tv Morning Joe MSNBC September 26, 2018 3:00am-6:00am PDT
see donald trump. and they are openly laughing at him, at his tweets, his meetings with dictators, at his lies and his reality show policies, aren't they? the world is laughing at the united states and donald trump's america has become the butt of a big joke. >> the u.n. general assembly meeting every september was a symbol of that. what i thought we saw in watching president trump's speech was reality tv for real. the reality is that this president came before that body and made the kind of establishment he makes routinely in his rallies around the
country. i've been more successful than almost any administration. and from from that world body, he has -- he receives spontaneous laughter at that claim. even trump, in an unusual moment had to acknowledge it. but it's a snapshot of where the united states is right now. the united states has significantly changed its position in my judgment for the worst. we are not seen as the leader of traditional institutions. trump was bragging about how he's pulling the united states out of them, out of the international criminal court, out of the human rights commission. he was siting those as advantages of his policy. the rest of the world for the most part feels very differently and that's what we saw yesterday. >> interesting, too, sam, the president was jarred by that moment. he's used to get ago cheer like at that boy.
but there he kind of paused and stopped in his tracks and later said well, it was meant to be a joke. but if you look at the content of the speech, it was not unlike the one he made last year which is putting forth the steven miller america first policy. >> as someone who has had people laugh at him a lot, with it hurts. it's jarring. so i feel bad for trump in that sense. no, i don't. but i think, you know, it's funny because you look back at his twitter feet and he literally is talking about how people are laughing at us and now it's actually happened. his whole thing is america
first. the consequences may be laughter, but it is putting us in a different place in the world. it was about setting up essentially an international patronage system in which people had to show us respect in exchange for us helping them. so, yeah, he got laughed at, but this is what the outcome is of the world view that he holds. >>. >> yesterday's performance, you can see view it as one portion of a long, plain tv series, which he has set up in his mind. but if you frame it up in this sense that a year ago he stood up and rocket man from the u.n. podium and everything like that, inge many of the delegates who arrive here around the globe were shocked, were taken aback at the lack of detore yum and what they viewed as the lack of policy in terms of public
speaking. until yesterday you have the contrast one year later they snicker and laugh at donald trump on the podium. but do you think they're laughing at trump or are they just sitting there because he's amusing to them now, not so much fearful as he was last year, but they've come here, once again, looking for a country that they feel is lost and that country is america? >> well, for me, he just reordered the world. he called saudi arabia good people. it's almost describing the world in a completely different reality than it is, actually. so he just legitimized some actual dictatorships. he legitimized -- a lot of
people in the east are saying we need to look at new alliances. now that america is going through this turmoil, we need to look at new alliances. such shifting back of international relationship sess dangerous for america. it is reducing america's power and this speemp was a very, very serious one to shift that. >> but do you think many of the delegates were surprised by that? >> i think they were surprised, but many are scared. you have king abdallah of jordan taking it sooer very seriously. you have people taking him seriously and you have people laughing. but it was a scary speech in international relations. he's underestimating the meaning of diplomacy and he's underestimating how much work has been done to bring the world together. and he's single handedly destroying that. >> stitch by stitch.
>> yeah. >> we're bog to show more of the president's speech later on. to our other top story, the senate judiciary committee will vote on brett kavanaugh's nomination to the supreme court just hours after he and christine blasey-ford will testify before the committee. chairman chuck grassley said if the committee is ready, it may hold a vote on kavanaugh on friday at 9:30 a.m. senate republicans are under pressure to move kavanaugh quickly through the final stages of his nomination to the supreme court. majority leader mitch mcconnell has warned his colleagues that he has planned to hold a vote no matter what happens possibly as soon as next week. mcconcanel says he is confident going into a vote. >> we're going to be moving forward. i'm confident we're going to win, confident this is able to
be confirmed in the very near future. >> meanwhile, president trump is speaking out on his supreme court nominee's second accuser, slamming deborah ramirez's credibility. also congressional democrats of playing a con game with the allegations against brett kavanaugh. >> the second accuser has nothing. the second accuser doesn't even know -- she thinks maybe it could have been him, maybe not. she admits that she was drunk. she admits there are time lapses. i think it's horrible what the democrats have done. it's a con game they're playing. they're really con artists. they're trying to convince -- you know, they don't believe it themselves, okay? they know he's a high quality person. they don't believe it. it's just resist and obstruct. they're playing a con game and they play it very well.
pit cann it cannot be allowed to happen. the democrats know it's a con game. they know he's high quality. and they the wink at each other. they're winking. they know it's a con game. >> what he said about the accuser is simply disgusting. willie, i guess we can back up and put that in a box. there are so many self-inflicted wounds on the part of the republicans, the vote on friday calling the -- i think it's a female prosecutor, sex crimes prosecutor who will possibly be doing the questioning tomorrow. an assistant? some of them are small fails, but my god, come on, get it right. >> the president stayed on message for several days. the white house, his senior aides, rick tyler got to the president and said you cannot go after the women. say what you want that brett kavanaugh is a good person.
but don't go after the women. the judiciary committee now has rachel mitchell coming in to do some of the questioning of dr. ford and judge kavanaugh tomorrow. how is the dynamic because of that different today than it was this time yesterday? >> how is what dynamic difference? >> the dynamic with rachel mitchell, the sex crimes prosecutor being in the room tomorrow? >> it's hard to know. look, i think this process has just been really -- i know republicans have got to move on this vote because they're running out of time. but the whole process has lost credibility. we're in, really, a post truth political world where it doesn't seem to matter to one side or the other who is telling the truth. everybody seems to have weighed in. we haven't heard from any witnesses. let's have the vote on friday morning and after this has happened and we'll see what comes out of the hearing. but it's just remarkable to me
that everybody has this inclusion on one side or the other based on whether it helps my team, the republicans, or my team, the democrats, without hearing from dr. ford. why are we coming to these conclusions first and not later? because this process is not designed to get to the truth. >> and a lot of people on both sides have made up their mind before they heard from judge kavanaugh. a new wrinkle overnight details some of what dr. blasey-ford is expected to share when she the testifies. usa today confirms it has object stained declarations of sworn witnesses. quoting from the report in her declaration, ford's friend said ford told her with about the alleged assault during a june
2013 meal and contacted ford's attorneys on september 16th of this year to tell them ford had confided in her five years ago. in that declaration, she writes, during that meal, christine was visibly upset so i asked her what was going on. christine said she was having a hard time because she was thinking about an assault she experienced when she was much younger. she told me she had been trapped in a room with two drunken guys and that she had escaped, run away and hid. remember, that's june 2013. more from the "usa today" report on the sworn declarations of four witnesses for dr. ford. keith koegler said he confessed to her when discussing the light sentencing of brock turner. he said christine expressed anger at mr. turner's lenient sentence saying she wasly
bothered by it because she was assaulted in high school by a man who is now a federal judge in washington, d.c. koegler said ford revealed to him that the person who attacked her in high school was president trump's favorite nominee. ford's e-mail response, brett kavanaugh. another declaration from rebecca white, a neighbor of dr. ford, also recalling ford sharing her story with her after white wrote a blog post about sexual assault. so, mika, this is a new usa today revelation that came in overnight. there's been a lot of talk that there hasn't been strong corroboration of dr. ford's story. now you have four different people kwor rating. no. and this is the kind of information that's going to be put on the table. i think it's going to be a very difficult day for dr. ford because she's basically going to
have to put her life out there to talk about something terrible that she truly believes happened to her and absolutely may have happened to her. but am i using my words correctly? because in -- i think i -- i feel like in the media especially, we have two camps, some who say it has to be believed and that's where you begin and others who just want to report the story to say to see what's going to happen. what do we do with these allegations? in the age of "me too," now what with this? >> we have become cynical and jaded about such stories and what we really need to exercise is respect and compassion for people's integrity. >> absolutely. >> i think a lot of people don't understand that when something happens to you as a 16-year-old does matter. you continue continue to suffer with it. it trauma advertises you. if you had not been assaulted, think of a car accident that
happened to you. this is psychological impact. what we need psychologically -- i feel like there's so much political discussion, what we're missing is psychologists, experts in the field of why this matters to dr. ford as an individual. why this is impacting her life. i believe that if something happened to you, at any age, it does impact your life and why it matters for america to potentially have a supreme court judge who has his views about women, who has a predatory aggressive views about women. that does matter for the future of our country and our goals and teenagers, no matter who you are. so in order to get the truth, we need to actually create safe space tomorrow for her to tell the truth. this is a trauma advertised person.
>> can the republicans even help themselves? this is not that difficult. you can have.respect. many republicans are standing firm in their support of judge kavanaugh and some are publicly rejecting the the sexual misconduct allegations against him. >> what we see we see taking place right now is a pr stunt by the democrats. it is character assassination. this is something that is dirty politics at its worst. >> certainly, if it's true, it means he did something bad 36 years ago, but does it disqualify him from the supreme
court? >> so you think these women are making it up? >> they had a little help, i have a feeling. accusations are being made, things that didn't happen and i think it's unfortunate. >> nobody wants to hear what you think, actually, because at this point, this is an allegation and your answer should be, sir, this is a really important thing that we need to look at. this is a very serious allegation. i don't know why they have to smear her. i don't know why they have to force a vote on friday and make it completely look like they don't care what is going to happen on thursday. and sam stein who calls a female sex crimes prosecutor an assistant at this point, really? i get why you can't talk yourself on the committee because you're incapable of being respectful or treating
women of any sense that they might have qualifications to be as high ranking as you. here is mitch mcconnell, an assistant. really. >> we have hired a female staff to come in and ask these questions in a professional and respectful way. >> what's wrong with them? i think there could be a really good reason, sam stein, politically, to have a woman ask the questions. it could be a great way of saying that. and he just -- i don't know. what happened there? he can't look at a woman in any other way but a supportive role that is lower. >> there is obvious discomfort.
why not bring in a psychologist as a witness to further bolster the testimony? why not bring in a medical expert? in addition to the friends and mark judge, that would create a forum that would be helpful for the confirmation process but informational about the issue of sexual assault. in the end, though, what they're essentially doing is nothing that has happened this had week will encourage future victims of sexual assault from ever coming forward if the person they're accusing is a person of privilege or power. donald trump is the most powerful man in the world. for him to take a position of attack is jarring. and it will have ramifications
for years to comer for people who have been victimized by sexual assault and feel that they need to come forward. but look at what happened to her and say i can't do that. >> the woman's name, the assistant, is rachel mitchell. but when you hear jim say this didn't happen, definitively, he doesn't believe the story put forward by dr. ford. this guy is a bad guy, things we've heard about him, he shouldn't be on the supreme court, what do you hear when you hear all that, other than two sides who made up their minds before this process even started? >> i hear sexism being had legitimized in public. this is the definition of
sexism. and, at the same time, to dismiss a woman's claim is disrespectful of her entire story. it is not easy to talk about such intimate emotional issues. it's not easy to talk to your best friends about it. it's not easy to talk to your therapist or in front of politicians cynical about your own thing. we need to start with the basic concept of respect for women. >> and that extends to the not holding a vote within 18 hours of her testimony. so be able to fully process what's going to.happen on thursday, i would imagine people would want to take some time to talk about it. but for them to now schedule a vote at 9:30 a.m. on friday where they will have basically 12 hours or so to process what it says is in itself insulting to dr. ford.
>> david, like you, i've been sitting here listening to this conversation and like you, my hair is graying. i'm wonder background your thoughts on the following premise, that the institution of the presidency and the united states senate, that everyone so revered not that long ago is how long will it take to repair the damage being done to both institutions? >> you put your finger on what i think so many of us feel watching everything coming out of washington. washington is in a partisan war, the likes of which i've never seen. we've had nasty supreme court confirmation battles. but never one as sharply polarized as this had.
we've had presidents who attack the opposite party. i think one powerful strand of the cav knew story is that real human experience, the experience of dr. ford, her memories of it, her trauma, her having told her husband, her therapist, her friends about these memories years ago before brett kavanaugh's supreme court nomination was ever even imagined, we're all thinking about it and dealing with that reality of trauma and i'm also struck, mike, by the fact that the republicans know they have to be careful. this is a different country in some ways. so i think that says that however nasty this spectacle has been this week, the country has moved some.
the claims of the women who were victims in these cases, i think, are are being taken more seriously. the republicans are more afraid of seeming to roll right over them. >> yeah. there's so much going on here. good thing we have a three-hour show. but before we go, marsha blackburn, a woman calling another woman a liar without knowing the truth. i have to tell you, that is going to -- that's not going to play well with the women in tennessee. it may play well with the president who pays off porn stars and playboy bunnies and brags about grabbing women by the genitals. it's not going to play well with the women of tennessee the. still lady, we'll talk to a member of the judiciary committee. senator john kennedy. what does he want answered during tomorrow's hearing? plus, more on the reaction to the president's speech at the u.n. general assembly. or as "morning joe" imagined
that we offer our congratulations on your acceptance..." through the tuition assistance program, every day mcdonald's helps more people go to college. it's part of our commitment to being america's best first job. if you're waiting patiently for a liver transplant, it could cost you your life. it's time to get out of line with upmc. at upmc, living-donor transplants put you first. so you don't die waiting. upmc does more living-donor liver transplants than any other center in the nation. find out more and get out of line today.
from capital one.nd i switcheded to the spark cash card i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. and last year, i earned $36,000 in cash back. which i used to offer health insurance to my employees. what's in your wallet? with large debris and stuck-on dust, so shark invented duoclean, replacing the front wall with a rotating soft brush. while deep cleaning carpets, two brush rolls pick up large particles with ease, make quick work of stuck-on dust, giving hard floors a polished look, and fearlessly devour piles. shark duoclean technology, designed to do more on carpets and floors, available in corded and cord-free vacuums, and only available from shark.
this is moving day with the best in-home wifi experience and millions of wifi hotspots to help you stay connected. and this is moving day with reliable service appointments in a two-hour window so you're up and running in no time. show me decorating shows. this is staying connected with xfinity to make moving... simple. easy. awesome. stay connected while you move with the best wifi experience and two-hour appointment windows. click, call or visit a store today. >> how do you think your speech went today? >> i think really well.
it's gotten great reviews. >> how about the laughter, what did you think about that? >> it was great. it was meant to get some laughter, but it was great. >> president trump telling reporters that his laugh line was intentional. >> willie, come on. he does not think that, does he? >> steven miller is one of the great comedy writers. >> that guy is a funny guy, doesn't want anybody to come into america unless they're white. that's it. >> that's not one of his funnier lines, certainly. >> he's a funny guy. >> he took on iran and took on what he called globalism. >> iran's leaders sow chaos. they do not the respect their boarders or the sovereign rights of nations. instead, iran's leaders plunder the nation's resource toes enrich themselves and to spread
mayhem across the middle east and far beyond. the iranian people are outraged that their leaders have embezzled billions of dollars from iran's treasury. the united states has launched a campaign to deny the regime the funds it needs to advance its bloody agenda. america's policy of principled realism means we will not be held hostage to so-called experts who have been proven wrong over the years time and time again. the united states will not be taken advantage of any longer. america is governed by americans. we reject the ideology of
globalism and we embrace the doctrine of patriotism. the united states is the world's largest giver in the world by far of foreign aide, but few give anything to us. that is why we are taking a hard look at u.s. foreign assistance. moving forward, er only going to give foreign aid to those who respect us and, frankly, are are our friends. >> so david ignatius, the u.s. embassy in israel moved to jerusalem, the president pulled out of the iran deal, the summit with kim jong-un, going after nato for its spending, the list goes on and on. what jumped out at you as difference and new in his speech this year versus last?
i think you have to say that president trump is getting more confident in the way that he wants to run u.s. foreign policy, pulling out of international organizations, treaties, traditional alliances. he thinks that's working. a year ago, we had the intense rhetoric toward north korea. the speech a year ago at the u.n. talked about rocket man and then we were shocked and then the fire and fury period. and trump says to himself, look, i'm now in a negotiation with north korea about denuclearizing its program. he's playing exactly the same script now with iran. very sharp rhetoric. at the same time, he's saying to
rouhani, i'm ready to sit down and talk with you at some point. i'm prepared for negotiations. he's seeing the same process that happened with north korea eventually, i think, happening with iran. so however much we and others may be troubled by what the president said, it's clear that in his own mind, he thinks this is working. >> so president rouhani of iran said that president trump suffers from a weakness of incident lukt. is it true, that's, as some of our guests said yet that president trump wants to sit down with rouhani, he wants a new deal, he wants to reshape that relationship? >> if he does, then he needs to deal with it differently. he's underestimating what the meaning of culture is, how you actually deal with this. you have to be respectful so you can encourage them to sit down and with america.
they are financing military militias all over the region. it is how do you deal with the bad guy? do you make them close to you or do you isolate them and make them nor -- this is how you get someone on the negotiating table. so he's missing the mark. he's using authoritarian doctrine to deal with international relations and that is accurate, i would have to say. >> culture adviser, we'll add that to the list of history adviser, sexism adviser with, maybe an overall truth adviser. it has its problems, this presidency. rick tyler, were there any pieces of the speech that were
strategically puts in place for the republican base? >> no, i don't think so, mika. look, the president took his comedy show to the world and in six official languages of the u.n., they got the joke. but being serious about it, he outlined his vision on of withdrawing from the world. i think, you know, the trade deals that he has, the tariffs are a bad idea because they're attacks on the consumer. but he's misunderstanding the mother of the world as a stabilizing force and after world war ii, there was a reason we paid for defense of europe, defense of japan. and he seems to ignore all that history. and what was revealed by sort of the laughter is that he is not taken sears why youly by the u.n. i think a lot of gripes with the u.n., but if they don't respect him, then it's a wasted
opportunity. it was a real wasted opportunity with the leader of the free world. and his vision was we're withdrawing from the world, you all are bad actors and we're going to go home. we did that before, we did that during woodrow wilson. that led to world war i. i think this is a serious moment that the president and his leadership is not taken seriously by the world and i don't know how we cover from that. >> i don't, either. i think this has pretty tough consequences. and it's a tough day with america as did the biggest loser to use i guess reality show terms. still ahead, the federal government is once again on the brink of a shutdown. the house is poised to pass a short-term spending bill, but there is fear on capitol hill that the president trump could veto it.
politico's game sherman joins us with new reporting on that. "morning joe" will be right back. let's face it everybody hates fees. now sofi has no fees on personal loans. that's right no fees on loans to remodel your bathroom. ♪ no fees on loans to consolidate your credit card debt. see no fees just feels good. ♪ boo yeah. if you've got the drive, you can do a lot with no fees on personal loans. boo yeah.
"have you lost weight?" of course i have- ever since i started renting from national. because national lets me lose the wait at the counter... ...and choose any car in the aisle. and i don't wait when i return, thanks to drop & go. at national, i can lose the wait...and keep it off. looking good, patrick. i know. (vo) go national. go like a pro. takes more than just investment advice. from insurance to savings to retirement, it takes someone with experience and knowledge who can help me build a complete plan. brian, my certified financial planner™ professional, is committed to working in my best interest. i call it my "comfortable future plan," and it's all possible with a cfp® professional. find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeaplan.org.
. busy day in news. mika's book, racing up to the best seller list yet. the book is doing great. >> i'm loving the reaction we got. we were on the "the view" yesterday. joe did a great job. we talked a lot about the book and why it's important for women to have their voice now more than ever in the age of trump, in the age of what dr. christine blasey-ford -- >> there's joe holding the purse. >> everyone needs one. i figured everyone had a purse holder. >> that is quite an image. >> i love it. >>. >> hoda has had a lot of the same problems i've had that i wrote about in the book, so we
had a great time talking about it. but, you know, when you're under the gun and you're trying to negotiate or advocate for yourself, i think women suffer from a great deal of nerves. the voice control, let alone the other strategies and tips in terms of how the negotiate. that i think we feel very torn about how to handle these issues. >> it's really -- i highly recommend it. it's really, really helping me. even at 49, i'm still working on these things. >> thank you. it's all about the part we can control. you can get more information about know your value.com. >> also on the "today" show was mandy moore. >> she's amazing. >> one of our favorite actresses on the planet from "this is us" and many other things. and she watches "morning joe."
i can confirm that. i interviewed her last year. she was incredibly smart and charming and all she wanted to talk about was "morning joe." so good morning, mandy. >> mandy, thank you. that was so nice. it was so great to meet her and fun to be there. thanks to our friends at the "today" show. coming up, americans don't know who to believe in the brett kavanaugh controversy. we'll have the new numbers on that. keep it right here on "morning joe."
poorly, the president might -- is at rick to shut down the government as a distraction. the white house denies it. but remember, government funding runs out at the end of this week. and we've seen this movie before. the last time government funding was up, the president said he was going to sign a big spending bill and almost did want and had paul ryan at the white house almost begging him to sign. the stakes are extraordinarily high. it's an incredibly extraordinary week and the president has not said he's going to publicly sign this bill. >> jake, would it be over the border wall funding strictly or is there something else complicating this measure? >> there shouldn't be anything else complicating this measure. the border wall is the one thing the president has said he wanted
and he has not gotten. it's a high likelihood that he's not going to have a republican washington in a couple of months and this is the one thing, probably the central tenant of his entire presidential campaign was this rd bohrer wall, something that in an all republican washington with paul ryan and mitch mcconnell controlling capitol hill he's not been able to get. if he doesn't shut down the government this time, there's a likelihood he could do it in december. i think the chances of a government shutdown before the end of 2018 are extraordinarily high. >> jake, big day tomorrow. two testimonies before the senate judiciary committee, dr. ford and judge kavanaugh, it's like the season ending finale of a big soap opera deal. 5:00, rod rosenstein at the white house. so given what might occur tomorrow, the kcosmetics of wha might occur tomorrow, the optics, is mitch mcconnell determined? is it set in cement that there
will be a vote very or saturday? >> it's not set in cement. the senate judiciary committee has taken the first step to set up the vote in the committee on friday. chuck grassley, the chairman of that committee they are noticing it to get it on people's radar, we will see how the hearing goes on thursday and then they will make a decision, but at the top of playbook this morning senate republicans have told the white house and have told other people in washington that they could vote on a procedural measure to advance kavanaugh as soon as saturday. so all available evidence, again, we don't like to make predictions right now, but all available evidence indicates that the senate republicans are pushing ahead with this nomination. they are leaving almost no possibility for this nomination getting off the rails and they believe they could move as soon as this weekend in a very rare weekend session for the senate. so it does look like all full steam ahead at this moment and mitch mcconnell has said as much.
he has said basically kavanaugh will be a supreme court justice in short order. >> so what is the pressure, as you talk to senators, congressmen and women in their offices, jake, that they're feeling from the outside, from conservative activists, from their own constituents about this nomination? it's almost an avatar for something else, we can't back down, we can't lose this fight, regardless of what the testimony is tomorrow. is there any world, is there anything that mitch mcconnell, chuck grassley could hear tomorrow that would change their votes on judge kavanaugh? >> i think the most important thing to keep an eye on is anybody who is worth their salt with a, involved in this campaign, not people who are detached from the campaign, but people who are sending money and looking at the polling data no he that this election hinges on basically one subset of the population, college educated female voters. there is nothing else almost that matters. those voters went for donald trump in 2016 in larger number than people expected and have peeled off. you talked about the florida
senate race and the texas senate race. you're seeing women in big numbers go for democrats and you could chalk that up to whatever you would like, but i think most republicans feel like they are going to have a woman who is going to be most likely sitting at a table, emotional about an episode that she recalls 30 years ago and you are going to have a bunch of white men who are going to go ahead with the nomination and vote on this nomination for brett kavanaugh just days after that. so if you talk to republicans privately, there's no question they're concerned about the dynamics and the optics and as you put it the cosmetics of this. again, we are right on the doorstep of election day so it's incredibly important the optics are more important than ever. >> rick, if you hear jake's reporting it seems they are aware of the optics and dynamics and yet literally it appears every move they make falls flat from calling this female prosecutor that they're bringing in to do questioning, which you could spin well, as, you know, we are self-aware, i don't think
it would be the most comfortable situation for a woman to be surrounded by ten men and questioned about her personal life so we are being mindful of that and bringing in a like-minded -- you could spin this in a positive way or calling her an assistant. i mean, what is that? that's just -- you don't need to have unforced errors like that at this point. ramming the vote through on friday morning, not even 24 hours after the testimony, it shows you don't even care what she has to say. can they even pretend to care about women? can they even take this and use it as, quite frankly, an avenue to show that they care about women, that women should be heard and that women should be respected. why can't they help themselves? what am i missing? >> the optics will terrible and will continue to be terrible. i don't think this is lost on mitch mcconnell. let me offer an alternative thinking. he has viewed what's going on and what i believe he needs --
that he believes needs to happen is the bleeding needs to stop and he's going to put up this vote despite that he says he's going -- the supreme court and all that, he has to say that for his base but i think he understands the risk full well. he may put this for a vote on friday morning and i don't think rushing the vote may work in republican's favor. lisa murkowski and susan collins will have to go back to their states of maine and alaska and explain why they supported judge kavanaugh, you also have jeff flake on the committee. i think leader mcconnell is willing to risk getting this done one way or the other, either get him on the supreme court or have it over with and, by the way, there is a great argument to be made for eight on the north and not nine as a conservative, we can talk about that at another time, but i think that's what's going on here. >> final thoughts. i personally at this point don't understand why the republicans don't ask for an fbi investigation. >> it's the least they can do. what we need to do -- regardless if you are a democrat or republican, we need to do the
right thing. >> right. >> and the right thing is to respect both judge kavanaugh as well as dr. blasey ford. we need to do the right thing by investigating it, we need to do the right thing by taking our time to actually decide what's the right thing to do. about you this rushing, it makes it jaded, it make it cynical, it loses everyone's credibility in here and that's my callout. is for us to do the right thing, the just thing, the truthful thing and based on the foundation of respect. >> jake sherman, thank you very much, rick tyler, thank you both as well. great to have you on. coming up after showing some restraint president trump escalates his rhetoric against brett kavanaugh's accusers. "the new york times" peter baker joins us with his latest reports on that. plus new reporting on the president's thinking about deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. oh, yeah, that's going on tomorrow, too, ahead of their highly anticipated meeting which happens tomorrow. "morning joe" is coming right back.
♪ not long ago, ronda started here. and then, more jobs began to appear. these techs in a lab. this builder in a hardhat... ...the welders and electricians who do all of that. the diner staffed up 'cause they all needed lunch. teachers... doctors... jobs grew a bunch. what started with one job spread all around. because each job in energy creates many more in this town. energy lives here. and the wolf huffed and puffed... like you do sometimes, grandpa? well, when you have copd, it can be hard to breathe. so my doctor said... symbicort can help you breathe better. starting within 5 minutes. it doesn't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden symptoms. doctor: symbicort helps provide significant improvement of your lung function. symbicort is for copd, including chronic bronchitis and emphysema. it should not be taken more than twice a day.
it may increase your risk of lung infections, osteoporosis, and some eye problems. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. grandpa: symbicort could mean a day with better breathing. watch out, piggy! (giggles) get symbicort free at saveonsymbicort.com. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
take us downtown, waze. if you can't afford your medication, waze integration- seamlessly connecting the world inside with the world outside. making life a little easier. ♪ the new well-connected 2019 lincoln mkc. you can do it. we can do this. at fidelity, our online planning tools are clear and straightforward so you can plan for retirement
while saving for the things you want to do today. -whoo! wnow sofi has no fees on gs personal loans. that's right no fees on loans to remodel your bathroom. ♪ no fees on loans to consolidate your credit card debt. see no fees just feels good. ♪ boo yeah. if you've got the drive, you can do a lot with no fees on personal loans. boo yeah. in less than two years my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. america -- so true. [ laughter ] >> i didn't expect that
reaction, but that's okay. >> the laughter, what do you feel about that? >> oh, it was great. that was meant to get some laughter, but it was great. >> yes, i'm a changed man now and it's all because of pathological liars anonymous. i even have my picture on the cover of news week magazine, yeah, every day. that's the ticket. >> welcome back to "morning joe." it is wednesday, september 26th. with us we have msnbc contributor mike barnicle, politics editor for the daily beast sam stein, columnist and associate editor for the "washington post" david ignatius, former aide to the george w. bush white house and state department's elise jordan, "new york times" reporter jeremy peters and chief white house correspondent for "the new york times" peter baker. joe has the morning off, but, willie, we were talking last hour about the president getting laughed at at the unga. it's clear the world was laughing at him, you get a
window into what he appears to be like to the outside world. do you think he got it? the president? >> he didn't get it in the moment. >> he didn't get it. >> he was stunned by the laughter. he didn't know what was going on. as we showed later on he said it was written that way. we wanted to break the ice at the beginning. your reporting from the white house, what was the real reaction to trump getting laughed at in front of the world? >> well, this is a president who is not used to audiences like this. >> right. >> he only speaks to rallies and friendly places, rallies that are usually very affirming for him, that he plays off of, great energy between him and his supporters. this is not a crowd of his supporters, this is a crowd of very skeptical in some cases hostile foreign leaders that haven't taken to his leadership. what he was something at the beginning was this braggadocios about how great america is doing. it didn't go well in that hall. there are some hong his lashing
out later in the day at judge kavanaugh's accuser and some of the democrats who are opposing him was at least a function of his frustration over what happened in that hall, that he was sort of reacting to that sort of mockery in effect that he was feeling from these world leaders. >> mike barnicle, who in the white house, who is the person who had the job to tell the president, no, mr. president, they weren't laughing with you like at a rally, but the entire world was laughing at you. >> no one told him that. >> what made you think someone would do that? >> if he was walking around frustrated obviously he got the message and i'm not going to go on a limb and think he got it himself. >> could you give me about three or four years to come up with an answer for that because there is no one. >> there is no one. >> there is no one. >> they just said that was great. >> i don't know whether they said that was great but there's no one that is going to bring up anything negative to him. >> how much tv did he watch yesterday. >> exactly. peter baker and then i'd like
david's reaction to this as well. according to your reporting, peter, does this speech yesterday represent a real ascendancy for john bolton, along with stephen miller who is always there drafting these epic speeches, but john bolton's voice seems to have been implanted in parts of that speech. >> it is, yes. obviously right now bolton is probably the most important voice in their ear when it comes to foreign policy other than perhaps steven miller particularly on immigration issues. you heard bolton's view about iran in that speech. iran has been an important element of john bolton's world philosophy going back years, so the confrontation, the desire to sort of take on iran is going that john bolton has been add vieding republican presidents to do for quite a while. remember, no speech is going to constrain president trump. no speech is going to define even how he approaches things. a year ago he was full of
balcosity towards north korea, today he's praising kim jong-un as terrific and practically his best friend on the world stage. it's very much something that is a one-man presidency. a president who can shift on a dime when it comes to foreign policy depending on how he thinks things are going. >> is that your view? >> i think that the price of a speech, the value of a presidential speech, has just been completely downgraded in this presidency. so donald trump appears to be reading for the first time a speech from the teleprompter. it's so unauthentic. we know that the second that he leaves the official format he's going to say what he really believes. and so i guess i somewhat see why they're disincentivized, the whole national security apparatus, his speech writers, his coms people from spending a lot of time and effort on a
speech for the u.n. general assembly, but it is sad that the president doesn't seem to take these ceremonial duties serio seriously. >> after watching tv and realizing laughing was not a good thing, the last time he was publicly laughed at was i think the white house correspondence dinner and he ended up running for president. >> he might end up running for reelection, who knows. >> david, we are all focused on the laughing. i think it was significant. i really do. i felt it deeply. having said that, could it be argued that his policy and his approach has made the world safer, perhaps surrounding north korea and events in north korea, are there positives to draw from in terms of the president's approach? >> well, i think it's hard not to see the world as somewhat safer, a world after the rhetoric about north korea. we are now in a diplomatic negotiation with north korea
about denuclearization. nobody knows where that's going, but i think that process is a good one and i think it's given trump some confidence. i thought peter baker's comments about the growing primacy of john bolton, the national security adviser, were interesting. i still as i look at this administration see the center weight in foreign policy president himself obviously but secretary of state mike pompeo, he's kind of the guy who can finish trump's sentences and he's the lead negotiator with north korea, he is really the key strategist, i think, on iran and how to deal with iran. he is appointed a range now of special invoice to cover all the key issues, afghanistan, syria, north korea. so the trump show is as unpredictable and as we saw laugh prone as ever, but there is a little more balance in how
policy is conducted out at the state department now. >> mike, go ahead. >> how does secretary pompeo figure he's going to deal with iran, take care of iran's issues with regard to the rest of the world without really talking with iran? >> so i think we should take seriously, mike, trump's repeated asides about how he's willing to sit down and talk with the iranians. everything i hear behind the scenes tells me that trump has a model, you know, uses a lot of rhetoric, beat them up, threaten war and then sit down and do the deal. and he keeps saying to president rouhani in the end you will sit down. in the end we will do a deal. i think he means it. this is his model for how things work. so we will have a lot of bumps along the way but i think in donald trump's mind there is this idea eventually we will get to a new negotiation. i will do the deal that president obama could never do,
the great deal. so i wouldn't -- i wouldn't just ignore the talk about diplomacy. >> peter baker mentioned that president trump then spoke out on his supreme court nominee's second accuser, i mean, we thought the day was done, but he kept going. here is president trump slamming deborah ramirez's credibility. >> the second accuser has nothing. the second accuser doesn't even know -- she thinks maybe it could have been him, maybe not. she admits that she was drunk. she admits time lapses, there are time lapses. >> i think it's horrible what the democrats have done. it's a con game they're playing. they're really con artists. they're trying to convince -- you know they don't believe it themselves, okay? they know he is a high quality person. they don't believe it. it's just resist and obstruct. they're playing a con game and they play it very well. >> it cannot be allowed to
happen. and the dems -- the democrats are playing a con game. c-o-n, a con game. they know it's a con game. they know he's high quality. and they wink at each other, they're winking. they know it's a con game. >> all right. lease jordan, so this is fascinating on many levels, i think his comments about the accuser were disgusting. i also think that he -- we -- i think we're going to see a risk that the democrats completely overreact to this, that liberals overreact to this and that republicans some of them play into it too much. this is the kind of thing trump loves, sewing doubt about people, questioning their credibility, if it revolves around sex he's even more interested. if it gets into the gutter, that's where he's the happiest. but i think there are political ramifications for both sides if we get in on this fight. i mean, there's a story here
that's going to play out on capitol hill in my opinion the republicans should be calling for an fbi investigation, and respect the facts. >> well, you look at what just happened there with donald trump and he has this moment where he's on the international stage and he could talk about america's role in the world but instead he does, he goes directly into the am you had. >> he loves it, yeah. >> so you look at the political actors through this confirmation process and they have been the ones who have been really failing. you look at what donald trump did just there, attacking the accusers. you look at mitch mcconnell yesterday talking about the assistant that they brought in to question the accusers tomorrow and to question judge kavanaugh. this has just been a complete misplay from the politicians on the republican side, the male politicians, and they're supposed to be guiding someone who isn't a political actor, judge kavanaugh, through the process and their missteps may well blow this process.
>> to your point, i mean, look at how excited he was to talk about that, compared to how he was reading that speech. it's just a different type of person almost. >> this is his wheelhouse. >> yes. i would say there were two ways for donald trump to deal with the debbie ramirez accusations, assuming that he wants to discredit them, which is very apparent he does. one would be what he did, sort of vicious attack saying -- suggesting that for some reason if you were inebriated you couldn't possibly account your own sexual assault, which is absurd. the second way would have been, listen, i respect her story, i think she's wrong, let's get to the bottom of it by looking into the facts. and that would have been the sober-minded way to do this. i can't get over the fact that the republican party simply has refused to take that second route with respect to dr. ford as well. we are talking about this, but if you were accused of sexual assault and you knew you were innocent, 100% innocent, you would do everything you could to
open up the books on your life. you would call every single person forward, have them testimony, you would ask if not demand for an independent investigation because you would have nothing to hide. and the reason you would do this especially in the circumstances because this is not a criminal trial, this is a political trial and if kavanaugh ends up on the supreme court he needs to bring with him some credibility so the institution of the court is maintained. if he does that under this cloud and with a 50/50 vote in the senate, we are talking about the potential of institutional damage to the reputation of the supreme court and no one is actually processing this. >> wow. who would want to damage our institutions? i wonder. >> sam is making the case, you, joe and i have been making for a week and a half. if you're brett kavanaugh and you are adamant that this didn't happen, wouldn't you want a third party, perhaps the fbi, to look into this and let them state unequivocally that it didn't happen if, in fact, it didn't happen, but we are far beyond the point of an fbi investigation, we will have a vote on friday morning. a new poll released this morning says there are high stakes for tomorrow's supreme
court hearing as if we didn't know that already. 58% of americans tell the npr pbs news hour marist poll they plan to pay attention to the testimony. the poll conducted saturday through monday finds the nation is closely divided on kavanaugh's nomination with 43% opposed, 38% in support and 19% undecided. concerning christine blasey ford's allegation, 32% believe dr. ford, 26% believe judge kavanaugh and 42% are unsure. when asked if the allegation proves to the true, 59% say the senate should not confirm him, while 29% believe he should be confirmed regardless. jeremy peters and then peter baker, what is the white house seeing in those numbers? what is the white house seeing in this conversation has its developed over the last week? as we just showed the president's posture has changed completely. he was on message, he wasn't going after dr. ford, he wasn't going after ms. ramirez, he had
been kept sort of in line by i guess kellyanne conway and others who set the tone and said this woman should be heard, should not be mocked or ridicul ridiculed. what changed? >> that would be one way to handle it and certainly it was the way that trump and a lot of other republicans were handling this until the pressure from the right, the conservatives and a lot of other more kind of hard right politicians started to really weigh on senate republicans. you go online, you listen to talk radio, what you're hearing is confirm him now. we don't care what these women say, we don't think they're being honest, they are being paid by the democrats, george soros is involved, all of these liberal boogie men are involved in a conspiracy to take out judge kavanaugh. and that has really had its effect. i don't think that you would have seen senator mcconnell call for a vote as quickly as he did if that pressure had not
materialized. what you're hearing now more and more from the right is, look, if republicans don't push this through and confirm him, you can kiss the senate good-bye because our voters are going to stay home. i really do think there is some truth to that, though i think republicans probably lose either way because if they ram this through it's going to look so bad with the independent voters that they need, but it's also going to look really bad and probably sway the opinion of the people like lisa lurk ski and susan collins and jeff flake who ultimately matter in whether or not kavanaugh is confirmed. in her interview with the "new york times" to my colleague the other day, lisa murkowski could not have been clearer in saying don't rush this. do not rush me. i need to hear from the accusers and i want to make up my own mind. i don't think that's a place where enough republicans are operating from right now. >> peter baker, the president's posture last week was judge kavanaugh is a good man, he is a
man of integrity, but i believe dr. ford should be heard. that has completely changed this week. what was the pivot point do you think? >> yeah, it has changed this week. i think jeremy is right, obviously that this has become a galvanizer issue on the right among the base, there is a feeling of resentment and a feeling of anger, grievance and a sense that this is one of our nominees and they're going after him. on top of the political pressure i think there is a sense among republicans both in the white house and in the senate that they are being played in some way, that this is n fact -- it's not just rhetoric to say that it's democratic plot. there is a feeling among republicans that they have, you know, somehow been on the receiving end of a dirty trick in effect because the issue did not come up until the end of the process rather than in july when dr. blasey ford first wrote her letter to senator feinstein. senator feinstein said she didn't bring this up because dr. blasey ford asked for
confidentiality, but there is a raw feeling right now, neither party trusts each other, both parties look at each other in the most suspicious and most nefarious terms so that when something comes up like this it must be part of a plot rather than, you know, sort of a human kind of situation where a particular woman in california, a professor, you know, struggling with whether to come forward or not and so i think those raw feelings have animated this president, he wants to be more aggressive, he wants judge kavanaugh to be more aggressive. he thought the other night on fox that judge kavanaugh wasn't strong enough and he's telling him when he gets up there tomorrow the senate judiciary committee he needs to be more forceful in his response to this. >> i just don't understand, you know, after anita hill and everything that you would think republicans have learned, why, he wi elise, there couldn't be a negative reaction about what president trump said about the second accuser. by the way, you can be angry at
democrats and you can think there's a plot, think it's dirty pool, but you still have to respond in a way where your constituents understand that you have a sense of respect for women, that you take something seriously and that you're not a misogynist. i feel on many levels it's a fail, fail, if a i will. >> i think peter baker identified exactly that, the fact that president trump thinks that judge kavanaugh needs to be more aggressive and more attacking. >> good gracious. >> it's exactly the wrong strategy and it has been the white house's strategy to try to trump-a-fy someone who is anything but the man that i knew who worked at the white house was a serious scholar, a serious person, he was great. i, you know, had no issues whatsoever and think so highly of him as a mentor to women, and these allegations he could build upon that history in his defense, but instead the white house is attempting to
trump-a-fy someone who isn't that. >> donald trump has faced these accusations himself from multiple, multiple women and what he has done is he has gone on the counterattack time and time again and i think what he has internalized is that he did it, it worked, he's president and therefore brett kavanaugh should follow that playbook. i think it's as simple as that. >> that's all true expect one of the underlying issues is for the first time in my memory you have a whole republican party, there are only 100 united states senators, they were elected for six-year terms and you have 51 republican senators who are motivated on a daily basis by fear of twitter, right wing radio stations and a minority instead of focusing on the country, on the future of the republican on the supreme court, they're motivated by fear. they are afraid. >> so fear of a man who paid a porn star to be quiet, a playboy bunny, who brags about
assaulting women. you are afraid of that? you should maybe step up for what's right, it would feel a lot better. be better for the country. peter baker, jeremy peters, thank you both. still ahead on "morning joe," she sums up the president's message to the u.n. as, quote, it's every country for itself. nbc's chief foreign affairs correspondent andrea mitchell joins the table next on "morning joe." - [announcer] the typical vacuum head can struggle with large debris and stuck-on dust, so shark invented duoclean, replacing the front wall with a rotating soft brush. while deep cleaning carpets, two brush rolls pick up large particles with ease, make quick work of stuck-on dust, giving hard floors a polished look, and fearlessly devour piles. shark duoclean technology, designed to do more on carpets and floors, available in corded and cord-free vacuums, and only available from shark. on carpets and floors, available in corded ...ancestrydna can pinpoint where your ancestors are from...
...and the paths they took, to a new home. could their journey inspire yours? order your kit at ancestrydna.com. i couldn't catch my breath. it was the last song of the night. it felt like my heart was skipping beats. they said i had afib. what's afib? i knew that meant i was at a greater risk of stroke. i needed answers. my doctor and i chose xarelto®
to help keep me protected from a stroke. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. warfarin interferes with at least 6 of your body's natural blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor. for afib patients well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. we distributeus, i'm the owner environmentally-friendly to help protect yourself from a stroke.
packaging for restaurants. and we've grown substantially. so i switched to the spark cash card from capital one. i earn unlimited 2% cash back on everything i buy. and last year, i earned $36,000 in cash back. that's right, $36,000. which i used to offer health insurance to my employees. my unlimited 2% cash back is more than just a perk, it's our healthcare. can i say it? what's in your wallet? i'm ready to crush ap english. i'm ready to do
what no one on my block has done before. forget that. what no one in the world has done before. all i need access, tools, connections. high-speed connections. is the world ready for me? through internet essentials, comcast has connected more than six-million low-income people to low-cost, high-speed internet at home. i'm trying to do some homework here. so they're ready for anything. there are all these countries that are laughing at the stupidity of the united states. >> they're laughed at all over the world. >> our people are babies, like a bunch of dumb babies. >> people are laughing at us. >> the world is laughing at us. >> all over the world they're laughing at us. >> everybody is laughing at us. >> everyone is laughing at us. >> how stupid are we? >> the world is laughing at us, folks. the whole world is laughing at us. >> the world is laughing. >> our country is a laughing stock all over the world. >> they're laughing at what's
going on in our country. >> in less than two years my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. america's -- so true. [ laughter ] >> i didn't expect that reaction, but that's okay. >> i don't think it is, actually, but it turns out president trump was correct, the world is laughing at us. joining us now, nba news chief foreign affairs correspondent and host of ""andrea mitchell reports"", andrea mitchell, and the director, president and ceo of the wilson center jane harman, she served nine terms -- nine terms in congress. >> and survived. >> a life sentence. >> honestly. we have so much to talk about. brett kavanaugh obviously, but, you know, i guess trump got it
later because apparently he's very upset that the world is laughing at us and he didn't know? >> the spin afterward was that it was written as a laugh line. clearly it wasn't. andrea, you've covered a couple of these speeches in the general assembly. >> just a few. >> have you ever seen anything like that? >> no. we've had times when american presidents have come in and the world because of the general assembly definitely not being, you know, pro america when it comes to our iraq policy, our middle east policy, a lot of other policies, you know, palestinian issues with israel. so there have been problems before, but they ever like this. the atlantic alliance is the underplayed story is completely fractured. here our closest allies, he's criticizing angela merkel and no criticism of vladimir putin who attacked our elections. on the very day that theresa may was in the general assembly with a very strong statement about
the sk the skripal attack. we are still in talks with trade with canada, our close partner, and the fact that he came out and basically said every nation for itself, you know, this was a steve bannon speech without steve bannon, written by steve miller. >> he is a comedy writer. i don't know if you know in his other life. >> the writing was so bad, number one, but the thought process. what i really challenge is the philosophy that we give foreign aid only to those people that support us, it's not in our national interest, and out of the u.n., the human rights commission council has had problems, but out of all of these agencies zeroing out palestinian refugee aid through the u.n. agencies. what does that say? into meetings with palestinians
this week. >> david ignatius is still with us and he's got a question for jane harman. david? >> -- probably almost every day of the week. >> i cannot hear. >> what are you hearing from people overseas as they come to visit you in washington, what are you hearing them say about this administration, this foreign policy? >> so what are you hearing from world leaders, from overseas, about this administration's foreign policy, especially from your perspective at the wilson center? >> well, thank you for that question, david. i travel a lot for the wilson center and, by the way, nine terms in congress was a long time into that's a long time, jane. >> elected in the year of the woman, 1992. >> awesome. >> where anita hill was the searing image. i won in a lean republican seat because maureen reagan lost, she was pro choice, the other
candidate was anti-choice and all the republican women came on over to support me. >> there's the message right there for republicans. >> listen up, everybody. it's a big deal that's going on this week. but international leaders were baffled and terrified for a while. i actually think they're now doing work around. i went yesterday in the gridlock and rain to hear president moon and to hear president trudeau and they all said nice enough things about president trump but then they launched on what their agenda is and what that tells me is the shock and awe factor has faded from president trump's rhetoric. there are things going on here, the korea thing is, i think, very complex and i'm worried that we will make an inadequate deal with north korea and south korea, which is a problem, but to david's point, world leaders, i think, went through a period of fear and i think -- i think they are now brave enough, like theresa may, to state their own
priorities here. >> they are laughing out loud. >> well, they're filling the vacuum which is what everyone predicted would happen when the united states chose not to lead under donald trump. i guess what was most upsetting to me about that speech was what did it actually say? principled realism? what does that mean? >> exactly. >> it's just total nonsense that i can't believe it got cleared by the national security council to go forward. this meaningful hodgepodge of nonpriorities. i just -- it's really embarrassing for me that the president of the united states delivered that kind of speech at such a major international forum. >> another grades was we reject globalism, we are in favor of patriotism. what does that mean? none of these phrases really had any content except when he said, you know, with e rk, we've been advantage of too long. he's basically saying for 70 years the burden sharing that is
the appropriate role for erk ma, think of the marshall plan, think of everything that we've done throughout history that has stabilized global economies and made us stronger economically and militarily. >> jane, is there anything positive that you can draw from this president's foreign policy? i think especially pertaining to north korea where a year ago we were in a pretty bad place. >> i agree. and kudos to nikki haley who has done a really good job up here. >> she's amazing. >> she's on the trump message but she's also a welcoming figure and a very capable, i think, ambassador to the u.n. and to mike pompeo who is, i think, in his way he is up here, too, so far as i know, but projecting, you know -- really helping president trump. on north korea what i'm worried about is that the south korean agenda and our agenda are not totally aligned. south korea wants integration of the country after all these years and president moon seems very capable and focused on
that. we want really denuclearization in a much more profound way that than they care about and there are underground facilities there. let us not take our troops away from the dmz by an unnecessary and too early declaration of truce from the korean war. >> jane harmon, i want to get your insight into what is going on with the brett kavanaugh nomination process, the accusations against him, the process of having these women heard. you mentioned exactly how you were launched into congress. why are there so many repeats happening here? what's the message for republicans? >> well, the message for republicans is you have daughters who went to high school, too, listen to your daughters and possibly they haven't gone to high school yet, i have two daughters and two sons who went to high school, it
was a traumatic time for everyone, none of them had the experiences that are alleged to have happened here, but i think the country, maybe the world, has woken up to what -- the problems women have faced for a generation and i think it's going to be a very, very hard vote for some people in congress. it matters what tomorrow looks like and what the witness looks like and that they had to import a woman to question her says a lot about the house -- the senate judiciary committee. why have there never been women republicans on the committee? it's really time for us to get over at least this challenge. >> you would think. >> to equality, gender equality. i worry about the format. >> not only the woman questioner who is a trained prosecutor and is trained not to be getting facts but to be prosecuting a witness and so if dr. ford is being treated as someone who is on trial here, rather than as a
fact witness, that's a real problem. but the real problem is as well the format. one round apiece of five minutes. you can't ask questions and follow-ups and do a decent job of the democrats as well as the republicans. >> jane, just politically would it be smart for the republicans to say we need an fbi investigation at this point? >> absolutely. this should have happened, it should have been expanded last week and i don't know how long it would take to do it. i mean, it was 35 years ago, memories are probably fleeting -- >> at least you would have the most effort possible to find the facts. >> somebody is going to channel the john mccain moment and say process matters and vote no on that basis. >> andrea, stay with us if you can. jane harman, thank you so much. great to see you. still ahead, we will talk to one of the republicans on the senate judiciary committee ahead of tomorrow's highly anticipated hearing with judge brett kavanaugh and one of his accusers. senator john kennedy joins the conversation next on "morning joe."
every day, people are fighting type 2 diabetes with food, family and farxiga, the pill that starts with "f". farxiga, along with diet and exercise, helps lower aic in adults with type 2 diabetes, it's one pill a day. and although it's not a weight-loss drug, it may help you lose weight. do not take if allergic to farxiga. if you experience symptoms of a serious allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking and seek medical help right away. do not take farxiga if you have severe kidney problems, are on dialysis or have bladder cancer. tell your doctor right away if you have blood or red color in your urine or pain while you urinate. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, genital yeast infections in women and men, serious urinary tract infections, low blood sugar and kidney problems. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have signs of ketoacidosis which is serious and may lead to death. ask your doctor about the pill that starts with "f". and visit farxiga.com for savings. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help.
andrea mitchell has the first question. >> senator, great to see you again. >> same here. >> a lot of people are questioning the process here. why schedule a vote you've heard from the witnesses, what's the rush. also i've watched you in hearings, you ask great questions, so why are you going to rely on this prosecutor from arizona, a woman, when senators are elected to find facts themselves, that's your job, you do a great job with it? >> let me ask -- answer your last question first. >> sure. >> ms. mitchell. i only speak for myself. dr. ford through her counsel was very insistent that we not allow the hearing to be hijacked with theatrics, like the confirmation hearing was in my judgment. we talked about it among ourselves, we meaning the republicans on the committee,
and decided that given the amount of time that we have, dr. ford also insisted on just one round of questions, that we would hire somebody who has expertise in trying to ferret out the facts in a case where sexual assault has been alleged. i don't know that every committee member has given up the right to ask questions, but i know i intend to defer to -- i can't remember the name of the prosecutor, ms. mitchell, i think. >> no relation. >> yeah. it was in part at dr. ford's suggestion, though i don't want to mislead you, she didn't suggest we hire an attorney, but we felt like with the amount of time we have, we each have five minutes, which is not much time at all, but dr. ford wanted one round, she asked for frequent
breaks, we're going to do it in a smaller room at her request, one camera, and i'm repeating myself, but one round of questions. >> so i will follow up just so, you know, kind of keep it open positive conversation here, i've been very vocal about how the media could do better covering this story. i feel like a lot of people are kind of going out on a limb an convicting brett kavanaugh or smearing the accusers and it's happening in the media and it's a struggle, but are there areas where the republicans could do better in this and especially on the judiciary committee in terms of handling accusers in situations like this and in this specific situation? >> well, i think there are areas where we could all do better, not just the politicians, but america. this is no country in my judgment for creepy old men or young men or middle-aged men, but this is also no country to
ignore due process. some of my colleagues have suggested -- and i've tried to understand their point of view -- that you're morally tainted if you don't automatically believe the accuser. i don't agree with that. i think you're morally tainted if you don't take the accuser seriously, if you don't afford the accuser and the accused an attentive ear, fairness and due process. i realize reasonable fair-minded people disagree, but that's what we've tried to do here. >> yeah. >> that's one of the reasons we're having the hearing and we are doing it -- i don't want to overstate this, but a lot of the rules have been set by dr. ford's counsel. >> right. so i'm hearing you on fairness and due process and i'm hearing you on responding to the requests by dr. ford's counsel, but why a vote on friday, 24
hours after the hearings and why not just to sort of really go for fairness here and the biggest effort toward the truth, why not an fbi investigation? >> let me answer the hearing venue and time first. i asked about that. we are required -- the rules require us to give three days notice to have what's called a markup which is senate-ese for saying a vote. i think senator grassley was doing that to start the time running. number two, the deadline that i've always worked with has been october 1. my goal has been to have a decision made by october 1, which of course is the date that the united states supreme court begins its new session. now, in terms of the fbi, i don't have enough information to ask for an fbi report. in fact, i don't have any
information firsthand. all the information that i have, and i think most of us have, comes from an article that dr. ford gave that ult ready from an interview she gave in the "washington post." i'm not criticizing the "washington post," but i need to hear from dr. ford firsthand. point two, staff, both minority and majority staff for senate committees investigate allegations, alleged facts, all the time. we don't normally go to the fbi. we have a very good and not inexpensive majority staff and minority staff that are investigating all of these claims right now. now, senator feinstein has instructed the minority staff not to participate. that's her call. but i don't want people to think these allegations by dr. ford or ms. ramirez or -- i can't think
of his name -- stormy daniels' counsel. >> avenatti. >> mr. avenatti or whoever else makes allegations, they are going to be investigated and they are being investigated. but i want to hear from dr. ford. some people suggested that this is not regular order, some people -- normally when confirmation is over and someone comes forth with information you turn it over to your staffs, they investigate and report back to us written -- in written form. some suggested that's the way we do it, i asked to have a hearing and many others did as well and i hope dr. ford comes tomorrow. i don't want her -- i mean, i told you why i agreed to hire the special counsel, if you will. i'm not giving our special counsel instructions to go cat woman or batman on dr. ford. that's not the purpose. the purpose is to elicit the information. >> senator, it's willie geist. we appreciate you taking the time with us this morning. >> you bet. >> you said after judge
kavanaugh's initial testimony after he finished those three days of testimony, quote, i'm going to vote happily and proudly to confirm him. >> yes. >> are you open to the possibility, senator, that by the end of the day tomorrow based on what you hear from dr. ford you could be a no vote on judge kavanaugh? >> well, of course. that's the purpose of the hearing. now, i believe judge kavanaugh. i've spoken directly to judge kavanaugh. i've asked him point-blank. he is resolute. he's determined. he's not mad at anybody, he didn't speak ugly about anyone, willie, but he told me categorically unconditionally did not happen. i believe him, but that doesn't mean that i could not be persuaded otherwise. i really want to hear from dr. ford and accord her of the respect and the due process that she deserves as well as judge kavanaugh. i want to treat dr. ford as if she were my daughter, but i want to treat judge kavanaugh as if he were my son here. >> there you go. >> and on the other side of it
you said unequivocally judge kavanaugh says he didn't do it, dr. ford said it happened so how do you balance those two claims? >> i don't know if this will be a discussion of the truth as much as it will be an analysis of the memory. it happened a long time ago. i can tell you how my mind works, my memory is not like a computer file that i can call up with perfect retrieval. my mind is selective when i think back 30 or 40 years ago. my stroll down memory lane is kind of a lurch down memory lane, there are gaps in some of thigh memories when i try to reconstruct things, sometimes i fill them in with what i think is the truth, i can't be 100% certain it's the truth. i think most of us have that experience. 35, 40 years ago is a long, long time ago. i think we have to take that
into consideration for both dr. ford and judge kavanaugh. >> and with all that in mind, senator, you know how this is going to play out. we've seen this. whatever happens tomorrow democrats and progressives will say it's conclusive dr. ford is telling the truth, a lot of conservatives and republicans as you know will say we stand with judge kavanaugh. so with that, wouldn't it be smart and proper to have a third party look into this just to set the record straight and if you're judge kavanaugh wouldn't you want that record set straight by somebody so he could say, don't take my word for it, take the fbi's word for it. >> well, that's a fair point and that's what the majority staff and the minority staff, the republican and democrat staff are supposed to do together. but to your point, willie, and it's a good one, anybody who has been watching this and who has the sense that god gave a goose can understand that this whole thing has been marbled with politics. there haven't been many lincoln
moments in this. i go back to the original confirmation hearing with senators interrupting senators and talking over each other and 240 protesters. i hope that tomorrow does not end up like the original confirmation hearing did. i was embarrassed for us, quite frankly. >> so are you -- you know, i agree the process has across the board gotten difficult to watch and difficult to cover. >> and if i can say this, mika, and the supreme court in the minds of many fair-minded americans has become politicized. and do you know whose fault that is, in my judgment, primarily the united states congress, because we keep punting on the tough issues. nobody around here wants to be a senator and take a tough vote. >> yeah. don't disagree. so on the issue of fairness and some of the words you said are inspiring this question, but if
you hear something that really does sew doubt in your mind about brett kavanaugh's claim that he did not do this, are yo calling for or supporting an fbi investigation if you hear something tomorrow that truly concerns you? >> sure? . i wouldn't go to the hearing otherwise, this is not a done deal for me but i don't want to bubble wrap this. i think this is going to be very difficult to determine the truth. i have spoke within brett kavanaugh. i have the advantage i guess of having watched him through 32 hours of testimony. i've read many of his opinions and law view articles, i believe him but that doesn't mean that i'm not prepared to be persuade bid dr. ford and to listen to her attentively. let me say it again. i want a country without creepy old men but wu w due process.
>> i hear you, and what you're saying is you want to hear her this is fair and that's all i think we can ask for. david ignatius has a question for you, senator. david? >> senator kennedy. you said that this process historically has been marbled with politics, that was a good phrase. i want to ask you a question i think a lot of people are wondering. this is a lifetime appointment to the court. what's the rush? why have this artificial timeline for voting and getting it done so quickly when there are obvious profound questions. why the need to do it so quickly? >> a couple reasons. first i think we have to accept reality. there are people on both sides of this nomination who are in good faith, there are people on both sides of this nomination who are not in good faith. it's about power. it's about truth or memory or
fairness. that's just reality. number two, i have always believed that we should have someone in place by october 1. i don't think it's fair to have people, litigants, spend a lot of money on important questions to get a kiets united states su court and end up with a 4-4 tie. that's not what our founders intended. that's what's driven me. i will say, i'm not impugning her motives but i'm disappointed that senator feinstein did not bring these allegations, redacted protecting dr. ford's anonymity to us earlier. i think this would have been a much different process. now she has her reasons and i like dianne, she's smarter than me, she's more experienced than me certainly for sure and she has her reasons but i will tell you i bet in her heart if she had it to do other again she
would do it differently. >> andrea mitchell. >> one question senator about another accuser debra ramirez who said the president was inebriated and all messed up. she was to many accounts trying to be honest about her memory and how she was inebriated but there are other supporting witnesses to her character. hur lawyer has tried to get in touch with the grassley committee and keeps getting put off. the staff keeps saying they will get back to her but she's had no opportunity to speak to the staff and what wouldn't the committee want to hear from her privately, publicly, whatever, talk to her attorneys, hear her story before a vote takes place on friday? >> that's not what the staff tells me, andrea and again i'm
talking to the staff appointed by senator grassley because the staff appointed by senator feinstein has been instructed not to participate but i asked point blank our staff and i was told our staff tried repeatedly to reach ms. ramirez's counsel, they finally got through to the counsel, the counsel said we don't have a statement to make, read the "new yorker." well, i have read the "new yorker," it's the only information i have a to go on. as i understand it no one -- there were a lot of people at the alleged party. no one either recalls it or says it happened that ms. ram ram's best friend through her four years at yale never recalls ms. ramirez talking about this. i've never met ms. ramirez, i'm not calling her a liar but i was told to go read the "new
yorker." with all due respect, my constitution does not say the "new yorker" gets to advise and consent, it says the senate does and that's why i want to hear firsthand on all of this information but there's got to be a modded couple of cooperation. >> i really appreciate this interview, this has been fascinating and i urge people on both sides of the issue no matter who you support or what side of the aisle you're on to watch this again. we're all considering the position these women are in. >> it's tough. it's tough. >> you're also in a position where you have to make a decision on it and we appreciate your candor this morning. >> well, thank you, i've enjoyed it. >> senator john kennedy, thank you very much. >> i would add in while we've been talking here the attorney for debbie ramirez talking to savannah said she would be willing to testify and he said it wouldn't surprise me if she would do it without the promise
of an fbi investigation. >> the other aspect of the interview -- and senator kennedy is a fair man, you can tell he's a fair man by his appearance this morning -- but he was going on about how he hates to see the supreme court engaged in 4-4 ties. i realize he was not in the united states senate when this occurred but merrick garland sat on the sidelines without a hearing for nine months. >> there is a lot of things to consider, why you can't sync something out in a minute or less. you have to let a conversation draw. there's a lot of challenges here. coming up, from the supreme court controversy to the russia investigation, we'll see what voters in one of america's toss-up districts are saying about the drama playing out in washington. "morning joe" is coming right back.
>> look at that beautiful smart powerful woman. >> she loves him. >> and you on the left. >> she has a big heart. >> she's a great philanthropist. >> know your value, mike. congratulations. happy anniversary. >> thank you to my wife. >> that is quite a feat. >> amazing, i have chills. still ahead, name a veteran prosecutor, a republican, alex? tell me? oh, republicans name a prosecutor to question brett kavanaugh and his accuser tomorrow or, as senate majority leader mitch mcconnell calls her, an assistant. that was a slip. plus, the president's applause like at campaign rallies becomes a laugh line at the u.n. general assembly. we'll discuss the affect donald trump is having on america's image abroad. "morning joe" is coming right back. sometimes, the pressures of today's world can make it tough
>> in less than two years, my administration has accomplished more than almost any administration in the history of our country. america -- [ laughter ] so true. didn't expect that reaction but that's okay. >> we'll start to show right there. what works on the campaign trail doesn't necessarily work at the united nations. good morning and welcome to "morning joe." it's wednesday, september 26. joe is off today. with us we have msnbc contributor mike barnicle. politics editor for the daily beast, sam stein, author zaneb salby. also rick tyler and columnist and associate editor for the "washington post" david ignatius. a lot to get to. especially the brett kavanaugh hearings and potentially a vote
on friday. but what do you think about this clip? they were opening laughing at donald trump at his tweets, his lies, his reality show policies. aren't they? the world is laughing at the president of the united states. david ignatius, i'll start with you. the consequences are no laughing matter, are they? >> consequences are serious. the united states has been used to unquestioned leader sfwhip the world. the u.n. general assembly meeting every september was a symbol of that. what i thought we saw in watching president trump's
speech was reality tv for real the reality is this president came before the body and makes the statement he made routinely, i've been more successful than almost any administration. and from that world body he had -- he received spontaneous laughter at that claim. even trump in an unusual moment had to acknowledge it that wasn't the reaction i was expecting. but it's a snapshot of where the world is right now. the united states in two years has significantly changed his positi position. the united states was pulling him out of the u.n. human rights commission. he was citing those as an advantage of his policy. the rest of the world for the most part feels very
differently. >> interest iing if you look at the content of the speech, it's not unlike the stephen miller policy around the world. >> as someone what who had someone laugh at them, it hurts. i feel bad for trump. no, i don't. >> one of the themes is that the u.s. had become a laughing stock. he talked about how people are laughing at us. now it's happened and for him it
has to be galling, it has to be frustrating and embarrassing. then i think this is the personification of his foreign policy. he wants the isolation. his whole thing is america first. the consequences of that may be laughter but it's also putting us in a different place than the rest of the world. the speech was geared towards that. it was about everyone respecting their own sovereignty. about setting up an international patronage system in which people had to show us respect in exchange for us helping them. >> yesterday's performance by mr. trump at the yai-- t united nations, you can view it as a portion of a long-playing tv series which he set up in his mind. you have the speech. but if you frame in the this sense, that a year ago when he stood up and rocket man from the u.n. podium and everything like
that, many of the delegates that arrive here from around the globe were shocked, were taken aback at both the lack of decorum and what they viewed as the lack of quality in terms of public speaking. until yesterday they have the contrast one year later they snicker and laugh at donald trump on the poed yum -- podium. they've come here once again looking for a country that they feel is lost and that count i have america. >> for me the laughter was the least concerning thing of his speech. his speech was a scarry speech. he reordered how we deal with the world. he called countries like saudi arabia who is committing mass atrocities in yemen as good people.
it's almost describing the world in a completely different reality so he just legitimized some dictatorships. this is reducing america's power and this speech is a serious on one. >> i think somewhat surprised but some were scared. you have the germans laughing on his claim that they would be dependent on russia gas which is not true. you have king abdullah of jordan taking it seriously because it impacts his country. you have people taking him seriously and you have people laughing but it was a scary speech in international
relations, he's underestimating the meaning of diplomacy and underestimating how much work has been done to bring the world together. he single-handedly destroyed is. >> that stitch by stitch. >> we'll show more of a president's speech later on. but to our other top story, the senate judiciary committee will vote on brett kavanaugh's nomination to the supreme court just hours after he and christine blasey ford will testify in front of the committee about an alleged sexual assault that took place more than 30 years ago. chairman chuck grassley said yesterday that if the committee is ready, it may hold a vote on kavanaugh on friday at 9:30 a.m. senate republicans are under pressure from the white house to move kavanaugh through the final stages of his nomination to the supreme court. majority leader mitch mcconnell has warned his clooegs polleagu he has plans to hold a floor vote on kavanaugh no matter what
happens in the senate judiciary committee and as soon as next week. though kavanaugh's fate is uncertain, mcconnell said he is confident going into a vote. >> we're going to move forward. i'm confident we're going to win. confident he will be confirmed in the near future. >> meanwhile, president trump is speaking out on his supreme court nominee's second accuser, slamming debra ramirez's credibility while also congressional democrats of playing a game against the allegations of brett kavanaugh. >> the second accuser has nothing. the second accuser doesn't even though -- she thinks maybe it could have been him, she admits maybe he was drunk. she admits time lapses, there were time lapses. they're con artists. they don't believe it
themselves. they know he's a high quality person. they don't believe it. it's just resist and obstruct. they're playing a con game and they play it very well. it can not be allowed to happen and the democrats are playing a con game, c-o-n, a con game. and they know it's a con game. they know he's high quality and they wink at each other, they're winking. they know it's a con game. >> what he said about the accuser is disgusting but willie, i guess we can back up. he called a female sex crimes prosecutor who will be doing the questioning tomorrow an assistant. some are small gails but my god, come on, get it right. >> the president stayed on message for several days.
the white house, his senior aides have said you can't go after the women. you can say what you want, that brett kavanaugh is a good man that you believe that. but you can't go after the women. he threw that completely out the window yesterday. as mika said, the judiciary committee has rachel mitchell, a highly esteemed sex krooims prosecu -- crimes prosecutor to do the questioning of dr. ford and judge brett kavanaugh tomorrow. how is the dynamic different than it was this time yesterday. >> hard to know. i think this process has been real really. wily in this world where it doesn't matter who is telling the truth, everybody has weighed in and we haven't heard from witnesses so i think it's probably appropriate -- let's have the vote on friday morning
and after this has happened and we'll see what comes out of it. but it's remarkable to me that everybody has this conclusion on one side of the other based on whether it helps my team, the republicans, or my team, the democrats, without hearing from dr. blasey ford. why are we coming to these conclusions first and not later? because this process is not designed to get at the truth. >> up next, a first look at what professor christine blasey ford is offering the senate to back up her assault claim against judge brett kavanaugh. we'll have is that report straight ahead. but first, bill karins with a check on the forecast. bill? >> good morning, mika. yesterday what a mess with the heavy rain for that evening commute outside of new york city. first let's go to bayonne, new jersey, and this is what we tell you a million times. this is why flooding kills the most people in this country is that people try to drive through stuff like this. they have no clue what the road looks like underneath it, whether it's been washed out. in southern connecticut, there
were about eight inches of rain. i-95 was a river at one point. this is derby, connecticut. it improved for the morning commute but yesterday was a mess. we have a humid air mass, it's been a cloudy and wet september in the eastern half of the country. it continues today. it's pouring in northern alabama and the rain is up through ohio. later today it's humid enough and just warm enough that we'll spark severe thunderstorms. wind damage is the primary threat but we may have an isolated tornado this evening in areas of fwhoouch and vermont. it's not often i say that so we'll see how that materializes, hopefully it won't. but 47 million people at risk. not everyone will get hit. the big cities are the timing for the airports, d.c. around 6:00 p.m., new york city and philadelphia around 8:00 or 9:00 if you want gra if you want great fall weather, it happens today in the midwest. so far, a nice september for you out west.
new york city, still dodging hit-and-miss showers. it will clear out, be warm, summer like and then thunderstorms this evening. you're watching "morning joe." we'll be wrightback. making my dreams a reality takes more than just investment advice. from insurance to savings to retirement, it takes someone with experience and knowledge who can help me build a complete plan. brian, my certified financial planner™ professional, is committed to working in my best interest.
a new report overnight details some of what dr. christine blasey ford plans to share when she's expected to testify in tomorrow's reopened supreme court confirmation hearing. "usa today" reports it has obtained sworn declarations of four witnesses -- three friends and ford's husband -- saying her attorney shared with the senate judiciary committee in seeking to corroborate her claim that judge brett kavanaugh assaulted her when they were teenagers, a story kavanaugh denies. quoting from the report in her declaration, ford's friend said ford told her about the alleged assault during a june, 2013, meal and contacted ford's attorneys on september 16 of this year to tell them ford had
confided in her five years ago. in that declaration she writes during our meal, christine was visibly upset so i asked her what was going on. christine told me she had been having a hard day because she was thinking about an assault she experienced when she was much younger. she said she will be almost raped by someone who was now a federal judge. she told me she'd been trapped in a room with two drunken guys and she escaped, ran away and hid. remember, that's june, 2013. more from the "usa today" report on the sworn dwlaigs ofeclarati. ford. keith koegler said ford revealed the assault to him in 2016 when they were discussing the sentence of brock turner. she said she was particularly bothered by it because she was assaulted in high school by a man who is now a federal judge in washington, d.c. on june 29, ten days before kavanaugh's nomination, koegler
said ford revealed to him in an e-mail that the person who assaulted to her in high was president trump's quote favorite" for scotus. he wrote i remember you told me about him but i don't remember his name. can you tell me about him so i can read about him? ford's response, brett kavanaugh. another declaration from rebecca white, a neighbor of dr. ford, also recalling ford sharing her story with her after white wrote a blog post about sexual assault. so this is a new "usa today" revelation that came in overnight. there's been talk there hasn't been strong corroboration of dr. ford's story. now you have four different people corroborating. >> and this is the kind of information that will be put on the table. i think it will be a very a difficult day for dr. ford because she's basically going to have to put her life out there to talk about something terrible she believes happened to her and absolutely may have happened to
her. but am i using my words correctly? because in -- i think -- i feel like in the media especially we have two camps, some who say it has to be believed and that's where you begin and others who just want to report the story to see what's going to happen. what do we do with these allegations in the age of me too. you have an ongoing series on pbs "me too, now what?" now what with this? >> we have become cynical and jaded about such stories and what you need to exercise, all of us right now, is respect and compassion for people's integrity. i think a lot of people don't understand that when something happens to you at 16 years old, it does matter. you continue to suffer with it. if you had not been assaulted, think of a car accident that happened to you. you're still suffering physically. this is psychological impact. what we need -- i feel like there's so much police cal discussion, officersy theory,
this and this. what you are missing is psychologists. experts in the field of why this matters to dr. ford as an individual. why this is impacting her life. i believe that if something happened to you at any age it does impact your live and why it matters for america to potentially have a supreme court judge who has his views about women, who has a predatory aggressive view about women. that matters for the future of our country and girls and teenagers no matter who you are so in order to get the truth we need to create safe space tomorrow for her to tell the truth. this is a traumatized person. you cannot just have the senate judiciary committee just grilling her. we need to have respect from her integrity in order to get the truth from her and from him. >> the entire process needs to be respectful and the politics of this, sam stein, can the republicans even help
themselves? just with small little things that might just make them get through the day without being mocked, ridiculed and by the way losing women in the midterms? because this is not that difficult. you can have respect. coming up on "morning joe," a republican senator says christine blasey ford is getting a little help. as if brett kavanaugh isn't? that's next on "morning joe." - [announcer] the typical vacuum head can struggle with large debris and stuck-on dust, so shark invented duoclean, replacing the front wall with a rotating soft brush. while deep cleaning carpets, two brush rolls pick up large particles with ease, make quick work of stuck-on dust,
giving hard floors a polished look, and fearlessly devour piles. shark duoclean technology, designed to do more on carpets and floors, available in corded and cord-free vacuums, and only available from shark. brushing only reaches 25% of your mouth.ors, available in corded listerine® cleans virtually 100%. helping to prevent gum disease and bad breath. never settle for 25%. always go for 100. bring out the bold™
working closely together to deliver truly personalized cancer care. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com appointments available now. and i am a certified arborist for pg&e.ughes i oversee the patrolling of trees near power lines and roots near pipes and underground infrastructure. at pg&e wherever we work, we work hard to protect the environment. getting the job done safely, so we can keep the lights on for everybody. because i live here i have a deeper connection to the community. and i want to see the community grow and thrive. every year we work with cities and schools to plant trees in our communities. so the environment is there for my kids and future generations. together, we're building a better california.
♪ don't worry about a thing many republicans are standing firm in their support of judge brett kavanaugh and some are publicly rejected the sexual misconduct allegations against him. >> what we see taking place right now is a pr stunt by the democrats. it is character assassination and this is something that is dirty politics at its worst. >> even if it's true, does it disqualify him? it certainly mean he is did something bad 36 years ago but does it disqualify him from the supreme court? >> so you think these women are
making it up? >> they had a little help, i have a feeling. accusations be r being made about things that didn't happen and i think it's very unfortunate. >> nobody wants to hear what you think, actually. at this point this is an allegation and your answer should be, suir, this is an important thing we need to look at, this is a serious allegation, we need to find out the facts. it's easy to say and you can be respectful. >> it's easy. i don't know why they have to smear her. i don't know why they have to force a vote on friday and make it completely look like they don't even care what will happen on thursday and sam stein, who calls a female sex crimes prosecutor an assistant at this point? really? i get what you can't talk for yourself, republicans on the judiciary committee, you can't, because you're literally incapable of being respectful or
treating women with any sense of -- that they might have qualifications to be as high-ranking as you. here's mitch mcconnell. an assistant. really. >> we have hired a female assistant to go on staff and to ask these questions in a respectful and professional way. >> i can't even. what's wrong with them? i actually think there could be a good reason, sam stein, politically, to have a woman asking the questions. there could be a great way of saying that and he just -- i don't know. what happened there? he can't look at a woman in any other way but a supportive role that is lower. >> there's obvious discomfort senate republicans have about this entire process and i think it's been bungled at various points. obviously -- well, i guess to me it's very odd they are rushing it for that precise reason. it comes off as deeply
insensitive to the story of there woman. why not bring in a psychologist as a witness to further bolster the testimony? why not bring in a medical expert in addition to the friends and mark judge, that would create a forum that could be helpful for the confirmation process but also informational about the issue of sexual assault. in the end, though the real damage won't be to brett kavanaugh's supreme court proceedings or not. nothing will encourage future victims of sexual assault from coming forward if the person they're accusing is a person of privilege or power because we've witnessed that institutions and partisanship will always be against you. donald trump is the most powerful man in the world. for them to go after debbie ramirez, at the point of her
most intentional vulnerability, is jarring and it will have ramification for years to come for people who have been victimized by sexual assault and feel they need to come forward but look at what's happening to her and say i can't do that. coming up, who's ahead in the u.s. senate race for texas senate. depends on the day, i guess. polling shows a tight race between ted cruz and beto o'rorko o'rourke. only half the story? at t. rowe price our experts go beyond the numbers to examine investment opportunities firsthand.
like e-commerce spurring cardboard demand. the pursuit of allergy-free peanuts. and mobile payment reaching new markets. this is strategic investing. because your investments deserve the full story. t.rowe price. invest with confidence. to take care of yourself. but nature's bounty has innovative ways to help you maintain balance and help keep you active and well-rested. because hey, tomorrow's coming up fast. nature's bounty. because you're better off healthy.
we have two new nbc/marist polls from two critical swing states to talk about. the poll of ohio likely voters out this morning has democrat richard cordray and republican state attorney general mike dewine tied at 47% each in the race for governor. while democratic senator sherrod brown has pulled away with a 13-point lead against congressman jim renacci, 52% to 39% in that state's senate race. in the florida senate race,
democratic senator bill nelson has a three-point advantage against his republican challenger governor rick scott, a statistical tie. a poll conducted more recently from quinnipiac found nelson jumping ahead to a seven-point lead with likely voters, 53% to 46%. and in the race for florida's governor, tallahasse mayor andrew gillum leads republican ron desantis by five points, 48% to 43% in the nbc/marist poll. joining us now, columnist at the washington examiner, kristen soltis anderson and here on set, nbc news correspondent jacob soboroff. we'll start with you, jacob. you just got back from texas where you spoke with voters there in one of the state's key tossup districts. what did you find out? >> it's never what you think. i was down there last week when the kavanaugh allegations were exploded and the russia investigation, twists and turns, everyday. when you ask them what do you
care about? it will always blow your mind. watch this, guys. this is a cucumber covered in chili, it's delicious. this is a flea market on the south side and we came here with gina ortiz to find out what people want around here. >> people want clothing, backpacks, boots. >> these are nice. my wife asked me to buy boots. these are awesome. >> hi, gina. >> reporter: what matters most for you? other than child-sized cowboy boots. >> my community. >> reporter: do you go out and vote in elections? not always. >> not always. >> reporter: that's a thing around here. i heard not very many people vote. >> business and kids, it gets hectic. >> reporter: what would be the thing that gets you fired you have no go vote. >> to help make a difference, especially for the people in the lower income bracket and so
forth. and our people. >> reporter: when you say "our people"? >> hispanics. >> reporter: this district is largely hispanic. >> 71%. >> it's about how we look after one another and how we invest in the future. >> reporter: we are on our way from one of the most populated parts of the district, the corner by san antonio where 70% of the voters live to one of the most remote parts, terrorism city, and that's where we'll meet the district's congressman, his name is will hurd. nice to see you. >> the 23rd district of texas is larger than 26 states, roughly the size of the state of georgia. >> he's doing 38 stops, 32 different town halls, 14 of which are dairy queens. do you have a preferred order? >> on my own it's a medium dip co cone. >> reporter: me, too. >> but i'm a purist. come on, come join us, come join us. what's your question. >> we're one of the highest unemployment rates in the country. i think you know that. >> my concern is the streets.
>> reporter: potholes. >> major problem is is good education for our kids. >> reporter: why did nobody as the first issue bring up what's going on with the supreme court or russia? >> i think the issues thaw are being brought up are not only important issues, but they affect us immediately here. these are the things that we know will make a difference tomorrow. >> what most elected officials and what the media try to cover are not the same conversations you have down here locally. >> reporter: the other thing nobody brought up with will hurd was the southwest border and his district has a third of it. so we headed down there to eagle pass to see if we could figure out why. we're on the mexico side of the border wall but still in the u.s. it's no-man's-land. we just met frank who works construction but has time off and he's playing golf. that's mexico right there. that's the rio grande. if you can hit the ball far enough, it goes into mexico. let it rip, frank. not quite to mexico but not bad. so what are the big challenges of being a small business guy?
>> things are a little slow. i got people i got to pay. i got material i got to pay. >> reporter: you need a strong economy in order for your business to be doing well. >> to be thriving, exactly. >> reporter: this is the rio grande right here? >> yeah, right there. >> reporter: so when you're golfing, are you thinking about, you know, all the politics people talk about with the border? >> no. >> reporter: what do you think about? >> let's go to work. what time is tee time? go golf. >> first of all cob, he was smart to lay up and then -- >> you don't want to go in the river. >> take out the nine iron then put it into mexico. >> the rio grande is the drink. love that. >> so instructive. you hear that district to district, claire mccaskell talks about this in missouri, the concern about obamacare, these are the issues on people's minds. >> it's not that they don't care about the supreme court or the russia allegations or what's going on with the border. that's something that didn't come up. it's that they don't bring that up first. they bring up potholes, things
your continue person can't necessarily influence. that won't be between hurd and ortiz-jones. turnout is terrible. they have the third worst turnout and they need to figure out how to get people to come out if people like beto will win. >> kristen soltis anderson, this is a state by state, district by district question. but what do you think is motivating people to get out to the polls, particularly on the democratic side. >> i think on the democratic side there's a desire to get out and send a message about president trump. on the republican side i think voters are motivated to show a sign of support for president trump. this is a question pollsters have asked voters going back midterm after midterm after midterm. is your vote about the issues or the president? support or oppose? this election we're seeing record highs on both sides saying their vote will be about the president for democrats opposed for republicans,
support. but i would love to take that package jakob did and show it to as many other folks as i can because i think it underscores a point that has frustrated me the last couple months, this idea that everything that happens in the news cycle. well, is this the thing that will cost republicans the house? is this the thing that will swing these races? it's much more slow burning and it's about pocketbook issues which is why someone like will hurd who has at times distanced himself from the president, made himself an independent voice, is able to be polling so well until a district that hillary clinton did so well in even in an environment that's bad for republicans. there's a chance for members to do the right thing and have their own voice to overcome a political environment. >> the thing is, the economy, the president continues to trumpet how well the economy is doing but when you go to places like this, people don't have jobs, people are leaving places like eagle pass to try to work in the eagle ford shale and oil business or going to wisconsin or going to wherever. i met all kinds of people where
they're -- it's an older generation of folks and their kids are leaving town because they're not able to get work. so for the president to say the economy is doing great goes over these folks' heads. >> there's also this perception -- we were doing our own polling on this. there's a perception that while the economy is good, the benefits have been tilted towards the top 1%. the tax cut package especially was supposed to be this great legislative savior for the republican party heading into the midterms and what we've witnessed now is from an advertising standpoint republicans don't mention it. they don't mention it. from a polling standpoint it's fairly clear the public has concluded that the package was done to benefit the wealthy and i think that is a political killer for this president heading into the midterms because he can point to a good economy. he can point to good economic news but people are perceiving it as something that's benefitted wall street as opposed to main street. >> so let's look at florida. tell us what these numbers say
to you and whether this -- mayor andrew gillum has enough momentum to help other parallel races happening. >> well, being up five is better than being even, but certainly what you've got with this race is a candidate who is still introducing himself to the state of florida, you have ron desantis who is also still introducing himself but he had more of a prominent profile as a very big sort of trump supporter and now has seen this break with president trump. he criticized president trump's comments on hurricane maria because there is a large puerto rican population in the state. so president trump distancing himself from that so if you wind up being the trump guy who nonetheless doesn't have trump's support anymore, that's a really tough place to be. that's a lose-lose proposition. meanwhile, rick scott is generally well liked as governor of florida. bill nelson had been asleep and not campaigning that much.
you can see her he has begun to turn his campaign machine on but it's remarkable that a senator who is reasonably well liked as bill nelson in this kind of political environment is facing such a strong threat from rick scott. >> elise jordan, florida as always is fascinating. >> well, in this year particularly given the parkland students and their organization and how that issue is ground zero. they got behind andrew gillum and you look at how ron desantis has struggled in this general election to recover from his gaffes and absolutist stance on donald trump and i wonder if we are going to see turnout we haven't seen before in some of these unlikely voters that don't turn out, that's what the progressive left is banking on. >> how often when you were in texas eating dairy queen -- >> it's a chocolate dip. >> i'm jealous. that's a great trip.
>> how often did you hear donald trump's name? is it top of mind? >> almost never and if it comes up they say i don't feel like i can control what's going on in washington. it's ironically the reason they voted for him in the first place. now that he's in there they say i don't know what's going to happen. i have to figure out what to do tomorrow. >> jacob soboroff, thank you for being on the show. we want to update you on big news. bill cosby sentenced to three to ten years in prison for sexual assault. the 81-year-old was led out of the courtroom in handcuffs after being denied bail less than an hour after his sentencing where the judge ruled him a sexually violent predator. under that distinction, he'll have to undergo monthly counseling for the rest of his life and register as a sex offender. cosby was fined $25,000 and will be required to cover the costs
of proougs whi-- prosecution wh amounts to $43,000. we'll be right back. i'm closer to my retirement days than i am my college days. hm. i'm thinking... will i have enough? should i change something? well, you're asking the right questions. i just want to know, am i gonna be okay? i know people who specialize in "am i going to be okay." i like that. you may need glasses though. yeah. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today with td ameritrade. with my bladder leakage, the products i've tried just didn't fit right. they were very saggy. it's getting in the way of our camping trips. but with new sizes, depend fit-flex is made for me. introducing more sizes for better comfort. new depend fit-flex underwear is guaranteed to be your best fit.
you can do it. we can do this. at fidelity, our online planning tools are clear and straightforward so you can plan for retirement while saving for the things you want to do today. -whoo! i couldn't catch my breath. it was the last song of the night. it felt like my heart was skipping beats. they said i had afib. what's afib? i knew that meant i was at a greater risk of stroke. i needed answers. my doctor and i chose xarelto® to help keep me protected from a stroke. once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people
with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. warfarin interferes with at least 6 of your body's natural blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor. for afib patients well managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase your risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. before starting, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures and any kidney or liver problems. learn all you can to help protect yourself from a stroke. talk to your doctor about xarelto®. to help protect yourself from a stroke. could light up the room? aveeno® positively radiant sheer daily moisturizer. lightweight hydration for positively radiant skin that lasts.
aveeno®. naturally beautiful results®. when you rent from national... it's kind of like playing your own version of best ball. because here, you can choose any car in the aisle, even if it's a better car class than the one you reserved. so no matter what, you're guaranteed to have a perfect drive. [laughter] (vo) go national. go like a pro. see what i did there? we may have to close up our country to get this straight. we either have a country or we don't. you can't allow people to pour into our country the way they're doing. these are the laws passed by democrats so we have open borders. they want open borders. we have to have borders, if you don't have borders you don't have a country.
so we're going to have one. >> that was president trump suggesting closing the country's borders as an alternative to immigration issues. and our next guest also argues for a tighter u.s. immigration policy, executive editor for national review, rihan solemn joins us now. it's great to have you on. >> thanks for having me. >> he's the author of the new book "melting pot or civil war." great to have you on the show. congratulations on the book. your response to hearing the president speak so -- just that last sound bite on borders. >> one thing that's really important to keep in mind is that americans are actually very attuned to whether or not they feel the immigration system is controlled, whether it is managed. they actually are necessarily so sensitive to exactly what the numbers are, they want to be sure it's in the national interest. in you get that right, if you're conveying that the system is
controlled, it's managed and being managed in the interests of working americans, whether they're foreign born or native born, by the way, then people feel much better about the system. there's a feeling that this is out of control. and that's at the heart of the issue, i think. >> there are some democrats, some progressives, but i would say they're on the extreme, who are calling for open borders. but there's not really a chance that that is going to happen. in its purist sense. on the other extreme, you have separating families and putting kids in these detention camps. what's the middle ground between those two extreme positions? >> for democrats it's a real struggle. a lot of democrats actually want to have a pragmatic position but they feel very pulled by activists who are saying we're not saying open borders, but we will basically attack every enforcement mechanism. you hear people from the obama and clinton administrations who lament this development. on the republican side, similarly, there are a lot of rank and file voters who are saying i just want to be sure
this makes sense for us, that we can absorb and integrate newcomers rather than have a system where we're creating burdens we're not willing to do with. some people will promise it's a free lunch. others are saying it's a tricky issue. we need to think about it long term. >> sam? >> what if i told you we can construct a universe in which you would clamp down on some employment issues with legal immigration, create a pathway to citizenship, but there would be hurdles. revamp the visa programs and asylum seeker programs and in exchange you would have $40 billion in border security measures to clamp down on those borders. would you take that? >> i wouldn't take that necessarily, sam. >> why not? >> if you look at the gang of eight, for example, what they did is it actually created guest worker programs, temporary work programs that actually are really hard to enforce down the line. it also increased legal levels by quite a lot. if you look at the american
public, most folks actually want to keep legal admission levels steady rather than increasing them. >> don't you think as a general matter that this is the problem with immigration debates is that each side is like, you know what, your position is ridiculous, it's going to create a huge moral void in our country, it will cause problems with employment and there's no middle ground? i honestly think that the gang of eight was probably the sincerest effort. >> it was middle ground between employers who want low-wage labor and between folks who want amnesty. it was not a middle ground between americans who are concerned about whether or not we have control, whether or not it's in the national interest. and folks on the other side who, myself included, believe that you're going to need some kind of amnesty. it was a fake bipartisan compromise rather than a real bipartisan compromise based on the real divides in the country. and, you know, that's why a lot of elites thought, what's going on here? this is exactly how it's supposed to work. but no, it ignored the actual sentiments. >> one last question. isn't trying to move forward, though? we're on a status quo that i
think no one is happy with. wouldn't it be better to try to move incrementally forward with those types of bills and then maybe improve on them? >> i don't think you can do that. that's why i say you can't just have a narrow amnesty for dreamers, for example. you need something bigger than that. why? because democrats will not agree to workplace enforcement, to mandatory ever fie unless you have something bigger, unless you do is a law me slicing. donald trump hasn't always been consistent on this issue in a way that's caused a lot of confusion on the republican side. >> kristen soltis anderson has a question. >> my question for you is reading your book i was struck by the notion that the way we think of what a compassionate immigration system is, i think, is very different in your view than what is traditionally thought of as a compassionate immigration system. i'd like you to talk more about
why you think sort of being restrictive about immigration is in any way more compassionate? >> the really key issue from my perspective is that immigration is not just about immigrants, it's about the children of immigrants as well. what we're seeing right now is that we're not doing a great job of integrating the children of working class immigrants. if you are an immigrant, you're moving from one country to another, you're uprooting yourself, it makes sense for you to do that. you feel i've bettered my life for doing that. but if you're the kid growing up in a low-income household headed up by an immigrant, you don't necessarily feel grateful, you feel like i'm a u.s. citizen, i deserve to be part of middle class. and we're not addressing that. so by fixating solely on this one generation we're losing that multigenerational perspective. that's going to be a big source of tension going forward in my opinion. >> well, i'm just going to give the disclaimer i've been a long
time big fan of yours, and your writing is always provocative. and you're pushing the envelope in terms of going -- taking the debate to new places. and you really have followed the republican party for quite some time. and so with this book what is your determination about how important immigration is to the future of the republican party? as an issue. >> what i really want to drive home is that you cannot have a message that demonizes working class people who are first and second generation of the country. if you want to get control, if you want to have a system that works for all americans, you need to bring lots of people in. that means making tough compromises, not compromises that are just in the kind of elite circles, we're going to compromise with, you know, the folks in wall street and what they want to do and what folks on the left want to do. you actually have to bring ordinary folks in, including first and second generation americans, republicans need to get that most of all if they're going to connect with younger folks. >> all right. elise jordan is officially the
official morning joe fan girl. your writing is so provocative. >> i happen to think she's the greatest too. there you go. >> there you go. the book is "melting pot or civil war? a son of immigrants makes the case against open borders." reihan salam, thank you. and kristen soltis anderson, thank you. very quick final thoughts. >> i don't think it's an overstatement to say that tomorrow is a significant day in american history, that dr. ford testifying before the senate judiciary committee followed by judge kavanaugh. we heard from senator kennedy, the republican from louisiana, that he is open to changing his vote. he's a yes. he's open to changing his vote based on what he hears tomorrow. >> yeah, no, that's all -- i mean, tremendous implications for the supreme court, for how we process issues of sexual assault allegations in this country. you didn't even mention the other fact, which is president trump's meeting with rod rosenstein tomorrow. >> oh, my gosh, yes. >> we could potentially witness the defanging of the justice
department, the gutting of the justice department and a real constitutional crisis if he goes forward with firing rod rosenstein. >> everyone has been anticipating that perhaps the testimony tomorrow will lower the temperature a bit. and that's just delusional. because it's going to get even more heated after both sides find their different camps to cling to. sorry to be debbie downer. >> i'm going to end with, the world is laughing at us, literally. so yesterday, i think, was a really significant day. we don't talk enough, i think, about hoour place in the world d what this country has spent so many years building. and what is slowly being chipped away at before our eyes, before the world's eyes. and that is what's happening at this point. that does it for us this morning. stephanie ruhle, i'll see you in a half an hour. i'll be on your show. she picks up the coverage right now. >> thank you so much, micah.
i look forward to seeing you in a few. we've got a lot to cover this morning, setting the stage, 25 hours away from the ford/kavanaugh hearing. we now know the details, republicans have appointed an arizona prosecutor as their questioner. as an optimistic grassley schedules a committee vote for friday with some republicans thinking kavanaugh is still a slam dunk. >> we're going to be moving forward. i'm confident we're going to win. >> the democrats are playing a con game-c-o-n, a con game. >> more and more republicans are signaling -- could his confirmation be in question? and no laughing matter, minutes from now the president will be back at the united nations, a day after his speech in front of the general assembly drew a curious reaction. >> my administration has accomplished more than