Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

Brett Kavanaugh's Confirmation Hearing; Voting Comes After a Moving Hearing; American People are Divided on the Kavanaugh/Ford Case; New Information from "The New York Times" Regarding the Female Questioner for Ms. Ford. Aired 10-11p ET

Aired September 27, 2018 - 22:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[22:00:00] (JOINED IN PROGRESS)

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. Thanks for joining us. Live in Washington tonight.

Here's what a source is telling CNN. That President Trump told a room full of Republican donors the Senate judiciary committee hearing today was, quote, |brutal and tough to watch."

Well, Mr. President, I agree with you. I've seen a lot of crazy things in this town. But this, this incredible hearing that went on for hours and hours and hours, was not like anything any of us has ever seen before.

I was on the edge of my seat. You probably were too.

Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh telling their stories in their own words. And the whole thing played out live with millions of us watching all across this country. People watched on planes, mid- flight. Including on Air Force One.

Students watched in North Carolina in social studies classes and in law school. People watched in a deli in Philadelphia. They listened on the New York City subway. When you get someone to listen on a New York City subway, you know it must be incredible.

Even a 76-year-old sexual assault survivor called in to C-SPAN saying Ford's testimony just broke her heart. There were tears, both from supporters of Ford and from Kavanaugh, two incredibly emotional stories, two people whose lives have been thrown into chaos. But their stories, well, don't jive. You can't believe both of them.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Dr. Ford, with what degree of certainty do you believe Brett Kavanaugh assaulted you?

CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD, BRETT KAVANAUGH'S ACCUSER: One hundred percent.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: One hundred percent.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: None of these allegations are true? BRETT KAVANAUGH, SUPREME COURT NOMINEE: Correct.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No doubt in your mind?

KAVANAUGH: Zero. One hundred percent certain.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: She told the horrific story of what she says Brett Kavanaugh did to her when they were both teenagers. Pushing her down on a bed, groping her, trying to undress her.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

FORD: Brett and Mark came into the bedroom and locked the door behind them. There was music playing in the bedroom. It was turned up louder by either Brett or Mark once we were in the room. I was pushed onto the bed. Then Brett got on top of me. He began running his hands over my body and grinding into me.

I yelled, hoping that someone downstairs might hear me. And I tried to get away from him. But his weight was heavy. Brett groped me and tried to take off my clothes. He had a hard time because he was very inebriated and because I was wearing a one-piece bathing suit underneath my clothing. I believed he was going to rape me.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Well, in his opening statement Kavanaugh exploded, calling the accusations against him a political hit. Using language perfectly calibrated for an audience of one. An audience of one in the Oval Office.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAVANAUGH: 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. Revenge on behalf of the Clintons. And millions of dollars and money from outside left-wing opposition groups.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Well, she said it was the trauma of the assault that burned into her memory.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), CALIFORNIA: You are very clear about the attack, being pushed into the room. You say you don't know quite by whom. But that it was Brett Kavanaugh that covered your mouth to prevent you from screaming. And then you escaped. How are you so sure that it was he?

[22:04:56] FORD: The same way that I'm sure that I'm talking to you right now. Just basic memory functions. Also just the level of norepinephrine and epinephrine in the brain that sort of as you know encodes that neurotransmitter, encodes memories into the hippocampus, so the trauma-related experience then is kind of locked there whereas other details kind of drift.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: And he walked a razor's edge, saying he has no ill will toward her while swearing he's innocent of what she says he did.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAVANAUGH: My family and I intend no ill will toward Dr. Ford or her family. But I swear today under oath before the Senate and the nation, before my family and God, I am innocent of this charge.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: And he insisted that four people who were at the party would back him up.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAVANAUGH: All four people allegedly at the event including Dr. Ford's long-time friend Ms. Kaiser have said they recall no such event. Her long-time friend Ms. Kaiser said under penalty of felony that she does not know me and does not believe she ever saw me at a party ever.

In her letter to Senator Feinstein she said that there were four other people at the house. But none of those people nor I live near Columbia country club.

All four witnesses who were alleged to be at the event said it didn't happen.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: OK. So here's the truth. Those four people did not say it didn't happen. What they said was they had no memory of it or no knowledge of it or no recollection of it. That's different.

Her friend Leland Kaiser told "The Washington Post" that while she doesn't remember the party she believes Ford's story. That's why a full investigation is crucial here. And if you think she is credible or if you think he is credible, there's one man who holds the key to getting to the truth of that, and that man is Mark Judge. Not testifying. Didn't testify. That's Kavanaugh's friend.

The man Christine Blasey Ford says was in the room when Kavanaugh assaulted her, allegedly assaulted her. Now, if Judge Kavanaugh is innocent, the question is why doesn't he want his old friend to testify?

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. PATRICK LEAHY (D), VERMONT: Mark Judge was a close friend of yours in high school. Now, Dr. Ford as you know has said he was in the room when she was attacked. She also says you were too. Unfortunately, the FBI has never interviewed him. We have not been able to have his attendance here. The chairman refuses to call him. If she's saying Mark Judge was in the room then, he should be in the room today. Would you want him called as a witness?

KAVANAUGH: Senator, this allegation came into the committee--

(CROSSTALK)

LEAHY: No, I'm just asking the question. Would you want him to be here as a witness?

KAVANAUGH: He's already provided sworn testimony to the committee. This allegation's been hidden by the committee--

(CROSSTALK)

LEAHY: No, it hasn't been -- it has not been investigated by the FBI. The committee has refused to allow it to be--

(CROSSTALK)

KAVANAUGH: It was dropped on me. It was sprung.

LEAHY: It was not investigated by the FBI and he has not been called where he might be under oath--

(CROSSTALK)

KAVANAUGH: Should have been handled in the due course, senator, when it came in.

LEAHY: I would disagree with that. I've been on this committee 44 years. Both Republicans and Democrats. I've never seen somebody that critical not allowed to be here, called to testify for an FBI background--

KAVANAUGH: He's provided sworn testimony and senator--

(CROSSTALK)

LEAHY: He has not--

KAVANAUGH: Senator, let me finish. He -- the allegation came in weeks ago and nothing was done with it by the ranking member. Then it's sprung on me--

(CROSSTALK)

LEAHY: Judge Kavanaugh, I've heard your line and you've stated it over and over again and I have that well in mind. But let me ask you this. He authored a book titled "Wasted: Tales of a Gen X Drunk." He references a Brett Kavanaugh vomiting in someone's car in beach week and passing out. Is that you he's talking about?

KAVANAUGH: Senator, Mark Judge was--

(CROSSTALK)

LEAHY: To your knowledge, is that you that he's talking about?

KAVANAUGH: I'll explain if you let me.

LEAHY: Proceed, please.

KAVANAUGH: Mark Judge was a friend of ours in high school who developed a very serious drinking problem and addiction problem that lasted decades and was very difficult for him to escape from. And he nearly died. And then he had leukemia as well on top of it.

[22:10:04] Now, as part of his therapy, or part of his coming to grips with sobriety, he wrote a book that is a fictionalized book and an account. I think he picked out names of friends of ours to throw them in as kind of close to what -- for characters in the book. So you know, we can sit here--

(CROSSTALK)

LEAHY: So we don't know whether that's you or not? Is that what you're saying?

KAVANAUGH: We can sit here and make fun of some guy who has an addiction. I don't think that--

(CROSSTALK)

LEAHY: I'm not -- I'm trying to get a straight answer from you under oath.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Never really answered the question. So how is all this going to end? How is it going to end? The judiciary committee will vote as scheduled tomorrow morning just hours after this raucous whirlwind of a hearing. They say history doesn't repeat itself. But maybe it does.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CLARENCE THOMAS, ASSOCIATE JUSTICE, UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT: This is not an opportunity to talk about difficult matters privately or in a closed environment. This is a circus. It's a national disgrace.

KAVANAUGH: This confirmation process has become a national disgrace. This is a circus.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: Well, as you can see, we've got a lot to talk about tonight. I've got the a-team, an a-list here with me in Washington. And we're going to get into all of this when we come right back. [22:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Big breaking news today. Just hours from now the Senate judiciary committee is scheduled to vote on judge Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination. Will the full day of testimony be heard today from -- we heard today from Kavanaugh and his accuser Christine Blasey Ford, will it make a difference?

Let's break it all down now. David Gergen is here. April Ryan as well. Gloria Borger, Laura Coates, Gregg Nunziata, and Douglas Brinkley. Hello to all of you.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Welcome to Washington.

LEMON: Yes. You know, it was a very emotional day. I happened to be -- I started watching it at home.

BORGER: Yes.

LEMON: Then I went to the airport to come here, listened to it on the plane. When I lost connection, I was furious. I was lucky that when we landed it picked up from where we left off. And I was glued. I could not take my eyes off it.

BORGER: Right.

LEMON: And for Gloria, just for many survivors of sexual assault it was a difficult thing to watch today but important and healing. And what did the country see today? What happened?

BORGER: I think the country saw two very emotional people. I think the country -- her testimony was completely credible and believable. And when she was asked what was most indelible to her, that was what struck me. When she said it was the laughter. It was the laughter when she was being assaulted by these two men.

And you know, that -- I'll never forget her saying that. And when that half of the day was over, people thought Kavanaugh was -- that was it. He was gone. How could he recover from this? People at the White House were scared. They were, my God, this is not good.

And then Kavanaugh came out playing, I would argue, to an audience of one, which would be Donald Trump. And then Kavanaugh came out and in an opening statement aside from being way too political and saying this is revenge by the Clintons for, you know, the Ken Starr investigation or whatever, which I thought was sort of the left-wing conspiracy argument which as a judge--

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Which was surprising to hear.

BORGER: Well, also for somebody who is looking to be a judge on the Supreme Court. I don't think it's a great idea to make a political statement like that. The rest of his statement, we saw him in tears too. We saw him talk

about his family. We saw him talk about what this has done to him. And then he said 100 percent he denied that he did what she said he did, and she said 100 percent that he did it.

LEMON: OK.

BORGER: So at the end of the day I'm not so sure that anybody's mind was changed except that people watching this took a look at Congress and said come on, folks. How can you operate like this?

LEMON: How can you operate like this? And listen, this is -- don't take this as ageism. But people who are out of touch with the culture of the society now. People who no longer know where the country is going or may now be behind the curve here.

I just -- I was sitting there watching who do you believe, do you believe the woman who sat there and gave an account of something that's very difficult, answered the questions, tried to get clarification, or do you believe someone -- this is me -- who never answered a question?

The answer to every question was, well, I got good grades. I did this. I know a lot of people got good grades and they have great jobs and they drink Jordan dry and licked the bank in college. But that doesn't mean you deserve that you didn't do the other thing.

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Listen, I think it was a sad day for democracy. It started out as a search for truth. It started out with an inspiring statement from Christine Ford. And when Kavanaugh came out all guns blazing there was a sense he'd been -- he had been grievously hurt by this process. You had to be sympathetic to him as well.

But then it swerved into a partisan brawl. I think it changed when Lindsey Graham opened up. We've never, rarely seen Lindsey Graham like this. You have to wonder if he had a call from the president saying slug it out. Take the woman off the stage. He was trying to be the interlocutor. And slug it out. And now I think we're on the verge very possibly of one of the most divisive moves by the U.S. Senate in our lifetimes.

LEMON: If you are innocent, Gregg, thank you for joining us, by the way, the former chief nominations counsel to the Senate judiciary committee. If you are innocent, why wouldn't you want the one person who could vindicate you to come testify and say this did not happen?

GREGG NUNZIATA, FORMER CHIEF NOMINATIONS COUNSEL, U.S. SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE: So I think that he may very well want that person to come forward. The way these background investigation processes work is folks talk to the investigators or they don't.

[22:20:01] I'm not -- I can't ever recall subpoenaing somebody. Mike Judge -- Mr. Judge has put in a statement, which is punishable by five years in prison if he's lying. I don't know how much more we could ask for. BORGER: He didn't sign it. His lawyer signed it.

LEMON: His statement says he doesn't recall. It says -- and let me read the statement--

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: I don't mean to interrupt.

LEMON: That's OK. I'm going to let him finish. It says, Mark Judge's lawyer release the statement tonight saying, "Mr. Judge does not recall the events described by Dr. Ford in her testimony before the U.S. Senate judiciary committee today. We have told the committee that Mr. Judge does not want to comment about these events publicly. We also have said that he is willing to answer written questions, and he has. In addition, he is willing to participate in a confidential fact- finding investigation."

Go on, Gregg.

NUNZIATA: We should go back to the confidential fact-finding investigation. That's what's supposed to happen here. That's what we've been doing for 30 years in the Senate, where allegation that are sensitive in nature come up. It's all done behind closed doors. It's never in the paper.

And something went badly wrong here that was bad for the country, bad for Dr. Ford if she was in fact a victim either of judge Kavanaugh or somebody else. Bad for Kavanaugh and his family.

So I think Senator Feinstein's going to have something to answer for on this, why we got here in the first place, because this process is not the best process I think we can all agree to get to the truth here.

LEMON: Yes. Laura, he does not recall. Does that stand out to you in this statement?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It does. It's one of those vetted lawyer statements that you say. Every lawyer who's worth their salt will say please do not try to answer a question that you do not recall unless you are absolutely and 100 percent certainty comes back because your words will be used against you.

And I am a little tickled as a prosecutor here about all the people who are inserting their preference about how to answer and respond to a request for testimony by a federal official.

I mean, I cannot think of somebody who was jumping at the chance to testify in any one of my trials or any of my colleagues' trials. And what you did was not say, you don't prefer to talk to us today in a public setting? That's great. Here's the subpoena for you. I'll see you at 9.30.

And so this kind of magnanimous pseudo gestures that are being made I think really is what is one of the most difficult things for the American people to grasp. The idea that you have a fact-finding mission, you have hurdles that are put in place that really don't need to be there. Obstacles that are pretext reasons to shield oneself from the mission of finding the truth.

And I think people are frustrated because today in many ways did not move the needle away from what you originally read in her statement or his original unequivocal denial. And why?

BORGER: Right.

COATES: Intention.

LEMON: Let me ask you this. So if someone is on trial, an eyewitness or whatever and they subpoenaed me, I said I don't want to go to court, I'll just give a statement. I didn't go or what happens. So I end up in jail?

COATES: Well, I'd send the federal marshal to come bring you. And the reason I say that it may seem very hard.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Thank you. That's my whole point here.

COATES: This isn't a trial.

LEMON: But that's the point. It's not that it's a criminal trial. But in an investigation, though, if there was a legitimate investigation, these are political operatives basically answering questions, asking questions, rather. And the point--

(CROSSTALK)

COATES: Don, you know, a grand jury is not a trial. And you get subpoenaed to those.

LEMON: OK.

COATES: You get subpoenaed to come to the office. What I take issue with is cherry-picking portions of the criminal trial process that will suit the narrative for either party as opposed to expanding it to if you're going to have a microcosm of a criminal trial you've got to bring in other aspects including the idea of having the presumption of innocence and also witnesses to corroborate or undermine.

LEMON: OK. Stand by. There's a method to my madness. We're going to go to the historian last to try to make some sense of this.

April, do you think Democrats dropped the ball in their questioning today when they didn't press Kavanaugh hard on taking a polygraph, they didn't force him to answer about Mark Judge?

APRIL RYAN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Yes, they did. And you know, when we watched today, I mean, just how Judge Kavanaugh, he went after many of the questioners, the Democratic questioners. And you know, I believe that the believability by many of the Democrats who were there today, the senators, from Dr. Ford maybe changed their mind on how to deal with it.

Maybe they thought that the believability was just hanging more so over the nation. If you watched Twitter, you saw so many people come out talking about it. You even heard at the White House they were saying she was believable. But at the end of the day it was more politics.

So I don't know how the Democrats plan to come back from this, but I talked to a Democrat. A former high-ranking Democrat in the Obama administration who really pushed on issues for women. This is a bad day, they said, as it relates to women because this woman was believable but there could be the next Supreme Court justice called Kavanaugh.

LEMON: Someone I know very well and respect said this was a big, giant you know what to women.

BORGER: Yes.

[22:25:02] LEMON: Today.

GERGEN: That's the way it's turning out.

LEMON: That's the way it's turning. With that said a woman, who was a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh, told our Chris Cuomo not that long ago that she doesn't believe him, that he was not the choir boy. I don't know if you saw the interview. That they had, basically saying the same sentiment that I had.

You can do these other things and still get good grades, still have a great job. That's why they call people functioning alcoholics. I'm not saying that he was. But there is that term. There are functioning addicts. There are people who are very high performing who have -- who deal with issues. It's not -- they're not mutually exclusive.

DOUGLAS BRINKLEY, CNN PRESIDENTIAL HISTORIAN: Exactly. And we saw that Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde kind of phenomenon on the Fox News interview just a few days ago. Brett Kavanaugh was the choir boy. And that was his approach. He got yelled at by Donald Trump that he blew that interview on Fox.

So today we saw the other side of Kavanaugh. He seems to have a duality to him. There are these two different sides. And I don't think he helped himself in history by being as brutal as he was today. I think he's trying to just placate the hours--

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: I think you're being generous. When he walked in, Douglas--

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: Combative.

LEMON: -- you could see it in his face. Game face on.

BRINKLEY: Gladiator on.

LEMON: And everyone kept saying that I was speaking to and even the folks who were in the hotel as we were checking in said why is he so mad? This is not good.

NUNZIATA: If he believes himself to be innocent, he should be furious that people are calling him a rapist--

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: But that is not the place to be furious.

LEMON: I think that's valid.

NUNZIATA: He was not acting like a man who was trying to get confirmed. He was acting like a man who was trying to vindicate his own name.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: He was also acting like a man who was entitled for the job in some instances. So you cannot -- you can't have it both ways. If you're going to stand in and try to defend yourself and want the American public to come to you, and especially at a time when Republicans are losing women, you want to come and give information consistently, concisely, and calmly. He did not do that.

NUNZIATA: I think it's hard for any human being to be calm in a situation like this. It's not all strategy.

RYAN: He could possibly be the next U.S. Supreme Court justice. And this will always be the albatross over his neck.

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: Well, look at Clarence Thomas.

RYAN: Exactly.

BORGER: But it's not such an albatross. Clarence Thomas is a functioning Supreme Court justice. He's as conservative as we thought he was going to be.

RYAN: Senator Leahy said we failed Anita Hill today, 27 years ago, and they could possibly fail Dr. Ford today.

BORGER: Look, I think this is a he said/she said situation that was not resolved. But I think what we saw today was a man not just fighting for a job.

LEMON: Yes.

BORGER: He was fighting for his reputation, his entire career. I mean, if this is true, he could be impeached from his current job.

LEMON: Yes. COATES: Exactly.

BORGER: So don't, you know, don't forget that. He should have left the politics out of it.

RYAN: Exactly. This is about humanity.

BORGER: He should not talk about Hillary Clinton and all the rest. When he talked about his life--

LEMON: Yes.

BORGER: -- he was much more believable.

LEMON: I interrupted you, Douglas. That's the point. That was my point. Right? Go.

BRINKLEY: He came off as a tool of Donald Trump.

LEMON: Yes.

BORGER: Exactly.

BRINKLEY: He was his own man before this, but now he seems to have taken the Trump style. And Lindsey Graham became the junkyard dog. They had a routine going. And the decision was to slam it down. And it very well might be a strategy that works when the vote comes in. It's still back to -- it's still back to Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins and Jeff Flake--

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: Same place we were.

LEMON: We are -- we're not done. We're going to talk about that and do they have the votes. And I know you're raring to get in. And everybody is as well. We'll be back. Don't go anywhere.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:30:01] LEMON: Back with me now, David Gergen, April Ryan, Gloria Borger, Laura Coates, Gregg Nunziata, and Nunziata, excuse me, and Douglas Brinkley. Just quickly, was this again a political Rorschach test as to what you're -- what side you're on? Listen, I have been independent. So it doesn't -- you know I am not registered as a political party.

I just watched it from a human standpoint. And she was really sort of credible, and you're like, well, I guess, you know, she sounds like she's credible. He never answered a question. What do you say?

BORGER: What do I say? I don't know how political -- for people out in the world, in the real world, and not here in crazy town. I think that it was a human moment. It turned into a political circus, and that was unfortunate for all of us.

LEMON: Yeah.

BORGER: But it was a human moment for all of us, as we watched her in tears, and we watched him in tears.

LEMON: Yeah.

BORGER: And everybody was interested in it.

LEMON: Yeah.

BORGER: And everybody came away I think thinking -- feeling a little unsatisfied because two people were saying I am 100 percent. I am 100 percent. And we -- you know -- now, you have a preference for who you believe, obviously. You were just saying this, right?

LEMON: It's not a preference. It's just who was more believable.

BORGER: Who was more believable? And people will disagree on that.

(CROSSTALK)

GERGEN: But there was a difference that transcended who you might have gone in there thinking. And that is that she came in from outside Washington. She seemed much more authentic because she was not of this crazy town. And she was -- she didn't have high-powered lawyers around her and having the White House to go do nine hours of testimony in. And she was herself. And she seemed very real.

BORGER: And believable.

GERGEN: And very humane, very human, vulnerable, smart, somebody you'd like to have as your neighbor, and believable. I think she was credible. He came in -- and listen. I think he -- I think he came from way behind. He was two touchdowns behind going into the second half. And he evened it up for political purposes, but in the process he was very calculated. And I think that the belligerence that he showed is going to come back to haunt him.

If he gets on the court, there are going to be a lot of people who feel he was what they said there about a -- how much he had to drink. He got really belligerent. And he is there to get revenge. He will take out -- we've never seen a nakedly...

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: Wasn't that clear today? Wasn't that clear today that he kept saying this is supposed to be a judge that represents everyone, but it sounds like he is running for office or he is...

GERGEN: Yes.

LEMON: One of the Trump surrogates that we have...

BORGER: Exactly.

(CROSSTALK) GERGEN: This hasn't happened in history.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: And when -- you know, and I want to be clear. I am not on any side. But I was watching both of those persons sit there and give their truth. But as a reporter, I saw something believable. You know, disheveled professor, like the nutty professor. I was like -- and I felt her.

[22:35:09] LEMON: How long have you been doing this?

RYAN: I have been doing this for a while, 21 years.

LEMON: Covering this. But you were a reporter before that.

RYAN: Yes.

LEMON: You developed a gut.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: You know when someone's BS-ing you and you know when they're not.

RYAN: But -- I called a friend of mine, who I knew was sexually assaulted twice or more than that, and she was in tears. She felt it. So many women on Twitter were reliving what they had gone through. They believed her.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: But let me say -- about Brett Kavanaugh. I saw someone who had gone through prep and had talking points. He talked about the media and he talked about politics. And I said, I could see -- it could be President Trump's -- I saw President Trump in Brett Kavanaugh today while he was giving -- I saw the bombasticness. I saw the frustration. I saw the defensiveness.

LEMON: Yeah. He was angry at the process.

(CROSSTALK)

NUNZIATA: I don't think that's all fair.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: I have covered this President for a while. I saw it.

(CROSSTALK)

COATES: I have to say to be fair, I don't think I have ever seen a defendant become a shrinking violet who wants to take the stand. To very different degrees, they all need to come out swinging because your life is on the line.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: The President wants you to swing.

COATES: Talking about President Trump, just yesterday, one of the things that he was talking about was why is it he always sides with the accuser? And he said that he sees himself essentially in it, and that was what informs and guides his opinion. And you asked about the Rorschach test. Absolutely, it was for everyone on the panel and everyone listening, because they wanted to see -- do I see myself in the accuser?

Do I see myself, my father, my son, my husband in this particular man, or the wife behind? Do I see the person in my neighbor? You used to talk to about that someone you liked and is a nice woman. I mean the idea that is all about -- we all became jurors today inadvertently in the court of public opinion, and we didn't see the needle move the evidence.

LEMON: Let me say this.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: (Inaudible) personal here. So if you see the vulnerability in her, right? You see the humanness. So if you are a person who is more a feeling person and not a political animal. You felt that, right? But in the response I couldn't -- I kept wondering why does he keep going back to I went to a prep school. I went to elite -- because he is showing the divide between privilege and someone who is an actual victim or possible victim.

And then many victims around the country are saying, well, I don't see myself in any of that. This man has a privileged life. I am not saying it's OK. But this is what people were saying. This man has a privileged life. He's lived all of these -- done all of these great things, and now he feels that he is entitled to them. And the first time that he is checked, he gets angry and cries about it.

(CROSSTALK)

BRINKLEY: Entitlement is part of the MeToo movement, that men have been entitled for so long. And you know, Mavis Staples has a great song, you are not alone. She was not alone, Dr. Ford. She has tens of millions of women in America that are backing her. And they're angry about the Access Hollywood tape. We had a million woman march here in Washington, D.C. They're angry at Donald Trump as all these assault charges...

(CROSSTALK)

GERGEN: Where do we go now from here?

RYAN: We've got to heal.

LEMON: A vote. I am sorry, say it again.

GERGEN: Where do we go from here? LEMON: I don't know where we go from here. And listen, the whole --

what I am saying is I'm trying to -- I am projecting here what people are feeling at home and people who are watching this who are not part of -- as you said, crazy town. He may very well be innocent. I am just talking about the feeling around the country. And his performance I thought did not help him.

(CROSSTALK)

RYAN: The beer stuff didn't help either.

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: Wait a minute.

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: There's something called judicial temperament. I just heard from my former colleague on CNN. She's now on HLN, Ashleigh Banfield, who knows an awful lot about the law. And she was saying to me, you know, there's a question of judicial temperament. Maybe you can talk about this, Laura. But you saw his anger and you can see if you're unjustly accused of something, of course, you would be angry, as you were saying.

But the question is when he kept battering the senators and kind of -- Amy Klobuchar and you know, Whitehouse, Senator Whitehouse. Do you drink a beer? Do you drink? No, Senator. Do you drink a beer? I thought -- and Ashleigh reminded me. We talked about it a little bit this afternoon. Is this good judicial temperament?

NUNZIATA: I think he made some mistakes. But to me, that made him more credible, that he wasn't working off talking points. He was there and being raw and real from his perspective, and that's how it read to me, and judicial temperament, of course, that matters.

BORGER: If you're on the Supreme Court especially.

[22:39:59] NUNZIATA: And his judicial temperament has been considered by the American Bar Association, by six FBI background checks, and none of this stuff ever came up, that he was either had a problem with anger or with substance abuse.

LEMON: Where do we go from here? That's the question.

GERGEN: Yes.

LEMON: And then we have some new information too about the woman who was hired to question Ms. Ford today. We'll talk about all that. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: OK. We're back now, everyone. So I want to get this in before we move on. And this is new information. This is from the New York Times. And it says Rachel Mitchell, she was the outside questioner. The outside questioner, privately told GOP senators tonight that based on the evidence she heard at the hearing, she would not have prosecuted or even been able to obtain a search warrant.

That's according to three Republicans. You're the legal person here. What do you say to that?

COATES: Well, part of that fault of not being able to get information is the absence of questions that would have gotten to the information she needed.

LEMON: She also said, with that said. Remember during the hearing, she said five-minute segments of questioning. This woman was not the way to get to the heart of the matter.

[22:45:07] COATES: That's true. But five minutes is time to get at least to different discrete points. I had questioned whether or not she was effective, only because she was hired by the GOP senators. And so in many ways, she was effective at not moving the needle to get the answers that...

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: She wasn't an impartial...

(CROSSTALK)

COATES: I don't know but in part -- but also if they were hiring her to change the optics but not to actually gain some insight into what happened, then she was quite effective in that. But I will say that the notion of probable cause and what they're able to get is a very fair assessment to say that 36 years later, it would be very hard now to go back and try to figure out if it was a felony offense that would eliminate the issue of limitations period in Maryland.

At the time, however, if the information was available, if it had been reported perhaps it could have been more. But we still don't have all of the specific information that you would need in order to go to a judge and say I want a search to figure out if there is anything there, there. But we still -- in the court of public opinion, there's plenty there to secure a subpoena to get information about trying to figure out if this particular judge has the wherewithal, the judgment, and the discretion to become the ninth Supreme Court Justice.

BORGER: Well, there was no evidence presented. She said the, you know, the evidence -- what was the quote? Due to the...

LEMON: She said based on the evidence she heard at the hearing...

BORGER: What evidence?

LEMON: Right.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: All right, so I had to report this. And it's right here on the prompter in front of me. America Magazine, a Catholic Jesuit publication is rescinding their endorsement of Judge Brett Kavanaugh tonight. Here's what they write. They said if Dr. Blasey's allegation is true, the assault and Judge Kavanaugh's denial of it mean that he should not be seated on the U.S. Supreme Court.

But even if the credibility of the allegation has not been established beyond a reasonable doubt, and even if further investigation is warranted to determine its validity or clear Judge Kavanaugh's name, we recognize that this nomination is no longer in the best interests of the country. Is this significant?

BRINKLEY: I think it's very significant. I mean he went to Georgetown Prep School, Kavanaugh. It's a Jesuit school. Here's the leading Jesuit popular magazine denouncing Brett Kavanaugh tonight. I think what we may be getting -- you're asking, Don, where are we going from here?

LEMON: No, that was David.

(CROSSTALK)

BRINKLEY: I mean this may not be a vote tomorrow. They could boot it till Monday. Murkowski, Collins, and Flake hold all the cards. There's no Republican vote without them saying we're ready. And they really may not have decided yet. They might want to see more and more what comes out on periodicals like this and the public sentiment.

LEMON: Were you talking big picture or were you talking process?

GERGEN: I am talking big picture.

LEMON: Big picture. Where do we -- that's what I -- hang on. We want to answer that. Process, where do we go from here?

NUNZIATA: Well, I think they're going to want to move to a vote pretty soon. Not much new came out today. And I think if something new came out today, that the committee felt the need to follow up on, the committee might be inclined to push the vote. But it's true that the vote is so narrow that if one or two senators seem to be wavering and want more time, I suspect we'll have more time.

LEMON: So where do we go? That's a good -- can you answer your own question, because I can't really tell you. I think that the country today saw -- I think the dam broke when it comes to people who are victims of sexual assault and sexual abuse. I think that she opened the dam for people to feel that they can be heard. Whether they can get justice or not, that's to be determined.

GERGEN: But the environment here in Washington I would submit is very different from the environment of the country at large. Today, within the Washington community, you know, Kavanaugh sort of saved it by rallying at some expense with his temper. But he got it back to even. And I think that being -- it's very likely to go to a vote quickly.

The committee's going to meet tomorrow morning. They're going to vote out, I think. Unless -- it's very likely we're going to have a vote confirming all of this within the next two or three days. I think we're on the edge of the most divisive vote in our lifetime, and one of the most, certainly one of the most divisive. Because -- and out and around the country, I will just tell you.

I think you're going to see a wave of women who feel that if he's just confirmed after all of this with no more questions, no more investigation, and it just goes through, that the women's movement has been gigantically insulted. And I think that's going to be -- I think that's going to be very divisive for the country.

LEMON: I promise you we'll talk about that when we come back. But just remember what happened after Anita Hill. There were a whole lot of women who got elected to Congress.

RYAN: That's right. And they're poised to be elected now.

BORGER: That's right.

LEMON: Hold on. Hold on because I have got to get to the break. And also, I am wondering what the chief justice, what was going through his mind with these proceedings.

BORGER: Aye, aye, aye.

LEMON: Oh my, gosh. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[22:50:00] LEMON: So we're -- and we're back. So I am going to start with you, Douglas. Does he make it through, Kavanaugh?

BRINKLEY: It looks like he's going to make it through. It would take a bolt of Murkowski and, you know, Jeff Flake and a few of them to just change their minds. But I think if they don't vote tomorrow and you have a long weekend, there will be more journalism coming out. And it very may be you lose Collins and Murkowski.

LEMON: You said what I said last night. That's why they didn't want to keep this going because they're afraid of more.

(CROSSTALK)

NUNZIATA: I think so. I think he saved his confirmation this afternoon by raising questions about the process and by showing his own humanity and his anger at what's happened to him.

LEMON: Ms. Coates.

COATES: Just like a court of law, it doesn't need to be the whole nation to be convinced, just 12. In this case, it was 51. And I think that he may have done it with people who are already leaning, looking for a reason to support him. They may have found it.

LEMON: What do you think?

BORGER: I don't know -- I can't.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: I can't with this. I can't with you anymore, Don.

BORGER: I can't predict because it's too close.

LEMON: Yeah.

[22:55:004] BORGER: And I predicted wrong in the past. So I am not going to do it again. But what I will say is that if he does get through, he ought to hug Lindsey Graham really close.

LEMON: Saved him.

BORGER: Lindsey Graham saved him today by taking control of that hearing after Dick Durbin had Kavanaugh up against the wall, saying shouldn't Mark Judge come in and testify.

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: He said you would have to ask him that question.

BORGER: And then, you know, Lindsey Graham came in and he, you know, he said I voted for Sotomayor and Kagan, which is true. So he has credibility on this. And he said this is a sham. It's a political process. And you know what? I would never do that, and you know this is going to keep good people from coming forward.

LEMON: I am going to be over, but got to go quick, 10 seconds. What do you think? Does he get through?

RYAN: I don't know. But Elijah Cummings says if this does happen. The President will control all three branches of government.

LEMON: And he said that's not good.

RYAN: He said that's not good.

LEMON: What do you think?

GERGEN: Very likely by Tuesday night, very, very explosive and divisive.

LEMON: Yeah. I say he makes it.

RYAN: Might be right.

BORGER: I am too chicken to...

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: You know, you can just say hey, I was wrong. It's that easy. Thank you, all. I appreciate it. We'll be right back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)