Christine blasey ford has not yet been contacted by investigators. This comes after fords attorneys told the New York Times they have not heard from the fbi despite repeated efforts to speak to them. All of this happening as the white house is placing the blame on lawmakers for any limits on the scope of the federal Background Investigation. They have free rain. Theyll do whatever they have to do. Whatever it is they do. The white house is not micro managing this process. This is the senate is dictating the terms. For more, lets bring in nbcs jeff bennett at the white house. Jeff, okay. So its been ever moving here. Question being whos on the list that we know about . And who is not on the list . Great to see you, richard. There are reports that the fbi spoke with Deborah Ramirez today in the investigation into Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Nbc has not yet independently confirmed that. But we have confirmed that the fbi has not yet contacted dr. Christine blasey ford. It doesnt mean that they wont. But they havent yet. Meanwhile, President Trump and senior white house officials are pushing back against our reporting that the white house has laid down ground rules for this new fbi Background Investigation into the Sexual Assault and misconduct allegations leveled against Brett Kavanaugh. Democrats have said a limited investigation could taint kavanaugh and the confirmation process, criticism about which President Trump is saying in a tweet, wow, just starting to hear the democrats who are only thinking of obstruct and delay are starting to put ott wout thd that the time and scope of the fbi looking into judge kavanaugh is not enough. Hello. For them it will never be enough. Stay tuned and watch. After our story broke, the president told me on the White House South Lawn that the fbi should have free reign to do whatever they have to do. He sent out a tweet late last night saying the same thing. But two high level sources tell our colleague that his comments and his tweet have not changed the limits imposed by the White House Counsels Office on the fbi investigation. The fbi has received, were told, no new instructions from the white house about how to proceed with this weeklong investigation. N white house Officials Say they are not micro managing the process. That may be true. But theyre certainly in charge of it. Because this is not an fbi criminal investigation and instead an fbi Background Investigation, the white house in calling for the probe sets the parameters. Thats how this process works. The white house has steered Julie Swetnick and kavanaughs alcohol use may be offlimits. You can understand why there are concerns that limiting the investigation could play a role in determining what if anything the fbi finds. What do we know about the would you say counsel and his role in all of this, if any . As the white House Counsel, he and his team of advisors are in charge of setting the parameters and telling the fbi effect who they can and cannot inview. When you hear white house receiv Officials Say its up to the senate and fbi, they say its really up to don mcgann and his team to lay the ground rules for any fbi Background Investigation. In in case, the reopen the investigation into Brett Kavanaugh, richard. Wrap up on the latest on what nbc can report at this hour in terms who have is on the list and who is not or spoken to or not. Jeff, thank you so much there at the white house for us. Lets bring in New York TimesCongressional Correspondent cheryl gates, former Senate Judiciary committee staffer, loo he issa grav lisa graves and ets Risk Management operator and frank faglusi. He is also an msnbc contributor and Nbc News National Security analyst. The longest title we got for you today here. Frank, kick us off, if you will. We know from jeff, right, who is contacted in terms of what we know right now. Who has not been. What do you take from who is on the list that we know of at the moment . So i think this is very important to talk about. Theres every indication tonight that there are tight handcuffs being placed on the fbi. If this were going to be a broad, deep inquiry into kavanaugh, we would already be seeing multiple people being interviewed. You would already be hearing reports of that. The fbi would be surging hundreds of agents in various field offices to tear through records, photographs, dorm records, payroll records at a safeway, finding the house in suburban maryland, documenting the construction of the house. We hear none of that happening. En that and that is a bad sign. The president says the fbi has free reign that is he is not being truthful. Despite the fact that president is pointing his finger at the senate, the direction to the fbis coming directly from the white house and there is not even evidence yet tonight as you are reporting that dr. Ford is even on the list to be interviewed. Cheryl, reflect on what frank said there. And what are your sources telling you in terms of who is in the discussion about who will be contacted . Who will be on the list or not . So what our reporting shows is that senator Mitch Mcconnell, the republican leader gave don mcgann the white House Counsel a list of four people to be interviewed. Those four people are Deborah Ramirez who had accused judge kavanaugh of exposing had him is environmental to her when they were freshmen at yale, mark judge who is the good friend of judge kavanaugh who Christine Blasey ford says was in the room when she was assaulted. P. J. Smith, another friend of judge kavanaugh and leeland kaiser, a friend of Christine Blasey ford who christine says was at the party. So thats what we know. The fbi presumably is working today to interview those people. I think there are very Big Questions about what will happen if those people raise names or incidents that ought to be further explored. How much will the fbi have how much leeway will the fbi have in pursuing other leads . We know, for instance, that Julie Swetnick who made allegations that judge kavanaugh was involved in sexual misdeeds, gang rape in high school, is not someone to be interviewed but mark judge supposedly is to be interviewed about Julie Swetnick and about her claims. I guess its big question is how wide will this investigation spread . And one thing that i would note is that the white house is characterizing thises characterizing this as a background check. That is different from a criminal investigation. So we also have expectations that are set differently for a background check. John flannery, make those distinctions between background check, criminal investigation as was just noted by cheryl. I conducted an investigation into whether the fbi withheld information from the Senate Labor Committee and the confirmation hearings of ray monld i dont kn raymond donovan. What they withheld in the investigation under the direction of the white house, reagans white house, it appeared they withheld the fact that there was a tape from my old office, a wiretap, showing he was mobbed up. En that was withheld from the committee and therefore compromised the ability of the senators on the committee to advise and consent to the nomination. Similarly here. No Background Investigation that was serious as it was regulated by white House Counsel mcgann before the hearing and then we sat on a railroad as we tried to exclude any pause that would allow members of the committee, the Judiciary Committee, to look at the thousands and thousands of documents. And then they beef about the fact that a senator on the committee respected an individuals confidentiality and then when it came out they attacked her for not revealing it sooner. So from the Background Investigation is at the direction of the white house which is a serious flaw. And the investigation should be whether or not this nominee assaulted women sexually including but perhaps not limited to dr. Ford. And they should follow a lead as best they could in the week that they had and they could assign what agents that they needed to get it all done right. Lisa graves, as we look at the process moving forward, we just getting word in that senator Dianne Feinstein who is Ranking Member on the Senate Judiciary committee has just sent this letter here to don mcgann. Just within well, what we know in the last five or ten minutes. And in that letter, she is requesting certain pieces of information. Specifically she is saying here that chairman grass sley is requesting a supplemental Background Investigation with the nomination of judge kavanaugh to be an associate justice of the Supreme Court. Given the seriousness of the allegations before the senate, i am writing to questirequest to e the committee with a copy of the written directive sent from the white house to the fbi. If the fbi requests any expansion beyond the initial directive, please provide the names of any additional witnesses or evidence. So this being your former beat here, lisa, what do you make of the Ranking Member here, senator Dianne Feinstein putting this out on twitter and saying she is reaching out to these two very influential individuals . I think it is proprly appropriate for senator feinstein to make that request and i think that request should be honored. You have an extraordinary situation in the colloquy between the senators on the Judiciary Committee on friday it was clear that this was a time bound supplemental investigation but zinld to lodesigned to look into the credible witnesses, the credible allegations against Brett Kavanaugh. En that would include all three women in my opinion. You have the sworn statement of jul jul Julie Swetnick and dr. Fords testimony. That is not enough. All of that should be included along with any witnesses that they suggest and any witness thats really come up as part of just looking into it. It shouldnt be limited by don mcgann. I think its highly irregular in many ways for this to be limited in any way in terms cof which witnesses can be spoken to. Theyve been trying to orchestrate the deep sixing of the truth. What the fbi does and what it does well is do an investigation where it follows every lead that needs to be followed. And thats what needs to be thats what needs to happen here just as james comey wrote today in the washington post. Thats the job of the fbi. And if anyone is obstructing it, that should be stopped. And why dont i read a little bit of what james comey did say in an oped in the New York Times. In part, once they start interviewing, every witness knows the consequences. Of course, the bureau wont have subpoena power but most people will speak to them, refusal to do so is its own kind of statement. Frank put that together with james comey and what he just said. Im talking about Dianne Feinsteins letter there to don mcgann and ray as well. Yeah, i think we need transparency here. I think the American Public and the Judiciary Committee needs to know exactly what the directives were from the white house to the fbi. What handcuffs have been put on . Why are they not being allowed to do what they need to do . And if the fbi comes in and says we want to interview additional people and additional leads, the following accusers have come in, survivors have come into our field offices and reported information. We would like to take the statements. We need to hear that and the senate needs to know that. And, cheryl, reflect please again. Dianne feinstein, the Ranking Member here, she will will show the letter again. Nicholas fanned tweeting it this out. This coming from the Ranking Member. Is this about transparency what frank is saying . It is. Democrats are very upset that they were cut out of the discussions that led to the white house directive. I was done only by republicans on the Judiciary Committee. I talked yesterday to senator dick bloomenthal. He said we need to know the scope of. This he indicated that the democrats were going to be getting together to try to draft some response. I gather that this is the response from senator feinstein, the top democrat on the committee. But democrats feel like they have a stake in this and, you know, they deserve to know too. All right. Cheryl, thank you so much for stopping by on a sunday p lisa, john and frank, well see you shortly. Thank you for being here too. Coming up, how the kavanaughford hearing impacted women and Sexual Assault victims across the country as they brought their own stories forward in an unprecedented way after this. After this how do you top mac cheese . Start with 100 clean ingredients. Like vermont white cheddar. Then. Add bacon, bbq chicken, or baja blend. Catering and delivery now available. Panera. Food as it should be. Dont forget that the past can speak to the future. Im going to be your substitute teacher. Dont assume the substitute teacher has nothing to offer. Same goes for a neighborhood. Dont forget that friendships last longer than any broadway run. Mr. President. laughing dont settle for your first draft. Or your 10th draft. You get to create the room where it happens. Just dont think you have to do it alone. The powerful backing of american express. Dont live life without it. Im ready to crush ap english. Im ready to do what no one on my block has done before. Forget that. What no one in the world has done before. All i need access, tools, connections. Highspeed connections. Is the world ready for me . Through internet essentials, comcast has connected more than sixmillion lowincome people to lowcost, highspeed internet at home. Im trying to do some homework here. So theyre ready for anything. Youre allowing somebody to sit in the Supreme Court. Youre telling all people in america that they dont matter. They should keep it to themselves. If they told the truth, theyre just going to help that man take power anyway. Thats awhat youre telg all of these women. Look at me when i talk to you. Youre telling me that my assault doesnt matter. What happened to me doesnt matter. Perhaps the most played interaction after the testimony from Brett Kavanaugh on the hill this past week. Two Sexual Assault survivors there con fronting senator jeff flake inside an elevator. Its a scene thats becoming more and more familiar unfortunately. Survivors speaking out about their individual stories. Thats the important part. And using the experiences to bring about change from workplaces across the country to the highest court. A new vice on hbo documentary is exploring the issue of consent. What it means in the me too era. The producer is uche lisually b the camera but no the this time. She decided to go public with her own story. I remember when i was about 18 and that was the there was a guy that is a friend of mine who i just thought was the most beautiful person in the world. And we had gone out one night. We were drinking a lot. And it wasnt until i kind of turned around and saw him naked and he started taking my clothes off and pushing my head down that i realizeded that i really not a tiny part of me wanteded to do that. Its only really now that this moment of cultural reckonning has come about that i think so many of us are thinking about our own experiences and our own sexual encounters. She joins us now. When you watch that, it takes you back. Why did you decide that this was the right time . And now that you have told your story, what is your reflection on having told it . Yeah. I mean its been a pretty tumultuous year, i think you would agree, over the last 12 months or so since the Harvey Weinstein allegations started coming out. This is a documentary that weve been working on for the last few months. It seemed like a pretty opportunity time to talk about this. We asked women to come in and share the intimate moments. It only felt fair to declare my own story up front, declare my own personal biases, of course. And to try and move foefrd arwa talk about how sexual con sent plays out in our lives and beyond what is happening in hollywood. It was about the headlines, it was about transparency and about your own story. All of those together in terms of why decide up front i want to say that ive also gone through this experience. Sure. Yeah. I felt like it was i needed to say it. I also felt like i wanted to move on from that. And still apply my journalistic credentials and explore sexual con su consent and why there is misunderstanding around that topic. Were going to get to that. You have moved on then . Have i moved on . You said you wa