Trump, Japan's Abe to hold summit in New York City next week

President Trump welcomes Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to the White House in Washington, June 7, 2018.  (Associated Press)

A summit between President Trump and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe will take place next week in New York City, a spokesman for Japan’s government said Friday.

The meeting next Wednesday will be on the sidelines of the 73^rd United Nations General Assembly, Reuters reported.

The two leaders will dine together ahead of the summit, a Japanese government official said. The summit will mark the eight meeting between Trump and Abe.
The two leaders are likely to discuss North Korea’s denuclearization as well as trade issues. Japan has long sought to normalize diplomatic relations with North Korea, which have been strained since the abduction of Japanese citizens in the 1970s and 1980s.
On Thursday, Abe was reelected to a third term as leader of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party in Japan, paving the way for him to serve as prime minister for up to three more years.

America, don't be like California – misery loves company

Once again, California has the highest poverty rate in America. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent report, the Golden State’s Supplemental Poverty Measure averaged 19 percent between 2015 and 2017.

Nationwide, poverty dropped in 2017 from 14.7 percent to 14.1 percent, but California’s rate was proportionately 35 percent higher than the national average.

In spite of (or perhaps to divert attention from) its high poverty rate, California’s left-wing political class continues its unrelenting sermonizing to the rest of us.
Big drivers of California’s poverty are: costly rents (second-highest in the nation after Hawaii); expensive electricity (highest in the lower 48 states outside of New England); heavily taxed and high-priced gasoline (second-highest after Hawaii); and high state taxes, combined with heavy housing and environmental regulations.
Some California politicians justify high taxes by pointing to the state’s generous welfare benefits, including a vigorous expansion of Medicaid.
However, the Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure, in use since 2009, considers a wider array of government assistance than does the old Official Poverty Measure, which doesn’t even look at cost-of-living differences between the states.
For a path out of poverty, a job beats welfare every time. But in high-cost California, having a job and receiving government assistance isn’t enough to lift millions of residents out of poverty.
California wasn’t always a high-cost state. But over time its dominant Malthusian, anti-people philosophy made housing hard to build, while government officials refused to invest adequately in new roads or water infrastructure.
Meanwhile, California’s wealthy elites, who largely live close to the temperate Pacific coast, are pushing energy policies that threaten even higher costs for electricity and commuting.
The California Legislature passed a bill signed into law by Democratic Gov. Jerry Brown that lays the groundwork for the state getting 100 percent of its power from renewable energy by 2045.
In the same legislative session, a Democratic lawmaker proposed a law that would ban the sales of new gasoline-powered cars by 2040. It didn’t get a hearing.
In late August, news out of San Diego highlighted a 28.5 percent jump in electricity rates – with one homeowner complaining about a $900 electric bill to cool his 1,379-square-foot house only a mile from the ocean.
Misery loves company and California wants to share its misery nationwide.
Gov. Brown calls the Trump administration’s pro-energy policies “insane” and bordering “on criminality.” Brown has urged other states to follow California’s example.
Meanwhile, Tom Steyer, the billionaire California environmentalist who made his money the old-fashioned way – on coal, oil and natural gas – now reportedly harbors ambitions of replacing President Trump in the White House as he spends millions of dollars to gather meaningless signatures on impeachment petitions.
Steyer’s latest project: resisting Trump’s energy policies in the states through ballot initiatives or by convincing unelected regulators to copy California ruinous renewable energy gambit.
If California is America’s Yin, Texas is its Yang.
Where California has high taxes, including the nation’s highest marginal income tax rate, Texas has low taxes, with no income tax at all.
Where California has heavily-regulated electricity markets with draconian mandates for solar and wind energy, Texas has free markets with electricity selling at a little more than half of California’s prices (while producing five times as much wind power to boot).
And where California’s endless environmental delays halt the building of homes, roads, and new reservoirs, Texas welcomes construction.
The divergent policies in America’s two most populous states have consequences.
In 2017, the U.S. Census Bureau calculated that, of America’s four major demographic groups – non-Hispanic whites, blacks, Asian-Americans and Hispanics – the lowest poverty is among the white and Asian-American categories.
The Census Bureau estimated that 52.4 percent of California’s population last year was non-Hispanic white or Asian-American. In Texas, those two groups comprised 47 percent of the state’s residents. Yet California’s three-year poverty rate of 19 percent was almost a third higher than Texas’ 14.7 percent.
The Lone Star State has its own challenges. Texas Governor Greg Abbott, a Republican running for a second term this year, has frequently warned of the danger of Texas “being California-ized” through city level “bag bans, fracking bans, (and) tree cutting bans (that form) a patchwork quilt of bans and rules and regulations that is eroding the Texas model.”
Further, property taxes – the domain of ostensibly non-partisan local government – are soaring in Texas, even as the heavily Republican state Legislature has modestly cut statewide taxes.
More ominously, the state’s continued rapid growth is prompting increased pressure from both liberal and conservative homeowners on their city and county elected officials to put the brakes on new housing, slowing construction and contributing to a quickening rise in rents.
For Texas, and America, the lesson should be obvious: for human thriving, freedom beats government control – don’t be like California.

Is the president really seething over Sessions and other setbacks?

The media are back in the business of reporting on Donald Trump’s mood.
This has become a staple of White House coverage. The president is regularly reported to be livid, fuming, frustrated, upset, unhinged or paranoid, depending on the latest developments and how they're playing in the press.
Now sometimes this is legitimate, given Trump's tendency of lashing out at those around him. But I don't recall regular updates on whether Barack Obama was mad or George W. Bush was ticked off and so on. (Yes, I know, Trump is a very different president.)
He has, by any measure, had a rough few weeks.
Paul Manafort, his onetime campaign chairman, pled guilty and agreed to cooperate with prosecutors, after Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, did the same.
Omarosa, his erstwhile friend, wrote a book trashing him.
The Bob Woodward book portrayed senior officials as actively working to undermine a president they viewed as uninformed and erratic. That message was driven home by the unnamed official who vented about Trump in the New York Times. (I guess Anonymous got away with it, since the piece has faded and no manhunt is under way.)
And Trump was feeling satisfied as Brett Kavanaugh was on the verge of Senate confirmation — only to have the nomination thrown into turmoil by Christine Blasey Ford's last-minute accusations.
Now the media could argue that the president has been unusually disciplined this week (and a few journalists have noted this). Rather than going off script, rather than attacking Ford, Trump has repeatedly said she should be heard and he hopes that she testifies. He has defended Kavanaugh, said he has a hard time believing the allegations and ripped the Democrats for their handling of the matter, but hasn't posted any incendiary tweets.
But that has been overshadowed by his latest swipes at Jeff Sessions. In an interview with Hill TV, Trump said Sessions had been "mixed up and confused" during his confirmation hearings, adding: "I don't have an attorney general. It's very sad."
Trump later told reporters that he has an AG (of course he does, literally) but is disappointed in Sessions — as he has been since the former senator recused himself from the Russia investigation. What Trump really meant with his earlier comment is that he doesn't have an attorney general who will watch his back, which is not the job of the nation's top law-enforcement official.
The Washington Post describes this as "a raw expression of vulnerability and anger from a president who associates say increasingly believes he is unprotected" — including "the Russia investigation steamrolling ahead, anonymous administration officials seeking to undermine him and the specter of impeachment proceedings, should the Democrats retake the House."
I'm not so sure about the last point, but it's certainly a concern within the White House.
More from the Post: "The president, as well as family members and longtime loyalists, fret about whom in the administration they can trust, people close to them said." On that score, can you really blame them?
I've got to throw in a great quote from Steve Bannon, who says Trump is right to feel vulnerable.
"The Woodward book is the typed-up meeting notes from 'The Committee to Save America.' The anonymous op-ed is the declaration of an administrative coup by the Republican establishment."
Perhaps Trump is seething over these betrayals and setbacks. We can argue over how much responsibility he bears for some of the messes. But it's hardly shocking if he's angry about being secretly taped, leaked upon, and faced with defecting loyalists and a last-minute roadblock for his Supreme Court nominee.
Howard Kurtz is a Fox News analyst and the host of "MediaBuzz" (Sundays 11 a.m.). He is the author "Media Madness: Donald Trump, The Press and the War Over the Truth." Follow him at @HowardKurtz. Click here for more information on Howard Kurtz.

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford's team lays out terms it wants for potential Senate interview, sources say

Christine Blasey Ford's legal team has asked the Senate Judiciary Committee to agree to certain terms before she sits down for a potential interview over her accusation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her decades ago, two sources told Fox News on Thursday night.
Among the terms: Only members of the committee -- no lawyers -- can question her; Kavanaugh cannot be in the room at the time; and Kavanaugh should be questioned first, before he has the opportunity to hear Ford's testimony.
The requests, some of which appeared to be negotiable, capped a whirlwind day of back-and-forth statements. Ford's lawyers told the Senate Judiciary Committee that she was open to testifying next week, apparently backing off her bid for the FBI to first launch a new inquiry into her allegations.
But the attorneys said it was "not possible" for Ford to testify at a hearing scheduled for Monday by Senate Republicans, without explaining why, and they reiterated that she had a "strong preference" for an FBI probe beforehand.
According to an email sent by her attorney Debra Katz to the committee, Ford would appear as long as senators provide "terms that are fair and which ensure her safety."
It was not immediately clear whether Senate Republicans would agree to Ford's latest requests, but they reportedly have indicated they were considering them. Judiciary Committee Republicans have offered Ford the opportunity to testify privately, and have indicated they're willing to fly out to California "or anywhere else" to question her there if she would find that more convenient.
Speaking to Fox News' Sean Hannity on Thursday night before a rally in Nevada, Trump called Kavanaugh "an outstanding person" and said, "I don't think you can delay it any longer."
PURPORTED WITNESS BACKTRACKS, DELETES ONLINE ACCOUNT BACKING FORD AFTER INCONSISTENCIES EMERGE
Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate considered a potential key swing vote in Kavanaugh's confirmation, previously had suggested that lawyers from both sides initially question Kavanaugh and Ford. That arrangement, Collins suggested, would avoid an overtly political atmosphere in which Ford was questioned by Republicans on the Judiciary Committee -- an entirely male contingent.
For his part, Kavanaugh, in a letter to the Judiciary Committee on Thursday, indicated he would be ready and willing to testify on Monday. "I continue to want a hearing as soon as possible, so that I can clear my name," he wrote.
"Since the moment I first heard this allegation, I have categorically and unequivocally denied it. I remain committed to defending my integrity."
Kavanaugh's letter did not contain any preconditions for his testimony. Fox News has learned that Kavanaugh, under oath, answered questions from the Judiciary Committee earlier this week, and denied the allegations.
DEMS DEMAND FBI PROBE OF THREATS AGAINST FORD -- BUT DON'T MENTION DEATH THREATS AGAINST KAVANAUGH'S FAMILY
In a series of tweets earlier Thursday, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee noted they had obtained statements, under penalty of felony, from two other people at the house party where the alleged assault occurred, including Kavanaugh friend Mark Judge and another individual.
Committee members also wrote that they had reached out to a "fourth person allegedly at the party," as well as "a schoolmate who claimed on social media this week to have info related to Dr. Ford’s allegations" -- but had not heard back.
That was an apparent reference to a widely circulated online account by Cristina Miranda King, who claimed that she heard about the alleged assault at the time. King deleted her online post after questions emerged about apparent inconsistencies in her claims.
"[Ford's] attorneys say there needs to be an investigation, which is exactly what the committee has been doing all week," the GOP members wrote. "And we would love to hear from Dr. Ford. Democratic staff is invited to participate fully every step of the way."
On Thursday, Ford's lawyers reportedly requested that the Judiciary Committee subpoena Judge to testify. Earlier this week, Judge told committee Republicans that he had "no memory" of the alleged incident, and said he did not want to testify.
GRASSLEY UNLOADS ON FEINSTEIN: 'I CANNOT OVERSTATE HOW DISAPPOINTED I AM'
Asked whether Republicans had planned to call Judge to testify, Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told reporters, “No reason to. ... He’s already said what he’s going to say."
It would be highly unusual for a witness before a Senate committee to dictate who receives a subpoena as a precondition to testifying.
Meanwhile, a former classmate of Kavanaugh's said that he had no "recollection" of any incident at the house party Ford described, saying he was one of the people Ford had claimed to be there.

"I remain committed to defending my integrity."
- Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh

Senate Republicans have been harshly critical of Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., for receiving a letter from Ford outlining her allegations in July, but failing to disclose them, even anonymously, to federal officials or other committee members until last week.
Ford alleged in the letter that Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her more than 35 years ago, although she has since indicated that she cannot be sure in which house the assault occurred, or why there was a gathering there.
"I cannot overstate how disappointed I am," Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, wrote Wednesday, charging that Feinstein "chose to sit on the allegations until a politically opportune moment."
Grassley again requested Feinstein turn over an unredacted version of the letter Ford sent to Feinstein in July, and expressed exasperation that he still had not received it. The only copy Grassley had was included in the supplemental materials provided by the FBI after Kavanaugh's background check, he wrote to Feinstein.
He said the document was necessary as he worked to "prepare for Monday's hearings" -- proceedings that appeared very much in doubt Thursday evening.

Democratic Socialist Cartoons

Socialism rises in Democratic Party as primary season of upsets comes to close

As Democratic socialists chalk up victories across the country during primary season, there are indications that the wave is having an impact on the Democratic Party at large.
Backed by Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a slew of liberal candidates have pulled off upsets in Democratic primaries across the country this year by embracing a Democratic socialist platform, with agenda items such as implementing Medicare-for-all, free college tuition, abolishing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agency and impeaching President Trump.
Among candidates embraced by the left wing of the party who have won primaries in major contests this year: New York Democratic congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Maryland Democratic gubernatorial nominee Ben Jealous and Florida Democratic gubernatorial nominee Andrew Gillum.
The results have been a mixed bag, however, with a number of candidates falling flat. Most notably, “Sex and the City” actress and New York gubernatorial challenger Cynthia Nixon was soundly beaten by establishment Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo last week despite a high-profile campaign.
Cuomo mocked the idea of a left-wing wave in remarks Friday, saying that his brand of pragmatic progressivism was where the real revolution was.
“That is a revolution,” he said of his win, according to The New York Daily News. “That is a wave. On the numbers. Not on some Twittersphere dialogue where I tweet you and you tweet me and between the two of us, we think we have a wave. We’re not even a ripple.”
But there is no sign that left-wing push is slowing down and party elders are warning the party not to go too far to the left. Even the liberal former President Jimmy Carter is expressing concern that Democrats could alienate independents.
“Independents need to know they can invest their vote in the Democratic Party,” Carter said Tuesday during a speech at his post-presidential center and library in Atlanta.
Joe Lieberman, who was the Democratic Party's candidate for vice president in 2000, said in an interview with Fox News last month that Ocasio-Cortez’s ideas will struggle to gain support across America.
"When I see somebody who really says she's a socialist -- she's a very captivating, charismatic candidate -- when you look at those policies, those policies will not be supported in many places across America," Lieberman said.
ALEXANDRIA OCASIO-CORTEZ SHUNS HOLLYWOOD ELITES IN WEST COAST TOUR 
House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has also expressed concerns about the left-wing’s push for the impeachment of Trump, calling it a “gift” to Republicans.
Pelosi told Politico in May that impeachment was popular in her district, but that she still didn’t support it: “I’m not walking away from impeachment for political reasons and I’m not walking toward it for political reasons. I just think it’s divisive and I think what we should do is always try to unify.”
But there are signs that the groundswell of hard-leftism is having an effect on more mainstream, national candidates.
For instance, while Cuomo brushed off Nixon’s challenge, he had also dipped his toe into some left-wing positions such as abolishing ICE, at the same time as Nixon was calling it a “terrorist organization.”
Controversially, Cuomo took a left-wing turn in August and declared that America “was never that great.”
“We have not reached greatness, we will reach greatness when every America is fully engaged, we will reach greatness when discrimination and stereotyping against women, 51 percent of our population, is gone,” he said.
"I think this is just another example of Andrew Cuomo trying to figure out what a progressive sounds like and missing by a mile," Nixon told NY1.
Top 2020 Democratic prospects have also started endorsing some of those radical ideas. Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., Kamala Harris, D-Calif., and Kirsten Gillibrand, D-NY, have all expressed support for abolishing or overhauling ICE. President Barack Obama recently voiced his support for Medicare-for-all healthcare plans.
Polls are showing increasing support for socialism, once a dirty word in American political discourse. According to a Gallup poll released in August, more Democrats view socialism positively than they do capitalism.
Fifty-seven percent of Democrats polled by Gallup have a favorable view of socialism, while just 47 percent of Democrats in the poll have positive feelings about capitalism.
Republicans meanwhile, are licking their lips at the prospect of a hard-left turn by Democrats. President Trump, in an interview with Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo in July, predicted that if Democrats push to abolish ICE, they will get beaten in elections.
“Well I hope they keep thinking about it. Because they’re going to get beaten so badly,” he said.

Oregon candidate Amanda La Bell bows out over false claims about university degree: reports

Amanda La Bell, who was accused of making a false statement about her education in the official Oregon voter guide, has dropped out of an Oregon state legislative race.  (The Bulletin via Associated Press)

An American Working Families Party candidate quit an Oregon state legislative race Wednesday amid false claims about her university degree, according to reports.
Amanda La Bell, 41, dropped out of the race for House District 54 in Bend, Ore., the Oregonian reported, citing an announcement from the party.
Her departure gives a boost to Republicans' hopes of keeping the House District 54 seat, the Oregonian reported.
“We are sorry that Bend voters will no longer have an opportunity to vote for a State Representative who can effectively fight for issues impacting Oregon’s working families,” the party's statement said.
The Bend Bulletin had reported Tuesday that La Bell falsely claimed on her official Voters Pamphlet statement to have earned a bachelor's degree from Valdosta State University in Georgia, calling into question her candidacy's legitimacy.
La Bell clarified her education to the Bulletin.
“Regarding my college education, I attended Gulf Coast Community College for two years then transferred to Valdosta State University in the pursuit of my Bachelors of Arts in Music,” La Bell said. “However, after one semester at Valdosta State University, I had to withdraw and enter the workforce. Through the years I tried to re-enter college but, like many working families, I faced significant barriers to completing my degree.”
She said the claim about her education was "due to an oversight during the rapid launch of my campaign."
“Unfortunately, I did not catch this until it was too late to correct," she told the paper, adding that she takes "complete responsibility for the mistake."
La Bell also penned an open letter to Bend community, espressing her "profound apologies" and saying "for years, I felt a deep sense of guilt and shame at not being able to achieve the milestone of a college degree."
She wrote that her barriers included balancing work, school, financial pressures and caring for her family, revealing that she also suffered domestic violence.
Democrats had turned to La Bell in hopes of winning a three-fifths supermajority in the state's House, amid sexual misconduct allegations against their candidate, Nathan Boddie, according to the Oregonian.
Boddie, a Bend city councilor, had denied the allegations and also refused to allow Democrats to replace him with another candidate, the report said.

Nathan Boddie, a Bend city councilor, is the Democratic candidate for the state legislative race.  (City of Bend)

Democrats would need one more seat in the Oregon House to win the supermajority that would allow the party to pass tax bills without GOP votes, the Oregonian reported.
The Secretary of State's Office said it was too late to withdraw La Bell's Voters Pamphlet statement, the Bend Bulletin reported.
It was also too late for the American Working Families Party to replace La Bell with another candidate or remove her name from the ballot for Nov. 6, according to the Oregonian.
“We are supportive of Amanda in putting the needs of her community first by suspending her campaign," the Working Families Party statement read, according to Oregon's KTVZ-TV.

"We are supportive of Amanda in putting the needs of her community first by suspending her campaign."
- Statement from The American Working Families Party

"We are so grateful to the Bend residents who trusted us with this effort, and, above all, we are unwavering in our commitment to fighting hand-in-hand with the community for a Bend that works for all of us.”
Republican Knute Buehler, running for governor, left the Bend House seat open.
The GOP candidate is Cheri Helt, a restaurateur and Bend-La Pine School Board member, the Bulletin reported.

Cheri Helt is the GOP candidate for House District 54 in Oregon.  (Facebook)

Bend is about a three-hour drive southeast of Portland, Ore.

Pompeo blasts Kerry on meeting with Iranian officials, says time to get off the stage

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Wednesday criticized John Kerry for meeting with Iranian officials and said the former Obama administration official "can't seem to get off the stage."
Pompeo, who sat down exclusively with Laura Ingraham, the host of "The Ingraham Angle," said the former secretary of state “fundamentally got it wrong with Iran, and we’re trying to make it right for America.”
“Secretary Kerry can’t seem to get off the stage, and you have to," he said. "When I’m the former secretary, I’ll get off. Every previous former secretary has done that, too."
Last week, Pompeo called out his predecessor for "actively undermining" U.S. policy by holding meetings with Mohammad Javad Zarif, the foreign minister, since leaving office, whom he reportedly met with on several occasions and discussed the scraped nuclear deal.
Pompeo said speaking with foreign governments is fine, as long as you are working on behalf of American foreign policy.
“They’re working for the foreign policy which is theirs, not the one that belongs to the United States,” he said.
During an appearance on Fox News’ “The Daily Briefing with Dana Perino,” Kerry did not deny the suggestion he’s telling the Iranians to wait out Trump until there is a Democratic president again.
“I think everybody in the world is talking about waiting out President Trump,” said Kerry.
“Let me be crystal clear: When I met with the Iranians, the policies of the United States was still to be in the Iran deal because the president had not decided and not pulled out,” Kerry said.
Pompeo said he is focused on executing America’s foreign policy, and will “leave the legal action to others.”
“They are not only unhelpful, but they are acting in ways that are harmful to achieving what’s best for the American people,” he said. That’s my criticism. Stop it. Let it go. You’ve had your day.”

Grassley demands Feinstein turn over letter from Kavanaugh accuser: 'I cannot overstate how disappointed I am'

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley on Wednesday unloaded a torrent of criticism on Sen. Dianne Feinstein for her handling of the sexual assault accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, telling the ranking Democrat on the committee, "I cannot overstate how disappointed I am."
Saying Feinstein "chose to sit on the allegations until a politically opportune moment," Grassley demanded she immediately turn over an unredacted copy of the letter from Kavanaugh's accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, that Feinstein received July 30.
Feinstein, D-Calif., shared the letter with federal authorities and other senators only last week, days before a key Judiciary Committee vote on Kavanaugh's confirmation, after a leak about the letter was published in The Intercept. Republicans have accused Democrats of orchestrating that leak.
Grassley, R-Iowa, who called the document a "significant piece of evidence in Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation process," said that despite multiple requests, he still has access only to a redacted copy of the letter included in supplemental background materials provided by the FBI to a select group of senators.
SUPPOSED WITNESS IMPLICATES KAVANAUGH WITHOUT FIRST-HAND KNOWLEDGE -- THEN DELETES POST AFTER QUESTIONS SURFACE 
He asserted that he needs the full version of the document in order to "prepare for Monday's hearings" into the allegations against Kavanaugh. Ford's lawyers strongly suggested in a letter late Tuesday that she won't appear at the hearing until the FBI conducts a "full investigation" into her claims.
In a follow-up letter Wednesday, the lawyers, Lisa Banks and Debra Katz, doubled down on that request, even as Republicans characterized it as a stall tactic that did not excuse Ford from providing sworn testimony before the Senate.
"Dr. Ford was reluctantly thrust into the public spotlight only two days ago.  She is currently unable to go home, and is receiving ongoing threats to her and her family's safety," the lawyers wrote. "Fairness and respect for her situation dictate that she should have time to deal with this.  She continues to believe that a full non-partisan investigation of this matter is needed and she is willing to cooperate with the Committee. "
Just days ago, on Monday, Katz had said her client was willing to testify, telling CBS News, "My client will do whatever is necessary to make sure that the Senate Judiciary Committee has the full story and the full set of allegations to allow them to make a fully informed decision."
And Banks said in an interview, "She will agree to participate in any proceedings that she’s asked to participate in.”
But on Wednesday, the lawyers suggested that more witnesses should be called in order for any hearing to have legitimacy. Earlier in the day, a former classmate of Kavanaugh's said that he had no "recollection" of any incident at the house party Ford described, while another witness who had backed up Ford deleted her account online after inconsistencies surfaced and she admitted her statements were not based on any first-hand knowledge.
"The Committee's stated plan to move forward with a hearing that has only two witnesses is not a fair or good faith investigation; there are multiple witnesses whose names have appeared publicly and should be included in any proceeding," Ford's attorneys wrote. "The rush to a hearing is unnecessary, and contrary to the Committee discovering the truth."
POLYGRAPH TAKEN BY KAVANAUGH ACCUSER COMES UNDER SCRUTINY -- HOW DOES THE TEST WORK?
Sources told Fox News that Senate Republicans aren't the only ones working to get ready for Monday's factfinding hearing, which appears ready to proceed even without Ford's participation. The White House confirmation team on Tuesday conducted a so-called "murder board" with Kavanaugh, to test him with tough questions he might face during his testimony. Kavanaugh did well in the session, the sources said, adding that "he was solid - there was no wavering."

"I cannot overstate how disappointed I am."
- Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley

However, GOP leaders have signaled there will be no hearing if Ford refuses to show. “If she’s not attending I don’t know what the point of going forward would be,” said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn, R-Texas, a member of the Judiciary Committee. Republican senators gave Ford a deadline of Friday to indicate whether she will testify next week.
Feinstein appeared to wash her hands of the process in a brief interview outside her Senate office with Fox News on Tuesday, saying, "I have no say, I'm the lead Democrat. ... I think it's really too bad that no one called her, or called her lawyer."
WATCH: FEINSTEIN ADMITS SHE CAN'T GUARANTEE ACCUSER BEING ENTIRELY 'TRUTHFUL'
She added: "This is a woman who has been profoundly impacted by this. Now, I can't say everything's truthful. I don't know."
Top Republicans have said they repeatedly called and emailed Ford's lawyers, and have offered to fly staffers to California "or anywhere else" to speak with Ford. They have also offered her either a public or private hearing, but haven't heard back.
In his letter Wednesday, Grassley unequivocally dismissed Feinstein's suggestions that her delays were motivated by a desire to protect Ford's identity, and suggested that her actions had in fact compromised any legitimate desire to preserve her anonymity.
"These allegations could have been raised to me, or to Judge Kavanaugh, while protecting Dr. Ford's anonymity," Grassley said. "Had Dr. Ford not made her allegations public via The Washington Post over the weekend, I still would not know her identity."
He continued: "These allegations could have been raised both within the last seven weeks and in a way that protected Dr. Ford's anonymity. Instead, you chose to sit on the allegations until a politically opportune moment. I cannot overstate how disappointed I am in this decision."
President Trump echoed that line of argument Wednesday, even as he encouraged Ford to speak to the Judiciary Committee and said she deserved to be heard.
"Why did [Democrats] wait until everything was finished and then bring it up? That doesn't look good," Trump said.
Also on Wednesday, Grassley sent two other letters -- one to Ford's attorneys urging her to appear at Monday's scheduled hearing into her allegations, and another scathing missive to Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats.
READ GRASSLEY'S OVERTURE TO FORD'S LAWYERS, SCATHING LETTERS TO DEMS
In those letters, Grassley railed against Democrats' "abuse of this confirmation process" through "delay and obstruction ... with every argument available." He reiterated that Monday's hearing would remain on the calendar despite Democrats' objections."
"I will view any additional complaints about this process very skeptically," he said.
The Judiciary Committee chairman flatly disputed claims by Ford's lawyers that he had requested Kavanaugh sit at the same "table" with Ford during Monday's hearing, or that he had only sought a publicly televised hearing. Instead, Grassley said, Ford was offered the chance to testify privately in a confidential session with Republican senators and staffers, without Kavanaugh nearby.
Grassley has also repeatedly rejected suggestions by top Democrats and Ford's lawyers that an FBI probe would be appropriate. He specifically dismissed comparisons made by Ford's attorneys to the FBI investigation of Anita Hill's sexual harassment allegations against then-nominee Clarence Thomas in 1991, saying that Hill's allegations were non-public when the FBI conducted a few days of background interviews to assess their validity before forwarding them on to the White House.
Once Hill's allegations became public, Grassley wrote, the Judiciary Committee did not request additional FBI assistance.
"We are in the same position the Committee was in after Professor Hill's allegations were leaked," Grassley said. "After that leak, we did not ask the FBI to conduct an investigation. Instead, we reopened the hearing and assessed the testimony that was given on our own."
For her part, Hill told PBS' "NewsHour" Wednesday that the Judiciary Committee could not be trusted to probe the accusations against Kavanaugh fairly, "because I doubt they are qualified to carry out an investigation in a neutral fashion."
On Tuesday, a federal law enforcement official told Fox News, "It's totally inappropriate for someone to demand we use law enforcement resources to investigate a 35-year-old allegation when she won't go under oath and can't remember key details including when or where it happened."
Fox News has learned from a source close to Sen. Susan Collins, a moderate considered a potential key swing vote in Kavanaugh's confirmation, that she had called the FBI's Deputy Director David Bowdich on Wednesday to learn more about the FBI's potential role in the proceedings as part of her "due diligence."
Meanwhile, Missouri Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill tweeted Wednesday night that she would not vote for Kavanaugh. In her message, she explicitly wrote that his legal rulings and ideology, and not the allegations by Ford, were the reason for her decision. McCaskill is locked in a tight re-election race in a red state that Trump won handily in 2016.

NFL 2018 Ratings Cartoons