house records. citing executive privilege. but twice now federal courts have ruled against him. but he is expected to appeal that case to the supreme court. likely this week. okay paula reid keep us posted. thank you. rindto mariotti is the host of the podcast on topic good to see you rindto. congressman scott perry says, no. can the committee subpoena a fellow member of congress? they can. it s a little bit more complicated. there is an absecure portion of the constitution called the speech or debate claus which essentially protects members of congress from, you know, criminal investigations into their legislative activities. of course this isn t a criminal investigation. this is a fact finding inquiry. he will i m sure raise noise about that. ultimately i think he is going to have to comply, although i
white house bhch susan collins was in consultations with the white house making sure there weren t limits on what the fbi can do. when discussions were had on friday about the scope of the investigation, the focus was really on the first two ow accusers, not really on the third. and noek s has been there today. they should lee they should be allowed to pursue them. and at this moment even though senate majority leader mitch mcconnell says he plans to vote this week, senate republicans don t have the votes. the threshold what those three senators deem an adequate investigation and what they take from that investigation will determine what whether they confirm him to supreme court. will the entire senate be given the findings? because obviously the nomination has already been voted out of
questioned about at the time? it s certainly not proof either of itself that either kavanaugh did anything wrong at the time or he was drunk. but it certainly fits with the pattern of what several witnesses are saying is that he was someone around alcohol a lot when he was an under graduate. that doesn t mean he lied in his testimony before the judiciary committee. but it also suggests that a thorough investigation of whether he lied would take some time. and there are going to be people you are going to want to identify and interview if you really care about whether he told the truth. carry, as a support of the judge, i m wondering does this bar incident worry you at all and other former classmates who said he was a sloppy drunk and seen him staggering and the like? look, i think leader mcconnell put it really well today. said if you listen carefully you can almost see the goal posts moving. first they said we need a heavy hearing, they got a hearing and
sometimes you don t have a choice. but it doesn t mean you can t get back on track. great. yeah, great. i d like to go back to bermuda. i hear it s nice. yeah, i d like to see it. no judgment. just guidance. td ameritrade. as we ve reported the brett kavanaugh nomination depends upon an fbi investigation ordered by the white house and just what three senators thinks about what that investigation finds and what has already been said by christine blasey ford. what is the latest you re hearing from those key swing senators or about them? anderson, it s let the fbi do its job. you ve heard that from senator jeff flake, senator lisa murkowski and senator susan collins. as the story has been shifting, i ve actually been told multiple senators have reached out to the
allegations. now the focus is on drinking and whether or not he misrar mischaracterized his drinking 30 plus years ago. he has multiple sexual assault allegations against him. that s the most important thing is to get to the bottom of that to find out whether or not that happened. that s the most important thing for justice and also for brett kavanaugh is to have a real investigation to try to figure out what happened here as definitively as you can figure out what happened 35 years ago. the drinking what i was saying before, the drinking comes into it for a couple of reasons. one is because the allegation in both, at least in first two were that he, in all three he was drinking excessively. if he says i didn t drink excessively then it means if you have enough people saying i didn t drink excessively then maybe he wasn t the guy. that s why it s a factor and why anybody would be looking into these things. it s not that people think you can t be on the supreme court