Due diligence. I think this committee has done a good job, but i do think that we can have a short pause and make sure that the fbi can investigate. The investigation that flake requested into credible Sexual Misconduct allegations against kavanaugh is now under way. The white house has said it will be, quote, limited in scope and completed in less than one week. But on that scope question, its not entirely clear what that means. Will the investigation be confined to the allegations from dr. Christine blasey ford . Or will it include the allegations made by any of the other women who have accused Brett Kavanaugh of Sexual Misconduct . Michael avenatti, who by now should be very familiar to you, represents a woman who could potentially be interviewed by the fbi as a witness. Julie swetnick claims she witnessed kavanaugh participating in Sexual Misconduct when he was a High School Student at Georgetown Prep tore school in the 1980s. The allegations are disturbing, alleging gang rape of women who had been rendered disoriented by alcohol. To be clear, she has not accused kavanaugh of any crimes against her and kavanaugh has strongly denied the allegations. Joining me now is Michael Avenatti, attorney for Julie Swetnick. Michael, first of all, good morning. Good morning. So lets talk about your clients allegations. She submitted a sworn affidavit which you originally wanted to result in her being questioned by the committee. That didnt happen. But has she been contacted by or contacted the fbi to be part of this reopened investigation . Not yet, joy. You know, weve been asking for a full fbi investigation now for days. We want my client to be called by the fbi. She wants to sit down with fbi agents, to tell her story, to tell them the facts and the circumstances that she witnessed, to tell them what happened to her, and were waiting for the fbi to contact her. Now, i was pleased to see what happened yesterday afternoon, that the Committee Vote proceeded. However, theres a oneweek delay. But i want to tell you this, im very concerned about this scope question. When i hear people throw around things like, well, the fbi is going to investigate credible allegations, well, hold on a minute. The fbi is supposed to determine whats credible or not. If they dont get a chance or if theyre told not to speak to certain individuals, then how can they determine whether an allegation is credible or not. So im hopeful for this investigation is going to be thorough, im hopeful that it is going to include my clients allegations, which, as you stated, were made in a sworn declaration under oath. They absolutely should interview my client. Im hopeful that all the facts are going to be known ultimately to the American People. But if the fbi does not meet with my client or question her, then i think thats going to call into question who told the fbi not to meet with her. So your client, to be clear, Julie Swetnick, is claiming that she attended parties during the 1980s when she was a High School Student that included boys from Georgetown Prep, including mark judge and Brett Kavanaugh, according to Julie Swetnick, there were girls that were being inebriated with alcohol, rendered unconscious and then essentially run trains on, to use the colloquial term, gang raped. She said this happened to her. Shes not saying Michael Avenatti did it shes not saying that Brett Kavanaugh did it. But michael, you have said that shes got corroborating witnesses, that these included boys that were high school and college boys. Do you have names of those witnesses that you are now submitting to the fbi . Well, we have names of a number of the witnesses, and ive spoken to a number of the witnesses and we are anxious to submit those names to the fbi. Joy, i want to be clear. I urge everyone thats watching your show and everyone in america that is interested in this issue, this confirmation, to go and actually read the threepage declaration that my client signed under penalty of perjury, because its not just limited to this allegation of women being put through train rapes, et cetera. Its a broad theres a broad basis of facts and evidence that are set forth relating to aggressive conduct by Brett Kavanaugh when he was under the influence of alcohol towards women. And, joy, were not alone. There are numerous media reports, numerous witnesses, that have attested to witnessing the same thing. So when you have senators on the Judiciary Committee that want to mock me, want to mock my client and talk about how absurd this is, they need to go back and look at the article from the Washington Post in the 1990s that described this environment at many of these prep schools. They need to look at the article in the new yorker. They need to look at the article in slate magazine, all of which include numerous witnesses that support a version of events very similar to my client. And now let me say this. If the fbi investigation is not curtailed by the white house or others, if they are permitted to do their job as they do every day in this country, Brett Kavanaugh will not survive this process. He will not. If they are permitted to interview witnesses that know of these allegations, there is no way that Brett Kavanaugh will be placed on the u. S. Supreme court, nor should he. Im going to bring a panel in a second but i have two quick questions for you before i bring the panel in. Question number one, beth wilkinson, judge kavanaughs lawyer, has said she said on cnn, she denied the allegations that your client has made against Brett Kavanaugh, and she said that your client could have just gone directly to the police with these allegations and still could. Did these alleged crimes take place in Montgomery County, and will your client attempt to file a Police Report about them now . She may very well pursue criminal charges against the individuals involved, joy. I think as my clients story is told my by client here shortly, america is going to learn the details surrounding what happened and exactly what she did at the time. There are witnesses that she confided in contemporaneous with what transpired. So were talking about decades ago. And confided in them about what transpired. And i think that goes to support her credibility. Let me say this about miss wilkinson and her client, Brett Kavanaugh. I have offered that if miss wilkinson would like to cross examine my client for eight hours under oath in a videotaped deposition, im more than happy to make her available, provided that shell grant me the same opportunity with her client, Brett Kavanaugh. In fact ill take half the time, joy. Ill take four hours with Brett Kavanaugh. Brett kavanaugh is a liar. He is not credible. In fact if you look at the fox news interview, you look at his testimony before the committee, its absolutely absurd, especially in light of the entries in the yearbook from his high school days. We all went to high school. We all know what that looked like. We all or many of us know what the prep School Environment looked like in the washington, d. C. , area, as evidenced by a number of these articles. Brett kavanaugh is lying to the committee, hes lying to the American People, and its just not believable. Hes lied about a number of things quite honestly that he didnt need to lie about. Michael, im going to ask you to stay and im going to bring in my panel. Jill winebanks, maya wiley, mimi rocah and karine jeanpierre. We have a power panel this morning. I want to throw it open to the table here. Any responses to what the Julie Swetnick allegations and what they might do, how they might play, im start with you, mimi, and how they might play into this fbi investigation. Id like to start with a question to michael if i could, because i think its important to clarify something. Michael, youre a great lawyer and im sure this affidavit is worded very carefully. Theres a statement in there that ive heard some people debating. She says, i think its paragraph 13, in approximately 1982 i became the victim of one of these gang or train rapes where mark judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present. Now, i was with you on tv the other day and you clarified that you were saying that they actually participated in that gang rape, i believe, but that isnt no. No . Okay. Then i misunderstood you so i want to clarify. No, thats not what ive said and ive been asked a number of questions about this paragraph 13. You know, i wish people would concentrate on many of the other paragraphs in the declaration, because they are equally damning to Brett Kavanaugh. And those other paragraphs in and of themself if true would render him unable to be confirmed for the u. S. Supreme court. I just think its important to clarify this. This is a serious allegation and a lot of people have asked about it. Im going to answer it as ive answered it the last four days. There are facts that suggest to her that he was involved. There are facts that suggest to her that he was not involved. This is not as clear cut as many might hope. People might say why is that or how is that . Because she was under the influence of alcohol and or drugs involuntarily and she does not know with great certainty exactly what happened. Thats why these girls were able to be taken advantage of by these boys at these parties. That was the m. O. That was the process. Thats how they went about taking advantage of these girls. But this idea that this declaration is not to be believed, we dont know whether its to be believed. Its been submitted under penalty of perjury and we want these allegations tested appropriately pursuant to a proper fbi investigation. Just to be clear, i was certainly not saying that i dont believe it and i just want a clarification and your explanation makes a lot of sense to me actually. You know what, i want to go to maya on a question about this. The Montgomery CountyDistrict Attorney has indicated an openness to hear a criminal complaint related to these crimes. I dont think theres a statute of limitations on rape, right . Theres no statute of limitations on felony rape or Sexual Assault. So in theory if miss swetnick or if anyone who believes that crimes were committed against them in Montgomery County were to go forward, we just saw bill cosby was convicted and sentenced to 3 to 10 years for events that took place years earlier. So in theory this could result in criminal charges . Sure. Any person who has an allegation that someone has sexually assaulted, attempted rape or raped them has the ability to go and file a criminal complaint and thats true. If these events happened in maryland, which they did obviously in this case, obviously that is an option open to them. I think this is critically important to distinguish between what the senate Judiciary Committee is supposed to be doing. Part of whats been so problematic about the hearing process is that and this also goes directly to mr. Avenattis point. The question is how credible is he and is there reason to be concerned, not whether theres evidence that would convict him of a crime, because it is about whether to seat him in a Supreme Court seat. So the fact that this declaration that theres a witness who says actually the conduct and behavior that he is denying is actually conduct and behavior that i myself witnessed is relevant, and i think mr. Avenatti is absolutely right to draw attention to that point. The question i have because its problematic to me that the committee has been treating it this way is its almost like if you cant say you actually saw him attack someone, it is not sufficient to make us question whether he should be a Supreme Court justice. Thats a problem. Thats just wrong. Thats why my question for mr. Avenatti is, are any of the witnesses able to corroborate that any physically violent behavior towards a woman, because although i believe it should be sufficient to actually corroborate the kind of behavior youre talking about, it seems to me that the problem with the politics here is that the committee is looking for more direct evidence so im just curious about the witness list in that regard. Yes. My client and other witnesses can state unequivocally that they saw Brett Kavanaugh engage in inappropriate physical contact, groping, grabbing, other aggressive sexual behavior towards women personally. They will be able to attest to that. I think its laid out in the declaration. As well as conduct and this is part of my frustration, because everybody just wants to go to paragraph 13 and everybody wants to avoid the paragraphs above paragraph 13. Everybody wants to focus on the train rape allegation, as if thats the only allegation in the entire declaration that matters. Lets also back up and remember this. Lets remember 1991. 1991 was about an allegation by anita hill of sexual harassment, and the chief focus in that hearing was the allegation of a pubic hair on a coke can and a comment by then judge thomas. That was the focus as to whether he should be put on the court for making a comment generally about a pubic hair on a coke can. Now fast forward to this point in time in our history. At the height of the me too movement. Were talking about something far more important or far more extensive than a pubic hair on a coke can. Were talking about dr. Fords testimony, were talking about miss ramirez allegation, were talking about my clients allegations, were talking about other allegations of physical inappropriate sexual contact by judge kavanaugh, which should render him unable and not able to be confirmed on the u. S. Supreme court. All of these women are not making it up. They all didnt just meet at the local starbucks and have a secret meeting and conspire to derail this nomination. Theyre not all lying while the choir boy, Brett Kavanaugh, is telling the truth. Its just not possible. Real quickly before i bring in my other panelist, michael, Chuck Grassley made a lot of hay about the fact that they didnt need to have an fbi investigation because the senate had its own investigators. Did those investigators contact you, and did you deem, if you did have interactions with them, that to be an aggressive potentially thorough investigation in and of itself . We asked for an fbi investigation. We asked for an opportunity to take a polygraph exam, if Brett Kavanaugh would take one. We asked for mark judge to be subpoenaed. None of thataddressed. They refused to get back to us for days. They blew us all all day monday, all day tuesday and ultimately they said after we released the declaration, well, wed like her to meet with two investigators from the committee. Now, as you know, dr. Ford declined that and we declined it. The reason is because these investigators in our view were part of the majority leadership. Theyre not unbiased. And we want this investigation done by professionals. We want it done by members of the fbi. And in my experience, and im sure others on the panel will support me on this, when individuals are fabricating stories, they dont readily admit or welcome fbi agents to sit down and speak with them about those allegations because, of course, lying to an fbi agent is a very serious offense and its punishable by imprisonment. I want to go to Jill Winebanks on that very point. You had the Senate Judiciary chairman, Chuck Grassley, insisting that an investigation by the majoritys investigators that was not even participated in by the democrats, so the 11 Senate Republicans had their own investigation they said they were doing that they said was sufficient to determine these claims, but the majority were already on board to confirm kavanaugh. So is that normal . I mean it didnt seem normal in the moment, but was it normal . No, it isnt normal and it isnt fair. They are clearly demonstrating they had no interest in the truth. This was never a search for truth. If it was, they would have allowed other witnesses to testify. They would have allowed the fbi to investigate. They would not have set a fiveminute limit on questions, which was absurd. You cannot develop evidence in a fiveminute segment of questions. They would have had the courage to do the questioning themselves and not use the show of having a woman brought in who was a sex crime prosecutor to do the questioning. Who they yanked as soon as she started to ask all she did is asked the question that could have led to something really interesting about the july 1st where all the people that dr. Blasey ford said were at the scene of the crime, all of a sudden she was silenced. This is not a search for truth. And they have already announced exactly what they are expecting the outcome to be. Were going to push this through. Hes going to be confirmed. We need to hear the facts. Let them confirm one way or the other whos telling the truth. Lets look at ramirez. Lets look at swetnick. We need to hear all of the witnesses. His College Roommate said he was often drunk. We need to look at his history of drinking and whether his outburst on the day of the hearing thursday shows that he is still a mean alcoholic because there was nothing judicial about his behavior on