Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Feinstein Calls for Delay in Kavanaugh Nomination after New Allegation. Aired 6-6:29a ET

Aired September 24, 2018 - 06:00   ET

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

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BRIAN STELTER, CNN CHIEF MEDIA CORRESPONDENT/"RELIABLE SOURCES" HOST: A second woman is speaking publicly with accusations against Kavanaugh.

[05:59:33] DAVID GERGEN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: It's absolutely wise to be cautious. It has the possibility for changing the game.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: The stage is set for Thursday when Blasey Ford is scheduled to testify.

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), SOUTH CAROLINA: I want to listen to her, but what am I supposed to do? Ruin this guy's life?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: I believe her. His credibility is already very questionable.

SEN. SUSAN COLLINS (R), MAINE: I was appalled by the president's tweet.

MIKE PENCE (R), VICE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I believe that Judge Kavanaugh will soon be Justice Kavanaugh.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

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

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to our viewers in the United States and all around the world. This is NEW DAY. It's Monday, September 24, 6 a.m. here in New York. Alisyn is off. Erica Hill joins me this morning. A big morning.

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: It's never a dull moment around these parts.

BERMAN: No. Explosive developments overnight. The top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dianne Feinstein, is now calling for an immediate postponement of any further action on Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation after a new allegation of sexual misconduct against the Supreme Court nominee surfaced overnight. That report laid out, in graphic detail by Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer in "The New Yorker," it comes just hours after Professor Christine Blasey Ford agreed to appear at an open hearing on Thursday to discuss her sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh. HILL: Kavanaugh and the White House deny the claim made by a second

woman, Deborah Ramirez. She told "The New Yorker" about an incident in college, alleging Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a dorm party, thrusting his genitals in her face and causing her to touch it without her consent.

Now, this comes as Republican allies urged the president to hold his fire and not get rid of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, advising restraint, given the misconduct allegations roiling Kavanaugh's confirmation and, of course, the upcoming midterm elections.

All of this as the president is in New York this week. He will speak at the United Nations this morning.

CNN's Abby Phillip is live at the U.N. with the latest this morning.

Abby, good morning.

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Erica.

CNN has learned that yesterday, President Trump spent the day talking to his team about these latest allegations against Judge Kavanaugh, but those officials say that the president is not considering withdrawing his nomination.

But while multiple officials last week said they were confident that Judge Kavanaugh would be confirmed, these new allegations cast that into serious doubt.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIP (voice-over): The ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Dianne Feinstein, calling for an immediate delay in Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation proceedings and an FBI allegation after "The New Yorker" published new allegations of sexual misconduct from a second accuser.

"The New Yorker" reports that Deborah Ramirez, a classmate of Kavanaugh's at Yale, says she remembers Kavanaugh exposing himself to her at a drunken college dormitory party.

Kavanaugh categorically denying the claim, writing in part, "This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. This is a smear, plain and simple."

The White House throwing their full support behind President Trump's nominee, saying, "This 35-year-old uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the Democrats, designed to tear down a good man."

Ramirez told "The New Yorker" that, at first, she was unsure of Kavanaugh's role in the alleged incident, but after assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, she's confident in her recollection. A classmate who was not at the party told the magazine he is 100

percent sure that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student that exposed himself to Ramirez, but a number of other classmates denying any memory of this party, including a student Ramirez said egged Kavanaugh on.

A spokesman for Chairman Chuck Grassley tells CNN he has plans to look into the accusations but has no plans to postpone Thursday's hearing with Professor Christine Blasey Ford, who says Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her at a high school party, a claim Kavanaugh denies.

SEN. MAZIE HIRONO (D), HAWAII: I would be wanting to hear what kind of environment it was in high school. Apparently, there was a lot of drinking and partying going on. This is why we need an investigation.

PHILLIP: Ford has committed to testifying, despite Grassley offering no details about who will be questioning her and the committee's refusal to subpoena other witnesses like Mark Judge, who Ford says was in the room when the alleged assault occurred.

CNN has learned that Kavanaugh plans to use calendars from 1982 as part of his testimony, and Grassley is seeking any written, audio, visual or electronic materials related to the allegations from both parties.

GRAHAM: Unless there's something more, no, I'm not going to ruin Judge Kavanaugh's life over this.

PHILLIP: Meanwhile, sources tell CNN that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called President Trump on Friday to tell him that these tweets attacking Ford were not helpful. Criticism echoed by senators on both sides of the aisle.

COLLINS: I was appalled by the president's tweet. We know that allegations of sexual assault are one of the most unreported crimes that exist.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PHILLIP: And the Senate Judiciary Committee staffers on the Republican side are working to interview some of the people who might have information about the alleged incident involving Ford, including a life-long friend of hers who says she has no recollection of the incident.

Meanwhile, President Trump is here in New York this whole week for the U.N. General Assembly. He's got a day packed with meetings, including meetings with the leaders of South Korea, Egypt and France. But it's going to be a real split-screen day and week for President Trump this week -- Erica and John.

[06:05:08] BERMAN: Indeed. All right, Abby Phillip for us over at the U.N. Abby, thanks very much.

Joining us now, CNN legal analyst and former federal prosecutor, Laura Coates; White House reporter for Bloomberg, Toluse Olorunnipa, who is with us in New York, which is wonderful to have him here; and CNN senior political analyst John Avlon.

Friends -- and I apologize to the parents out there and the children who might be watching. Again, this new allegation from Deborah Ramirez is that Brett Kavanaugh, as a freshman at Yale, thrusts his genitals in her face and caused her to touch it -- them without her consent. That is what the allegation is.

Now, "The New Yorker" was not able to corroborate that Kavanaugh was, in fact, at this party. Kavanaugh denies it, and the White House denies it. There are the merits of this allegation, and then there are the politics of what this means. I would like to discuss both.

I think to get to the politics, we have to discuss the merits and strength of the allegation. First, Laura, so I want to go to you with that. What do you make of this, given all the caveats and the hedging that "The New Yorker," to its credit, does in its own piece.

COATES: Well, you know, I give him a lot of credit for doing so. Things that stick out to me was, of course, the notion that she had to, essentially, rehabilitate and reassess her own memory after speaking with counsel.

In that particular aspect of it, we were talking about how to assess and evaluate the credibility of the claim, is very, very important. Because it's something that she identifies as having gaps initially. Her memory failed her different times, and she herself was drinking.

And so this does not negate it ever happened. It's just that needs to take into consideration you have these factors that undermine the ability of people to believe it wholeheartedly.

Having said that, it would be, essentially, a sexual battery if it, in fact, occurred. It's an offensive touching. It's one in which somebody did not consent to. However, there are so many leaps and bounds to get this to be a criminal -- criminally prosecutable offense because of the lapse of time and because maybe there's no reporting of it. But still, it does go along with the other accusations being levied about drinking combined with sexual contact and lack of consent.

HILL: Can I just push on one more thing, Laura? Because as we talk about the fact that she doesn't -- this is laid out in the article, that you know, she spent six days going over this with her attorney.

COATES: Right.

HILL: What are those conversations like between an attorney and a client? OK, so let's so go back again to this night. And what is that discussion?

COATES: Well, the discussion is essentially asking question about the relative time period. Where were you? Who was involved? Was there a party? Are you sure you remember this particular person? It's a lot of "Are you sure?"; a lot of "Are you certain this happened, this is the person?" And in many ways, a defense counsel, if this were a criminal case,

would look at this and say, "So you were able to be persuaded by your attorney that you knew all of these facts and all your ducks were in a row, and you couldn't remember it outright until there was another allegation made and until somebody was able to really test your own credibility."

That's really what they're going to be going for: defending themselves against people who are going to attack, and also thinking about not a story line in a feigned sense, Erica, but essentially, are you certain that this is the person of all the people that were there. And, more importantly, did you tell anyone about this: a classmate, a friend, anyone who could possibly corroborate this with you. And they may have even invited that person in to try to bolster her memory and credibility at that point.

BERMAN: I should note, we're going to have Ronan Farrow on next hour. He is one of the writers of this piece, along with Jane Mayer. We're going to ask him about this whole process and how they came to publish it.

That's the case. She says what she says. He denies it. We have all the caveats right there in the piece, John Avlon. So what happens now? Now, it goes into the realm of politics. Christine Blasey Ford was set to testify on Thursday. What does the Senate do with all of this?

JOHN AVLON, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: We are even deeper into unprecedented territory. This is beyond jump ball. And so bringing out your crystal ball, everybody is going to eat glass if they look too deep into it.

That said, I think the pressure to potentially delay the hearing, as Dianne Feinstein said, will be back on the table. Republicans will try to resist it. Seems to me that senators Collins and Murkowski have an unusual amount of power in how this goes forward.

Remember, Republicans only have a 51-49 margin here. There is not a lot of margin for error. The Democrats, the red-state Democrats who were seen as likely to support Kavanaugh, I think they've got a very clear off-ramp from that, from a political standpoint.

The pressure is going to be incredible, because the headline is horrible, even if this is a different level of sexual harassment than we've dealt with at these level of confirmation hearings.

BERMAN: Sexual assault. I think waving your genitals and forcing someone to touch them, that as Laura just said, is battery.

AVLON: Sounds like sexual humiliation rather than an attempted -- anything that could be classified as an attempted rape.

BERMAN: It's the difference between exposing yourself, though, and again, forcing someone to touch your genitals --

AVLON: Yes. BERMAN: -- without consent, that to me goes beyond humiliation.

AVLON: It is -- it is a horrific allegation, not just for the politics of it but for the human element of it. This is not anything that resembles a "boys will be boys" allegations, you know, in any -- in any typical sense. That's why this is so unprecedented.

[06:10:08] And a lot of folks will say, look, there is == against the backdrop of Merrick Garland, against the backdrop of Kavanaugh's own work on the Starr Commission against Bill Clinton, which tried to use sexual humiliation to pressure a president out of office, that this is all, you know, comeuppance. But all of this is unprecedented. This is incredibly high-stakes what will happen this week. And this is a horrible fact pattern for the White House and Kavanaugh.

HILL: Well, in terms of the White House, as we're looking at all this, too, we saw what happened on Friday with the president's tweet. And we heard the reporting of how much pushback there was from a Republican, saying, "Don't mess this up for us. This was not a smart move."

And now here we are on Monday morning. I -- I mean, I can only imagine what must be happening, what the conversations must be this morning.

TOLUSE OLORUNNIPA, WHITE HOUSE REPORTER, BLOOMBERG NEWS: Yes, we've already started to see a shift in the White House, where before when the original claim came out from Dr. Ford, they were always focusing on -- on Judge Kavanaugh, saying, "This is not in his character. He's never done this before. There's no pattern. There's only this one case."

Now that we see another potential case, we're seeing a shift from the White House, and they're looking to try to make a case that Judge Kavanaugh is not only -- not only would he not do something like this, but they're trying to poke holes in the case of the accuser, saying that she was inebriated, saying that she doesn't remember, saying that she's tied with Democrats. So they're really pushing a little bit more hard in trying to make the case that this is a Democratic plot to try to undermine this -- this nomination. There's a shift in the strategy, and the only thing that we are having to wait for is whether or not the president will lean into this with a tweet and really start attacking the accuser in a much more direct way.

BERMAN: You call this report a bombshell report, and you think, Toluse, that it will make it harder for Republicans to keep the momentum forward, to speed this thing up, although they did agree to wait till Thursday at this point. But you think it's harder for them to push now on speed?

OLORUNNIPA: Yes, we've heard from a number of different Republicans say -- say things like, "We're just going to plow through. This is just a hiccup, and we're just going to move right ahead with it. And at one point, they even threatened Dr. Ford and said, "If you're not going to agree to our demands, then we're just going to go ahead with this vote on Monday. So that's going to be much more difficult for them to do. There's going to be much more pressure for them to take their time, potentially have the FBI get involved and really investigate this. Otherwise, it will look like they're not taking these very serious allegations seriously.

And I think that that pressure is likely to increase. And the idea of just plowing through is no longer something that can be on the table at this point, because it will look like they are disregarding sexual assault survivors, allegedly.

HILL: And that's so important, Laura, especially as -- as we look at the reaction over the weekend, obviously, with this hash tag, "#WhyIDidntReport" and we'll dig into that a little bit more throughout the morning. But the optics here can't be ignored.

COATES: No, they cannot. And the idea that you're going to simply undermine every sexual assault allegation claim simply because of the speed in which somebody reports or the failure to do so, really is a passe principle at this point in time. We know there are a number of reasons why people do not report.

However, it still has to make people very much aware that this is a political process. It's not a court of law that's happening in front of the Judiciary Committee, although it has the term "judiciary" in it, although there are many lawyers who previously -- who were previously lawyers who are now on the committee. This, in many ways, is a forgone conclusion exercise for many of them.

And you're going to have it come down to one of the things that's so uncomfortable in the #MeToo movement and any discussion of sexual assault, which is the he said-she said. And when it comes down to the credibility of one person against the other, that's one of the things that makes it the most precarious and delicate situation.

And so you're going to go forward and see the testimony -- I think Lindsey Graham came forward and talking about am I supposed to do if one person denies it? What could I possibly do? The old hands up in the air routine.

Well, that tells you that it's going to be very a he said-she said, which is why it's very clear that there's a reason they do not want to have anyone present to bolster Dr. Ford and perhaps Ms. Ramirez at some point in time.

BERMAN: This -- John, to the idea that there's no other witnesses here. It's just Professor Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh scheduled on Thursday, this new allegation, I think, does draw questions into that, because there is someone who could say, whether it's true or not, something else like this did happen.

There's also, in this "New Yorker" report, some serious allegations about Mark Judge, who the Senate Republicans have just chosen to believe his denial that he was in the room.

AVLON: Yes, look, I think as this expands and Ms. Ramirez is included in any kind of inquiry, it's going to be difficult to say, "We're only focusing on Ford and then we're going to have a vote."

I think the Senate Republicans' decision to not call other witnesses, particularly Judge, is just basically problematic. It seems to say that they're not interested in an inquiry in the truth.

Also over the weekend, though, one of the people that Dr. Ford named said -- who had been a lifelong friend, said she had no recollection of Mr. Kavanaugh -- Judge Kavanaugh or the party, and that's a significant fact, as well.

BERMAN: We'll talk about that. Leland Keyser, I think, is the name. I also think it's significant Brett Kavanaugh is producing some evidence he thinks helped bolster his claim that he wasn't there, a calendar that he allegedly kept from 1982. We'll talk about that.

[06:15:03] Coming up next, we're also going to hear from Ronan Farrow. In the next hour, we're going to hear from Ronan Farrow, one of the reporters, along with Jane Mayer, behind this new report this morning. That's coming up in the next hour.

HILL: And much more on the Kavanaugh controversy. Will he and his first accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, still testify this Thursday? Of course, that a major question now this morning. We'll tell you what we know about the planned hearing, how much of that will stick. That remains to be seen.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

HILL: Following days of negotiations, Christine Blasey Ford has agreed to tell her story on Thursday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Now, the hearing is scheduled to happen at 10 a.m., with Ford testifying first, then Kavanaugh. They can request 45-minute breaks as needed. Brett Kavanaugh's accuser will have dedicated security, we've learned.

The Republican-led Senate panel, however, did not agree to everything Ford and her attorneys asked for.

Back with us now, Toluse Olorunnipa, Laura Coates and John Avlon. We look at what's laid out. And again, all of this we learned just a short time before this "New Yorker" piece dropped last night.

But based on what we see here, what do we get out of this, Laura, in terms of what we're going to learn? If everything proceeds as planned on Thursday, what do we actually learn from these two?

COATES: Well, we're going to learn about our own gut credibility assessments. Remember, that's what the Judiciary Committee is going to be doing. They've been looking to figure out whether or not they believe the people who are testifying.

Having Ford go first is essentially what happens in a criminal system, right, where you have the defendant who's able to rebut the statements that are made, who are able to hear the full body of evidence around them that are being put up against them. And they're able to respond and retort in many ways.

[06:20:13] You're going to see this assessment going down. What you're not going to see, however, is going to, at this point in time, we don't know who's asking the questions.

Is she going to give -- have a platform of having a monologue, she's able to say? Is it uninterrupted? Is it an opening statement? Is it one of the cross-examinations involved here? Will they be able to have questions from the accused that are asked of Dr. Blasey Ford, as well? Will she have a chance that then, after she testifies to then give a bit of a rebuttal of what he has now said? That, for me, it's what's lingering, so we can really figure out what will be gained from this.

As of right now we literally have a she said and then a he said. That doesn't help anyone, because we have all the information already through the letters. I want to know about the actual parameters and the questioning process.

BERMAN: And again, the idea that this will all be limited and confined, if it was ever true Sunday morning, seems less possible now on Monday morning after "The New Yorker" piece where Diane [SIC] Ramirez says that she was assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh.

Toluse, over the weekend, again, there are people coming forward, including Leland Keyser, a woman who had been identified, apparently, by Professor Blasey Ford as having been at the party.

Look, I don't know Brett Kavanaugh. I don't know I've ever been in the same room as Brett Kavanaugh. There's a calendar, apparently, that Brett Kavanaugh has produced, which doesn't say that the party existed. It may not prove it doesn't exist. But he is producing evidence. Where does that all fall?

OLORUNNIPA: You're going to expect Republicans to try to say there's no corroboration. There is -- she says, which is her account, which is detailed. It's laid out in the letter as she talks about what she experienced.

But there aren't other people who can say that this is true. You have Mr. Judge, who is not going to be testifying, so we're not going to be able to cross-examine him and find out whether or not there are holes in his story.

It's going to be, really, her account, and they're going to expect Democrats to try to push against the denial of Judge Kavanaugh by asking him more about what he was like in high school, what he was like in his early college days, whether or not there was a lot of drinking while others were in high school and in college and whether or not they can paint this picture that would make people believe that this is something that possibly could have happened.

But you're going to hear from Judge Kavanaugh a clear denial. He's going to say that he does not have any recollection of being involved in anything like this, of being at any party like this, of being in any situation like this. So he's going to have a blanket denial that's going to be up to the senators to try to draw that out and find out who's more believable.

HILL: You know what's fascinating, too, is as we look at all of this, it is -- it is so political as we know, right? It's playing out in the court of public opinion.

But also interesting, what we heard from lawmakers over the weekend, so we were hearing obviously Lindsey Graham saying, "Look, my mind is made up. I don't know what's going to change it at this point."

But we also heard similar things, as well, from Mazie Hirono, who spoke with Jake over the weekend on "STATE OF THE UNION."

So when we get to this point, you know, as Laura points out, this is not a trial. This is not a court of law. This is a political process. We're still not sure who's doing the questioning. But that, too, is all going to figure into the fact that we have all of these lawmakers who are saying, "Well, sure, do your thing, but I know how I feel."

AVLON: One hundred percent. That's what's so dangerous about the politicization of the court. This is, in some ways, an extreme, absurd example of that and why we're here.

With the bad blood in the wake of Merrick Garland, making some Democrats say, "You know what? By any means necessary." By Lindsey Graham basically giving up the ghost and saying, "You know what? They should -- everyone should say their piece, but I've already made up their mind.

So who are the senators who are persuadable? Red-state Democrats, a couple of centrist Republicans, particularly Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski. But the backdrop of this is what makes it so troubling. And then there's the new standard that seems to be applied.

And what happens with that, is this about what is -- this is not about, to date, what Kavanaugh has done in his adult professional life. This is going back and saying that, look, who he was as a high- school student, as a college student speaks to his underlying character.

It's about the culture that he came out of, allegedly. Those are different standards than we have applied to Supreme Court judges in the past.

BERMAN: Well, but we have never known that a Supreme Court nominee had allegations against him or her of sexual assault.

AVLON: Yes.

BERMAN: So I think we have to be careful before we say this is a new standard, again, because maybe it's not such an incredibly high bar, to have a Supreme Court justice, as Brett Kavanaugh will be, who is not accused of having committed sexual assault, whether it was when he was 17 in one story or 18 in another. I just -- I think we have to be careful before we suggest that this is an incredibly high standard.

AVLON: It's different. It's different. And look, standards change over time. Hugo Black was in the KKK, an FDR, you know, appointee.

BERMAN: I understand. It's different, because these allegations haven't surfaced before quite like this. And that gets to, I think, also what is at stake here, because if all minds are made up, why are Republicans fighting so hard not to have it happen?

[06:25:07] I think part of the reason is we have -- well, one, we have new poll numbers out which show where Brett Kavanaugh stands in his battle. I think these are FOX News numbers. Would you confirm -- vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh? And this is from FOX News.

In August, it was 55 percent yes, 46 percent no. And those numbers add up to 101 percent. And now it's 50 percent no, 40 year. So you can see, though, it shifted. Fifty percent say they oppose Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation.

And Erica, I mean, I have been struck in my own life how many stories I have heard women saying, things that happened and they never came forward for, and I'm a guy.

HILL: Right.

BERMAN: So I have to believe that it's much more in your world.

HILL: Absolutely. And this was -- I will say this is a conversation over the weekend with a lot of my girlfriends who live in the same town as me, who don't, saying, "I can't believe I'm hearing this from all of these women." One woman posting, "This is what forced me to join Twitter, #WhyIDidntReport." People telling your source.

And I want to say, too, this is not just women. This happens to men, as well. That is an important conversation that was started a year ago, much more publicly with @MeToo, but this -- that's not something that can get lost.

And again, that was some of the pushback. I know that was the reporting out of the White House. That was some of the pushback on the president on Friday and over the weekend, you know, to put out that tweet and say, "Well, if this really happened and if it was really that bad, I'm sure you would have said something."

Really? A 15-year-old girl would have said something? I mean, that was tone-deaf, to say the least.

OLORUNNIPA: You saw the response from Senator Collins saying she was appalled by that.

HILL: Yes.

OLORUNNIPA: And Republican senators on the Judiciary Committee all men realized the optics are not in their favor, and they're trying to make sure that the president is on message. They're trying to make sure that they're not having a repeat of what happened with Anita Hill more -- almost 30 years ago. They realize that they are in a bind in terms of the optics of this.

HILL: Right.

OLORUNNIPA: And they're trying to get him confirmed without making everyone angry right ahead -- before the midterms, which are less than six weeks ago.

BERMAN: Laura, you're trying to get in there. I want to give you one last quick word.

COATES: I just want to be clear, and this is -- I prosecuted so many cases that involved delayed reports.

And I want to be clear when people talk about the word "optics." I think it's a term that people use to show that they have no idea how much of a reality it is. Optics is like an optical illusion. We perceive it some way.

This actually happens every single day, and there are many reasons people did not report. And I think when you have an opportunity to showcase the fact that we are now prepared to have on Thursday far less process than was had back 27 years ago in 1991.

It shows you just how little of a distance we've come. We talk about the notion of why somebody would not want to be -- to come forward with an accusation. They have this potential happening. Their credibility and death threats, and people who are alive having a reality, the death threats. That's the people who are famous, let alone people who, in their everyday life have a relative doing it to him or everything else. This is a reality, and I want people to be cautious, not with you about it, but the notion of optics versus reality. This is a real thing that continues to happen in America and all over the world.

BERMAN: It's an important reminder. Laura, thank you.

Toluse, great to have you.

John, thanks as always.

Heart-stopping video. A flight coming in for landing, and it does not go as planned. You're just seeing the beginning right there. How it all turned out, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)