Return to Transcripts main page

Don Lemon Tonight

Yale Roommate Says Kavanaugh Lied Under Oath; Senators to Start Reading FBI Report Tomorrow Morning; "New York Times:" Trump Inherited $413 Million from Father; President Trump Mocks Christine Blasey Ford at a Rally; McConnell Takes Key Step Toward Vote on Kavanaugh Nomination; McConnell Slams Protesters Confronting GOP Senators. Aired 11-12a ET

Aired October 03, 2018 - 23:00   ET

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

[23:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

DON LEMON, CNN HOST: This is CNN TONIGHT. I'm Don Lemon. Here's our breaking news. The Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell moving Brett Kavanaugh's nomination forward, a final vote could take place on Saturday. That is as Brett Kavanaugh's Yale roommate is speaking out. And what he said on CNN just a little while ago is really pretty stunning. He said he thinks Deborah Ramirez, who accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her is telling the truth and he said Kavanaugh lied under oath about his drinking and about the meaning of some clearly sexual references in his yearbook, but has he said this to the FBI? No, because they have not interviewed him. Not for this investigation or he says for any of the other investigations over the years.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANDERSON COOPER, BREAKING NEWS SHOW HOST: You say that Judge Kavanaugh lied under oath when he testified before the Judiciary committee last week. Can you explain how you know that he lied?

JAMIE ROCHE, BRETT KAVANAUGH'S FRESHMAN YALE ROOMMATE: I can. I wasn't able to watch the testimony. I was in an airplane, but I read the testimony the next day and I was struck as I was reading it that you know, I know Debbie. And --

COOPER: Debbie Ramirez.

ROCHE: Debbie Ramirez and I know from my experience with her that at least from my perspective, there is zero chance that she is making up the story and I heard Dr. Blasey Ford's or read Dr. Blasey Ford's testimony and heard some of it later. You know, I believe that she is telling the truth, but then when Brett started saying things about his drinking and his use of certain words, sexually oriented words, I knew he was lying, because he was my roommate. We were in a room together. Our beds were ten feet apart for a couple of months. What struck me and made me more interested in speaking out about it is not only did I know that he wasn't telling the truth, I knew that he knew that he wasn't telling the truth.

COOPER: You say that he was a, I'm quoting you, a notably heavy drinker even by the standards of the time. That is obviously not sort of how he described himself. Just since this is knowledge you say you specifically have, can you describe what you mean when you say he was a notably heavy drinker?

ROCHE: Well, sure. This is a time not long after animal house was shown, and people drank a lot. He went to parties and drank beer, many, many people did, but there were even within that environment there were people who were loud drunks, who are sloppy drunks, who were belligerent drunks. But even by those standards my memory of Brett was that he was -- he was on the far edge of this. He was notably heavier in his drinking than other people.

COOPER: Can you -- I don't know if there's any specific examples or can you say how often was this just something on weekends? I've read some accounts that there was a keg in the main room of the room that you -- the suite of rooms that you had between the three roommates.

ROCHE: You know, it was an awful long time ago. I can't say he was drunk on this date or not. But I can tell you that my recollection of my experience with him was that he was drunk frequently, that it wasn't drunk to the point of having trouble getting up every month or two, it was frequently. I would say with some confidence it was at least once, maybe twice on the weekends. It may have even been during the week.

I was listening to the radio, gosh, I want to say a week ago and they were talking about Brett having been interviewed by the FBI backgrounds done on five or six occasions prior to this. And it struck me that you know, I was his freshman year roommate. If you wanted to know how somebody behaved in college, which is a time where especially that transition from high school to college where people are likely to have done something that expressed thing that might have been a problem, that they would have contacted me, right?

Five or six FBI interviews. Now, I started talking to friends. I said is this just sloppy work or why would somebody not contact a freshman college roommate? His only freshman college roommate to try and figure out what this guy was like. And this person was quick to say listen, the FBI are good. They're good guys. They take it very seriously. They do the work that they're told to do. You know, if they didn't contact you, it's because whoever was doing the background check wasn't interested in what was going on at that time.

COOPER: So just for the record, you've never been contacted either now or in any past investigation?

ROCHE: I've never been contacted about Brett by the FBI ever.

[23:05:00] COOPER: So you actually, for people to know the situation, it was you, Brett Kavanaugh and another roommate in this basically there were two bedrooms you and Brett Kavanaugh shared a bedroom and there was a common room, as well. Your bed was as you said, a feet away from his. Did you ever see him black out? He has testified that he was asked about blacking out. He said he didn't. He said maybe sometimes he went to sleep. Did you ever see him blackout? ROCHE: You know, I didn't socialize with Brett, but being in the same

room where he slept, I saw him when he arrived at home regularly and I saw him in the morning. And I can tell you that he would come home and he was incoherent, stumbling, he would sometimes be singing. He occasionally would wary I think it was an old leather football helmet. And he would throw up. And then in the morning, would have a lot of trouble getting out of bed. You know,

I wasn't an angel back then either. There were times when I did the exact same thing. So we commiserated on this issue and so the answer to your question is yes, I saw him both what I would consider blackout drunk and also dealing with the repercussions of that in the morning.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So much on to discuss right now. David Gergen, John Dean, and Asha Rangappa are here.

Good evening, everyone. I appreciate you joining. Listen, we heard what he said, but in spite of what he said, it has been so short, Senators haven't even heard or seen I should say the investigation and the report. Mitch McConnell is moving forward.

DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Absolutely. Well, he does what he says. He plays a real serious game of hard ball. Very objectionable in many regards, but he delivers. That is why he is majority leader.

LEMON: Why is he moving forward so fast?

GERGEN: To get it done. I don't really think he gives a damn about whether there is a lot of questions about it, you know, what he cares about is getting it done.

We just heard from a man apparently struggling with his conscience whether he ought to come forward and do this TV interview or not. Took him a lot to do that. CNN had to check him out to make sure his reliability seemed strong. And I think he gave a remarkably credible statement about what happened in the freshman year at Yale.

What's astonishing is that the FBI is disinterested in his tale. And the tales of at least 30 to 40 other people that these women have recommended go look at and talk about. And so we're going to wind up with tomorrow and then on a vote Friday, Saturday, is a situation in which I think the odds favor a confirmation unless somebody shows more backbone than we've seen. And the country's going to feel like we were had.

You know, we thought this was, they were going to push through. They're going to have a full week. They've had five days including a weekend. They've had very little time. They've shut the investigation down and most importantly haven't gone to all these witnesses and when you've got a guy like Roche who said look I don't remember this. I can tell you this though, and he is lying about his drinking and that is relevant not only to whether he will would forget something like a relationship with Ford, an incident with Ford, it is also extremely relevant to his truthfulness in front of the committee under oath. So all of this is very disturbing.

LEMON: Asha, I want to follow up on some of David just said, he said the FBI seems uninterested or disinterested in speaking to people like James Roche. Why is that? Why wouldn't they contact him or someone like him?

ASHA RANGAPPA, CNN LEGAL AND NATIONAL SECURITY ANALYST: You mean right now or back when -- before? We --

LEMON: He said this time and also even in previous background checks he is never been contacted.

RANGAPPA: Yes. So I do think it's important to understand that these background checks typically go back 10 years. And so really the time when Judge Kavanaugh's college drinking would have been within the scope of the background check would have been in one of his earliest background checks, perhaps when you went to clerk for the federal courts or when he joined the Starr prosecutorial team.

After that it would have covered later and later periods of his life. And so, you know, those college days, those references probably would not have been within the scope of those interviews. So that is just to the put that out there since those six background checks are mentioned frequently. In this one, I am you know, concerned that he hasn't been interviewed, because you want the FBI to interview people like this precisely so they can probe and make sure they get full context for what the person is saying.

That they can not only get what they know, but explore things like motivation and biases and all the context in order to actually be fair to the person that the subject that they are speaking about.

[23:10:11] And I think what we need here is some transparency on exactly what the direction and restrictions were placed by the FBI in this interview, because in my opinion, I don't believe that the FBI would not follow leads that were logical if they had the freedom to do so.

LEMON: OK. John, do you think that there were restrictions, because remember, John, we were talking about before they were saying well, you know, the White House is controlling the investigation and they are determining the scope of the investigation and then there was an argument on the other side saying no, the FBI would never allow that. What do you think, John?

JOHN DEAN, FORMER NIXON WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL: It got awfully murky on the front side of the investigation as to what their scope was, their mission, and a lot of confused and conflicting reporting. Don, I had a flashing thought that the FBI cut this short, because maybe Mr. Judge fessed up. He was there. His girlfriend said she had been told by him that this had happened. So that was one -- that was the -- that would be the most amazing result.

LEMON: That would certainly be a block buster.

DEAN: That it would be a blockbuster, but that could explain also why they didn't go further.

GERGEN: There is a rumor like that, John that is passing around on the Internet.

LEMON: It's not confirmed obviously. I haven't read it.

GERGEN: It's just a rumor. I have no reason to believe it to be true.

LEMON: Yes. And I think if -- do you think that the Senators have some idea with what's in this report?

GERGEN: I think they probably do, yes.

LEMON: That is why -- if anything like that was true, do you think they would be setting a vote?

GERGEN: You know, the words rigged and fake and sham have been so overused it's almost difficult to talk anymore what's going on in Washington, but there is no question, but that intentional restrictions were placed on this so-called investigation. And that we the public were not told about them.

And I do think that going back, I think this question of transparency is really important to rebuild trust in a way we conduct our public business and to end frankly to preserve trust in the Supreme Court. This ought to be much more transparent. We ought to see the report tomorrow, we ought to see for ourselves, not just selective leaking from one side or the other taking a phrase and trying to make it into a big headline.

LEMON: Do you think, Asha seeing the report and knowing what happens with the FBI and other law enforcement agencies, do you think seeing that report would help some people feel better about the results?

RANGAPPA: I do. Because that report would contain, a, what derogatory information, if any the FBI found among the people they interviewed. And they would also reveal, because it would lay out the contents of the interview that they had whether there were clearly other leads or other people referenced that would have been logical for them to follow up with and weren't. So you wouldn't be able to hide kind of the scope of what they were looking at and what any investigator might do at that point. Alternatively maybe it would make clear that this was really all they needed to know. That I think would go a long way. And I agree what is at stake right now is the institutional legitimacy of the Supreme Court.

LEMON: Yes.

RANGAPPA: And to have half the country believe that it's politicized and the fix is in is really the last thing we need right now.

LEMON: John, how does the country react to this do you think having gone through something similar with Watergate?

DEAN: Well, I actually saw a justice put on the court during the Nixon years who had disassembled during his confirmation. Bill Rehnquist. It's sort of haunted his reputation with scholars. So it won't be good. As historians look back. I don't think they should jam this through and we're only having cloture vote initially. That is kind of a test vote. And who knows what will happen during the debate. That is where a lot of this might be flushed out.

LEMON: Yes. Thank you all. I appreciate it.

Well, "The New York Times" says President Trump inherited $413 million from his father. He inherited a booming economy from President Obama, better to be lucky than good.

[23:15:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: I want everyone to pay attention to this segment, because we like to provide you on this program with facts. Facts first. OK? So let's start with Sarah Sanders who is slamming a "New York Times" report alleging President Trump inherited a whopping $413 million from his father. Some of it though outright fraud.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS, DEPUTY WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Totally false attack based on an old recycled news story. I'm not going to sit and go through every single line of a very boring 14,000 word story. The only thing I will say one thing the article did get right. It showed the President's father actually had a great deal of confidence in him. In fact, the President brought his father into a lot of deals and they made a lot of money together. So much so his father went on to say that everything he touched turned to gold.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: All right. So the "Times" said some of it happened from outright fraud, right? And this was after Kellyanne Conway dodged the question turning to the economy when she was asked about the "Times" piece. Watch this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KELLYANNE CONWAY, WHITE HOUSE COUNSELOR: Does the mainstream media ever see anything positive in a booming economy? Even just today we have the projection of 185,000 new jobs in the private sector. But it was 230,000. Where is that? Where is the highest stock market, the boom, the lowest unemployment rates? They've never met a piece of good news under the Trump administration and so the President is right about that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[23:20:00] LEMON: So careful what you ask for. Because here we go. All right. Team Trump should tread very carefully here, because when it comes to the economy, Trump got a lot of help. He inherited a growing economy. A growing economy. Inherited it from his predecessor. Jobs are being created at roughly the same average rate as under President Obama. Wages are growing at about the same rate they did under President Obama. And economic growth isn't very different either. Even if the White House likes to boast about hitting 4 percent last quarter, the economy grew at over 4 percent during a few quarters under Obama, too.

To his credit, the administration has kept the recovery going, but Trump's biggest success as President is a lot like his success in business. It's the result of a big inheritance.

Let's discuss now with Catherine Rampell, Scott Jennings, Michael D'Antonio, the author of the book "The Truth about Trump," just the facts. OK? You saw them there. So, you can believe what you want if front of your own eyes, but that is the truth.

So, Michael this week we found out the President inherited hundreds of millions of dollars according to the New York Times. We know he is inherited a good economy. Is Trump lucky? Or is there something more do you think?

MICHAEL D'ANTONIO, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, he is a number of things. He is lucky, but he is also very persistent. And he is a fantastic promoter. So this is a man whose main construction project throughout his life has been the construction of his own myth. When I researched his life and I heard Sarah Sanders say that she wasn't going to set and go through all of the items in the "Times" report, I went through hundreds of claims that Donald Trump made to me directly. And not one of them held up.

So this is a person who is really challenged by the truth. He is been in favor with the economy and he surely benefited from his father's success. One thing that people have always overlooked is that Donald Trump's dad, Fred Trump, was one of the richest men in America in the 1960s. He just didn't brag about it. So there's so much that is fact challenged about President Trump that it's really more fruitful I think to go look for the things that he is stated that are not lies.

LEMON: Yes. Scott, do you think this report -- "The New York Times" report, do you think it penetrates -- do you think it hurts Trump's image at all?

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: No, I don't. I assume you mean among his base supporters or Republicans. I don't think it will hurt his image. I think the Republicans who support him are forward looking. They don't really care where he got his money. They know he is a rich man. They care what he is doing today. They like his economic policies, they like his judicial selections. They like the way he handles the Democrats, they like the way he handles the media. I don't think this particular story especially from this outlet which most Republicans don't trust is going to shake their confidence in the President one bit.

LEMON: Looking at the report and knowing the level of detail, I'm sure you've read the report, do you trust the reporting of this?

JENNINGS: Sure, look, I'm one of the Republicans out there that will give the benefit of the doubt to reporters, because I believe journalists are earnestly and in most cases trying to get to the facts and give information that is true. I think sometimes this newspaper has fallen short. They fell short recently on the Nicki Haley curtain story for instance, but I'm willing to give them a benefit of the doubt. I am not a tax law expert. I did talked to one in the CNN green room the other night who told me this looked a lot like what a lot of wealthy people do for estate planning and most of it looked like it was legal to him.

So I assume what's going to happen is the IRS, I'm sure they did with most wealthy people and I guess the New York State Tax Authority will look into this. And ultimately it will be up to them to continue to say whether these issues can be investigated or if the statute of limitations has passed. Or if everything he is doing now is closure. And I think that is fine. I don't have a problem if the government wants to look into folks over your tax returns, because that is what they're there to do.

LEMON: It is a year and a half investigation. I must point it out. Catherine, you know, we are almost two years into this presidency and this administration hasn't derailed the economy. So I guess it deserves credit for that. But does he deserve credit for the economy? Some credit I would imagine. He kept it going in the right direction.

CATHERINE RAMPELL, COLUMNIST, "THE WASHINGTON POST": Look, he had tremendous tail winds at his back. Presidents in general get too much credit when the economy is good and too much blame when it's bad.

LEMON: you said that to me. Say it again.

RAMPELL: I will say it many, many times over. Because this is always a problem that people want to impute a lot more responsibility for how the economy is doing to whoever is in charge in the White House. And it's just not the case. The business cycle does what the business cycle does. And Presidents can kind of change things on the margin.

[23:25:10] LEMON: Can I ask you something?

RAMPELL: Yes.

LEMON: Do you have to put a caveat in front of that if you're a President who is coming out of a major recession? Because your policies really matter at that point especially when the economy is falling off of a cliff. There are meetings before you even take office as to what to do if in case of emergency.

RAMPELL: Yes, and actually the point that I was about to make is that Presidents can make changes on the margin and a great example of that would be when the economy is facing recession, they can try to muster the political will to pass a major stimulus package, for example, and on that particular metric, Obama did manage to get a stimulus package through, probably the fed deserves more credit for the recovery than the stimulus package, but what happens next time there's a recession?

That is what I'm very concerned about actually, because it's not a matter of if. It's a matter of when. Again, business cycles do what they do. There will be a downturn at some point. And if anything if you look at Trump's economic policies they have made us less well situated for the next recession, because he has added $2 trillion to the debt during an expansion, because he has launched these precarious trade wars. Because he is driving away working age immigrants.

So, there are a lot of things that for the long-term health of the economy will probably weigh on growth and moreover, when we next have a downturn, we are going to have fewer bullets in the gun essentially to deal with it. In the same way that we need to deal with it in past recessions.

LEMON: I want to just turn to this, because it's very interesting, it just so happens that Forbes -- Michael, Forbes Magazine is out with its list of the richest 400 Americans. And the President has slipped 11 spots to 259. He is worth $3.1 billion according to him, but so I'm wondering how he is going to react to that, because some people say there's no evidence that he is actually a billionaire at all, but go on.

D'ANTONIO: Well, it matters a lot to him. He keeps score with his fortune. Now that he is the President, he has other metrics. I think he is probably aiming to win a majority of the popular vote in the upcoming election for President. So that he can claim that spot, but these rankings, you know, I've known enough billionaires that I know they all pay very close attention and they actually call each other and reach other about who is up and who is down. So it matters. I think one of the overlooked issues here in this whole story is that.

LEMON: I'm richer than you. Look how rich I am.

D'ANTONIO: And it's a matter of billions. I mean, how ridiculous is that? But I think that his siblings are the folks who really should be concerned about what's being examined today. His sister is a Federal Judge. I don't think it looks good for her to be in the paper with these issues. And I would hope that she has good representation.

LEMON: Yes. Thank you all. All these lists, these lists and five bucks will get you a cup of coffee at the coffee shop. I was going to name one shop, but that is not a good idea. Thank you. I appreciate it. I will see you next time.

Wait till you hear Senator Lindsey Graham's shocking defense of President Trump's attack on Christine Blasey Ford. We're going to play it for you next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: So the White House press secretary, Sarah Sanders, insisting that President Trump wasn't mocking Christine Blasey Ford last night at a rally of supporters in Mississippi, that he was only stating the facts about her testimony to the Judiciary Committee.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: How did you get home? I don't remember. How did you get there? I don't remember. Where is the place? I don't remember. How many years ago was it? I don't know, I don't know. I don't know! I don't know!

What neighborhood was it? I don't know. Where is the house? I don't know. Upstairs, downstairs, where was it? I don't know. But I had one beer. That's the only thing I remember.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: No mocking there. That was sarcasm, by the way. Got to give the president credit though. He knows his base. Nearly everyone behind him laughing and clapping. But he and his top aides clearly not listening to key Republican senators who forced the White House to order the FBI to investigate Ford's allegations. Here now, this is how they reacted to his mocking.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN. LISA MURKOWSKI (R), ALASKA: I don't approve of the comments from last night. I thought that they were wrong and extraordinarily unfortunate.

SEN. JEFF FLAKE (R), ARIZONA: Obviously, sensitive and appalling, frankly. There's no time or place particularly to discuss something so sensitive at a political rally. It was just wrong.

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R), MAINE: The president's comments were just plain wrong.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: But one outspoken Republican, Senator Lindsey Graham, who has morphed into a Trump BFF, claims he doesn't like what the president said last night and he said something else that shocked people in that room. I want you to watch the exchange with Jeffrey Goldberg. Jeffrey Goldberg is the editor-in-chief of "The Atlantic."

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JEFFREY GOLDBERG, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF, THE ATLANTIC: If he's listening right now, what would you say to him about his performance last night in which he disparaged the person who is alleging that she was a victim of sexual assault by a Supreme Court nominee.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: Hey, I can figure this out. Everything he said was factual. He's frustrated his nominee has been treated so badly.

GOLDBERG: It was a personal degrading attack on someone who is a private citizen.

GRAHAM: Well, you know, here's what's personally degrading. This is what you get when you go through a trailer park with a $100 bill. This is not the first time this has happened.

GOLDBERG: That was actually a reference to something somebody said.

GRAHAM: James Carville. See, most of you all are too young to remember this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[23:34:59] LEMON: OK, so that comment came out of nowhere. It shocked people who heard it. But it has history. It has a history that people need to know. So let me give you some background. There is what Graham is referring to, a remark made by James Carville. James Carville is a former advisor to Bill Clinton, President Bill Clinton, after Paula Jones accused Clinton of sexual misconduct back in the early 1990s.

Carville's exact words were, if you drag a $100 bill through a trailer park, you never know what you'll find." Lindsey Graham was apparently trying to say that this has been done before. Meaning, the tactic of defending a man accused of bad behavior by attacking the woman he is saying is not new. Trashing women, mocking their claims was wrong then and it's wrong now.

But for this crowd, it always goes back to the Clintons. Judge Kavanaugh went back to the Clinton well himself last week with his testimony. Remember he worked with Ken Starr back in the Clinton days.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BRETT KAVANAUGH, SUPREME COURT NOMINEE: 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 in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: He wants to be a justice. There was no evidence for that claim of revenge on behalf of the Clintons. No evidence. But Brett Kavanaugh, Lindsey Graham, they are both savvy enough to know that nothing pleases the president and the base more than a good old attack on the Clintons. And then there was this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

GRAHAM: If the shoe were on the other foot, and an accusation came from South Carolina against a male Democratic nominee, and I got a hold of it, and I didn't disclose it to the committee, I waited to leak it to the press against the wishes of the lady from South Carolina, I would be torn apart and I should be. And if a Republican had said --

GOLDBERG: Go on.

GRAHAM: Why are you doing this? We're trying to hold the seat open to get past the midterms so we can take power back, the Republican who said that couldn't go five feet in this town without having 100 reporters in their face. So the double standard here offends me and I voted for Sotomayor and Kagan and never thought twice about it. I would never have done to them what has been done to this good man. (END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: I've got two words for you, Senator Graham. Merrick Garland. A lot to discuss about this with a vote on Judge Brett Kavanaugh's nomination set to come as soon as Saturday. We're going to discuss. We'll be right back.

[23:40:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Here's the breaking news. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell advancing Brett Kavanaugh's nomination to the Supreme Court tonight. A final vote should come as soon as Saturday. Senator McConnell saying the results of the FBI investigation will be in the hands of the Senate tonight.

And tonight, the attorney for Christine Blasey Ford issuing a statement saying, "An FBI supplemental background investigation that did not include an interview of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford nor the witnesses who corroborate her testimony cannot be called an investigation. We are profoundly disappointed that after the tremendous sacrifice she made in coming forward, those directing the FBI investigation were not interested in seeking the truth."

Let's discuss. Republican strategist Rick Wilson, the author of "Everything Trump Touches Dies," CNN Political Commentators, Symone Sanders and Margaret Hoover, they are all here. Thank you so much. What do you think of this latest him moving it forward and her statement?

SYMONE SANDERS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I think it's clear that Mitch McConnell had always wanted this vote to happen. He has said time and time again that basically through hell or high water, the Senate is going to vote on Brett Kavanaugh. The Senate can vote it up or down, but there is going to be a vote.

I'm just so surprised that even after folks pushed for an FBI investigation, that the FBI investigation didn't even bother to interview Dr. Ford. So I understand why not only Dr. Ford's attorney but many Senate Democrats and folks outside of the Senate are saying this cannot be a credible investigation.

LEMON: Why have an investigation and not interview the principals?

MARGARET HOOVER, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Look, you've had people on the show segments before us who are on FBI who gave all sorts of texture what they could be doing and what could have happened. We don't know what the FBI investigation says. We have no idea what the report says. I don't want to get out in front of it and say there's no way it's credible. That is just step undermining the institution --

LEMON: I was kind of surprised that they put out a statement because they don't know what the report. Unless they have some idea, meaning Christine Blasey Ford's attorneys, unless they have some idea of what the report said.

HOOVER: Why would their lawyers have any idea? The Senate just got it tonight.

LEMON: Yeah. I mean, why? Because, you know, maybe it ended early for good reason.

RICK WILSON, REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: They may have had some sort of evidence that disqualified her testimony or some evidence that proved her testimony. We just don't know that right now. But it is interesting they didn't interview her.

I think just in terms of a sense of completion and thoroughness for sort of the public facing narrative, that probably would have been a good move on the FBI's part, but it's -- we're going to know more tomorrow because, you know, the Senate never leaks except 30 seconds after they get information.

[23:45:05] LEMON: Have you ever heard of the sieve (ph)?

(LAUGHTER)

LEMON: So, it's Flake, it's Collins and Murkowski. Each of them came out today saying, all right, the president mocking Christine Blasey Ford was wrong. He should not be doing that. Did he damage, meaning the president, the chances -- Kavanaugh's chances by doing this?

HOOVER: Doesn't help. Certainly doesn't help. Riles up the troops. Each one have people in their offices just protesting down the halls, in the elevators, ask Jeff Flake. We've all seen the video. And all that does is rile up the troops and make it more difficult for the ones who we all know are going through a really discerning and thoughtful and rigorous process to evaluate.

LEMON: Symone Sanders -- Sarah Sanders said, the president --

SANDERS: I would like that job.

LEMON: Just giving the facts.

SANDERS: No, that is not what he was doing. It was especially despicable what he did at that rally.

LEMON: But was that just too cute for her to say, oh, he's just giving the facts?

SANDERS: I mean, look, I don't know what compels Sarah Huckabee Sanders to go out there and say what she says to defend whatever she has to defend this day or the next about Donald Trump. But many people by now have seen the clip. And what you saw Donald Trump doing was in fact mocking Dr. Ford, making fun of her.

And by making fun of her, he's making fun of so many sexual assault survivors, rape survivors, attempted rape survivors in this country. Women heard that clip. And they see that Donald Trump is not taking them seriously.

LEMON: All right. Rick, we'll get to you more on the other side. Everyone, stick around. When we come back, protesters confronting Republican senators over Judge Kavanaugh's nomination. Those senators are not too happy about it.

[23:50:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

LEMON: Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell saying Republican senators will not be intimidated by the growing protests against Brett Kavanaugh's nomination. Many of those protests right inside the Capitol.

Back with me, Rick Wilson, Symone Sanders, and Margaret Hoover. So Rick, today Mitch McConnell slammed the protesters who were complaining to the senators over the Brett Kavanaugh vote. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SE. MITCH MCCONNELL (R), KENTUCKY: I want to make clear to these people who are chasing my members around the hall here or harassing them at the airports or going to their home, we're not going to be intimidated. If facts and evidence couldn't get the job done, then intimidation tactics and bullying would have to do.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

LEMON: So he says he and other members are being bullied. Rick, is that how you see it?

WILSON: Look, democracy sometimes gets up in your grill. And as long as it stays behind the line where violence and physical contact is involved --

LEMON: Right.

WILSON: I think as a member of Congress of the U.S. Senate, you're going to have to expect once in a while that somebody is going to get inside that bubble and confront you on something where there are passionate public feelings. There were certainly Republicans and Tea Party members who were up in Nancy Pelosi's face during the Obamacare battle.

And this runs on both sides of the ideological fence. And guys who live in a bubble and everyone in Washington and both parties are sort of in a very comfortable world of security details and staffers to protect them from outside opinions. Well, sometimes when the outside opinions come in and talk to you, they change where your head space is at.

I mean, I think you saw Jeff Flake go through a moment of personal moral agony when he was confronted by those protesters. Maybe they were loud, maybe they were rude, maybe not the decorum of the Senate, but it meant something because their personal stories were very passionate and intense and personal. And I think you see that -- that happens on both sides of the fence. I think that's part of democracy and part of being an American.

LEMON: It's part of being a politician. SANDERS: Part of being a politician. Look, now, some of these senators, I know they've never been mayors of a good city, but I've worked for a mayor or two. This is part of the job. But when you are in the United States Senate, when you're in Congress, as Rick noted, sometimes you're insulated.

What struck me about what Senator McConnell said though, these people that he is talking about, these are constituents that Congress is supposed to serve. These people, many of them, the protesters that confronted Jeff Flake, they were sexual assault survivors telling their stories.

LEMON: I just want to put this up. Yeah. Earlier this week, Mitch McConnell, Senator Bob Corker were confronted at Reagan National Airport by survivors of sexual assault. What do you make of the tactics of officials being confronted in public, Margaret?

HOOVER: Here's the -- the truth of the matter is that it so rarely happens to them, right? It's representing to them. Yes it's getting in their comfort zone, yes it's uncomfortable, but alarm bells should be going off to them if this has risen to a level where this has hit sort of a third rail in American culture.

People are -- you know, this is the kind of thing you see when really important social shifts are happening, right? If Roe V. Wade were up and being decided, you would have this kind of outpouring -- you would have more, right? But, like, really big things -- this is -- these people are representing their views and these views are important and they're widespread.

And we have seen a cultural shift on these issues in the last two decades. I mean, this is not -- this was not happening during the Clarence Thomas hearings. There has been like "Me Too" is real, this is new front for it, and it's uncomfortable for them.

LEMON: Yeah. Would they expect people to just walk up to them and say, I'm actually surprised -- this is a surprise to me that there's so much outrage and feign like oh, my god, about people, about your constituents, the people who actually voted for you, who are paying your salary, confronting you over an issue that they are so upset and shocked by it.

[23:55:07] People come up to me all the time, some of them I don't like, I'm in the public eye, I didn't put my name on the ballot but you know what I'm saying.

WILSON: These guys -- one of the big things that they're missing, the reason that they're being confronted is because they live in a bubble and they stop doing town hall meetings and they stop doing things where people could confront them.

This happened in the very early part of the Trump administration where they will go to these town halls and people will just go bonkers about preexisting condition coverage, all these other issues that were really burning. And they decided, instead of town halls, I'll do a controlled Facebook live event or I'll do a digital town hall, and it's junk. And people know it's crap. And they want to have an actual interaction with their elected members. And they deserve it.

SANDERS: It's their right.

WILSON: Yeah, it is their right to address the people who they have elected to office.

HOOVER: Not all these are necessarily their constituents --

WILSON: True --

HOOVER: Like, there is certain way Bob Corker can know that those people are from Tennessee and Mitch McConnell's constituents --

(CROSSTALK)

LEMON: They represent constituents in their state but they also represent all of us. They're responsible for what goes on and what the laws that --

SANDERS: Absolutely. And Mitch McConnell's statements on the floor today demonstrate to me that he doesn't think he works for anybody, I guess, except Donald Trump.

LEMON: Thank you. Thank you, all.

WILSON: Thanks, Don.

LEMON: And thank you for watching. Our coverage continues.

[24:00:00] (COMMERCIAL BREAK)