swetnick, a third kavanaugh accuser. >> just to be clear, should the fbi interview all three of brett kavanaugh's accusers? >> it wouldn't bother me at all. it depends, i don't know all three of the accusers. certainly i imagine they're going to interview two. the third one i don't know much about. but it wouldn't bother me at all. i've heard that the third one has, i have no idea if this is true, has very little credibility. if there is any credibility, interview the third one. >> should brett kavanaugh be interviewed by the fbi? >> i think so. i think it's fine if they do. >> swetnick's lawyer, michael avenatti, has spoken about her case, but she has not, until tonight. you will hear from ms. swetnick for the first time. that's right here on "the beat." the other big issue is testimony from kavanaugh's friends, like mark judge, who has spoken to the fbi, as well as their credibility. new reports that his former girlfriend says she wants to speak with the fbi but hasn't gotten much of a substantive response. the fbi can talk to these people around the main parties as well. nbc reporting kavanaugh's team tried to talk to some of them, encouraging accounts that would back him up. another college classmate alleges that he would get aggressive while drinking. so a lot of different accounts swirling around. we begin with senator richard blumenthal, a democrat from connecticut. he signed a letter today listing about two dozen witnesses that they believe the fbi should interview. i'm also joined by former democratic senator carol mosley braun, she won her seat in 1992. she was also the third woman efficient to serve on the senate judiciary committee. senator blumenthal, when you look at the direction we're going here when the president said the fbi expanding aspects of the probe, do you feel it's the right direction? >> it's the right direction, but whether they go far enough and quickly enough remains to be seen. those 25 witnesses that i sent to the white house and to the fbi along with almost all my colleagues on the judiciary committee, democratic side, are the minimum that ought to be interviewed. as you well know, witnesses can lead to other witnesses that have to be pursued. so i believe that jeff flake truly wants a real investigation, not a check the box sham. and that's what the fbi ought to be doing. difficult, though, because as you said very well this deadline is tight and arbitrary. in fact, too accelerated and too artificial to really get the job done. >> one of the things that's come through in the process is increased scrutiny on whether brett kavanaugh, who is a sitting federal judge, who testified under oath, has been wholly truthful throughout. and you got it at that point with your exchange with him. let's take a look. >> you're aware of the jury instruction -- [ speaking latin ] are you not? you're aware of that jury instruction? >> i am. >> you know what it means? >> you can translate it for me, senator. >> false in one thing, false in everything. >> what were you getting at there? were you at a function after a few days where you can say you can think he did make materially false statements to the senate or are you not there yet? >> i think he definitely was evasive and seemingly misleading. he made statements that were directly contradicted by facts and now have been impugned by other potential witnesses who have come forward, who should be interviewed under oath. i would never judge right now that a sitting judge would be prosecuted for perjury based on what we know. but there is certainly reason for the fbi to be investigating that issue. and that investigation, by the way, ari, is going to go on, whether it occurs before the vote or afterwards. not like the wrongdoing goes away just because of the vote. >> senator, stay with me, as i turn to another former senator. senator braun, i want to play for you a little sound from two other senators. this is relatively short for senator-on-senator analysis. a republican and democrat in a much-watched, much intreegintre intrigue "potential pass statements by judge kavanaugh. >> if judge kavanaugh is shown to have lied to the committee, the nomination is over? >> yes. >> i would think so. >> you saw the republican there, jeff flake, nodding his head vigorously. the democrats have certainly held that view. do you hold that view? do you think that he was evasive, as senator blumenthal has just said, or something more directly false? >> well, the united states constitution calls on the senate to advise and consent. this is supposed to be a search for truth. and not just a matter of a pure power play and patronage politics, which frankly it may come down to be. it may be that the majority leader in the senate will try to just ram this thing through without regard to the outcome of the fbi investigation or any other evidence. so the question is whether or not the senators will discharge their constitutional duty, and i think they will, and examine the -- all of the facts of this case. it's not a criminal case, it's advise and consent. so there's a different standard. but it should not be allowed to become patronage politics over whether or not this is the spoil system and the supreme court can go to whatever party is in power. it shouldn't be that. it should be a search for the truth and a search to get to the bottom of what has occurred here. >> senator mosley braun, the other issue is not only how brett kavanaugh and dr. ford conducted themself, much has been made out to "snl" on how it was the accuser who seemed so measured and calm, and the person being accused who seemed to, at times, emotional and upset. even if you wanted to be charitable and say people may respond differently to different things, he's also a sitting judge who has to return to the bench no matter what happens. so if we can compare that to what we call the kavanaugh standard, what he said judges ought to do and how they ought to act. take look. >> to be a good judge and a good umpire, it's important to have the proper demeanor. really important, i think. and to keep our emotions in check. to be calm amidst the storm. on the bench, to put it in the vernacular, don't be a jerk. i think that's important. there's a danger of arrogance, for umpires, refugees, and also judges. >> do you think he followed his own advice last week? >> he clearly did not. that's the reality there. he just attacked the senators who were on the panel, which was just i thought inappropriate and did not show judicial temperment. but having said that, what concerns me is why republican women are not more outraged, because the republican side of the committee, they couldn't even have -- they didn't have a female member of the republican side of the aisle on that committee. they had to go and rent a person to come and be the stand-in female to do the questioning. i just think that that ought to energize republican women to say why respect there more republican women sitting on that other side of the senate judiciary committee, or in the senate, period? so i think that is a very important issue here, >> thanks to both of you. i want to turn now to "the new york times" editorial board. a sexual assault survivor. and lisa lara and gene robinson for "the washington post." my thanks to all of you. lisa, starting with you. what do you think is important now? we are a long ways, as i mentioned in the open, from president trump claim thing isn't what the fbi does or they should do it with a narrow account of who they can talk to. >> what's important is what has always been important, the votes of senators flake, kol listens, murkowski, maybe manchin. more issues seem to come out, but if mitch mcconnell feels he has the vote to push it through, he will push it through. so the deciding voices on this will be that said of three or five senators, if they feel satisfied with what has happened in the past week, then he'll bring it to a vote. if jeff flake does not feel satisfied, then it's hard to see how -- and then republicans are in a tough spot. >> right. and jean robinson, what lisa is referring to is the fact that this is a somewhat public, messy process. no one is claiming it's all that logical and rational. although as i was pushing the senator on it, if you want more time and witnesses, this would seem to be going in that direction. take a look at the president today. >> i want them to do a very comprehensive investigation. with that being said, i would like it to go quickly. >> just for clarity, will you instruct the white house counsel, don mcgahn, free reign to investigate whoever they want? >> i did instruct him, but i did say within the bounds of what the senate wants. to use an expression often used by me, we don't want to go on a witch hunt. >> gene, he had to get that in there. what do you think about that direction and the president, look, you could say low bar, you can say low expectations. but something has moved the president. maybe just the raw political pressure of needing a couple of votes. >> at the very least, we have a good cop, bad cop routine going on here, where the president, for a change, is the good cop who is saying, have an investigation, look into everything, talk to anybody you need to talk to. this is what i want the fbi to do. and on the other end of pennsylvania avenue, you have mitch mcconnell saying, we're going to vote this week. i'm going to call a vote, and we are going to put it up. that, is i think, in part a bluff, because he certainly will not bring it up for a vote if he doesn't think he has the votes to pass, to get judge kavanaugh confirmed. but it's the kind of routine going on, and i'm as confused as everybody else about how thorough this investigation will be, how quickly it can be done, and what the standard is, what's the cutoff. do you find out he lied to congress, but you can't substantiate the sexual assault charges, what do you do? is that enough for jeff flake or not enough for jeff flake is >> yeah, i don't want to get too caught up in the fbi investigation, because i think it's important, because it means that dr. blasey ford's claims are being taken seriously, and that's good. but we already have a lot of information before us even without the fbi investigation, that suggests brett kavanaugh is unfit for this role. one of those pieces of evidence is dr. blasey ford herself. her testimony is credible. brett kavanaugh's testimony is not credible. and there are reasons for that, and one of those reasons is because he's been misleading and had a hissy fit on national television. that is not what we want in a supreme court justice. and i think that, you know, we should kind of remember that, because rather than fall into the trap of, let's see whether it's possible to prove that dr. blasey ford is telling the truth -- it may be there's no evidence 36 years later that can prove all of the claims that she's brought up. but yet there are lots of reasons to find her testimony credible, and frankly brett kavanaugh's not credible. >> lisa, doesn't that go to the very peculiar maleness or male privilege that he would seem to inhabit, which has been a part of the discussion for many days now, which is, it is hard to imagine a female judge, candidate, nominee, or senator, necessarily being given the same dispensation if they comported themselves over self-hours like that. >> i'm smiling, because it's not hard to imagine, it's impossible to imagine. >> i do a little bit of jumd statement -- understatement on the show. >> so clearly there is a double standard at play. that seems fairly obvious for anyone who has watched these testimonies, who has watched washington, who has watched politics. i also think there's another thing going on that's important to remember, which is let's say this all works for mitch mcconnell and he gets confirmed and put on the court, what does it do to the institution of the court? you have this controversial nominee, you have a broad swath, a growing swath based on the polling of the american public, who are not comfortable with him, and then you have future potential justice kavanaugh who is going to be on the kaucourt ruling. and then there's the temperament issues, the openly partisan statements he made in his testimony that could be damaging for the court as an institution. >> that goes to gene, something i want to read that cuts into another heart of this debate, which is what is the right ratio, and i don't think anyone has the right answer, but what is the ratio between the age of an allegation. the older and less serious, you say oh, jaywalking, and it was 60 years ago, and it was in a horse and buggy jaywalking situation. versus something super serious or super recent. i want to read to you from some of the new accounts coming out. the washington report quoting on the record -- >> any time you have the intersection of criminal law or the alcohol mixed with allegations of criminal conduct, you're in a little bit of a different space than what people like to say. oh, 40 years ago these were wild parties. how do you see these accounts affecting it in >> well, that definitely gets your attention, but i want to go back to the point that dr. blasey ford's testimony, first of all, what she alleges is serious. and it's serious enough that there's not a statute of limitations on that, both literally and i think in terms of consideration for the supreme court. and second, her testimony is evidence. it is powerful. i mean, she is an incredibly credible witness. i don't know anyone who listened to her last thursday and said she was anything less than believable. so if you're going to say she's believable, we should believe her. we should certainly give her more of a presumption of truthfulness than is being given her now, and when we say in the me too era, believe the woman, that doesn't mean believe the woman for, you know, half a day and then tell her to go away and shut up. >> its go goes to the point, she came out, spoke under oath in public. mark judge speaking in private and only speaking under oath because of what jeff flake and others pushed for. that wasn't at all guaranteed. as always, appreciate your expertise. coming up, nbc's kate snow has an exclusive interview with kavanaugh accuser julie swetnick. and later, a deep dive into what fbi agents might be looking at as they review the record of mark judge. and bob mueller in court defending his authority and talking about rod rosenstein. and why there are more immigrant children than ever in a tent city in texas. an important story we'll be covering later. i'm ari melber. you're watching "the beat" on msnbc. "the beat" on msnbc. n on our faces? or something woven into the dna of the doers, the determined, the driven? and while the bar keeps getting higher, ambition gives us the power to tackle any obstacle. opening the doors to bigger leaps, larger goals and financial freedom. sofi. we stand for ambition. sofi. not in this house. 'cause that's no so-so family. that's your family. which is why you didn't grab just any cheese. you picked up new kraft expertly paired mozzarella and parmesan for pizzahyeah! kraft. family greatly. if you have moderate to thsevere rheumatoid arthritis, month after month, the clock is ticking on irreversible joint damage. ongoing pain and stiffness are signs of joint erosion. humira can help stop the clock. prescribed for 15 years, humira targets and blocks a source of inflammation that contributes to joint pain and irreversible damage. humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened; as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common, and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. help stop the clock on further irreversible joint damage. talk to your rheumatologist. right here. right now. humira. opportunlike here.rywhere. and here. see? opportunity. hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. ev-er-y-where. about to be parents. it's doing a lot of kicking down there. meeting the parents. it's gonna be fine. and this driver, logging out to watch his kid hit one out of the... go dani, go! opportunity is everywhere. all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪ today the white house authorized the fbi to expand its investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against judge brett kavanaugh. two accusers, dr. christine ford and deborah ramirez have talked to the fbi as part of this probe. now a third who came forward recently, julie swetnick, was not on the original list of fbi interviews and has not spoken in public since releasing a written statement, until now. nbc new's kate snow just interviewed julie swetnick, and interview that will air now for the first time. kate? >> what we want to do here is lay out all that she said her story, our reporting. he want to be transparent, because these are very serious allegations. kavanaugh has called julie swetnick's story nonsense and a farce. the president today questioned her credibility, and nbc news, for the record, has not been able to independently verify her claims. there are things that she told us on camera that differ from her written statement last week. we've been trying independently to reach out to anyone who remembers attending partying with julie swetnick and brett kavanaugh, and we've been asking her attorney for names. so far we've not found anyone who remembers that. she's also unclear about when she first decided to come forward. >> why are you sitting here today? >> well, i'm quite a shy person and quite a private person. and i wouldn't be here today except for about six weeks ago, i happened to learn about brett kavanaugh becoming one of the people who was short listed to go to the supreme court. >> this is in july, summer? >> i don't remember exactly. but it was about six weeks ago. and then i became aware of dr. ford and her description of what had happened to her at a party one time, that also had brett kavanaugh involved. and i started to think back to my days when i was in the early '80s in montgomery county in maryland. and i thought that i might have some information that might corroborate some of the things that she had stated. >> so you only thought about coming forward when you learned about dr. ford sh >> yes. because i did not know how close brett kavanaugh was to possibly becoming the next supreme court justice. i just want to get the timeline right about this, because he was nominated in july. christine ford, dr. christine blasey ford, came forward in "the washington post" more recently in september. so was it in september that you -- >> it's been several weeks. but i'm not somebody who follows the news. i'm not political at all. >> julie swetnick says she was in community college when she started attending house parties that included high schoolers. >> you graduated in 19 1980 fro high school. so a lot of people wondered what are you doing at a high school party. >> it was about high school party. these parties had everybody between an age range of 15, 16 to 25, maybe even more. >> how did you meet brett kavanaugh? did you actually meet him if >> i did actually meet him. i remember meeting him. i remember -- he's got a very distinctive face, very distipgtidistip distinctive face, as does mark judge. i remember specifically meeting him, being introduced to him. >> did you know anything about brett kavanaugh? >> no. i believe he might have been wearing a georgetown prep uniform, which a lot of the boys used to wear at least a uniform or parts of their uniform. >> at the party? >> sometimes. i think they were very proud. >> in your statement, you described a range of behavior. >> uh-huh. >> and you say you saw -- >> oh, yeah. >> brett kavanaugh do these things. describe what you saw him do. >> he was very aggressive, very sloppy, mean drunk. i saw him go up to girls and paw on them, try to, you know, get a little too handsy, touching them in private parts. i saw him try to shift clothing. >> later in the entire view, she went further. >> i saw him push girls up against walls. he would pretend to stumble into them. he would push his body against them, grope them. >> there are some differences between her sworn statement. she said she became aware of efforts by kavanaugh and mark judge to spike punch at parties. in our interview, she said she saw them near the punch but did not specifically say she saw either man spike it. >> did you see brett kavanaugh, you know, spiking the punch in >> well, i saw him giving red cups to quite a few girls during that time frame. and there was grain punch at those parties. i would not take one of those glass from mark kavanaugh -- brett kavanaugh, excuse me. i saw him around the punch containers. i don't know what he did. but i saw him by them, yes. >> in her declaration, swetnick wrote, i also witnessed efforts by mark judge, brett kavanaugh, and others, to cause girls to become intoxicated and disoriented so they could then be gang raped in a side room by a train of numerous boys. i have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties, waiting for their turn with a girl inside the room. these boys include mark judge and brett kavanaugh. >> what did you see? >> well, until what happened to me happened to me, i didn't put two and two together. but i would see boys standing outside of rooms, congregated together. sort of like a gauntlet. and i didn't know what was occurring. but i would see them laughing, a lot of laughing. >> standing in lines outside of rooms? >> not lines, but huldled by the doors and i didn't understand what it could be. >> and you describe brett kavanaugh and his friend, mark judge, standing outside a door? >> yes. with other boys. >> so you're suggesting that, in hindsight -- >> yes. >> -- you think he was involved in this behavior? >> i would say yes. it's just too coincidental. >> she says she had no idea exactly what that behavior was, until she herself was attacked. >> can you tell me what happened? as much as you're comfortable telling us? >> what happened to me is probably the most horrendous, awful thing that could happen to any human being. my body was violated. my soul was broken. i was not able to have somebody stop when i said no, stop. i felt like somebody took me and basically said you're worthless. you are nothing to us. you are disposable. i was at a party, and i remember i started not to feel very well. and next thing i know, i was shoved into a room, and i'm having my clothes torn in different directions. i was touched everywhere. i was physically assaulted in every way you can physically sau assault a woman. it was horrible. i had no way to fend them off. >> you know what i'm going to ask. everyone is wondering if one of those people was brett kavanaugh. >> i cannot specifically say that he was one of the ones who assaulted me. but before this happened to me, at that party, i saw brett kavanaugh there. i saw mark judge there. and they were hanging about the area where i started to feel disoriented and where the room was, and where the other boys were hanging out. and laughing. i could hear them laughing and laughing. it's very hard for me to talk about this, but it's important that somebody says something, because if brett kavanaugh was one of those people that did this to me, there is no way in the world that he should go scot-free on this, and that he should be on the supreme court. it's just unthinkable to me. if he does, there's no justice in the world. >> after your -- what you describe as an attack on you and a rape, did you tell anyone? >> oh, yes. i contacted the montgomery county police. >> you did? >> i told my mother and she cried with me. she held me the next day. i was so distraught. she wanted me to go to the police immediately. she was just outraged. she was so hurt for me. >> do you remember who you spoke to? >> i vaguely remember people, but i'm not quite sure. i'm not 100%. >> swetnick's mother has since passed away. she also named one of the officers she said she spoke with. that officer is now deceased. nbc news verified he worked for the montgomery county police at that time. we've requested copies of records, but police officials said it could take up to a month for them to respond. >> it's not true, it's not true. >> reporter: judge kavanaugh said he doesn't know who swetnick is, and her allegations are from the twilight zone. >> i want to play you a little bit of what he said on thursday. >> the swetnick thing is a joke! that is a farce! never met her. don't know who she is. there is a letter released within two hours of that breaking yesterday from i think 60 people who knew me in high school, men and women, who said, their words, nonsense. totally, you know, the whole thing, totally ridiculous. >> none of these allegations are true? >> correct. >> no doubt in your mind? >> zero. i'm 100% certain. >> not even a sintilla? >> 100% certain. >> do you swear to god? >> i swear to god. >> mark judge put out a statement. he said under oath that your allegations are bizarre and that he would remember something so outlandish, even when suffering from an addiction. he categorically denies your allegations and says he doesn't know you. what do you say to that? >> what i say about that, he's an admitted blackout drunk and drug addict. how could he know that you have. >> on sunday, swetnick's credibility was questioned. a company said you lied about johns hopkins. >> that's total kaka. i remember when this happened and it was ridiculous. and that's why they dismissed it. >> you didn't lie? >> no. it was just fabricated. >> what was it about? the lawsuit says -- let me -- the lawsuit by your former employer says you engaged in unwelcome sexual and inappropriate conduct after three weeks on the job. >> never happened. that's why it was dismissed. >> senate republicans and other critics noted a restraining order filed against swetnick by an ex-boyfriend in 2001. >> he filed a restraining order against you, which we did find evidence of. it was effective for 12 days. >> that is preposterous. and honestly, i never received a restraining order. >> court records show the petition for the restraining order was dismissed 12 days after it was filed. swetnick is represented by michael avenatti, who also represents stormy daniels and is an outspoken critic of the president. she says he reached out to him after a friend, who went to law school with avenatti, recommended him. >> my best friend went to george washington law school with him. and michael knows washington. i wanted an attorney who knew washington and who was recommended. >> as you know, some people -- probably a lot of americans expressed doubt about your story, simply because of how it came out and who represents you. >> i cannot speak for other people and why they would form certain opinions. i just know that i wanted to have good representation, and i think i found it. >> i asked swetnick if any of her friends from the '80s remember going to these parties with her. are there friends who remember these parties too? >> i think everybody in the county remembers those parties. >> we haven't heard from those friends. so i'm asking are there people -- >> yes. there are people that know about those parties. >> this morning, swetnick provided four names of friends she says went to the parties with him. one of them says he does not recall a julie swetnick. another of the friends she named is deceased. we reached out to the other two and haven't heard back. swetnick says after the alleged attack on her when she was 19, she never returned to those big house parties. >> you said it was the last party you remember going to. >> that was the last party i consciously remember going to. it was definitely the last party i ever went to in montgomery county. the next year i remember being at beach week in ocean city. i wasn't there for beach week, i was just there vacationing, and i bumped into some friends, and somehow we ended up going to a get together in ocean city. and at that party, i did see brett kavanaugh there again. and it crushed me. i was -- i fell apart. and i had to get out of there. >> swetnick told me that if she had known what was happening to her had possibly happened to other women or men, she would have absolutely tried to break into that room. this is a quote, and save whoever the person was at those parties. she would have contacted authorities as well. again, judge kavanaugh said he does not know julie swetnick, and has called her claims, ari, nonsense. apologies for my voice. >> you've been working hard. it's a big story. we're going to fit in a short break, 30 seconds and i'll be back with kate snow. d i'll be back with kate snow. you might take something for your heart... or joints. but do you take something for your brain. with an ingredient originally discovered in jellyfish, prevagen has been shown in clinical trials to improve short-term memory. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. welcome back to "the beat." i'm here with kate snow. we just aired her exclusive interview with a kavanaugh accuser, who is speaking out for the first time, julie swetnick. thank you for your reporting. there's a lot for people to see there. >> there's a lot in there. >> and there are things that go in different directions, as often happens when you report out a story like this. you pressed her on the timeline of when she decided to come forward. >> right. we saw that at the top of the piece. frankly, we found it a little bit confusing. first she said in july -- first she said she heard about brett kavanaugh being on a short list. and that happened in july. you heard me ask her that, wasn't that in july. she said yes, six weeks ago, but july was three months ago. then she mentioned dr. ford, and being inspired by her and wanting to support her and corroborate what she was hearing dr. ford say. but for the record, that was in september. so there's haziness when she decided to come forward. >> how does your reporting effort to account for her second hand sources or validaters compare to other stories like this that you've covered? >> here's what i can tell you. we found out about it, i found out about this interview on friday night. on saturday morning, i had my first confidence with her attorney, michael avenatti. i asked him at that point, can you provide us with names of people who went to the parties with her, just because we couldn't place her -- nbc news has not since last week been able to place her in that time period at those house parties, in that group of friends. there respect other people coming forward as happens in many other stories we cover, who say yes, i was there, too. and we're not discounting what she said in any way. we're just trying to do our reporting and make sure that there were people who said she was there, and to date, as of today, we haven't been able to find anyone who says yes, i saw her in the same room with brett kavanaugh. of course, judge kavanaugh says he was not in the same room, he doesn't even know who she is. >> while some of her allegations overlap with things we've heard from other multiple sources, it seems both in her sworn statement and in this interview, she's not alleging individual misconduct by brett kavanaugh attacking her. >> well, she's not sure about that. yes, that's right. she's not sure -- she said she thought she saw him in the vicinity, and then her description is that she got pushed into a room and was sort of out of it, and there were a number of men in that room. but she says she's not sure who was there. >> right. >> i think she would just also say that we have been trying to verify everything she said, you know, as much as we can. the resources of nbc news are way beyond me, ari. there are a lot of people in this newsroom working on this. we're interested in talking to anyone else who may have seen what she said she saw. she did describe not direct behavior against her, but you heard her in the interview describe behavior against other women she said she observed she said she observed judge kavanaugh pushing women against walls, you know, talking to them in a demeaning way. she's making some very serious allegations here. i think it's up to the viewers to decide what they make of this. >> right, about what she says she saw, and within this process as more information and more accounts come out, those will be weighed through the process. kate snow, thank you for sharing your reporting. we want to turn to another development. a key friend of brett kavanaugh, who has been laying low, mark judge, now he's been interviewed by the tfbi. dr. ford identifies him as part witness and part accomplice. and he responded by saying he doesn't recall the events and he never saw brett act in the manner dr. ford describes. until today, that written statement was basically all that anyone had directly from mark judge, meaning he was facing far less scrutiny than ford or kavanaugh. she detailed her memories about that night. >> brett and mark were visibly drunk. early in the evening, i went up a very narrow set of stairs, leading from the living room to a second floor to use the restroom. when i got to the top of the stairs, i was pushed from behind into a bedroom across from the bathroom. i couldn't see who pushed me. brett and mark came into the bedroom and locked the door behind them. there was music playing in the bedroom. it was turned up louder by either brett or mark once we were in the room. i was pushed onto the bed, and brett got on top of me. he began running his hands over my body and grinding into me. i yelled, hoping that someone downstairs might hear me. both brett and mark were drunkenly laughing during the attack. they seemed to be having a very good time. mark seemed ambivalent at times, urging brett on. and at times telling him to stop. a couple of times, i made eye contact with mark, and thought he might try to help me. but he did not. >> that is what everyone watching heard. mark judge would have strong views about that allegation, as it ricocheted across the country. and even if he genuinely does not recall that night, the fbi would want his view on many of these wider questions that he and kavanaugh faced about their alleged drinking together. and for judge, whether he remembers knowing ford or seeing her after the incident she details. and judge could have plenty to say about excessive drinking and blackouts, because he did write about his own battles with alcoholism and recovery. >> have you ever passed out from drinking? >> passed out would be -- no, but i've gone to sleep. >> you like alcohol if >> i like beer. do you like beer, senator? what do you like to drinksome >> so there's never been a case where you drank so much that you didn't remember happen the night before? >> you're asking blackouts. i don't know, have you? >> in mark judge's book, he writes about a pledge he and his friends made in high school to drink 100 kegs before graduation. there was a quote -- >> there's also a 1997 memoir, where judge writes about a "beach week" and has this passage. do you know bart kavanaugh? yeah, he's around here somewhere. i heard he puked in someone's car. yeah, he passed out on his way back from a party is the exchange. so is that bart o'kavanaugh name or character a reference to brett kavanaugh? >> mark judge was a friend of ours in high school, who developed a serious drinking problem and addiction problem. that lasted decades and was very difficult for him to escape from. >> i'm trying to get a straight answer from you under oath. are you bart o'kavanaugh that he's referring to? >> you have to ask him. ises that's judge kavanaugh ducking. so another judge, if you will, would take the question. one can now imagine the fbi doing exactly that, asking him, in its new questioning, as well as, of course, his recollection of the account about running in to dr. ford. >> yes. i was going to the potomac village safeway, the one on the corner of falls and river road. and i was with my mother and i was a teenager. so i wanted her to go in one door and me go in the other. so i chose the wrong door because the door i chose was the one where mark judge was -- it looked like he was working there. and arranging the shopping carts. and i said hello to him. and his face was white and very uncomfortable saying hello back. and we had previously been friendly at the times we saw each other over the previous two years. albeit not very many times, we had always been friendly with one another. he was just nervous and not really wanting to speak with me. he looked a little bit ill. >> how long did this occur after the incident? >> i would estimate six to eight weeks. >> the fbi may want to ask about that nonnon-drunk alleged encounter. >> a former girlfriend of mark judge's is saying that judge told her of an incident that involved him and other boys taking turns having sex with a drunk woman. also, the kind of question the fbi might want to explore in the context of this vetting. dr. ford was asked a simple question that many remember in her hearing last week. >> would you like mark judge to be interviewed in connection with a back ground investigation and the serious, credible allegations that you've made? >> that would be my preference. >> that would be my preference. simply stated, measured, modest, even the way she was throughout much of the hearing. what's easy to forget, because a lot is happening at once these days is when she gave that answer under oath, and then when kavanaugh came in after and then the next day, no one knew whether this would ever happen. in the space from her answer to today, a span of a few days, political pressure and activism have changed. so now mark judge has been interviewed by the fbi. that wasn't the original plan. mark judge now, because of all that, his testimony, true or false, the fbi will make its determination, would be key to unlocking so many open questions right now. today... back pain can't win. now introducing aleve back and muscle pain. only aleve targets tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve back & muscle. all day strong. all day long. ♪ ♪ if you have recurring constipation and belly pain, talk to your doctor and say yesss! to linzess. yesss! linzess treats adults with ibs with constipation or chronic constipation. linzess can help relieve your belly pain, and lets you have more frequent and complete bowel movements. see if you're eligible to get 90 days for as little as 30 dollars. do not give linzess to children less than 6 and it should not be given to children 6 to less than 18, it may harm them. do not take linzess if you have a bowel blockage. get immediate help if you develop unusual or severe stomach pain, especially with bloody or black stools. the most common side effect is diarrhea, sometimes severe. if it's severe, stop taking linzess and call your doctor right away. other side effects include gas, stomach-area pain, and swelling. so say yesss! to help for recurring constipation. yesss! to help for belly pain. talk to your doctor and say yesss! linzess. some of the big news today, trump's former campaign chair paul manafort in the hot seat. today bob mueller's people sat him down for a meeting, all part of his ongoing cooperation with the special counsel probe. i'm joined by david corn, mother jones washington bureau chief, specialist in the special counsel probe. what do you make of this development and also the push coming from the republican side to meet with rod rosenstein? >> well, one is a true matter. the other is a distraction. finally, paul manafort is sitting down with mueller. remember, we haven't heard a lot from mueller in the last couple weeks. it might be because we're nearing an election and he doesn't want to do too much before that and be accused of playing partisan politics. what manafort knows, about the trump campaign, also lobbying for the ukraine, russian oligarchs, this could be hours and hours and hours of debriefing for mueller's investigators who then go out and dig and look and come back to manafort and say, what about this, what about that? it's a long process. at the same time, they are also doing this with a guy named michael cohen. so, you know, they have a lot more work to be done on these two fronts. and it's serious. you know, we've seen mueller and his team. they are painstakingly thorough and that sometimes takes awhile. so there may be weeks, months before we see any signs of what these debriefings with cohen and manafort are bringing forth from an investigative point of view. >> do you think with the white house sailiying the trump rosenstein meeting will happen further, would it age well in business? >> let me look at trump's perspective -- >> as you always do. >> he has shown amazing self-restraint on this front and has not tweeted that much about it. you know, calmly noted last week that he would not bring this up on the day of the testimony of christine ford and brett kavanaugh and not create even more chaos. we know he likes to create chaos. >> are you low-key complimenting donald trump right now? >> well, listen. if you ever just call donald trump a sane reasonable human being, it's not necessarily a compliment. >> i just -- this is like a mike pence, kanye west side of you i didn't know about t. >> now, putting those two together kind of blows my mind especially -- >> they're both maga, baby. a i like to see mike pence dancing around in a perrier bottle. it could be trump doesn't want to make a move on rosenstein or sessions until after the election. he's convinced it will be bad politics for the midterm. >> you're saying it could be a rational thing and it doesn't give him a ton of credit, but that would be rationally reasonable. or it could be a bait and switch to then do something -- attacking the rule of law after election day. >> i know the odds are low on this, but yes, it could be a rational decision. >> great. and thank you for the snl perrier bougttle. do you know who was dancing -- >> next time throw me a life line. >> we're out of time, david corn. >> kanye is not on my time line. >> we'll be right back. back made the first commercial wireless phone call. we were both working on that first network that would eventually become verizon's. that call opened the door to the billions of mobile calls that we've all made since. i'm proud i was part of that first call, and i'm proud that i'm here now as we build america's first and only 5g ultra wideband network that will transform how we all live, once again. (bob) the first call that we've made on the cellular system. ♪ ok here we go guys, you ready? hi! cinturones por favor. gracias. opportunity is everywhere. ♪ it's gonna be fine. it's a door... ♪ it's doing a lot of kicking down there. waiting to be opened. ♪ whatever your ambition... ♪ whatever your drive... ♪ whatever you're chasing... driver, are we almost there? we're gonna have a baby! ♪ daddy! daddy! opportunity is everywhere. ♪ all you have to do to find it is get out... here. ♪ and as if that wasn't badur brand new enough, totals it. now your insurance won't replace it outright because of depreciation. if your insurance won't replace your car, what good is it? you'd be better off just taking your money and throwing it right into the harbor. i'm gonna regret that. with new car replacement, if your brand new car gets totaled, liberty mutual will pay the entire value plus depreciation. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ ♪ girls are not in school because of economic issues and they have to work. at the malala fund, we help girls stay in school. the malala fund invests in education champions who work in the community and pave the way so that girls can actually go to school. to have our financial partner guiding us is very important. the fact that citi is in countries where girls are vulnerable ensures that we're able to get funds to the people that we're working with. when girls go to school, we're going to maximize their talents. we could have a solution for climate change in that girl. that girl could be the next nobel peace prize winner. ♪ turning to a significant story that the government may not want you to see, the trump administration right now secretly moving hundreds of migrant children to tent cities. this is all happening in the middle of the night. they forced the kids on buses for relocation to a tent city in south texas often without warning. 1600 children moved under darkness because they are less likely to try to run away. that is according to a new account in "the new york times." these facilities appear worse for children than where they were staying because they have no school, they have less access to legal services to protect their rights, and while some potential caretakers are arrested by i.c.e., they have less caretakers. the trump administration had set regulations for the new tent camp but let's be clear, that means fewer protections than where the children were previously housed, places regulated by state child welfare authorities. we wanted you to see that story. we'll have more on it in the days ahead. that does it for us, though. "hardball" starts now. /s >> kavanaugh cover up? threats' play hardball. ♪ ♪ >> good evening. i'm chris mathews in washington. tonight there are new revelations concerning judge kavanaugh's second accuser, deborah ramirez who alleged late last month that the supreme court nominee had once exposed himself to her at a dorm party while they were both at yale. nbc news is now reporting tonight that in the days before ramirez went public with her allegation, quot