Says her client wants an fbi investigation before she will testify about her accusation in public, before the Senate Judiciary committee. That hearing, as you know, is scheduled to take place on monday. We have veterans of the fbi and Justice Departments standing by to weigh in on this, but first, here is a part of the letter sent by fords attorney to Judiciary Committee chair Chuck Grassley of iowa, just tonight. In it, it says, in the 36 hours since her name became public, dr. Ford has received a stunning amount of support from her community and from fellow citizens across our country. At the same time, however, her worst fears have materialized. Shes been the target of vicious harassment and even death threats. As a result of these kinds of threats, her family was forced to relocate out of their home. Her email has been backed and she has been impersonated online. The attorney goes on to write, while dr. Fords life was being turned upsidedown, you and your staff scheduled a public hearing for her to testify at the same table as judge kavanaugh in front of two dozen u. S. Senators on National Television to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident. The hearing was scheduled for six short days from today and would include interrogation by senators who appear to have made up their minds that she is, quote, mistaken and mixed up. Dr. Ford wants to cooperate with the committee and with Law Enforcement officials. As the Judiciary Committee has recognized and done before, an fbi investigation of the incident should be the first step in addressing her allegations. That reference, by the way, to mixed up, is a direct quote from senator orrin hatch. Do you think that any of these claims are legitimate . No, i dont. I think this woman, whoever she is, is mixed up. And, but i cant speak for her. All i can say is, no, i dont. I know the judge very, very well. I know how honest he is. Earlier tonight, one of fords attorneys was interviewed on cnn. What were seeing is there should be an investigation because thats the right thing to do. If theres not an investigation, would she appear on monday . She is prepared to cooperate with the committee and with any Law Enforcement investigation. And that has been her position and it continues to be her position. So she will cooperate with the committee in whatever form that takes and it remains to be seen. We have to talk with senator grassleys office and the other Committee Members to determine what form that will take. Its premature to talk about a hearing on monday, and i think people understand that because she has been dealing with the threats, the harassment, and the safety of her family. And thats what shes been focused on for the last two days and will continue to be focused on that. If they care about doing the right thing here, and treating this seriously as they have said, then they will do the right thing and they will properly investigate this and she will work with them in that investigation and also to share her story with the committee. However that happens. Senator Dianne Feinstein who is the top democrat on the committee issued a statement that reads in part, i agree with her 100 that the rushed process to hold a hearing on monday has been unfair and is reminiscent of the treatment of anita hill. I also agree that we need the facts before senators, not staff or lawyers, speak to witnesses. We should honor dr. Blasey fords wishes and delay this hearing. A proper investigation must be completed. Witnesses interviewed. Evidence reviewed and all sides spoken to. Only then should the chairman set a hearing date. But within the past hour, the chairman of that committee, Chuck Grassley of iowa, issued this statement. We have offered dr. Ford the opportunity to share her story with the committee as her attorneys said yesterday she was willing to do. We offered her a public or a private hearing as well as staffled interviews, whichever makes her most comfortable. The invitation for monday still stands. Grassley goes on to say this, dr. Fords testimony would reflect her person knowledge and memory of events. Nothing the fbi or any other investigator does would have any bearing on what dr. Ford tells the committee so there is no reason for any further delay. Earlier this evening, before we learned of Christine Blasey fords request for an fbi investigation, senator Lindsey Graham indicated there would be no delay in confirming judge kavanaugh. If she does not want to come monday, publicly or privately, were going to move on and vote wednesday. And today, President Trump offered up his thoughts on the need for an fbi investigation before any new hearing, while also reaffirming his support and sympathy for this nominee. Ask the fbi to open its file . How important i dont think the fbi really should be involved because they dont want to be involved. If they wanted to be, i would certainly do that, but as you know, they say this is not really their thing. Now, they have done, supposedly, six background checks over the years as judge kavanaugh has gone beautifully up a ladder. Hes an incredible individual. Great intellect. Great judge. Impeccable history in every way. In every way. I feel so badly for him that hes going through this. To be honest with you. I feel so badly for him. This is not a man that deserves this. On that note, lets bring in our leadoff panel on a tuesday night. Philip rucker, White House Bureau chief for the Washington Post. Ashley parker, White House Reporter for the Washington Post. Both are recent Pulitzer Prize winners for their work. Also back with us is maya wiley, former assistant u. S. Attorney for the Southern District of new york. Currently a professor at the news school here in new york. And counselor, id like to begin with you because this is chiefly a legal, yes, a political matter. As apolitically as you can, could you make a case for not investigating . Would you put a witness on the stand absent the underpinning facts . I cant make any neutral legal argument for not investigating serious allegations of an attempted rape. I mean, particularly for someone whos facing the possibility of being in one of the nations most powerful positions. Let me tell you why, just to be clear. It doesnt matter whether or not you believe based on the news reports that you heard if youre a senator on the Judiciary Committee who you believe, Brett Kavanaugh or professor ford. What matters is you recognize you have two people, each of whom have very different accounting of what happened, and that is smart of the reason why you have fbi background checks for significant and important positions in federal government. The only way you even know what questions to ask, someone whos going to come forward and tell you a story of their experience of an incident, is because you have had an investigation by trained investigators who go and talk to everyone including people who may be able to identify other people who are witnesses who may have been at the party. Who may be able to identify which party it was. Who might be able to shed greater light. If you are senator collins, for example, who says, look, if brett, judge kavanaugh, if Brett Kavanaugh has lied, thats the end of this for me. How will you know . You already know what they each say. The only way you will know is if you get investigators to go and get additional evidence including the fact that you have her therapist who from 2012 has said, yes, she told me basically the same story before judge kavanaugh was up for Supreme Court nomination. Thats something that merits investigation. So devils advocate, when grassley says no amount of fbi investigation is going to change the story you have to tell this committee, why cant you come and do it on monday . Your response . My response is you cant figure out which questions you should ask the witness. Can you imagine having a trial, brian, where a lawyer is told just go ahead and let the witness talk, even though you dont know anything about what the witness can say and, therefore, you cant come back and cross examine the witness. If youre actually the senator who wants to say im not sure i believe her, then dont you want to get all the information you possibly can that would enable you to ask the right questions . The same is true for those who believe her and have questions for the judge. For judge kavanaugh. Which is you have to know what youre going to ask. You never base a witness testimony only on the witness, him or herself. You always have additional information. Thats always the way its done and thats why you have a background process and if you have new information that comes forward, you want to get additional background. Ashley parker, two questions to start you off. Is there a plan b in the west wing, and how tied is the president to this nominee . So right now, everyone inside the white house and a number of republicans on capitol hill tell us that there is not really an official plan b and they are truly not talking about thinking of pulling judge kavanaughs nomination right now. Thats certainly not the case. I will say, however, that people in the president s orbit privately concede that if at any point this looks like it is politically not expedient for President Trump, that it is really going to go against his selfinterest, that the president is more than willing to sort of cut Brett Kavanaugh loose and go with someone else. You have to remember that this is a president who often demands extreme loyalty but doesnt return it in kind. Especially as someone like judge kavanaugh, he doesnt have a deep sense of loyalty to him. He doesnt have a deeper abiding personal relationship. This was someone who has pushed on him by white House Counsel don mcgahn. When you talk about a plan b, remember, there is that list of other judges who they thought who conservatives thought would be a good choice for the Supreme Court. And so the president does stand ready if he thinks he could get someone else in who would be, you know, heralded by the conservative base. Hes more than happy to replace justice kavanaugh, judge kavanaugh, with that person although, again, right now thats not really being discussed in any real way. Phil rucker, a question absent snark. The question is, which optic is worse . The hearing going on on monday and on the republican side, 11 exclusively white males conducting the questioning. Or the hearing not going as planned on monday and the vote goes through anyway and her story, her direct testimony, doesnt get heard because she has requested an investigation. Brian, both options are just so treacherous for the Republican Party. Remember, were only seven weeks away from the midterm elections where the polling indicates that democrats have a big advantage in momentum and enthusiasm and that could get even worse for the republicans if theres a huge sort of moment that angers, especially women voters in the country at that hearing on monday. You played in the opening of the show the clip from senator orrin hatch trying to discredit this accuser without even saying her name. Dr. Ford. Hes not met dr. Ford. Hes not heard her story other than reading the news reports and hes already concluded that she must be mixed up and that her allegations are not true. If you see that in that hearing live from all 11 of those republican male senators, that could be a real political problem for the Republican Party which already is struggling to hold on in some of these suburban house districts that are going to decide which party ends up winning control of the house of representatives. Maya, to your point earlier, we know what we know so far, and there are limits on that, but we believe theres only one other witness. This gentleman named mark judge who was in the room, its alleged, during the alleged incident. He wrote the committee today and says in part, i have no memory of the alleged incident. Brett kavanaugh and i were friends in high school but i do not recall the party described in dr. Fords letter. I never saw brett act in the manner dr. Ford describes. I have no more information to offer the committee, and i do not wish to speak publicly regarding the incidents described in dr. Fords letter. Again, apolitically, question to you, do you subpoena his testimony . Do you take no for an answer . You definitely subpoena his testimony because hes an identified witness. And you definitely want him to come and speak on the record under oath and say that he does not remember. And if he doesnt remember, why is he concerned about talking about it . Because theres nothing to talk about from his perspective. So its a bit perplexing to hear that you dont remember and you dont want to talk about it. You just said you had nothing to talk about. So the only conclusion to draw is that theres some reason he doesnt want to speak on the record under oath and i think that is a big problem not just for him, but for judge kavanaugh because if his corroborating witness is essentially saying i dont remember and i wont say i dont remember, that doesnt help him. Right . And i think if youre on the senate side, i actually want to go back to a point that ashley made, at the end of the day, the issue isnt whether or not theres a vacancy that a sitting president can fill, and i have questions about whether from a political standpoint and from a constitutional standpoint you should let a sitting president whos under federal investigation actually appoint a Supreme Court justice that may rule on that. But put that aside, if the only issue here is whether or not we allow the time it takes to make sure that one of the most powerful government positions in the country is sufficiently vetted, is sufficiently that no stone goes unturned, as to the character of someone who will have tremendous power and its really important to me to remind everyone that rape and attempted rape is actually a crime of power, not of sex. Its an abuse of power. Think about that when were talking about the highest most powerful judicial position in the land. Even one that has the ability to say to a sitting president or sitting elected officials whether or not they have the power to act on something. You definitely want to make sure you have someone with the fullest integrity. This is not a criminal trial. This is a this is a process of understanding the character as well as the competence and intelligence of the person youre going to put on the bench. This requires a full vet. So, ashley, to your other point that there is plan a and plan a so far, it appears based on reporting that judge kavanaugh was in the white house for a long day again today and over in the executive office building, the term of art is murder boards. There was something of a murder board, kind of a mock hearing to throw at him any and all uncomfortable questions they could think of to prepare him for monday. There sure was. And to the white houses credit, our understanding is that theyre also doing what they should do which is their due diligence. They understand that hes made very clear he wants to fight this and their Natural Inclination as always as led by this president is to fight, is to double down, but before theyre going to back him. You notice they made him put a lot of the stuff in his own words and the president has been sort of muted in his defense of judge kavanaugh. But they want to make sure that theres nothing else about his dating history, his interactions with women, anything else that happened in high school, anything else that happened going forward, for their own sake, for their own protection, and then, of course, as you said, as murder boards to make sure that if and when there is that public testimony, that public hearing, that he is prepared because as they say at the end of the day, a lot of people in the white house believe and it may shape up to be this way that its going to be a question of credibility. Its going to be he said she said and want to make sure hes prepared to present his best possible defense in public. Phil, just when i thought you and ashley could not work harder or more hours per day, along comes this story. I know youve been working it. So i ask, if not this nominee, then who, and when . Because were down, as you mentioned, 49 days away from the midterms. Yeah, its a good question, brian. I think certainly, if kavanaughs nomination is pulled, if he were to withdraw, the president , the white house, would immediately turn to that list that was made public in the campaign and expanded early on in the presidency for replacement. There were a few judges who were on the short list behind kavanaugh that would get consideration. But i think the key player in all of this is probably going to end up being Senate Majority leader mitch mcconnell. Kavanaugh was not mcconnells first choice for trumps pick, but trump went ahead and nominated kavanaugh, anyhow. Mcconnell got behind the nomination and has been pushing it through. I think if this nomination were to fail, mcconnell would seize an opportunity to step in and say let me take control of this process, this is all about senate votes. Its about can you get the 50 plus 1 majority in the United States senate to back a nominee . And mcconnell knows his members much better than the white house does. Hes good evening to know who senator collins, senator murkowski, senator flake, who theyre going to support. And i think mcconnell is going to try to make the power play to help drive this process. In terms of the timing, the midterms are coming up. Its very difficult to see how theyd be able to get through an entire vetting and nomination process to vote before the midterm elections and then that raises the question of whether they would do this all in the lame duck session which would be in late november and in december before the new senate is sworn in january. All this was just today. What a day its been yet again. Our great thanks to our