tv Outnumbered Overtime With Harris Faulkner FOX News October 3, 2018 10:00am-11:00am PDT
for before moving into politics, sharks and snakes all my life. as you said, it's not much of a change, prepares you for all of it. we will be back at noon eastern tomorrow on the couch but for now, here is harris. >> harris: fox news alert, we are awaiting the white house press briefing, where we are expected to get fresh reaction to the growing political showdown over supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. we are going to be 30 now, i'm harris faulkner. today's white house briefing will be the very first since the kavanaugh-forward hearing. it calms as the fbi can be wrapping up its investigation into the president's supreme court pick as early as today. but attorneys for accuser christine blasey ford are demanding the fbi interview her before issuing its report. this as new questions are being raised about ford's testimony after an ex-boyfriend came forward to dispute some of the claims she made under oath for the senate judiciary panel.
meanwhile, president trump criticized dr. ford during a campaign rally last night, watc watch. >> how did you get home? i don't remember. how did you get there? i don't remember. how many years ago was it? i don't know. i don't know. i don't know. what neighborhood was it in? i don't know. where is the house? i don't know. upstairs, downstairs, where was it? i had one beer, that's the only thing i remember i remember. >> harris: john roberts is live in the briefing room where the action is set to begin at any moment. >> the briefing set for about 1h sanders will be here to answer questions about why the president went after christine blasey ford to the degree he did last night in mississippi. this is a very sensitive time as the fbi is out there interviewing people who were either involved in directly or
peripherally involved in this. and we do not know if the fbi is going to interview christine blasey ford or judge kavanaugh. they may simply rely on the hours upon hours of testimony they gave before the judiciary committee. clearly this is a very important issue for the president, he wants judge kavanaugh confirmed to the supreme court but he did seem to be outwardly mocking christine ford last night as he was making his case for kavanaugh, listen here. >> i don't know, but i had one beer, that's the only thing i remember. and a man's life is in tatters, a man's life is shattered. his wife is shattered, his daughters, who are beautiful and incredible young kids, they destroy people. they want to destroy people. these are really evil people. >> democrats came out on masse on masse today denouncing what the president said last night but what really matters here is the fact that two key swing
votes on the republican side, jeff flake of arizona and susan collins of maine were both very taken aback by what the president said last night. let's listen to their reaction here. >> there's no time and no place for remarks like that, to discuss something this sensitive at a political rally it's just not right. it's not right, it's kind of appalling. >> the president's comments were just plain wrong. >> here's why it is so important for the president to not take off senator flake, who he's never had a relationship with, senator collins, senator murkowski. the fate of judge kavanaugh risks in their hands and if they are not comfortable voting for him they may not. anything the president does to make them less comfortable likely would be a detriment to himself. we had that letter that came out
yesterday to the judiciary committee from this ex-boyfriend of christine blasey ford who said she never expressed any fear being in closed spaces, no hint of claustrophobia, and that she helped prepare her friend for possible polygraph test, that friend came out and said "i have never had christine blasey ford or anybody else prepare me or provide any other type of assistance whatsoever in connection with any polygraph exam i have taken at any time." there is so much he said, she said in this case, it's difficult to keep track of it all. >> harris: we are waiting for sarah sanders to have something to say and as that press briefing begins we will take everybody there live. john roberts with great information today, thank you. let's bring in republican congressman andy biggs of the house judiciary committee. as you know, because we've been together on breaking news a time or two here on the program, as this press briefing begins we
may toggle to that it will come back to you. let's start with how delicate a vote senator jeff flake has in this whole process and whether the president does or does not need to be careful in terms of getting a response from flake that might be negative. >> i think flake views himself as the fulcrum and he may indeed be the fulcrum vote here. so i think the president does need to be aware of that but i think he's also going to speak to defend judge kavanaugh. so i hope that senator flake will vote for judge kavanaugh based on the merits of judge kavanaugh and not what any outside person says. >> harris: you are bringing up a point i also wanted to ask about. i don't know how much susan collins or the other people reportedly on the fence like lisa murkowski in terms of their vote on the nominee are but how much they would really be paying attention to what's going on in the peripheral and not drilling down and waiting for that fbi
report. >> i hope they are waiting for the fbi report, we are seeing so much, as john roberts just reported. i read the letter that was out, the stories about it and all this other stuff. we need to see what the fbi says. that's what they said they wanted, the fbi is about ready to release their report to the committee and i hope that's why they are going to go but i think judge kavanaugh is an excellent selection and i hope that's what they are focusing on. is he going to be the kind of judge that we want sitting on the u.s. supreme court? >> harris: how do you feel about this idea of an fbi investigation? we may be learning things about both individuals here. >> you know, that's what was going to happen. judge kavanaugh has been through six of these before. this is just going to be expanding and i thought it would just be he said/she said but it looks like we are going to find out more about dr. ford then
perhaps they thought would come out. and when that comes out this will certainly be leaked to everybody in the world. i think we are going to see that things may not be quite as they seemed in testimony last week. >> harris: do you think we need to hear directly via the fbi from their investigation? >> well, certainly, if the fbi feels it's necessary then they need to press ahead. i'm not sure this is in their normal wheelhouse. this certainly isn't the normal way they would do an investigation for somebody that's going to be on the supreme court but if that's the way the fbi thinks they need to do it then by all means, they should do it and i think they will. >> harris: what is the tone on capitol hill among republicans, in terms of whether we might actually see a vote on kavanaugh by the end of the the week as h mcconnell has said could happen. >> i will just talk about my echo chamber, they want to see the vote, they think of what
will happen because senator mcconnell said it's going to happen. and i think it needs to happen sooner rather than later because all you are doing is adding smoke to this smoldering fire here. >> harris: thank you for sharing the notes inside the echo chamber. always great to see you, thank you. >> thanks, harris. >> harris: let's bring in the other side of the political aisle, david sicily any the house judiciary committee. i first just want to get you to respond to anything, i asked my team to make sure you could hear the first interview, respond to anything you might want to respond to from that interview and then i have questions. >> sure, i think we should take this very serious allegation seriously. the committee has -- the president has directed an fbi investigation on these claims and i think it's important to wait for that but i think the president's statements last night were despicable when you consider that more than 70% of
sexual assault crimes go unreported because victims are fearful for a variety of reasons. we ought to take this allegation very seriously, i think dr. ford was credible, her testimony, even the president described as credible after he heard it. democrats pushed for an fbi investigation so we could know what the facts are and that seems to be a modest and reasonable proposal and we hope the fbi has ability to do a full investigation to understand what really happened and i think we ought to await that. >> harris: what happens if we learn more details that conflict with an actual senate judiciary panel hearing testimony from dr. ford? for example, the fact that it's being reported now, she told the panel and the whole nation, when she said she didn't coach anybody or teach anybody how to beat a lie detector test. but now there are some things that are coming potentially out of this fbi investigation that -- and via this letter from this ex-boyfriend that that's exactly what she did do.
how does that color your vision of her and how we move forward? >> the reporting you just reported on, the statement from the individual who took that polygraph said that dr. ford never at any time kosher help her prepare. i think that's why the fbi investigation matters, those are interviews done where people are required to tell the truth or face criminal prosecution. that's why they should interview all witnesses that are necessary to complete the investigation. but a lot has been made about dr. ford's testimony and lack of corroboration. i remind your viewers that in a criminal case, truthful testimony of a victim if believed by a jury is sufficient to convict someone of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. if it's good enough to convict someone in a criminal trial, it surely is a good enough someone from going on the highest court in the land.
>> harris: this is not being seen through the prism of a courtroom, this is an impression chamber, a job interview. and it does matter if details match. i am showing you details that don't match. >> look, i think there's been a lot of reporting about testimony from judge kavanaugh that is inconsistent with what this report will find. let's wait for the fbi report. we should have a full investigation. >> harris: sarah sanders inside the white house, white house press briefing. let's watch. >> secretary sanders: to the small business administration, linda mcmahon is here to accept the check, i would like to bring her up to say a few words about the how how the funds will be used. >> thank you very much, this is awesome. i would like to thank the president for his generosity and his support of the small business administration, he clearly understands the value of small businesses, there are approximately 30 million of them
in this country and i'm very happy to be their advocate. this money will be used in our veterans program, we are going to establish a seven month and intensive training program, and adaptation of that program for our veterans helping them transition from military life into private sector if they desire to start their own jobs in their own companies and be entrepreneurs. once again, we think the president very much for this and it will be put to a very good use. thank you all very much. >> secretary sanders: thank you, administrator mcmahon. i'd like to bring up john bolton to discuss the withdrawal from the optional protocol to the vienna convention on diplomatic relations. he will take some questions after some remarks and i will be up to take questions. >> thank you, sarah.
secretary of state pompeo made a very important announcement regarding the president's decision to terminate the 1955 treaty of amity. the treaty made a mockery of what that support for terrorism, and maligned behavior throughout the middle east. today's decision by the international court of justice was a defeat for iran. we are disappointed that the icj failed to recognize that it has no jurisdiction to issue any order with respect to sanctions of the united states imposes, protect its own essential security under the treaty. instead, the court allowed iran to use it as a form for propaganda. the iranian regime has systematically pursuit policy of hostility towards the united states that defames the central premise of the treaty of amity. the regime cannot practice
animosity in its conduct and ask for it and amity under international law. in addition to the treaty of amity i am announcing that the president has decided that the united states will withdraw from the optional protocol and dispute resolution to the vienna convention on diplomatic relations. this is in connection with the case from the so-called state of palestine, naming the united states as a defendant. i'd like to stress that the united states remains a party to the underlying vienna convention on diplomatic relations and we expect all of the parties to abide by their international obligations under the convention. our actions today are consistent with the decisions president reagan made in the 1980s in the wake of the politicized suits against the united states by nicaragua to terminate our acceptance of the optional compulsory jurisdiction of the international court of justice under article 362 of the icj
statute and his decision to withdraw from a bilateral treaty with nicaragua. it's also consistent with the decision president bush made in 2005 to withdraw from the optional protocol to the vienna convention following the icj's interference in our domestic criminal justice system. our actions today deal with the treaties in current litigation involving the united states before the international court of justice. given this history and iran's abuse of the icj, we will commence a review of all international agreements that may still expose the united states to purported binding jurisdiction dispute resolution in the international court of justice. the united states will not sit idly by as faceless, politicized claims are brought against us. that concludes the statement i'd be happy to try and answer a few
questions. >> i wanted to get your reaction and i wanted to ask you, if i may, mr. ambassador, about north korea, the announcement that the secretary seems to be traveling to >> harris: pyongyang. do you trust kim jong un, do you personally trust kim jong un? >> we want to emphasize the steps that the president authorized in connection with those treaties. iran is a rogue regime, it has been a threat throughout the middle east, not only for its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs but it's acted for a deck decades as the central bank for international terrorism and its hostile and aggressive military behavior in the region today is in breach of international peace and security. so i don't take what they say
seriously at all. >> reporter: are there any practical steps for around? and second, were you at all concerned about the message it to to the people i ran by canceling the treaty? >> our dispute is with the ayatollah who have taken the iran to being a rogue state. our dispute has never been with the people of iran, we wish they had the ability to control their own government. >> i'm trying to figure out, the open path for potential talks that you still have with iran and the palestinians.
>> this really has less to do with iran and the palestinians they on the continued consistent policy of the united states to reject the jurisdiction of the international court of justice, which we think is politicized and ineffective and relates in part on our views to the international criminal court and the nature of purported international courts to bind the united states. it's closing doors that shouldn't be open to politicized abuse which is what we've consistently seen. >> as you know, yesterday, the french government announced the iranian government for a terror plot in paris. the national council of iranian resistance, was that of a factor in any of the decisions you've
made? >> no, these decisions were made before we were aware of the french decision but i have to say, with the french have done is exactly the right thing. they arrested and other european governments arrested accredited iranian diplomats for conspiracy to conduct this attempt at assault on the rally in paris. that tells you i think everything you need to know about how the government of iran views its responsibilities in connection with diplomatic relations. i hope it's a wake-up call across europe to the nature of the regime and the threat they pose. >> i these actions ramping up tensions and what is our intelligence going to come to their system, the nuclear weapons, et cetera at this moment? >> i'm not going to get into
what our intelligence states but the issue is protecting the united states against the politicized use of these international institutions. i've said, this goes back now close to over 30 years, really, in connection with u.s. policy and rejecting jurisdiction of these courts and it's a continuation in the interest of the american people. >> any kind of attempt to try to come together on what was, prior to work with them. >> they are bringing a lawsuit against us and it has nothing to do with a diplomatic effort to resolve our differences. it was the politicized use of the court that exacerbated the difference. >> [inaudible] >> our policy is not regime
change but we expect substantial change in our behavior which is where the president has directed all of us in the government to come up with steps to reimpose the economic sanctions and do whatever else is necessary to ensure we bring maximum pressure on the regime to stop this maligned behavior. not just in the nuclear field but across the board. >> doesn't make the united states ever to try to force iran to bend or dismantle its nuclear program, how much level did you have? >> i don't think iran is dismantling its nuclear program. recent reports indicate it's increasing its activity. i think we are going to apply the maximum amount of leverage we can, working with our european partners, the british,
the french, the germans, they've chosen to remain in the iran nuclear deal. it's like a book that was written several decades ago. it's something like the six stages of grief, you have denial and anger, eventually you get to acceptance and i think that's the direction the europeans are going in. european companies in droves don't want to be caught up in the pressure campaign we are applying. >> you just addressed palestine and said it -- is that language productive? >> it's accurate, it is not a state. >> the president in new york city, as you know, recommitted his goal to achieving solution. is using that sort of language productive in his goals?
>> of course, it's not a state now. it does not meet the customary international test of statehood, it does not control defined boundaries. for a whole host of reasons why it's not a state, it could become a state as the president said but that requires diplomatic negotiations with israel and others. calling at the so-called state of palestine defines exactly what it has been, a position in the united states government has pursued uniformly since 1988 when the palestinian authority declared itself to be the state of palestine. we don't recognize it as the state of palestine, we have consistently opposed the admission of palestine to the united nations as a state because it's not a state. >> the iaea is not taking at
face value claims that iran is harboring a secret warehouse. do you agree with the israeli prime minister that there should be an expression and what's your reaction? >> i haven't seen those comments, i will say our intelligence community has been reviewing the material that israel expected from iran and going over it in quite some detail, and we've been very supportive of the israeli effort and supportive of the iaea taking new steps to follow up on it. the senate just confirmed a few days ago, jackie walcott who will be taking up her new position as u.s. ambassadors to the u.n. agency in vienna, specifically the international atomic energy agency, she will be on the job shortly making our case there.
>> when the president came out in support of a two state solution at the u.n. last week, he's confident israel would maintain security control under any white house plan. are you open to no security presence from israel at the borders? >> we've been working as you well know on peace plan involving israel and the palestinians. we will be rolling it out in due course when we decide it's the most appropriate time to do it and i'm sure that will answer your question. i am sorry. i actually did try to recognize this gentleman, i guess i didn't point accurately enough, my apologies. >> former secretary of state john kerry said he is not met with the iranian since the ul pulled out of the deal but he has met on them on several occasions, do you think he was violating the logan act for doing so?
>> secretary pompeo address that previously and i will stick with his remarks. thank you very much. >> secretary sanders: thank you, ambassador bolton. fema in coordination with the federal communications commission will conduct a nationwide integrated public alert and warning system test of the emergency alert system and the wireless emergency alert later today. this will take place in two parts. this is the first nationwide test in the fourth for the eas. the overall test will assess the operational readiness of the infrastructure for distribution of a national message to determine whether technological improvements are needed. looking ahead to monday, president trump will travel to orlando, florida, to address the international association of chiefs of police, as the largest gathering of police leaders.
the president will speak about the administration protecting american communities by supporting local law enforcement and securing the border. senator schumer declares democrats would oppose this nomination with a vending they had. before a single document was produced, a single meeting with a senator or a hearing was ever scheduled, chuck schumer and the senate democrats telegraphed a strategy to throw the kitchen sink at the judge with no regard for the process, decency, or standards. they are not opposed to judge kavanaugh's judicial abuse, they are trying to undercut the voice of the american people when they elected donald trump. they have questioned his legitimacy and casually talk back tossed around accusations of perjury. they've sunk lower as they spring these a a legend accusations. this is a coordinated smear campaign, no evidence, no independent corroboration, just smears. here are a few of the examples.
chuck schumer said "there's no presumption of innocence or guilt." chris said "kavanaugh now bears the burden of disproving these allegations rather than dr. ford and mr. ramirez." mazie hirono said that "judge kavanaugh does not preserve do not deserve the presumption of innocence. democrats want to block kavanaugh and hold the seat open until the 2020 election. this is about politics and this is about power, pure and simple. they've destroyed judge kavanaugh's reputation, undermined dr. ford's privacy and tried to upend our traditions of innocence until proven guilty in the process. it's a complete and total disgrace. we will receive and submit the fpi supplemental background investigation on his nomination to the senate as a leader mcconnell said, judge kavanaugh deserves our prompt vote and we expect them to get one. with that, i will take your questions. >> the three people that are the
most important in this processor senator murkowski, collins, and ford. this morning, to go of them were upset about how the president described christine mallozzi ford in that rally in mississippi. knowing how sensitive this is, these people need to be comfortable with voting for him. why did the president say what he did in the way that he said it? >> secretary sanders: the president was stating the facts, the facts that were included in rachel mitchell's report. he was stating facts that were given during dr. ford's testimony and the senate has to make a decision based on those facts. and whether or not they see judge kavanaugh to be qualified to hold the position on the supreme court. every single word judge kavanaugh has said has been picked apart. second by second of his
testimony has been picked apart yet if anybody says anything about the accusations that have been thrown against him, that is totally off limits and outrageous. this entire process has been a disgrace and the only reason it's been that way is because senate democrats didn't do this the way it should have been done and they circumvented the entire system and undermined our entire judicial branch by the way they've acted in the inappropriate way they've conducted themselves. >> pointing out inconsistencies intense money is one thing but the tone with which the presideo key swing votes for his nomination. as the president concerned he may have put those votes in danger by doing what he did last night? >> secretary sanders: the president is very confident in his nominee as he stated time and time again and we expect the senate to vote and we hope they do that soon. >> the white house response to the report, the president was
briefed on this investigation. >> secretary sanders: the president has been made aware of it as we said yesterday, the u.s. secret service to respond to those. >> do you have any information on the president meeting with rod rosenstein? >> secretary sanders: again, we don't have any updates on that front. if there's a meeting we will let you know but at this point they continue to work together and show up every day and do their job. >> with the president, are you trying to have it both ways by attacking democrats for doing something that wasn't in their interest, potentially mocking her -- >> secretary sanders: we are pointing out the hypocrisy. none of this would be taking place if democrats had done this in a normal order and not exploited dr. ford and attacked
judge kavanaugh in such a public manner. all of this could've been been handled completely differently. and the senate democrats hold all of the responsibility for that process. >> "the new york times" reported yesterday that the president had engaged in suspect tax teams, getting more money from his parents then he said. can you explain what is inaccurate about that story if there is anything that is actually accurate about it? >> secretary sanders: those totally false attacks based on an old recycled news story, i am not going to go through every single line of a very boring 14,000 word story. i will say one thing the article did get right was that it showed that the president's father had a great deal of confidence in him. the president brought his father into a lot of deals and they made a lot of money together. his father went on to say that everything he touched turned to gold. the president's lawyer addressed some of the specific claims and
walk through how the allegations of fraud and tax evasion are 100% false and highly defamatory. there was no fraud or tax evasion by anyone. he went on much further and i would encourage you to read every word of his statement which completely undercuts the accusations in "the new york times" ." i know that a number of his taxes are still under audit. >> from the '90s and the early 2000s? >> it was a couple of days ago that the president called christine blasey ford a very credible witness. very credible, very compelling. but now he is basically making her out to be a liar. which is it? >> secretary sanders: the testimony by dr. ford was compelling. but you can't make this decision based on emotion, it has to be baked on based on fact. they have determined what the facts are of this case.
it's one of the reasons they paid for the fbi and delayed a hearing vote so they could get more facts on this case. we expect the fbi to turn those facts over to the senate and they can make a determination based on that. that's all we are asking for. >> you said he was stating the facts at that campaign rally but this was so much more than stating the facts. this was a full-scale campaign rally assault on a woman who says she is the victim of sexual assault. what do you get out of that? is that to help kavanaugh's nomination? to rally the base? is a going to help the midterm? what's the point in doing that? >> secretary sanders: i dispute that it wasn't anything other than the president stating facts that were laid out and the prosecutor's memo that she put forward to the senate. each of the things he called out where things laid out in that memo. >> there is conflicting feelings on capitol hill right now over whether the fbi investigation into judge kavanaugh should be
made public or not. does the white house committed to transparency on this effort and let the american people see the full range of this investigation regardless of the findings? >> secretary sanders: we've been very open and transparent to the process, the president is the one who ordered the fbi investigation to take place and allow the senate to control and dictate the terms and scope of the process, the investigation. we are continuing to do that and allowing the fbi to do as they do best and it's their job to do this investigation. >> another question if i may on declassification since we haven't spoken in a while. the president has said that he would refer the d declassification process to the doj inspector general but he wants to see it happen quickly. what does quickly mean? will we see the documents before the midterm elections? >> secretary sanders: we are continuing to work through that process and we will let you know. >> you said earlier that michael
cohen was acting on his own and arbitration proceedings to prevent stormy daniels from doing television interview. >> secretary sanders: i am not going to get into a back and forth, that's an issue for the president's outside counsel. i direct you there to answer. >> two brief questions. first, the impact and meaning of the president's comments in mississippi notwithstanding, it is a fact that senators collins, murkowski, flake, and senator manchin are the undecided votes critical to the nomination. are there any plans to call any of them between now and next week to explain his remarks a little bit more? >> secretary sanders: i am not aware of a specific scheduled call but we have been in close contact with a number of members and we will continue to do so. >> i was going to ask, two of
the president's early supporters in the house, collins of new york, are running under indictment. there are rules of the national republican congressional committee barring support for members who are under indictment. does the president still support both of them for reelection? >> secretary sanders: i can't get into a lot of details, with an ongoing investigation, i am not going to be able to comment on that front. >> the rumor that's been out about the article about the fbi background investigation, bloomberg is reporting that the fbi hasn't interviewed kavanaugh or dr. ford, the white house has given investigators clear authority to do so, is that the case? >> secretary sanders: as we've said several times, the president has indicated that whoever the fbi deems necessary, he asked that the senate and
they need to make a decision on whether they vote cavanaugh up or down. i can tell you that both judge kavanaugh and dr. ford were questioned in the most public way possible. by the members of the senate who are ultimately the ones who have to make make a determination on whether they vote for judge kavanaugh. if they have additional questions for either one of them they had a time and an opportunity to ask those. >> does the white house believe it's appropriate? >> secretary sanders: we are going to allow the senate to make the determination. >> thank you. president trump talked a lot yesterday about this issue of being concerned about men being guilty, being found guilty before proven innocent and this idea of due process. but in the past he put out an ad basically calling for the death penalty before they had been
found guilty and even after they were exonerated he still basically said that they may be guilty and even as president he has talked about, presided over rallies with people saying "lock her up talking about hillary clinton. i guess, is there a disconnect between when the president is interested in due process for some but not for others. >> secretary sanders: not at all, the president encouraged the senate to hear dr. ford's testimony in the same way he encouraged them to hear judge kavanaugh. he is simply stating the fact that we are a country of law and order. we are a country that still believes you are innocent until proven guilty and we want to see that process go through in its entirety on a fair playing fiel field. >> does he feel that now? >> secretary sanders: i would have to look back at the specific comments. >> the president has taken this moment to say that he has been
affected personally by all these allegations and he is picking and choosing just as this question was. he has made bill clinton guilty, has he decided to change his mind. >> secretary sanders: nobody wants to hear those accusers voices be heard but you are certainly happy to hear all the others. i've addressed this, i don't have anything else to add to. >> there are several times in the last week the president has tried to reassure voters that he will protect people with pre-existing conditions from losing their health insurance. is that a sign that he's worried republicans are losing the argument on health care in this election? speak >> secretary sanders: i think it's a sign that the president wants to protect people with pre-existing health conditions, it's pretty simple. he wants to make sure that's not something that gets lost. >> it was pretty obvious that the president was mocking
christine blasey ford last night, he said "how did you get home, i don't remember. how did you get there, i don't remember. where is this place? i don't remember." he seemed to be, to the delight of the crowd in mississippi, mocking her repeatedly. isn't there something wrong with the president of the united states mocking somebody who says she was sexually assaulted? >> secretary sanders: it seems to me that she was he was stating facts that dr. ford herself has laid out in her testimony. everything judge kavanaugh has said has been picked apart by everything in this room but nobody is looking at whether or not the accusations made were corroborated. every person she named has come out and said they didn't recall it or they weren't there. every evidence we've seen in this moment have supported judge kavanaugh's case. and the president simply pointed out the facts of the matter and that is what the senate will have to use to determine whether they vote to support him or not.
>> are you saying judge kavanaugh is the victim and all of this? >> secretary sanders: i think dr. ford and judge kavanaugh are victims of the hands of the democrats. i think it's absolutely disgraceful what they've done and exploited this process. they are exploiting all the women that have come out to make any type of accusation. this isn't the process that should have been done and certainly everybody deserves to be heard but that includes judge kavanaugh and that should be part of this process. the facts have to be looked at and i think you have to look at the prosecutor's memo. you see all of those facts laid out and i think she makes a very compelling case. >> you don't have any problem defending the president's comments. >> secretary sanders: i don't have any problem stating the facts, no. that's something you probably have a problem with, i don't. >> we do state the facts and there have been many occasions when you don't state the facts. >> five days ago on friday the president when asked about
dr. ford's testimony, the senate said she was a very credible witness and we saw a different tone, in those remarks to the campaign rally audience in mississippi. why the change in tone? and does the president still believe what he said on friday, that she was a very credible witness? >> secretary sanders: i have addressed this in a number of times. the president also said she had a very compelling story. nobody disagrees with that. and nobody disagrees that the president is simply stating the fact that she laid out in her own testimony. and that the prosecutor laid out in her memo at the end of the day. the senate has to make a decision on where they stand. >> this president still believes that dr. ford's testimony was credible when she testified under oath? >> secretary sanders: the president believes that judge kavanaugh should be confirmed, he has a lot of confidence and he'd like to see about to see that happen. >> president trump has seemed to
link the credibility of a claim with how much time has passed since the individual made it. president trump also called the sex abuse scandal in the catholic church very sad but many of those victims waited decades to come forward. why does the president seem to assume men who wait to come forward are telling the truth but not women? >> secretary sanders: that's completely untrue, the president has supported, again, throughout this entire process, dr. ford's ability to come forward and tell her story. he's the one that ordered the fbi to do a background, further supplemental background check to look into eat each of the accusations allegations that the senate deemed necessary before making a vote. he's more than happy to give a platform to the accusers that have come out against then president bill clinton. to say that he's never sided
with women is just ridiculous. >> secretary sanders: he has implied that they are coming out of the woodwork all of a sudden and cited that as a reason why s called for an investigation -- >> secretary sanders: after judge kavanaugh has been in public service and in the public eye for over 26 years and been through six background investigations, that this is the first time you are ever hearing of any of these allegations. the fact that through all those background checks, not even an inkling of any of those things and never come up despite the fact that he was one of the top prosecutors in a major public position. none of these things came up. when he was nominated to be on the federal bench, none of these things came up. he's been a public figure and there's been a lot of opportunity for the people to raise this issue and it never has. at the 11th hour the democrats have exploited this process and done so publicly and it's a shame that he is simply calling that out. thanks so much, guys, we will see you soon.
>> harris: with that, sarah sanders, press secretary taking a lot of questions. we first saw from the small business administrator secretary mcmahon and then we saw the national security advisor ambassador john bolton talking about our move today with regard to oran. we'll get into all of it in just a moment. i want to bring in scott taylor of virginia, on the house appropriations committee and a former navy seal. i want to start, great to see you. haven't seen you for a while. i want to start with judge kavanaugh end of the comments there. sarah sanders bringing up some strong points against some strong questions. she said "i think both kavanaugh and ford are victims at the hands of the democrats." what do you think she means and do you agree? >> let me start with the second one first, i do agree. senator feinstein had this information months ago while he's being investigated by the fbi. if they felt it moved to the level to be looked at by the
fbi, she had a duty to hand that information over. it's very clear she kept it for political purposes, political timing and someone leaked her name out there. it wasn't republicans who had her information, it was senator feinstein or someone in her office who knew it. it was on the democrats side so i do think the democrats have not handled this -- they've handled the process very poorly. with complete disregard for dr. ford or their families. >> harris: it just confirms how this is being handled. he saw the barrage of questions from reporters on basically a simple question and a singular question from the president's rally last night. it had to do with poking some fun at who can remember what end it seemed to be about dr. ford. sarah sanders taking a lot of
questions on that and how would you categorize the answers toda today? >> let me say that politics aside, this -- both his family, the kavanaugh family, ford family, what's amazing is like you said, the questions are solely focused on one thing the president said but not what he said in terms of the answer she gave during her testimony where she couldn't remember anything. you have the lady who generated the response and picked apart her whole argument, that's news. they need to look further into that. i understand it's certainly news if he's accused by someone but the one girl who was on tv and got interviewed, she knew nothing and now she's walked back her accusation. this is incredible. >> harris: you are talking about the woman who was the
third accuser. it's interesting because as you are pointing out, the inconsistencies that we are seeing about the lie detector test and look, we are looking at the basic facts, a letter came in from an ex-boyfriend, we are not saying whether she's telling the truth. we are just looking at the facts. and i understand what you are saying, i got what sarah sanders was saying, why are we not looking at those inconsistencie inconsistencies. i understand. i want to ask you about iran if i can. the united states has canceled the 1955 treaty with iran on economic relations and counselor rights. what does this mean going forward with our relationship with them? >> there is no secret that our relationship is certainly strained, it has been since 1979. we as americans, we want to have relationships with them.
they are undermining other governments. obviously they are a big threat to our friend and ally israel. i am for that, i support that. >> harris: scott taylor, thank you very much for being on the program. responding in breaking news fashion from the white house press briefing, appreciate it. >> always a pleasure a pleasure. >> harris: we are going to take a quick break right now, "the new york times" article that came out, the president calling it a hit piece on him and his family. we will chat about that with the power panel, stay close. i wanna keep doing what i love,
that's the retirement plan. with my annuity, i know there is a guarantee. it's for my family, its for my self, its for my future. annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retire your risk dot org. you might or joints.hing for your heart... but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally found in jellyfish, prevagen is the number one selling brain-health supplement in drug stores nationwide. prevagen. the name to remember.
>> harris: breaking news, the white house pushing back hard on a "new york times" report accusing president trump of participating in dubious tax schemes during the 1990s. here's sarah sanders seconds ago. >> a totally false attack based on an old, recycled news story. the president's lawyer addressed the specific claims and walk through how the allegations are 100% false and highly defamatory. there was no fraud or tax evasion by anyone. >> harris: power panel one, alex will, david bernstein.
>> i think this is an issue that was largely litigated during the 26 2016 elections. the american people decided whose credibility they supported more in that election so i feel in terms of the political impact of this report i don't see it having that much of an impact because i feel like these are disputes that were already talked about. >> the reality is it's just further evidence that we need to see these tax returns. we are probably not going to get them, we've been calling for them. >> harris: you don't think "the new york times" is pulling a plot to be able to do that? >> there's probably one person besides the people who've already seen them who has them, it might be robert mueller. he's not going to release them publicly under the president has already excused this a bunch of different times. i disagree, the reality is there are a lot of questions. >> harris: i want to give alex
a chance to have a comment back. >> this is something that during the 2016 elections, the president ran on his business record. >> harris: what does he do about it now? does he need to respond to something that's 40 years old about his father's financial dealings? >> this is probably a story that's not going to catch on so the white house is probably going to move on from it. >> harris: forgive me, all this breaking news. i have to bring you back for more time. thank you, i appreciate your comments coming out of the news conference. stay close. moving. paying the rent. trying your best to save up to buy your own home someday. today is that day. because, by using your spouse's va home loan benefit, you could buy a home with no down payment. no. down. payment. at newday usa, you don't have to save up to move up. why rent when you can buy? newday usa has been granted automatic authority by the va, too.
that means they can say yes when banks say no. and they can close your loan faster. you could be moving into your own home in a matter of weeks. that's why they can do more for those who serve and their families. helping veterans and their families buy a home of their own is what newday usa is all about. call newday usa right now. go to newdayusa.com, or call 1-855-595-9641. >> tech: don't wait for a chip like this to crack your whole windshield. with safelite's exclusive resin, you get a strong repair that you can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace. sometthat's when he needs the way ovicks vaporub.'s sleep. proven cough medicine. with 8 hours of vapors. so he can sleep. vicks vaporub. goodnight coughs.
with uncontrolled moderor atopic dermatitis, you never know how your skin will look. and it can feel like no matter what you do, you're itching all the time. but even though you see and feel your eczema on the surface of your skin, an overly sensitive immune system deep within your skin might actually be causing your eczema. so help heal your skin from within. with dupixent. dupixent is not a steroid, and it continuously treats your eczema even when you can't see it.
at 16 weeks, more than 1 in 3 patients saw clear or almost clear skin, and patients saw a significant reduction in itch. do not use if you are allergic to dupixent. serious allergic reactions can occur. tell your doctor if you have new or worsening eye problems, including eye pain or changes in vision. if you have asthma, and are taking asthma medicines do not change or stop your asthma medicine without talking to your doctor. help heal your skin from within. ask your eczema specialist about dupixent.
>> harris: a white house press briefing and busy hour of breaking news. my handle down there, let's talk on social media. i'm harris. here's dana. >> dana: fox news alert. the white house vigorously defending the president's comments last night on christine blasey ford as the white house and senate await the supplemental fbi background report. hello, everyone. i'm dana perino and this is "the daily briefing." senate majority leader mitch mcconnell setting the gears in motion, aiming for an up or down vote this week on brett kavanaugh. the white house is defending judge kavanaugh. >> every single word judge kavanaugh has said has been picked apart. every single word. second by second of his testimony has been picked apart. yet if