Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Kavanaugh & His Accuser to Testify Before Senate on Monday; Will Senate Call Mark Judge to Testify in Kavanaugh Hearing? Aired 6- 6:30a ET

Aired September 18, 2018 - 06:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: I believe her. Many, many women in America certainly believe her.

[05:59:28] SEN. ORRIN HATCH (R), UTAH: I talked to him on the phone. He wasn't at the party. Somebody is mixed up.

DONALD TRUMP (R), PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I'd like to see a complete process. If it takes a little delay, it will take a little delay.

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R), MAINE: If Judge Kavanaugh lied, that would be disqualifying.

SEN. RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (R), CONNECTICUT: This hearing should take place only after the FBI investigation.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There's no way to go back 35 years and prove it or disprove it. We're going to have a circus on Monday.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

ANNOUNCER: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota and John Berman.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: All right. Welcome to our viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is NEW DAY. It's Tuesday, September 18, 6 a.m. here in New York, and less than one week from today a professor could sit before the Senate and the country and say she was sexual assaulted by a Supreme Court nominee.

Now, if this takes place, this will be a public hearing with huge political and societal consequences. Professor Christine Blasey Ford says that 36 years ago, Brett Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and groped her. When she tried to scream, she said he put his hand over her mouth. Judge Kavanaugh, Brett Kavanaugh says it didn't happen.

So who will the Senate believe? After Ford's lawyer told Alisyn that her client would be willing to testify under oath before the Senate, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a hearing for next Monday, but now it's Democrats saying, "Not so fast. Don't rush the process."

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: And CNN has learned the White House strategy will be to bring out supportive women who will back Kavanaugh's character, including some of the 65 women who signed that letter of support when the sexual assault claims surfaced.

Meanwhile, President Trump continues to defend his Supreme Court pick, and the president is showing uncommon restraint in not attacking Kavanaugh's accuser. The president will hold a news conference at the White House later today.

So let's begin with CNN's Suzanne Malveaux. She is live on Capitol Hill with the latest. What is the latest, Suzanne?

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Alisyn.

This really is a dramatic development, extraordinary showdown between these two. It is on Monday when we expect to see Judge Kavanaugh and his accuser in public under oath tell their story, and essentially, what this does, this puts the issue of sexual assault before the American people front and center, just seven weeks before the midterm elections.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

MALVEAUX (voice-over): The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee bowing to bipartisan pressure, scheduling public testimony next Monday from Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and the woman accusing him of sexual assaulting her at a high school party.

CAMEROTA: Will your client, Christine Ford, be willing to testify in public to the Judiciary Committee?

DEBRA KATZ, ATTORNEY FOR CHRISTINE BLASEY FORD: The answer is yes.

MALVEAUX: Kavanaugh has forcefully denied the allegation by California Professor Christine Blasey Ford, and the White House said Monday that he looks forward to a hearing where he can clear his name of this false allegation.

HATCH: I talked to him on the phone today.

MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: And what did he say to you?

HATCH: Well, he didn't do that. And he wasn't at the party. So, you know, there's clearly somebody is mixed up.

MALVEAUX: But Democrats are calling on the FBI to investigate the claims before the hearing.

BLUMENTHAL: We're going to be asking those questions in the dark. We'll be shooting, in effect, blindfolded.

MALVEAUX: Senator Dianne Feinstein accusing the committee of rushing the process and repeating mistakes made in 1991 when Anita Hill also testified days after she was identified publicly of accusing Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment. The Justice Department signaling that they don't plan to reopen

Kavanaugh's FBI background check for now. Republicans relenting and scheduling a public hearing after a dramatic day on Capitol Hill.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), MAJORITY LEADER: The Democrats have spent weeks and weeks searching for any possible reason that the nomination should be delayed.

SCHUMER: For too long, women have made serious allegations of abuse and have been ignored or dragged through the mud.

MALVEAUX: Judge Kavanaugh can only afford to lose two Republican votes if all Democrats vote against his nomination; and a number of key Republican senators have been calling for additional information before voting on his confirmation.

COLLINS: If Judge Kavanaugh has lied about what happened, that would be disqualifying.

SEN. JEFF FLAKE (R), ARIZONA: I would have voted no this week, absent her being able to tell her story.

MALVEAUX: President Trump strongly defending his Supreme Court nominee, but choosing not to criticize Ford like he has with other sexual assault accusers.

TRUMP: Judge Kavanaugh is one of the finest people that I have ever known. I want him to go in at the absolute highest level, and I think to do that, you have to go through this. If it takes a little delay, it will take a little delay.

MALVEAUX: A source tells CNN that the president's restraint is a sign of how critical Kavanaugh's confirmation is, noting that conservatives have made it clear that the president cannot afford to do anything to derail the imperiled nomination.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MALVEAUX: And there's an extraordinary public relations campaign that is already under way as people, advocates both for and against the judge, are putting up money, as well as ads on TV and online. We saw Kavanaugh at the White House spending nine hours with his confirmation team coming up with a strategy.

One of the pieces of that strategy: to lean on women who have come before previously to advocate for his character. That is something that they are trying to do.

And then of course, 2 p.m., that is when the president has a press conference, the president of Poland. Kavanaugh will be front and center of that discussion -- John, Alisyn.

BERMAN: We'll be listening to that very closely. Suzanne Malveaux on Capitol Hill, thanks very much.

[06:05:04] Joining us now, CNN senior political analyst John Avlon; CNN senior political reporter Nia-Malika Henderson; and former federal prosecutor and CNN legal analyst Laura Coates. If this happens Monday, and we can talk in a second --

CAMEROTA: Why do you keep saying "if"? It sounds like it's --

BERMAN: I am surprised and curious about what Democrats are doing. We heard it yesterday here with Dick Durbin, the No. 2 in the Senate where he said that he thought that tomorrow would be too fast for a hearing, but now all of a sudden Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer saying -- Richard Blumenthal saying we need to have the FBI investigate. They seem to be putting on the brakes now.

CAMEROTA: They have to wait for the FBI you're saying, that's their strategy.

AVLON: I'm curious how far they're willing to push that. Look, since we brought that up, let's start there.

CAMEROTA: All right. Let's start there. So let's do that.

BERMAN: How far -- what is the risk for Democrats here to try to gum up this hearing that is now scheduled for Monday? The lawyer for this woman, for Christine Blasey Ford, told Alisyn yesterday she wants to testify. The Senate Republicans schedule a hearing, and now Democrats are saying not so fast.

NIA-MALIKA HENDERSON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: It's really unclear why they're doing it because you recall, I mean, there have been tactics before the Democrats sort of trying to delay this, needing more documents, saying that the hearing shouldn't start until they have more documents. So it's unclear what the strategy is here.

I think mainly for Republicans, there's pretty much down side to this hearing, because you have the specter of all of these men essentially going after this woman or asking her questions, perhaps in a harsh way. And for Democrats there's typically upside, I think, to this, because they have a much more diverse panel who will be asking questions.

So this kind of playing politics with trying to delay this hearing, the strategy is unclear and the reasoning why they would want to delay it is also unclear, because the FBI has already seen this, right?

Dianne Feinstein gave this information to the FBI, and then they passed it along with the White House, so unclear what the strategy is.

BERMAN: I can think of one reason. I can think of one reason why Democrats want to slow it down if they can, and they may not succeed, is to protect Ford, to give her time to prepare, perhaps to get the witness in the right frame of mind to talk publicly.

CAMEROTA: Could it be as simple as trying to delay towards the midterms?

AVLON: I mean, clearly at this point, the midterms are looming in the background of the timing, but I think Democrats may not be being motivated solely by concern for the victim, Christine Ford. They're being motivated probably by politics and by desire to make sure they have their own ducks in a row strategically, and this indicates that they don't yet. There are still things they may not know.

And the way this all came out didn't exactly reek of strategy, either, even though it's had the effect of coming in at the 11th hour to really block the nomination or to throw a major obstacle at a nomination process that seemed preordained. So this is a big deal, and this Monday hearing, if indeed it goes forward on Monday, is going to be one of the high-wire acts of Senate hearings in American mystery. Epic.

CAMEROTA: And history, it gives us a guide for what this might look like. If we harken back to 1991, Laura, remember this moment where the committee of, at that time, all white older men, all interviewed and asked questions, often aggressively, of Anita Hill when she came forward with her accusations against Clarence Thomas.

Obviously, the demo -- demographics of the Judiciary Committee has - have changed, at least on the Democratic side, but do you think that this is akin to what it will look like on Monday?

LAURA COATES, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, certainly, demographics have changed, but note, of course, that the #MeToo era has not had the effect of completely equalizing the power that women are perceived to have in these scenarios.

And I say that to say that remember when Anita Hill testified she, a seasoned attorney, somebody who worked at the EEOC, along with Clarence Thomas and Department of Education, still a law professor to this day, was dismissed as an erotomaniac. She was called "a little bit nutty, a little bit slutty." She had commentary about whether or not she knew what she was talking about.

And the allegations that she is describing happened around the same time within a decade, of course, of the confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas as the allegations that are being waged against one Brett Kavanaugh.

I think it's surprising to many people that we haven't quite come far enough to know that, at the still 11th hour, justice Joe Biden decided to not delay a vote knowing that he had knowledge about the allegations against Clarence Thomas before the confirmation hearings began. You have Senator Dianne Feinstein, albeit for different reasons deciding, as well, to look in a different direction.

And now at the 11th hour, trying to get Dr. Ford ready to testify, perhaps, and to address it in the long run. I think you have a lot of the same parallels happening here.

The biggest distinction of course, Alisyn, is that the conduct between the -- alleged between Hill and Clarence Thomas was between adults. The conduct alleged between Kavanaugh and Dr. Ford was between minors. Not to dismiss it, but it was between minors and not in a professional setting.

[06:10:06] So you do have these -- these echoes, but you do have some key distinctions here that will be at play.

BERMAN: Another distinction: this is alleged sexual assault, attempted rape.

COATES: Right.

BERMAN: That was workplace harassment. There is a very big difference there. And I think that politicians are going to need to be careful whether they dismiss this as, "Oh, drunken adolescent sexual assault."

COATES: Right.

BERMAN: That does not seem to me as high a bar as some people are presenting it over the last few days.

Nia, as we look at this, we talk about the changes from 1991. Yes, I mean, that was a full committee of white men. The Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee, it's 11 white men.

HENDERSON: Yes, yes.

BERMAN: And so you are going to be presented with a picture, unless they bring in some staff member, a female staff member to do the questioning or a female senator. I don't know who that would be.

You can bring in anyone to ask whatever questions you want.

HENDERSON: Which would in some ways highlight the fact, right, that there are 11 men who would be doing the questioning. We haven't seen the shifts in demographics in terms of representation on the Republican side that we have seen on the Democratic side. On that Democratic panel, they'll have Kamala Harris; Amy Klobuchar, as well, Obviously, Dianne Feinstein.

So the dynamic is going to be pretty difficult for the Republicans. And I've heard sources say, essentially, for the Republican senators there, they really need to be careful about their questioning. They really need to rely on staffers, maybe female staffers, to help them craft the questioning.

Also, I think Kellyanne Conway is really, I think, providing a good sort of framework --

AVLON: Yes.

HENDERSON: -- for how to deal with this. Basically, she needs to be heard. She doesn't need to be criticized. And you ideally hope, if you're a Republican, that they follow Kellyanne Conway's advice here.

AVLON: I think it makes such an important point. Because you got the sense that when Kellyanne came forward on the camera, she was maybe ahead of the White House messaging or the president's instincts. But the president has been enormously restrained, because I think Republicans realize that they are in a danger zone, that optically, this is really bad. And it's not helped by the president's own problems in this area.

And, you know, it makes sense because, look, culture wars ultimately play out in the Supreme Court. So that's why this is so fraught. And you are going to see a real culture war fight play out in this hearing in particular.

CAMEROTA: Laura, did you have something?

COATES: I was going to say, on that point the idea of culture wars, one of the things that's so important and why, especially for a lifetime position, one's entire life has to be on display and up for, you know, at least some sort of reckoning.

And so you have somebody who is posed -- poised to potentially talk about women's rights issues, the least -- not the least of which is the Roe v. Wade case that may be looming in the distance for Brett Kavanaugh. So it's very important.

Also, by the way, the cases involve people like Bill Cosby, the Harvey Weinsteins, the cases involving the #MeToo have really allowed the American people to understand that there are real reasons why there are delayed reports of sexual assault and that the factors that would be dismissive, perhaps, for Anita Hill in 1991, where there's the victim shaming and the incredulity displayed of people who delay reporting of these things will likely not be here to the same degree for Dr. Ford.

But it's sad that she will still face the anguish of having to testify and have her life on display, but she, unlike Brett Kavanaugh, has not chosen that particular role. She's asking to be heard. He's asking to have a lifetime appointment.

CAMEROTA: OK. So then there's this other strange wrinkle to all of this, which is if it's just her memory against his memory, obviously the lawmakers will have to decide who they find most credible.

But there was a third person who she says was there at the moment who witnessed it, who was actually involved in part in the assault by, you know, laying on top of the two of them and that is this guy named Mark Judge. He is, I think it's fair to say, a highly unreliable narrator. He has made a brand out of how drunk he was in high school. And here's a picture, his picture wearing a beret for some reason.

HENDERSON: Yes.

CAMEROTA: And -- in his yearbook. We go back for bread crumbs, right? We go back to look for crews. The yearbook is filled with bread crumbs.

HENDERSON: Yes.

CAMEROTA: So he wrote in his yearbook, "Certain women should be struck regularly, like gongs." Who says that? OK? I remember 1983. No guy said that in my group.

BERMAN: It was just high school. It was just high school. CAMEROTA: No, no high school guy said that. No normal guy.

BERMAN: Which yearbook editor says that's OK?

CAMEROTA: I don't know.

BERMAN: Which faculty adviser for a yearbook says that's OK?

HENDERSON: In some ways this gives us a window into these elite D.C. prep schools, which I don't really know anything about. I grew up in small-town South Carolina and went to a public school, but this is the kind of thing that, you know --

CAMEROTA: Misogynistic --

HENDERSON: This is obviously somebody who Brett Kavanaugh, at least according to this woman, hung out with. I think we should be careful about tying Brett Kavanaugh too closely to Mark Judge. We'll see if Mark Judge testifies.

[06:15:09] CAMEROTA: I think that Mark Judge has said they were friends. Right?

[06:15:12] HENDERSON: Yes, but the behavior of Mark Judge doesn't necessarily implicate Brett Kavanaugh.

BERMAN: Assaulting women -- assaulting women was every bit as offensive in 1983 as it is today. It's every bit as -- as offensive at any prep school in America as it is in any public school. I don't think the venue explains how it is that this was OK.

CAMEROTA: You don't think that there was a culture of -- at an all- boys prep school of elite boys? You don't think there was there was a misogynist strain that might run through there?

BERMAN: Well, evidently there was. It doesn't make it right, though. Evidently, there was, but it doesn't make it right.

AVLON: Of course not. And you know, this guy's quoting Noel Coward. I think that speaks to the sort of clubby misogyny that existed in a lot of these old-school environments for a long time. And then there's the question of, you know, does the sins of the friend transfer, as Nia was asking.

And Judge is an unreliable narrator not only because of an admitted blackout drinking problem as a teenager but, you know, his conservatism sense, and does that impact testimony? And we'll see.

BERMAN: We're going to talk more about Mark Judge. You are the lawyer here. We definitely needed to get your take on Mark Judge as a witness. We're going to talk about that coming up and also the political impact that all this will have, not just on the midterms but maybe on the 2020 presidential election.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) [06:20:05] CAMEROTA: OK. There was a third person in the room, allegedly, when Christine Blasey Ford says she was sexual assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh at this high school party in the early '80s.

So will the Senate Judiciary Committee call on Kavanaugh's classmate, Mark Judge, to testify?

We're back with Nia-Malika Henderson, Laura Coates and John Avlon.

So, Laura, let's talk about this. As we were just saying, Mark Judge is an interesting character. Dr. Blasey says that he was there in the room. He witnessed it when they were -- but they were stumbling drink, she says, when all of this happened. And again, he has sort of made a brand out of being a drunk at -- during those times. In fact, he wrote a book called "Wasted: Tales of a Gen X Drunk."

Does he get called?

COATES: He should. Because, of course, normally, we don't have the scenario when he said/she said scenario. You just have the battle of credibility.

Now you actually have a third person to either corroborate the statements of Brett Kavanaugh that this never happened or to bolster the statements of one Dr. Ford who said this is what happened. Here is who was involved and at least the toppling of it.

And so it's rare that they should look at. And of course, the fact that he has now since made a brand about alcoholics and his own battles with alcohol throughout his youth and childhood is not supposed to be simply transferred onto Brett Kavanaugh.

But what it does test is the theory of whether or not somebody who was unequivocally denied that anything like this has ever happened would have some basis to now recall and then issue a more nuanced approach. For example, you know, now that I'm hearing from Mark Judge or Dr. Ford, perhaps we were at a party together at some time, but I don't recall this ever happening the way she had.

And that one entree could be enough to plant that reasonable -- that seed of reasonable doubt that he should actually be the next Supreme Court justice or that he was guilty.

BERMAN: And I have to say it's the same thing as yesterday when the judge for Professor Blasey said that she's willing to testify. If you're going to hold this public hearing, how do you explain not bringing Mark Judge before it? There was one other person allegedly in the room. How do you justify that politically? That's a bind, Laura, for these Republicans.

COATES: It is and of, course, Senator Joe Biden at the time, now -- you know, now Vice President Biden, but at the time he called that one of his biggest regrets. When he knew that there were three other people who were available to bolster the credibility and support the testimony of Anita Hill back in 1991, and he chose not to do so. And just last year he came out and said he owed her an apology for

that, and he should have done -- should have done a better job of doing it.

So you think about the House Judiciary Committee whose role it is to investigate these matters, particularly for a lifetime tenure, you cannot avoid calling somebody in who may be the missing puzzle, even if his own particular credibility issues or he's not a sympathetic witness, it doesn't mean he doesn't recall the event.

CAMEROTA: So John.

AVLON: Yes.

CAMEROTA: Mark Judge has already talked to "The Weekly Standard" about this when the allegations first broke. Here's his quote: "It's just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way."

But again, unreliable narrator.

AVLON: Yes, I mean, you know, he has admitted somebody who had blackout drunks as a teenager. That's not typically who you'd call for perfect recall in the Senate confirmation hearing, and that may be the out.

I think the problem is sort of the definitive nature of some of these denials. In the background of this is all going to be politics. You know, Judge subsequently has written for a lot of conservative publications. Will that be used? Will Democrats say that will be used against him? Will however gently Ford be interrogated and whether she has a partisan agenda behind this very personal accusation.

These are all going to be playing out, because of course, this isn't just the lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court, the midterms are looming. If the Democrats succeed in blocking Kavanaugh, if he doesn't pass through, you're not going to see a nominee before the midterms, certainly. And -- and the Republicans already are dealing with a really steep gender gap which is compounded by the fact that, you know, more than a dozen women have made accusations against President Trump. This doesn't help.

BERMAN: Do you know why Republicans will be terrified for Mark Judge to walk in that room? Because Mark Judge has got all kinds of writings glorifying male power. I don't know any other way to write this.

He writes about Barack and Michelle Obama, and I'm just going to read the end of this here. You know, "With her love of violent movies, her fixation on fitness, death glare, Michelle is actually more of a man than her husband. Oh, for the days when President George W. Bush gave his wife, Laura, a loving but firm pat on the backside in public. The man knew who was boss."

That's the third person, allegedly, in the room. That's the witness who may appear next Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee. HENDERSON: And that's the person that's going to be tied to Brett

Kavanaugh. And Brett Kavanaugh has done everything possible to court women. He's talked about his wife. He talked about coaching a teenage girls' basketball team. He talked about how much his mother inspired him, and so there he is --

BERMAN: People are asking whether or not he was perhaps projecting that there might be issues. You look back now, it's --

HENDERSON: In some ways, sure. I mean, I think he knew that his path to being the next Supreme Court justice went through women, two women in particular, Lisa Murkowski as well as Susan Collins, and just overall, women in general.

[06:25:09] But you're right, this idea that maybe he was protesting too much.

AVLON: But I think we have to assume that that is sincere. Also, obviously, the obstacle of Roe and questions about whether, you know, he would be the judge that overturns Roe. That's the political calculation. But I think you have to take that testimony as sincere.

The question is whether there's a synaptic continuity between what he allegedly did in high school and the man he seems to be and believes himself to be now.

CAMEROTA: Well, his writings certainly echo the same sort of feeling. I mean, the same sort of sexist strain.

BERMAN: Judge's. Judge's.

CAMEROTA: Oh, sorry.

BERMAN: Mark Judge. Mark Judge's writings do. Not Judge Kavanaugh.

CAMEROTA: Yes. Absolutely. Sorry.

HENDERSON: Judge confusion here.

COATES: You know what? There's also 65, right, women who will come out in a letter for him. There's some question about whether they're sincere about their support for him, but you have a witness list there, don't you?

If you are the Judiciary Committee, in addition to Mark Judge you have women from the high school ages who can say what kind of person and his character at the time. So you don't just have the, perhaps, you know, not credible witness of Mark Judge and the blackout period in his youth, you've got women who have put their name to support him. So whether they come forward to support him will also be a part of the hearing and should be.

BERMAN: I've got to ask one last question. You've been in a courtroom. I know it's different than a hearing, but put yourself in the position of, like, Ted Cruz asking these questions, a guy who is up for reelection, has a lot to lose. How do you go about asking questions in a public hearing like this?

Can you get through this without politically damaging yourself?

COATES: You should be able to ask an objective question that tries to get the person to divulge information. The open-ended questions, the who, what, when, where without the grandstanding, without the judgment, without the presumption that, in fact, she is not telling the truth and without making her the poster child for the entire #MeToo movement; and focusing on this particular claim, what her role in it was, what she recalls and not attempting to do the Anita Hill slander of "a little bit nutty, a little bit slutty," but instead actually having the wherewithal to understand that, when you ask a question and you're a senator, you should get an answer, and you should do it with respect.

CAMEROTA: All right. Monday will be very interesting. Panel, thank you very much.

Now to this. The death toll rising in the Carolinas and Virginia as people there struggle with the catastrophic flooding in the aftermath of Florence. So where all of this is heading now. We'll get an update next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)