with congress in your role at at at the FBI in it. The president has said again today, Chuck Grassley said, other Republicans that this is not the FBI's job to investigate this this. This is the committee's job to investigate it, and they say they're making a good faith effort to do that by inviting her to testify under oath before the committee, David Gergen sites precedent from nineteen Ninety-one. We're president George H W Bush ordered the FBI to look into the hills allegations. What is your view of the law here? Does the FBI should the FBI be investigating? Should the president order the FBI to investigate? Well, the process would include the ability on the part of the president to direct the FBI to reopen the background investigation and run down this new lead and interview any witnesses that might be relevant. The this typically happens as as David pointed out when this has happened in the past it, it, it typically. Before the nomination is formally announced. It hasn't always worked that way. But typically the idea is to get all of this investigative work as part of the background investigation done before the nomination is actually made public. But the president in this case could direct the FBI to do more work. I think that the Republicans and the Democrats on the Senate Judiciary committee need to understand that it may also be better in this circumstance to have committee staff do whatever additional fact finding the committee deems necessary. But I think I think two things are reported. The Republicans need to be careful to to not appear to be rushing this despite this new evidence and the Democrats need to be careful to not appear to be delaying it just for the sake of delaying it. There has to be some accommodation between the two sides on that point. David, if I could ask you, we have the accuser here, Christine Blasi Ford. She's under enormous pressure as a woman coming out clearly had no desire understandably to to come out in public with with with with her account of a pain. Experience. So that's understandable. She received death threats. We understand what he's had to leave her home because of those death threats that this is this is to say the least a difficult time for her that said. Is there an argument here where she should take this opportunity to speak under oath because she has made an allegation against Brett Cavagnaud that is and could be enormously damaging? Does she have some responsibility to whether it's in public or in private or whether she sits down, for instance, with Chuck Grassley staff as he sends them out to California. Well, listen, I think we should start with the proposition. This has been a very difficult time for her. She's been very brave, but it's also been a very difficult time for judge Cavanaugh and both need to be treated fairly, go through this. And I think the Republicans have a point. It would have been a lot better to Bill with this turning the airings us all to go public lay earlier, but we are what we are. And the question is how to handle this fairly and I, I must tell you it's, it's not an easy call, but I do think that she should come and testify under protest and lay out the case why it's unfair to ask for some more time and then lay on her her views. They're an awful lot of women, this country who who were pulling for her, and I think she has some. She's taken on some responsibilities as citizen to fellow women to make the best case you can for why she by this being railroaded through why was inappropriate at this wasn't fair. Why. She did what she did. She could be very sympathetic witness. And frankly, I think judge Cavanaugh it's in his interest to do a background, so it removes any cloud over his head. I personally believe judge Cavanaugh to ask for FBI background, check if he feels like he's done nothing wrong, what's the harm opportunity to clear his absolute Laura? Let me let me ask you to in on that in your view at it again. No one can make this decision, but for it frankly. Right? And and that it is, it is hurt decision ultimately. But in your view. Should she take this opportunity? I think she should. And here's why the idea that the metoo movement or the idea that we've come so far from twenty seven years ago about public shaming those who allege sexual assault, which also includes men by the way who have had that unfortunate circumstance from impressed upon them as well. You know the idea that you are are battling against its presumption of incredibily that people assume that you're telling a falsehood simply by virtue of the fact of your gender or that it sue in uncomfortable or inconvenient to make the claim. I think it is Covent upon people to follow through with this. Her evacuation sedan straight that there in fact, is some foundation to be believed. Not that you can believe that the person you're accusing guilty. But if you're going to have presumption of innocence in this country but also requires there's a presumption that you will believe credible witnesses or at least the opportunity to do so. And so I would implore her to do so not just because I'm. I'm fascinated or because I'm nosy. I wanna have some salacious event unfold on Monday, but because as a former prosecutor, I can tell you, I routinely had to confront women and men who sexual assault who had no interest in coming forward because they knew what was the head of them. They knew about the Boehner abilities and the tag, mystic attitude, defense counsel and yet, and still they had a responsibility and civic duty and a subpoena as well. That said we have to protect the next person. And in many ways, somebody looking for a lifetime appointment is I, it's incumbent upon them to allow their entire life to be valuated including this point that she can gave that elimination, please do so. The president has implied not only that it's not the FBI's job to look into this allegation, but almost that the FBI is not interested in looking into the allegation. You served a lot of time with the FBI. Do you think if asked the FBI would would step into the breaches it were and and do this? I do. I don't think the FBI would hesitate if directed by the White House to reopen its background investigation and do additional work. The FBI would absolutely do that. But I think just to emphasize Laura's point, I think that Dr Ford, having put this allegation out there does need to go on the record and explain why she thinks this is relevant to the confirmation of judge cabin. And then fundamental fairness would dictate the judge Cavanaugh be given an opportunity on the record to respond to that. But I, I think that this without that full airing of this allegation and any response to the allegation, the committee just isn't getting all of the information that it needs to make a decision. Listen, thanks to all the. It's tough issue. It's tough issue. Got knows for those involved personally, we appreciate you sharing your thoughts tonight out front next Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein is defending herself against criticism from both parties. Why did she wait so long before telling the FBI about Ford's allegation plus new people from Christine, Blasi Ford's past are coming out, what are they saying about her credibility and Trump hits the ground in the Carolinas ahead? The high and low moments as he meets with Florence survivors. Support for out front comes from our friends at rocket mortgage by Quicken Loans. Let's talk about buying a home for a minute because of rising interest rates. There's a lot of unpredictability when it comes to buying a home these days, it's causing a lot of anxiety with folks. Well, our friends at Quicken Loans are doing something about that. They're calling it, the power buying process. Here's how it works. Quicken Loans will verify your income assets and credit in less than twenty four hours to give you a verified approval. This gives you the strength of a cash buyer. Then once you're verified, you qualify for their all new exclusive rate shield approval. I, they'll lock your rate for up to ninety days while you shop. Now, here's the best part. If rates go up your rate stays the same. But if rates go down, you'll rate also drops either way you win. It's the kind of thinking you'd expect from America's largest mortgage lender to get started. Go to rocketmortgage dot com. Slash out front rate shield approval only valid on certain thirty year purchase transactions. Additional conditions or exclusions may apply based on Quicken Loans, data in comparison to public data records equal housing lender licensed in all fifty states and MLS consumeraccess dot org. Number thirty thirty. Breaking news tonight. Christine Blasi Ford's lawyer within the last hour releasing a statement, saying, quote, the rush to a hearing is unnecessary and contrary to the committee, discovering the truth and quote this as the committee's chairman, Chuck Grassley is digging in saying that Ford needs to confirm by this Friday at ten o'clock in the morning, whether or not she is going to testify that is whether in public or in private out front. Now EMMY Kramer she is co, founder and co chair of women for Trump and Robby Mook. He's former Hillary Clinton campaign manager. Thanks to both of you for joining tonight. Robbie, if I could begin with you here. Ford has an opportunity to testify under oath. Granted on that day on Monday at first, her lawyer said she will testify in public then said she's not ready to testify. Now, tonight you have a new demand in fact that listen beyond an FBI investigation. More witnesses should be heard on Monday. I, I wonder from your view, are Democrats losing control of this situation to some degree. Well, I, this really shouldn't be about Democrats or Republicans. It should be about the truth and what Dr blazey is asking for here is as David Gergen just mentioned. This is exactly what need a hill got in her hearing. There were other witnesses called the FBI did do an investigation and three days. And I think a lot of people today would feel that that case was was handled improperly that she wasn't given enough and that the that Haracic stations weren't hurt out enough. So I think it is only fair for her to ask for the same thing here. And frankly, I don't understand if I were a Republican Senator or any Senator entrusted with choosing someone for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. I don't understand why wouldn't want the FBI to spend what seventy two hours just trying to lay out the facts in this case before speaking to her. I I don't understand why somebody wouldn't want that. I, it me t to rob his point. Why the rush here? Why not? Let. The FBI investigate, for instance, as they did with Anita Hill's case some twenty seven years ago ordered then by Republican president, President Bush, and that at that point only took three days, right? Why not allow that extra vetting? Hugh? So let's deal on facts. First of all, the FBI this is not their jurisdiction. It should go to the local authorities there in Maryland wherever this happened. Number one, the second with an it is true. Robbie, second of all, the Neto injustice, Justice, Thomas, please let me finish second of all with the Anita hill acusations. Those didn't happen thirty five years ago. It was in a much shorter time period. So that is a big difference. The FBI. So they go do an investigation. I think Chuck Grassley said that an FBI investigation is not going to help recall her memory or change her memory. What they want to hear from her is her memory and what she has to say that the FBI. Has done six investigations on Brett cavenaugh and I just heard David Gergen talk about. She should come forward. She could be sympathetic witness. Let me tell you something. It's not about being sympathetic witness. It's about getting to the truth and facts. And the bottom line is we're never going to prove or disprove it. It's he said, she said, so why delay this any further? It is clear as day that the Democrats are trying to gin up the hysteria machine and order to delay this this confirmation so that they can delay delay it through the midterms and then appointed supreme court, Justice, twenty. That their objective responded to on the facts of. The issue of testifying now the FBI investigating and so on that not being necessary in effect. Tell me your response. I'm sorry that it's not necessary for her to testify at all or that it's just. I'm just giving you a chance to respond to Amy. Oh, oh, well, my pleasure. I mean, look, let's Amy opened up saying, let's talk about facts. I do wanna talk about facts when Anita hill brought charges against Clarence Thomas, a Republican president ordered the FBI to investigate. It is absolutely the FBI's role to investigate nominees for something like this, and I just want to reiterate something. This is a lifetime appointment to the highest court in our land. This man will we making life and death decisions and Republicans are turn a rush by a matter of days to jam him through simply because they don't want the truth to come out. And again, I don't understand why Republican Senator no hold on a sec. Hold on a sec. You said that it's he said, she said, and that's exactly all we're going to have if we don't allow the FBI to investigate, let's let law enforcement professionals lay out a clean explanation of all the facts and then absolute. Both sides should testify and we should hear from them. And by the way we should hear from other witnesses. I just don't understand why these Republicans can't do their job. Their job is to vet these people in these guys just want to jam this. Let me ask you because I want to get it into different way if I can. Couldn't you make an argument that it is fair to Brit Cavagnaud to have a full investigation, right? Because you have this alarming allegation out there. Would it not also offer him an opportunity to potentially clear his name to have the FBI chase down the leads talk to other witnesses. I mean, I personally have no problem with it. I think that that Chuck Grassley should if FBI wants to do it, go do it. We'll have the hearing on Monday. She doesn't want to testify that's up to her, and then they'll call the vote afterwards. That's exactly what they should do. But if I were Brett Cavanaugh, I would want it done because I would want to clear my name and if it's not factual, if this did not happen, I'd sue for defamation. That's. That's progress there. We, we agree that would add some value route. Robert. Let me ask you this though because now Ford has been offered an opportunity to make this allegation provide details under oath. Listen, I want to acknowledge as we did in the previous segment that she's under enormous pressure. Now, she's had to leave her house. She's under death threats. She's got children. None of us can identify with that. So we have to factor that into this timeline, but, but just on the point of testifying, whether in public or in private, should she not take that opportunity. I think that she should testify and I want to underscore where you just said, I cannot imagine what she is dealing with right now and the kind of bravery this is requiring. This was, you know, this was put on her and she has stepped up to the situation. But I also think that it is fair for her and for the process for her to insist that we follow protocol and I and I have to say, and it's sad that I that any of us have to say this. She cannot trust these Republican senators to do what's right, and they are trying to set so they can campaign manager. So. The final chance to. Joe, I don't think I don't think that's at all relevant here is, you know, they are trying to set this up so that they can bully her, and I think it is perfectly within her rights to ask that this is done the way it was over twenty years ago by Republican president to his nominee the same way we are now with Trump and a process by the way that's been criticized since that time as unfair. I think that's the least that we can do. And by the way, I think it's the least we can ask of our United States. Senators whose job is to put honest good people in this lifetime point. So so. Would would that twenty-seven years ago, would that not show lack of progress? If if that chance wasn't afforded here to the days, I said she has been given every opportunity. Chuck Grassley has said they'll fly to California. They'll do it behind closed doors, whatever she wants. They want to hear from her. She can't even answer the Email. The Terni is putting out public statements, but they will answer Chuck Grassley in the Senate Judiciary committee. This is a PR studt the the democrat firm s. k. d. knickerbockers involved in it. I mean, I was born in the morning, but not this morning and we all know what's going on here. You're trying to de rail a confirmation and the Republicans. Thank goodness are not buying it anymore. I think you call what she's doing. Publicity stunt is really sad and says a lot about this administration. I mean, Robbie, we're going to have to leave it there. It's a tough one. We're gonna. We're gonna keep. We're gonna. Keep on this story out front next questions about Christine. Blasi Ford's credibility are front and center, but what people from Ford's past are saying about her tonight and Trump says, quote, I don't have an attorney general. What does the president's endgame. Are you drowning in credit card debt? Now you can have a large portion of your credit card debt forgiven. Get relief today wants to give you free information that shows you how it's a secret. Credit card companies. Don't want you to know about thousands of people have used this program to have millions of dollars in credit card debt medical bills and department store debt, white clean, get relief today. We'll give you the secret to this money saving program. Absolutely. Free. Get relief today provides excellent service proven by their four star rating from the trust pilot call for your free debt forgiveness information. Now eight hundred two zero three zero zero one. Eight. That's eight hundred two zero three zero zero one eight eight hundred. Two zero three zero zero one. Eight. The breaking news in a new statement, a lawyer for cavenaugh accuser, Christine Blasi. Ford is reiterating the danger that her client is in saying, quote, she is currently unable to go home and is receiving ongoing threats to her and her family's safety. This is more people are coming to Ford's defense. The time spoke to several people who have known for professionally and personally for years. One professor who's known Ford for fourteen years telling the times quote, I know her to be an honorable, honest, straightforward, decent person. I can't conceive of doing this for any other reason than she is honestly reporting what she's experienced out front now is Maya loud. She was one of the reporters who wrote this story here. My my understanding is spoke with several people who know Christine, blowzy four, they know her well, they've known for a number of years. What does the common thread that you've heard from that. They held her in very high regard. They have a lot of respect for her. I spoke to chew Stanford professors, both of whom have worked with her for over ten years, have written scholarly papers with her have taught grad students with her. Both of them said that she is very well liked by students. She's lovely to work with. She's professional. She has a lot of integrity and a lot of her work centers on statistics and in analyzing massive amounts of data and interrogating it and saying, can we really say this about the data? Is this data really saying this? And that that kind of work requires a level of integrity and the they. They really feel that she has that for transparency for viewers. How did you find these people were their names provided to you? Did you track them down yourself? They're definitely not provided to us. We did a lot of old fashioned shoe, leather reporting. I knocked on a lot of doors made a lot of calls set in my colleagues and we, we reach out to a lot of people. That's what reporters do allow. Thanks very much for sharing what you found out front. Now, Paul Callan, Wendy Murphy, both Murphy both former prosecutors, Paul, I, if I could begin with you, a lot of people have come to Ford's defense as you hear and again, you're, you're watching this from afar. You have no personal knowledge of what happened here. But as an experienced prosecutor, do find her allegation credible. Well, I've worked as a prosecutor and a defense attorney, and I've tried cases where people have been acquitted for this sort of charge. And when I look at this case, first of all, it's thirty six years old. I mean, we're reaching back to high school to try to resurrect this claim against judge Cavanaugh and it's almost impossible to prove a case of that age and what prosecutors look at. They look at to see if there was a fresh complaint made about the alleged rape or attempted rape at the time of the incident. And of course there was none may. Made for at least another twenty years. Just think about the Cosby kiss for minute that's dominated American coverage of the courts. This case is twenty years older than the criminal case he was tried on. So if you were trying this case, it would be one of the oldest rape cases in America, very difficult to prove to a jury, Wendy experienced prosecutor as well. There's been some criticism from Republicans who say, well, she can't remember some of the key details here exact date exact location that said, she does share vivid details of the experience itself. In your experience, what does that tell you? Well, it tells me she was traumatized, you know, I can't remember where I was in anybody's particular house thirty five years ago, but I suspect that if I had been sexually assaulted, I remember lots of things about the sexual assault. I might not remember the details that weren't related to the trauma, but I would remember the trauma and I have to disagree with Paul about whether this case is weak because it's old, how many of the Catholic church abuse cases that were very successful, highly credible and the church spent billions of dollars settling them. Have we heard about in the past ten years with no other evidence, but for the credible word of an adult who describes something that happened many, many years earlier often as a child. Here's why I think she's credible. And I think this is such objectively clear proof of her credibility that I think it's going to be a hard hard time for the Republicans to disprove at least the issue of whether she's motivated to lie based on. Politics, and I think that's the strongest point. And it's this if she's motivated to lie for political reasons. And she just came up with this cockamamie story because she wants to hurt judge Cavanaugh, which I suppose is possible. But why in God's name would she have named his friend as the eyewitness knowing damn well, that he would be coming forward saying, she's wrong. I never saw. She's lying. I'm on his side. He's the best thing since lice bread. So as a prosecutor, when I think about the evidence that it is absolutely not an easy case, one way or the other, they're both respectable. They're both highly educated. They come with lots of character witnesses on their sides. That's not the issue. The issue. I just want to win. Say. I just wanted to talk about. Good. What what I'm trying to emphasize here is that you look for small things like if she's lying, would she have named his friend as the key eyewitness knowing that would hurt her credibility? And the answer is, no, that's why I think she's to let me just. To address? Why would she name him name smart judge as being in the room. When this occurred with Mark judge happens to be a blackout. Somebody who's admitted to being a blackout drunk. He's written books about it. So if you were going to pick somebody to put in the room. You couldn't pick a better person than somebody who was completely drunk and. Unable really to contradict her version of events. The other thing to remember is she if she's saying that Cavanaugh was really trying to rape her and she managed to escape from the room, she goes into the bathroom and a rapist would've pursued her. But these two young men went downstairs according to her testimony and remained in the house. She then left the house self reported it to her parents. So, and this is ninety six years ago. So you're telling me. Tell you why don't talk politics though, since one of the one of the reasons, one of the other reasons she's credible is because she didn't overstate what happened. If you're trying to derailed, judge Kavanagh's nomination, you don't say he jumped on me and grabbed at my clothes. You say he grabbed my breast, he put his hands down my pants. She didn't do that for something. Horrific means there's no, no Paul, it suggests that Paul, it suggests that she's credible because she's not over doing it. And of course she didn't have to name Mark judge at all. If this was a lie, she could've just said Brett Cavanaugh was there and me, and that's it. The fact that she added Mark judge to the story is why she's credible because it makes no sense for someone who's lying to include stories book and what he says. Could it there, but thanks to both of you, Wendy. Thank you. Paul for sharing your spirits on this out front next President Trump with his most vicious attack yet on Jeff Sessions. So why does it he just fire him and Trump meets with hurricane survivors. It's been a tough role for him at times in the past, how did he do today? My name is Paul Shirley, and I've gone on a lot of dates. I've noticed something on these dates. I often find myself telling the same stories stories about my mother teaching sex Ed stories about playing college basketball stories about playing NBA basketball and almost dying in the process. We all do this. We tell stories on dates because dates or when we get to explain where we've been and what we've seen in why we think like we do my name is Paul Shirley, and I hope you'll check out my new narrative podcast stories I tell on dates, you can subscribe for free on apple podcasts or wherever you find your favorite shows. President Trump with his toughest attack yet on attorney general Jeff Sessions Trump in an interview released earlier today, saying, quote, I don't have an attorney general the president who has long denounced sessions for recusing himself from the Russian investigation added that his anger was about more than just the recusals saying, quote, I'm not happy at the border. I'm not happy with numerous things, not just this democratic congressman, Ted lieu of California joins me. Now he sits on the House Judiciary committee, congressman, thanks very much for taking the time. Thank you, Jim, as listed. This is not the first criticism leveled at the attorney general Jeff Sessions from President Trump, but this was particularly pointed. I have no attorney general do see the president here, laying the groundwork to fire Jeff Sessions after the midterms or trying to force them out for him to resign. Thank you for your question on the judiciary committee, we have oversight over the apartment of Justice, and it's clear that Jeff Sessions is aligned with the Trump administration on basically every issue except the Russia investigation. So Donald Trump would have fired Jeff Sessions that would be obstruction of Justice because he wants to put someone in who will interfere with special counsel molar or potentially fire him. That's similar to what Richard Nixon did with the Saturday night massacre where you fire numerous department Justice officials to get at the special counsel. I hope Donald Trump doesn't do that. You believe you, you don't want him to fire sessions and you don't believe session should resign. That is correct. I believe the special counsels integrity and interference from punchy different person will be put in would be worse than have Jeff Sessions would resign or be fired. Well, let me ask you this because I, I wanna see how you wreck you reconcile this because you you have. We've noted before you've been critical of sessions in the past saying that he should go have a listen. I don't even know why he is still Torney general. He'd lie before congress order to get confirmed. That's perjury charge. He also lied on his security clearance forms about his Russian meetings. Those are false official statements. He should've resigned months ago. Why we so certain Dan. And why do you feel differently now. I was wrong. Jim. I have seen their increasing evidence of collusion regarding not just Trump associates, but also those people potentially higher up in the White House, including perhaps the president. And I have now come to a conclusion that preserving the independence of the special counsel is more important than Jeff Sessions, resigning fair. We give everybody a chance to to to change their positions. I, I wonder if I could move on to another topic. Of course, one that we've been discussing in great detail the sexual assault allegation against the supreme court nominee. Brett cabinet is accuser, Christine, Blasi Ford. She just released a statement tonight saying, she described it this way. There are multiple witnesses whose names have appeared publicly and should be included in any proceeding. The rush to a hearing is unnecessary and contrary to the committee discovering the truth. Now she has been offered this chance to speak. She's asking here for other witnesses to testify there. Is it fair to say that she's moving the goalposts on. On this opportunity to speak this testimony on Monday or the at least the offer to give testimony on Monday. No, it's actually the Republicans who are breaking were precedent during the Nita hill hearings. They had FBI investigation. It took less than a week. In fact, the president could order an FBI investigation today, they'll be done likely by the end of this week and Anita hill head other witnesses as well. So I think Republicans simply follow precedent and not rush through what would be a lifetime appointment. There's nothing magical about this coming Monday. There's nothing that says they have to have a vote on that day. Fair point. Do you believe that the criticism that the that Senate, the ranking democrat on the on the judiciary committee, Dianne Feinstein that she had word of this allegation for a number of weeks. Now, she has said that that Ford did not want her name out there did not want it released to the public, but they're even some Democrats is said that Feinstein could have shared this anonymously with other members of the committee could have gone to the FBI earlier than she did last week when the name leaked out. Do you think that that Chris. System is fair. Not at all. I think Senator Feinstein did the right thing by preserving the confidentiality and the wishes of Dr Ford. I don't think people should be judging Senator Feinstein unless they were in that exact same position. That's a very difficult situation for Senator Feinstein to have handled. I think she handled it well, congressman, Ted lieu. Thank you for joining us tonight. Thank you. Jim out for next President Trump touring the Carolinas in the wake of hurricane Florence. Come here. And Judy most on the giant typo flown around the world. Hey, it's Howard Beck, and I've got money mccutchen the NBA vice president of referee development and training on reports the full forty eight referee serve the game, our players, our coaches, and our franchises are the game. And that's a huge distinction that I referees understand and it's wonderful to serve this. This game is the best game ever been to my biased opinion. And I, we love serving the game. So check out the full forty eight. Now on the Bleacher report app, apple podcasts, and Spotify. New tonight. President Trump in a role that he's not always been at ease within the past. Comforting survivors of natural disaster Trump toured the hurricane devastated Carolina's today, handing out meals, pausing for word or a selfie at one point, even taking time out for presidential hug. Ceylan Collins out front at the White House and killing the president. Did his best to really connect with people today? Was there something going on behind the scenes that made him suppose you say, step up his game here as he went down to the Carolinas storms, like these are always a big test for presidents because they don't only test the competency of their administration, but also their empathy is well, and one little mishap can hang over there presidency forever and their legacy forever. Even after they've left the White House, you've seen that clearly George W Bush whose name is now synonymous with Hurricane Katrina. So certainly a big test. There's a lot on the line here when they're handling these storms, and they don't just have the human aspect of making sure everyone's okay and making sure people power and water. They also have a political aspect of course, worldly few short weeks away from the mid terms. And in Carolina, President Trump is hoping that governor McMaster wins his reelection bid. So a lot at stake here, of course, but especially for President Trump who was widely criticized. In the days leading up to the storm for how he handled Puerto Rico. And we saw the president very sensitive to that criticism because he lashed out disputing the death toll saying that three thousand people did it die. Even though a pretty comprehensive study concluded that was how many people did as a result of hurricane, Maria when it hit Puerto Rico in devastated the area. So that's why so much on the line today. But by all means, President Trump critics will say he did have a successful day. He went through, he shook hands. As you said, he handed out meals and he really played that role of consoler cheap. Say the president has passed, had some cringe worthy moments, hard. Forget that image of him flipping those paper towels to survivors of hurricane Maria, Puerto Rico today, there was this moment. Norman, that area. How's that doing student? Good, but still I love that area just I can't tell you, but I love that. I can't tell you why, but I love that area. What was Trump referring to there? Yeah. Jimmy says he can't tell us why, but it may have something to do with eighteen hole golf course that bears his name and it sits on the shores of lake Norman there near Charlotte, North Carolina, the president checking in on that today, seeing how they fared. Of course, the president does has, we know has a high interest in his properties which he often visits normally golf course outside of Washington. His hotel and restaurant here as well as clubs in Bedminster New Jersey in Palm Beach, Florida. So certainly that making it an aspect that the president involved in his well while he was there touring that storm damage, Scotland as well. Kaelin Collins. Thanks very much next genie, most with proof that everybody needs a really good copy editor. Soccer fans are you? Tired of missing? Great UEFA games getting soul, crushing spoilers from friends, good news, reports, new Biard, live that helps you all UEFA champion and your openly gay funding because live should be live know what third-party sites, cramping, your style? Scouring the internet for updates. Now with Biard live super easy to get started. Download the app to be our dot. Live live over Edison in subscription purchase. Additional terms may apply. When it comes to spelling, some people just fly by the seat of their pants. Here's janey mose. This is one way for an airline doing crease its name recognition, misspell your own name, Cathay Pacific. The world is often tips. Page owes apparently didn't have an f. at their fingertips resulting in cafe Pacific, instead of Pacific cafe Pacific itself tweeted the mistake saying, oops, this special livery won't last long. She's going back to the shop, celebrating the new colors. Kathy Pacific Internet celebrated the mistake, welcome to the new cafe where we give no f- someone else inserted the f. with the notation fixed it. Well, yet another comment concluded if an airline is going to make a mistake, let it always be on the paint job. The Hong Kong based airline likes to explain who we are, your the ones whose painters need to go back to school as it's been misspelled in various school zone. Owns sure. There are bungled traffic signs and even tattoos else with too many es. And remember the time the Mitt Romney campaigns spelled. Ricco wrong. Tie pronouncing this Amir SIA, Marsha, wow, who is the genius? Probably not the same genius who turned into cafe Pacific someone tweeted, I guess no one gives a flying if these days genie CNN new. Thanks so much for joining us tonight on Jim shoe. AC three sixty starts right now. So many people around the world depend on CNN's quality reporting, and now they have an incredible online store with clothes gear and gadgets. Right now you can get fifteen percent off your purchase, just visit store dot, CNN dot com. And when you're checking out into the code CNN podcast, just one word and get a fifteen percent discount it stats simple that store dot CNN dot com.

Coming up next