kavanaugh. that's a wrap of this hour. i'm back in two hours at noon eastern. stay where you are. you know why. it's time for a.m. joy with my good friend joy reed. >> i think it's fine. i think actually this could be a blessing in disguise because having the fbi go out and do a thorough investigation, whether it's three days or seven days, i think it's going to be less than a week. but having them do a thorough investigation, i actually think will be a blessing in disgieuis. it will be a good thing.
>> i don't have anything. i don't need a backup plan. we'll see what happens. i think he's going to be fine. >> despite calling christine blasey ford a very credible witness, donald trump seems convinced his supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh will make it to the high court in no time. perhaps that's because the white house put strict limitations on the fbi as they reopen their investigation into kavanaugh and his alleged sexual misconduct. on saturday an nbc news report citing multiple people familiar with the process said for now the fbi will look into the allegations made by dr. ford and by deborah ramirez. but as not been permitted to investigate the claims of julie swetnick who claims she witnessed kavanaugh engaging in sexual assault conduct in the 1980s. also in that nbc news report, a white house official confirmed
that her claims, which kavanaugh strongly denies would not be pursued as part of the reopened background investigation into kavanaugh. trump seems to want the american public to believe otherwise, however. this is what he had to say about the fbi's scope before heading to his west virginia rally. >> they have free reign. they will do whatever they have to do. they will be doing things we never even thought of. >> joining me now is msnbc contributors. thank you all for being here. l lisa, let me start with you. at least nbc news is reporting that the fbi's reinvestigation, reopening the investigation into these alleged sexual misconduct allegations will not include julie swetnick or the potential
fourth accuser. donald trump is
refuting that. retweeted saying that nbc news incorrectly reported that he was limiting the fbi investigation of kavanaugh to only person people. and he adds actually i want them to interview whoever they deem appropriate at their discretion and says, please correct your reporting. what is your view on this? if the allegations people believe are credible. if you have more than one other woman, do you think those allegations need to be included in the investigation? >> the limits on this investigation, both in terms of the scope and the timing are a slap in the face to all of the women in america. i have represented hundreds of sexual harassment and assault victims. i represent many today. there is no way this can be done in one week. nobody wantings s to talk to yo. witnesses are absent. they're sick. they have to go to work, et cetera. then you have to follow up with what the witnesses tell you.
it is absolutely impossible. is this one week standard going to apply to everybody in america accused of assault or just donald trump's friends? this is designed to get to a specific result so at the end of the week they can say, all right, the fbi wasn't able to find very much. >> this does seem designed to meet the deal that jeff flake cut with senate democrats saying that he would agree that no final vote on kavanaugh should continue until there is an fbi investigation, but only if it is limited. it seems that that's what the senate republicans want, is that, yes, they can say they agreed to a review but that there is not enough time to really do a thorough job. >> right. and the odds that the fbi is going to uncover some smoking gun, some calendar entry that says on july 2nd, this was the night i sexually insulted someone are incredibly slim. so what this has done is allowed the reopening of the investigation, you know, for the benefit of those three or four
republican and maybe one or two democratic senators to have some reason to vote for kavanaugh because it is clear they ultimately want to. jeff flake had said, he's a con ser have tivgs i'm a conservative and i ultimately want to support him. let's not forget there is credibility evidence of this individual having committed a sexual assault. this gets back to whose statements are valued in the united states senate or as lisa was saying in sexual assault cases around the country. is it individuals or women whose voices are directed to pleas and not tip the boat or men that kick and pound and talk about what their alma mater is. we're discrediting valid, credible testimony so three or four senators can have some basis to cast a vote they already want to cast. >> there are republicans, including some that are hemming and huhhing and saying they are
undecided that really want to get to a yes. and being able to tick off a box saying an fbi investigation happened, even if it is a truncated brief investigation seems like it would tick that box for a susan collins or for a jeff flake because they want to vote for him, if they want to vote for him. >> or lisa murkowski. i agree with my fellow panelists. they want an excuse to be able to vote yes. we as a public will never know what the fbi investigation revealed. it will be revealed to the white house and then to the senate judiciary committee, but they won't make those results public. so that kind of gives an out to the senators who have been looking for an excuse to vote for this candidate. there is also the issue that we -- that the results -- it's different when you are issues a written statement to the judiciary committee versus when you are actually sitting down and talking to an fbi agent. it is also different versus when
you're misrepresenting statements to a judiciary committee versus when you are lying to the fbi, both of which can carry consequence to it. so i think we will have to see what this yields. i think the gop is still in a very touchy position. they don't know the scope, the full scope of the fbi investigation. it will be challenging. michael avenue gnatty willing to make his client available to speak with the fbi. there is no record at this point showing will that actually happen. we're all in a wait and see mode. but i'm just not convinced this fbi investigation will reveal some smoking gun. >> just to recap, of course, michael represents julie sweat nick, but you have deborah ramirez. we have from her attorney john klune a statement saying we can confirm the fbi has reached out to interview ms. ramirez as she
has agreed to cooperate with their investigation. julie swetnick clarified after the publication of the nbc news story that while investigators may not be interviews her herself that doesn't preclude from asking other witnesses about the allegations she made. i want you to listen to lindsey graham this morning commenting specifically on the julie swetnick allegations. >> so she will not be interviewed by the fbi? >> i think the allegation that she makes is outrageous. not one democrat mentioned it. but mark judge who is named by her as being part of the gang rape and drugging women will be asked if he ever saw this happen or see kavanaugh engage in it. >> the presumption from lindsey graham and some of these other republicans is they already
don't believe these allegations. so it makes the fbi investigation thing feel a bit like a rouse, no? >> i think on the julie swetnick question, if they are excluding her, there needs to be an explanation for why they are excluding her. i am most worried about if you are going to judge who is most in quotes "believable," one important way to do that is who told the whole truth and nothing but the truth and who shaded the truth or misled or lied. and the way this may be set up is there will be no way to judge some of judge kavanaugh's comments about drinking, about blacking out, about a whole lot of other activities where he went way out there with denials that as corey booker pointed out in, i thought, a very powerful summation of the facts, there's just a lot of evidence that what he said wasn't true.
so i think that we need to know a lot more over the next day about how much free reign as the president put it will the fbi really have? will they be able to go to questions as sort of second-level questions that will help us know who is telling the truth? because i am very worried, as a lot f people have already said, that this becomes the excuse for people to say, well, you know, you wanted an fbi investigation. you got it. and now we can vote for kavanaugh without exploring the core question of how much truth did he tell and where did he go off the rails when it came to the truth? >> yeah. lisa to that very point -- here is a list of potential people, by the way. mark judge who seems to be the person the most salient because his book and other things go to whether or not kavanaugh was truthful in front of the committee about his drinks.
christine blasey ford, elizabeth razor, deborah ramirez, julie swetnick and tim gaudette. and other people listed in kavanaugh's famous calendar. none of them have to talk to the fbi. they're not being subpoenaed. >> yes. >> so is there a concern here that you get a mark judge in front of them and he just declines to answer questions? >> there are hundreds of witnesses they should talk to. i do these investigations for my rape clients constantly, and i can tell you the first thing ever witness can tell you is i don't want to be involved, especially in a high-profile case when you are dealing with a powerful, well connected person like kavanaugh and a woman with no power who is going to go back to their life. they're going to tell you, i
don't know anything. i don't remember. you have to work with them over a period of time. multiple phone calls, establish a relationship of trust. get some of the details. all right. you don't remember. but did you go to parties like that at the time? was there a lot of drinking? and you build up a relationship of trust. mark judge, who is going to say he doesn't remember anything, you need to talk to the people around him. you need to talk to the corroborating witnesses that each of these three women have, who they told contemporaneously shortly thereafter or at least in the case of dr. ford years ago, her therapist and her husband, two doors on her house because she was so afraid of being trapped. a woman's testimony is evidence. to say there is no evidence is a slap in the face to dr. ford who came in and who testified. many of my clients, the only evidence they have is their credible testimony, and that is enough in an american court. >> well, can i stay with you just for one second because in these cases, i think you make an important point is that people
are discounting dr. ford's own words as evidence. you hear republican after republican saying i haven't senior rob ration. in the typical case where a woman is alleging rape or an attempted rape, what corroborating evidence is there normally? there are usually only two people there. >> that's correct. so you look at the surrounding circumstances. did she go to that school? was she in that place and time? that has been established. then you look at who she told contemporaneously. she told her therapist. she told her husband. let's talk to them. let's get the record. what reason on earth would she have had six years ago to tell this story when kavanaugh was not nominated for the supreme court at that time? in the case of accusers number two and three, they have even stronger corroborating witnesses, people they told at the time. that's very typical. you look at behavioral changes, the course of her life. has she lied in the past?
has she filed fake lawsuits? no. she built up a career who clearly was terrified to come in and testify, but she did it anyway because it was her civic duty. >> can i come in on that? i think that is such an important point and it is odd that republicans are in a position where they are all saying they respect her, they admire her, they admire what she said and she does have corroboration, as lisa suggested. she was willing to take a polygraph. she told people about this long before there was any political connection. and i think in the end the only out republicans have to keep those two stories in line is to say she's identifying the wrong person and she said flatly, no, i'm not. so they are in a very tricky position because they don't want to go after her because she was so moving and credible. >> last point, too, the
incuriosity of republicans. if you have multiple women who are saying there is a combination of drink and forcing o oneself on them, it seems like there is not an interest of exploring that pattern. >> we are using a lot of talk about criminal justice here and what it would take to convict brett kavanaugh of a sexual assault beyond a reasonable doubt. you know, certainly, he's not entitled to having all charges against him proven beyond a reasonable doubt when what we're doing is assessing the wisdom and judgment and putting this individual with a lifetime tenure on the supreme court. he's entitled to a presumption of innocence, but the senate doesn't have to demonstrate every charge to a degree of certainty. you have sworn testimony from an individual saying judge kavanaugh sexually assaulted her that long ago.
that, right there, is significant and, you know, worth a great degree of consideration. now, think about other circumstances in life in which any sort of criminal charge like this would come up. if it were a catholic priest, no one would be wanting to demonstrate to perfect certainty that the charges were true. i think we're out of time. >> i think you're right. no one would be asking if the boys that are now adults that are coming forward have corroboration. no, i have never heard of that. >> or if it were your kid's kinder garden teacher, you want to establish the charges. but the mere fact it wasn't a provable charge beyond a reasonable doubt would suggest automatically this person should be hired for another position. you heard the words job interview again and again. to some extent that's what this is. it is for promotion, not conviction. >> judges are supposed to avoid the appearance of impropriety. clearly we have reached that level. >> this is a great discussion. thank you all.
have a great sunday. next up "saturday night live" returned last night and took immediate aim at brett kavanaugh's temperament. [ applause ] >> what! says and it'll help- sorry i have to take this. we're good. hi. uh no i need it right now, yeah... my life was narrated for me by others. their voices were forceful, emphatic, absolute. it had never occurred to me that my voice might be as strong as theirs. the most inspiring minds. the most compelling stories. download audible. and listen for a change. download audible. so why not bundle them with esurance and save up to 10%?
which you can spend on things you really want to buy, like... well, i don't know what you'd wanna buy because i'm just a guy on your tv. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. that's confident. but it's not kayak confident. kayak searches hundreds of travel and airline sites to find the best flights for us. so i'm more than confident. kayak. search one and done. but some give their clients cookie cutter portfolios.
fisher investments tailors portfolios to your goals and needs. some only call when they have something to sell. fisher calls regularly so you stay informed. and while some advisors are happy to earn commissions whether you do well or not. fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.
this confirmation process has become a national disgrace. the constitution gives the senate an important role in the confirmation process, but you have replaced advice and consent with search and destroy. >> you're saying there has never been a case where you drank so much that you didn't remember what happened the night before or part of what happened? >> you're asking about, yeah, black-out. i don't know. have you? >> could you answer the question, judge? i just -- so that's not happened? is that your answer? >> yeah. and i'm curious if you have. >> brett kavanaugh's often combative testimony has raised new questions about whether he has the temperament to be on the supreme court. but it also provided plenty of fodder for this season opener of "saturday night live." >> let me tell you this. i'm going to start at an 11.
i'm going to take it to about a 15 real quick. dr. ford has no evidence, none. meanwhile, i've got these. i've got these calendars. these beautiful, creepy calendars. about lifting weights with pj and sque and doug. you just want to humiliate me in front of my wife and my parents and alyssa frigg initiation nilanno. >> i asked you if you drank in high school and you said i like beer ten times. did you ever drink too many beers? >> you mean, was i cool?
yeah. >> joining me now, msnbc political analysts. that was actually quite funny. but, i want to go back to the conversation we were having. let's bring our off air conversation on the air. we were talking a lot about this issue of, you know, corroboration and what an accuser and the accused might have as corroboration. and the thing that seems kind of obvious even to a nonlawyer like myself is that her story, the things around it line up. she says mark judge worked at a safeway. he says in his book he worked at a store. she says she lived in suburban maryland. did she? yes. the "saturday night live" skit illustrate illustrated everything was trying to make it out that he lived a life that no high school student lived. he only drank because it was
legal and only when he was a senior. >> and that wasn't even true, right, joy? >> right. so those are elements and her testimony is also part of the evidence. >> right. that's what we have to take away from this entire experience. if there is one thing, i hope it's that when women come forward and tell their stories, that seis evidence. don't wait for the dna results to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt because we're not in a court. and in most cases you will never have that. you are going to have to weigh the credibility of competing testimonies. in this case it is not close. she came out. she was very deliberate. she was very precise. she pulled out a number two pencil and she was like, wait, i'm going to go through my statement and make sure there are no errors. he came out and he was not precise and he was not dleb r e deliberate and he lied repeatedly about little things that he didn't need to lie about. >> i want to talk about her temperament. john brennan tweeted, dr. ford
is a national treasure. kavanaugh's temperament and blatant partisan ship are disqualifying for a supreme court seat. here is lindsey graham talking about kavanaugh's temperament. >> it was a man who was innocent, who was rightly offended by being destroyed for a political purpose. >> it strikes me that a woman who was that angry and tearful and yelling and interrupting would have been seen as immediately sort of disqualified for whatever she was trying to do. whereas, it did strike me not only was dr. ford very krebcred, but he was constantly apologizing. he actually was performing the thing that women have to do in terms of minimizing the threat of her presence. >> right. we have to be honest about this in this moment. women are not allowed to be angry in the same way men are.
particularly black women, joy. so there are different levels to it. but obviously she couldn't come out and yell at the senators and push back at the senators and cry and rant and rave the same way he was able to do. and not only is the temperament not appropriate for somebody who wants to be a supreme court justice, you couldn't even go into a job interview at dunkin donuts and behave that way and get the job. i can't believe anyone can look at his performance on thursday, which actually, as the days go by, it looks crazier. so when you were watching it live, you were like, wow, he looks angry. i could imagine him being a mean drunk. i really can, just to be honest. each day that goes by, it looks even crazier because it's so unusual for someone seeking that type of office to behave in this way in public. >> i wonder if the "saturday night live" effect then starts to kick in with these senators. they opened with a brilliant matt damon send up of his angry
crying rant. so that's now about who he is. that's not of a supreme court justice. >> we are seeing a system designed for men like brett kavanaugh to have this drunken, belligerent behavior be viewed as youthful discretions. he came across as the villain in every 1980s high school movie. we saw his true colors. he's really biff. this is what happens when biff becomes a supreme court justice. he appeals to people who say, oh, he's like me. i get him. i understand him. they view him through this lens of he was just a kid that had too many beers. if only we could view trayvon martin, jordan davis through the lens of just kids who were never accused of sexual assault.
this is a real challenge. he tried to martyr himself as this last face of this belligerent beating my chest men culture that people think, you know, these left wing upper crust elites want to castrate. you have to ask yourself, why even have this guy? his record is already tarnished. we have a credible witness giving a credible account of what she says happened to her. why not just pull his nomination? he has a long list from the federalist of society of somebody else who can come in. why? because he is the only justice on that list who said that a sitting president cannot be indicted. i don't want us to lose sight of that with all of these other headlines hitting the papers. this is really what it's all about, when you have three women accusing your nominee of sexual assault, the easy thing to do is say, no problem. we have somebody else. but they know that the senate is in trouble. republicans realize it is in
play and democrats may control the senate and donald trump is shaking in his boots because he cannot have somebody else come in this court who will not be his protector. i also want to say his -- not only was his performance very troubling, but the partisan temper tantrum that he threw. you have a justice like chief john roberts who has broken the ranks. you don't ever have to worry about that happening with this judge. when he was questioned, a formidable prosecutor, she was perceived as an angry black woman attacking this angry, poor guy. yet, he was championed by the right by somebody outraged of these false allegations against him while making dr. ford out to be someone they carefully bypassed in criticizing and made the democrats the face of this huge partisan movement, trying to unseed him. to people of color, this is all a very familiar thing playing
out in the justice system. >> trayvon martin, 17, his b boyhood was not an issue. i don't think their boyhood was ever -- or timmy rice. i want you to listen to one more piece from "saturday night live." >> i don't know if mr. kavanaugh actually has a history of assault or if he actually has a drinking problem. but i do know that he might. and you shouldn't be on the supreme court if you might. you shouldn't be on the people's court if you might. sometimes might is enough. i mean, i don't want to pet your dog if he might bite me. i don't want to leave you in my house if you might be a crack head. >> e.j.? >> that's awesome. look, i think there were two moments in that hearing that were especially revealing.
there were a lot of them, obviously. the one about dr. place yeah ford that stuck with me is there was a moment when she was asked did judge kavanaugh push you into the room? she went out of her way to say she didn't know who pushed her in the room. she was so concerned with accuracy that she said that. and there were many points like that where she was very clear what she didn't know. that sure sounds like a truth teller. the moment -- it's not simply questions about drinking. i think that moment when judge kavanaugh went all partisan, left wing conspiracy, democrats protecting the clintons, hate donald trump, you can't have any confidence in how he will rule on voting rights or gerrymandering or any issue that involves politics. beyond everything, i think that was the disqualifying moment. >> and there is no requirement
for a supreme court nominee to recuse. it is up to them to recuse on these cases. it is pretty clear -- at least you would guess on how he would rule on much of everything. thank you very much. enjoy your sunday. tiffany cross will join us again. thank you. next up, i'll talk with somebody who actually knew brett kavanaugh in the 1980s. - i love my grandma. - anncr: as you grow older, your brain naturally begins to change which may cause trouble with recall. - learning from him is great... when i can keep up! - anncr: thankfully, prevagen helps your brain and improves memory. - dad's got all the answers. - anncr: prevagen is now the number-one-selling brain health supplement in drug stores nationwide.
- she outsmarts me every single time. - checkmate! you wanna play again? - anncr: prevagen. healthier brain. better life. i needthat's whenvice foi remembered that my ex-ex- ex-boyfriend actually went to law school, so i called him. he didn't call me back! if your ex-ex- ex-boyfriend isn't a lawyer, call legalzoom and we'll connect you with an attorney. legalzoom. where life meets legal. (door bell rings) it's ohey. this is amazing. with moderate to severe ulcerative colitis, are you okay? even when i was there, i never knew when my symptoms would keep us apart. so i talked to my doctor about humira. i learned humira can help get, and keep uc under control when other medications haven't worked well enough. and it helps people achieve control that lasts. so you can experience few or no symptoms. humira can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers,
including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. be there for you, and them. ask your gastroenterologist about humira. with humira, control is possible. ♪ ♪ no matter when you retire,
when i was born in 1983, 52% of the world's population lived in extreme poverty. it is now down to less than 10% of the world's population today. that progress is truly extraordinary. there is a new report that came out from the world bank this week that suggests that while progress is continuing, it is actually slowing down. we have only two years, now through to 2020 to get that progress back on track or we will not achieve the end of extreme poverty by 2030. now is the time for activists to call on their heads to state to make a meaningful impact. >> the global citizen festival took place at central park here
in new york city. i had the pleasure of cohosting. there were amazing performances. plus, impactful speakers all gathered for a very worthy cause. also making a surprise appearance, democratic senator and republican senator jeff flake who were critical to getting donald trump to launch an fbi background investigation into the allegations of sexual misconduct against brett kavanaugh. there is also tense moments for the crowd. but in the end all was fine. much respect to the nypd for their work getting everything back to together so everyone could get back to enjoying the show. thanks. more a.m. joy after the break. ks more a.m. joy after the break. i was getting all these leaves and i was going back generation after generation. you start to see documents and you see signatures of people that you've never met. i mean, you don't know these people, but you feel like you do. you get connected to them. i wish that i could get into a time machine and go back 100 years, 200 years and just meet these people.
being on ancestry just made me feel like i belonged somewhere. discover your story. start searching for free now at ancestry.com. so shark invented duo clean. while deep cleaning carpets, the added soft brush roll picks up large particles, gives floors a polished look, and fearlessly devours piles. duo clean technology, corded and cord-free. the riskiest job. the consequences underwater can escalate quickly. the next thing i know, she swam off with the camera. it's like, hey, thats mine! i want to keep doing what i love. that's the retirement plan. with my annuity i know there's a guarantee. annuities can provide protected income for life. learn more at retireyourrisk.org
carla is living with metastaticd breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of her body. she's also taking prescription ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. carla calls it her new normal because a lot has changed, but a lot hasn't.
ask your doctor about ibrance. the #1 prescribed fda-approved oral combination treatment for hr+/her2- mbc. and if you get lost, just hit me on the old horn. man: tom's my best friend, but ever since he bought a new house... tom: it's a $10 cover? oh, okay. didn't see that on the website. he's been acting more and more like his dad. come on, guys! jump in! the water's fine! tom pritchard. how we doin'? hi, there. tom pritchard. can we get a round of jalapeño poppers for me and the boys, please? i've been saving a lot of money with progressive lately, so... progressive can't protect you from becoming your parents. but we can protect your home and auto when you bundle with us.
i drank beer with my friends. almost everyone did. sometimes i had too many beers. sometimes others did. i liked beer. i still like beer. we drank beer. my friends and i, boys and girls, yes, we drank beer. i liked beer. still like beer. we drank beer. we liked beer. >> what do you consider to be too many beers? >> i don't know. you know, we -- whatever the chart says, the blood-alcohol chart. >> it is clear he likes beer. but whether or not he drank to excess in his high school and college years has become an
issue in his confirmation hearings. kavanaugh portrayed himself as enjoying a beer or two with friends, incorrectly stating that his drinking was legal at the time. but some of his former classmates say his innocent self-portrait is not true. joining me is one of his classmates at yale who said she drank with him. thank you so much for being here. >> thank you, joy, for beihavin me. >> let's start with this question of whether or not brett kavanaugh was a drinker and whether or not he drank to excess. first of all, you were roommates, i understand, with deborah ramirez, who is the second accuser, now being interviewed by the fbi and claims that brett kavanaugh exposed himself to her and that when she tried to move away she was sort of inadvertently made to touch him in a way that repulsed her. and, so, first of all, i'll start by asking, do you believe debby ramirez's story?
>> so i want to make it very clear i was not at the party that was referenced freshman year. i didn't really hang out with this crowd freshman year, so i didn't witness anything. but i don't know why debby would make it up. >> and you were freshman roommates with her? >> no. i didn't -- she lived right above me freshman year. >> got it. >> i became her roommate in my junior year. >> got it. all right. so let's talk about these parties at yale and brett kavanaugh's demeanor during them. this is mr. kavanaugh disputing that he was a sloppy drunk in college. please take a listen. >> so you were not a sloppy drunk, so your roommate was lying. >> i will refer you again to the redacted portion. i'll say look at my academic record. i don't usually like to talk about myself that way, but in response to your -- you know, i worked very hard in college in my studies, and i also played basketball. i did sports. >> so that was brett kavanaugh
disputing that he was a sloppy drunk, which was something that his then yale roommate said he was. he said he drank often until he couldn't remember what happened to him. who is right here? do you believe brett kavanaugh when he says he was just playing sports and going to class and not drinking to excess? >> so i found that part of his testimony not to be credible. he was, in my view, trying to imply there that it was one or the other. you either get good grades and play sports or you go out and drink. and that's just simply not the way it was at yale. i was a two-sport athlete at yale. i got good grades. i got into a top business school. we all drank too much in college. that's not the issue on whether or not he drank in college. the issue is he's a federal judge and he is mischaracterizing himself because now his past is not convenient for him. i was witness to -- i was at many, many parties with brett.
we generally went out on saturday night. so it is not every night partying, but the drinking on saturday nights was pretty hard and there were many times when i witnessed brett being incoherently drunk. so again having too many beers in college is not -- is not a problem. the problem is when you mischaracterize it and misrepresent yourself, the foundation of our jewishuation system is built on the truth. and if we have judges that are blurring the lines between truth and lies, how are we supposed to trust in our judges and judiciary system? >> did you ever witness brett kavanaugh become belligerent while drunk? >> i have seen him become obnoxious while drunk. i wouldn't characterize it at
dl bl belligerent. i can't attest to blacking out. that's usually someone that goes to brunch with him on sunday mornings. they'd be talking about the exploits and laughing about what they did and did not remember. i have witnessed it being very questionable. that to me was the part that wasn't credible, that he never drank so much as to not have any gaps in memory. i just found that not to be credible at all. >> yeah. let me play an exchange during thursday's hearing and get your response. and i have a question for you on the other side. >> was there ever a time when you drank so much that you couldn't remember what happened or part of what happened the night before? >> no. i remember what happened and i think you've probably had beers,
senator, and so has -- >> so you're saying there has never been a case where you drank so much that you didn't remember what happened the night before or part of what happened? >> you're asking about, yeah, black-out. i don't know. have you? >> could you answer the question, judge? i just -- so that's not happened? is that your answer? >> yeah. and i'm curious if you have. >> i have no drinking problem, judge. >> nor do i. >> there were a lot of questions about kavanaugh's temperament during that hearing. which of the two brett kavanaugh's was more authentic to your memory? the first round where he tried to say he was very neutral or the second round where he was angry and combative? >> well, i will say i never really saw brett as an angry combative drunk. again, i would say more on
noxious and playing with the crowd. there was a lot of frat boy laughter and times that got obnoxious. so i can't really speak to either of those temperaments. >> sure. very quickly because we're almost out of time. a will the of people will assume that you are saying these things because maybe you are a liberal democrat, that maybe you oppose donald trump. are either of those things true? >> so i am not a democrat. i have been a registered republican since i was 18. this is not able democrats versus republican. this is about the truth and the integrity of our courts. >> lynn brooks, thank you very much. appreciate you joining us. and more a.m. joy after the break. us. and more a.m. joy after the break. 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. need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done.
upmc does more living-donor liver transplants than any other center in the nation. find out more and get out of line today. now i know you're thinking, "i don't want to hear about insurance." cause let's be honest, nobody likes dealing with insurance, right? which is why esurance hired me, dennis quaid, as their spokesperson because apparently, i'm highly likable. i like dennis quaid. awww. and they want me to let you know that, cue overdramatic music, they're on a mission to make insurance painless. excuse me, you dropped this. they know it's confusing. i literally have no idea what i'm getting, dennis quaid. that's why they're making it simple, man in cafe. and they know it's expensive. yeah. so they're making it affordable. thank you. you're welcome. that's a prop apple. now, you might not believe any of this since this is a television commercial, but that's why they're being so transparent.
anyways. this is the end of the commercial where i walk off into a very dramatic sunset to reveal the new esurance tagline so that you'll remember it. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. what are you and where are you from? >> i'm white. i'm caucasian. that is my haeritage. >> white is not a country. when you say white, what does that mean to you? >> white is the default race. >> it is just the norm. to be white is the good thing. >> a fill immammaker has docume
and analyzed the experiences people encounter when dealing with race in america. but now he is documenting his own experiences in his own book "dear america." and my friend is joining me now. hello, friend. i wish you were here. >> me too. i'm in san francisco for this book tour. >> and it is a great book by the way. and i really highly recommend people read it. i love the fact that you subtitled it notes of an undocumented citizen. why did you make that choice? because it is also underlined. >> i'm a huge fan of james baldwin, so it is a tick to notes of a native son. but i think in terms of the word citizen that was intentional on my part because i think that the conversation is what does it mean to be a citizen of this country. i'm not a citizen because i was not born here and legally i'm not a citizen, but i would argue being a citizen is participating and contributing. and so that is the conversation
that i was kind of hoping to start. >> and we had a great conversation about this book not too long ago. and i asked you to read a passage which is probably my favorite passage in the book because it is so poignant as to what the separation of a mother and the child really feels like. this is from chan ter call gamblers. it says after handing me a brown jacket with a made in the usa label on its collar, a christmas gift from her parents in california, the grandparents i would soon be living with, my mom says it might be cold there. it was the last thing i remember her saying. that parting there your mom is so searing in the book and i think that people forget that there is a lot of pain involved in a parent separating from their child and a child being separated in this way. >> this that is the reason why i ended up writing the book the way that i did. i didn't want to write about policy, i wanted to write about the psychology of all of this, like what does it mean to be
separated from your family. in my case my mom for 25 years. this morning when i got up here in san francisco, i was reading the "new york times" report about the 3800 kids that are lock up in a tent in south texas. and the question for me, what are we doing? like we're locking kids up in tents because why again? why are we locking them up, why are they separated from their parents? and so we talk so much about this issue in such a partisan way that i think for me at least as you know traveling across the country, i think we've lost the mental health part of all of this, like what is the xwleegs emotional toll and cost that is happening not only to the parents and the kids. i'm a 37-year-old man and being put in an airport and staying good-bye to my mom was something that i did not think would haunt me as a 37-year-old man, but it has been traumatic in that way.
>> and can we talk about the 11 million undocumented people living in america? we don't talk about the other people that are helping them in their daily lives, almost a conspiracy of everyone working together to make your life and the lives of other undocumented people work. >> and actually a real point of co doing that in the would be. i book. i'm from the bbay area ain't noe been able to hide in america without all those people. lying, passing and hiding which is the condition undocumented people find themselves in, but we can't do it alone. there are employers, co-workers, classmate, friends, who let us do that. it is in a way a conspiracy. >> and one of love. you talk about these two families. >> absolutely. >> your white american family and your family back in the philippines. it is a fantastic book. it is called dear america, notes of an undocumented citizen by
jose antonio vargas. have a happy and safe book tour, my friend. >> thank you, joy. i appreciate it. i apecpriate it. oh! oh! ♪ ozempic®! ♪ (vo) people with type 2 diabetes are excited about the potential of once-weekly ozempic®. in a study with ozempic®, a majority of adults lowered their blood sugar and reached an a1c of less than seven and maintained it. oh! under seven? (vo) and you may lose weight. in the same one-year study, adults lost on average up to 12 pounds. oh! up to 12 pounds? (vo) a two-year study showed that
ozempic® does not increase the risk of major cardiovascular events like heart attack, stroke, or death. oh! no increased risk? ♪ ozempic®! ♪ ozempic® should not be the first medicine for treating diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not share needles or pens. don't reuse needles. do not take ozempic® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to ozempic®. stop taking ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, itching, rash, or trouble breathing. serious side effects may happen, including pancreatitis. tell your doctor if you have diabetic retinopathy or vision changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase the risk for low blood sugar. common side effects are nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, stomach pain, and constipation. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. i discovered the potential with ozempic®.
♪ oh! oh! oh! ozempic®! ♪ (vo) ask your healthcare provider if ozempic® is right for you. opportunlike here.rywhere. and here. see? opportunity. hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. ev-er-y-where. about to be parents. it's doing a lot of kicking down there. meeting the parents. it's gonna be fine. and this driver, logging out to watch his kid hit one out of the... go dani, go! opportunity is everywhere. all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪
and not have her heart -- your heart go out to her. this is a disaster for the republicans. >> good morning and welcome back to "a.m. joy." that is how things started out on fox news thursday morning after dr. christine blasey ford gave her wrenching opening state an account of what she says was a sexual assault by sprooupreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. but a couple hours later, after kavanaugh argued with democratic lawmakers trying to ask him questions, fox news began singing quite a different tune. >> you had very heartfelt statement by christine blasey ford, but you didn't have any corroboration. in fact there were substantial contradictions. but it isn't a trial, takit is political process and i think kavanaugh has a strong afternoon. >> let's go to our panel.
michelle bernard, and jason johnson joining us. thank you all for being here. chris wallace i think sort of channelled fox's initial oh, crap reaction to hearing dr. christine blasey ford. he even talked about his daughters coming to him and talking about experiences they had. let's play a little bit of that. >> over the course of this week like i think a lot of american families, my family a lot of it on e-mail has been discussing this. and disagreeing and arguing about it. and two of my daughters have told me stories that i had never heard before about things that happened to them in high school. and hadn't told their parents. >> but as the "washington post" put it, and they called it a ride on fox news' roller coaster of emotions during the hearing, by the end of the day most of the hosts believed that kavanaugh has increased his
chances to a likely confirmation. and this has everyone else thought that kavanaugh's performance was a disaster. >> on fox nobody loves a white guy yelling at people more than fox news. what we saw in the first half of the hearing in the coverage was they did not expect dr. blasey ford to be so credible. they did not expect her to be so poised, composed. she held it together. and told a very riveting story about what happened to her. the second half was brett kavanaugh going guns blazing full trump, this is someone who was called a bush person who before our very eyes became a donald trump person. and they loved it. when you look at fox news primetime programming, sean hannitytucker carlson, they ate it up. >> and it does point out, everybody understands what fox news is, takes conservative news outlet, it is constituent service to say things that republicans want to hear, right, that's what they are there to do. but just the analysis of a
supreme court nominee, it is not a political office, but the fact that the more political he got, the more he behaved like donald trump, and the more he literally yelled at democrats and shouted conspiracy theorys, the brighter his outlook came for fox. that says something about what they do for a living. >> one thing interesting to me about fox and i've seen them do this before, when a news story first happen, they react the way traditional news media might react. and then as they start to figure out how to set that news event in the context of how they talk about politics, how they speak to conservatives, then the spin starts to change and they talk about it differently. and i felt when i was watching them when christine blasey ford was speaking, they were reacting the way everyone across media was reacting and across social media. but as the political import of how she was coming across was starting to impact their spin on
it started to change. and the other thing i think that they were doing is they were reflecting the way conservatives were reacting in general. what i was seeing on social media, what i was hearing from people who seemed to be friendly to conservative ideas, they had the same reaction. they were impressed by dr. ford, but kavanaugh came out and spoke the way trump does, spoke as you noted tucker carlson and laura ingraham and pundits on fox regularly speak, they felt this guy is standing up for mts, thi this is what we want. and so in a way fox was echoing the heartbeat of conservative thought in a way that it often does. >> and michelle, let's look at the way sean hannity and laura ingraham reacted to jeff flake cutting that deal. i saw that they actually played the elevator video, that wrenching conversation that senator flake had with these two women activists who confronted
him about their own sexual assaults in the past and then he had this side meeting with chris coons and amy klobuchar and said let's do an fbi investigation. here is how hannity reacted to that. >> of course republicans predictably caved and flake flaked and bought the democrats more time to seek, search, destroy and bludgeon. >> and here is lauraingraham. >> i thought jeff flake sounded liken a out of touch narcissist today like i'm mr. smith goes to washington, i'm going to save the whole process. the process was polluted by an uncorroborated allegation being used to smear a man who has been this public life for almost three decades. so jeff flake, sorry, you are a little late. >> stipulating that a if you had dime for every democrat who spends a lot of time complaining
about how democratic politicians do their jobs and how poorly they fight, i mean i think you hear that pretty much every day from democratic voters who get upset at the party not fighting hard enough. that was pretty open, right? jeff flake is an easy target, he is leaving congress. but that deal is what really set off the anger over across the plaza. >> absolutely because they thought that the fix was in and that kavanaugh was well on his way to being confirmed to be the next justice on the supreme court. you know, it was interesting watching the coverage during that time period when people didn't understand what was happening and watching lindsey graham sitting there and chris coons and people trying to figure out what was happening with flake and during that time period if you looked at social media, you had people who i would assume are with a liberal bent were saying flake is flaking out, he will vote him in, republicans felt happy and
excited, they were going forward. and then flake comes in and he does quite frankly what i think was the right thing to do. you would assume that every person particularly anyone who believes in the country, believes in the republic and believes in how our democratic values are supposed to work and how the supreme court is supposed to work would be congratulating jeff flake for doing what he did. this was a very visceral reaction that we saw on behalf of fox news hosts and what is so scary is that they do mirror the feelings of so many conservatives around the country. people don't want to know the facts and the fact that this woman was alleged and gave very credible testimony is no different to the folks at fox than the allegations of roy moore. they support him wholeheartedly and don't care about the facts and that is what angered them about jeff flake because he put country above party. >> and jason, the way that you knew that brett kavanaugh did well in the eyes of fox news
viewers is that pretty quickly lindsey graham mimicked him. lindsey graham came out and then gave the same -- a similar performance. not the crying part, but a similar angry performance and republican strantegies says lindsey graham helped himself immensely for a guy who people were mad at for running against trump, to somebody that he is like a hero now. >> so this whole coverage by fox and some of the republicans, this is what happens when you cover politics like a sporting event as opposed to searching for the truth. like michigan fans, oh, wait, we're down 17 with dr. ford, oh, wait, deuces o, we won. if you were concerned about the truth, you would do what jeff flake did which is we need to find out what actually happened one way or another. but if you are concerned with performance, you love the brave
heart speech by lindsey graham. and all he is doing is basically this is his job application to take jeff sessions job after he gets fired. so all of this was a sporting event. it is shameful because at the end of the day, even for them to complain about the fact that we have a one week delay, there should be no time line on justice. so this one week that we had to supposedly find the truth is still going used for something for performance as opposed to fining oe finding out what happened that night in 1982. >> and i did not watch the fox news coverage that day, but the "chicago tribune" reports that in between the time period between christine blasey ford's testimony and brett kavanaugh's testimony in the afternoon, fox's commentators referred to that break as halftime, they were absolutely looking at it as if it was the super bowl of sporting events. >> wow. >> if i could break in for a second.
i would also note that their approach to covering this seemed to mimic the strategy of the republican leadership on the senate judiciary committee. their approach was to be respectful to ford, to let her tell her story, to have a female prosecutor asking the questions so that you didn't have the visuals of these 11 white guys bearing down on one woman. and then when kavanaugh came out and sort of gave them license to bevented that emotion. so we had a strategy that sort of mimicked what we saw the republicans on the committee do in terms of handling the entire day's testimony. >> i want to let the panel jump in, because i think no one kind of summarized the feeling over there and the pent up frustration that was unleashed. you heard lindsey graham erupt and really sideline the prosecutor. she was done with her and then they all jumped in.
but tucker carlson i think epitomized it the most. i think he summed up what the beef really is with this idea of raising these accusations against brett kavanaugh from that fox news oriented point of view. let's listen. >> at this point kavanaugh isn't just a supreme court nominee. he is a folk hero to many people. an inspiration to millions. people who spent the last two years being brow beaten and bullied by their moral inferiors were buoyed by what he said. these are people that were told they were worthless and bigoted, and they are in the way of other people gaining power, they have been commanded to shut up and obey. >> and you saw in the picture behind him was white women. but he is really talking about men, right? he is talking about white guys. and the white guys aren't going to take it anymore. >> the entire orthodoxy under donald trump is about old white
guys still wanting their way. anytime anybody of a different creed, a different faith, a different skin color wants to have a piece of that pie, they get angry and they want to snatch it right back. and that's what we saw play out at the hearing with lindsey graham's outburst attacking the senators and committee members in an unprecedented way. it is not about substance or truth, it is about make america great again which we all know makes great america as white as humanly possible and everything that has happened under the trump administration has been all about empowering white people and telling everybody else to sits down, shuts up and take it. >> michelle, they could have in the last 30 something years since anita hill, they could have put one of the women elected on the judiciary committee. i mean the choices that leadership makes about who to put on plum commb committees, a intel and judiciary are considered plumb assignments. but they chose to have it be just white guys. it is not like a slam to say their committee was all white
men. that is what they chose to do. and now to have that anger and say we're not going to take it anymore, i mean, it was an interesting thing. >> it was insane. and there seems to be ample evidence that sometimes the fox commentators and anchors sort of telegraph to the president what he should sho he should or shood nt n should . and it was said that they have to be questioning their theory and the way that they went about this and having the quote/unquote female prosecutor. and i say quote/unquote because i really could have just referred to her as a prosecutor. but that stwraenlg of having her ask questions. and i want to mention that because i feel like she telegraphed a very important piece of strategy to them because after the quote/unquote
halftime break and when judge kavanaugh testified, you will notice that the prosecutor only got to ask maybe one or two questions and then all of the members of the senate judiciary committee, the white males members of the senate judiciary committee, started asking their own questions and testifying and making statements. and i truly believe that if that prosecutor had been allowed to do the job that she was retained do, methodically and as a lawyer, there would have been evidence or at least questions that would have been raised by the questions that she posed to kavanaugh and they cut it off and i absolutely believe that it was strategic and it was done purposely and they listened to martha mccallen and people said we have a problem here, she can't ask anymore questions. >> if i can break in, i think there is a question about what her job actually was. i think her job was to provide cover, not necessarily to
unearth facts. but what strikes me about that tucker carlson clip that you played and what troublings me about it, we've seen tucker carlson criticize the idea that diversity is strength, that institutions and our country can be strengthened by our die verszity. and this idea that equalizing people, that bringing equality to systems is a zero sum game and that whites people have to lose in order for -- or white men have to lose in order for women and people of color to be equalized, that is a fallacy. and that is what bothers me the most about what we saw in that clip, this idea that diversity doesn doesn't improve us which isn't true. . >> and one of those 11 guys is hispanic, ted cruz. so we should note that. thank you very much.
trelegy works 3 ways to... ...open airways,... ...keep them open... ...and reduce inflammation... ...for 24 hours of better breathing. trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling,.. ...problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. think your copd medicine is doing enough? maybe you should think again. ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy and the power of 1-2-3. ♪ trelegy 1-2-3 save at trelegy.com. and if you get lost, just hit me on the old horn. man: tom's my best friend, but ever since he bought a new house... tom: it's a $10 cover? oh, okay. didn't see that on the website. he's been acting more and more like his dad. come on, guys! jump in! the water's fine! tom pritchard. how we doin'? hi, there. tom pritchard. can we get a round of jalapeño poppers
you see it happening right now. and they are determined to take back power. by using any means necessary. you see the meanness, the nastiness. they don't care who they hurt. who they have to run over in order to get power and control. that's what they want is power and control. we're not going to give it to them, we'll keep it running the way it has been running. >> well, during yet another one of his rambling rallies in west virginia last night, donald trump took the already ugly battle over his supreme court nominee and made it uglier. he even accused dianne feinstein of leaking a letter from christine blasey ford. >> remember dianne feinstein, did you leak? remember her answer. did you leak the document?
huh, what? no, huh, no, i didn't -- huh, well, wait one minute. did we leak? no, we didn't leak. >> and as if there wasn't already you enough drama surrounding the hearings, conservative states like red.com added to it by img applyi imply feinste feinstein's staff manipulated wikileaks pages of the senate committee. and joining me now is that congresswoman maxine waters. always good to see you. >> thank you. >> so let's go through this, because this was a strange sort of twist in the whole kavanaugh saga. red state.com and some other conservative sites claim that a group of people are were editing the biographies of republican senators that are on the senate judiciary committee making public their private information, their phone numbers and home addresses. they implied that it mitch been one of your female staffers
despite the fact that in the same article, the red state article says people who claim to be experts say the odds that this woman did it are low, but the common ip address indicates it is in a block on of ip addresses assigned to your office. what is your response? >> already the capitol police and our internal expert said absolutely not, that the number that they have given certainly is not connected with our office. it has no truth in it. and so it is just an anonymous something that the right wing would like to try to indicate that somehow my office has done something wrong. has no credit ability and prove not to be true. >> and interesting that the crisp blog world would try to draw you into the nominatioanont do you make of them trying to pull you into it? >> it just doesn't work. everybody know what is is coming out of that right wing block of
people who try to dominate the media and those who would try and in some way indicate that democrats are responsible for something wrong. we don't pay any attention to it. we've said what we had to say. the capitol police have said it is not true. our internal expert has said it is not true. the number does not match with anything in our office. it is just another lie. >> and we did have -- there has been an association made between the kavanaugh hearings and the anita hill hearings. and it makes sense because even though these allegations are even more egregious, you were elected to the congress in 1990, so you were in congress at the time of these contentious hearings. you had several house democratic women stood in silence on friday during the judiciary committee as they took up the court bid to estimate ebola liz t symbolize that there is unbroken history of not believing women and taking their claims
seriously. what do you make of that anita hill comparison? >> well, let me just say that anita hill comported herself in a very, very credible manner. and she took a lot of heat from those white male senators, but she really helped people to understand what, you know, happens in these kind of confirmation hearings and what happens when a woman comes forward and, you know, alleges that she has been sexually harassed or abused. it was riveting. she came out having been absolutely attacked, but she handled it very well. but it helped us to understand how women are treated and disrespected. and it still goes on. as we take a look at what is happening in this kavanaugh hearing. and so we just know that we have to stand up, we have to fight, we have to not only fight to make sure that women get the respect that they deserve, but when you have a credible person
like christine blasey ford, it helps us to point out that no matter how credible they are, no matter you how well spoken they are, no matter how smart they are, that these senators do not intend to allow sexual assault to be the reason why someone will not be confirmed. and so i think that this has played out in a way that will only strengthen us and strengthen women and those who care about justice to fight and to confront them and protest against what we're seeing. kavanaugh is very interesting. i think one of the most serious things that we have learned about him is he is trying to be confirmed to the highest court in the land, but he is not an independent. what he did is he went back up to the white house and the president told him what go back and and i sand hsay and how to . so if he is nothing but a puppet to the united states of america,
why would we want him on the highest court of the land. it doesn't bode well for america. >> to that very point, i want to very quickly play you that sound bite that goes to what you're talking about, that a lot of people thought was the most outrageous part of his hearing. take a listen. >> this whole two week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit fueled with apparent pent up anger about president trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, rejevenge on behalf of the clintons and millions of money from outside left wing opposition groups. this is a circus. >> revenge on behalf of the clintons. what did you make of that, congresswoman? >> well, it sounded as if it was coming straight out of trump's mouth. and so he had his orders. and he came back and he did
exactly what he was told to do. i think that is a serious problem with anybody who is wishing to be confirmed to the highest court of the land. he cannot be trusted. and if he is nothing but a mouthpiece for trump, we know what that means for democracy. we know what that means for a lack of justice that is going to come out of the supreme court by someone like him. it is outrageous that he would allow himself to basically take those kind of orders and come back and execute them. everybody could recognize what that was all about. and the difference between even how he first comported himself and after he had gone to the white house, it is so obvious that he is not independent and will never be independent. so bring politics into it and to talk about hillary clinton and the democrats? no supreme court justice should act that way. he cannot be trusted. and he should not be confirmed.
>> congresswoman maxine waters, always making it very plain as always. thank you very much. have a wonderful sunday. >> you're so welcome. thank you. and coming up, more on what the white house is saying this morning about the kavanaugh confirmation battle. 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.
the full value oft wyour new car? you'd be better off throwing your money right into the harbor. i'm gonna regret that. with liberty mutual new car replacement we'll replace the full value of your car. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪ are you one sneeze away from being voted out of the carpool? try zyrtec®. it's starts working hard at hour one. and works twice as hard when you take it again the next day. stick with zyrtec® and muddle no more®. carla is living with metastatic breast cancer, which is breast cancer that has spread to other parts of her body.
she's also taking prescription ibrance with an aromatase inhibitor, which is for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive her2- metastatic breast cancer as the first hormonal based therapy. ibrance plus letrozole was significantly more effective at delaying disease progression versus letrozole. patients taking ibrance can develop low white blood cell counts, which may cause serious infections that can lead to death. before taking ibrance, tell your doctor if you have fever, chills, or other signs of infection, liver or kidney problems, are pregnant, breastfeeding, or plan to become pregnant. common side effects include low red blood cell and low platelet counts, infections, tiredness, nausea, sore mouth, abnormalities in liver blood tests, diarrhea, hair thinning or loss, vomiting, rash, and loss of appetite. carla calls it her new normal because a lot has changed, but a lot hasn't. ask your doctor about ibrance. the #1 prescribed fda-approved oral combination treatment for hr+/her2- mbc.
the devastating earthquake and massive tsunami that hit indonesia friday has now taken more than 830 lives. and joining me now with the latest is lucy kafanov. please tell us the latest. >> good morning. this was a disaster on an unimaginable scale. 7.5 magnitude quake, sue you nam a -- tsunami waves as high as 20 feet. and authorities fear that that a death toll will ultimately end up being in the thousands and that is because they are still struggling to get to the hardest hit areas. the death toll so far largely coming from the city of palu, the is it i city is in ruins.
and there is heavy equipment needed to shift the rubble. most of the search and rescue is being done by hand. the problem are the areas further north. they are not accessible. communications are down. roads and airports washed out, blocked by landslides. rescue teams are trying to make their way to these areas, but they have no idea what they will find once they get there. and we are talking about a combined population of 1.2 million people trapped in the aftermath of this disaster. and that is what is fueling those fears of an ultimately much higher death toll. >> wow, very tragic. lucy, of ththank you very much bringing us the updates. bringin.
you might take something for your heart... or joints. but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. in the movies, a lot of times, i tend to play the tough guy. but i wasn't tough enough to quit on my own. not until i tried chantix. chantix, along with support, helps you quit smoking. it reduced my urge to smoke to the point that i could stop. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. some people had changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, agitation, depressed mood, or suicidal thoughts or actions with chantix. serious side effects may include seizures,
new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking or allergic and skin reactions which can be life-threatening. stop chantix and get help right away if you have any of these. tell your healthcare provider if you've had depression or other mental health problems. decrease alcohol use while taking chantix. use caution when driving or operating machinery. the most common side effect is nausea. my favorite role so far? being a non-smoker. no question about it. talk to your doctor about chantix. no question about it. the smoother the skin, the more comfortable you are in it. and now there's a new way to smooth. introducing new venus platinum. a premium metal handle boosts control... to reveal up to 100% smooth skin. venus ♪ as moms, we send our kids out into the world, full of hope. and we don't want something like meningitis b getting in their way. meningococcal group b disease, or meningitis b, is real. bexsero is a vaccine to help prevent meningitis b in 10-25 year olds.
even if meningitis b is uncommon, that's not a chance we're willing to take. meningitis b is different from the meningitis most teens were probably vaccinated against when younger. we're getting the word out against meningitis b. our teens are getting bexsero. bexsero should not be given if you had a severe allergic reaction after a previous dose. most common side effects are pain, redness or hardness at the injection site; muscle pain; fatigue; headache; nausea; and joint pain. bexsero may not protect all individuals. tell your healthcare professional if you're pregnant or if you have received any other meningitis b vaccines. ask your healthcare professional about the risks and benefits of bexsero and if vaccination with bexsero is right for your teen. moms, we can't wait. ♪
this can't become a fishing expedition like the democrats would like to see it be. i think you have to go back to the very beginning of day one of when president trump nominated judge brett kavanaugh. from that very first moment before any of these allegations had even been brought up, democrats said they were not going to support him, they weren't going to vote for him, and they were going to do everything within their power to fight him. we've seen that play out. they have been absolutely disgraceful in the way that they have handled this process and the way that they have exploited both brett kavanaugh and dr. ford. >> white house press secretary sarah huckabee sanders is denying the white house is limiting the scope of the background check investigation
into brett kavanaugh. and doubling down on the party line that democrats are exploiting both kavanaugh and dr. ford. back with me are michelle, jason and tiffany. senator hirono from abc earlier. >> i would think that jeff flake and the other senators who are going for this investigation will call for this time, you know. every senate vote matters and there is time to get to the bottom of it. seven days is bad enough, but you then to limit the fbi as to the scope and who they will question, that is -- that really -- i wanted to use the word as far as, but that is not the kind of investigation that all of us are expecting the fbi to conduct. >> michelle, is this beginning to look like it might be a farce
to give republicans a an excuse to vote for kavanaugh? >> absolutely. if you are going to have an investigation, a real investigation, at a minimum they have to interview mark judge. they have to interview the three other women who have made allegations against judge kavanaugh. they have to talk to people to find out if there is a pattern and practice on the judge's behalf of lying on small things as well as big things. problems with alcohol. the possibility that he blacked out and didnoesn't actually remember what may or may not have happened. you cannot limit the scope of the investigation because if you do, there is no reason for the one week delay. it would be an absolute as far as and i am hoping that if they really limit the scope of the investigation that jeff flake are step will step up and vote no. >> and let's go to lindsey graham, talking about kavanaugh's drinking also on abc. >> he is not a stumbling bum
blink drunk. i don't believe that you could accomplish what he has accomplished in a serial rapist in high school. the devil's's t e's triangle is drinking game. i think he is a capable man and his life was ruined here. >> jason, i'll give this to you with the caveat that one can be quite successful and have a history of doing things wrong, #bill cosby. go for it. >> this is what makes it disingenuous. the question is not whether he was in a devil's triangle or whether republican interns tried to change the wikileaks entry. that is not the question. the question is number one did he sexual assault someone in 1982 and did he engage in a lifetime of behavior into possibly his 20s of harassment and abuse and mistreatment of women that manifests itself in how he will operate as a judge. so the republicans want to focus in on this night or limit the scope, that doesn't really
matter. but if you are somebody who has a lifetime of abuse, make be you shouldn't be on the court. >> let's go to kellyanne conway. something similar happened yesterday on our show. kellyanne conway got emotional, talking about her own status or survivor of sexual assault. and this is from cnn earlier today. >> what you saw the other day is a senate judiciary committee confirmation latering. it is not a criminal or civil proceeding. and let me just sayle it is not a meet being of the "me too" movement. i feel very empathetic frankly for victims of sexual assault and sexual harassment and rape. that -- i'm a victim of sexual assault. i don't expect judge kavanaugh or jake tapper or jeff flake or anybody to be held responsible for that. >> that was very emotional moment for her, but at the same time, i'm not sure that the argument she's making is that essentially the democrats on the
committee are trying to hold brett kavanaugh responsible for all of the sexual assaults and rape that has happened everywhere. >> yeah, so the thing that all of these people have in common, sarah huckabee sanders who has zero credibility with the american people, senator lindsey graham whose performance was an audition for the position of attorney general. and now you have kellyanne conway trying to conflate issues that really aren't relevance. any woman who has been a victim who has survived it obviously my heart goes out to them, i applaud them and i extend that to kerry sheffield as well. i watched her tell her truth yesterday. the challenge is kellyanne conway is actively defending a man who has 15 being a y15 accu. so i don't know how you co-exist with those conflicting i'd yol yol-of-ideologies. i don't buy it. and the fact that they are trying to make the narrative that the democrats are out, you know, trying to make brett kavanaugh the face of this
movement, i just think that argument is going to fall flat. this is somebody who had active accusers three that we know of incredibly accusing him of sexual assaulting him. that is what is at issue here. and the biggest question that people need to understand, does this man deserve to it is on the supreme court. like i you pointed out yesterday, his liberty is not at stake. this is not a question of does he deserve to spend his life in prison. the question is does he deserve to sit on the highest court of the the land. and after we saw his belligerent performance, i don't know how you can call yourself a patriot even though you have a confederate flag in your pickup chest, stand up for this country and show that is not the way the highest court of the land functions. you cannot allow this person to serve on the supreme court when they there are still questions about his sobriety, his truthfulness and his ability to operate as a jurist in a bipartisan way.
>> i want to quickly play a joints interview that jeff flake and chris coons did talking about kavanaugh's behavior. >> i have to say that when i heard him, i heard someone who i hoped i would sound like if i had been unjustly accused and to see his family behind him as chris said. and it was anger. but if i were unjustly accused, that's how i would feel as well. and as it went on, i think his interaction with some of the members was a little too sharp. >> your thoughts, jason. >> so this is what is interesting about this kind of behavior and these kinds of questions. unarmed black people get shot all the time and people just take the cop's word for it, but suddenly we have this situation and everybody has to be like svu and we have to find the information, the evidence, et
cetera. it is whether you believe this woman or not. it is whether you believe dr. ford or not. and what is particularly egregious about all this, regardless whether yyou believe her or brett kavanaugh, how many watching right now could throw a temper tantrum during a job interview and still get the job? if nothing else, he was yefling at the people that are eventually making the decision. >> very quickly, i have to -- we're changing topics. a hard turn. i have to play this sound bite and get each of you to comment it. this is donald trump on the dictator of north korea, kim jung-un. >> i was really being tough and so was he. we have a back and forth and then we fell in love. okay? no, really. he wrote me beautiful letters. and they are great letters. we fell in love. >> let me get michael avenatti's
response to it. he loves himself, himself, himself, vladimir putin, kim jung-un. top that, michelle. >> i can't even begin to fathom what i could say to cap it. all i can say is our country has become the laughingstock of the world. this is absolutely horrific. he loves a despite. >> and i'll just say when you elect the clown, you get the circus and we're seeing that circus right now. >> lords have mercy. go forth and have brunch. thank you all very much. coming up, the next stop on our series. the next stop on our series it was here.
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®.
-of course, daniel. -fridge, weather. -clear skies and 75. -trash can, turn on the tv. -my pleasure. -ice dispenser, find me a dog sitter. -okay. -and make ice. -pizza delivered. -what's happened to my son? -i think that's just what people are like now. i mean, with progressive, you can quote your insurance on just about any device. even on social media. he'll be fine. -[ laughs ] -will he? -i don't know. -will he? >> tech: don't wait for a chip like this to crack your whole windshield. with safelite's exclusive resin, you get a strong repair that you can trust. plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. >> customer: really?! >> singers: safelite repair, safelite replace.
patrick morrissy. >> 38 days until election day. patrick morrissey got a lot of love from donald trump during his rally in his state. while west virginia isn't known for high democratic turnout, a democrat has held this coveted senate seat since a 2010 special election, and that democrat is joe manchin, the governor elected to his first term in 2012 with more than 60% of the vote. while morrissey has internal polling showing he and manchin are in a dead heat, the cook political report has ranked this likely democrat. it make the virginia senate watch the next to watch. trump won west virginia by 41 points in to 16. democrats must hold onto this seat if they have any chance of flipping the senate. joining me now to discuss this is perry macon jr., senior
political writer at 538.com. explain this to us, if you could, perry, how can it be that donald trump blows out west virginia, wins it by 41 points but joe manchin seems to be in the lead? >> whatever you think about joe manchin's politics and policy views, joe manchin is a very, very politician. west virginia has moved to the right dramatically in the last 20 years but joe manchin has won five statewide elections during that time, since the 2000s. he's been very effective. every poll i've seen in this race shows joe manchin ahead. our site says he has 87% chance of winning this race. joe manchin is pretty centrist, very popular in west virginia, even though trump has campaigned against him. i could see joe manchin has a brand outside of the democratic party and people in that state really like him. >> let's talk about how the kavanaugh vote or kavanaugh supreme court nomination could impact this race. there's a bloomberg article that
say five meet privately on kavanaugh. we're still talking about joe manchin, who hasn't said how he'll vote. no decisions made on anything. i can assure of you that. also in the meeting were three republicans, collins, flake, murkowski, the usual suspects we know of. does manchin -- does the vote on kavanaugh potentially impact that -- chances of him keeping a seat? >> manchin is ahead in every poll, ahead by nine in some recent polls. i think he voted against the health care bill that trump poe posed. i think if you're a west virginia voter who wants a trump-like person, joe manchin is not voting with trump a lot. so, could i see it hurting him slightly. yes. i think he has a substantial lead. manchin has a really strong brand in that state. i see him being able to say, hey, the investigation wasn't thorough enough.
i have some -- i'm not sure. and he could vote no. but i would say also manchin is a pretty conservative person id idealogically, but he might vote yes because he likes kavanaugh. >> let's talk about his opponent. is he somebody know known known in the state? patrick morrissey. what does it say about him that trump had to come in and rescue him like he's about to do for ted cruz, or try to rescue him? >> trump won this state overwhelmingly. morrissey is not as well known as manchin, who's been basically representing the state his lifetime. i think it's an i.d. trying to make this vote more about trump is smart for the president. i think the president wants to campaign a lot and this is a place you could see he would make a difference. i think trump will help in like north dakota, indiana. i just don't know if he can break through against joe manchin because of manchin's own
brand in that state. >> clinton west virginia. is there a blue pocket in this state at all? >> i don't think so anymore. the governor was elected democrat and changed party last year. at this point, west virginia is a state -- it's like -- it's not in the south geographically but it's like the south politically where it was democrat for a long time. bill clinton won there. al gore almost won there. kerry lost by a lot. so manchin is pretty much alone in that state. >> there are issues like the teacher pay and things -- >> there are some activists there. >> it's always so nice to talk to you. thank you very much. >> thanks, joey. hanks, joey.
so why not bundle them with esurance and save up to 10%? which you can spend on things you really want to buy, like... well, i don't know what you'd wanna buy because i'm just a guy on your tv. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. ♪ ok here we go guys, you ready? hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. opportunity is everywhere. ♪ it's gonna be fine. it's a door... ♪ it's doing a lot of kicking down there. waiting to be opened. ♪ whatever your ambition... ♪ whatever your drive... ♪ whatever you're chasing... driver, are we almost there? we're gonna have a baby!
♪ daddy! daddy! opportunity is everywhere. ♪ all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪ when heartburn hits... fight back fast with tums smoothies. it starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue... and neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪ tum tum tum tum... smoothies... only from tums
that's our show for today. thanks for watching. "am joy" up next sunday. up next is alex witt. >> are you sure you're coming back? i thought after seeing you last night at global citizen fest, i thought we lost her to the fandom. >> i love it but i needed to sleep. good day, i'm alex witt. here's what's happening right now. new questions this hour. does the fbi have free rein or is the white house micromanaging? into the scope of