stepping in. so, again, i don t know who listens to that, i don t know who believes it, but more to the point i don t know why lindsey graham would even say it, it s ridiculous. est that the biggest surprise there. michael schmidt, let s bring you in here. what a long strange trip it s been for you, you re hated by kraits throughout the campaign, you re hated by republicans everyone hates you. no, during the trump presidency liberals have loved him, conservatives have hated him because he s writing true stories about donald trump then this crazy twist over the weekend where liberals are on your back again because you write a story about rod rosenstein and liberals are saying he was just being sarcastic. tell me with all of your reporting, with all of your information when we talked about wearing a wire and talked about a vote on the 25th amendment with donald trump was rod rosenstein being sarcastic that s not what the depth and breadth of our reporting showed. it showed tha
anonymous source who is a second hand source.rc the new yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that judge kavanaugh was present at the party. they ran withs that story. that was not sufficient for the new york times . and, obviously, andrea, we have all of this happening. backdrop to all of this is the explosive rod rosenstein story, north and south korea getting together,h talking. there s so much going on right now. donald trump s trade war kicking into full gear and the impact it will have. how do we sort through this? how do you sort through this? i mro not sure exactly how because you ve got the iranian president here in new york. you got, of course, gridlock every where. the president today meeting with the south korean mountaon, who
testify. you look at the allies of the witnesses from statement that can t corroborate the act. but you also look at reporting and what they did with her husband quite moved me. i think it was a very honest account of a woman, who if she is telling the truth, has grappled about this. i remember that. all of you stay where you are because the fallout from the rod rosenstein story is next. what is the president likely to do about it? and the new democratic 12-point lead over republicans. is it insurmountable? waze integration- seamlessly connecting the world inside.
in public, in private. the places her lawyers are pushing back are unreasonable. where she said she wants to have brett kavanaugh go first and then she response, i don t think that is reasonable, not the way our justice system works where you have the accused testify before the accuser. i think they will reach a reasonable accommodation and will allow doctor ford to tell her story and but brett kavanaugh tell his version of events. the legal team is asking for more time to make a decision. that is more than reasonable. the judiciary committee, so gracious to give her an extra day and setting an arbitrary deadline to make the decision. this is a woman who has been suffering, she didn t come forward for 36 years and now demands that they do it on their terms when they have no idea what they have been through.
these people have not been there, to tell her they want it done her way is unreasonable. they have to move the confirmation process forward. it has been delayed in the extreme and are asking for another day. if they want another day that is fine but ultimately she needs to decide whether she s going to tell her story and i think the republicans are going the extra mile, several extra miles to enable her to tell the story in a context where she feels comfortable doing so. i m optimistic and hopeful she will accept this opportunity and tell the story. mike: the rod rosenstein story, is a major shakeup coming to the department of justice? i will say yes but not in the near-term. i would say there would be a shakeup after the midterm election. today s news is hard to make of it and i would take it with a grain of salt. we don t know the sources for this. we heard rod rosenstein deny saying anything along those lines so i view this story with a lot of skepticism. clearly reinforces the