SUMMARY: As Justice Kavanaugh’s tenure on the Supreme Court begins, echoes from his contentious confirmation hearings remain. Will the anger and partisanship surrounding this appointment damage public perception of the Supreme Court? Marcia Coyle from the National Law Journal joins Judy Woodruff to report on Kavanaugh's first day on the bench and how the court’s new makeup might affect upcoming cases.
SUMMARY: Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Judy Woodruff to discuss the week’s news, including the dramatic decisions made by senators on whether or not to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, as well as the deeper national impact of the contentious process.
SUMMARY: Fallout from sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh threw American politics into upheaval this week. Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks join Judy Woodruff to discuss the testimonies of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, how partisanship is recasting our politics and a moral reckoning around sexual abuse.
JUDY WOODRUFF (NewsHour): From the stock market floor on Wall Street to barbershops on Main Street, the nation tuned in to watch a series of riveting moments unfold in United States Senate this week.
Thankfully, we have the analysis of Shields and Brooks. That is syndicated columnist Mark Shields and New York Times columnist David Brooks.
We're so glad to see both of you tonight.
Yes. What are we going to talk about?
Mark, yes, there was the Kavanaugh hearing yesterday, the extension of the hearing, but — and the news today that the Republicans in the Senate have agreed to go along with an FBI investigation before a vote, a week. I have just been told that the Senate has formally gone into session to consider the vote. We're still talking about a week from now.
But what do you make of this turnaround by Republicans in the Senate and the President?
MARK SHIELDS, syndicated columnist: I first want to say a word about — about Jeff Flake.
Jeff Flake is a senator from Arizona. When Tim Kaine was nominated for President by the Democrats in 2016, he immediately tweeted the statement, trying to count the ways I hate Tim Kaine, coming up with a blank. Good man good and a good friend.
(LAUGHTER)
MARK SHIELDS: And that's — that's Jeff Flake. I mean, he has friendships.
And one of the friendships he has is Chris Coons, the Democrat from Delaware. And these are two people who aren't constantly running for President. They are — they are senators. They treat each other as human beings. They treat other senators as human beings.
And Jeff Flake — Jeff Flake did the Senate a favor. He did the Supreme Court a favor. He did the entire country a favor, not the least of which his own justice, Judge Kavanaugh, he did a favor to. And he did his party a favor.
If this nomination, Judy, had been railroaded through, strong-armed through, outmuscled, and all the rest of it, it would have left an aftertaste, it would have left bitterness, more business than there already is.
And, most of all, 27 years after Anita Hill testified, there is still a cloud of controversy and doubt over Justice Clarence Thomas. And, to me, this week is that important. It was that logical and almost inevitable to have it done, and have done the right thing.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But, David, I mean, it is a turnaround.
This morning, it looked as if Republicans were moving through the Kavanaugh nomination regardless, no FBI investigation.
DAVID BROOKS, New York Times: Yes, but we were entering a period of semi-political hysteria and confrontation over that.
I was hearing e-mails with friends wondering if this would turn to violence, if this would lead to such a sense of civic breakdown and national anger, that it would spill over into something completely ugly.
And that was a very plausible conversation. And maybe it still will be. But we had a very believable and compelling witness in Dr. Ford, I thought also a compelling witness in Kavanaugh, a man who clearly believes in what he's saying.
And, as a result, because — and there was no evidence corroborating one side of the other, basically. And so we had a country breaking down purely on tribal lines. Who you believed was 100 percent determined by which party you supported.
And there was no intellectual integrity. People were making an avalanche of bad arguments to support their side. Passions were going up, as people egged each other on. And so maybe this will allow us all to step back.
And, frankly, there are a lot of questions I would like to see answered. I sat there trying to think, who do I believe? And I really don't know. And so to have Judge interviewed, to have Leland Keyser, Ford's friend, interviewed…
JUDY WOODRUFF: The woman, then girlfriend of hers.
DAVID BROOKS: Who was allegedly at the party.
Maybe they will be some more information. Maybe we can find the house where it happened, and that can provoke some more facts.
And so, to me, just to prick the bubble of hysteria that was sweeping around this whole thing was a very important thing.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Mark, what about yesterday? Did you find one more credible than the other? What did you make of her testimony and his?
MARK SHIELDS: Well, it's the first time we had met her.
And all we knew was what we had heard about her, read about her. I thought compelling is an understatement. She was — she was believable. She was — what she wasn't, I think, was almost as impressive as what she was. She wasn't brittle. She wasn't vengeful.
So there was nothing mean-spirited. There was an openness about her, a naturalness. She wasn't affected. She was totally believable. And I thought she — she came across as an appealing human being.
And I would say, after that, after her appearance, the Republicans were despondent. And I think Brett Kavanaugh, probably shrewdly, changed his testimony, I mean, that he realized he had to go back and win — re-win the Republicans, beginning with 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, where they had openly expressed doubts about his appearance, I think the wisdom of his appearance, on FOX News.
This became the first, I think, Supreme Court nominee to discuss his loss of virginity. I don't think Earl Warren did that. Maybe — I could check.
(LAUGHTER)
MARK SHIELDS: But, you know, in a rather bizarre interview.
And so he tried — riled up the base. He went to the…
JUDY WOODRUFF: You mean by being angry and combative.
MARK SHIELDS: By being angry. And Democrats gave him a legitimate case.
I mean, when Cory Booker said, anybody who supports Brett Kavanaugh is complicit with evil, I mean, that just changes our politics. I mean, not that David's wrong, or made a mistake, or made a larger conclusion, you're evil, that you're somehow morally unacceptable, that just changes the entire equation and makes future coalitions or compromise all but impossible.
JUDY WOODRUFF: But, David, I mean, you're saying this whole thing yesterday was — was moving in a partisan direction, that no matter what they were saying, you're saying, I mean, that neither story was — she gave, as both of you have said, a credible — I mean, a credible, compelling performance.
But you're saying it's still hewed to the party lines.
DAVID BROOKS: Well, I just looked at my Twitter feed. I looked at all the commentary. I looked at the political reactions.
And it was 100 percent correlated. If you supported Bill Clinton during the whole impeachment thing, then you were against Kavanaugh. If you opposed Clinton, you were for Kavanaugh. It was 100 percent party line.
I don't think I saw a single deviation from what you would predict from party affiliation. And so we used to have people who could step back and look at the evidence. And to me, I tried. You get wrapped up in this — in the emotion. And you begin to want to fight.
But I think you got to step back. This is about the truth. And one of my rules is truth before justice. You got to — if we don't know what the truth is, we can't fight for justice. You can never put justice before truth. You always have to figure out what actually happened.
And a lot of people were not doing that. And you look at these two people, and I found them both very compelling. Now, she — my interpretation, psychological, from the TV screen, is that she suffered a trauma, and she's been dealing with it for a long time. And so something probably happened.
When I looked at Kavanaugh, frankly, I thought he's in the middle of the trauma. He is a week in. You can imagine what it would feel like. I think he feels completely innocent, that the Democrats have staged a partisan hit on him, and his whole reputation has been destroyed after 35 years of adulthood.
I'm sure that's a tough thing. And so when he drinks water and sobs — choke sobs, I sort of get that. But who to think is true, I don't think any of us have any concrete evidence to make a dispositive judgment on that. I'm hoping it will come in the next week. I don't know.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Mark, what about Kavanaugh's decision to take his anger and basically take it right back to Democrats, to challenge Amy Klobuchar: How much do you drink?
(CROSSTALK)
MARK SHIELDS: That was a mistake. There's no question about it. He apologized for it. It was dumb. It was rude to do that.
And the Republicans made a mistake coming with Kavanaugh. They introduced Brett Kavanaugh, who is a widely respected judge, a widely respected public figure, they introduced him as a Norman Rockwell good boy. He studied hard. He helped the poor. He was an athlete. He was, you know, just kind of an admirable citizen.
George W. Bush, when he ran for President in 2000, had a far more checkered personal background than Brett Kavanaugh of personal embarrassments, drinking and misbehavior. And they made a very wise decision. They said, when I was young and foolish, I was young and foolish, and it became the answer.
And so, when Kavanaugh then was confronted with questions about his misbehavior, they kind of scurried back, and he got defensive. There's no doubt about it.
And — but, I mean, I think he achieved what he felt he had to achieve. He stayed alive. I think they were ready to cut him loose after her testimony. I mean, the President reportedly said, according to two of my sources, after her — why didn't anybody tell me she was that good?
And what — he gave the highest salute he can give afterwards. Brett Kavanaugh showed the nation why I picked him.
It always does come back to Donald. But that was…
JUDY WOODRUFF: But — and, David, what about the reaction of women?
I mean, there have been, what — I just read there were 88 more people arrested at the Capitol today. Women were calling in yesterday to hot lines talking about their own experiences that they hadn't been comfortable talking about before.
This has intersected with the #MeToo movement. And people keep talking about the comparisons to Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill 27 years ago, but we're in a different time now, aren't we?
DAVID BROOKS: Right.
Well, frankly, this week, I have been thinking about millions of women over 20 centuries who — we have a world history, world literature going back 20 centuries, and, presumably, sexual abuse has been a part of human civilization for all that time. And how many stories have come out?
And so, to me, it's a big, finally, unveiling of stories that have been hidden for 4,000 years. They come out in little bits of literature, but not really.
And so, to me, that's one of the historic good things of this horrible moment, that at least the stories, these sorts of stories are coming out. And it's part of the unveiling that we have to go through, just as racial stories have to come out. And so, to me, that is the one good thing that's coming out of this week.
MARK SHIELDS: I think that, politically, to be venal about it and bring it down to politics, Donald Trump did carry women who had not gone to college by 27 points, 61 to 34. That's how you could say he got elected. They were 17 percent of the electorate in 2016. He lost college-educated women to Hillary Clinton.
Right now, Republicans generically are running 5 to 6 percent behind among non-college women, and 22 percent behind among college women.
So, yes, I mean, Trump set the table for the Republicans to be in trouble on this issue. And I…
DAVID BROOKS: Yes.
MARK SHIELDS: Go ahead. I'm sorry.
DAVID BROOKS: Well, I would just say, I think the Republican intensity is up. The early polling indications is that Republican — Democratic intensity has been up.
MARK SHIELDS: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Has been up.
DAVID BROOKS: Republicans' is coming up.
I happened to be in Texas, Minnesota, and Appalachia and Southeastern Ohio this week, and so saw it in the context of that. And what struck me is, when we're in Washington, we think it's right-left. But in — with the conversations I had this week, maybe 150, a lot of people, it was in, out.
They just wanted to recoil. And it wasn't like, oh, the Republicans are good, the Democrats are bad. It's, Washington is a swamp.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So it's not just Kavanaugh. You mean Washington.
DAVID BROOKS: The conversation is, the general tenor was, what a mess that is. Aren't you so glad you're out of there?
And so, to me, the big winners of the week politically are Trump, because he hates — he wants to blow up the system, and some future Democratic version of Trump, who will also want to blow up the system.
MARK SHIELDS: Boy, I disagree completely.
I think this is a referendum in 2018 on Donald Trump, as it is on every sitting President, especially in his first term. It's a corrective election. There's no question that voters do want a check, not — they don't want Donald Trump with a blank check.
And I think that's what we're going to see in 2018. I think we're headed to it. Republicans I have talked to report basically nothing but bad news from races.
DAVID BROOKS: Yes, I don't disagree with that.
But I just think there's a recoil from Washington. Washington is some hostile thing that we can't affect and can affect us. Let's just get away from that whole Washington thing.
MARK SHIELDS: I do — I think that part of that — not to get on a Trump diatribe, but there's a sense of exhaustion, that Donald Trump — I think voters are really — somebody who just says, look, I'm going to bring tranquility to the country. We're going to get along. We're going to move ahead. We're going to bring justice.
I think it's a winning message. I mean, the idea that everything has to be chaotic, that everything has to be a crisis is what — seems the watchword of this administration.
SUMMARY: High drama played out in a day-long hearing on the allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Christine Blasey Ford offered her much-awaited testimony about the summer day in 1982 that she remembers being assaulted, while Kavanaugh defiantly called it a “political hit.” Amna Nawaz reports, then Lisa Desjardins and Yamiche Alcindor join Judy Woodruff for more.
SUMMARY: Judy Woodruff takes a deep look at the day-long hearing into allegations of sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh with Amy Walter from the Cook Political Report, Michael Gerson of The Washington Post, and former Rep. Elizabeth Holtzman, also a former prosecutor.
SUMMARY: Samantha Guerry, a friend of Christine Blasey Ford, says that Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony that he didn’t know Ford seemed “like an evasive answer.” Guerry talks with Amna Nawaz about watching Ford testify in front of Congress and how she might feel if Kavanaugh is confirmed.
SUMMARY: Syndicated columnist Mark Shields and Ramesh Ponnuru of The National Review join Amna Nawaz to discuss the week’s news, including the controversy surrounding the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, the decision by President Trump to push back his order to declassify Russia probe documents, and how the President could influence the midterm elections.
Amna Nawaz (NewsHour): Now we turn back to the controversy surrounding the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.
And to the analysis of Shields and Ponnuru. That is syndicated columnist Mark Shields and Ramesh Ponnuru of The National Review. David Brooks is away.
Gentlemen, welcome.
Let's jump right in.
The biggest story of the week, obviously, here in Washington, Judge Kavanaugh, right? We're having this conversation at the unfortunate intersection of high-stakes politics and how we handle sexual violence in America.
Ramesh, the Republicans are in charge here, though, kind of running the show. How are they handling it?
Ramesh Ponnuru, The National Review: Well, I would say that things took a marked turn for the worse when President Trump decided that he was tired of being responsible and sober-minded, which must have chafed, and instead decided to attack Dr. or Professor Blasey Ford, saying that, if this was a real thing, she should have come forward decades ago, which anybody who's familiar with these cases understands is not the way these things work.
So I think that's a real black mark on the Republicans. And I know a lot of Republicans, including Senator Collins, were really smarting over that remark and wanting to distance themselves from it.
On the other hand, you look at the Democrats, and they haven't been covering themselves in glory either. Senator Feinstein's handling of the allegation, sitting on it for two months, essentially, was almost inexplicable. And you have got various Senate Democrats who are pre-judging the case, saying that they — as Senate Republicans, some are, too — saying that they already believe the allegations without having heard anything.
Amna Nawaz: Mark, what do you make of all this?
Mark Shields, syndicated columnist: Well, let me agree with Ramesh, especially on President Trump.
If you're a Republican in 2018, and on the eve of an election that is increasingly looking pessimistic, by numbers and outlook, for the Republicans, the last thing you want to be talking about is women and sexual abuse and recalling of the Anita Hill hearings, and having as your spokesman a man who has been 19 times accused of sexual abuse or sexual harassment, the President of the United States, Donald Trump.
It's not a message you want, and it's not a messenger. This is more than about Brett Kavanaugh. This hearing that's coming up is essentially about David against Goliath, against — we're going to hear from Professor Ford for the first time. And that will determine how the country responds.
But between — before then, I think the one indicator that has hit me is polls that suggests that women are more upset about the charges and the response of the Republicans than any other group.
And you will recall, in the 2016 election, Donald Trump carried women who had not been to college by a 61 to 34 margin, decisively. Hillary Clinton carried a majority of women who had gone to college. If women in — the non-college-educated women are responding to this charge and the sense that something is wrong and that — that this is a society that is indifferent and intolerant of women and the abuse they have suffered, this is nothing but bad news for the Republicans.
It's not where they want to be.
Amna Nawaz: So, how do they handle this? Part of this is about optics, right? I mean, and we're talking there could be a hearing next week. We don't know where this stands.
You have got three men who could be questioning Dr. Ford who were there back in 1991, right, questioning Anita Hill, and didn't handle it well back then. How do they move forward? How did they have the hearing that everyone says they're going to be moving towards to some degree and not alienate this group that Mark was just talking about?
Ramesh Ponnuru: Well, I think one thing we all have to remember is, the optics actually have to take a backseat to the facts.
And it's going to be very hard to determine the facts. But the senators need to go in and be seen to be going in, yes, but mostly to actually go in, trying to determine the facts.
We have got sworn statements now from Judge Kavanaugh, from Mark Judge, from an unnamed third party. We will presumably get a third — get a sworn statement from the accuser as well, Professor Blasey Ford. And then we're going to have to actually try to do what we can to figure out who's telling the truth.
Amna Nawaz: Do you think that the way they have presented it so far enforces that message that we take this seriously, we have an intention to get to the bottom of this?
You're hearing some folks, like Mitch McConnell earlier today, we heard him in the show saying, Judge Kavanaugh is going to be confirmed.
Ramesh Ponnuru: Right.
So I think it's one thing to say that, based on the evidence that you have heard so far, you are inclined to go with one or the other. But I think it's a real mistake to close your mind to the possibility that you're going to get new information. If that's the case, then you do have to ask, why are we having any hearings at all?
Amna Nawaz: I want to bring up a poll too. We have got some numbers to look at, Mark, and get your take on these.
Mark Shields: Yes. Sure.
Amna Nawaz: This shows publicly, look, there has been an actual increase in opposition to Judge Kavanaugh over the last month, up nine points.
At some point, does he become a political liability?
Mark Shields: I'm not sure he's a political liability.
I think that the subject is a political liability for Republicans. And, obviously, if he's stayed with and sullied with it, yes, he becomes a political liability.
I think the hearing is — Ramesh is right. The Republicans and the Democrats have basically taken their position, put on their uniforms, or at least the partisans have. The group that has yet to make a decision on this will look at the hearings. And the hearings will be determinate.
And it really isn't about Judge Kavanaugh as much as it's about Professor Ford. I mean, is she believable? Is she sympathetic? Is she convincing?
And the President saying, why didn't she come forward, why didn't she go the FBI when she was 15 years old, first of all, it's not a — it's not a — I'm not sure that we're talking about a federal offense. But, secondly, I mean, if anything we have learned, through the pain and torment of the Catholic clergy sexual abuse, is that people, out of pain, embarrassment, humiliation, a sense of fear, don't come forward.
I mean, the Department of Justice own numbers say that 22 percent of rape victims ever come forward. And so that — but, really, it is David against Goliath. And the focus is on her. The question, is she believable? Is she convincing?
I wasn't sure that Mark Judge had signed a sworn statement.
Ramesh Ponnuru: He made a statement to the Judiciary Committee. So, that is a potentially legally actionable document that is…
Mark Shields: OK, because he showed no willingness to…
Ramesh Ponnuru: He doesn't — but he doesn't want — yes, right.
Mark Shields: He wrote a book on the subject, but he didn't want to — he doesn't want to talk about it.
Ramesh Ponnuru: He doesn't want to talk about it anymore.
Amna Nawaz: This is the other individual that Dr. Ford says was there in the room that day.
(CROSSTALK)
Mark Shields: And his not testifying, seems to me, absolutely irrational.
(CROSSTALK)
Amna Nawaz: Go ahead, Ramesh, yes.
Mark Shields: Sure.
(CROSSTALK)
Ramesh Ponnuru: One of the things that's most dismaying about this entire debate is that almost everybody's views about what did or didn't happen 36 years ago lines up perfectly with what they think ought to happen to Roe v. Wade now.
And that's not the way it ought to be.
SUMMARY: After having a confidential letter revealed in the press, Christine Blasey Ford came forward this weekend as the woman accusing Judge Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault more than 30 years ago. Kavanaugh has issued a strong denial. Lisa Desjardins reports, then Judy Woodruff talks with Emma Brown from the Washington Post, who was in touch with Ford for months before publishing her account.
SUMMARY: President Trump defended nominee Brett Kavanaugh on Monday from allegations by Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually assaulted her decades ago, but also said Ford should be heard out. Democrats have been quick to call for a delay, and a handful of Republicans have also voiced concern. Lisa Desjardins and Yamiche Alcindor share developments with Judy Woodruff.
SUMMARY: President Trump defended Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh again on Tuesday from allegations by psychology professor Christine Blasey Ford that he sexually assaulted her while drunk at a party 36 years ago. Meanwhile, senators jousted over a hearing set for Monday to question Kavanaugh and Ford. Judy Woodruff talks with Lisa Desjardins and Marcia Coyle from the National Law Journal.
SUMMARY: President Donald Trump and key Senate Republicans said this week that an FBI investigation into Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh wasn’t necessary before a scheduled hearing next week about a sexual assault allegation made against him.
But Anita Hill, a law professor and author who famously accused Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment during his confirmation hearings 27 years ago, told the PBS NewsHour’s Judy Woodruff that “without an investigation, there cannot be an effective hearing.”
Hill provided testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee back in 1991, after she had publicly accused Thomas, then a nominee. The accusation, which he denied, upended his path to confirmation, but did not derail it: He was confirmed soon after and remains on the court to this day.
SUMMARY: Christine Blasey Ford, the woman who is accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault in high school, now says she might be willing to testify next week, but not on Monday as Senate Republicans want. Amna Nawaz reports, then William Brangham and Lisa Desjardins join Judy Woodruff to discuss the fallout on Capitol Hill and what could be gleaned from an FBI investigation.
SUMMARY: After days of measured talk, President Trump fired off sharp words Friday about Christine Blasey Ford, the woman accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault. Trump tweeted that if the attack was “as bad as she says,” charges would have been filed. Ford has talked to the FBI about receiving death threats, as her lawyers negotiate potential testimony. Lisa Desjardins reports.
SUMMARY: President Trump’s tweet challenging Christine Blasey Ford’s claims because she didn’t report it when it happened set off alarms for survivors and advocates. In fact, most victims never report the sexual assault to law enforcement, says clinical psychologist Veronique Valliere. She joins Amna Nawaz to talks about the complexities of reporting sexual violence.
SUMMARY: The allegations against Brett Kavanaugh have compelled people to share their own experiences with sexual assault and why they didn't come forward. When Chessy Prout was a freshman in high school, she was raped by a classmate. She spoke to authorities, brought charges and suffered a backlash. The author of “I Have the Right To,” Prout joins Amna Nawaz to discuss the shame she experienced.
SUMMARY: Confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh will begin a week from today. Set against the backdrop of the ongoing Mueller investigation, new attention is being focused on Kavanaugh’s record on executive power. John Yang turns to Jonathan Turley a law professor at George Washington University, and Robert Barnes a Supreme Court reporter for the Washington Post, for analysis.
SUMMARY: Business and labor are two areas of the law that have been front and center at the Supreme Court in recent years. What does nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s record suggest about how he might rule on cases at the high court? Judy Woodruff gets analysis from Karen Harned of the National Federation of Independent Business Small Business Legal Center, and Daniel Goldberg of Alliance for Justice.
SUMMARY: In just 12 days, President Trump's Supreme Court pick will face contentious hearings before the U.S. Senate. Where does nominee Brett Kavanaugh stand on key issues? Lisa Desjardins, and CNN Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic, join Judy Woodruff to analyze Kavanaugh’s judicial record and recent statements on the politically charged topic of abortion, including whether Roe v. Wade is 'settled law.'
