thanks so much for joining us live from san francisco today. i'm going to head back to new york and we'll be back tomorrow morning with maria, with our regular crew. have a great day. "varney & company" begins right now. stuart, take it away. stuart: i shall. ladies and gentlemen, take your seat for the big fight. it starts now. an all-out attack on the president-elect, no holds barred. good morning shall everyone. first up, confirmation hearings for jeff sessions as attorney general. half an hour from now. the democrats will try to brand him a racist, despite prosecuting and executing a klansman in alabama. sessions will be tarred with the racist brush. new jersey democrat senator cory booker will testify against him. that breaks all senate precedent. booker, who is black, says he'll represent vulnerable communities. at 10 eastern, the black caucus

will hang this that portrays pigs. and the black caucus puts it back up despite the rash of cop killings. the media intense opposition to all things trump. the headline in "the washington post," how to remove trump from office. he hasn't taken office yet. and at times, trump wandering in a labyrinth of lies and cragg dragging the country with them. the president-elect has begun to reverse the flow of the jobs overseas. after a trump tower visit, alibaba will support a million apple may expand its $2 billion plant in arizona. toyota 10 billion in the next five years. that's not making headlines. opposition to trump is and you're going to see that opposition in fu force today. mr. trump says all of his

nominees will be confirmed, the left will go all out to stop it. sit back and watch intense political theater. "varney & company" is about to begin. ♪ >> i think the crimson tide wins hands down and you say what, sir? >> alabama should win, but clemson is very capable, win it. stuart: let's be honest, you don't tune into my football predictions, i said alabama would win and clemson scored a last second touchdown and they won 35-31. next year, please play the championship game on a saturday or start it earlier so we could all see it through to the end. ashley: and did you say the "titanic" over here? [laughter] >> ladies and gentlemen, that concludes our sports coverage for the day. quickly to the market, dead

flat open for stocks this morning. we're about 112 points away from dow 20,000. how about that nasdaq? third record close of the year. that was yesterday. 5,022. there we are. here is the price of oil. 52 a barrel. take a look at alibaba stock after chief jack ma and met with president-elect trump. a bump on the news, promising to support a million jobs in america. got it. take a look at yahoo! up 37% in the past year and most of that gain came from the verizon by without proposal. maris sa mayer will step down and yahoo! will change to matalba.

we begin with the rehanging of the anti-police painting. duncan hunter, congressman from california you removed that picture forcibly just the other day now it's going to be rehung at the insistence of the black congressional caucus. you say what? >> number one, it's very strange. i don't understand why democrats in the congressional black caucus stand for and portray cops as pig. i don't understand it, it blows my mind. if the democratic party now stands for making cops look like pigs and hanging a piece of art like that in the u.s. capitol, that's a sat commentary on their party and what they stand for. you have a thin blue line in this country and you have law and order and makes america great and we need to support our police not put up a painting in the u.s. capitol that depicts them as pigs. stuart: congressman, this puts race at the center of today's news. attorney general nominee jeff

sessions will be tarred as a racist and this picture is going to be put back up on capital hill despite the recent cop killings. it focuses attention on race, which is really a diversion of what it's supposed to be about. >> this is what democrats are doing and again, for democrats to make race their number one priority, and this isn't a racial painting to an extent it is, but it's about portraying police officers as pigs. if this was-- if this was a painting with commentary on just race, i think it would be, you know, a better painting because you know, ferguson is in missouri and in the district, the congressman who put this up and they can talk about that artistically if they want to. the only problem we have is calling cops pigs, that's wrong and that shouldn't be in the u.s. capitol. stuart: congressman, thank you for joining us. thank you very much, sir. >> thank you. stuart: want to get to the confirmation hearing of jeff

sessions as attorney general. join us is mike lee from utah on the judiciary committee. senator, do you have any doubt that mr. sessions will be confirmed? >> no, i don't. this committee is going to act, we're going to hold hearings this week and i anticipate that we will see jeff sessions confirmed as our next attorney general sometime next week. stuart: i want you to listen to this from senator cory booker, who is talking about he's going to testify against senator sessions. roll tape. >> breaking a pretty long senator tradition by actually being a sitting senator testifying tomorrow against another sitting senator so please understand, i think these are extraordinary time and they call for extraordinary measures. he has a posture and position that i think represents a danger to our country. there's a whole of jeff session's own words, a threat to a population in our country

and i feel i'll do everything i can to speak out against. stuart: a real danger to the country, a threat to vulnerable populations in this country, the good senator there breaking precedence. what do you make of this, sir? >> i don't know exactly what he's going to be talking about, what i do know is that senator booker and i are friends. senator booker and i have worked together on criminal justice reform legislation as we share that fashion in common, but just because senator sessions might disagree with senator booker or with me or others on this one issue or on some other issue he can identify doesn't mean he's not qualified to be the attorney general of the united states. i know senator sessions well. i consider him a friend and although he and i don't agree on everything, i have full confidence in his ability to stand as an impartial advocate for the law within the administration. and i'm going to support him strongly and i look forward to the moment when he's confirmed. stuart: senator lee, thank you for joining us, we'll be seeing

you again later. >> thank you. stuart: i want to tell you about a very high level meeting which received very little publicity. house speaker paul ryan met with mr. trump's very, most senior economic advisors. the topic, tax cuts. with us now, special advisor to the trump transition deem, je-- team, jeff dewitt. can you tell us anything about the meeting last night? >> the only inside about the meeting i can share is reportedly they had italian food. stuart: we have investors and we want to know about tax cuts. >> tax cuts are coming. as you saw before, the trump tax plan was similar to the one that paul ryan introduced earlier. 20%, the trump tax plan has it down to 15%. outside of that, mostly similarities between the two so when you have meetings like this and we'll see more of them. stuart: to iron out differences. >> to iron out the differences

and see how fast we can make movement on this front. stuart: this was paul ryan, speaker ryan representing his plan with the top level trump meeting together. >> and reince priebus, good friends with paul ryan and everyone is cohesive. stuart: after that meeting are we going to get something about tax cuts included in the president-elect trump's speech when, after his inauguration and he becomes the president on that day january 20th? >> no one will say for sure, but i think it's a very real possibilities if the details are ironed out. stuart: that may be the result of last night's meeting. what will the trump team get into the ryan plan. i'm pushing hard here. the media is apoplectic about mr. trump's win and he hasn't taken office yet.

i'm going to show you headlines from the media, washington post, how to remove trump from office. wait a minute, there's more. and this tweeted from the new york timditorial board. trump is lost wandering in a labyrinth of lieand trying to drag the country in with him. now, that's pretty strong enough. it's not going to change, is it? >> no, unfortunately, it's going to be there i think his entire time. the liberal elites and global elites are absolutely dumbfounded how the american public could have voted against their wishes and their will. >> well, now mr. trump has to win and get all of his nominees confirmed into his cabinet and he's got to layout policy. if he does that, he beats what they're saying. >> and mr. trump has been successful his entire life and he will be successful now. reagan, even at the end much his presidency, there were still marches against him, big million man marches in europe over the deployment of missiles.

the whole time he was president, even in my book, he goes down as one of the best, if not the best ever, there were people doing this the entire time. but the american public sees through it. we know these are the same people that don't have america's best interests at heart and the american public has spoken. and i just wish that these liberal elites in the media would get on board and if we all work together we could get so much more done. stuart: jeff, we want you to leave the studio, walk across the street to trump tower, tell us what happened at the meeting on taxes last night and get back to us. >> you got it. stuart: jeff dewitt, we'll see you soon. >> thank you. stuart: jeff sessions confirmation hearing is minutes away, it will be contentious, the left will play the race card. you'll see it unfold, you'll see it live. a picture depicting police officers as pigs will hang back up. the congressional black caucus will hang it back up again. that will happen during this

program and you'll hear what police think about that. alibaba, jack ma promises to support a million american jobs. small businesses will get to sell their products on that site and we're on that one, too. later in the program, dana lash joins us to talk jeff sessions and gun policy, that's 11:15. we'll be back.

>> this is capitol hill, democrats getting ready to grill jeff sessions at his confirmation hearing to be attorney general. judge andrew napolitano is with us. it seems like the democrats are making this all about race, that's it. >> they are. well, look, you have a white, male, southern, conservative republican. it is the left's favorite tactic to paint that person with a tarnish that you can't get off by calling him a racist. he may have made some racially insensitive statements 30 years

ago, he denies he made them. there are some people who said they heard them. he said he didn't say that. that's equivocal. what is not equivocal is there is no racial motivation in his public work and his public record, as attorney general of alabama, as united states attorney from alabama and as a senator from alabama for 20 years. stuart: he did-- he voted in favor of the civil rights act, give it a 30-year extension. he voted in favor of that. spearheaded the medal to rosa parks and i believe he was in favor-- well, he prosecuted and the man was executed, a klansman in alabama and it was jeff sessions who prosecuted that man and he was executed. >> i am sure that all of this will come before the committee. the committee's motivation and the democrat's motivation is

this, they don't like the fact that donald trump was elected and that donald trump gets to appoint him. they have to prove the case against him. stuart: it's not about jeff sessions, it's the effort to tar mr. trump as a racist. stuart: it's a long-running idea and it's not over. >> we will see contentious arguments all week, throw all kinds of things at rex tillerson, throw things at general kelly later today, but the most contentious will be this, and we talked about it. hillary clinton's back front and center because of the what the fbi says they were hacked by friendly and hostile services. stuart: i have to bring one more legal issue to you here. twitter is being sued by the widow of one of the brussels attack victims, claiming that the site is used by terrorists

as a tool and weapons. you say what? >> she might as well sue all the media, twitter, facebook, times, they're medians for expressing ideas. stuart: it won't go anywhere? >> i don't know where she's going. if she's suing in the united states it won't go anywhere, in europe the libel laws may be different. depends where she's suing, but the general rule in all western law is that the messenger can't be punished for the message. stuart: if you really boil this down, do we really want the twitters and the facebooks of this worlds to act as censors about what can be said? >> no. i don't think we want that. i don't think the public wants it, i don't think consumers want it, i don't think that shareholders want it. stuart: and yet, judge, child pornography was successfully

removed from the spectrum of the internet by going after it? >> yes, it's an equivocal argument if you want to care child pornography to this type of information. stuart: i think i got you in a corner there. >> yeah, you did, you did. because the real libertarians believe you should be able to look at whatever you want. stuart: yeah, they do. >> a tough argument. stuart: you'll withdraw from that. >> i'm a little soft hearted on that one. stuart: the stock market pretty flat at the opening bell. and by the way, we got a reading on small business optimism. it's received a 12-year high, that's from the federation of independent business. 30 year history and 50% of respondents say they expect better business conditions up from just 12% who said that in november. i guess that's a trump effect. se there's capitol hill, the hearings begin shortly.

as we told you, marissa mayer stepping down from the yahoo! board. what we didn't tell you, what she's going to get when she leaves. that number has gone up. we have that number for you. fireworks before the jeff sessions hearing, one senator set to testify before another. the hearing begins in minutes and we'll take you there.

>> yahoo!'s chief is marissa mayer, she's going to step down from the yahoo! board when verizon finishes its merger deal with yahoo!. e-mack is going to tell us how much money marissa mayer walks away with. liz: $132 million. last time we reported it was $123 million. some reporters have the number higher because the stock price went up the last time we reported it. stuart: has she been considered a success during her term at yahoo!. liz: no, back to you. stuart: and how about this, l.l. bean, you know, the clothing company, pleading with customers, oh, please, don't boycott us over a trump donation. what is that about? >> it's about linda bean, the heir of the company.

there's an anti-trump group called #grabyourwallet. they provide a list of companies that do business with donald trump or support donald trump and people are being asked to boycott l.l. bean who says, look, we have a big family and we have a wide variety of political views, no one in particular. this could back fire. stuart: of course it could. a lot of people vigorously support donald trump and will buy something from l.l. bean j us to stick it to the boycott. ashley: you know, you punish a good business over one person has the right to free speech. it again highlights how, you know, they call for unity, they call for inclusion and this is the opposite. liz: intolerant. stuart: i agree with you. that's pretty good. we're off and running. ashley: yes. stuart: two big stories straight ahead for you, the confirmation hearing of jeff sessions. she's going to gavel to order in a few minutes and we expect fireworks.

and of course, we have the opening of the stock market. what is going to make this market pop again? we're on it. me to reach my goals.hat's ale

so i liked when my doctor told me i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating what's within me with once-weekly trulicity. trulicity is not insulin. it helps activate my body to do what it's supposed to do release its own insulin. trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. i take it once a week, and it works 24/7. it comes in an easy-to-use pen and i may even lose a little weight. trulicity is a once-weekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. trulicity is not insulin.

it should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take trulicity if you or a family member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if you've had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing; a lump or swelling in your neck; or severe pain in your stomach area. serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar. common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite and indigestion. some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. with trulicity, i click to activate what's within me. if you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar numbers with a non-insulin option click to activate your within. ask your doctor about once-weekly trulicity.

>> all right. what you're looking at now is protesters dressed as klansmen escorted out. this is capitol hill and they're led out, they're taking them out. the confirmation hearing for senator jeff sessions as attorney general, that will begin in just a couple of minutes. and the democrats and the protesters, of course, are trying to tar jeff sessions as a racist and unhinge his

nomination because of his background of what they say is his past. as you saw there, the protesters are taken out. they're applauding on wall street. that means they're about to start trading and literally it's two seconds away. we're off and running. the left-hand side of the screen, the jeff sessions confirmation hearing, just before it's started and hnd side, early going on wall street. we're down 15 points. check out the dow 30. i should tell you, in the background here we have the small business optimism reached a 12-year high. apparently that's not affected the market as we speak, but that's an interesting back drop to trading today. the s&p 500 has opened ever so slightly higher. very slightly. and how about the nasdaq? it hit its third record close of the entire year yesterday

and it's up a bit more as of right now. how about that? the price of oil going nowhere this morning, $52 a barrel. the price of gold hanging well below $1200 an ounce. 1185 to be precise, the price of gasoline keeps edging up. we now have a national average of 2.36 per gallon or regular. who is with us for what may be a horrific day. liz macdonald, tom horwitz and it seems like this might be flat up to the inauguration, do you agree with that mike murphy? >> after the november 8th election, the market is churning at these levels. let's look, when you see banks announce earnings later this week, that could be the catalyst to get this market moving to new highs in front of the inauguration. stuart: if you hear shouting in the background, that's protesters at the jeff sessions confirmation hearing, some have been removed.

you'll hear fireworks and interruptions will be frequent. what do you say, todd horowitz. the market will stay flat until we find out about taxes? >> i think that's a great observation. on the other side of mike's argument, if the banks are bad, that could be the catalyst that doesn't let us get to 20,000 at this particular time and actually push the markets lower. stuart: look at the nasdaq because it's gone up for six straight sessions and we've had three record highs, it's at another record high level as of right now. 5536. what's going on with this? it's not the big name technology stocks that's moving the nasdaq, it's the smaller ones, mike. >> what you're seeing is a technological revolution. we've talked about this before. you have technology changing the way people live. you have tech nation affecting all parts of the way we live.

people are looking for the next facebook. the next microsoft. that's why you're seeing the move up here. stuart: that's interesting. the left-hand side of the green, senator grassley is about to start his initial opening statement at the hearings for jeff sessions as attorney general. look on the right-hand side of your screen, the nasdaq hitting another record high, 5538 as we speak. staying with donald trump and the incoming administration, he did meet with alibaba's chief, jack ma yesterday. what happened, ash? >> well, they came out afterwards and trump called it a great meeting and jack ma called trump senator-- smart and open-minded and alibaba will give access to chinese consumers the next five years and hopes to create 1 million jobs in the u.s. good move for jack ma given trump's very strong anti-china stand on the campaign. stuart: the stock is up this morning, a buck 95. mike murphy, would you gubuy it?

>> i would buy amazon over alibaba. but came up mid 70's to where it is high 90's. stuart: now this one, marissa mayer is leaving the yahoo! board, she'll do that when the verizon deal goes through. any details. liz: 132 million is the estimate of his golden parachute. maybe not 4.8 billion, this company is a market cap about 38 billion. so this is a real indication of where marissa mayer's legacy is. stuart: would you buy yahoo! at this level, mike murphy? >> i would not. stuart: would you buy verizon? >> i'd rather buy at&t, if you're buying verizon it's for the $5% dividend. stuart: we're looking at the opening statements about to begin for jeff sessions as attorney general. we'll keep you up-to-date on that, there will be fireworks later. we're following the opening of the stock market. it was down 50, now down nearly 35.

i've got to bring to your attention, wd-40, that's an independent company, not part of a conglomerate. they grease the wheels, so to speak. they lowered their forecast. and here is a story for you, food stamp recipients will soon be able to shop on-line and they can use it on amazon, safeway, fresh direct. what do you say, liz. liz: really big deal. it will hit wal-mart hard. wal-mart makes 13 billion a year. it does not cover shipping charges, but it will reach those in what they call food deserts. stuart: chipotle shall the stock is up. and it's back above $400 a share. let's take a look at citi, please. no, take a look at goldman sachs, i'm sorry, goldman sachs, why would we do that?

because citi says sell goldman sachs. it has one extraordinary run-up, what do you say about that? >> i think looking at the environment we're in selling the banks is not the r right above. you'll have less registration and takes everything off the equation. and the prices should go higher. stuart: drug maker valeant is in the news, they're going to pay down debt. nicole, give me an update on what's going on with valeant. nicole: they have a 30 billion dollar debt load and selling off areas. l'oreal is buying skin care products, 1.3 billion. skin care overall has been booming. and as selling off a cancer business to a chinese conglomerate. the new ceo has been focusing

on the key areas, that's skin, drugs, stomach treatment, eye care, consumer health. valeant is down over 80% in the last 52 weeks and today they're up 10%. yahoo! as they start to get off some of these other assets that are non-core assets. stuart: thanks very much, nicole. the left-hand side of your green, senator grassley has begun his statement, kind of gavelling to order. a lot of people are not listening to him milling around as they get ready for a contentious hearing. that's senator grassley now. before we get to the fireworks on capitol hill, more stocks, google is in talks to sell its satellite business, what's that all about? >> they call it terra bella, they are looking to selling. they originally bought it 2014 for $500 million.

they sent up several small satellites that took aerial images. what did they do with them? they collected data of what they could sell, stock piles of copper ore. stuart: they got rid of auto cars, waymo. are they making a profit on buying and selling the companies? >> they're making a little profit, but the bigger thing is, if google doesn't want it, who is buying this? . and there are claims that the okculus was billed with stolen material. liz: the says of facebook may take the witness stand. they're saying that facebook stole the hardware and software. it's a $2 billion lawsuit, what

facebook paid when this bought the technology in 2014. stuart: murphy, didn't you say that facebook was going to become the first trillion dollar company? >> i did and i will say that facebook will be a trillion dollar company and walk it back a little bit because what apple is doing, the setup for apple, a big ungrade. they have a better chance to beat them. stuart: what an apple doing that's so right all of a sudden? >> they have the phones with the big part of the market. they're making a lot of money from the watch now and they now own a lot of your hardware and software. liz: amazon's killing them with alexa echo. why doesn't apple ceo, tim cook, have basically a siri speaker you could talk to? why? because he wants to keep it in the iphone. stuart: he doesn't want a separate unit. >> i think there's room for

amazon and apple here. and based on what we have in my husband. liz: the echo ran out of inventory, it's so popular. >> but so did the iphone. liz: people like it. they like jeff boseos vision of the "star trek" bridge that you control your entire home from the echo. >> i think that amazon is doing a phenomenal thing. and apple is not getting credit. stuart: i don't have any iphone with me, i've switched topher an a 7. as my producer said, that's a first world problem, stuart, grow up. back to mr. trump, mike, why buy any stock when you could get trumped. when he walks in and says hey, i'm going after this bunch? >> that's the world we live in

today. he could also say, look at what the market's done, he could give a stock a boost to the upside. i think that people are focusing too much on his comments on twitter. right now, the setup is less regulation, lower taxes should be better profits, should mean stock prices higher. stuart: todd horowitz, i'm leaving you out. not just you're in chicago, but i can't see you directly. what do you say about getting trumped? >> i think this is all going to eventually go away and what we'll see, markets have a way of pricing in where they think they're going to do. i think we priced in good news for the banks and already priced in, whatever they're going to do. it's going to be a market back to normal. i think the biggest thing about trump. you're going to see more for your markets and price discovery versus the manipulated market for the past eight years. stuart: let me explain what's going on in your screens. we're setting up for the congressional hearing, the confirmation hearing into senator jeff sessions.

in his position as forth coming attorney general. right-hand side of the screen, along the bottom of the screen, you're looking at the stock market as it opened 11 minutes ago, liz. liz: it looks like code pink has showed up at the hearings to disrupt it and whether they're the ones dressed up as kkk. stuart: earlier we did see a couple of men dressed in the white sheets and robes looking like klansmen being escorted out. judge napolitano is with us this morning. that hearing on our screens right now has nothing to do with the stock market, does it? >> well i don't think it has to do with the stock market. ap donald trump's nominee to be attorney general. not one that one would think would affect the stock market. judge michael mukasey, a former attorney general of the united states, to his left. to his right. mrs. session i think is holding one of the grandchildren. >> if someone of mr. trump's

nominees were not could be-- confirmed. >> it would be a setback. stuart: the market likes what's put in place. if one of the team is out, that's a problem for the market, i suspect. >> yes. stuart: mike murphy, small business confidence, small business, optimism, i'm sorry, small business optimism is at a 12-year high. >> that to me, stuart is the key. that's the underpinnings of the stock market. businesses are excited, feeling good for the first time in a very long time. again, less regulation and lower taxes and it's a technological revolution, you'll see small businesses and great time to be a venture capitalist. >> that's an extraordinary statistic. 12-year high and the market is down, explain that. >> so that's not going to affect the day-to-day movements

of the stock market as we see it, the dow 30 or s&p 500. that's what's going to affect the markets, six months and 12 months down the road as people are starting businesses and making money with them because of the confidence they see in the new administration. stuart: liz, you have a point. liz: the alibaba move, bombed out sections of the midwest who are farmers, agricultural businesses, who may be small manufacturers shipping to china. that's a huge deal. stuart: i want to switch attention aa way from the market in a moment and bring in former chief counsel for the senate judiciary committee william smith. i want his comment on what we're seeing now on the left-hand side of your screen, the confirmation hearings of jeff sessions. you, sir, you worked with jeff sessions for a long period of time. is he the racist that democrats say he is? >> jeff sessions is absolutely not a racist. he is an honest, honorable man and do a fine job as attorney

general of the united states of america. the fact that these people are here trying to mischaracterize his record will not go over well with the american people. they have no facts to demonstrate that jeff sessions is a racist, they should stop the smear campaign and move on to something else. stuart: what do you make senator cory booker, he is black, he's going to testify against senator jeff sessions, the first time in history a senator has testified against another in a confirmation hearing. what do you make of in? >> it's unfortunately, you see senator cory booker with a double standard. he'll hold hands with jeff sessions with a path to rosa parks for a congressional medal and then testify against him. one things he says he's fighting against criminal justice reform. i'm fighting against criminal justice reform as booker sees it.

we don't need hard and fast criminals, repeat violent offenders should not be out of prison. and while jeff sessions is protecting the country, senator booker is playing monopoly, thinks everybody should get out free. and why race? >> it's been made all about race because the democrats have nothing else. when your policy views have been rejected by the american people, when you're afraid to debate the policy views in front of the american people, you have to play the race card because you have nothing else. stuart: how long did you actually work with senator sessions? >> i worked with senator sessions over ten years and i've known him over 20 years, when i did work for him, the senate judiciary committee the first time i've ran his leadership pact. and i've known him a long time and worked with him a long time, over 20 years, never seen any indication of racial bias. stuart: forget race, how is

senator sessions on dealing with the law, impartially looking at the law and administering the law? >> so if there's one thing i learned under senator session it's equal justice under the law. senator session loves people, he believes that people should be treated fairly, that the law should be enforced whether you agree with him or not. when you have someone like senator sessions going to not politicize the department. you have a lot of people upset. they are afraid the marijuana laws might be enforced, that the immigration law would be enforced. he thinks that everybody should be treated fairly. stuart: can i ask you about the painting that's going to be rehung that portrays police officers as pigs. it's going to be hung up on the wall. do you have a comment on this. >> my role here is not to make news, to talk about senator

session, about a fine man he is, about how honest he is, about his integrity and character, so, i've been limiting myself talking about senator session and not-- >> are your views. doeses black community share your views son senator sessions, do you know? >> i think anyone who knows senator sessions knows my views. for instance, you've got the perry county case, the that's whatever you want to call it and the defendants who agreed to plead guilty to at least one crime. you have a lot of people citing that case, but the son of the defendants has supported senator sessions so people who know senator sessions, people who have been around him, spent, 10, 20, 30 minutes with him they know his heart and his kind and they support him. people who don't know senator sessions probably won't support him. stuart: william smith, thank you for joining us on a very important day, we appreciate you being here, thank you, sir. >> thank you. stuart: do you have any

comment, judge napolitano listening to that? >> well, you know, this is somebody who has worked with him closely and this shows the willingness to work with people of another race, which belies much of the criticism against him. stuart: okay. i want to get back to the market for one brief shining moment. we're down, but not by much. 19855. the market really has been on a pause as it ran up towards 20,000 and you've got some details on the hearing. ashley: as we wait for this to get underway. senator grassley is kind of laying out what's going to happen and he said moments ago that he is prepared to stay as long as it takes to accommodate all member questions. so the first round of q & a will give senators ten minutes each we are told. after that grassley says he'll give eight minutes each. 11 republicans, 9 democrats on the committee. stuart: i'm going to senator feinstein in a moment, in a moment.

she's about to give her statement. she's doing various procedural moves before she gives the opening statement. we will go to that, the lead democrat on the committee. she's the ranking member on the democratic side. ashley: yes. stuart: we'll take her statement in a moment. i don't expect dianne feinstein to be fiery on the issue of race, do you? >> no, no, the fieriness is going to come from the witnesses. it might come from one or two of the senators, but not her. she's going to present more of a leadership role, a look-see, you know, he's a member of this committee. he usually sits with them. one of the interesting questions is whether or not he he can vote as a committee member on this committee because he's a member of the judiciary committee. stuart: wait, how many republicans, how many democrats on the senate judiciary committee? >> i think it's 11 republicans and 9 democrats. stuart: even if senator session were not allowed to vote for himself and his nomination, it would still be 11-10.

>> that's not to say all democrats will vote against him. i don't think that's going to be the case. as well as i know senator booker, i do not believe that he represents a majority of democrats. stuart: wait a second, it's not a -- if not all democrats vote against senator sessions, if they're not in lockstep that takes thunder away from him. if they're not united in calling him a racist, you've got a problem. >> i don't think they're all united in calling him a racist, but we'll hear from senator feinste feinstein. stuart: she's started. we'll listen. >> to get a special prosecutor to look at your situation, end quote. mr. chairman, that's not what an attorney general does. an attorney general does not investigate or prosecute at the

direction of the president. nor do attorneys generals wear two hats, one as the president's lawyer and one as the president's-- as the people's lawyer. that model has failed. rather, the attorney general must put aside loyalty to the president, he must ensure that the law and the constitution come first and foremost, period. president lincoln's attorney general, edward bates, i think, said it best when he said this, and i quote, the office i hold is not properly political, but strictly legal and it is my duty above all other ministers of state to uphold the law and to resist all encroachments from whatever quarter, end quote. that is the job of the attorney general. if confirmed, senator sessions

will be the top official charged with faithfully and impartially enforcing all federal laws and protecting our fundamental right to vote from all incursions, whether they be foreign or domestic. his duty will be to enforce and protect our civil rights and constitutional freedoms, including a woman's right to choose. he will run the department that ensures those who commit hate crimes are held accountable and he will be charged with protecting consumers and taxpayers from fraud and making sure that corrupt public officials are held accountable. you will prosecute polluters based on federal law and it is the attorney general who must ensure that this government follows the law, does not ever torture again.

this is an awesome responsibility and an enormous job. what we must do now in these hearings is determine what type of attorney general senator sessions will be if confirmed and let me express a deep concern. stuart: now, senator feinstein expressed an important opinion there, judge. am i might in she saying a backhanded semi slap against the attorney general right now, loretta lynch. >> yes, by criticizing too much loyalty between the attorney general and the president of the united states. she may very well be arguing that jeff sessions shouldn't have, if he is confirmed, that kind of loyalty with donald trump, but her argument is a sound one. the attorney general is not the president's lawyer, he's the people's lawyer. stuart: it was hardly a blast against jeff sessions. >> correct. stuart: let's go back to dianne feinstein, she's now talking about race. >> throughout his career senator sessions advocated an extremely conservative agenda.

for example, he voted no and spoke for nearly 30 minutes in this committee against the leahy amendment two years ago that expressed the sense of the senate that the united states would not bar people from entering this country based on their religion. he voted against each of three bipartisan comprehensive immigration bills in 2006, 2007, and 2013. twice he voted against the dream act, the bill for undocumented youth known as dreamers who were brought here as children through no choice of their own, calling it a, quote, reckless proposal for mass amnesty, end quote. he voted against efforts to prohibit the use of waterboarding and other so-called enhanced interrogation techniques, calling them lawful and

praising attorney general mukasey in 2008 for refusing to rule out the use of waterboarding in the future. these interrogation techniques are and were at the time illegal and thanks to a provision senator mccain placed in the defense authorization bill this past year, they are now prohibited from use. in addition, senator sessions voted against the matthew shepherd and james byrd hate crimes act which among other things expanded the hate crimes law to cover sexual orientation and gender identity. arguing against the hate crimes law in 2009, he said this: today i'm not sure women or people would different sexual orientations face that kind of discrimination. i just don't see it, end quote.

well, this senator regretfully sees it. hate crimes are happening. the department of justice must see it, must investigate it, and prosecute it appropriately. those are votes that are deeply concerning. they are recent, they are important, and they clearly show this senator's point of vi view. now, for all these reasons, this hearing must determine clearly whether this senator will enforce laws he voted against. we, the american people, want to know how he intends to use this awesome power of the attorney general if he is confirmed. will he use it fairly? will he use it in a way that respects law and the constitution? will he use it away that eases tensions among other communities and our law enforcement officers? will he be independent of the white house?

will he tell the president no when necessary? and faithfully enforce ethic laws and constitutional restrictions? so we will ask questions and we will press for answers. ultimately, we must determine whether senator sessions can be the attorney general for all of our people. mr. chairman, i'd like to conclude with one final point, we cannot ignore that there are deep concerns and anxieties throughout america. there is a deep fear about what a trump administration will bring in many places and this is the context in which we must consider senator sessions' record and nomination to become the chief law enforcement of america. communities across this country are concerned about whether they will be able to rely on the department of justice to

protect their rights and freedoms. these freedoms are so cherished. they are what make us unique among nations. there have been sit-ins, protests and writings and the committee received letters of opposition from 400 different civil rights organizations, 1400 law professors, a thousand law students, a broad task force of organizations that oppose domestic violence, 70 reproductive health organizations, and many, many others. all of these letters express deep anxiety about the direction of this country and whether this nominee will enforce the law fairly, evenly, without personal bias. so, i hope today's questions are probing and the answers are fulsome. ladies and gentlemen, this is

the only way we have to know whether this man can dispatch himself from the president and from his record and vote in full, according to the laws of the united states of america. thank you very much. >> thank you, senator feinstein. before i turn to senator shelby and collins. stuart: dianne feinstein laying out a broad-based case on behalf of the democrats against senator jeff sessions. she said, judge, help me out here, she said he said no on the dream act. he said waterboarding was lawful. he had not extended hate crime legislation. senator feinstein said would he be fair in implementing the law. >> it's an interesting, non-racial based attack on jeff sessions, an attack whether or not a very conservative republican senator who becomes the attorney general can enforce laws that he himself voted voted against and argued against.

stuart: she did not say i can't vote for this guy. she will way it all together. judge napolitano: she is making the case against him, making a case against him. she left room for open-mindedness on her part. stuart: mister shelby is speaking, listening please. >> jeff sessions began his distinguished career as a practicing attorney and then served as united states attorney for alabama's southern district before becoming the attorney general of the state of alabama. during the past 20 years in the u.s. senate, i have had the opportunity to know him well not just as a skilled attorney but an accomplished record as a prosecutor and legislator, as a man of extraordinary character. i have the highest regard not only for his intellect but his integrity. unfortunately since the

announcement of his nomination, jeff's political opponents have attacked his character with tired allegations. in reality jeff sessions's extensive record of treating all americans equally under the law is clear and well documented. throughout his decades of public service including his impressive tenure on this committee jeff's commitment to upholding the rule of law is unparalleled. the integrity, humility and gravity with which jeff sessions will approach the office of attorney general of the united states is unquestionable. i have no doubt, mister chairman, that he will apply the law with impartiality required of the job. i am also confident that this committee will report favorably and expeditiously jeff sessions's nomination to be the next attorney general of the

united states. stuart: that is a controversial painting on capitol hill right there, the canon tunnel, that is the painting depicting a police officer as a pig. in recent days, congressman duncan hunter from california took the painting down, unscrewed it from the wall and took it down, took it away, congressional black caucus insists it be re-hangs. liz: they were threatening duncan hunter with theft charges even though he returned the painting to the congressman from missouri. two things, free-speech rights to be allowed to hang a painting but attacking police officers when they are the guys and women who will see terrorist acts first, pretty dangerous to put your country and that position. ashley: this was done by a highschooler as part of an exhibit from missouri and the

democratic congressman lacy clay was the person behind it, the congressional black caucus have been vocal, this should be allowed on the wall, a first amendment issue, it shows a police officer as a pig pointing a gun at african american protesters. stuart: this puts race front and center as senator sessions is being grilled. stephen king joining us now, you are a republican congressman from iowa. what do you make of this re-hanging of this picture. it is about race as senator sessions is being grilled about race to be attorney general. >> no doubt the timing of this thing is unfolding as if cornered by the congressional

black caucus. law enforcement appreciation day, jeff sessions is being grilled by the united states senate. i just walked by the location where the painting had hung. duncan hunter took down, i am grateful for and as i came through lacy clay had the painting in his hand and is preparing to hang that as we speak. stuart: it literally just happened, congressman. you are being called a white supremacist. people google your name and up comes white supremacist and they have race coming into this picture all over again. >> i get called all kinds of names. i will turn that into a negative to save them time. they over use these terms so much they are just dogeared terms, racist, white supremacist, it goes on and on. it happened through the obama administration starting with professor gates and officer crowley and it is the division

of this country created by the congressional black caucus, president obama and people who think they can gain political leverage by dividing americans and this is an overt example of an attempt to divide americans and it is racist at its core to do that and attack cops the way they are, the very people designed to protect us and watch the murder rates go up in the inner cities because they are intimidating cops from doing the jobs they are sworn to protect and serve. stuart: stay right there. i want to bring in detective steve loomis who is watching the proceedings which you are a police officer. what is your take on the rehanging of that picture? >> as offensive as it is, a painting made depicting civil rights violations of the 60s. and so we stop looking backward we can never move forward in this country. it is absolutely offensive and divisive.

stuart: not what you can do about it. >> we can say how disappointed we are in our leadership. these are legitimate leaders of this country that are advancing a false narrative through art. stuart: what is the false narrative? that the police are oppressing the black community? what is it? >> that is exactly what it is. gender driven by racially exclusive groups, by profiteers. the fact of the matter is the men and women of law enforcement are doing a job nobody else wants to do and doing it for the god-fearing law-abiding citizens of this country that support us and not these small groups of divisive people. stuart: what do black police officer think of this? >> they are as offended as anybody else. police officers are blue.

police officers aren't blue, there is an issue and they show themselves very quickly. the vast majority of police officers are absolutely offended by this. hanging in the walls of congress, maybe an art studio somewhere is not so bad but validating it by hanging it in congress is offensive. stuart: thank you very much. the confirmation hearings for susan collins, giving her opening statement as we speak but i have with me congressman stephen king, republican iowa. you are pushing back to get the kate steinle law. you are involved in that effort and therefore, if it were to be

senator sessions. and i count him as a friend, a lot of issues together. i see him again barriers he won't cross, these are constitutional barriers to me lives within those guidelines and we need to be invested in restoring the respect for the rule of law, and a better person than jeff sessions to do that. he has integrity, these allegations they are digging up from 30 years ago weren't valid then, they are certainly invalid now. democrats are making fools of themselves. stuart: do you know if senator sessions is in favor of kate's law? >> i can't say i know that. the direct conversation with him, or offer a case law, and another building, and a constituent in sarah route, donald trump has made big

issues, to trump's death and have the grieving families standing behind donald trump. stuart: senator sessions standing to take his seat in front of the judiciary panel. senator collins has ended her opening statement. senator sessions returning to his seat. there will be other speakers right there. before you leave us do you have any doubt that senator sessions will be confirmed attorney general of the united states? >> i have no doubt but i will make two predictions. one is jeff sessions will be confirmed as the next attorney general of the united states and the painting that is in the hallway i walked by will not last a day. it will be down before the end of this day. mark my words. stuart: thank you for joining us on an important day, we

appreciate it. listen to this please. >> do you swear that the testimony you are about to give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god? thank you and please be seated, senator sessions, it is our normal process if you desire to introduce people that are with you including your family. i'm sure you are proud of, you are free to do that and go immediately to your opening statements. >> it is an honor to be here. my wife mary for 37 years. and we are so proud.

our focus -- stuart: not sure if the microphone is turned on or not. now listen to this. >> they have two children, jay and richie, they wish me well this morning. and they stand up and john walk is an attorney with the department of homeland security, four children as you see before you today. grace and hannah and joanna and phoebe, they are twins. my son sam is a graduate of auburn and alabama law school. sorry, sam, about the game last night. lindsay, congratulations, wherever he is. in birmingham, he is married to angela, four children, lewis and

nicholas, ten grandchildren, the oldest is 9 and you can imagine the week we had this summer in alabama. as humble as i am to be receiving such overwhelming support and encouragement from our nation's law enforcement community. many are here today. with your permission i would like to ask those present to stand and be recognized, law enforcement here today. can you please stand? every major law enforcement organization in america has endorsed my candidacy. i feel the weight of the confidence they placed in me and i will do my best to be worthy of that and if i may, mister chairman, yesterday was law enforcement officer appreciation day. sadly on that day we lost two of

my brave officers, orlando police department master sergeant brooke clayton, one of the first officers to respond to the orlando nightclub shooting in june was shot and killed while confronting a subject wanted for murder. sergeant clayton, a 17-year-old veteran of the force was married with two children, while assisting in the search for that assailant, orange county deputy first class norman lewis was killed in a traffic accident on his motorcycle. he was an 11 year veteran of the sheriff's office. these honoraves have dedicated s to keeping their communities safe and we should remember their service and keep them in our families, in their families in our prayers. chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein, distinguished

members of the committee, i am honored to appear before you today. i thank you for the opportunity to respond to your questions as you discharge your duty in the appointment process as prescribed by the constitution. i want to thank my dear friend. >> no-trump. no kkk. no fascist usa. people in the streets of dc. and stay in the streets. [shouting] ashley: protesters, two of them removed from the speaking room shouting no kkk, no fascist usa.

subsistence -- jeff sessions continues we >> i think richard shelby, and senator susan collins for their kind and generous introduction, very moving and touching for me. hard to believe the three of us have served together in this body almost 20 years was when i arrived in the senate in 1997 i probably wouldn't have anticipated becoming so close with a colleague from maine. two people from the northernmost part of the country and 7 most part of the country. ashley: another interruption, a young lady standing up breaking into the proceedings. you probably can expect more of this that will stand up individually after every five minutes to disrupt proceedings with their statements about kkk, no fascist usa and senator sessions will continue. >> understand our accent, once we did we became fast friends.

richard shelby and i never had an accident problem. he was a steadfast friend and we have been a pretty good team representing the interests of alabama and the united states. i want to thank president-elect donald trump for the confidence and trust he has shown in me by nominating me to serve as attorney general of the united states. i feel the weight of an honor greater then i aspire to. of confirmed i will commit to you and to the american people to be worthy of the office and special trust that comes with it but i come before you today is a colleague who has worked with you for years and some of you 20 years. you know who i am and what i believe in. you know i am a man of my word and can be trusted to do what i say i will do. you know that i review the constitution, am committed to the rule of law and i believe in

fairness and impartiality and equal justice under the law. over the years, you heard me say many times i love the department of justice, the office of attorney general of the united states is not a normal political office and anyone who holds it must have total fidelity to the laws in the constitution of the united states. he or she must be committed to following the law. he or she must be willing to tell the president or other top officials if he or they overreach, he or she cannot be a beer rubberstamp. he or she must set the example for the employees of the department to do the right thing and ensure when they do the right thing, they know the attorney general will back them up no matter what politician might call or what powerful special interests and influential contributor or friends might try to intervene. the message must be clear.

everyone is expected to do their duty. that is the way i was expected to perform as an assistant united states attorney, working for attorney general mead and part of my career. that is the way i trained when i became united states attorney and if confirmed, that is the way i will lead the department of justice. in my over 14 years in the part of justify tried cases of every kind, drug trafficking, very large international smuggling, many firearms cases on violent crimes. a series of public corruption cases of significance. financial wrongdoing and environmental violations which are often supported historic civil rights cases and major civil cases, protecting the people of this country from crime and violence crime is a high calling in the department

of justice, today it has become more important than ever. since the early 1980s good policing and prosecutions over a period of years have been a strong force in reducing crime, drug use and murders are half what they were in 1980 when i became united states attorney. i am concerned the recent jump in violent crime and murder rates are not anomalous but the beginning of a dangerous trend that reversed the hard won gays that made america a safer and more prosperous place. the latest fbi statistics show all crimes increased 4% from 2014 to 2015. the largest increase since 1991 with murders increasing 11%, the single largest increase since

1971. in 2016 there were 468 shooting victims in chicago, baltimore homicides reached the second highest per capita rate ever. and in the throes of a heroin epidemic with overdose death more than triple between 2010, and 2014, tripling 50,000 a year die of drug overdose, meanwhile illegal drugs flood across our soil and southern border, into every city and town in the country bringing violence, addiction and misery. we must not lose perspective when discussing these statistics and we must remember these crimes were committed against real people, real victims. it is important that they are kept in front of our minds in these conversations and to ensure that their rights are protected so these trends cannot continue. it is a fundamental civil right to be safe in your home and your

community. if i am confirmed we will systematically prosecute criminals who use guns in committing crimes which is united states attorney my office was a leader in gun prosecutions every year. we will partner with state and local law enforcement to take down these major drug trafficking cartels and dismantle criminal gangs. we will prosecute those who violate our borders. it will be my priority to confront these crimes vigorously, effectively and immediately. approximately 90% of all law-enforcement office labs are not federal with state and local, they are the ones on the front lines, better educated, trained and equipped than ever before. they are the ones we rely on to keep our neighborhoods and playgrounds and schools safe. in the last several years law-enforcement as a whole has been unfairly maligned and blamed for the unacceptable

actions of a few of their bad actors. they believe political leadership in the country has abandoned them. they felt they have become targets. more out has suffered and last year under intense public criticism the number of police officers killed in the line of duty increased by 10% over 2015. firearm deaths of police officers are up 68%. this is a wake-up call, and dealing with rising crime and work with more effectively local law enforcement. asking them to lead the way. and in their lawful duties. in the meeting prior to this hearing. the federal government has an

important role to play, we use the research and expertise and training that has been developed by the department of justice to help these agencies and developing the most effective and lawful law-enforcement methods to reduce crime. strengthening the partnership and enhanced common and unified effort for the rising crime, as united states attorney i worked directly and continuously local and state of law-enforcement officials. if confirmed this will be one of my priority objectives. many things the department can do to assist states and local officers to strengthen relationships with their own communities where policies like community-based policing have absolutely been proven to work. i am committed to this effort

and to ensure the department of justice is a unifying force for improving relations between the police and this country and the communities they serve. this is particularly important in minority communities. positive relations and great communications between the people and their police are essential for any good police department. when police failed in their duties they must be held accountable. i have done these things as united states attorney. i have worked to advance these policies. law-enforcement officers, and the rising threat of terrorism that reached our shores. protecting american people from the scourge of radical islamic terrorism will continue to be a top priority. we work diligently to respond to threats using all lawful means

to keep our country safe, partnership will be vital to achieving more effective enforcement fiberthreat and the department of justice has a lead role to play in that essential effort. we must assess our abilities and have a different plan for defense and offense when it comes to cybersecurity. the the permit of justice must never falter in its obligation to protect the civil rights of every american particularly those who are most vulnerable, special priority for me in this regard will be the aggressive enforcement of laws to assure access to the ballot for every eligible voter without discrimination and to ensure the integrity of the electoral process which has been a great heritage of the department of justice. further, this government must

improve its ability to protect the united states treasury from fraud, waste and abuse. this is a federal responsibility. we cannot afford to lose a single dollar to corruption. you can be sure if i am confirmed i will make it a high priority of the department of justice to root out and prosecute fraud in federal programs and recover monies lost due to fraud and false claims and contracting fraud in issues of that kind. the justice department must remain ever faithful that the constitution's promise in our government is one of laws. it will be my unyielding commitment to you if confirmed to see that the laws are enforced faithfully, effectively and impartially. attorney general, one, no matter how powerful, accountable, no one is above the law and no american will be beneath its

protection. no powerful special interest will cower this department. i want to address personally the fabulous men and women that work in the department of justice. that includes personnel in maine justice in washington, also the much larger number that fulfill their responsibilities every day throughout the nation. as united states attorney i work with them constantly. i know them and the culture of their agencies, they represent the law enforcement officers, i know their integrity and their professionalism and i pledge to them a unity of effort that is unmatched. together we can and will reach the highest standards and highest results. it will be the greatest honor for me to lead these public servants. to my colleagues, i appreciate

the time each of you have taken to meet me one on one. as senators we don't always have enough opportunity to discuss matters face-to-face. i will understand and respect the conviction that you bring to your views even though we may always be an agreement you have always been understanding and respectful of my positions and i of yours which in our meetings over the past weeks we have had the opportunity to share with me, relating to the department from and prosecuted crimes on tribal lands, it is greater then i had understood, to discourage human trafficking and child exploitation, concerns about cuts in grant programs, protection of american civil liberty and the surge of heroin overdose to name a few things. i learned a lot during those

meetings particularly in my meeting with senator white house i discussed cybersecurity is a great deal of knowledge and you and senator graham have taken a lead on this important issue and we can work together and make some progress. senator graham, congratulations on your victory last night. i want to share all of my colleagues, i have given your concerns honest reflection and will bear them in mind, i will sincerely endeavor to keep these lines of communications open and hope we can continue -- if confirmed i commit to all of you the department of justice will be responsive to congress. and work with you on your priorities, and guidance in views while appropriate, will respect your constitutional

duty, oversight role and particularly important separation of powers between the executive and was afraid of branches. let me address another issue, accused from 1986 of failing to protect the voting rights of african-americans representing the case. creating civil rights advocates, and harboring sympathies for the kkk. these are false charges. the office prosecuted was response to pleas from african-americans, elected officials who claimed the absentee ballot process involved the balance task for them was stolen, altered and cast, prosecutions sought to protect the integrity of the balance, not to block voting.

it was a voting rights case. as to the kkk i invited civil rights attorneys from washington dc to help us solve a very difficult investigation into the unconscionable, horrendous death of a young african-american coming home from the 7-11 store at night simply because he was black. michael donald. and actively backed attorneys throughout the case and they broke that case. that led to a guilty plea and life sentence for one defendant and his testimony against the other defendant. there was no federal death penalty at the time. i felt the death penalty was appropriate in this case and push to have it tried in state court which was done. ironically, as alabama's attorney general, my staff participated, and sentence after

i became united states senator, that murdering person was indeed executed. for the clan and what it represents and its rightful ideology. - hateful ideology. southern poverty law center and his lawsuit, the successful collapse of the klan in alabama, the seizure of their building at least for that period of time. as civil rights division attorneys testified before the committee, i supported lee their historic cases that the justice department failed to advance civil rights and i supported including cases to desegregate schools, abolish at large elections for cities, county commissions and school boards. these at large collections were mechanisms used to block african-american candidates from being able to be elected to lords and commissions, a

systemic plan to reduce the ability of african-americans to have influence, the election and governing process. i never said the naacp was un-american or civil rights attorney was a disgrace to his race. there is nothing i am more proud of than my 14 years of service in the department of justice. i love and venerate that great institution which i hold dear its highest ideals. as god gives me the ability i will work every day to be worthy of the demands of this august office. you can be absolutely sure that i understand the immense responsibility i have. i am not naïve. i know the threat our rising crime and addiction rates posed to the health and safety of our

country. i know the threat of terrorism, i deeply understand the history of civil rights in our country and the horrendous impact that relentless and systemic discrimination and the denial of voting rights has had on our african-american brothers and sisters. i have witnessed it but we must continue to move forward and never back. i understand the demands for justice and fairness made by our gbt community. i will ensure that the statutes protecting their civil rights and safety are fully enforced. i understand the lifelong scars borne by women who are victims of assault and abuse and if i am fortunate to be confirmed as your attorney general you can know that i understand the absolute necessity that all my actions must fall within the bounds of the constitution and the laws of the united states.

all humans must recognize the limits of their abilities and i certainly do. i am ready for this job. your input will be valued, local law enforcement will be our partners. many friends in federal government that i had in law enforcement will be respected. i always love the law. it is the very foundation of this country. it is the exceptional foundation of america. i have an abiding commitment to pursuing and deceiving -- achieving justice as a record of doing that. if confirmed i will give all my efforts to this goal. i ask that you do your duty as god gives you the ability to see that duty as you are charged the constitution. thank you for your courtesy. i look forward to working in this hearing.

>> before i ask questions -- stuart: speaker ryan holding his weekly news conference has just said moments ago that when they repeal obamacare they will have a replacement with it concurrently, at the same time. nobody is going to be left without a replacement for obamacare. a couple points mister sessions said, just as the pig painting was being remounted on the wall on capitol hill, he said the cop killing spree must stop. he just said that. he also said he would prosecute those who violate our borders, and oblique reference to the kate steinman situation, she was murdered by allegedly a man who repeatedly reentered and broken our borders. let's bring in molly hollinger -- henning, had something to say, senator sessions had a lot to say, what democrats were

saying about him. will you deal with these cases in order? the voter fraud case. >> he tried to clear up problems in perry county which is known for having voting problems. more people voting than actual voters and he is accused of being a racist, and was asked to clean up the situation there. stuart: tell me about the kkk. we have demonstrators removed from the hearing room. no kkk and, no fascist usa. that is the slur on senator sessions. >> this one is amazing given what senator jeff sessions did to destroy the kkk in alabama, shows an amazing amount of ignorance. there was a case in 1981 of a

young black man being abducted and lynched by members of the kkk and the man who prosecuted that case said he could not have done it without the help of senator jeff sessions. he made sure was prosecuted in a state court so they can get the death penalty and they did. senator jeff sessions's office was involved in making sure the death penalty was carried out in an appeal. they could successfully get these guys, a difficult case to prosecute. to impanel a federal grand jury so they could hit these guys time after time after time so one of the guys end up breaking tiger noel and the other guy serves a life sentence, the other guy henry hayes, the son of the leader of the kkk in alabama, the death penalty, the idea jeff sessions of all people would be accused of being a member of the kkk when he was instrumental in bringing it down is my thought. stuart: last one, the left is

saying mister sessions said nasty things about the naacp. what about that? >> this is one of the things that is interesting, there are people who came out decades ago saying he said things that are unsavory and very little corroboration for that. interesting that this was the original, when he was nominated decades ago, ted kennedy and other democrats tried to do we call forking. the year before judge bork was given the same treatment and it is something people find very unsavory and are not willing to let it happen now after people know senator jeff sessions was in senate for so long, so many friends on both sides of the island his character speaks for itself. people don't like that he's going to enforce the law and that is a big difference from the last eight years, what we have seen and he will have differences of opinion on drug enforcement, immigration and what not from the current administration. that is why you are seeing these protests. stuart: thank you for joining

us, we appreciate your information. john bolton is with us, ambassador to the united nations, welcome back to the program. you are no stranger to highly contentious hearings in congress. you went through this in 2005 and before then, i believe. >> sessions made an excellent case, i was involved in his confirmation in 1986 when the democrats tried to smear him. his confirmation was the first in a series of spring training, dan manion and the seventh circuit was next and the real focus was on nomination of william rehnquist to be chief justice, they fail that and broke their game back again in 1987 and the vicious attack on robert bork. when the confirmation process

gets out of hand. the nominee disagreeing with the nominees views, disagree with the presidents views, not to be a ground to vote against them but he. it out to be purely a question of competence but the process has gone beyond that. they are attacking jeff sessions for being donald trump's nominee, that is what it boils down to. stuart: it seems like the left is trying to tar the entire trump team including mister sessions with a racist brush and that will be there attack on him and the attack on the administration going forward. >> a large basket of adjectives in the basket of the plurals they can use and they will pick different ones out for different people. this is part of the problem with the loss of perspective of what the senate's proper role is. if it is multiply philosophical disagreement, if you have to show somebody unqualified as in the case of jeff sessions, they

are eminently qualified to be attorney general, you have 2 resort to vicious personal attacks in a variety circumstances. it is unfortunate for the nominees but more important over the past three or four decades it has proven unfortunate for the country. you have to ask people sensibly why would you ever want to go through this? in a senior position of the united states government, personally attacked -- senator sessions will be confirmed as attorney general. republicans have a vote on the judiciary committee, they have votes in the senate and so far mister sessions refuting charges of racism has been very solid. any doubts he will be confirmed? >> no and i think susan collins took the words out of my mouth. arlen specter voted against him

in 1986, when spector switched to be a democrat he was asked of the thousands of votes, did you regret any one voted arlen specter set i regretted voting against jeff sessions which i have come to see what a good man he is, not attained of racism and i will make a prediction, i think senator sessions is going to get a lot of democratic votes. a substantial majority in support of his nomination. stuart: i want to go back to the hearings. there is a question about hillary clinton and the new email revelation. >> i, like a lot of people, made comments about the issues in that campaign with regard to secretary clinton and some of the comments i made, i do believe that could place my

objectivity in question. i have given that thought. i believe the proper thing for me to do would be to recuse myself from any questions involving those kind of investigations that involve secretary clinton and it was raised during the campaign. or could be otherwise connected to it. >> let me emphasize with a follow-up question, to be very clear, you intend to recuse yourself from both the clinton email investigation and any matters involving the clinton foundation if there are any? >> yes. >> let me follow up again because it is important. when you say you are recused, you will actually recuse and the decision will therefore fall to i assume a deputy attorney general? i ask because after attorney general lynch met with president clinton in phoenix she said she would, quote, defer to the fbi

but she never officially recused. >> no, she did not officially recuse. there is a procedure for that which i would follow and i believe that would be the best approach for the country because we can never have political dispute turn into a criminal dispute that is not in any way that would suggest anything other than absolute objectivity, this country does not punish his political enemies but ensures no one is above the law. >> you touched on something very dear to me and that is working with having executive branch people working with members of congress and you also mentioned working with us on oversight but since that is important to me let me say that the executive branch has always been one of my

top priorities regardless who occupies the white house. i have often said i have an equal opportunity overseer. now over the years that i asked quite a few executive nominees both republican and democrat to make commitments to respond to oversight. you said you would but in my experience nominees are usually pretty receptive to oversight requests during these type of hearings but after they have been confirmed oversight doesn't seem to be a high priority for them. i told you when we met privately in my office sometimes i think nominees should go ahead and be a little more straightforward during their hearings and instead of saying yes to everything we ask about oversight, it would be more honest to say maybe when asked if they would respond to our questions. and i hope you will be different from predecessors in response to

oversight questions and i have with me that i will get to one of your staff a bunch of letters that haven't been answered and you signed with me to the department of justice. i hope you would go to great lengths to see if the next what is answered and if i am contacting you that they haven't been answered, the trump administration might be blamed for in these are a result of not getting answers from the last administration so i hope you will only get answers to at least the one you helped me right. >> mister chairman, you are correct that this committee has oversight but it goes beyond that. this committee and congress funds various branches, you have every right before you fund our agencies and departments to get

responsive answers. sometimes congress has asked for issues there is legitimate reason to object to but they should object statewide mister chairman, i will be responsive to your request and i understand your history more than anyone in congress to advance the idea the executive branch needs to be held accountable. >> senator feinstein contacts you don't use this excuse so many years that if you are not chairman of the committee you don't have to answer the question. i want her questions answered like you have answered mine. >> thank you. that was above and beyond, i would like to begin with the second largest criminal industry

in this country which is believe it or not by revenues produced human sex trafficking and trafficking victims are among the most vulnerable in our society. the average age is 12-14. they are beaten, raped, abused, at times handcuffed so they can't escape and often move from place to place, forced to have sex with multiple men. stuart: we will rejoin senator feinstein and her questioning in a moment but i want to repeat the news that senator sessions just broke. he told the committee he will recuse himself from any investigation of senator clinton, hillary clinton, about emails or the clinton foundation. he will not be part of that investigation, will not make decisions, he will recuse himself completely. he is doing this because he made

comments about hillary clinton before the election. he said those comments would prevent him making an objective decision after the election as attorney general. what did he say? >> you cannot be secretary of state and use that position to extort or see contributions to the foundation meaning the clinton foundation. he said it seems the fbi did not fully investigate the clinton foundation in terms of compelling a grand jury. stuart: he said that before the election and now he says because i said that i must recuse myself. ashley: that is true, shows the prejudice going into an investigation, taking the high road. stuart: if anyone watching this program now was thinking attorney general sessions if he is confirmed will be leading the charge to prosecute hillary clinton, forget it, that is not going to happen. >> donald trump said i will appoint a special prosecutor to look into hillary clinton and her time as secretary, he could reopen the email investigation and continue with the charitable

foundation probe but he is saying i'm recusing myself from that. stuart: fully recusing himself. that is very interesting news item. for all of those who want to know what is going to happen to hillary clinton going forward with emails and the foundation i want to repeat one item of news broken by speaker ryan who holds a weekly press conference, when they repeal obamacare they will have a replacement at precisely the same moment. larry elder is going to join us from los angeles, california. it seems to us that the democrats are trying to tire senator sessions and the whole trump team with the racist brush. that is my best way of putting it. how do you see it from your vantage.-- vantage point in

california? >> steve bannon was anti-semite, donald trump is a racist and a bigot and the uniform and jeff sessions is a racist. definitions's big crime is he is a white male christian conservative from the south. that is not allowed unless you are robert bird and a democrat. there is nothing there. he has worked for 20 years with people across the aisle, democrats and republicans, has been complemented by both. a lot of black support including lawyers who work with them. he will get through but this is all about getting everything teed up for 2020. stuart: the leader of the democrats and chuck schumer, used the word racist in connection with mister sessions. he said he was troubled by mister sessions. you got something on that.

>> i do. back in 1974 when chuck schumer was running for state assembly in new york he had a meeting of people in brooklyn and these neighbors did not want a group of blacks sitting there and according to somebody at the meeting chuck schumer promised when he became an assembly been to oppose legislation to move these black people are to refurbish their apartments and be given offer of first recusal but departments would be so expensive they would be able to move back into the neighborhood. this is all a scheme to get rid of bunch of blacks in a flatbush area of brooklyn. the guy that was there was in american spectator, the reason he wrote about it is he got tired of hearing chuck schumer put out the race card maligning people after people -- he had this racist scheme to get rid of a bunch of blacks in a flatbush area in brooklyn. stuart: larry, hold on a second. i want to go back to the hearing, senator feinstein is

asking about roe v wade. >> settled for quite a long time and it deserves respect and i would respect it and follow it. >> on november 14, 2016, appearing on the tv show 60 minutes the president-elect said the issue of same-sex marriage was, quote, already settled, it is law. it was settled in the supreme court, it is done and i am fine with that. do you agree the issue of same-sex marriage is settled law? >> the supreme court has ruled on that. the senate -- it was 5-numfour, 5 justices on the supreme court from -- a majority of the court established the definition of marriage for the entire united states of america and i will follow that decision. >> here is another question. if you believe same-sex marriage is settled law but a woman's right to choose is not, what is

the difference? >> i haven't said the woman's right to choose or roe versus wade or progeny is not the law of the land or not clear today. i would follow that law. >> i would like to ask one question based on the letter we received for 1400 law professors from 49 states, only alaska is left out. i inquired why and they said alaska doesn't have a law school. it is a pretty comprehensive list representing law professors in every state that has a law school. what they said and this is what i want you to respond to. nothing in senator sessions's public life since 1986 has convinced us that he is a different man than the 39-year-old attorney who was deemed too racially insensitive

to be a federal district court judge. all of us believe it is unacceptable for someone with senator sessions's record to lead the department of justice so i want your response to this and answer to the question, how do you intend to put behind you what are strongly felt personal views, take off the political hat and be an attorney general who fairly enforces the law and the constitution for all? >> senator feinstein, i would direct their attention to first the remarks of senator specter who in his entire career said he made one vote he would regret and that was to vote against me. he indicated that was an egalitarian, a person who treated people equally and respected people equally. this caricature of me in 1986

was not attorney. i supported as civil rights attorney said, major civil rights cases in my district that integrated schools and prosecuted the clan and ended did single-member districts that denied african-americans the right to hold office. i did everything i was required to do any complaints about the voter fraud case and the clan case that i vigorously prosecuted and supported are false and i do hope this hearing today will show that i conducted myself honorably and profitably at that time and i am the same person, perhaps wiser and a little better, i hope so, but i did not harbor the kind of animosity and racial be based discrimination ideas that i was accused of.

i did not. >> thank you, mister chairman. >> senator hatch and senator leahy. stuart: interesting development right there. mister sessions was asked, is roe v wade settled law? he responded i will follow that decision. another question, same-sex marriage, he repeated i will follow that decision, the decision of the supreme court of the united states which he was then asked about all the law school professors who opposed him in an open letter to congress and that was going back to 1986. i have conducted myself with honor. i did not go against the interests of any section of our country. >> i asked consent to put that letter in the record. >> thank you, mister chairman, thank you for your fair approach to this, the first hearing of the 115th congress, you have

structured this hearing in line with the committee's precedent, you are including more witnesses in this area than the past average for attorney general nominees. senator sessions has provided this committee with 150,000 pages of material relevant to his nomination. that is 100 times what attorney general lynch and 30 times what attorney general holder provides. this ethereal comes from someone we know, someone many of us have served with in the senate, on this very committee, some on the far left will stop at nothing to defeat this nomination. they oppose this nomination precisely because senator sessions will not politicize the justice department or use its resource to further a political agenda. they make up one thing after another to create a caricature that bears no resemblance to the

nominee who is before us today. i am on this committee for a long time and i have seen these very tactics used before and they are not going to work this time. senator sessions, it sounds strange to say this but welcome to the senate. the senate judiciary committee. i am sure there will be some need to address false claims and fabricated charges during this hearing but i have some questions about issues and policies you will be addressing when you become attorney general. the first is one i have raised with every incoming attorney general nominee for nearly 25 years and it concerns enforcement of federal laws prohibiting obscenity, the 108th congress you introduced senate concurrent resolution 77, the sense of congress that federal obscenity laws should be

vigorously enforced throughout the united states. it pleased the senate, it passed the senate unanimously, please do too, it is the only resolution on this subject ever passed by either the senate or the house. i want to share with you that resolution adopted by last year outlining why pornography should be viewed as a public health problem as well as the latest research to the harms of obscenity. is it still your view federal law prohibiting adult obscenity should be vigorously enhanced. stuart: i do want to go back to a significant news development.

.. lynch sort of part of the way half heartedly took herself off of the case because of this meeting she had with bill clinton at the phoenix airport while mrs. clinton was the subject of an investigation. what senator sessions has offered is a formal recusal. he will sign a document that will remove him forever from these cases and will place the number two, whoever that is, in the justice department in his shoes for all clinton investigations.

stuart: so you could still have a clinton investigation and/or a prosecution, but it would not be conducted by jeff sessions. >> correct. stuart: if he became attorney general. >> correct. he'd be attorney general for all purposes but these cases on which he recuses himself. stuart: that was a surprise to you? >> it was a surprise to me. it probably cuts off a lot of intended areas of inquiry. stuart: it certainly tones down the level of attack on him. >> yes. and, quite frankly, i think he did the right thing politically, morally, legally and ethically. stuart: larry elder is with us still from southern california. i like to point that out, larry. [laughter] now, we just heard jeff sessions say -- [laughter] that roe v. wade, the abortion case, is settled law and that same-sex marriage, sessions would follow that decision from the supreme court. that is a very soft approach from senator sessions on two key issues. that will go down well in california, will it not? >> of course it will.

and what else did you expect him to say? i don't think that roe v. wade is settled law? i'm looking forward to it being overturned? he's not going to say that. what this was was the inconsistency on the part of donald trump when he had that interview with "60 minutes." on the one hand, he said same-sex marriage is settled law, but roe v. wade is not. what it shows you is that donald trump is very liberal on the issue of same-seax marriage. you'd think his critics might take some comfort in that. stuart: well, what do you think about the recusing himself from the prosecution or investigation of hillary clinton? i believe you want -- [laughter] i know, i can tell you're laughing. i know you want a prosecution and an investigation, but you're not going to get it from jeff sessions as attorney general. >> it also shows you that the idea of prosecuting hillary is not off the table which puts front and center whether or not president obama in the waning days of his administration is going to pardon her. i think the pressure will be

even greater on him to pardon her after what jeff sessions said which implies that the investigation is still possibly going to go forward under a president donald trump. stuart: okay. we're about 90 minutes into this. i don't believe a glove has been laid on jeff sessions yet. what do you have to -- >> if trump doesn't pardon, you know, an as yet unnamed deputy attorney general could maybe go ahead with the clinton probe. possibly. stuart: now, so far -- peter kiernan is with us, a market guy, former partner at goldman sachs. you follow the markets, you follow money. it occurs to me that jeff sessions will be confirmed as attorney general. they're not going to turn him down at this point. is that helping the market? because we're now up 50-odd points. >> i think the way it helps the market is not so much jeff sessions, but it's another brick in the wall, and that's what's going on here. trump needs to erect not a wall down in mexico right now -- [laughter] he needs to create a wall, he needs to create a wall of advisers and helpers in washington.

and this is the first one, and it gets laid well, i think it portends good things, and that's why the market -- stuart: about a half hour ago, we also had speaker ryan say that just as they repeal obamacare, they will have a replacement for it in place right there and then, simultaneously. that's good for the market too, isn't it? >> that's great for the market. actually, this group, this ministration-to-be needea strong dose of reality. you can't repeal without replacing. you have 23w million people who are currently covered who may not be. that's way too many americans to leave up in the air. this is a good move for the administration and, therefore, good for the markets. stuart: carol roth is with us, carol, you were a friend of the program many years ago. great to see you back again. the point i'm trying to make here is they've not laid a glove on jeff sessions, he will be confirmed -- looks like it. i don't want to forecast that, but it sure looks like it. we have paul ryan saying we're going to repeal obamacare and replace it virtually simultaneously.

i'm saying that that's good for the market, and so is peter kiernan. another brick in the wall of the trump administration going forward with what it's supposed to do. the market is up. what say you? >> i think it's not only good for the market, i think that it's good for the economy and the american people. and i think that there's sometimes a divergence between what is good for the market and what is good on main street. but to have jeff sessions potentially confirmed really helps to legitimize the president-elect which i know, obviously, has been one of those things creating some volatility in the market and also out there on main street. and i think that repealing obamacare and having that replacement is critical. like your other guest said, you cannot have that hanging out there. and, certainly, everybody from small business owners up through people who are depending on it through their jobs really need to know that they're going to have that health care in place. it creates confidence, that confidence moves markets, it

moves the economy. i think it's a very good tng, stuart. stuart: we're up about 50 points as we speak, 19,9 3w-6. ash? >> don't forget, donald trump has a press conference tomorrow, the first since july. he could give renewed, fresh optimism to investors out there, and that could spark anotheror . so it'll be interesting to see what he has to say after criticizing hillary for not giving many news conferences, this is his first since july. it'll be good for him to address some issues. stuart also, peter, last night there was a big meeting on taxes. paul ryan was there from congress and all of mr. trump's senior economic advisers were in that meeting. it was a big, long meeting. maybe mr. trump will say something about tax cuts tomorrow. that helps the market. >> i think it does. there are two big issues in the meeting last night. one was border tax, and the clear message if you manufacture there to sell here much cheaper, you're going to likely pay a little bit of a fee going across that border. and secondly, territorial tax. if you're a u.s. company and

you're making money in an overseas country, you should not have to pay tax on that income. that puts us level set with the rest of the world. if he does those two things, those are big breaks for government coming to business saying we are working with you, but we're not going to let you jam down cheap goods to the american people by giving them lower jobs, fewer jobs by exporting them to mexico. stuart: i'm not forecasting this at the press conference tomorrow, but if he did, that's a plus. >> i think border tax is a big plus even though a lot of companies won't like it. stuart: judge politano, you've been watching this throughout. seems to me like mr. sessions is putting a very calm face -- >> yes. stuart: -- on his appearance? >> he has yet to face his most aggressive interrogators but, yes, it is very calm. there was no follow-up from senator feinstein. she did challenge him on same-sex marriage, and she challenged him on abortion, and his answers, i think, were satisfactory to her. whether she votes for him or not, i don't know. but the public perception of a

rational, even-keeled, fair-minded, calm jeff sessions is being repeated over and over. stuart: carol roth, i hear you trying to get in. what's your point? maybe she wasn't. carol? i was -- i heard you -- >> yes. stuart: -- talking in the background there. you want to make a point? go? >> i'm sorry, sorry, institute, there was a little -- stuart, there was a little miscommunication with my earpiece. i do want to go back to what peter was saying on the border taxes. i don't know that is so great for the market. i think there are a lot of participants in the market who are advocates of free trade. i think as donald trump approaches taxes that i'd like to see more incentives than penalties. i think if you create the right incentives to create and foster more jobs and more opportunities for companies, certainly beneficial tax breaks are good things, but i don't think that having tax penalties and restricting free trade is something that's going to be

welcome for the market -- stuart: i can see that, carol. peter? >> i understand the point, i think it's a valid one. here's why i think it has impact on the markets. if you look at what ford and general motors and other companies are doing saying we're going to think twice about manufacturing overseas, we may think better to avoid a border tax, it's one of those clubs i've got that he doesn't have to use, but i get your point. stuart: i believe senator leahy is now asking questions to mr. sessions. let's listen in to that. this may be harsh questions. >> domestic violence and sexual assault. why did you vote no? >> mr. chairman, i did, indeed, support the bill in 2000 -- >> i'm talking about the bill that is law today. >> i understand what you're -- >> the law that was passed in 2013 by an overwhelming margin in the senate and by an overwhelming margin in the republican-controlled house signed into law by president obama. i'm asking about that. why did you oppose it? >> mr. chairman, a number of

people to opposed some of the provisions in that bill, not the entire bill -- >> i'm just asking about you. >> i'm trying to answer. >> go ahead. >> so when we voted in the committee, eight of the nine republicans voted against the bill. one of the more concerning provisions was a provision that gave trial courts jurisdiction to try persons who were not tribal members. that's contrary, i believe, the only time that's ever happened. that was the big concern that i raised, i believe primarily, on the legislation. so i voted with the chairman and the legislation he had that i thought did the job for protecting women, to reauthorize the violence against women act but at the same time did not have other things attached to it that i thought were concerning. >> well, on the tribal courts,

those have now been prosecuted very carefully. dependents receive due process rights, they have to. none of the non-indian dependent defendants that have been prosecuted have appealed to federal courts. many feel it's made victims on tribal lands safer. do you agree with that? do you agree with the way the justice department has handled such cases? >> mr. chairman, i do believe that the law has been passed by congress. i'm interested to see how it plays out in the real world with, and i will do my best to make my judgment about how to enforce that as attorney general. >> well, we -- >> the law itself has many powerful provisions, and i'm glad it was passed -- stuart: i just want to come back to the judge here. senator leahy has asked a question about the violence against women act, and it's developed into an in-depth

decision of tribal courts. it doesn't seem like that's a profound critique of mr. sessions. >> i don't think it is, and it's really in the weeds, and this is what happens sometimes when they get off on a tangent. i thought that senate leahy was going to be very aggressive -- stuart: yes. >> and i think you did as well. stuart: i did. >> his initial tone was combative, now they're in the weeds. stuart: dana loesch, come into this please. it's not revealed much of a chink in the armor of senator sessions. what say you? >> no, and thank you for having me. it hasn't because there isn't much of one to begin with. in fact, all of these accusations against senator sessions have been based in identity politics, and it's a lame attack on someone who has a good record and was a good ag in alabama and would be a good attorney general for the united states. and, quite frankly, it's something that we need particularly when we're fighting voter fraud, when we're hoping to have some of these cities where you have federal judges

that have individuals going into their courts and these people aren't serving minimum mandatory, a lot of these federal cases aren't being prosecuted. there are a number of issues that i think jeff sessions would be a great fit for, and that's why he's been nominated. stuart: well, he's come out today and said roe v. wade, the abortion issue, is settled law. same-sex marriage, mr. sessions said he would follow the decision of the supreme court on that. he's going to recuse himself from any investigation or prosecution of hillary clinton, the e-mails or the clinton foundation. he's putting forward a very soft approach. it will be very hard to not confirm him in the light of what he's been saying for the past two hours. >> i think he's playing a very interesting game, and i have to say because sessions, i would imagine, is quite conservative on those issues as i am too. but those positions, we have for the longest time we have complained about politicians, and we've complained particularly about people who are in positions where they are

not tasked with legislation, with writing our bills, actually creating law. and that's one of the things that jeff sessions is not doing here. that's actually -- if people want to change it, that's the responsibility of the voters to change that. we are the last gatekeeper, not someone who's being nominated for attorney general. and that's quite refreshing to see, actually. stuart: what do you think is going to happen when the issue of guns comes up? because it will be raised almost certainly in the next couple of hours. what say you on that, dana? >> well, i can't wait to hear his answer on that specifically because we're going for the hearing protection act. i would love to see that passed just because it's, quite simply, common sense. but also the bigger case, and this is where sessions' name is tossed around quite a bit with, where it concerns national reciprocity. this is also quite simple. my concealed-carry id shouldn't end at the state line. my driver's license count, so why does my right to exercise the second amendment and carry a firearm lawfully, why shouldn't

that as well? we don't have regulations over free press and practice of religion and assembly and speech. so i think that would be a great move. i can't wait to hear sessions' answer on this, and i think he would be very strong, a very strong constitutionalist and stick to the law as it is written instead of having very progressive interpretations of what he would like to see it operate as. stuart: one of our viewers, judge napolitano, our second amendment people, they don't want the law messed around with from where it is now. i take it you don't believe mr. sessions would mess around -- >> all he has to do is say the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental liberty protected by the second amendment and the supreme court has ruled that. in terms of what dana is suggesting, i fully agree with her. i don't know if he's going to get into that. that is legislation that has been proposed but not yet voted on which would allow the right to keep and bear arms as granted by one state as being reciprocally recognized by all other states. that's not yet the law.

i suggest jeff sessions is in favor of it. he probably won't express an opinion on it because it's not yet the law. stuart: he's not doing too badly -- >> no, not at all. stuart: senator leahy didn't lay a glove on him. >> they were actually laughing. i don't know what they were laughing at, but they were laughing. stuart:@very hard to see senator sessions rejected as attorney general -- >> it's going to get a little harsher as we go along. stuart: who's coming up? >> sheldon whitehouse, al franken, richard blumenthal out of connecticut -- >> these are very, very liberal members of the democratic party. senator blumenthal is a former attorney general of the state of connecticut, an expert in state and federal law, probably will ask questions that are a little more pointed. then, of course, we have senator cory booker who's actually going to be a witness against him but will not have the opportunity to interrogate him. stuart: dana, the democrats are trying to portray mr. sessions and the whole trump team as a pack of racists.

that's the brush they're trying to scrape over the entire administration. so far it doesn't look like it's been successful. mr. sessions had a pretty good answer for charges about the voter fraud and the kkk, etc., etc. >> yeah. it's silly to call one who busted the klan in alabama, to claim that they're racist. and the accusations that came up against jeff sessions came from two individuals who proved themselves to be not credible witnesses because they both ran afoul of the law. one was indicted on bribery, and herbert was scolded by the 11th circuit court of appeals for impropriety. especially when you consider that a number of other associates of jeff sessions, black and white together, defended not only his integrity, his character and his record. these are silly charges brought on by a losing party that actually just needs to stop and allow this mandate to take place because that's what the vote delivered. stuart: you know, that's what we like about you, dana loesch, you

call it as you see it. you shoot straight, as one might say. peter? >> i know both sheldon whitehouse and dick blumenthal there. sheldon has a penchant for torture and waterboarding, sessions has hidden behind the skirts of the constitution which is a good place to hide if you're going before the justice committee. what i really think is i'd look for sheldon to look for areas where it's not settled law and see where he is out in the grasslands. >> i tell you where i think they're going to go, and this is the discretion of the attorney general -- >> exactly. >> eric holder exercised his discretion as did loretta lynch not to prosecute the personal use of marijuana in states where the state government has made it lawful even though it is unlawful everywhere under federal law. >> right. >> how will you, senator sessions, exercise your discretion. now, i think i know which way he's going to go because the president-elect said during the campaign he would enforce federal law, and he would

appoint an attorney general who would enforce federal law. but still the ag has a lot of discretion. are you going to prosecute doctors who prescribe marijuana where it is a lawful prescription in their states? that's 27 states. that's more than half the states in the union. stuart: and what would senator sessions say, if asked that precise question? >> i think that question is going to be put to him by one of those senators, whitehouse, blumenthal or franken -- stuart: what will he say? >> i don't know what he'll say. he's appointed by a man whose opinions are well known on marijuana. stuart: met me -- >> it's federal law. stuart: as i understand it, donald trump doesn't use drugs, doesn't drink, doesn't smoke, etc., etc., and does not approve of legal, recreational marijuana. is that accurate? >> i believe that's accurate, yes. stuart: so they're talking about vetting at the moment. let's listen in to this, because that's important. let's listen. >> great believers in religious freedom and the right of people

to exercise their religious beliefs. >> before i turn to -- >> [inaudible] >> yes. so without objection, your inserts will be included. i have a letter from solicitor general ted olson in support of senator sessions -- stuart: i'm sorry, we just missed the comment from mr. sessions. he was asked about vetting. he replied that he, yes, of course, vetting but not a blanket stoppage on one particular religion coming into the country. i think that was the gist of what he had to say, but the question was raised. the questioning will continue. the market shows a 55-point gain. we've gone up steadily throughout the court of this -- the course of this hearing. the judge is laughing -- >> you want that 20,000 mark to be hit on your show, and i don't blame you. [laughter] stuart: i'm trying to connect, i'm trying to connect -- >> desperately. [laughter]

stuart: no, no, no, i am not a cheerleader. i'm trying to connect the likelihood of mr. sessions' confirmation as attorney general and all of the other trump picks for the cabinet, the likelihood that he'll get his team in place is good news for the market because that means trump policies will be put in place, and we're up 55 points. lizzie? >> well, senator leahy has been grilling mr. sessions on whether he would back the president-elect's threat to ban muslims from entering the country. stuart: yes. >> so we're trying to ascertain where jeff sessions is coming -- stuart: well, he's not going to have that blanket ban. >> right. stuart: i'm missing out one thing from our market coverage, you will be pleased to hear, judge napolitano. [laughter] earlier today we had the small business optimism index. it just hit a 12-year high. i think that's a plus for the market, peter. >> it has been, and it's one of the things that's driving -- and the beauty of this is most of those small businesses are not affected much by a strong dollar because they don't export much. the thing to watch with small business is so far the hiring has not come through yet.

december was kind of disappointing in small business hiring, and i'm watching that particularly because a lot of the small business leaders i talk to say i have a problem, and that problem is i'm not finding qualified talent, sufficiently trained talent. that's going to be an anchor a little bit on their growth. stuart: dana, last word to you on in this. looks like trump is encouraging optimism in the american economy. you going to take me on on that one? >> well, i'm not surprised, actually. when you consider everything we've been through the previous eight years, it's been a climate that is not good for business, it has been a climate that's actually penalized success. business owners have been penalized. they don't have -- we have some of the highest capital gains, highest corporate tax rates in the world which is crazy because i always thought out of everything that progressives love about europe and love about every other country, they don't like their lower corporate tax rates which seems odd. but, no, i can see that the markets are doing well. people have a lot more optimism simply because they realize here's an individual --

regardless of what you think about some of the characteristics or personal beliefs, etc., strictly on the topic of business he is more open minded considering what we've been through than the candidate the democrats put up. and that's something -- people are optimistic about that. job creators are optimistic about that. i want to -- make the business climate great again, that's what i'm looking forward to. stuart: dana, thank you very much, indeed. i want to get the exact quote of what mr. sessions said about the admission of muslims coming into the country. have we got that on the scream, please? okay. i have no view and do not sport the idea that -- support the idea that muslims as a religious group should be denied entry to the united states. that's what he said. >> and he added to that as a footnote that mr. trump has shifted his approach to, quote, strong vetting of individuals from countries that have a history of terrorism. and jeff sessions is saying he does support that. stuart: okay.

>> ask general kelly because it's under the department of homeland security, not under the justice department. stuart: so far mr. sessions has had to deal with questions about roe v. wade -- he says it's settled law -- questions about same sex marriage, he says he respects the decision of the supreme court, questions about his supposed racism of the past -- he's answered all those questions about his handling of voter fraud cases and the kkk and a couple of other race-related issues as well. i mean, he's run through the gamut of stuff here, and he's come out as a very, as a very soft approach, a very constitutional approach to his position. >> very measured. >> he only got emotional, really emotional, when he was challenged about his positions on race, and he says he strongly rejects the kkk, he strongly objects to the way people are characterizing his positions on race. as for the reauthorizing the violation against women act, he was questioned on that because there were amendments that would have given protection to people, you know, same-sex couples.

stuart: the news that he broke this morning is, judge, that he's going to recuse himself from any investigation or prosecution of hillary clinton. >> correct. that doesn't mean the justice department wouldn't continue to investigate the clinton foundation or the newly-discovered evidence on the e-mails. it just means that attorney general sessions would have no say in the investigation. stuart: okay. larry elder still with us down there in southern california. you have a comment, please, on mr. sessions' views on the immigration of muslims to america. state your case. >> well, that's right. donald trump has modified his point of view, and now, as jeff sessions pointed out, has focused on what he calls extreme vetting. and the bottom line here is that they can't stop this. the democrats did away with the filibuster rule when it comes to con to fir mission be of cabinet appoint tees, and now it's coming back to part-time them in the tail. all they've got is to pound and pound and pound and argue that he's a bigot.

one more quick thing, a personal note, one of jeff sessions' top aides is a young man named steven miller. steven miller is so talented, sessions lent him to the trump campaign, and miller is the one writing the inaugural speech for donald trump. i've known him since he was a teenager. he is not working for a white supremacist. he wouldn't do that. stuart: okay. larry elder, thank you very much for joining us today. we do appreciate it. the hearings continue. we're now two hours into the hearing session of jeff sessions to be the attorney general of the united states of america. we were expecting a very contentious hearing. we were looking for fireworks. so far we've really not had them. i thought that senator leahy, democrat of vermont, would chime in with some caustic comments to mr. sessions. he did not do that. mr. leahy ended his questioning with all smiles from both sides, from mr. sessions and from senator leahy. does anybody around this table think there is the slightest

chance that mr. sessions will not be confirmed as attorney general? >> no. guaranteed. stuart: liz city? >> i the he gets -- yes, i think he gets confirmed. >> even though some of the worst is still to come, he's doing so well -- stuart: define what's the worst? >> good question, stuart. most aggressive questioners are still to come. mostcerbic testimony still to come. thus far he has burst the bubble of all of his adversaries. he's only had two, senator feinstein and senator leahy, and he's done so with charm and humility and grace. stuart: there has been no truly caustic questioning. >> correct. stuart: and no grandstanding by any of the senators on display today. >> correct. stuart: none whatsoever. >> correct. stuart: peter? >> if you go back to 1834, which is about the time you and i were born -- stuart: yeah, yeah, yeah. [laughter] >> there have not been nine rejections by the senate of anybody proposed by an incoming president.

not nine so far. stuart: listen in, i think we've got another protest. listen in, please. >> no! [inaudible] stuart: that was the third interruption that we've seen. earlier demonstrators were shouting no kkk, no fascist usa which is remarkable since mr. sessions prosecuted a klansman in alabama. he was prosecuted successfully and executed. we'll listen in some more. >> terrorism as a military action, not a law enforcement

ti. they're not trying to steal our cars or rob your bank account. they're trying to destroy our way of life, and i hope you'll go after them without apology, apply the law, and the law is the law of war, not domestic criminal law. and you'll have a friend in senator graham if you intend to do that. cyber takes. do you think -- attacks. do you think the russians were behind hacking into our election? >> i have done no research into that. i know just what the media says about it. >> do you think you could get briefed anytime soon? >> well, i'll need to. >> i think you do too. you like the fbi. >> do i like them? >> yeah. >> some of my best friends are -- >> do you generally trust 'em? >> yes. [laughter] >> you aware of the fact that the fbi's concluded that it was the russian intelligence services who hacked into the dnc and podesta's e-mails? >> i do understand that. or at least that's what's been reported, and i've not been briefed by them. >> right. >> on the subject. >> from your point of view,

there's no reason for us to be suspicious of them. >> of their decision? >> yeah. >> i'm sure it was honorably reached. >> how do you feel about a foreign entity trying to interfere in our election? i'm not saying they changed the outcome, but it's pretty clear to me they did. how do you feel about it and what should we do? >> senator graham, i think it's a significant event. we have penetration apparently throughout our government by foign entities. we know the chinese reveal millions obackground information on millions of people in the united states, and these, i suppose, ultimately are part of international big power politics. but it, when a nation uses their improperly gained or intelligence-wise gained information to take policy positions that impact another

nation's democracy or their approach to any issue, then that raises real, serious matters. it's really, i suppose, goes in many ways to the state department, our defense department and how we as a nation have to react to that. >> which which would include developing some protocols where when people breach our systems and a price is paid -- even if we can't prove the exact person who did it. >> i agree. i've got 20 seconds left. i've known you for, i guess, 15 years now. we've had a lot of contests on the floor and sometimes we agree, sometimes we don't. i'm from south carolina, so i know what it's like sometimes to be accused of being a conservative from the south. that means something other than you're a conservative from the south. in your case, people have fairly promptly tried to label you as a racist or a bigot or whatever

you want to say. how does that make you feel? and this is your chance to say something to those people. >> well, it does not feel good -- >> this whole -- [inaudible] needs to be stopped before they start. >> [inaudible] >> if nothing else, i'm clearing the room for you. [laughter] and i would suggest that the freedom of speech also has some courtesy to listen. so what's your answer? >> senator graham, i appreciate the question. you have a southern name, you come from south alabama, that sounds worse to some people. south alabama.

and when i came up as a united states attorney, i had no real support group, i didn't prepare myself well in 1986, and there was an organized effort to caricature me as something that wasn't true. it was very painful. i didn't know how to respond and didn't respond very well. i hope my tenure in this body has shown you that the caricature that was created of me was not accurate. it wasn't accurate then, and it's not accurate now. and i just want you to know that as a southerner who actually saw discrimination and have no doubt it existed in a systematic and powerful and negative way to the people, great millions of people this in the south particularly of our country, i know that was wrong. i know we need to do better. we can never go back.

i am totally committed to maintaining the freedom and equality that this country has to provide to every citizen, and i will assure you that that's how i will approach it. >> senator durbin. >> thank you, mr. chairman. senator sessions, let me first say it's, i'm glad that you brought your family with you today. it's a beautiful family with your wife and your son and daughters and those four beautiful little granddaughters. you kept them as quiet as you could for as long as you could, so thank you so much for being here today. i'm sure it was great moral support and part of your effort here today. when you came by my office last week, i talked to you about a man named alton mills, he's my guest today, and with the permission of the chair, i'd like to ask, mr. smith, please stand up. thank you for being here today.

when alton mills was 22 years old, unemployed, he made a bad decision. he started selling crack cocaine on the streets of chicago. he was arrested twice for possession of small amounts of crack cocaine. the third time that he was -- stuart: that is senator durbin, a leading democrat on the judiciary committee. i was expecting some harsh questioning. he hasn't got there yet, maybe he will after he tells this story. right now i want to bring in congressman bill johnson, republican from ohio. congressman, it seems like thus far we're two hours into this hearing, i don't think they've laid a glove on him yet. what say you? >> well, i would tend to agree with you, stuart. you know, i've never met senate senate -- senator sessions personally, but i know where he's from. i was stationed in the state of alabama numerous times when i spent my 26 years in the air force. and i know what the people there think. and i can, from what i see,

senator sessions is doing a great job of dispelling any of the concerns that the members of the senate might have. stuart: mr. sessions has been interrupted four times now by demonstrators in the audience. all of them attacking him on the basis of race. the last interruption was a young lady who was saying sessions is a racist. before that they were saying that no kkk, no fascist usa. but it doesn't look like -- mr. sessions' response to this race charge has been very solid. what say you on this? >> well, i -- and i would agree. and i think if there were concerns that senator sessions were a racist, you would hear very, very strong questions and more aggressive questioning from the democrats on the confirmation panel. you're not seeing that. and, obviously, those who are calling senator sessions a

racist, they have not been informed about his voting record and about his position on those issues. stuart: what about senator cory booker who will testify tomorrow directly against jeff sessions? i think this is the first time in history that one senator has testified against another in a hearing of this kind. >> well, it'll be interesting to hear what senator booker has to say. i mean, he's putting himself in a very precarious situation because if he, if he tells the truth, enthen i -- then i presume that's what he wants to do, then he's going to have to go back to senator sessions' record and how he's voted and how he's conducted himself both as a federal attorney and as the attorney general there in the state of alabama. so it'll be interesting to see what happens with senator booker. stuart: congressman, at the end

of the day, have you any doubt that mr. sessions will become the next attorney general of the united states? >> no, i don't have any doubts. i believe he'll with concerned. -- be confirmed. stuart: thanks very much. so far, as iaid, we are o hours into this. rit now he's being questioned by senator dick durbin, leading democrat on the judiciary committee. let's listen in again. >> said openly on the floor of the senate that i believe these crack cocaine laws were too harsh, and particularly it was disadvantageous to the african-american community where most of the punishments were falling. and it was not fair, and we ought to fix it. so i just want to say i took a strong stand on that, and i did not agree, you and i did not agree on the retroactivity because a lot of these were plea bargained cases and may not have been totally driven by the mandatory minimums. but, so i thought the court had

basically now agreed that it is retroactive. i don't know what group is not being covered by it, but a large group was covered by a court decision. we sort of left it open, as i remember finish. >> we did. >> you and i discussed -- >> let me say in the issue of fairness, i will acknowledge you stepped out on this issue, and you and i both recognize the brutal injustice of 100 to 1 and we agreed on 18 to 1 how laws are made. and now we have 5,000 prisoners sitting in federal prison still there under this brutal, unjust 100 to 1. and all i've asked and all senator grassley's asked, allow them as individuals to petition to the judge, to the prosecutor, to the department of justice so that their sentences could be considered. that's something you've opposed. so in fairness, tell me why you ill oppo that. >> well, first, i would tell you with absolute certainty that

if -- that it is a decision of this body. it's not the attorney general's decision about when and where a mandatory minimum is imposed and whether it can be retroactively altered. so i will follow any law that you pass, number one. number two, i understood the sincere belief you had on that issue, and it was a difficult call, and that's why we really never worked it out. so i understand what you're saying. but i did believe that you are upsetting finality in the justice system, that you are suggesting that these kind of factors were not considered when the plea bargaining went down. so it's an honorable debate to have, and i respect your position on it. >> senator, you have been outspoken on another issue, and i would like to address it, if i could. i have invited here today sergeant oscar vazquez, if he

would be kind enough to stand up and be recognized. sergeant, thank you for being here. be i'll tell you his incredible story in short form. brought to the united states as a child, in high school he and three other dreamers started a robotics club and won a college-level robotics competition. they made a movie out of his story. he graduated from arizona state university with an engineering degree. the obama administration granted him a waiver and allowed him to become a citizen and enlist in the united states army where he served in combat in afghanistan. senator sessions, since joining the senate in 1997, you've voted against every immigration bill that included a path to citizenship for the undocumented. you described the dream act, which i introduced 15 years ago to spare children who were undocumented through no fault of their own, as, quote: a reckless proposal for mass amnesty. you opposed the bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform bill which passed the senate four years ago. you've objected to immigrants

volunteering to serve in our armed forces saying, quote: in terms of who's going most likely to be a spy, somebody from coleman, alabama, or somebody from kenya. when i asked what you would do to address the almost 800,000 dreamers like oscar vazquez who would be subject to deportation if president obama's executive order was repealed, you said, quote: i believe in following the law. there is too much focus on people who are here illegally and not enough on the law. senator sessions, there's not a spot of evidence in your public career to suggest that as attorney general you would use the authority of that office to resolve the challenges of our broken immigration system in a fair and humane manner. tell >> well, you are wrong, senator durbin. i'm going to follow the laws passed by congress. as a matter of policy, we disagreed on some of those issues. i do believe that if you

continually go through a cycle of amnesty, that you undermine the respect for the law and encourage illegal immigration into america. i believe the american people spoke clearly in this election. i believe they agreed with my basic view, and i think it's a good view, a decent view, a solid legal view for the united states of america that we create a awful system of immigration -- a lawful system of immigration that allows people to apply to this country. and if they're accepted, they get in. if they're not accepted, they don't get in. and i believe that's right and just, and the american people are right to ask for it. we have not delivered that for them. >> senator graham asked this question, and i listened to your answer. when he asked you what would happen to those 800,000 currently protected by president obama's executive order known as daca who cannot be deported for two years, it's renewable, and work for two years, and you said let congress pass a

comprehensive immigration reform bill. you opposed the only bipartisan effort that we've had on the senate floor in modern memory. and what's going to happen to those 800,000 if you revoke that order and they are subject to deportation tomorrow? what is going to happen to them? what is the humane legal answer to that? >> well, the first thing i would say is that my response to senator graham dealt with whose responsibility this is. i had a respondent as a member of this -- a responsibility as a member of this body to express my view and vote as i believed was correct on dealing with issues of immigration. that's not the attorney general's role. the attorney general's role is to enforce the law. and as you know, senator durbin, we're not able financially or any other way to seek out and remove everybody that's in the country illegally. president trump has indicated that criminal aliens, like president obama indicated, certainly are the top group of

people. and so i would think that the best thing for us to do -- and i would urge, colleagues, that we understand this -- let's fix this system. and then we can work together after this lawlessness has been ended, and then we can ask the american people and enter into a dialogue about how to compassionately treat people who have been here a long time. >> that does not answer the question about 800,000 that would be left in the lurch whose lives would be ruined while you're waiting on congress for a bill that you opposed. >> well, i thought it did answer it pretty closely to what you asked, and i understand your concerns. >> senator cornyn. >> senator sessions, congratulations to you and your family on this once-in-a-lifetime honor to serve -- stuart: okay. the issue of immigration was just discussed. it was not particularly contentious, but the emotion was rising there.

judge, would you just sum up what we just saw about immigration? >> yes. president obama has signed several executive orders which prohibit the deportation of parents of children who have been born here or of churn who were born here -- children who were born here at such a young age that they now are fully americanized. when those executive orders expire be, these people will be subject to deportation. senator durbin attempted to get senator sessions to commit himself to how this issue would be resolved, and senator sessions, in my view, wisely said that's for the legislative branch to decide. that's not for the attorney general. the president may have an opinion on it, but you guys write the law, the attorney general does not. stuart: he was asked why had you opposed previous immigration reform proposals, and he says because all of them were basically amnesty. and he said a cycle of amnesty encourages illegal immigration. >> it's a little odd to see him being forced to explain votes that he took on the floor of the

senate when he has already said under oath i will enforce all the laws, all the federal laws whether i agree with them or not even those that i voted against. stuart: yeah. it is intriguing, is it not? >> they keep pressing that issue on him. stuart: the fireworks and the contention i was expecting has not appeared in the first two and a half hours of this. >> agreed. stuart: but it probably will later on todaynd certainly tomorrow with cory booker, but so far it's not. i want to introduce a very special guest this morning, jim carlstrom is here, and it's particularly good that you are sitting in, listening to this discussion, jim. you are the former deputy director of the fbi, correct? >> assistant director in charge of new york. stuart: got with it. [laughter] okay. i'm going to get the title right just there. now, mr. sessions was asked do you trust the fbi. he said, yes. do you like the fbi? he said some of my best friends are in the fbi. [laughter] would you, because -- now, the attorney general of the united states runs the fbi. the attorney general is the boss

of the fbi. would you, as an fbi guy, be comfortable with jeff sessions running the show? >> totally. stuart: yeah? >> great guy. i've had the opportunity to meet him a few times in my career. very reasoned, very smart, very balanced, very respectful of the rule of law -- stuart: that's the way he's coming off. >> the constitution of the united states. he's a terrific guy with a great family, and he'll do the right thing for everybody. and he will enforce the rule of law. something that hasn't happened that much in the last eight years. stuart: i knew you'd get that in. [laughter] i knew you would, and you did it. >> yes. stuart: now, he did break news earlier today when he said that he would -- mr. sessions -- would recuse himself from any investigation or prosecution of hillary clinton about e-mails or the foundation. you surprised at that? >> no, i'm not. i think he would -- he should give it to professional prosecutors to look at -- stuart but it's the right thing to do. he had made comments before the election about hillary clinton. >> right.

stuart: so his recusal -- >> no, i think it's fine. and i'm not sure what he will do, but i don't think it really hurts the rule of law that much by him recusing himself. a lot of people should have recused themselves in the last eight years from many things. [laughter] stuart: have you seen anything thus far morning that would make you feel that he will not be the attorney to general? >> no. i think he'll become -- i think, just knowing him, i mean, we're not friends, but we've met numerous times. i've been on different panels with him on things for the last 40 years, i think he'd be a fantastic attorney general. he'll set a great tone for the country. he's so measured and calm and respectful of everybody, i think he'll be a great person. stuart: that's interesting. we've sat here for a couple of hours and watched mr. sessions being questioned, and your right, it's -- you're right, it's a very calm, balanced, reflective response on all occasions. >> he hasn't been flustered at all. stuart: no.

they haven't laid to a glove on him. >> agreed. there were four groups of protesters, and he didn't get rattled. the only time i felt he got emotional when he was asked about how he was wrongfully caricatured about his position on race, and that's when he got emotional. stuart: do you, jim call strom, think there is a hint of racism in this gentleman? >> absolutely not. i mean, he was at the tip of the spear on dealing with racism down south. i mean, he was the guy that was really the leader. i mean, it's crazy. and it's hypocritical, and it's, you know, they go back to that over and over again when they have nothing else good to say about anybody. stuart: judge? >> i agree with everything jim has just said. i also agree with you that he's coming off measured, confident and a person prepared to do the job. stuart: it was a very balanced response. he was asked what about same-sex marriage? well, i agree with the supreme court ruling. what about roe vs. wade? it's settled law. >> yes. stuart: totally uncontentious. >> yes.

stuart: does he have to behave that way if he became attorney general? he could turn on a dime, could he not? >> well, not on those two areas. he can turn on a dime on areas where is he has discretion like whether or not he's going to enforce federal marijuana laws in states that have purported to legalize it. but in these areas same-sex marriage, the federal government really has nothing to do with that. and even with respect to abortion, abortion is regulated by the states and performed locally. and, again, the feds have very little to do with that. >> well, the doj has to protect abortion clinics, right? that's an issue. i think when you look at the broad spectrum of what's being discussed, what he seemed to also get passionate about is national security, and there's a number of questions around visas for immigrants coming in here, and he's been tough on that position. it's clear in his testimony that he will uphold what the trump administration is about, and that's national security and not letting terrorists into the country. stuart: i believe mr. sessions was just asked would it be appropriate on any occasion for

any reason to assault a police officer? i think that's what he was just asked, and he responded -- how did respond? he's responding now. listen to -- >> would be sure that when we criticize law officers, it is narrowly focused on the right basis for criticism. and to smear whole departments places those officers at greater risk. and we are seeing an increase in the murder of police officers, it was up 10% last year. so i just could say i could feel, i could feel in my bones how it was going to play out in the real world when we had what i thought often times was legitimate criticism of perhaps wrong doing by an officer, but spilling over to a condemnation of our entire police force. and morale has been affected. and it's impacted the crime rates in baltimore and crime rates in chicago. i don't think there's any doubt about it. i regret that's happening.

i think it can be restored, but we need to understand the requirement that police work with the community and be respectful of their community, but we as a nation need to respect our law officers too. >> well, i for one appreciate your comments, because we ought -- stuart: now, that comment about respect for the police force apropos to the rehanging of a picture in the senate -- [inaudible] the picture depicted a police officer as a pig. that painting had originally been taken down by congressman duncan hunter, republican from california. this morning at 10:00 eastern the congressional black caucus put it back up again. despite the fact that it's all about -- it's characterizing police officers as pigs. jim carlstrom, fbi guy, you better comment on this. >> i think it tells you all you need to know about where the black caucus is going can.

it's not in support of the rule of law or supporting law enforcement. you know, it is painting with this huge brush, and it's just not right. it's wrong. paul ryan ought to step in here and have an opinion of whether we should hang such trash in the capitol. stuart: your position, judge, was that he shouldn't have taken it down in the first place because it draws attention -- >> there are hundreds of these things, and you just walk by, and you don't even notice them. i don't know what the rules are for hanging these things. i agree with jim, it is trash, but it's an opinion, and this person's entitled to express even a trashy opinion. stuart: you've been in the corner a couple of times this morning. >> i have, yes. life is not always black and white. [laughter] especially when the fbi itself is right here. [laughter] >> i love this guy. stuart: we all do. [laughter] great guy. quick issue. we're going to hear later from someone who is a proponent, i think, of legalized marijuana for recreational purposes.

i think that's going to be one of the questions raised of mr. sessions. fbi guy, jim carlstrom, do you favor the legalization of -- >> totally opposed to it. i think it's mind-altering. i mean, i think there's study after study after study that point that way. you know, it's just, you know, it's just part of this downward to bargain run we're on, you know, including a million other things that i personally -- maybe i'm showing my age, but i do not, i do not agree with it at all. stuart: well, president-elect trump has said he doesn't -- i think i'm right in saying this -- >> yes. stuart: he did say it's up to the states. it's their decision. you approve of that, i take it? >> i don't think that's what president-elect trump said. i think he said he would direct his attorney general -- presumably jeff sessions -- to enforce the federal law. that would effectively nullify the states which have made recreational use legal. as to medical use, i don't know

what the president-elect's opinion is on that. stuart: okay. now, we're coming up to 12 noon. i'm going to be handing over the program to neil in just a moment. let me sum up what we've seen so far both in the hearings on capitol hill and on the stock market. be i'll deal with the market first. opened up this morning on the downside. we then moved to the upside, and at the moment we're up about 47-50 points. that's where we are n. the background to the markets, we had a report today from small business. small business optimum -- what is it, optimism index is at a 12-year high. it's gone up dramatically since november of last year. that is probably helping the stock market this morning. as for the hearings on capitol hill, they haven't laid a glove yet on jeff sessions. looks very much likely that he will be the next attorney general of the united states. that, too, may be a plus for the markets. if mr. trump gets his team all in place and puts forward his policies that he wants, the

market likes that, and that may explain some of the gain that we've seen thus far on wall street. other than that, it's been a rather placid hearing for jeff sessions as the next attorney general of the united states. and with that, i'll hand it over to neil. sir, it's yours. neil: all right, stuart, thank you very, very much. again, that pretty much describes what's going on on capitol hill, placid, even though jeff sessions has been interrupted four final by protesters -- four times by protesters. fact of the matter is he is getting through this, at least at this juncture, with barely a glove laid on him. of course, that could change tomorrow when senator cory booker, the new jersey senator -- many argue maybe a future presidential prospect -- challenges him directly as a witness against jeff sessions. that is unusual if not close to unprecedented. we haven't gone back into the 1800s to see if there's been a case like that, but at least over the last 100 years or so, we haven't seen anything lik