mitch mcconnell will be here. that is it for this "special report." fair, balanced, and unafraid. it's a big night. u.s. supreme court nominee an hour away. martha maccallum starts right now. ♪ >> martha: breaking tonight, we are one hour away from the announcement that could begin to change the face of the supreme court for decades to come. this decision tonight from president trump could set off a battle that may bring us back to the days of the clarence thomas hearings. welcome, everybody, to "the first 100 days." i am martha maccallum. there is the white house. just after 7:00 p.m., inside, they are busy preparing for a very big moment. we are told that will happen shortly after 8:00 local. president trump will step in front of the microphone and the east room to unveil his toys. now, the two leading contenders appear, to become at this point, judge neil gorsuch of denver, and judge thomas hardiman of

pittsburgh. both are favorites among conservatives to fill the seat that was once held by the late justice antonin scalia, who died about a year ago. before that choice has been named, some democrats are already threatening to block this nomination no matter what. they are accusing republicans of stealing the seat because they refused to grant president obama's nominee, merrick garland, a hearing at all. we will examine all of this tonight. in moments, we talked to mike lee, he was also on the president's list of 21 that was released in the summer. we will also be joined by charles krauthammer. first, let's talk to shannon bream, reporting live as she has throughout the day from the steps of the supreme court. shannon, good evening to you. >> hi, martha. as you mentioned, we are down to two federal judges. judge neil gorsuch. he is the one with a sterling resume. you look at him on paper and his friends and supporters say come and practice, as well, he went to columbia, harvard, got her doctorate at oxford. he is very well respected.

here is a little bit about his feeling on justice scalia. he was giving a speech last year at case western reserve in cleveland, ohio, and he talked about judicial philosophy, praising justice scalia and fingers. >> as justice scalia said, if you are going to be a good and faithful judge coming up to resign yourself to the fact that you are not always going to like the conclusions you reach. if you like them all the time, you are probably doing something wrong. >> so, he says, you shouldn't be about politics or pleasing family or friends or party or any other particular ideology. you should stick to the facts, the law, make your decision that way. we have another federal judge in the mix, as well. thomas hardiman. he is a personal connection to the term family because he is fifth on the bench of the president's sister on the third circuit. he has a little bit of a different story, went to notre dame and georgetown. the only nonivy league member on the bench. he put himself through college and scholarships. also, by driving a taxi.

he also has a very specific judicial philosophy. here's a bit of what he said in 2006, has anna tearing a confirmation with current seat. he said, "our role as judges is to interpret our law, so, with our task is to give an honest construction as to what pass are lost by the legislature. i have no hesitations. any good judge recognizes his or her place in our constitutional government and that places not to upset the will of the people as expressed through their elected representatives." martha committees or boards that ring true and walter conservatives who are excited about both of these picks. they are a little bit worried that they are a bit thin. they feel very excited about these picks. both of them passed the senate back in 2006, 2007, no opposition. that means a lot of the senators who were there then, including top democrats like senate minority leader chuck schumer and diane feinstein, they were okay with him then and they will be voting again on possibly one of these two. we will know soon. >> martha: thank you, shannon.

joining me now, constitutional law expert and professor at george washington law school, jonathan turley. welcome. great to have you with us tonight. >> thank you. >> martha: first of all, what you make of this is an evening event, usually, we see these things take place during the day, and we are told that both of these gentlemen are in the white house vicinity. >> the last part of that is not uncommon. there is an aspect of theater to this. presidents don't like the media to get ahead of their speed on a question like this. they often bring in the nominees just to keep people guessing a bit. by doing it in the evening, that is something of a surprise. it drives the media crazy, part of the point here. this is usually something that you do before that final news cycle in the day to allow people to cooperate on evening news. that is obviously not a priority here. the timing is different. so much else is different, as

well, and this administration. >> martha: what you think of these two men, jonathan? >> they are very different. not so different in others. gorsuch is an intellectual leader. he fits the bill, for those people who view scalia as the loss of an intellectual icon. gorsuch has that depth of analysis that you see in his opinions. he is a true sense of his jurisprudence. he will come to the court with a very strong record, a very powerful writer, a very considerable intellect. hardiman is very well respected. many people think of him more as a sort of sam alito, very consistent. he is not necessarily viewed as one of the intellectual leaders of the judiciary as a whole but is still viewed as extremely

intelligent. he has a wonderful background, he drove a taxi to go through georgetown law. quite frankly, the fact that he is a georgetown law degree is really appealing too many people. we have had a lock out, if of anything but yale and harvard law grads. any nation that leads the world in legal education, that has been very insulting and a little bit embarrassing that we have this exclusion of every other school. they are different and my sense of what you want to get out of them. i think that hardiman is sort of like roberts and a sense. he is sort of, if you are picking the tires are nominees in the show room, he is not reliable, family van for conservatives. he will get you where you need to go, no surprises. gorsuch is more of a roadster. he is the ability to be a powerful intellectual leader on the court. i think hardiman does, too. but gorsuch has been that far so, i think i'm on the appellate court. >> martha: as you look at this, there were 21 people on

that list, is there anything on your mind that suggests that maybe he will surprise us tonight? maybe he will pick someone that we are not expecting? >> there is all these rumors swirling around washington right now, which is really -- >> martha: that never happens. [laughter] >> there are rumors he will appoint his sister, who is a colleague of hardiman. hardiman is believed to be an inside candidate because his sister really likes him. it is really, truly machiavelli and in terms of these theories. the fact is that all three of these judges, including pryor, are very well respected. i have a personal attachment to pryor because we clerked together on the fifth circuit. he appears now to be not one of the two front runners. but gorsuch and hardiman are extremely intelligent and well-respected judges. it is going to be hard for democrats to go after them. it sounds like gorsuch has the advantage.

>> martha: it sounds like that's what they have in mind. >> he is as close as he could to conservative aristocracy. his mother was a very famous epa administrator, the first woman in that position. she was involved in some of the reagan controversies. he has an absolutely impeccable resume. it will be very hard to attack them. but what i think you want to look for is that first 24-hour period of how this will play. with robert bork, kennedy came right to the floor and started painting him as an extremist. and the mistake at the white house made with bork is that they lets at first 24-hour. that is when attitudes solidified. >> martha: i don't think that is what is going to happen with us white house. i don't think they will add 20 for hours go by if they feel like there is something that needs to be counterattacked. we will watch that. we will talk to a little bit later. thank you so much for being here. jonathan turley, great to see you. >> thank you. >> martha: as we wait this big

announcement from the white house, charles krauthammer will join us on the battle that is to come from the pike. senator mike lee also will join us after the break from the white house where he is expected to be with president trump later tonight when that pig is announced. plus, for the first time, secretary john kelly, of homeland security, addressed americans in for year rated by president trump's executive order on travel into the united states from countries that have ties to terror, shedding new light on what it really means for refugees. we will take that on right after this. ♪ ♪ if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis isn't it time to let the real you shine through? introducing otezla, apremilast. otezla is not an injection, or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. some people who took otezla saw 75% clearer skin after 4 months.

and otezla's prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you.

yet up 90% fall short in getting key nutrients from food alone. let's do more. add one a day women's complete with key nutrients we may need.

plus it supports bone health with calcium and vitamin d. one a day women's in gummies and tablets.

>> martha: we are waiting president trump's announcement of his pick to fill the supreme court vacancy. it will happen in about 45 minutes from now. while president trump's supreme court list has been narrowed down to two, we believe come at this point, i did once feature 21 people on that list. one of them was utah senator mike lee, a member of the senate judiciary committee and a former supreme court clerk for justice samuel alito. the senator joins us from outside the white house, where he soon he will be inside helping to be part of the announcement that will happen. senator, welcome. great to have you with us tonight. >> thank you, martha. >> martha: do you believe it's down to these two individuals? do you believe it is down to hardiman and gorsuch?

>> guess, from everything we have heard, it is down to these two judges. judges gorsuch from a tenth circuit and judge hardiman from the third circuit. they are both accomplished jurists in their own right, i look forward to hearing which one will get the nod. >> martha: do you have a favorite? >> i really like judges gorsuch. i have argued in front of him, i'm appellate litigated, it is really what i did before i was a senator. he is the kind of drugs that every lawyer wants to have on his or her panel, this is the kind of judge who reads all the briefs and reads all the cases cited in all of the briefs. he comes to argument completely prepared, knowing exactly what the law says. with that kind of judge, you can proceed with your case with great confidence. >> martha: in terms of the fight that is going to be on everyone's hands from the senate, what do you anticipate? will this be a claris thomas situation? a judges bork situation? we have seen a tremendous amount of pushback, who said, he will

only vote for one person, that is merrick garland, who is not an option. >> that is interesting, the fact that they are signaling that before we even have someone named for this position, that is indicative of the fact that we are likely to face opposition. it will be a fight. there is no question about it. i want to be very clear. there is a high degree of resolve among senate republicans to make sure that this nominee gets through. especially, given that we have narrowed down to two names, they are very accomplished jurists. there are no pathologies here that should keep either one of them from serving on the court. we will make sure that this nominee is confirmed. we will fight to make sure that gets done. >> martha: senator, does that mean that you will employ the nuclear auction option if you need to? >> that is not what that means. it means we have various tools at our disposal. there is no reason for us to identify which tools we will have to utilize in advance of the need for utilizing them. we will get this person confirmed.

>> martha: when you take a look at the fight, and a lot of people would say, well, basically, republicans at the same thing. no matter who the president puts forward, president obama, you weren't going to have a hearing for that person. they will say turnabout is fair play. >> sure, they will say that. look, martha, there is a very big difference between saying that in an election year, a presidential election year, when you know that by the end of that calendar year, when this vacancy first arose, that we would have our next president chosen. the big difference between saying that to them and saying what the democrats are saying now, and any event, we do have a republican president, we do have a republican senate. that nominee confirmed. >> martha: fascinating to watch. senator, great to talk to you tonight. >> thank you. ♪ >> martha: for the first time, new home on security secretary john kelly, general john kelly,g

president trump's controversial new immigration policy. secretary kelly stepped to the podium, as you see they are today, to defend this. he was obviously hiding the department that is involved in writing visitors executive orders. he said it is not a "muslim man." watch this. >> i would like to clarify that the most recent executive order does what it does and does not mean, this is not a travel ban come with us in the temporary clause that allows us to better review the the refugee and visa system. this is not, i repeat, not a ban on muslims. the homeland security mission is to safeguard the american people, our homeland, our values, and religious liberty is one of our most fundamental and treasured values. we knew it was coming from two years ago, when that came down, i think i was in my sixth day on the job. i relied on people, the ones that are standing up here, the hundreds at the headquarters, to say, we have -- this looks weird to us. we are off to the races.

>> martha: how did that go over? joining me now on the fall out, a trump supporter, and brian fallon is the former spokesman and clinton campaign national press secretary. brian, let me go to you first on this. a lot of stories whirling around today that there has been some tensions over all of this, how it was rolled out in the white house, people pointing fingers at each other. what did you think? were you convinced by general kelly today? to put your mind at ease at all? >> not really, martha. he essentially had to admit, the secretary did, that he hadn't seen the actual precise language of the executive order. that corresponds with the report that we have seen over the last several days of people within trump's own administration that didn't have the opportunity to review it. it was apparently written by some of the top political advisors within the west wing. you even heard complaints today from paul ryan, the speaker, criticizing the manner in which this was rolled out. they had to adjust some of the aspects of the executive order on the fly. initially they were saying it was going to include green card

holders, then, they had to walk that back. i think this all goes to suggest that it was rushed out. it is overly broad. i think there are serious constitutional concerns at issue here. on a practical standpoint, it was incompetence in terms of the rollout. i think that is why you are seeing so much criticism, even from republicans. >> martha: david, clearly, it didn't come across in the way that the president wanted it to. i mean, there was a lot of backlash, and perhaps if it had been rolled out in a better way, it wouldn't have been met with, and some areas, hysteria, over what appears to be a three month pause and allowing people from a certain country, which has been done before. >> wright, martha. there is always going to be speed bumps at the beginning of every administration. what is the reality here, martha? when you want a background check on somebody, you can do their fingerprints, a live scan that shows you the criminal record, shows you their bankruptcies, shows you restraining orders against them. that type of digital infrastructure does not exist in

the seven countries. in fact, some of them, honor killings are not an offense, they wouldn't even show up on anything if they did have a background check. we have to be exceptionally careful, the way barack obama was in 2011, when he had a six-month basically moratorium on issuing leases to iraqis. mr. trump will be putting americans first, the safety of americans first. that includes muslim americans, martha. you've got to understand that this is a comprehensive goal that he has had for the last 18 months. maybe there will be some things that offend people. maybe it wasn't technically correct and the way it was implemented. but he is going to get it right. it may be that some people are caught up briefly in this problem. but once it is rolled out, once it is executed in the correct way, it will be perfect. >> martha: let me put it up on the screen what president obama said. two weeks from the inauguration of president trump. we already had some response from president obama.

he said "president obama is heartened by the level of engagement taking place in communities across the country. the president fundamentally disagrees with the notion of discriminating against individuals because of their faith or religion." the rest of the story was that he was getting calls from reporters and people were saying, they're so much happening, how could you not weigh in, you have to wait and auntie felt compelled to do so through a spokesperson. i think this is an unprecedented window of time for a former president to start responding to the actions of the white house. what do you think? >> i think that barack obama himself, martha, would not have predicted he would be re-engaging in the public discourse this quickly. but i think of the president probably made a judgment that this issue went too close to the heart of our fundamental values as americans for him to remain silent. >> martha: its not do similar from something he did in 2011. >> there is actually some important distinctions there. if the president were asked that question, he would point to the fact that actually, there was no

band during that period in 2011. no monitoring data span where there weren't still iraqi refugees coming into the country. >> yes, there was praise because there was not a ban. no period -- >> martha: we got to go. >> refugees don't rely on visas to come into the country. >> lasted from the syrian emigrants, there were more than 10,000, 99.5% of them were muslim immigrants are refugees, .5% for christians. that is despite the fact that 10% of the country are christians, we talk about discriminating based on religion, that is what it is. >> martha: we will leave it there. brian fallon, thank you very much. david wohl, we will see both next time. they could you, gentlemen. we are watching the white house tonight, as you know, we are waiting for word from president trump on his nominee. there are only eight justices right now, they are supposed to be not come at has been that way for almost a year. charles krauthammer weighs in on what he thinks about the bruising confirmation battle which is expected to follow. also, tonight, democrats employing new and some would argue, less than savory tactics

to block three critical trump cabinet nominees. what is the hold up of these individuals? dana loesch and mad by not on that latest plan to take on president trump will make him back. -- when we come back. the highest average earning potential over their professional lifetime. see? uh, it's a girl. congratulations! two of my girls are toms. i work for ally, finances are my thing. you know, i'm gonna go give birth real quick and then we'll talk, ok? nice baby. let's go. here comes tom #5! nothing, stops us from doing right by our customers. ally. do it right. whoo! look out.

ally. do it right. withevery late night...g... and moment away... with every click...call...punch... and paycheck... you've earned your medicare. it was a deal that was made long ago, and aarp believes it should be honored. thankfully, president trump does too. "i am going to protect and save your social security and your medicare. you made a deal a long time ago." now, it's congress' turn. tell them to protect medicare.

when you have digestive sensitivities, life can feel like a never ending search for food that won't cause bloating, gas, or inner turmoil. try pronourish. a delicious nutritional drink that makes a great mini meal or snack that has protein and fiber. and pronourish has no gluten or high fructose corn syrup. and is low in fodmap ingredients that can trigger digestive sensitivities. the search is over. pronourish. nutrition you can feel good about.

a body without proper footd needssupport can mean pain. the dr. scholl's kiosk maps your feet and recommends our custom fit orthotic to stabilize your foundation and relieve foot, knee or lower back pain from being on your feet. dr. scholl's. we've done well in life, with help from our advisor, we made it through many market swings. sure we could travel, take it easy... but we've never been the type to just sit back... not when we've got so much more to give when you have the right financial advisor, life can be brilliant. ameriprise

>> martha: new efforts by democrats to bring the trump administration to a screeching halt today, half of the senate finance committee were empty. democrats refused to show up and vote for the nominations. here is with that pretty picture looked at. top dominic congressman tom price and steve mnuchin for treasury secretary. hours later, democrats forced to delay in the vote for attorney general nominee senator jeff sessions, which has already been delayed by a week and this process. ed henry joins us live in washington with what is going on. good evening to you. >> go to see you, martha. remember, on day one of the obama presidency, republicans confirmed this. on day one, president trump just got two confirmed. more than ten days later, he only has a total of four after elaine chao was confirmed today. the president today tweeting "when will the democrats give us

our attorney general and rest of cabinet? there should be ashamed of themselves. no wonder d.c. doesn't work." the democrats approved elaine chao. chuck schumer declaring because the white house is suffering a "crisis of confidence." mitch mcconnell fired back, the democrats are fools because they haven't got over the election results. a reversal of february 2010 when president obama cut off john mccain in health care summit. with a less than gracious, "you lost, get over it." >> let me just make this point, john. we are not campaigning anymore. the election is over. >> why your reminded of that every day. >> we can spend the remainder of the time with our respective talking points going back and forth. we were supposed to be talking about insurance. >> economist of the bestseller "the great equalizer" declared today that blocking a new treasury secretary is actually

destabilizing the markets. he charts this is causing uncertainty and is getting dangerous. martha appeared to >> martha: fascinating to go back to that sound bite. here with mark, dana loesch is the host of "dana" and matt bennett, former deputy assistant to president clinton. welcome to both of you. good to have you here. >> thanks, martha. >> martha: before you, you look at that moment, it was one of those things that made you catch your breath. an awkward moment in that room. he pressed forward on it. he believed that he won and that that gave him the mandate to move forward. why is it not the same for president trump? >> look, we are not litigating what obama did in 2010. what if we are talking about it with what is going on right now. the fact is we have never seen an opening of an administration anything like what we are seeing with trump. trump, all of the blame for this, really should be laid at the feet of donald trump. he is completely mishandling -- >> martha: he is doing exactly what he said he was going to do as a candidate. he won 306 electoral votes, now,

he is going on that list and doing those things. what is so shocking about that, matt? >> this is not about whether or not he is the president. everybody and congress acknowledges that donald trump is the dash won the election and is the president. the question is, is he running roughshod over congress? the executive orders that he issued in the last few days, including the travel ban, or so outside the mainstream, even republicans were shocked by the. democrats who came in that were skeptical but willing to listen, they move the move the initial nominees through -- >> martha: what we are talking about here is approving the nominees, we just saw the room, which was half empty. i want to play something from senator orrin hatch then, i want to get dana's thoughts. >> we need to stop posturing and acting like idiots. stop holding news conferences and come here and express yourself here.

and then, vote, one way or the other. i would like to see somebody with courage on that other side. >> martha: dana, your thoughts? >> i actually do think, martha, what former president barack obama did mattered. i love the quote that he said. rumor this one? "elections have consequences and a soda november 8th." the people voted, they made their voice known. they gave this new administration a mandate, i realize that it is difficult for people to see a president to go to work and accomplish something that first week of office and set up go to cocktail parties and never ending balls. if we are seeing here is actually the will of the people being done. we are seeing business being done. it is incredibly unfortunate that we have a political party in congress right now that wants to play petty politics with the lives of americans and tried to hold up every single nomination. i will tell you this, martha, democrats probably want to reevaluate that tactic of blocking everyone. you know that joe biden, he invented the hardball that democrats are playing right now.

they have midterms coming up. it is going to be quite a fight if they want to retain a semblance and this. >> martha: at some point, matt, democrats will be accused, by democrats, of not pegging their battles correctly here. >> first of all, let's rumor that mitch mcconnell said, after barack obama was reelected, that it was his job to make sure that barack obama couldn't do anything. >> martha: that really bother democrats. something that you are a big fan of now. >> also, let me point out another thing that bothered us. president obama nominated a supreme court justice last february. you pointed this out earlier. mcconnell sat on it for almost a year. >> martha: give what you get? that is the philosophy? >> i think there is a little bit of payback. but mostly, this is about the way that trump is conducting himself over the last few days. it is about the eos and the way that he has opened his presence.

>> martha: i really think at one point the american people look at this and they sort of agree with orrin hatch. you know what, enough. get in the room, do your job, sit down at the table, and let's vote on these things. we will see. we are out of time. thank you very much. matt bennett and dana loesch. still ahead tonight, as we wait president trump spec to replace judge antonin scalia and his vacant supreme court seat, we have got some new details tonight and what could happen after the pick, senator ted cruz is signaling that he is willing to give the so-called nuclear option on the table. we'll explain that coming up. coming up next. plus, charles krauthammer to tell us why the fight could be "bilotti and quite enjoyable" and his words. when we come back. >> would you want to make mcconnell to use the nuclear option? oh, yes, i wonder. >> you what? >> we have obstructionists.

for deep penetrating relief at the source. aleve direct therapy. (ee-e-e-oh-mum-oh-weh) (hush my darling...) (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) (hush my darling...) man snoring (don't fear my darling...) (the lion sleeps tonight.) woman snoring take the roar out of snore. yet another innovation only at a sleep number store.

and i finally found our big idaho potato truck. it's been touring the country telling folks about our heart healthy idaho potatoes, america's favorite potatoes, and donating to local charities along the way. but now it's finally back home where it belongs. aw man. hey, wait up. where you goin'? here we go again.

bounty is more absorbent,mom" per roll so the roll can last 50% longer than the leading ordinary brand. so you get more "life" per roll. bounty, the quicker picker upper and her new mobile wedding business.tte at first, getting paid was tough... until she got quickbooks. now she sends invoices, sees when they've been viewed and ta-da, paid twice as fast! see how at quickbooks-dot-com.

>> martha: seven >> caller: 37 on the east coast. take a look at this, in front of the white house, somewhat unusual scene. a huge crowd of people standing at the front door, as we are waiting for tonight's announcement. they may be bringing them in through that way, but it is somewhat unusual. john roberts is covering all of this for us. he -- is he in the crowd? he is, it is probably the press coming up from the white house briefing room, as they gather to go in for the decision. so, that would appear that we may be getting pretty close. 8:02 is when we expect we will get this announcement from president trump this evening. he will tell us his choice for the supreme court. even without a name offered, there is already quite a bit of drama on capitol hill about what will happen next. with some republicans signaling that they may be okay with this so-called nuclear option democrats decide to filibuster

this judge. trace gallagher explains all of that for us. hey, trees. >> hey, arthur. a quote, stolen seat, referring to when they chose not to hold a hearing for merrick garland. so, this time around, oregon democratic senator jeff berkley has promised to filibuster a fight, meaning trump's nominee would need 60 votes to be confirmed by the senate. it would also mark only the second time in history the senate has mounted a filibuster against a high court to pick. in 2006, democrats, including then senator barack obama, tried and failed to block the confirmation of samuel alito. texas senator ted cruz said, if the democrats this time plan to block president trump's nominee, then, republicans should use this so-called nuclear option. that is where the senate can change the rules, allowing the supreme court nominee to be confirmed with only 51 votes. senate majority leader mitch

mcconnell is reportedly against changing their rules. but he also guaranteed that trump's nominee will be confirmed. remember in 2013, then senate majority leader harry reid upended nearly 40 years of precedent by using the nuclear option to eliminate the filibuster of our president obama's federal and circuit court nominees. this was harry reid's argument at the time, followed by mitch mcconnell's warning. watch. >> the senates is a living thin thing. to survive, it must change, as it have. over the history of this great country. to the average american, adapting the rules to make us on at work again is just common sense. >> if you want to play games, set yet another president, that he will no doubt come to regret, i will say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, you will regret this, and you may regret it a lot sooner than you will think. >> it is sooner than democrats thought. in fact, in october, when

democrats expected to win both the senate and the white house, he reread again threatened to use the nuclear option, ending filibusters for supreme court nominees. martha. >> martha: wow. joining me now, marc thiessen, former chief speechwriter for george w. bush. he said mr. trump should go nuclear on his supreme court pick. the president of the alliance for justice, a progressive group who will fight president trump's nomination to the supreme court. welcome to both of you, as we watch the press filing in here and we get ready for this exciting announcement, no matter on which side of the i'll use it. we watch all of this unfold. you look at that, that back and forth with harry reid, and be concerned about using the nuclear option. mitch mcconnell saying, it could be on the other foot. of course, at that point, nobody thought we would have a republican president. you know, it seems like this was set up by your side. >> i think it's important, first, to remember that we are

confirming a supreme court justice, not for four years, not for eight years, but for a lifetime appointment. i think it is too early to talk about nuclear options, filibusters. >> martha: why are democrats already talking about rejecting this person no matter who it is? >> there is only one senator who stepped out and mentioned filibusters. i think senator merkley is just expressing the anguish felt by democrats over the mistreatment of merrick garland. but that was then. now is now. we will all be focused on the next denomination. >> martha: you are saying, one of these two individuals, hardiman or gorsuch, at this point, perhaps one or both of them is acceptable to democrats? >> based on the research, alliance for justice has done, neither is acceptable. in fact, no one on that list of 21 names is acceptable.

>> martha: they were improved 95-0 when they went through. some of these same senators, what a dramatic transformation happened to these individual since a few years ago when they were approved, nan? >> going to the supreme court is a very different question. >> martha: i guess they didn't do the research and they weren't paying attention the last time around? >> the research was done but everybody needs to look anew. after all, they have been on the bench now for about ten years. there is now a record to review. >> martha: mark, i want to bring you in before we have to run. what do you think? you are listening to what nan has to say, your thoughts? >> first of all, it is not just one senator, does chuck schumer, the minority leader, who said that anyone on trump's list of 21 judges, we will hold that seat open. they don't have the power to hold that seat open. they set a precedent. nan said this is a lifetime appointment. you know what they did in 2013? they got rid of the filibuster for light that mike lifetime to the federal bench. the reason i did that is that

they wanted to stack the nation's second highest court, the d.c. circuit come with liberal judges. they succeeded in doing that. now, there say, oh, please, don't use the nuclear options on the nation's highest court. if the republicans do that, it will only be because of the intransigence of the democrats saying they will oppose it before they knew who he edits. it is using the president that they set in 2013 for lifetime appointments to the federal bench. if it is good enough for the nation second highest court, wise and good enough for the highest court? >> martha: i need a "yes" or no. are we had appointed as a nation that we are so divided that the nuclear option as the only way that anything will get done and if the you are in power and you got elected into power, you are going to get your people through? nan, quickly. >> the only way we'll get a nominee confirmed is if that nominee is a person who will support court constitutional values, who will recognize the progress that has been made and workers rights, the environment, consumer, women's production,

and is willing to go forward, not go backward. >> martha: marc, very quick thought. >> donald trump is not going to up to mike appoint a liberal. the reality is, the democrats have been in charge last year, merrick garland was appointed, nan would've been the first one's income but we should use the nuclear option to put them on the court. so, we might as well go ahead and do it. whoever donald trump nominates today is going to be on the supreme court no matter what nan of the democrats say. >> martha: the senator said we have a lot of tools at our disposal. nan, thank you very much. marc thiessen, great to have you with us. you are watching this scene here, getting exciting. donald trump junior in the room of the east room. we haven't seen him at the white house. eric trump is also there. walking in. donald trump is about to make a very big decision, the president is. one of his campaign promises was a conservative judge to fill justice antonin scalia's vacant

spot. charles krauthammer here with his final thoughts on who president trump will pick and how this is going to go when we come back. when you have a digital notebook to capture investing ideas that instantly gives you stock prices, earnings, and dividends... an equity summary score that consolidates the stock ratings of top analysts into a single score... and $7.95 online u.s. equity trades, lower than td ameritrade, schwab, and e-trade, you realize the smartest investing idea

isn't just what you invest in, but who you invest with. ♪

>> martha: moments away from president trump stepping into the east room to announce his pick for supreme court justice. john roberts standing by inside

the east room tonight. in the center of the action. john, talus. pico martha, good evening. let's take a look around the east room. we have got all sorts of the dignitaries stopped at the white house, eric and don, jr., over there. we have all of the senators who will be involved in the confirmation process here. a lot of other invited guests, as welcome as we anticipate president trump's first nomination to the supreme court. my text message is starting to buzz, buzz, buzz, people saying it is gorsuch, gorsuch, gorsuch. we have not gotten not official yet from any white house source but people on the periphery certainly starting to talk about it. it definitely looked like he was the number-one pick between the two of them. now, it was neil gorsuch for the tenth circuit in denver or thomas hardiman from the third circuit. hardiman, a lot of people like them because they thought he would be in easy confirmation. allow the atomic a lot of the democrats voted for him in 2007, martha, they are still in the

center. a number of them are up for reelection in 2018 and states that donald trump won. they thought if we put forward hardiman, these people will likely have to vote for him to confirm him because they voted for him some number of years ago and they don't want to upset people in those states when they are seeking reelection. but it is looking, at this point, again, this is just what we are picking up on the periphery, that the strong lean is toward neil gorsuch. we will find out here very soon, martha, what the president's pick is going to be. oh, maybe nine or 10 minutes away in the east room. >> martha: room filling up. lots of excitement. thank you so much. we are just moments away, as john said, the president will unveil, rudy giuliani and the room now. he will unveil his pick for supreme court to fill the spot of antonin scalia, who passed away about a year ago. as john just said, judge neil gorsuch and judge thomas hardiman from the u.s. court of appeals for the third circuit, that is denver and pittsburgh,

respectively, are said to be the top picks. joining us now with his thoughts on the choices before president trump gets out there to speak, charles krauthammer. fox news contributor. charles, what is on your mind? what are your thoughts as we wait for this moment? >> we are down to a choice that for conservatives is a very good one. i think either one would please conservatives. i think just about anybody on the initial list of 21 possible supreme court choices was reassuring. it certainly helped trump to get reelected -- to get elected. i think that really made an impression. large number of people in the exit polls and said that the choice of supreme court was extremely important for them and the ones who did generally voted for trump. i think either one would be very pleasing. gorsuch, if that is the choice, it will be a particularly welcome one. >> martha: he will have the moment tonight where everyone in

the white house is happy and clapping. as you say, conservatives will be pleased with the choice. you know and i know that tomorrow, this battle is going to begin. characterize what you think this like for us. will there be like clarence thomas all over again? >> the democrats are not going to wait until tomorrow. the muskets are going to start to fire within minutes on tweets and elsewhere, the bombs bursting in air. the democrats will be right out of the gate. they probably have prepared all of their talking points. on the personal attacks before even knowing who the choice is going to be. i think they are ready. they have their playbook. extremist, not in the mainstream, he is not sensitive to the constitution, misogynist, not sensitive to women's rights, civil rights, et cetera. that is all prepared, it is not ready to go. it is a fill in the blanks assault and it will start right away. and it will fail. >> martha: we are watching us

live shot now. you see donald trump's sons, eric and don, jr. we just saw brad pascal, the brains behind the data machine that propelled the trump campaign to victory in many ways, telling them what counties you need to be in. so, this president, as you pointed out, charles, is where he is tonight, at least in part, because many people look to the equation between a clinton presidency and a trump presidency, and said, i want a more conservative supreme court pick. as you pointed out, this was a very important element for them. so, how that impacts the democrats if they go tooth and nail on this, do you expect that we will see a nuclear option or one of the other tools that senator mike lee put it to me earlier? >> well, if the democrats decide to filibuster, there will be a nuclear option. i guarantee it. mitch mcconnell is not going to allow this nomination to go down. now, perhaps, the democrats will decide that a filibuster in this

case is not worth it. after all, it is a 1 for 1 substitution for scalia. they want to hold their powder for the next one, which could be the replacement for a liberal, a democrat on the court. in which case, it would shift the balance of power dramatically for decades. and that could be the one which they want to have a massive fight. but i don't see any way that mcconnell will back down on this. after all, he stood up to a lot of heavy incoming fire by holding up the merrick garland nomination, which i think was exactly the right move. he held it up against all conventional wisdom, against liberal opinion, media opinion, obstructionists, he took all of the slings and arrows. he turned out to be right. the people got to choose supreme court nomination was high on the agenda of the voters. they are getting to choose through donald trump.

so, i don't see him allowing any of these to fail. it is up to the democrats, to chuck schumer, to decide if he wants to go to the nuclear option or not. and the beauty of it, sort of the pleasing part for conservatives, like me, is the poetic justice of the fact that it was the democrats when they had the majority, it was harry reid who changed four decades of custom to abolish the filibuster for judicial nominations below the supreme court. once he had done that, ripped up the principal, ripped up the norm, abandoned a precedent, there is no reason in the world why republicans shouldn't and won't do the same if the filibuster is threatening to hold up a republican nominee for supreme court. >> martha: you make a great point, charles. in many ways, this is potentially the first of two picks that donald trump will make.

there is a lot of strategy involved in that. for the democrats and for the republicans, in terms of shifting the balance of power in the supreme court. so, this pick, as you point out, is 1 for 1. it's a conservative replacement for antonin scalia for the next time around, it could be ginsberg or breyer or kennedy. that's another possibility. some people believe that he has suggested that perhaps he would consider retiring. that is a big question. it's a two party story, is it not? >> conservatives have to generally wait for republican administrations. they are near retirement. if they don't want to see their seat swing over to the other side. if the same with liberal justices. i think many liberals are rather upset with ruth bader ginsburg, who is now, i believe, 83, for not having stepped down when they had a democratic in the house. >> martha: charles, thank you

very much. we want to go to shannon bream, who is standing by. she's been covering the story from the steps of the supreme court throughout the day. she and then, your thoughts, as we are minutes away, we believe, from this announcement. >> martha, if we do get judge of neil gorsuch as a nominee, it is going to be a home run for conservatives. he is somebody who would he was attending columbia in the 1980s, he started cofounded a paper called "the fed," supposed to push back what he viewed as the pc feeling on-campus, the culture there. he is somebody who has a strong conservative conventional's, routes that run very deep. his mother was the first female head of the epa during the reagan administration. those close to him say that shee remembers the battles that she took on. he knows of this confirmation will be about. he has talked about how confirmations have become so political and they have become blood to sport almost. if he is a nominee, he knows what he is walking into. he is somebody almost, in addition, having clerked here at the supreme court.

he worked in the department of justice. he is well known by people and the bush 43 administration for his work in the doj. he is not an unknown entity. he has had years on the bench. he has got a lot of opinions out there, people have been able to look at is paper trail. he has that sterling credential of columbia harvard and oxford. you have judge hardiman as the other top contender. we are told that he went to an order tame and draw a child, drove a taxi to put himself through school. he is a personal connection to the president, he serves on the same bench as the president's sister, a judge in the third circuit. he also is a strong conservative credentials. he has talked about how judges, it is not their place ever to answer their own politics or feelings, you stick to the fact, the law, that is what conservatives like to hear. we will know and minutes, martha. >> martha: we will. shannon, thank you so much. we will be watching this throughout the course of the evening, of course. president trump are back to walk down that red carpeted hallway and make his announcement for the supreme court pick.

it's a big moment for him, to be sure. do something that he and his team have put quite a bit of thought into antonin scalia's seat has had open for nearly a year now. the announcement just moments away. bill o'reilly coming up next. ♪ ♪ >> bill: hi, i am bill o'reilly, reporting from los angeles. thanks for watching us tonight. you are looking at a live picture from the white house, we where just moments from now, president trump will announce his supreme court selection. the present and the proposed justice within speak for a few moments. we will bring you everything life as it happens and then, have analysis with our fox news team. and the reason that this is so important is because the shape of the country will be decided by the supreme court