>>> LET’S START WITH SOME OF THE GOOD NEWS.
THE POLITICAL RECEPTION TO DR.
CHRISTINE FORD, WHO’S ACCUSING
JUDGE KAVANAUGH OF SEXUAL
ASSAULT WHEN THEY WERE IN HIGH
SCHOOL, HAS BEEN BETTER IN SOME
MEASURABLE WAYS THAN THE WAY
THAT PAST ACCUSERS HAVE BEEN
TREATED.
TREATED. SOMETHING WE’VE BEEN COVERING
TONIGHT.
TONIGHT. FOR EXAMPLE, POLITICIANS IN BOTH
PARTIES HAVE SAID THAT THIS
ACCUSER: FORD, SHOULD BE HEARD.
CHAIRMAN GRASSLEY RESPONDED TO
THIS PRESSURE, EXTERNAL OR
WHEREVER IT GOT HIM, BY TAKING
THE UNUSUAL STEP OF SCHEDULING A
NEW HEARING.
NEW HEARING. HE DIDN’T JUST STONEWALL,
ALTHOUGH THERE ARE CRITICISMS
ABOUT HOW THE HEARING WILL RUN.
SO THAT INCREMENTAL PROGRESS IS
CERTAINLY WORTH NOTING AS A
FACTUAL MATTER.
FACTUAL MATTER. BUT IT IS NOT UNIVERSAL THIS
WEEK.
WEEK. THERE ARE PEOPLE WITH PLATFORMS
RUSHING ALREADY TO IMPUGN DR.
FORD AND WE HAVEN’T EVEN HEARD
FROM HER OTHER THAN THE
INTERVIEW WITH "THE WASHINGTON
POST."
POST." THERE ARE PEOPLE WITH MEGAPHONES
IN RIGHT WING MEDIA WHO ARE
SUGGESTING, WITHOUT EVIDENCE,
SHE’S A POLITICAL OPPORTUNIST
TRYING TO SMEAR KAVANAUGH BASED
ON HIS JU DIJ PHILOSOPHY.
>> IT’S ABOUT ABORTION.
DOES ANYBODY BELIEVE THE STORY
WOULD HAVE SURFACED IF KAVANAUGH
HAD PLEDGED ALLEGIANCE TO ROE V.
WADE?
WADE? >> THE TIMING IS CURIOUS.
THIS WHAT IS THE QUHIF OF
POLITICAL SMEAR MASK RATING AS
SEXUAL ASSAULT ALLEGATION.
>> WE HAVE REACHED PEAK LUNACY
ON THE LEFT.
AND THIS IS BY THE WAY THE MOST
DISGUSTING THING THAT THEY HAVE
DONE YET.
DONE YET. ANY PERSON THAT ACTUALLY
SUPPORTS SEXUAL ASSAULT VICTIMS
SHOULD BE SPEAKING OUT AGAINST
THIS BECAUSE THIS IS ABSOLUTELY,
AS I SAID BEFORE, DISGUSTING,
DESPICABLE BEHAVIOR.
DESPICABLE BEHAVIOR. >> DISGUSTING.
>> DISGUSTING. A WORD THAT SOMETIMES COMES UP
IN PROJECTED CRITICISM.
ALSO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS FORMER
GOP OPERATIVE, WHO ACTUALLY
HELPED ORCHESTRA THE ATTACKS ON
CLARENCE THOMAS’ ACCUSERS,
WRITING KAVANAUGH’S ACCUSER MUST
UNFORTUNATELY EXPECT THIS ANITA
HILL TREATMENT FROM TODAY’S
REPUBLICANS WHO WILL DEFEND THEM
AT ANY COST.
WE’RE ALREADY SEEING SOME OF THE
SMEAR TACTICS AT WORK, WEBSITES
WHO PEDDLE FALSE CLAIMS SAYING
THE PROFESSOR WAS TROUBLED.
THE INFORMATION FOR THOSE BEESES
WERE BASED ENTIRELY ON A
DIFFERENT PERSON, A DIFFERENT
CHRISTINE FORD.
CHRISTINE FORD. BUT THAT WAS ALREADY AMPLIFIED
BY THE DRUDGE REPORT AS WELL AS
FOX HOST NEWS LAURA INGRAHAM
BEFORE ANY CORRECTIONS APPEARED.
AS I MENTIONED WE WANT TO DIG IN
WITH AN EXPERT WHO HAS REPORTED
ON MANY OF THESE TYPES OF
STORIES.
STORIES. "NEW YORK TIMES" COLUMNIST
MICHELLE GOLDBERG.
MICHELLE GOLDBERG. "BOYS WILL BE SUPREME COURT
JUSTICES."
JUSTICES." SHE SAYS BASED ON HER REVIEW
THIS ACCUSER LOOKS CREDIBLE, BUT
WILL IT MATTER?
I WONDER JUST BIG PICTURE HOW
YOU FEEL AND WHAT YOU’VE
CONCLUDED ABOUT WHETHER THERE IS
IMPROVEMENT AND WHAT IS STILL
BEING DONE WRONG AS WE LOOK TO
ADJUDICATE IN PUBLIC A DIFFICULT
THING THE WEIGHT OF THIS
ACCUSATION AND THE FACTS AGAINST
THIS JUDGE AND WHETHER HE SHOULD
BE PROMOTED.
BE PROMOTED. >> I THINK THERE’S CERTAINLY
IMPROVEMENT, FIRST OF ALL THAT
EVERYBODY -- THERE SEEMS TO BE A
BROAD CONSENSUS THAT THESE
CHARGES SHOULD BE TAKEN
SERIOUSLY AND SHOULD BE AIRED.
A LOT OF THE PUSHBACK IN THE
RIGHT WING MEDIA TO CHRISTINE
BLAZY FORD COMING FORWARD HAS
ALMOST ASSUMED WHAT SHE IS
SAYING IS PROBABLY CORRECT, BUT
BASICALLY SAID IT HASN’T BEEN A
BIG DEAL.
BIG DEAL. YOU SEE A LOT OF PEOPLE SAYING,
IS IT REALLY FAIR TO JUDGE
SOMEBODY FOR WHAT THEY DID IN
HIGH SCHOOL?
HIGH SCHOOL? ARI FLEISCHER, FORMER GEORGE W.
BUSH PRESS SECRETARY, TALKING ON
FOX NEWS, CAN ONE LITTLE
INCIDENT IN HIGH SCHOOL DERAIL
YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO ASCEND TO A
SUPREME COURT SEAT OR THE
PRESIDENCY LATER IN LIFE?
WHICH IS KIND OF RICH, COMING
FROM A PARTY THAT HAS SHOWN
VERY, VERY LITTLE CONCERN FOR
JUVENILE OFFENDERS AND WHETHER
THEY’RE EVER ABLE TO EXPUNGE
THEIR RECORD AND KIND OF GO ON
TO REDEEM THEMSELVES AND LIVE
PRODUCTIVE LIVES.
PRODUCTIVE LIVES. I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO
REMEMBER THAT THE PRESIDENT
CALLED FOR THE DEATH PENALTY FOR
FIVE ACCUSED RAPISTS, THE
CENTRAL PARK FIVE, WHO WERE
SINCE PROVEN INNOCENT BY DNA,
BUT WHO WERE 14, 14, 15, 15, AND
16.
16. NOW, ALL OF A SUDDEN, THIS SAME
SORT OF GROUP OF PEOPLE IS
SAYING, WELL, COME ON, YOU CAN’T
REALLY HOLD WHAT SOMEBODY DID AT
17 AGAINST THEM.
BUT THE FACT THAT I THINK YOU
HAVE A NUMBER OF SENATORS OUT
THERE SAYING THAT, IF THIS IS
PROVEN TRUE, THAT WOULD BE
DISQUALIFYING.
DISQUALIFYING. IT’S PROGRESS OF A SORT, RIGHT?
THERE MIGHT BE CYNICAL
INTERPRETATION, WHICH IS THAT
THERE’S NO PROVING EITHER WAY IN
A CASE LIKE THIS.
BUT I THINK THAT IT’S GOOD THAT
THERE IS AT LEAST, ON SOME
LEVEL, A CONSENSUS THAT IF HE
DID THIS, IT’S SERIOUS.
>> RIGHT.
>> RIGHT. WELL, I’D LIKE FOR YOU TO PEEL
BACK SOME OF THE DOUBLE TALK
WE’RE SEEING AS WELL.
BECAUSE THIS, LIKE THE HILL
HEARINGS, CAN BE AN INFLECTION
POINT.
POINT. THE POSSIBILITY OF LEARNING OR
WHAT I MIGHT CALL LEARNING UNDER
PRESSURE.
PRESSURE. AND SO SENATOR GRAHAM, WHO KNOWS
BETTER, IS SAYING THINGS THAT
REGULAR PEOPLE, RANDOM PEOPLE,
MIGHT THINK SOUNDS SUSPICIOUS,
BUT ARE NOT.
THAT YOU AND I KNOW ARE NOT,
THAT HE KNOWS ARE NOT.
FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MS. FORD HAD A
LAWYER AND A POLYGRAPH TO TRY TO
IMPROVE HER CREDIBILITY.
LINDSEY GRAHAM WAS A MILITARY
J.A.G. LAWYER, AND HE KNOWS
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG, INDEED,
IT IS ILLEGAL AND
UNCONSTITUTIONAL TO HOLD IT
AGAINST SOMEONE THAT THEY RETAIN
A LAWYER.
A LAWYER. YET HE SAYS THIS, TAKE A LOOK.
>> I DON’T KNOW WHEN SHE TOOK
THE POLYGRAPH, I DON’T KNOW WHO
PAID FOR IT, I DON’T KNOW WHEN
SHE HIRED A LAWYER, I DON’T IF
HE PAID FOR IT.
IF YOU DIDN’T WANT TO GO PUBLIC,
WHY ARE YOU BUYING A POLYGRAPH,
WHY ARE YOU HIRING A LAWYER?
ALL THOSE THINGS WILL COME OUT.
>> YOU’RE HIRING A LAWYER IF
YOU’RE GETTING ANYWHERE NEAR THE
HOT ZONE ANITA HILL GOT TO, AND
THAT DOESN’T SPEAK TO YOUR
VERACITY, EVERYONE HAS RIGHTS TO
LAWYERS, PERIOD.
LAWYERS, PERIOD. WALK US THROUGH SOME OF THE
SENATORS WHO SEEM TO BE TRYING
TO HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
>> LOOK, I THINK LINDSEY GRAHAM
IS A WEASEL, TRYING TO INSINUATE
THAT HER KIND OF ELEMENTARY
STEPS SHE TOOK TO DEFEND AGAINST
THE ONSLAUGHT THAT IS NOW BEING
DIRECTED AT HER IN SOME WAY
JUSTIFIES THIS ONSLAUGHT.
I DON’T THINK FOR A MINUTE THAT
THE VAST MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS
IN THE SENATE REALLY CARE ONE
WAY OR THE OTHER WHETHER SHE’S
CHARGES ARE TRUE.
FOR THEM THE QUESTION IS, WILL
THEY STILL BE ABLE TO VOTE FOR
KAVANAUGH WITHOUT POLITICAL
REPERCUSSIONS WHEN THIS CIRCUS
IS CONCLUDED?
IS CONCLUDED? TRYING TO ORCHESTRATE IT IN A
WAY THAT WILL LET THEM DO THAT.
>> AN ATTACK, IT’S NOT TO
PRESENT ANY KIND OF MORAL
EQUIVALENCE, BECAUSE INDEED
VIEWERS WILL RECOGNIZE MANY OF
THE CLAIMS OF THIS AD HAVE BEEN
HIGHLY SUPPORTED, LIKE THE MANY
INVESTIGATIONS THAT SHOWED ROY
MOORE CREDIBLY ACCUSED OF
PREYING ON GIRLS.
HAVING SAID THAT, THERE IS THIS
TYPE OF ATTACK COMING OUT NOW.
TAKE A LOOK AT THIS NEW AD
AGAINST JUDGE KAVANAUGH.
>> YOU CAN DO ANYTHING, GRAB
THEM BY THE [ BLEEP ].
>> AN ADMITTED SEXUAL ABUSER
SITS IN THE WHITE HOUSE WHO
SUPPORTED AN ACCUSED CHILD
PREDATOR FOR THE SENATE.
>> SO GET OUT AND VOTE FOR ROY
MOORE.
MOORE. >> HE NOMINATED THIS MAN TO THE
SUPREME COURT.
SUPREME COURT. >> ACCUSING KAVANAUGH OF SEXUAL
ASSAULT.
ASSAULT. WHEN SHE TRIED TO SCREAM SHE
SAYS HE PUT HIS HAND OVER HER
MOUTH.
MOUTH. >> WE CAN’T LET BRETT KAVANAUGH
DECIDE ON OUR RIGHTS FOR A
GENERATION.
GENERATION. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT
TACK AT THIS JUNCTURE, IN
JUMPING JUDGE KAVANAUGH TOGETHER
WITH THOSE INDIVIDUALS AS A WAY
TO DEFEAT HIS NOMINATION?
>> FIRST OF ALL, I ACTUALLY DO
THINK THAT THERE IS SOME SORT
OF, I DON’T KNOW, MORAL
IMPLICATION IN ACCEPTING A
NOMINATION FROM THE PRESIDENT AS
DISGRACED AND SUCH DUBIOUS
LEGITIMACY AS THIS ONE.
AND I THINK THAT THAT AD -- DO I
THINK IT’S FAIR AT THIS STAGE TO
COMPARE BRETT KAVANAUGH TO ROY
MOORE?
MOORE? NO, CATEGORICALLY NO.
I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I THINK
PART OF THE DEEP AND PROFOUND
INSULT OF THIS NOMINATION IS
THAT YOU HAVE THIS PRESIDENT WHO
HAS BOASTED OF SEXUAL ASSAULT
NOMINATING THIS FRAT BOY WHO HAS
BEEN ACCUSED WITH SOME
CREDIBILITY OF ATTEMPTED RAPE.
AND THAT THAT IS GOING TO BE THE
THING THAT ENDS ROE V. WADE,
THAT STRIPS AMERICAN WOMEN OF
REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS.
REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS. IN SOME WAYS IT MAKES VERY PLAIN
THE BRUTE PATRIARCHY, THE CRUEL
POWER, THE CRUEL IMPOSITION OF