the supreme court. will the senate even consider his pick? the senate judiciary committee insisting no nominee will get a hearing until after the election. reporter: he's respected on both sides of the aisle for his intellect and relatively mild positions on most things. garland is the chief judge at the d.c. circuit, one level several of the current justices served on the dc circuit before you elevated to the highest court. garland served with a man who is now chief justice of the supreme court, and graduated first in his class from harvard

undergrad, graduated harvard law school and did clerk for justice william brennan. he has been in private practice and worked as a federal prosecutor. he oversaw the investigations into the oklahoma city bombing and the unit bomber so he is well respected for his work on and off the bench. he was confirmed in 1997. many lawmakers on both sides have sung his praises talking about what a great pic he is, what a good job he has done on the dc circuit. those words are used by the white house. he is saying we have had a number of people in the senate, those who would say they would block a vote on anyone saying in the past is intellectually superior, well-qualified by the american bar association. there are no questions about his intellect, writing ability or decisionmaking. there are questions critics have about second amendment gun

rights, his willingness to recognize the administrative power of bodies like the epa but he has been tough on the government when it comes to issues like terror detainees, things involving guantánamo and the pentagon so he has got a very lengthy paper trail, 19 years on the bench means critics have plenty to pick through. a number of conservative scholars have said he is probably the best pic you could get from a democratic president. he was on the shortlist the last couple times with sonja soda mayor and elena kagan being named the last two spots. they have a friendship and relationship but his nomination, in a bit of a tough spot, well respected and liked on both sides of the aisle, you have to ask whether the president thinks he has a chance to ascend to the highest court. if so he might have gone with a

younger pic like sri srinivasan. >> we are waiting for the president to emerge from the rose garden inflaming the battle between the white house and senate republicans and is sure to heat up the campaign trail. let's go to an attorney and supreme court analyst who spent two decades covering the high court. give us your assessment of judge garland. >> reporter: he is a highly regarded nominee. orin hatch, leader of the senate republicans said a long time ago, republicans couldn't do any better. if mister obama is putting republicans on the spot with his nomination he will succeed.

bill: is that what he is trying to do? >> reporter: i am sure he will say there is a constitutional duty to hold hearings. whether it is in the interest of the republican party is just a statistical question given we don't know who will win the white house and there are 34 senate seats up for grabs, 24 of those being held by republicans. if republicans lose the white house and the senate they know get anybody on the supreme court as moderate as garland. if they lose the election mitch mcconnell might call for hearings the very next day. bill: vulnerable senators might not want to be seen as obstructionists. the president and the nominee are stepping up to the microphone. let's listen to president obama. >> of the many powers and

responsibilities the constitution invests in the president, few are more consequential than appointing a supreme court judge. particularly one to succeed justice antonin scalia, one of the most influential jurists of our time. blue blue and women who sit on the supreme court are the final arbiters of american law. they safeguard our rights. they ensure our system is one of laws and not men. they are charged with the task of applying principles put to paper more than two centuries ago and the most challenging questions of our time. this is not a responsibility i take lightly. the decision requires me to set aside short-term expediency and narrow politics, make faith with our founders and future

generations. that is why i have done my best to set up a rigorous and comprehensive process. i have sought the advice of republican and democratic members of congress, reached out to every member of the senate judiciary committee, constitutional scholars, advocacy groups, bar associations representing opinions from all across the spectrum. today, after completing the exhaustive process i have made my decision. i have selected a nominee who is widely recognized not only as one of america's sharpest legal minds but one who brings a spirit of decency, modesty, integrity, evenhandedness and excellence. these qualities and his long commitment to public service have earned him the respect and admiration of leaders on both

sides of the aisle, who will bring the same character to bear on the supreme court, an institution in which he is uniquely prepared to serve immediately. today i am nominating chief judge merrick garland to serve the supreme court. [applause] >> in law enforcement circles and the legal community at large, judge garland needs no introduction. i would like to introduce merrick garland to the american people whom he so ably serves. he was born and raised in the land of lincoln, my hometown of chicago, my home state of illinois.

his mother volunteered in the community. his father ran a small business in their home. inheriting that work ethic he became valedictorian of his public high school, earning a scholarship to harvard where he graduated summa come out of. he worked as a tutor, stocking shoes in a shoe store and what is always a painful moment for any young man, selling his comic book collection. [laughter] >> been there. he graduated from harvard law and the early years of his legal career bear the traditional marks of excellence, he clerked for two of president eisenhower's judicial appointees, a legendary judge on the second circuit, judge henry friendly, and supreme court justice brennan.

following his clerkships he joined the highly regarded law firm, focus on litigation, representation of disadvantaged americans. within four years he earned a partnership, the dream of most lawyers. in 1989 just months after that achievement, he made an unusual career decision, he walked away from a comfortable and lucrative law practice to return to public service. he accepted a low level job as a federal prosecutor in president george hw bush's administration taking a 50% pay cut. a windowless closet smelled of stale cigarette smoke. this was a time when crime in washington reached epidemic proportions and he wanted to help and quickly made a name for himself going after corrupt politicians and violent criminals. his sterling record as a prosecutor brought him to the

justice department where he oversaw the most significant prosecutions in the 1990s including every aspect of the federal response to the oklahoma city bombing. in the aftermath of that act of terror, 160 people, many small children, were murdered, merrick garland had one evening to say goodbye to his young daughters before boarding a plane to oklahoma city where he remained for weeks. he remained side-by-side with first responders, rescue workers, local and federal law enforcement, led the investigation and supervised the prosecution that brought timothy mcveigh to justice. most important is the way he did it. throughout the process merrick garland took pains to do everything by the book.

when people offered to turn over evidence he refused taking the harder root of proper subpoenas instead because merrick garland would take no chances that someone who murdered innocent americans might go free on a technicality. merrick garland made a concerted effort to reach out to victims and families, updating them frequently on the case's progress. everywhere he went, he carried in his briefcase a program from the memorial service with each of the victim's names inside. a constant searing reminder of why he had to succeed. judge garland has referred to his work on the oklahoma city case as close, the most important thing i have ever done in my life. through it all i never lost touch with the community that he served.

it is no surprise that soon after his work in oklahoma city merrick garland was nominated to what is often called the second highest court in the land, the dc circuit court. during that process, during that confirmation process, he earned overwhelming bipartisan praise from senators and legal experts alike. republican senator orrin hatch, chairman of the senate judiciary committee, supported his nomination. back then he said in all honesty i would like to see one person come to this floor with one reason merrick garland does not deserve this position. he accused fellow senate republicans trying to obstruct up to 24's nomination of playing politics with judges. and he has since said judge garland would be a consensus

nominee for the supreme court, very well supported by all sides, no question merrick garland would be confirmed with bipartisan support. ultimately, merrick garland was confirmed to the dc circuit, the second highest court in the land, a majority of democrats and a majority of republicans. three years ago he was elevated to chief judge. in his 19 years on the dc circuit, judge garland has brought his trademark diligence, compassion, and unwavering regard for the rule of law to his work. circuit court known for strong-minded judges on both sides of the spectrum judge garland has earned a track record of building consensus as a thoughtful, fair-minded judge who follows the law. he has shown a rare ability to bring together odd couples, assemble unlikely coalitions,

persuade colleagues with wide-ranging judicial philosophies to sign onto his opinions. this record on the bench speaks to judge garland's fundamental temperament and insistence all views deserve a respectful hearing. his habit, to borrow a phrase from justice john paul stevens, of understanding before disagreeing, disagreeing without being disagreeable, speaks to his ability to persuade, to respond to the concerns of others with sound arguments and airtight logic. as former colleagues in the dc circuit and current chief justice of the supreme court, john roberts, once said, anytime judge garland disagrees, you know you are in a difficult area. at the same time, he is more than a brilliant legal mind. he is someone with a keen

understanding that justice is more than abstract legal theory in a dusty casebook. his life experience, his experience in places like oklahoma city informs his view that the law is more than an intellectual exercise. he understands the way it affects the reality of people's lives in a big complicated democracy and rapidly changing times. throughout his jurisprudence runs a common thread, dedication to protecting the basic rights of every american. a conviction that in a democracy powerful voices cannot drown out the voices of everyday americans. to find someone with such a long career of public service marked by complex and sensitive issues, to find someone who just about everyone not only respects but genuinely likes is rare.

it speaks to who merrick garland is not just as a lawyer but as a man. people respect the way he treats others. his genuine courtesy and respect for his colleagues and those who come before this court. they admire his civic mindedness, mentoring as clerks throughout careers, urging their legal training to serve communities, setting his own example by tutoring a young student each year for the past 18 years. they are moved by deep devotion to his family. his wife of 30 years and their two daughters, becky and jesse. their love of hiking and skiing and canoeing and their love of america by visiting our national

parks. people respect merrick garland's deep passion for protecting our most basic constitutional rights. a passion i am told that manifested itself at an early age. one story is notable. as valedictorian of his high school class he had to deliver a commencement address. the other student speaker spoke first and unleashed a fiery critique of the vietnam war. fearing the controversy that might result, several parents unplugged the sound system and the rest of the student's speech was muffled. merrick garland did not necessarily agree with the tone of his classmate's remarks or the choice of topic for that day but stirred by the fight of a fellow student's voice being silenced he tossed aside his prepared remarks and delivered on the spot a passionate impromptu defense of our first

amendment rights. it was the beginning of a lifelong career as a lawyer and prosecutor and judge devoted to protecting the rights of others. he has done that work with decency and humanity and common sense. and he will continue that on the nation's highest court. i said i would take this process seriously and i do. i chose a serious man and exemplary judge, merrick garland. over my seven years as president and all my conversations with senators from both parties in which i asked their views on qualified supreme court nominees, this includes the previous two seats that i had to fill, the one name that came up repeatedly is merrick garland.

i recognize that we have entered the political season. or perhaps these days never end. a political season that is even noisier and more volatile than usual. i know that republicans will point to democrats who made it hard for republican presidents who made it hard to get there nominees confirmed and they are not wrong about that. there have been politics involved in nominations in the past. it should be pointed out in each of those instances, democrats ultimately confirmed a nominee put forward by a republican president. i also know that because of justice scalia's roll on the court in american law and the fact that americans are closely divided on a number of issues before the court it is tempting

to make this confirmation process and extension of our divided politics, the squabbling going on in the news every day. but to go down that path would be wrong. it would be a betrayal of our best traditions and a betrayal of the vision of our founding documents. at a time when our politics are so polarized, at a time when political rhetoric and courtesy are so treated like they are disposable, this is precisely the time when we should play it straight and treat the process of appointing a supreme court justice with the experience it deserves because our supreme court really is unique. it is supposed to be above

politics. it has to be, it should stay that way. to suggest that someone is qualified and respected as merrick garland doesn't even deserve a hearing let alone an up or down vote in an institution as the supreme court when two thirds of americans believe otherwise would be unprecedented. to suggest that someone who has served his country with honor and dignity, distinguished track record of delivering justice for the american people might be treated as one republican leader stated as a political piñata, that can't be right. tomorrow judge garland will travel to the hill to meet with senators one on one. i simply ask republicans in the senate to give him a fair

hearing and an up or down vote. if you don't, then it will not only be an abdication of the senate's constitutional duty, it will indicate a process for nominating and confirming judges that is beyond repair. it will mean everything is subject to the most partisan of politics, everything. it will provoke an endless cycle of more tit for tat making it increasingly possible for any president, democrat or republican, to carry out their constitutional function. the reputation of the supreme court will inevitably suffer. faith in our justice system will inevitably suffer. our democracy will suffer as well.

i have fulfilled my constitutional duty. now it is time for the senate to do there's. presidents do not stop working in the final year of their term. neither should the senate. i know that tomorrow the senate will take a break and leave town on the recess for two weeks. my earnest hope is senators take that time to reflect on the importance of this process to our democracy. not what is expedient, not what is happening at the moment. what does this mean for our institutions, our common life? the stakes, the consequences, the seriousness of the job we all swore an oath to do. when they return i hope they will act in a bipartisan fashion. i hope they are fair.

that is all. i hope they are fair. as they did when they confirmed merrick garland to the dc circuit. i ask they confirm merrick garland now to the supreme court so he can take his seat in time to participate in his work for the american people this fall. he is the right man for the job. he deserves to be confirmed. i could not be prouder of the work he has already done on behalf of the american people. he deserves our thanks and a fair hearing. with that i would like to invite judge garland to say a few words. [applause]

>> thank you, mister president. this is the greatest honor of my life. other than the woman agreeing to marry me 28 years ago. also the greatest gift i ever received and there is another caveat, the birth of our daughters, jesse and becky. as my parents taught me by words and deeds, life of public service is as much a gift to the person who serves as it is those he is serving. for me there could be no higher public service than serving as a member of the united states supreme court. my family deserves much of the credit for the path that led me

here. my grandparents left the border of russian -- western russia in the 1900s fleeing anti-semitism and hoping to make a better life for their children in america. they settled in the midwest eventually making their way to chicago. my father who ran the smallest of small business hes had a room in our basement, took me with him as he made the rounds to his customers always impressing upon me the importance of hard work and fair dealing. there, my mother headed the local pta and directed a volunteer service agency instilling in my sisters and me the understanding that service to the community is a responsibility above all others. even now my sisters honor that example by serving the children

of their communities. i know my mother is watching this on television and crying her eyes out. my sisters supported me in every step i have ever taken. i wish my father were here to see this today. i wish we hadn't taught my older daughter to be so adventurous she would be hiking in the mountains out of cell service range when the president called. it was the sense of responsibility to serve the community by my parents to let me leave my law firm to become a line prosecutor in 1989. one of my first assignments was to assist in the prosecution of a violent gang that had come to the district from new york, took over a public housing project and terrorized, the hardest job we face was persuading mothers

and grandmothers that if they testified, we would be able to keep them safe and convict the gang members. we succeeded by convincing witness hes and victims that the rule of law would prevail. years later when i went to oklahoma city to investigate the bombing of the federal building, i saw up close the devastation that can happen when someone abandons them for absolving grievances and takes matters into its own hands. i saw the importance that the justice system's work, we promised we would find the perpetrators, bring them to justice and we would do it in a way that honored the constitution. the people of oklahoma city, we

did everything to work up to it. trust that justice will be done in courts without prejudice or partisanship is what in large part distinguish hes this country from others. people must be confident that a judge's decisions are determined by the law and only the law. for a judge to be worthy of such trust, he or she must be faithful to the constitution, statutes passed by congress, he or she must put aside personal views or preferences and follow the law, not make it. fidelity to the constitution has been the cornerstone of my professional life. it is the hallmark of the kind of judge i have tried to be for

the past 18 years. if the senate sees fit to confirm me for the position for which i have been nominated today, i promise to continue on that course. mister president, it is a great privilege to be nominated by a fellow chicagoan. i am grateful beyond words. [applause] >> a friendly crowd in the rose garden applauding as president obama nominates merrick garland, chief judge of the dc court of appeals to the us supreme court. the question is, what will happen now in the u.s. senate? let's go back to tim o'brien, long-term watcher of the us supreme court, he spent two decades covering the high court.

the president is saying to republicans this is a guy who deserves a vote and thinks he deserves a confirmation. is he going to get it? >> i don't know. he looked very much like a republican nominee and sounded like a republican nominee but he is not. he is nominated by democratic president in the waning days of his administration. we have noted that the vote for the us court of appeals was 76-23. those 23 no votes were not because of the nominee. they came at a time when the court of appeals was being expanded. there was considerable concern about that and it was in the waning days of the clinton administration. it would have been by a wider margin. the republicans have every right to block this nomination if they choose to if it is in the best interest of the united states and their own party. the whole ballgame changed.

the starting point for that history is 1987. robert bork, democrats were not going to let ronald reagan alter the direction of the court with this important nomination representing -- replacing lewis powell. you can argue whether that was right or wrong but that is the world we live in. it used to be intellect and integrity, now it goes into ideology. it started with bork and we are. republicans have the right if they choose to under the existing scenario, political decision to block this nomination. whether it is the right thing to do, a good thing for the country is another matter. bill: here is what the president had to say about whether he wants to deserve a hearing. i want to play this for you. >> no one as qualified or respected as merrick garland doesn't even deserve a hearing let alone an up or down vote to

join an institution as important as the supreme court when two thirds of americans believe otherwise would be unquestionable >> it is not unprecedented. his own vice president in june 1992 said if there were a supreme court vacancy in the final months of president george hw bush's term, the senate judiciary hearing should consider not even holding a hearing. >> if the shoes were on the other feet, if roles were reversed the scenario would play out as it is now loose with a republican president trying to get a nominee through and the democratic congress rejecting it, democratic senate. the question is not what you have the right to do but what is the right thing to do? the question of paralyzing the

court on important issues that it is routinely called on to decide, not just this term. the cases have been selected, the term will end in june, the new term begins in october. if we wait until january to put a new person on the court the next term will be paralyzed on issues like affirmative action, abortion, the death penalty, obamacare, immigration policy, gun control, separation of church and state. all those issues are before the court now and we will see in june a split numfour-numfour, some cases will be rescheduled for argument at another time. it will be a mess at the supreme court and republican senators have an obligation to think about that. that could backfire in the election. there are some concerns republicans could be tagged as obstructionist. i don't think that is true. it is possible, something to consider. the critical question for republicans is what if they lose the election? what if they lose the senate? with 24 of 34 seats up for grabs held by republicans.

merrick garland would look very good with hillary clinton and any other democratic president. bill: if republicans lose control of the senate in the upcoming election, if hillary clinton were elected president, it potentially would be possible for republicans to schedule a hearing postelection and hastily confirm merrick garland as the replacement for justice scalia. >> if they can do that they should try. with hillary clinton or bernie sanders in the white house merrick garland would look very good. bill: fascinating game of political and judicial tests. good to have you on. what could be a real turning point in america's election

headquarters with the outcome from yesterday's primaries having a major impact on both sides of the isle. the candidates reacted to the results. >> if we win in november i know our future will be brighter tomorrow than yesterday. >> if we stand together, there is nothing we cannot accomplish. >> this may not have been the year for a hopeful and optimistic future. i still remain hopeful and optimistic about america. >> i will not take the low road to the highest office in the land. >> together we will make washington less relevant in all of our lives. >> we are going to win win win and we are not stopping. we will have great victories for our country. thank you very much, everybody. bill: senior politics writer at us news and world report, obviously some things are settled, some things are still

up in the air. is this race in both parties going to go on into april or may? >> i think hillary clinton went a long way to being the presumptive democratic nominee last night. a clean sweep of five states especially ohio which bernie sanders really wanted and thought he had a shot at. they didn't get their. now it looks very tough, almost impossible for bernie sanders to overtake her in the delegate count. on the republican side you have a different scenario. donald trump nominating the night with two and the candidate still in the race, one more viable, the other, ted cruz is the last man standing against donald trump who has a realistic path. john kasich still in the race but only one a single state. he needs a hail mary pass going to a contested convention for him to have any chance with

trump and ted cruz saying they ♪ let that happen. they are unified on that front, internet be john kasich. it will be ted cruz and donald trump through the june contest. i do not think ted cruz will get out of the race. bill: our brain room did some research. john roberts points out there have been 8 contested election since 1880. in five of the eight the eventual nominee did not go into the convention with a plurality of the votes. that may be why john kasich is hanging in. >> there is history and the outside chance that could happen but it is hard to make a case when you have only one one state, that being your home state.

the question for john kasich is where you win. we saw contest, halfway through the process, the process moves to east coast states and west coast states. where does john kasich quinn? there is another wrinkle, the rnc has a on the books but no candidate name can be placed for consideration of nomination unless they won the majority of delegates in eight states. only one candidate surpassed that and that is donald trump so the rnc would need to change its rules which they can do on the eve of the convention to allow someone else in the race unless ted cruz or john kasich reach that standard of majority of delegates in eight states. bill: ted cruz does not think a contested convention is the way to win the nomination. >> he did not want a brokered

convention which he believes would involve party insiders come ing in and choosing mitt romney or paul ryan, installing someone who didn't go through the primary process. he changed his tune saying he would be okay with a contested convention against donald trump. candidates who won delegates through the primary process. he doesn't want to go out and pick someone who was not in the process. >> party elders don't like donald trump. a lot don't like ted cruz, he might have one fellow senator endorsing him. is it possible the party machinery gets behind john kasich and says this is our guy, let's get him the nomination. >> i think that is possible but they had multiple chances to get behind a guy whether it is jim busch who had a lot of money,

marco rubio who won a lot of support, just hasn't happened, hasn't jelled and the voters haven't cared. anytime another governor or senator endorses, the voter shrugs, goes to the polls in heavy numbers with donald trump or ted cruz. bill: thank you. >> a huge night for hillary clinton, the democratic front runner almost certain to win her party's nomination. still no sign of bernie sanders bowing out of the race. let we have over 15,000 activities

that you can book on our app to make sure your little animal, enjoys her first trip to the kingdom. expedia, technology connecting you to what matters.

♪ the roles you play in life are part of what make you, you. and you're not going to let anything keep you sidelined. that's why you drink ensure with nutritious calories, 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. come on grandma! giving you the strength and energy to get back to doing... what you love. from the #1 doctr recommended bran. ensure. always stay you.

martha: hillary clinton with new momentum after big wins in the primaries scoring solid victories including two big swing states, ohio and florida. as a result a big setback for

bernie sanders who is still vowing to fight on. is it really all over for the vermont senator? syndicated radio host simon rosenberg, president of the new democrat network and former campaign advisor to president clinton. thank you for joining us. is it a done deal for bernie sanders? >> i think he stays in all the way to the convention. he sees some points he gets a chance to make. hillary clinton has sewn it up numerically. the path to the nomination, the only thing that could get in the way is an indictment and an orange jail jumpsuit. martha: keep your thoughts to your self because we are going to john. >> the majority leader mitch mcconnell speaking now about the nomination of merrick garland. >> the nation would have to pay

for what would surely be a bitter fight no matter how good a person is nominated by the president. chairman joe biden. consider that last part. joe biden said the cost to the nation would be too great no matter who the president nominates. president obama and his allies may pretend this disagreement is about a person but as i just noted, his own vice president made clear it is not. the biden rule reminds us the decision was announced weeks ago remains about a principal and not a person, about a principal and not a person. it seems clear president obama made this nomination not with the intent of seeing the nominee confirmed but in order to

politicize it for purposes of the election which is the type of thing judiciary committee chairman joe biden was concerned about, the exact thing chairman biden was concerned about. the biden rule says what the president did with this nomination would be unfair to any nominee and more importantly the rule warrants of the great cost the president's action could carry for our nation. americans are certain to hear a lot of rhetoric from the other side in the come ing days but here are the facts they should keep in mind. the current democratic leader said the senate is not a rubberstamp and he noted the constitution does not require the senate to give presidential nominees a vote. that is the current democratic leader. the incoming democratic leader

did not even wait until the final year of george w. bush's term to tell the senate not, he said, not to consider any supreme court nominee the president send. the biden rule supports what the senate is doing today. underlining that what we are talking about is a principal and not a person. here is our view. instead of spending more time debating an issue where we can't agree, let's keep working on issues where we can. we just passed critical bipartisan legislation to address hair when and prescription opium process in the country and let's build on that success. lets work to get our economy moving again and make our country safer rather than endlessly debating an issue where we don't agree.

as we continue working on issues like these, the american people are capable of having their say on this issue. let's give them a voice. let's let the american people decide. the senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be. john: senator mitch mcconnell puts down the marker on behalf of republicans in the senate after president obama nominated

merrick garland, chief justice of the dc court of appeals to be the replacement on the supreme court for justice antonin scalia. you heard the former judge, the connell is a former judge himself saying it is not the time to consider in a political year the nomination the president puts forward. it is about the process and not the person, he says, and he cited as president the opposition from incoming senate majority leader chuck schumer and vice president joe biden who as we mentioned in 1992 said a president in the final year of his term should not put forward a nominee to the supreme court. the dye are cast, markers are laid down, let's see which the president of the united states or the u.s. senate. it is going to be a contentious battle ahead. martha: laying out the responsibility of the next president which will be to appoint the judge to replace

justice antonin scalia. let's bring in a syndicated radio host, simon rosenberg, president of the new democrat network and former campaign advisor to president clinton. i will begin with you. listening -- the gauntlet has been thrown down. in terms of the next president, whoever it should be, a republican or a democrat, in terms of how the race has been going so far, do you see it as being so divisive that we can't come together? >> on the issue of the supreme court justice? i listened to mitch mcconnell, this may not be the same opinion of many people watching the show but i don't think it is a winning argument. i heard it, listened to it, i don't think it will be persuasive to the american people. the idea that we have this vacancy, we should fill it now,

we shouldn't wait for another supreme court term to be finished, it is going to be persuasive to the american people and the republicans are making a mistake and i think democrats are going to win this in the months to come. >> simon is wrong about this. the choice is the american people's choice. i agree with mcconnell for a change. he is absolutely right. the choice is up to the american people. we will choose a new president, that president will choose a justice, the choice is appropriately theirs, not a lame-duck president. >> it is not about the person, it is about the principle. let's go back to the race between clinton and bernie sanders. do you think it is a done deal for bernie sanders? he says he will continue to fight on, clinton has a 300 delegate lead but he is not

going to quit. >> sanders and ted cruz are in similar positions. i don't think john kasich has any chance in this race, sanders and ted cruz will keep going, they have enough money, they have logic and rationale to keep going and it will be critical to watch whether donald trump and clinton can defeat them. hillary clinton did better than people expected, even her own campaign, they were surprised she won all five states. sanders is weakened but it will take more to be ted cruz and bernie sanders to roll up before the convention. my guess is this thing is not going to be over as early as april. neither of them will go all the way. heather: key swing states, do you think this is going all the way? >> i do. bernie sanders sees an opportunity to continue to push his communist agenda. why would he give up something like that.

for republicans we get a chance to see hillary clinton who wants to tilt toward the middle and convince americans she is a moderate but she has bernie sanders pulling her back to the left. it is absolutely delicious for us because we get a chance to see who hillary clinton really is. she is going to have to show her left wing sensibilities to pool votes from bernie and tilt towards the middle because she will end up running against donald trump. this is absolutely fantastic. heather: so many stories and scenarios. appreciate your time. >> surprise on the international scene, the russian government pulling its forces out of syria. what are the russians up to? we are joined by michael thing, managing director of the middle eastern affairs at the national security council. were you as surprised as many

others by this? >> vladimir putin is set doing what he said he would do, his forces would not be in syria long. they have accomplished what everyone thought was their objective, to save the asad regime from falling. it seemed they were really in trouble but now it has a lot of territory going into these peace talks with a position of strength and leverage. maybe russia says what let's watch our hands of any next phase of the conference whether that is beating isis. john: they said they would establish peace and take on isis but they propped up bashar al-assad. >> they are leaving, the terrorists are not defeated but bashar al-assad is propped up. there is something else, russia was internationally isolated

because of its invasion of crimea and ukraine, they have john kerry at the center of the peace conference and broke out of isolation. john: thanks for your expertise. we will be back with more "happening now". thousands of people came out today to run the race for retirement. so we asked them... are you completely prepared for retirement? okay, mostly prepared? could you save 1% more of your income? it doesn't sound like much, but saving an additional 1% now, could make a big difference over time. i'm going to be even better about saving. you can do it, it helps in the long run. prudential

bring your challenges my m...about my toothpasteice. she eveand mouthwash.ice... but she's a dentist so...i kind of have to listen. she said "jen, go pro with crest pro-health advanced." advance to healthier gums... ...and stronger teeth from day one. using crest toothpaste and mouthwash makes my... ...whole mouth feel awesome. and my teeth are stronger too. crest-pro health advanced... ...is superior to colgate total... ...in these 5 areas dentists check. this check up? so good. . . . .

you know the symptoms when they start. abdominal pain. diarrhea. xifaxan can help. prescription xifaxan is a 2-week treatment that can provide you with 6 to 24 weeks of relief from your ibs-d symptoms. specifically, relief from diarrhea and abdominal pain associated with ibs-d. do not use xifaxan if you have a history of sensitivity to rifaximin, rifamycin antibiotic agents

or any components of xifaxan. tell your doctor right away if your diarrhea worsens while taking xifaxan as this may be a sign of a serious or even fatal condition. tell your doctor if you have liver disease or are taking other medications because these may increase the amount of xifaxan in your body. tell your doctor if you are pregnant, plan on becoming pregnant, or are nursing. the most common side effects are nausea and an increase in liver enzymes. if you think you have ibs with diarrhea talk to your doctor about xifaxan. >> been a fascinating hour. a supreme court nominee put forward. the opposition by the republicans in the senate already expressed. where do we go from here? we'll find out. >> both sides seem to be sticking to their guns on that one. >> they are. we'll see you back here in an hour. "outnumbered" starts now. harris: list than an hour ago

president obama announced his choice to replace the late antonin scalia on the u.s. supreme court, setting into motion now a showdown with republicans, which could have huge implications in what is already a contentious presidential election year as you know. this is "outnumbered." i'm harris faulkner. here today, andrea tantaros, co-host of "after the bell" on fox business, melissa francis, democratic strategist and fox news contributor julie roginsky, and our #oneluckyguy, right on time, veteran trial attorney, fox news legal analyst, peter johnson, jr. pjj is outnumbered and we will lean on you heavily. >> please do. please do. harris: glad you're here. >> thank you so much. harris: we'll get to the news. now we have a name. president obama naming chief judge of the d.c. court of appeals, merrick garland to be his pick to replace the cornerstone of conservatism, the justice antonin scalia who you know died last month. in announcement from the rose garden p