And trading punches, china hitting back, imposing 60 billion in tariffs on u. S. Goods, prompting President Trump to threaten even more tariffs. But could this trade war actually be helping china . We begin this morning with a standoff in the u. S. Senate. Top democrats joining Christine Ford demanding an investigation into her allegations of Sexual Misconduct against Brett Kavanaugh before she sits down to testify. But republicans, they say no investigation, no delay. Shes got one shot to tell her story, monday on the hill, take it or leave it. I have a great team here to help break all of it down. But first, let me explain exactly where things stand right now. It is looking more and more like Christine Blasey ford is going to have to make a decision whether or not to show up at 10 00 a. M. On monday even if she does not get that investigation shes calling for. Senators on both sides say they want to hear from kavanaugh and ford. But she might only get one chance. On tuesday, fords attorneys responded to the offer in a letter saying that the timeline is unreasonable, particularly given the pressure ford is under. It says shes gotten a, quote, stunning amount of support, but also been the target of vicious harassment, and even death threats. While dr. Fords life was being turned upside down, you and your staff scheduled a public hearing for her to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident. While no Sexual Assault survivor should be subjected to such an ordeal, dr. Ford wants to cooperate with the committee and with Law Enforcement officials. For that to happen, ford and her attorney say the fbi needs to investigate first. But earlier this week the Justice Department said the fbi would not get involved unless there were allegations of a federal crime and indicated that it is done looking into kavanaughs background. They said theyve done their work. The president , he essentially said the same thing. How important is the i dont think the fbi should be involved because they dont want to be involved. If they wanted to be, i would certainly do that. But as you know, they say this is not really their thing. But let me explain something. The president could order the fbi to investigate if he wanted to. Theres actually been precedent for it. Please Pay Attention to this. President george h. W. Bush order the fbi to look into anita hills claims back in 1991. Hill is calling for a similar investigation this time around. She says the senators themselves should welcome more information and more time. Six days is not enough for the senators who probably know very little about these kinds of claims. Its not enough for them to inform themselves. Nevertheless, more and more republicans are indicating mondays hearing will go ahead as planned with or without dr. Ford. Shes been asking for the opportunity to be heard, and shes going to be given the opportunity to be heard on monday. As senator pointed out, she can do it privately if she prefers or publicly if she prefers. Monday is her opportunity. Jeff flake and bob corker have indicated that ford should be heard, and they say she should take this opportunity to come forward next week instead of asking for more time. Last night one of fords attorneys appeared on cnn and was asked what her client was going to do about all this. If theres not an investigation would she appear on monday . She is prepared to cooperate with the committee and with any Law Enforcement investigation. Would she show up . She is going to she will talk with the committee. Shes not prepared to talk with them at a hearing on monday. So pointblank, if theres not an investigation between now and then, she would not appear on monday in a public hearing . No investigation any legitimate investigation is going to happen between now and monday. Even if the fbi says they will investigate, or if the chairman says the fbi wont investigate, youre saying your client will not sit down monday for a public hearing . Theres no reason that we should have a public hearing on monday given what has occurred and when it has occurred. I want to bring in my colleague Garrett Haake live on capitol hill. Do we have any idea whats going to happen on monday . Steph, i wish we could say we did. It sounds like there are three options here. There could be no hearing at all, an open hearing in front of the entire world on national television, or a closed hearing. If both sides stay as dug in as they have been, this could go away on monday. We could see nothing. An open hearing has incredible political risks. Its the chaos moment on capitol hill. No one knows how that would go. If you play it all the way out, imagine a scenario in which republicans on the Judiciary Committee, a group consisting entirely of older white men are questioning someone who claims to be a Sexual Assault survivor about her experience with the ultimate goal of trying to potentially poke holes in her credibility. That is a spectacle that i dont think anyone particularly wants to see happen. So thats fraught too. But garrett . Yes, yes. She does have the option to do it privately, correct . Thats what i was getting to, stephanie. I think a closed hearing may be the goldilocks option here. It gives dr. Ford an opportunity to tell her story to the senators who will be making this decision without having to have it broadcast to the entire world. It would prevent some of that awkwardness and some of that potential for things to get truly off the rails. That option got floated late in the day yesterday and it may have legs. But i did just talk to one republican senator on the Judiciary Committee who said he thinks that would be a mistake. He thinks if this is real it needs to happen in the full public eye. Thats a long way of saying there are still a lot of different ways this thing could break in the next couple of days. To be very clear, dr. Ford has not said she will not testify. Its her first request is she would like an fbi investigation. But she hasnt turned down the invite, has she . No, she hasnt. That clip you played of her lawyer on cnn last night was really interesting in that you didnt hear the lawyer categorically rule out the possibility of her testifying. It was clear that the fbi investigation is the first option. But i never heard a hard no in there. All right. I want to bring my panel in. My friend robert costa, a National Political reporter for the washington post, and moderator of my favorite friday night show Washington Week on pbs, robert bianke, noelle mapour. Robert costa, to you first, what do you think is going to happen monday . If we continue to hear the requests to delay things, we do get mired in politics because while it is very complicated, we also know that democrats, whether Christine Fords situation exists or not, we know they want to do everything possible, and it makes sense, to delay this thing past the midterms. So this request does get mired in really sticky politics. It really does. And if you saw last night, senator corker, whos retiring, senator flake, who republicans, they came out with statements after the dr. Ford came out with her request through her lawyers, and they said they would urge her to still testify on monday. We still have to hear from senator Lisa Murkowski from alaska and senator Susan Collins from maine. They will decide whether this monday hearing gets postponed or not because they are crucial to this nomination getting passed. If they come out today and say we need a few more days or there should be an fbi investigation, Mitch Mcconnell will have to react to that. We have to remind our audience, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins, without an investigation, without due process, both called upon al franken to step down last year. Noelle, whats at stake here for kavanaugh . Its a catch22 for both parties. Whether or not these allegations, were not sitting here as a panel to go through her testimony to see if shes telling the truth, whos telling the truth here. What the problem of it is is the timing. The timing of this is absolutely despicable. They sat on this. They knew about this. They should have brought it forward. And now where push comes to shove, were pushing the supposed victim forward into a rush, you know, testimony. Shes now saying that she wants or her counsel is saying she wants the fbi investigation, which were not even sure if this is an fbi really moment to get into the he said she said. When we were back in the green room, we were talking, how do you do an fbi investigation before youre proceeding with this vote . What is the fbi supposed to do . How many, you know, crazy teenagers, you know, that are now adults and working with families and jobs, are they supposed to go back and say, do you remember where you were x night and doing what . I mean, really, what is the fbi investigation . Is that what theyre holding up for to proceed with this vote . And if she does testify, you know, the me too movement, one of the things that the me too movement did do on a positive note was give victims the courage, people are applauding women coming forward saying youre victorious for being courageous to go out and challenge these guys. So its almost setting it back a notch. You know, go and testify. If youre not comfortable doing it in an open setting with, you know, cameras everywhere, thats your prerogative. You have the absolute right to, you know, do it behind closed doors. But theyre offering you a chance to be heard. And one of the biggest things, when you looked at bill cosby and you looked at other victims, is they didnt get the dad gum chance to be heard and were offering her, everyones saying we want to hear you. You have worked on he said she said cases. This is so complicated because we dont know that much. There isnt an investigation. So on one said some people are saying this is crazy teens doing things that, you know, teenagers do. And on the other hand, maybe it is a case of Sexual Assault. So how complicated is it for a he said she said case for someone like dr. Ford to come forward and tell her story in a public setting like this . Walk us through how this works. Stephanie, as the prosecutors put those cases together, they happen all the time. Sadly. I hate this term he said she said you can convict in a criminal court beyond a reasonable doubt to 12 jurors based upon a jury just assessing the credibility of the victim themselves. But its not a criminal investigation. Exactly. So theres even less of a standard there. There isnt proof beyond a reasonable doubt needed. There isnt a fifth amendment right to remain silent. Kavanaugh has to testify. There isnt a presumption of innocence. If you can do it in a criminal prosecution, where all the rules are slanted, you can do it. The courts look at whats their interest in the outcome of the case . Reading from the jury charge in new jersey, very similar elsewhere, whats their ability to know . What was their candor like and the demeanor on the stand . Evasive or not evasive . Shes taken a polygraph, an aggressive action. She put someone else in the room who would not be her ally. Stephanie, as a prosecutor that would have been the biggest thing for me to say i believe in the credibility of the allegation, im not saying its true, the fact that she could have said it was just me and him and no one else was there, she put his friend in the room who is likely not to be a positive witness, that speaks truth to me as far as somebody thats Going Forward and saying i really by the way, i want a full investigation. Why dont you . When senator grassley says he wont even call or compel supposedly the third party in the room there, wont do anymore Due Diligence he doesnt want a full investigation. Then we get all tangled in the midterms. Heres a woman who, you know, is a victim and now her situation is being tangled in the timing of an election. One last point. Shes being victimized a second time by the process. Yesterday we had the president declassify information in a current investigation in the name of transparency. But you dont want to have any kind of transparency with somebody whos going to be on the Supreme Court of the United States by doing a full investigation . I call that hypocrisy. Welcome to the age of hypocrisy. Michael, some democratic aides are floating the idea that some people, democrats should boycott the hearing on monday. Is that a good strategic move . I dont know what the hearing on monday is going to be. Thats entirely premature. I think this idea that sets back the me too movement, if you dont testify at the exact specifications of the 11 men on the panel who dont want your allegations to be true what if 11 men, so what . To testify before 11 people who well, i think the gender actually will play a big role in the minds of voters. I think the fact that there are four democrats, four Democratic Women will mean something and i think that if you look at the anita hill hearings, all these men castigating anita hill did not play well and hurt them in the minds of voters. This idea that she is youre saying that i didnt interrupt you. First of all, it does not set back the me too movement to make her testify at the exact specification of her opponents does not set back the me too movement. Second of all, the idea that youre allowing her to be heard, anita hill was heard but she was railroaded. What were trying to do is put together a process that will get at the truth and not be a show trial that just allows Brett Kavanaugh to get confirmed no matter what. Bob costa, you tweeted this is a politically fragile moment for the gop. Specifically, i think of orrin hatch yesterday, when he did say i know him very well, hes a good guy, she must be mixed up. That, for me, was certainly a moment where i went, mixed up, theres lots of guys who could be good golfers or nice guys that youve had a beer with, but it certainly doesnt mean dr. Ford is mixed up and orrin hatch doesnt have any facts to back that up. And you think back to senator hatch in 1991, he was present for the anita hill hearings, so was senator chuck grassley, it was a fragile moment for republicans in 1991, led to the year of the woman in 1992 where women were elected to u. S. Congress. Were in a totally different era, the me too era. And what passed as okay for republicans politically in 1991, many republicans told me yesterday at the capitol they fear they could be too aggressive here, make mistakes. If theyre trying to move too quickly, they could pay a price with voters. This is a very complicated situation. We, unfortunately have to end it quickly. We have another developing story. The president , hes launching his latest attack against his own attorney general Jeff Sessions. And im going to say its one of his most brutal. Nbcs Hallie Jackson is following this from washington. Hallie, tell me about this new interview. Heres the thing, the president in this new interview with the hill, an outlet that covers all things washington, is going after his attorney general. That is not something thats particularly earth shattering. The president loathes Jeff Sessions as he has made clear very publicly stemming from Jeff Sessions recusal from the russia investigation over a year ago. This, though, that has a different kind of shading on it. Why . Because the president is now in this interview going after not just sessions and himself and the recusal, but going after some of the policies that sessions has implemented at the department of justice. Like, for example, mentioning border security, other issues that are important to the president. Thats interesting because the doj is one of the agencies along with, for example, the epa that has done a lot to implement the president s aegenda, to make sue hes ticking off promises made, promises kept from the campaign trail. This is an interesting twist there. Theres another piece to this too. The president says i dont have an attorney general. You can see the headline on screen. He says, and its very sad. Just a quick fact check, he does have an attorney general. It is Jeff Sessions. It is going to remain Jeff Sessions until the president decides to potentially fire Jeff Sessions, something that the president has said he will not do until after the midterms. So we are now seeing another flareup of this dissatisfaction that the president has with a top cabinet member, Jeff Sessions. Theres another piece to it too. In this wide ranging interview, steph, the president also talks about the fbi. And he says and im going to quote you this line here or paraphrase it. He says i hope to be able to put this up as one of my crowning achievements that i was able to expose something that was truly a cancer in the country, referencing the fbi and his longrunning fight with fbi leadership there. We are still reporting how that is sitting inside the walls of the fbi headquarters, steph, but you can imagine not great potentially given that the president is now calling some of those members, calling the agency, calling the corruption hes trying to root out, he believes inside the agency, a cancer on the United States. And now again, the president s perspective on this is hes not talking about the agents themselves, hes consistently said im talking about leadership. Im talking about the people that arent, you know, doing things that are fair, doing things that are right. We have to remember hes talking about peter strzok and that crew hes railed against for months now. If hes talking leadership, rank and file, President Trump didnt put any of those people in place. Leadership, the head of the fbi, his attorney general, the president