Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Christine Blasey Ford Agrees to Testify to Senate about Sexual Assault Allegations against Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh after Original Senate Deadline; Interview with Senator Angus King. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired September 21, 2018 - 8:00   ET

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

[08:00:00] UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -- to the Supreme Court come hell or high water.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: To see what's going on is just very, very sad. Why didn't somebody call the FBI 36 years ago?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: As soon as Democrats get gavels, we're going to get to the bottom of this.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is NEW DAY with Alisyn Camerota on John Berman.

ALISYN CAMEROTA, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning, everyone. Welcome to your NEW DAY. It is Friday, September 21st, 8:00 in the east.

So we have new developments. Christine Blasey Ford could testify next week, but it will not be on Monday. In an email obtained by CNN, Ford's lawyer, Debra Katz, told the Senate Judiciary Committee she wants to ensure the process is, quote, dignified and does not turn into a media circus. The only deal breaker is that Ford cannot appear at the hearing on Monday. So we're also learning about the terms that Ford's lawyers say their client wants before telling her story to senators even if the FBI does not investigate her claim that Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her when they were both in high school. Kavanaugh categorically denies that accusation.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: It is of huge significance that the only hold up is as long as it's not Monday, as long as it's not Monday it does look like this will happen, which is hugely significant. President Trump, he has been praised some for his so-called restraint on this subject. That seems to be over. Overnight he launched an attack on Professor Blasey's credibility using a refrain that is often employed to try to taint sexual assault victims.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Why didn't somebody call the FBI 36 years ago? You could also say, when did this all happen? What's going on? To take a man like this and besmirch -- with that being said, let her have her say and let's see how it all works out. But I don't think you can delay it any longer.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BERMAN: He caught himself at the end there saying let her have her day. But that part questioning why she didn't come forward 36 years ago, there are many, many reasons sexual assault victims do not come forward when they are attacked. Again, Brett Kavanaugh does deny this.

One more important development, there is this key line of defense for Kavanaugh that appears to be developing. It was someone else who attacked Professor Blasey. We are hearing that a lot. We heard it from a Republican senator. We also heard it from an ally of Kavanaugh in this bizarre detail. And now one of the president's closest advisers, Kellyanne Conway. Overnight she specifically raised the possibility on CNN that perhaps it was someone else who attacked the professor. Professor Blasey told the "Washington Post," no, I know who attacked me. Again, just one more time to be clear, Brett Kavanaugh denies this. Kellyanne Conway will be on NEW DAY in just minutes to discuss all of this.

And not for nothing, we should also say Michael Cohen is now reportedly talking to Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team in the Russia investigation.

CAMEROTA: Joining us now is Independent Senator Angus King of Maine. Senator King opposes Kavanaugh's nomination. Senator, thanks so much for being here. As we understand it, you opposed his nomination before these allegations came to light. Why?

SEN. ANGUS KING, (I) MAINE: That's right. I issued a statement early last week before any of this broke. I had a series of problems. One, I think Brett Kavanaugh, if you study his judicial record, which I did in some depth, has a very narrow view of what the federal government can do to protect its citizens -- health care, environment in particular is one I'm concerned about. But he has a broad view of what states can do to restrict people's personal liberty.

Probably the best example is Roe versus Wade. I don't know whether he'll vote directly to overturn it. I think he would, but I'm absolutely sure that he will vote to narrow the protections to the point where Roe versus Wade is essentially a hallow shell of a protection for reproductive rights for women across the country.

Additionally, it really bothers me, and this rush on this hearing is the other piece, is we only have 10 percent of the data, the documents that he produced when he worked at the White House. If somebody came to CNN, Alisyn, and said I want a job, but you can only see 10 percent of my work product. And by the way, that 10 percent is being picked out by one of my former employees and an old buddy of mine, and it's a lifetime job you can never fire me, you'd laugh at him. That's ridiculous. And that's exactly where we are today.

CAMEROTA: Senator, I'm sorry to interrupt. But I just want to --

KING: I'm from Maine. I want to know why they aren't showing us these documents.

CAMEROTA: OK, what Republicans say is they have produced more documents, that Kavanaugh's people have produced more documents than any other nominee ever.

KING: Well, they're talking about raw numbers. This guy has a huge record. That's the problem. The question is how much of his record are we seeing, not how many thousand pages. And the truth is we're only seeing about 10 percent of the documents that he worked on. When Elena Kagan was introduced, the White House produced 99 percent of her documents as opposed to 10 percent today. So if you do it in number, it's a lot of documents, but it's still a small percentage of the work that he did. And that's one of the things that bothers me.

[08:05:08] The other piece, Alisyn, that I don't think we ought to ignore is he has expressed in the past a very broad view of presidential power, even questioning whether a president should be investigated, let alone indicted or subpoenaed. That's -- he could take that position. People can argue about that. But for him to go on to the court with that position, nominated by a president who is under investigation who might well face a subpoena or some kind of legal process, to me, the obvious answer is recusal. He should have announced at his hearing I won't take part in these proceedings. And to not do so undermines the creditability of the court. I think it is a violation of judicial ethics which says you are supposed to avoid not only impropriety by the appearance of impropriety.

So you add those things together, I decided I just couldn't -- I just couldn't support his nomination. And we've got to remind ourselves, this is a lifetime job. There are no do-overs on this. This isn't like a bill we can amend next year or we can repeal. This is a one and done vote. I think it's probably one of the most important votes any of us in the Senate will take. It is going to affect the country for 30 years. And for that reason, I think we have to be exceedingly careful.

CAMEROTA: Senator, did you think that Judge Kavanaugh was honest in the answers that he gave to the committee? Again, the reason I ask is because Dianne Feinstein, one of your Senate colleagues did not think so. Here's what she said. "Brett Kavanaugh used materials stolen from Democratic senators to advance President Bush's judicial nominees. He was asked about this in 2004, 2006, and this week his answers were not true."

KING: Well, I think he was evasive. I'm not a student of that particular incident. The allegation is there was a Republican staffer who stole documents from the Democrats, fed them to the White House. Brett Kavanaugh handled them. The question is, did he know they were stolen? He says he didn't. I think you can argue about that. But I think throughout his hearing, and I went through a significant part of the hearing, even though I'm not on the committee. And the one thing I learned for sure, Alisyn, is the chairs for the audience aren't as comfortable as the chair the senators have at the head of the room.

CAMEROTA: Good to know.

(LAUGHTER)

KING: Good to know.

In any case, he really wasn't answering the questions. He would say things like Roe versus Wade is a precedent. And Planned Parenthood versus Casey is a precedent on a precedent. That's like saying today is Friday. That's a factual statement but it doesn't tell you what he thinks, what he would do, what his views are.

And I've got to tell you, I'm getting to the place where the next time I hear a judicial nominee say all I'm going to do is call balls and strikes, that's a no out of the box. That's just kidding us. He's going to have to make a decision, for example, whether some state, Arkansas, Texas, whatever, whether their law about abortion is unduly burdensome on a constitutional right. Deciding whether something is unduly burdensome is not calling balls and strikes. That's a value judgment call, and I think he was very disingenuous on those questions.

CAMEROTA: So Senator, given all of that, do you think your colleagues on the Judiciary Committee should accommodate Christine Blasey Ford's request that the things she's given them, the list of things that would make her more comfortable testifying?

KING: Well, I don't know. I'm not going to enter into those negotiations. I don't think it is unreasonable that the FBI reopen its background investigation. People are asking like this is something new. A judicial nomination starts with an FBI background investigation. So new information has come up in the process. Let them take a look at it, interview people. And maybe they can't do any better than what the information we have now is, but why not do that?

The question that's looming over this for me is what's the rush? Antonin Scalia's seat was held open for 14 months. This we're talking about 10 weeks. And there is this rush to get through all of these things. And I've got to tell you, it makes you wonder what is it that we're not seeing. So I hope they're going to be able to work this out. It bothered me, though, I've got to tell you, Wednesday night, Mike Davis, Chairman Grassley's counsel on nominations on the committee, tweeted out, unphased and determined, we will confirm Brett Kavanaugh. Now, do you really believe in the fairness of a process where the counsel to the committee basically has signed, sealed, and delivered? That really bothered me.

CAMEROTA: That leads us to one of your Democratic colleagues, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, who basically has said that even if he's confirmed and if Democrats win the House and/or the Senate that they will begin investigating Judge Kavanaugh. Here is Senator Whitehouse this week.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

[08:10:12] SEN. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, (D) RHODE ISLAND: This is such bad practice that even if they were to ram this guy through, as soon as Democrats get gavels, we're going to want to get to the bottom of this. JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: If the Democrats win back the House and/or

the Senate, Democrats will investigate what happened, the charges that Professor Ford is laying out, even if that means investigating a Supreme Court justice at the time.

WHITEHOUSE: I am confident of that.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

CAMEROTA: Senator, is that what Americans want? Is that what Americans should be in store for?

KING: No, I don't think so. I think we ought to settle this now. We ought to get to the bottom of the facts. And I think you phrased the question exactly right. People want a system and a process that they can have confidence in. They want a Supreme Court they can have confidence in. And that's why I think it is in Brett Kavanaugh's interest, in the president's interest, in the Republicans' interest to slow down, take your time, lay these issues to rest if indeed that's what will happen, and then you don't have someone going on the court under a cloud.

And I think that's why we ought to get it right now and not be hypothesizing about what may or may not happen in the future. This is the time to complete this investigation, do it in a proper way, look at all the issues. And as you pointed out at the beginning, I determined that I couldn't support this nomination before these allegations. But these are serious allegations, and we ought to try to get to the bottom of them.

CAMEROTA: Senator Angus King, we appreciate your perspective. Thanks so much for being on NEW DAY.

KING: Thank you.

CAMEROTA: Coming up in just minutes, we will speak to Kellyanne Conway, the counselor to President Trump about the Kavanaugh confirmation battle and so much more other news of the day as well.

BERMAN: And President Trump no longer holding back on Christine Blasey Ford. So how is she handling all of this? A friend of hers since high school joins us next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:15:00]

BRIGGS: Professor Christine Blasey Ford could testify next week about the sexual assault accusation she has made against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. CNN has learned that both Ford and Kavanaugh are now receiving death threats ahead of could be a very high stakes hearing.

Joining me now is Samantha Guerry, she's a friend of Professor Blasey for nearly 40 years going back all the way to high school. Thanks so much for being with us. I -- I know you have not spoken lately with Professor Blasey personally, but you have been in touch with people in her circle. How is she doing?

SAMANTHA GUERRY, FRIEND OF PROFESSOR BLASEY: She is doing well, I think. She has the strength of her resolve and her family. There is a -- a letter that her family issued yesterday that really, I think, spoke highly of how they see the situation right now. And, you know, if anything, I think the -- the dialogue around this has really strengthened her commitment to making sure we all get this right and that the process to hear her and have the appropriate testimony is done in a respectful way.

BRIGGS: So you know that if this hearing happens next week, it will be an incredible bright spotlight on your friend. Knowing her like you do, how do you think she will handle that?

GUERRY: I think she'll handle it beautifully. She's a strong woman who understands the implications of what she has brought forward and she is very articulate and thoughtful and will bring that forward as part of her conversation with Congress.

BRIGGS: She's dealing with a lot right now, obviously. She's dealing with what she says to be her memories of a sexual assault and she's also dealing with being in the middle of a political battle which on one side includes the president of the United States, arguably the most powerful person in the world. And overnight the president of the United States, who had been credited with being restrained on this subject, said something which can be seen as an attack on the credibility on your friend. I want to play this for you.

(VIDEO BEGINS)

TRUMP: You say, why didn't somebody call the FBI 36 years ago? I mean, you could also say when did this all happen? What's going on? To take a man like this and besmirch -- now with that being said, let her have her say and let's see how it all works out. But I don't think you can delay it any longer.

(VIDEO ENDS)

BRIGGS: So when you hear the president of the United States ask, why didn't she tell someone 36 years ago, what is your reaction?

GUERRY: Well, there are a couple things. First of all, the idea that someone would have told the FBI 36 years ago is ludicrous. I think it's adequately documented that women who suffer sexual assault are extremely unlikely to tell anyone. And -- and this spectacle this week is just an exaggerated reason why.

I have spoken to so many women and women who counsel women in this area who said that they have never told anyone. I think even Congresswoman Hirono said that several of her closest friends have come forward this week and told her about incidences in their own lives and she was -- that they have never shared with her and they are her closest friends. So this is a deeply personal, traumatic experience that has a lot of psychological complexity to it.

To make a flip remark about, well, why didn't you just go to the police? I think anyone who looks at this thoughtfully will see that women who make these claims are often belittled, told that they were mistaken, bullied and shamed for these experiences. That's been our typical approach to them.

[08:20:00]

BERMAN: Right.

GUERRY: Which is something we need to Change.

BERMAN: And one of the accusations often made is -- is that they're confused, it didn't happen the way they thought or maybe it was someone else, which is something new. Again, we are hearing this week from some supporters of Judge Kavanaugh. Orrin Hatch suggested it, this conservative friend of Brett Kavanaugh suggested it, and Kellyanne Conway said as much overnight to CNN that maybe it is someone else that Professor Blasey is thinking about. She says no. She says she knows who she's talking about.

GUERRY: That's wishful thinking on their part. Well, yeah, I mean, they weren't strangers. It's not somebody that she just passed by on the street. This is someone who was in our social circle. And while she didn't know him well, she knew -- she knew who he was and spent some time around him.

So, you know, that's just wishful thinking. I think they're trying to, you know, sow their own seeds of doubt, which I understand. I think that there is always got to be in these kinds of public incidences a healthy opportunity for the other side to -- to speak. Certainly Justice Kavanaugh needs to have a say too.

BERMAN: Sure. And just to be clear on that point, you -- you did run in this social circle. You went to high school with Professor Blasey all those years ago. She did not tell you about this attack, again, as is often the case with sexual assault victims. But you also knew Brett Kavanaugh. Did you see anything at that time to indicate this is something he had done?

GUERRY: You know, that's a trick question in some ways. I -- I've answered that question a few times, and, you know, whether I saw anything or anybody else saw something in his character really isn't all that relevant to the specific incident. You know, I didn't -- I've been very forthright that I did not know him well. He was in the circle. I knew who he was, but I can't speak to his character. I don't know him.

I think certainly, you know, his close friend, Mark Judge, is someone who has proven himself not to be credible and to be an aggressive and abusive person, so at least that part of the story seems very credible. I don't know. I wasn't there. I don't know what happened. I do know that this is a chronic problem for women.

BERMAN: Yeah.

GUERRY: And I think that Christine is a very credible source, who has been very thoughtful in how she's brought this forward. BERMAN: Samantha Guerry, and among other things, you do know your

friend. You do know Christine Blasey Ford, and that you can speak to. Thank you very much for being with us. Do appreciate your time.

GUERRY: Thank you very much.

BERMAN: Alisyn.

CAMEROTA: OK John, one week after Hurricane Florence dropped torrential rain on the Carolinas, residents there are bracing for even more flooding. We have a live report for you next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:25:00]

BERMAN: Hurricane Florence may be gone, but the storm's impact still being felt in the Carolinas. Nearly 70,000 customers without power still in North Carolina. The flooding is getting worse in some places. Our Nick Valencia is live in Conway, South Carolina with the very latest. Nick, what are you seeing?

NICK VALENCIA, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, John. This has been described to by residents here as a slow motion disaster. They know they soon will be inundated and they're in fact waiting for that to happen. Here we are in front of the Waccamaw River, which is two feet higher than it was at this point yesterday.

The mayor here, I spoke to earlier, and they are going through preparations. This community is a tired community. Four out of the last five years, they've gone through major flooding and if they get what they're expecting, it'll be the second time I about a week that they've gone through that. The National Guard is here. Federal resources are also working with other local resources. They brought in giant sandbags.

And one of their main concerns is a coal ash pond that's a few hundred yards from here. They're wanting to make sure that coal ash doesn't get into the water here. They're expecting a messy weekend. But as I mentioned, this is right now at this point, just a waiting game. This river, this Waccamaw River is not expected to crest until Monday. Alisyn?

CAMEROTA: OK Nick, thank you very much for the update from there. So Christine Blasey Ford says she could testify before the Senate next week if it's under the right conditions. What does the White House think of those conditions? Kellyanne Conway is going to join us live next.

[08:30:00]