JUDY WOODRUFF: Good evening.
I'm Judy Woodruff.
On the "NewsHour" tonight: a reluctant yes.
The Senate Judiciary Committee gives a green light to confirming Brett Kavanaugh, as the
White House goes along with calls for a new FBI background investigation before a final
confirmation vote.
Then: why the U.S. will be engaged in Syria for the foreseeable future.
It's Friday.
Mark Shields and David Brooks consider the Kavanaugh nomination process and yesterday's
striking testimony by him and Christine Blasey Ford.
Plus: "Murphy Brown" returns.
I sit down with Candice Bergen to discuss how the show is handling today's contentious
politics.
CANDICE BERGEN, Actress: Well, that's the gift of being on this show.
You get to do comedy and you get to tackle really major issues.
I mean, we did a MeToo episode that was very funny and very powerful.
JUDY WOODRUFF: All that and more on tonight's "PBS NewsHour."
(BREAK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: Dramatic new turns tonight in Brett Kavanaugh's fight for confirmation
to the U.S. Supreme Court.
President Trump is now ordering the FBI to investigate sexual assault allegations against
his nominee.
And Kavanaugh says he will cooperate.
This comes after Senate Republicans pushed a yes vote on Kavanaugh through committee,
but also changed its posture and agreed to the probe.
Congressional correspondent Lisa Desjardins begins our coverage.
LISA DESJARDINS: In the Senate Judiciary Committee, the time to vote quietly came and went.
But there was action, a lot of it, in whispers and side conversations.
And Republican Senator Jeff Flake took his seat and announced a major change in his approach.
SEN.
JEFF FLAKE (R), Arizona: I think it would be proper to delay the for vote for up to,
but not more than one week, in order to let the FBI do an investigation limited in time
and scope to the current allegations that are there.
LISA DESJARDINS: Flake said committee Democrats had raised a legitimate issue in demanding
the FBI investigate sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's.
SEN.
JEFF FLAKE: I'm not expecting them to the vote yes, but not to complain that an FBI
investigation has not occurred.
This country's being ripped apart here.
LISA DESJARDINS: The 11 Republicans on the panel then voted to move the Kavanaugh nomination
to the Senate floor, where Flake asked that it wait a week.
But South Carolina senator Lindsey Graham pointed out that Flake had no guarantee.
SEN.
LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), South Carolina: Senator Flake has made clear what it would take him
to be comfortable on a final passage vote.
But it doesn't matter what we say here.
This will be up to Senator Schumer and Senator McConnell.
LISA DESJARDINS: With that, Chairman Chuck Grassley abruptly adjourned the meeting.
An open mic between Grassley and Democrat Dianne Feinstein picked up the confusion over
what had happened.
SEN.
DIANNE FEINSTEIN (D), California: Is it going to happen, or did you cut off a vote?
SEN.
CHARLES GRASSLEY (R), Iowa: No, we didn't have a motion in front of us.
This is all a gentlemen and women's agreement.
LISA DESJARDINS: All this after an already dramatic day, which started with Flake announcing
he would support Kavanaugh in committee and on the floor.
Shortly thereafter, cameras captured the Arizona senator hidden by a half-closed elevator door
being confronted by protesters.
WOMAN: Do you think that he's telling the truth?
LISA DESJARDINS: Flake stayed silent there.
WOMAN: How can you be speechless?
LISA DESJARDINS: Meanwhile, the Judiciary Committee meeting got under way with Democrat
Richard Blumenthal moving to subpoena Mark Judge.
Christine Blasey Ford said he was the friend present when Brett Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted
her in 1982.
SEN.
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL (D), Connecticut: He has never been interviewed by the FBI.
He has never been question by any member of our committee.
LISA DESJARDINS: Grassley read a new letter from Judge maintaining that he didn't recall
the attack.
SEN.
CHARLES GRASSLEY: "I told the committee that I do not want to comment about these events
publicly.
I never saw Brett act in a manner Dr. Ford described."
The motion is defeated.
LISA DESJARDINS: Republicans defeated the motion to subpoena Judge and then quickly
began moving to vote, before Democrats could object or speak.
WOMAN: Mr. Leahy.
SEN.
PATRICK LEAHY (D), Vermont: No, because it violates the customs of this committee.
LISA DESJARDINS: Some Democrats expressed their anger by remaining silent when their
names were called.
And four Democrats walked out of the room.
SEN.
KAMALA HARRIS (D), California: This is a failure of this body to do what it has always said
it's about, which is be deliberative.
LISA DESJARDINS: Back inside, Democratic Dick Durbin read aloud a letter from the American
Bar Association urging a delay for the FBI to investigate.
SEN.
RICHARD DURBIN (D-IL), Minority Whip: "Deciding to proceed without conducting additional investigation
wouldn't only have a lasting impact on the Senate's reputation, but it will also negatively
affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court."
LISA DESJARDINS: But Grassley pushed back.
SEN.
CHARLES GRASSLEY: The ABA is an outside organization.
Like any other, they can send us letters and share their advice, but we're not going to
let them dictate our committee's business.
LISA DESJARDINS: There were greater cultural themes as well.
Graham said in an impassioned defense of Kavanaugh:
SEN.
LINDSEY GRAHAM (R), South Carolina: I know I'm a single white male from South Carolina,
and I'm told I should shut up, but I will not shut up, if that's OK.
This has never been about the truth.
This has been about delay and destruction.
LISA DESJARDINS: Republicans also said they believe something happened to Dr. Ford, but
that it didn't involve Kavanaugh.
Democrats urged Republicans not to dismiss Ford.
SEN.
AMY KLOBUCHAR (D), Minnesota: We have someone who made a credible claim.
The chairman even thanked her for her bravery.
Well, where is the bravery in this room?
LISA DESJARDINS: Even as the FBI investigation goes forward, Republicans still hope to start
Senate debate on Kavanaugh this weekend.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And Lisa joins us now to go over the very latest twists from Capitol Hill.
And our own Yamiche Alcindor is here as well.
She's been tracking reaction to all this at the White House.
So, Lisa, first to you.
Where does this stand right now with the FBI, with what the Senate is planning to do?
LISA DESJARDINS: Just when you thought there couldn't be more surprises, we had another
one today.
The plan right now is for the FBI to begin this background investigation, largely in
questioning witnesses.
We don't know who they're going to question.
And the deal that has been struck here is that they can do no more than a week's worth
of work before Republicans will move toward a final vote on this nominee.
Process matters here.
We're going to talk a little bit about that.
But, first, I want to mention the key witness that Democrats want to be interviewed, of
course, is Mark Judge.
He has put out a statement saying he is willing to cooperate.
But he said he wants it to be a matter of confidentiality.
We're not sure what that means.
We have to find out.
So he's -- still a lot of questions about that.
Let's talk about what happens now.
The FBI begins investigating tomorrow.
The Senate is expected to take a vote to begin the debate on Judge Kavanaugh.
This is procedural.
It is just one of a series of votes that need to happen.
Now, the next major vote would be to end that debate.
That's called closure.
But that won't happen until the FBI finishes.
Sometime next week is the expectation.
And then late next week, conceivably, there would be a final vote.
That's Republicans' hope.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, Yamiche, the White House has said the president didn't think this was
necessary, this investigation.
How are they responding to all this?
The president has given the go-ahead.
And how are they dealing with the delay?
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: The president is going along with what the Senate wants, but he is very
frustrated with it.
The president wants this to be over as quickly as possible.
Today at the White House, he said watching Mark Kavanaugh -- or -- sorry -- watching
Brett Kavanaugh, he found someone who was really acting in an incredible way, that he
was really impressed by all that he said.
He also said that Dr. Ford is a very credible woman, that she's a very fine woman.
But, in reality, she -- he still sides with Brett Kavanaugh on all the things that he
said.
And I want to read to you really quickly Brett Kavanaugh's statement.
He said: "I answered questions under oath about every topic the senators and their counsel
asked me.
I have done everything that they have requested and will continue to cooperate."
Now, soon after that, Dr. Ford also had her own statement.
And I'm going to read you a part of it.
It says: "A thorough FBI investigation is critical to developing all the relevant facts.
No artificial limit as to time or scope should be imposed on this investigation."
So she's happy that there's an investigation happening, but she's not happy with the fact
that there's only a week to do this.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So, Lisa, a little more background from the Hill.
LISA DESJARDINS: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: We know Senator Jeff Flake was key, as we saw earlier, but there were
others involved as well.
LISA DESJARDINS: That's right.
There was a clear cast of characters here today.
Jeff Flake could not have done this alone, because Republicans can spare a vote.
And they could lose one vote and still confirm Judge Kavanaugh.
So he needed some help.
Let's look at the key Republican senators here, Senator Susan Collins, Senator Lisa
Murkowski.
They have both come out and supported this idea of a delay.
And I was standing outside of the office where the three of them were meeting last night.
They were meeting not just with Republicans, but with one Democrat last night.
That's Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia.
Let's look at these key Democrats who are involved.
He is also supporting this idea of a delay, as Senator Heidi Heitkamp.
What is interesting, Judy, is Senator Joe Donnelly, who is up for reelection this year
in Indiana, vulnerable Democrat, he came out today as a firm no on Judge Kavanaugh.
And he referenced the hearings, because as much as the White House may be happy with
what Kavanaugh said, there are Democrats like Joe Donnelly who think his performance actually
harmed him.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Finally, Yamiche, what is the president doing to continue to push Brett
Kavanaugh through?
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Today at the White House, the president was very careful to not twist
the arms probably of any senators that are still waiting to make their decision.
He said he had no specific message, but he said that he hopes that they do what's right
and that he -- that he expects them to do that.
However, President Trump is known to call senators personally.
And he's also, from the sources that I have been talking to, allowed senators to call
him directly.
So if you're a senator, like Senator Collins, and you call the White House, you can get
through pretty quickly to President Trump.
So essentially he really wants to be able to talk to these senators, but doesn't want
to badger them.
A source told me today that they are -- that the White House has been continuing to engage
the Senate and will continue to do so.
So, essentially, they're pushing the Senate.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Interesting.
You're saying there -- that's all happening while the president is frustrated with the
process.
YAMICHE ALCINDOR: Yes.
Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Yamiche Alcindor, Lisa Desjardins, thank you both.
In the day's other news: The U.S. State Department ordered the evacuation of the American Consulate
in Basra in Southern Iraq.
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo blamed rocket attacks by Iranian-backed militias.
He warned that the U.S. -- quote -- "will respond promptly and appropriately" to any
such attacks.
A tsunami in Indonesia washed away homes today and left an unknown number of people missing.
An earthquake sent a wave of up to 10 feet high crashing into the coast of Sulawesi,
striking the coast of Palu and a smaller town.
We have a report from Geraint Vincent of Independent Television News.
GERAINT VINCENT: The sun is setting on a seaside town on the island of Sulawesi.
But the ocean is about to shatter the evening's calm.
A wave starts to roll across the sand.
In the places where people have sought refuge, there's panic.
The water crashes through the beachside cafe and onto the streets, into the grounds of
a mosque, where the earlier earthquake has already caused the roof to collapse.
After nightfall, on the other side of the island, people who were injured in the quake
made it to hospital.
But the fear of aftershocks and another building collapse meant that they were treated outside.
The safest place to sleep is out in the open.
Indonesian officials say that power cuts have made it difficult to assess the scale of the
damage, but that were swept away by the tidal wave and that families have been reported
missing along the many fault lines which stretch across this part of the earth.
Counting the cost of the latest quake will have to wait until daylight returns.
JUDY WOODRUFF: That report from Geraint Vincent of Independent Television News.
A former Vatican diplomatic accused Pope Francis today of waging a subtle slander campaign
against him.
Archbishop Carlo Maria Vigano has claimed a cover-up involving former U.S. Cardinal
Theodore McCarrick and alleged sexual misconduct.
In a new letter today, Vigano said the pope compared him to Satan in recent remarks, and
he said Vatican silence about a cover-up only confirms it.
Iranian government fired back today at Israeli accusations that it has a secret atomic warehouse.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made the claim at the U.N.
Today, Iran's foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, dismissed the presentation as -- quote
-- "an arts and crafts show."
Back in this country, Facebook reports that hackers have compromised 50 million of its
user accounts.
The tech giant said today that the attackers used a Facebook function that lets users see
how their profiles appear to others.
Facebook said it doesn't know who was behind the cyber-attack or if any hacked accounts
were misused.
A federal judge today allowed a lawsuit to proceed against President Trump over the so-called
Emoluments Clause in the Constitution.
Some 200 congressional Democrats have filed the suit.
It alleges Mr. Trump is illegally taking payments from foreign entities, especially through
his Washington, D.C., hotel.
On Wall Street today, the Dow Jones industrial average gained 18 points to close at 26458.
The Nasdaq rose four and the S&P 500 added a fraction.
And two robotic rovers hopping across the surface of an asteroid have now sent back
images.
The picture show a rocky surface taken from slightly different angles.
The asteroid is 170 million miles from Earth.
The rovers are about the size of cookie tins.
They were dropped to the surface by a Japanese probe.
Still to come on the "NewsHour": how Brett Kavanaugh's Senate testimony differs from
previous Supreme Court nominees; we discuss the Trump administration's strategy in Syria
with envoy Jim Jeffrey; Mark Shields and David Brooks break down a dramatic weekend in the
Senate; plus, Candice Bergen on the return of "Murphy Brown."
The drama unfolding in the United States Senate reflects much of a larger debate that's taking
place across this nation, how we see gender and power in the MeToo movement.
It all adds up to unchartered waters.
And Amna Nawaz examines how this week stands in sharp contrast to confirmations in the
past.
AMNA NAWAZ: In key moments this week, it was the tone that mattered.
Aside from the specifics of the sexual assault allegations, there were questions about Ford's
composure compared to Kavanaugh's anger and if the same rules applied to both witnesses.
The overt politics of the hearing were also a departure from precedent.
Here to help make sense of it all, Marcia Coyle of "The National Law Journal," and Deborah
Tannen, a linguistics professor at Georgetown University.
Welcome to you both.
Marcia Coyle, I would like to start with you.
You have watched a lot of confirmation processes, tracked them over the years.
A lot has been said about the demeanor of Judge Kavanaugh yesterday.
Have you ever seen someone deliver speech, remarks, a response in a similar demeanor
in past years?
MARCIA COYLE, "The National Law Journal": Amna, I think the closest that I have seen
come to Judge Kavanaugh was Justice Clarence Thomas, when he went before the Senate Judiciary
Committee in 1991.
I was thinking last night as I was watching Judge Kavanaugh of the old cliche that the
best offense -- or the best defense is a good offense.
And Justice Clarence Thomas in '91, he spoke first, before Anita Hill, and then he was
given rebuttal time.
And on his rebuttal time, he came out with the now -- the phrase that has lingered in
so many memories of that period, in which he called the confirmation process a national
disgrace, but a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks.
And at that moment, you could tell that the atmosphere in the room and on the committee
had changed.
Last night, with Judge Kavanaugh, he didn't have race to use like Clarence Thomas did,
but what he did have was partisanship.
And he -- his emotional, angry, often belligerent delivery focused on what he felt was a conspiracy
on the left to search and destroy him.
And he said that he saw this as revenge for the 2016 presidential election, his own ideology,
and the work he did for the independent counsel who had investigated the Clinton White House.
So this was being done on behalf of the Clintons.
It was such a stark partisan kind of attack.
And it is something that I have never seen before, not from a judicial nominee.
AMNA NAWAZ: Deborah Tannen, I would love to get your take on this.
Now, you study language and how people use it, how it is perceived.
Belligerent, angry, these were a lot of the words that were used to describe the way in
which Judge Kavanaugh defended himself.
How are you, as someone who studies this from an academic viewpoint, taking in what you
saw yesterday?
DEBORAH TANNEN, Linguistics Professor, Georgetown University: I would add to that so many aspects
of his self-presentation that were completely out of place in that context.
He was interrupting the senators.
He was disrespectful to the senators, the Democratic senators.
He turned the question back on them.
I like beer.
Do you like beer?
What do you like to drink?
The interruptions, the overlap, supporting along with them when he was supposed to answer
a question, he really never answered the questions.
But he never said, I'm not -- sorry, I can answer your question.
He certainly didn't say sorry about anything, but simply took the floor and went on repeating
the things that he had said with his opening statement.
And the contrast with Dr. Ford was really quite striking.
She apologized when she had nothing to apologize for.
And, by the way, I would point out that, for women, I don't think that really is an apology.
It's just a way of being -- taking into account the effect of what you're saying on the other
person, so trying to be helpful.
So, it's pretty routinized, women saying, I'm sorry.
But you -- and we did once hear Judge Kavanaugh apologize, to Senator Klobuchar.
But it was after a recess.
And you kind of had the feeling that maybe somebody pointed out to him he had gone a
bit too far.
(CROSSTALK)
AMNA NAWAZ: Deborah Tannen, let me -- sorry to interrupt.
DEBORAH TANNEN: Yes.
Sure.
AMNA NAWAZ: Let me ask you about something you just mentioned, the difference between
the two testimonies.
This is something we have heard a lot today.
Was there a gender dynamic at play?
Or were we just watching two different personalities make their cases?
DEBORAH TANNEN: Yes, of course.
It was almost like stereotypical representations of how women and men would be expected to
present themselves and to behave.
So, he was blustery.
He was taking up as much talk space as possible.
The anger is an emotion that is approved of in men and is often seen as positive in men.
She could not be angry.
She had many -- much reason to be, but she didn't show anger.
And it would be very unacceptable for a woman to show anger.
So, everything about her self-presentation was self-effacing, deferential.
What's interesting is that most people, men, as well as women, would be deferential to
the senators in a setting like that.
He threw all that to the winds, and was actually not -- not only fulfilling our expectations
of men, but not fulfilling our expectations of a person who was presenting himself before
a body that was going to judge him.
He was acting more like he was the judge.
(CROSSTALK)
AMNA NAWAZ: I would like to ask Marcia Coyle about the impact of that, because, as we know,
this is part of an interview process, an assessment process, for a very big, important job.
I want to show a graphic now that talks a little bit and shows quite clearly sort of
the partisan nature of this process over the years.
This is starting with John Paul Stevens in 1975, showing the Senate confirmation votes.
Started back then a 98-0 vote.
You see those margins growing tighter and tighter each year, until Justice Neil Gorsuch's
vote last year.
That was 54-45.
Marcia, you mentioned this earlier, of course, the partisan nature of that vote.
But Judge Kavanaugh himself delving into that partisan conversation, does that impact, do
you think, how he does his job moving forward?
MARCIA COYLE: Oh, moving forward?
Well, I think only he can -- if he is confirmed, he's the only one who will be able to tell
if he brings -- if he takes on to the court a bitterness, an anger towards any groups
on the left, any parties on the left that would come before him.
I can't answer that for him.
I think, in terms of the court itself, that I'm -- I think most of the justices know Judge
Kavanaugh, like him, respect him.
They have hired many of his former clerks for their own chambers.
But I have to believe that there was a certain amount of cringing going on last night.
I was thinking -- she didn't say this in the context of the nomination hearings, but Judge
Kagan recently said in a public conversation that the court -- the court relies on -- for
its legitimacy that the American people believe that its decisions are made with a certain
amount of integrity.
So, any time there is a partisan cast to any cases that come to the court, they worry about
this.
And they worry that they will be viewed as a partisan institution.
Now, I'm sure many people probably believe the court practices politics, not law.
But, as she said, you have to look at the institution.
And the American people do respect it because they still do believe that there is a certain
amount of integrity in the decision-making.
I think probably Justice -- Judge Kavanaugh's comments last night, as well as his appearance
on FOX television, which is associated with a certain political view, probably is a little
worrisome in terms of how some people will view him if he is confirmed.
AMNA NAWAZ: And we will see if he is, indeed.
Marcia Coyle, Deborah Tannen, thank you very much for your time.
MARCIA COYLE: Pleasure.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The Trump administration is making a renewed push to find a solution to
the war in Syria.
The man at the center of that effort is the newly appointed special representative for
Syria engagement, Ambassador James Jeffrey.
He sat down with foreign affairs correspondent Nick Schifrin, who sets the scene at a possible
turning point for U.S. policy.
NICK SCHIFRIN: For months, President Trump has warned he would leave Syria.
DONALD TRUMP, President of the United States: I want to get out.
I want to bring our troops back home.
I want to start rebuilding our nation.
NICK SCHIFRIN: But now he's authorized an open-ended deployment and a more assertive
strategy.
U.S. troops and allied Syrian forces are fighting the final battle in Syria against ISIS.
Following a Russian-Turkish agreement to pause the battle for Idlib, the rebels' final stronghold
located in Northwest Syria, the U.S. is pushing a political solution.
And it's adding a difficult new goal, evict tens of thousands of Iranian-backed troops
inside Syria, as Ambassador James Jeffrey reluctantly acknowledged in New York.
Will the U.S. stay in Syria until Iranian troops leave Syria?
And is that an expansion of the mission of defeating ISIS?
JAMES JEFFREY, U.S. Special Representative for Syria Engagement: The mission to defeat
ISIS by the U.S. military remains the enduring defeat of ISIS, why our U.S. military forces
are in Syria.
But we, the United States, are in Syria, with our allies, with our local forces, to try
to do three things that the president laid out here.
First of all, we want to de-escalate this conflict.
And we were really encouraged by the Turkish-Russian agreement that stopped the match on Idlib
by the Syrian forces backed by the Russians.
You will remember, two weeks ago, the president declared publicly that this would be a reckless
escalation of the conflict.
DONALD TRUMP: If it's a slaughter, the world is going to get very, very angry, and the
United States is going to get very angry too.
JAMES JEFFREY: Everybody took that seriously.
Based upon that, the president is calling for a de-escalation of the military situation.
So, de-escalate the military conflict, while reinvigorate the political process that will
bring this war to a close and allow the half the population driven from their homes to
come back and to have some kind of regional peace order again.
So that's what we're working on now.
NICK SCHIFRIN: But, if I could ask you, the national security adviser came out this week
and said U.S. troops won't leave until Iranians or their proxies leave Syria.
Is that an expansion of the mission for U.S. troops in Syria?
JAMES JEFFREY: I'm not going to contradict the national security adviser.
NICK SCHIFRIN: So does that mean that U.S. troops will remain in Syria?
JAMES JEFFREY: U.S. troops right now have the mission of defeating and ensuring the
enduring defeat of ISIS.
The U.S. as a whole will be staying on in one or another way.
There are many examples of how you can be present, including present with somebody's
military forces, without having American boots on the ground.
And, in some cases, you have American boots on the ground.
NICK SCHIFRIN: And regardless of whether it's boots, one of their missions, whether it's
diplomats or whether it's proxies that the U.S. uses or allies, will be to evict Iran
from Syria.
Is that right?
JAMES JEFFREY: The goal of the United States in Syria, as the president laid out, is, first,
the enduring defeat of ISIL, what our troops are doing there; second, the removal of all
Iranian-commanded forces from the entirety of Syria; third, a irreversible political
process, which is what we have really, we think, been advancing here with the entire
international community, with this U.N. process, under Staffan de Mistura, The U.N. envoy.
NICK SCHIFRIN: Can there be an irreversible political process with Bashar al-Assad staying
in power?
JAMES JEFFREY: We're not in the business of regime change.
We're in the business of setting conditions.
First of all, it has to be a Syrian process.
The enduring political solution under the U.N. process and the U.N. resolution calls
for the Syrian people to make that decision, including by a free election that the U.N.
would supervise and ensure is fair and free, including the diaspora, a good third of the
population that's been driven out of Syria.
And what they conclude, we don't know.
But it's hard for us to imagine that it would be a regime like that Bashar al-Assad currently
is in charge of.
NICK SCHIFRIN: And one of the conditions, of course, that you want is for refugees to
feel free to go home.
Can they really feel free to go home if Assad is still the president?
JAMES JEFFREY: Well, most of them have already voted with their feet or voted with their
posteriors by sitting exactly where they are, because nobody -- or not...
(CROSSTALK)
NICK SCHIFRIN: You mean -- meaning outside of Syria?
JAMES JEFFREY: Right, outside of Syria, because no one wants to return to be subject to the
extraordinary torture chambers, poison gas and absolute disgraceful barrel bombing oppression
of that regime.
NICK SCHIFRIN: And there have been peace talks, of course, as you know, in Geneva for many
years.
How do you get Syria and Russia to take serious these peace talks and the momentum toward
a political solution that you're talking about, when, frankly, they haven't taken it seriously
in the past?
JAMES JEFFREY: You're right.
First of all, we now have, at least for the moment, with the Idlib agreement between Turkey
and Russia, you now have what amounts to a military stalemate, thanks to the Idlib situation.
That's something new.
Secondly, we have said no reconstruction assistance, no assistance to encourage or force refugees
back and help rebuild the regime for Assad until we see a political process in place.
And, thirdly, you have got these five outside military forces rubbing against each other,
with risk of escalation, as we saw with the shootdown of the Russian aircraft by Syrian
enforces trying to go after the Israelis who had just bombed an Iranian target.
That's a nightmare scenario that I think encourages everybody to turn to the political process
that we are reinvigorating here this week in New York.
NICK SCHIFRIN: Ambassador James Jeffrey, thank you very much.
JAMES JEFFREY: Thank you.
JUDY WOODRUFF: 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: 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: 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.
JUDY WOODRUFF: We have had some crisis moments this week, for sure.
Thank you both.
Mark Shields, David Brooks, thank you.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Last night, the hit comedy "Murphy Brown" of the late '80s and '90s came
back to life in a reboot.
During the original run, one half-hour episode drew 70 million viewers.
I visited their Washington, D.C., cable newsroom set in a New York City studio last week to
see how times have changed and how some things are still the same.
CANDICE BERGEN, Actress: This is the bullpen of their morning show called "Murphy in the
Morning."
JUDY WOODRUFF: During the new "Murphy Brown" set in Queens with 72-year-old Candice Bergen,
I saw how her defining role, as straight-talking TV newswoman Murphy Brown, has stayed with
her all these years, and how today's storyline is written to be on top of the news.
There are some things that are exactly like what they were.
CANDICE BERGEN: They have gotten as close as possible to the original set that was 3,000
miles away and 30 years ago.
JUDY WOODRUFF: It was clear that Murphy Browns Georgetown living room have been updated with
the times too, complete with journalist Bob Woodward's latest bestseller about the Trump
White House, "Fear."
I sat down there with Bergen, who received five Emmy Awards for her role, and creator/writer/producer
Diane English.
So, what made you think bringing it back was a great idea?
Where did this come from?
CANDICE BERGEN: It came from Hillary losing.
(LAUGHTER)
DIANE ENGLISH, Creator, "Murphy Brown": Yes.
We wouldn't have really entertained the idea of coming back if she had won the election.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And, last night, the program brought on a surprise guest.
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, Former U.S. Secretary of State: Hello.
I'm here to interview for the secretarial position.
(LAUGHTER)
CANDICE BERGEN: Hillary?
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Yes, Hillary.
Hillary Clinton.
CANDICE BERGEN: I assume you have had previous secretarial experience?
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Absolutely.
For four years, I was the secretary -- I was a secretary of a very large organization.
(LAUGHTER)
HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Let me give you my card.
Thank you.
CANDICE BERGEN: Hillary@youcouldhavehadme.com.
(LAUGHTER)
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
JUDY WOODRUFF: Do you feel you have a mission in what you're doing?
CANDICE BERGEN: We're not fanatics, if that what you're getting at.
(LAUGHTER)
CANDICE BERGEN: I think that America would -- would welcome hearing another point of
view.
DIANE ENGLISH: We're living in a country right now that is so divided.
And it's not our intention to cause more division.
But I think that facts really go missing.
And that's a lot of what we're doing on the show, is really kind of presenting the facts.
JUDY WOODRUFF: How has Murphy changed over these 20 years after?
DIANE ENGLISH: As news and entertainment began to merge, I think she felt it was time to
step down.
But retirement didn't really sit well.
CANDICE BERGEN: She doesn't like the hours of her new show, which require her to get
up in the darkness and go to bed in blazing sunlight.
(LAUGHTER)
CANDICE BERGEN: But she just hated being out of the game.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And the game today, it's similar in some ways, but it's also very different,
isn't it, in a news environment.
DIANE ENGLISH: The press was very revered at that time.
And our characters are members of the press.
And now they're just being assaulted with fake news and enemy of the people.
I mean, it's kind of horrifying that the press is polling lower than the president.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Do you feel you can make these serious points and do it in a funny way?
I mean, how do you do that?
That's a real balancing act, isn't it?
CANDICE BERGEN: Well, that's the gift of being on this show.
You get to do comedy and you get to tackle really major issues.
I mean, we did a MeToo episode that was very funny and very powerful.
You have to come to this show socially engaged and aware of what's happening in the world
in order to even participate.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You're going to be reaching out to people who are on both sides of this
divide.
DIANE ENGLISH: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: How do you think it's going to be received?
DIANE ENGLISH: You know, laughter reaches every demographic, so I'm kind of counting
on that.
But my whole family voted for Trump.
So I'm very sensitive to not necessarily providing any kind of false equivalency, but Avery,
her grown son works, for the Wolf Network.
He's got a show on the Wolf Network, which is like the FOX network.
He's the liberal voice, but he's a character who spent a lot of time in the heartland covering
the presidential campaign.
And he understands people who feel like they have been left behind.
JUDY WOODRUFF: You're taking on some of the really hot issues of right now.
You mentioned MeToo.
We're in the middle of it.
Your own network, CBS, has had its issues, the CEO leaving.
And, Candice Bergen, you were defending Les Moonves up until well into that.
CANDICE BERGEN: I was, up until the second time -- was it...
DIANE ENGLISH: It was "The New Yorker."
CANDICE BERGEN: The second "New Yorker" piece.
I had great respect for Les, and liked him very much.
It's new ground.
And we haven't really walked much on this ground before.
And so the boundaries are being defined as we speak.
DIANE ENGLISH: He was a great executive.
And he turned this network around.
So we both had a lot of respect for him in that regard.
But there's -- there's no question for us that we stand with all those women.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Is there anything you won't touch?
DIANE ENGLISH: I don't think anything is off-limits.
The criteria for us is, can we walk that tightrope with an issue that is serious, but still make
a comedy out of it?
It was kind of our hallmark in the old days.
We never shied away from just having a very serious scene that didn't have any laughs
in it at all.
JUDY WOODRUFF: The midterm elections are front and center in the early episodes and add an
immigration wrinkle to the storyline.
CANDICE BERGEN: Whatever your party is, use your right to vote.
And it is said by a Mexican immigrant in the show.
DIANE ENGLISH: A dreamer, who can't vote.
JUDY WOODRUFF: There are six returning writers and some producers from the original crew.
CANDICE BERGEN: I still get tears in my eyes every time I'm introduced in curtain calls,
because it's just so much.
JUDY WOODRUFF: And it took two months to reconstruct the sets.
And now, as some producers call it, the oldest crew in show business is back.
And so is the studio audience.
Mainstays of the original "Murphy Brown" newsroom have also returned, Faith Ford as Corky, Grant
Shaud as Miles Silverberg, Joe Regalbuto as Frank Fontana.
There are occasional appearances from Charlie Kimbrough is Jim Dial.
Veteran actress Tyne Daly joins us a familiar bartender.
ACTRESS: Vice President Dan Quayle citing Murphy Brown as an example.
JUDY WOODRUFF: One original "Murphy Brown" episode is still talked about today, and landed
Bergen on the cover of "TIME" magazine.
What everybody remembers about the show -- they may remember a lot, but one thing they definitely
remember is Murphy deciding to have a baby.
It was 1992.
And the vice president of the United States then, Dan Quayle, made a speech and went after
Murphy Brown.
DAN QUAYLE, Former Vice President of the United States: It doesn't help matters when prime-time
TV, as Murphy Brown, a character who supposedly epitomizes today's intelligent, highly paid
professional woman, mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone, and calling
it just another lifestyle choice.
DIANE ENGLISH: "And calling it just another lifestyle choice."
(LAUGHTER)
JUDY WOODRUFF: You became a lightning rod in 1992.
CANDICE BERGEN: I just stayed in.
(LAUGHTER)
CANDICE BERGEN: Really.
It was overwhelming for me.
I was just -- on the show, we, in a very short form, debated whether she would keep the child,whether
she would abort the child.
And so it wasn't introduced casually in any way.
And we really gave it its weight.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Are you prepared to face that kind of political blowback now over other
issues?
DIANE ENGLISH: Yes.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Do you think?
DIANE ENGLISH: I mean, we're expecting it, just because of the mood of the country right
now.
And we know our president likes to tweet.
And so we are expecting that maybe that will happen as well.
JUDY WOODRUFF: So you kind of feel like you're home with this?
CANDICE BERGEN: I mean, oh, totally, totally.
JUDY WOODRUFF: I mean, you're back home?
CANDICE BERGEN: Between the sets and the cast.
Goodbye.
(LAUGHTER)
WOMAN: We're clear.
We're clear.
Thank you very much.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Thank you.
As we go, tomorrow's edition of "PBS NewsHour Weekend" looks at part one of a two-part series
on the resurgence of ISIS in Libya.
And that is the "NewsHour" for tonight.
I'm Judy Woodruff.
Have a great weekend.
Thank you, and we will see you soon.
For more infomation >> COSAS RARAS que hacen SOLO en GUATEMALA | Como casi me muero | ANNA la Ucraniana - Duration: 10:03. 
For more infomation >> Ein Rollstuhl aus Kinder-Spielzeug für Schildkröte - Duration: 1:14. 
For more infomation >> 【Korean Food】 My Original Tteokbokki Recipe / Aeriskitchen's Tip (한국어 자막 포함) - Duration: 6:12. 
For more infomation >> Renault | Kwid | Diga Oi | Loja Online - Duration: 0:45. 
For more infomation >> Body believed to be missing 6-year-old North Carolina boy found, FBI confirms - Duration: 2:16. 
For more infomation >> Anh -Thùy Chi ft Anh Vũ||solo guitar ||Thanh Huy - Duration: 3:19. 
For more infomation >> Hood wants crack-down on e-cigarettes - Duration: 1:17. 
For more infomation >> Woman saved from fire that destroyed home, killed pets - Duration: 1:05. 
For more infomation >> Local college volleyball team honors fallen state trooper - Duration: 1:00. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét