>> it wasn't the point he had one the president is under investigation, we approved justice breyer.democratic friends did not have this view when clinton was president. >> chris: since you point out i'm going to bring it up, 1994, clinton is under investigation by the independent counsel in whitewater and he was nominated. stephen breyer was confirmed to the court. >> more documents than the person ever nominated to the supreme court. we will have a hearing that there's no drama in this hearing. the only drama is those running for president, how will they handle this hearing on the democratic side? we will get this good man confirmed. >> chris: let me ask you about this question of criminal liability. i want to look at some of brett kavanaugh statements on that issue. in 1999 he said the nixon ruling, that president nixon had to turn over all of the white house watergate tapes may have been "wrongly decided." in 2009 he wrote criminal investigations take the president's focus away from his or her responsibilities to the people. is there a legitimate concern that justice cavanaugh, i

breyers. simplemente vainilla deliciosa.o.teligente? tal vez podrías confiar en que no tendrás que hablar con ese vecino. ¿vas a ver el partido? o tal vez podrías simplemente confiar en duracell. los viejos rockeros nunca mueren aunque se jubilan la frase podrÍa resumir lo que va a pasar cuando el grupo en pantalla se retire despuÉs de 45 aÑos de mucho rock, ya han anunciado su Última gira le pusieron un gran nombre. >>> un Último beso. >>> aunque aÚn no han dicho fecha ni lugares, la famosa banda deja las guitarras y maquillajes seÑa de identidad, siempre quedarÁn sus grabaciones. >>> el fegs tisstival del cine francisco estÁ en marcha, celebrando la magia de latinos. >>> miren. >>> (♪mÚsica♪). >>> (♪mÚsica♪). >>> y para hablar mÁs de lo que nos ofrÉcelo el festival estamos con el director lucho ramÍrez, ¿cÓmo estÁs? lucho? >>> buenos dÍas estoy muy bien. >>> que bueno y sabemos que trabajando muchÍsimo porque no es poca cosa hacer un festival del cine, esta es la ediciÓn nÚmero diez del festival cÓmo lo estÁn celebrando? >

breyers natural vanilla. milk and fresh cream, and only sustainably farmed vanilla. it's made with fresh cream... sugar... and milk! breyers. the good vanilla. we proudly partner with american farmers for grade a milk and cream. mmm! >>> good morning. there are calls to delay this week's scheduled vote on the nomination of brett kavanaugh for the u.s. supreme court. we have the latest on the claim by a bay area woman accusing judge kavanaugh of sexual misconduct. >>> florence continues to cause severe damage in north carolina the new threat posed by the storm. good morning and thank you for joinin >> let's go to steve paulson to check the weather on this monday morning. >> we have a fog back again. the systems keep rolling in and it enhances that fog bank even though it's getting late for that season. nice to mild. this pattern not changing. maybe wednesday or thursday we can get a quick warm-up but not today or tomorrow. 40s, 50s. a little warmer than yesterday. even some 30s. airport dropped to 39 sunday morning. 40s ar. saratoga in there. scotts valley and socal.

he nominated and the senate confirms stephen breyer and that was also in a midterm election year.at directly contradicts two of the argument you're making against brett kavanaugh.>> let me just say i was not a member of the senate when justice breyer came before the body. but i will tell you at the time, the investigation was underway. there was no suspicion at that moment that clinton was going to, you have no authority to even question me. it went forward but he was subpoenaed, deposed, tried in the house. and i should say indicted under the impeachment clause and tried in the senate. i was in the senate at that time. now we have a different situation completely. there's a serious question as to whether this president, given the opportunity, will end the mueller investigation. something most republicans and the majority of americans say would be a serious mistake. we asked brett kavanaugh what do you think, he said it's hands off when it comes to a president when it comes to his term in office. i think that's a mistake and when the major reasons people have misgivings about his

breyers. simplemente vainilla deliciosa. $35 al mes. calificado número uno en satisfacción al cliente sobre el cable. más de lo tuyo. es lo nuestro. llama al 1.800.directv. ♪ ♪ ♪ francisca:una noticia muy pero, muy fuerte. un actor sugiriÓ a un crÍtico de cine que se suicidara. asÍ como lo escucha. el crÍtico hace una crítica negativa en contra de la pelÍcula "el día de la uniÓn", en donde habla del terremoto que pasÓ en mÉxico. el crÍtico y conductor de televisiÓn. alan: es su Época fue conocido en mÉxico. francisca: considerÓ de que la pelÍcula no era muy buena y le voy a leer textualmente:"si estÁn aburridos este sábado les comparto mi enojo con la pelÍcula de el temblor" alan: dice que tenÍa mala direcciÓn, mala fotografÍa y que estaba sacado de un evento trÁgico. francisca: no se quedaron callado y le escribiÓ lo siguiente. " hace aÑo querÍa ser actor, luego cine, siempre mediocre, ahora criticas lo que deseabas. cuÁnto daÑo te hice con un logro mÁs me hiciste reÍr, vives dolor y deseo de lo que jamÁs serás ni lo verÁs.

breyers. simplemente vainilla deliciosa.esa de campaÑa de construir un muro en la frontera con mÉxico y ademÁs culpÓ a los demócratas por bloquear la iniciativa y llamÓ a los colegas republicanos a ponerse duros. buscan aprobar un plan para financiar al gobierno federal antes de que finalice el gobierno fiscal. 13 centros de detenciÓn podrÍa perder su licencia luego de que el departamento de servicios de salud notificÓ que las instalaciones no cuentan con registros de huellas dactilares, ni documento que comprueben la verificaciÓn de antecedentes penales a sus empleados. proceso que garantiza la seguridad de los pequeÑos. " me siento mÁs viva" son las conmovedoras palabras de la niÑa que recibiÓ trasplante de corazÓn en chicago, tras la visita sorpresa de un cantante. la niÑa ahora apoya a niÑos que esperan un donante. en compaÑÍa de su madre la elocuente e menor narrÓ cómo ha cambiado su vida luego de la operaciÓn. >> [habla en inglÉs] satcha: hermosa, el paÍs sigue de cerca la historia de esta pequeÑa quien pidiÓ dos deseo

the godfather of the major rules or major questions doctrine is justice breyer, who wrote about it in the 1980s as a way to apply chevron. the supreme court adopted that in the brown and williamson case, applied it in the uarg case, the one you referenced, justice scalia's opinion. what that opinion says is it's okay for congress to delegate various matters to the executive agencies to do rules, but on major questions of major economic or social significance, we expect congress to speak clearly before such a delegation. and that had not happened in my view with respect to net neutrality and i felt bound by precedent, therefore, to apply the major precedent. >> so minor rules would be okay but not major. i know in the decision you said you'll know the difference when you see it. i think that's why the other judges on the court appointed by both parties went with the traditional and precedential view of how to look at this and you used the 1986 law article albeit by justice breyer and then dicta from the king v.burwell case in 2015. i'm trying to show a pattern where you say congress sh

stephen breyer, longtime staffer for kennedy on the senate judiciary committee. did they destroy him? trash him? this is a one-way street, and it's about damn time the republicans stood up to it. we don't to need to listen to lectures by the leftists. we don't need to listen to leftists about women's rights. last time i checked we're all borne of women, including white males. i love my mother, my wife, my daughter and granddaughter, and i don't need to hear from leftists what women believe. i hear from my own women in my own life what women believe. we'll continue to go on here, but the fact of the matter is the left tries to generalize these hearings so to try and make you believe that they stand for minorities and they stand for women, they stand for equal rights. let me tell you something, they stand for a post constitutional america. they stand for big centralized government. they stand for an all-powerful supreme court and will never, ever willingly let go. obama's judges leave liberal imprint. this was a reuter's piece since he was leaving office of the 13

breyers. simplemente vainilla deliciosa.íon. ¿quieres? sure. >>> hace semanas tuve la oportunidad de recibir la invitaciÓn de la primero dama de puerto rico y visitar mi isla del encanto y aprovechar para irme por una de las Áreas mas afectadas y ver cÓmo ha mejorado a un aÑo del embate del huracÁn marÍa vamos a ver quÉ pasa. >> el 20 de septiembre de 2017 la vida de todos los puertorriqueÑos cambiÓ con el paso del huracÁn marÍa la comunidad de santiago de macao no fue la excepciÓn. >> a un aÑo acompaÑe a la primera dama de puerto rico beatrÍz a dar un recorrido por las Áreas afectadas de mi pueblo natal y ser testigo de la recuperaciÓn de las mismas. >> para santiago es un lugar que entendÍ que mascareÑo necesitaba y economÍa y es la pesca. >> como parte de la iniciativa se re construyeron. >> cuÉntame como se vio afectado con el huracÁn marÍa. >> como si fuera poco en esta Área recolectar mas de 800 libras de basura y se efectÚo una limpieza masiva. >> luego fuimos al centro comunal el cual estÁ preparado para servir como

have onesual to protestant, stevens, and the other two are jewish, ginsburg and breyer.mostly onay out issues of abortion when the public consciousness calms. as i note in the book, the supreme court received some criticism of the catholicism issue in 2000 seven when the justices for the first time struck down an abortion procedure which is known by its critics at the partial-birth abortion procedure and the majority of justices happen to be catholic. this is before justice sotomayor. that is when a lot of the criticism came to the forefront of our people voting their religion. , and sincee scalia he is conservative, he has a convincing argument at where he is at on the law anyway, even barry said about being influenced by his catholicism. he said there is no right to privacy which would protect abortion rights in the constitution. that is the end of the matter for me. i am just interpreting the constitution. i have strong religious police, but they do not influence me. he told me sometimes when he is coming out of mass on sunday fellow parishioners will say thank you fo

and that's a doctrine that justice breyer in the 1980s first talked about, i believe -- actually justice rehnquist in the 1980s decision as well talked about. and those -- that doctrine has been applied by the supreme court since the 1990s, most recently in the king v. burwell and uarg decisions. >> it seems to me that that's a a pretty broad or maybe narrow exception. and what i mean is ill defined. how -- [ shouting ] >> he's a puppet of the nra! stop killing our kids! stop killing our kids! >> how does a judge determine when you have a major circumstance that would be impacted by the exception? is there a standard? are there rules of how a judge makes that determination? >> there's no clear rule on that. i've talked about that in the u.s. telecom decision that the supreme court has not as yet provided specific guidance and you look at the number of people affected, the amount of money involved, the kind of attention, the kind of attention it's received in the public and you make a judgment based on that, whether this is the kind of rule as justice breyer first explained, it's filling

just a justice breyer were there. they were talking about the seeming disparity with minority law clerks and in particular african-american courts, they talked supreme court law clerks the supreme court justices. one of the things they said was they hired from the lower court. they pointed out that the pool in the courts of appeal and the disparities and so they were dependent on what the court of appeals did and does. it that is a bit "eggs you think about it might both pay back what did you do it back. >> ou "-spelling-right-double-quote sugalmansmight .-spelling-dot .-spelling-period wo (-spelling-left-parenthesis max terms of the reaction i got and --spelling-dash you .-spelling-period .-spelling-dot .-spelling-dot ion .-spelling-period "-spelling-right-double-quote tax .-spelling-point p .-spelling-point "-spelling-right-double-quote t you've read an opinion before where you agree with the conclusion but not the reasoning. have you had that experience? >> i have. >> i think we all have. can you tell me what in go

and that's a doctrine that justice breyer in the 1980s first talked about, i believe -- actually justice rehnquist in the 1980s decision as well talked about. and those -- that doctrine has been applied by the supreme court since the 1990s, most recently in the king v. burwell and uarg decisions. >> it seems to me that that's a a pretty broad or maybe narrow exception. and what i mean is ill defined. how -- [ shouting ] >> he's a puppet of the nra! stop killing our kids! stop killing our kids! >> how does a judge determine when you have a major circumstance that would be impacted by the exception? is there a standard? are there rules of how a judge makes that determination? >> there's no clear rule on that. i've talked about that in the u.s. telecom decision that the supreme court has not as yet provided specific guidance and you look at the number of people affected, the amount of money involved, the kind of attention, the kind of attention it's received in the public and you make a judgment based on that, whether this is the kind of rule as justice breyer first explained, it's filling

breyers. the good vanilla. we proudly partner with american farmers for grade a milk and cream. mmm! >>> good morning. accusations of sexual misconduct still following supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh. now there are questions about whether his accuser will testify. what she wants to happen before monday's hearing. >>> president trump making his way to north carolina today to survey the damage done by florence. what is on the agenda for the president as historic flooding is expected to get worse. good morning and thank you for joining us on this wednesday, september 19. i'm pam cook. >> good morning. i'm dave clark. we will find out if pam cook can be out in the he today. >> i wouldn't say heat. warmer. in north carolina now they have the humidity. they have no air-conditioning since the power is out. it warmer forecast for us. a little above average to near average. tomorrow looks to be above. very persistent and strong north northwest breeze on the coast. the water temperature is cold at about 51 - 53. when you get clear skies on the coast it is also pretty chilly. the win

justice breyer wrote about it in the 1980s. the supreme court adopted that. the brown and williamson case applied it in the case you referenced, justice scalia's opinion. what that opinion says is it's okay for congress to delegate various matters to the executive agencies to do rules, but on major questions of major economic or social significance, we expect congress to speak clearly before such a delegation. that had not happened, in my view, with respect to net neutrality. i felt bound by precedent, therefore, to apply the major questions of rules doctrine. >> i know in the decision you say you'll know the difference with you see it. i think that's why the other judges on the court, appointed by both parties, went with the traditional and presidential view of how to look at this. you use the the 1986 law review article by albeit justice breyer and then the ding v. burwell case. i'm trying to show this pattern where you say, oh, congress should step in and do everything. you're stepping in, in these cases. >> i would say it's a pattern of adhering to preced

breyers. the good vanilla. we proudly partner with american farmers for grade a milk and cream.skin. cosentyx can help people with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis find clear skin that can last. don't use if you're allergic to cosentyx. before starting, get checked for tuberculosis. an increased risk of infections and lowered ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor about an infection or symptoms, if your inflammatory bowel disease symptoms develop or worsen, or if you've had a vaccine or plan to. serious allergic reactions may occur. how sexy are these elbows? ask your dermatologist about cosentyx. temperatures today. the sunshine to the coast. 63, half moon bay. what a great day to be in san francisco. sunny, 70 degrees. then you can see 80s in your inland neighborhoods. 90s are on the way. i'll show you that coming up. how about the morning commute? >>> starting off pretty quiet, mike. no major incidents to talk about. a areas of fog on the visibility layer. i'll talk a little bit more about that in just a few. keeping an eye on road work. highway 4, san pablo dam

al-jazeera is correspondent stephen breyer the stories they tell you that this was not good news for the box office but it lets us know. we're at the mercy of the russian camp for palestinian refugees al-jazeera fluent in world news. is a popular filming location in france when it comes to stories about drugs crime and radicalization tired of negative stereotypes youth worker and it's nanny dearie this week claiming its image by putting its young resident behind the camera. the stories we don't often hear told by the people who live them. this is you're out on al-jazeera. and monday put it on. us and british companies have announced the biggest discovery of natural gas in west africa but what to do with these untapped natural resources is already a source of heated debate nothing much has changed they still spend most of the days looking forward to for the dry river beds like this one five years on the syrians still feel battered or even those who managed to escape their country haven't truly been able to escape the war. i and historic moment in pyongyang the south korea's president

justice breyer first articulated something like this in articles. -- log review articles. articles.iew like i said the supreme court adopted it in the late 1990's and in some cases would appear before that. i think that's a really important doctrine right now for broad delegations to agencies. if you are concerned about agencies taking vague delegations and doing massive agency rules this doctrine is critical. you see it in king versus burwell, but she's -- two things on this, how major is major? money, people, affected, what? ,n a dissent i wrote last year that is an important debate. some rules are obviously major. some rules are obviously major under any conception. that's one issue that is difficult. that is a piece of the non-delegation story. the nondelegation doctrine does not under current legislation have musty. the major question doctrine, it's important in having broad delegations. in a way that i think is putting the brakes on some of what some agencies have done. judgments about ambiguity could be dangerous. think any's would biased by strong cultural preferen

stephen breyer was ted kennedys lawyer. so they get to pick their judges from the liberal bench.ut when a conservative wins the white house, we can't pick a conservative. that's what she is trying to say. cern how much worse will it be if the president does get another supreme court pick. lire * i don't know what def-come 4 is. kennedy: you have having the senator from connecticut * saying there is so much secrecy surrounding this nominee. do you agree with that? do you think he's been cloaked in an invisible cape? >> he has had 307 decisions. a well defined judge and a well defined person. he's a republican conservative. probably the best mind of his generation. he's who i hope president trump would have picked. incredibly well qualified. there is nothing secret about where he's coming from. they want to lose the election and pick the judge and it doesn't work that way. my democratic friends, i voted for cage an -- voted for kagan d sotomayor because they were qualified, not because i would have chosen them. kennedy: if he has problems with his past interpretations, be sure you

. >> and justice breyer, who was the democrats chief counsel and the senate judiciary committee, do you think he has been able to successfully make the change asween that job and the role judge, circuit judge first, and then now as a member of the united states up in court? >> yes. >> attacking the claims administration's assertions during your work of the office of independent counsel on the other hand helping to draft whichive order 13233 establishes policies and procedures that govern the processing of request for presidential records and the assertion of constitutionally based privileges. set this executive order forth those circumstances under which an assertion of executive privilege should be made and/or would be successful, and does anything in the executive order purport to block prosecutors or grand jury's in gaining accents to presidential -- gaining access to present to records and a criminal investigation? >> senator, nothing in the order purports to assert privilege at all. it is up to the individual president, former president or current president to assert privilege foll

justice breyer committed to reducing cases and lloyds of london. justice ginsburg refused cases that were on her d.c. circuit recusal list, just as fully committed to recuse in this case an issue that was the same as an issue decided as the d.c. circuit judge. my question to you, will you commit to reducing in any case involving the civil or criminal liability. >> the independence of the judiciary requires that they would not commit and to issue a commitment on his discretion or recusal issue in either direction. so if i answer that question in either direction, i would be violating my judicial independent in my view by committing as in this context. >> with all due respect, sir, i've shared with you that others at that desk or some desk like that have committed to reducing. there have been circumstances where they have committed. is it your opinion that they violated some ethical code or role? >> i don't know all the circumstances, but i believe those are situations that required recusal is where they had previously hadio to recuse d were simply i

. >> when clinton was under investigation, we approved justice breyer.iew when clinton was president. >> there was no suspicion that the moment clinton was going to brush to the side until you have no authority to even question me. now we have a different situation. there is a serious question as to whether this president given the opportunity will end the mueller investigation. >> mike: back with the panel. steve, mara, chris, morgan. >> up i am looking at the numbers, i don't think there's any way he is not confirmed. 41 democrats are against him. despite the bipartisan rhetoric at mccain's funeral, they are still going to vote against him. you get to 51 very quickly. my question -- i think the president is going to have other republicans. what are the 11 swing senators do? i think it is a done deal, knock on wood. how does the progressive base react? reports that they are incredibly frustrated with their leadership for being unable to prevent trump from getting his second supreme court justice. does the progressive base of the party take it out on the

breyer 87. sotomayor, 68. kagan, 63. all were clearly qualified and you went to law school with brett kavanaugh and you both clerked in the same courthouse in delaware. i can understand you don't like some of his opinions but isn't he clearly qualified and within the judicial mainstream? >> well chris, as i said in the hearing. i've known judge kavanaugh for 30 years and i know him to be an intelligent, decent and thoughtful person. good father and neighbor. we've heard about what a good high school basketball coaching is and how he volunteers at a homeless shelter with his parish. all of those are admirable qualities. i am concerned that he is well outside the main judicial mainstream. a decision he rendered just this year, he refused to follow settled precedent and made it clear his views on executive power would lead to a dangerous rewriting of the core policies, the core constitutional traditions and decisions of the cord around presidential power. i will take advantage of the opportunity today to send questions for

it was the same for justice breyer in the 1990's, the numbers. think of justice scalia certainly a known character in 1996. t have been a law professor, written many things. he had been on the d c circuit. every democrat and every republican voted for him. that is the way it should be. become, a what it has highly partisan show. republicans move in lockstep, so do the democrats. wandh i could wave a magic wayhave it go back to the it was. justice liu: so, i want to thank the audience for some questions i have gotten on note cards. the justice was kind enough to take some prescreened questions. [laughter] justice ginsburg: not by me. [laughter] justice liu: i will give you a few, they will be easy ones. do you use a smartphone, and what app do you like to use? [laughter] --tice ginsburg: yes, i do oh, yes. i do have a favorite app. i don't know if it has a name, but it is sleep. when i travel i carry a noise machine. i turn on and i fall asleep instantly. if i didn't have my noise , then i was restless. i was in zurich and my noise machine broke.

. >> ruth bader ginsburg is almost unanimous, steven breyer was confirmed in almost a week and a halfhat's gone. >> you're right. the era is gone and what's happening here and what we saw yesterday is a very, very bad sign. >> chuck grassley is about to get this session into order. they allow the photographers a minute or two to take pictures and the session will begin, chuck grassley has been on time as opposed to many others here in washington. he said it will start at 9:35. you see the photographers will be taking a few more pictures. john, while we wait for this session to begin, you only need 50, it's a republican vice preside president's, to confirm. that's because the democrats changed the rule. here's chuck grassley. we had three people who had the hon november of introducing judge kavanaugh, senator rice and attorney lisa blatt. and we heard from judge kavanaugh. nbc news reported democratic members of the committee plotted with the minority leader to disrupt the hearing yesterday. democratic senators interrupted the hearing 63 times before lunch. in the audience, 70 people w

breyers. simplemente vainilla deliciosa.y le regalÓ una serenata a su esposa. dije esposa porque si no se han enterado la pareja se casÓ en nueva york la semana pasada. hablando de amor, miren el amor que las filipina siente por los chicos de cnco, estos vÍdeos muestran que han llegado a un nivel internacional. vean la cantidad de chicas que los persiguen en lo que parece ser centro comercial. gilberto santarosa cumple sus aÑos de carrera y lo hace contando anÉcdotas consell a sus anÉcdotas con celia cruz. jessica: reacciona como nunca a las declaraciones de trump de puerto rico. gilberto: pretender despachar las responsabilidades a lo polÍtico de acÁ. jessica:maribel guardia es amante de los perros. mira la foto que subiÓ en instagram ayer en donde nos muestra todos sus perros. en la revista el novio de jennifer lÓpez revela lo que le inspira de jennifer lÓpez. esta revista es para los amantes del cigarro. seguimos hablando de galanes. ayer antonio banderas nos dijo que estÁ posando con su no emmy y felicito a todos lo que

have you heard of justice breyer? do you know him? you can't say anything, i guess. where did he come from? he was ted kennedy's senate judiciary person. where do you think republicans are going to go find a judge? the whole argument is, you can be a conservative republican president but you got to nominate a liberal to be fair to the country. that's absurd. where do you think ruth bader ginsburg came from? general counsel of the aclu. wonderful person. what groups do y'all pick from? this is shaping up to be the hypocrisy hearing and that's hard to do in the senate. in today's time to be hypocritical. but let me just point to a few of these things. clinton, it didn't bother anybody for clinton to nominate breyer while he was under investigation. we actually did it. didn't bother any of y'all that ted kennedy staff person was his pick. it didn't me either. that's who i expect you to pick. this vills. you're one of the best choices any republican could make. as i said with justice gorsuch, i am glad you're here because i'm wondering, who would you pick? this is a home

in 1994 when kim nominated stephen breyer to be chief of the supreme court, they didn't halt his hearingamples here of one that she was on the other foot. joe biden cited >> president trump: and kavanaugh article about indicting sitting president. so bright cavanaugh who will destroy the republic because of his views on executive power. joe biden used his article on behalf of, before the she was on the other foot they did something differently. >> martha: and tomorrow we will dig into the questioning and watch all of that unfold as it gets underway. today a big decision from governer ducey, you were obviously so and what are your thoughts on when he decides to do that. >> they take his wing man who tries to solve hard problems and let him finish out his good friends term. it makes a lot of sense to me. come january we will get someone who will be able to run in 2,020, but a governer ducey did the people of arizona a great service. as for the vote for a kavanaugh, today the big winner was trumpet and the big loser was the democratic party because of this is their approach, as to how to go

anyway, indeed, justice breyer and kagan were both confirmed in midterm elections.hen the second attempt was to argue that we needed to request all judge kavanaugh's executive branch records. but they completely ignored the fact that we did not request all of justin kagan's executive branch records. indeed, her most recent and relevant executive branch records from the solicitor general's office were not requested. even despite the fact that judge kavanaugh has spent the last 12 years on the second most -- even though judge kavanaugh has spent the last 12 years on the second most powerful court in the country, issuing 307 opinions and joining hundreds of others. we received over 480,000 pages of documents from judge kavanaugh's time on the executive branch. this was more pages of such documents than the last five supreme court nominees combined. in short, it was the most thorough and transparent confirmation process of all. i'm going to put the rest of my statement in the record because i'm sure a lot of people are irritated right now, and i'll let them express that

so was president clinton when he nominated and got confirmed both ruth bader ginsberg and stephen breyerasn't. man in the office when alabama nominated garland? i think his point is my point. clinton was able to get things through, every president was. why was it a different standard for barack obama? >> it's a double standard. and the folks who have been controlling this process, chairman grassley and others, speak from both sides of their mouth. during justice kagan's nomination, folks like jeff sessions insisted on disclosure each and every document from kagan's time in the white house. but now we see the senate at every turn changing the rules of the game, abanding the long-standing pro decision and rules that have helped guide the most important task the senate carries out, installing lifetime judges on our nation's courts. this hearing should not be going forward on tuesday. we need to press pause, we need to give the senate time to evaluate each and every document underlying mr. kavanaugh's record so we can understand who he truly is before we think about whether he qualifies for

before the congress about the law clerk hiring at the supreme court and justice thomas and justice breyer before the appropriations committee announced about law clerks and the lack of the supreme court. and they said in essence we are hiring from the lower court. i remember reading not in thinking, well, i need to do somethingg about that. on the lower court. in one of them. after that i thought what can i do.t, i didn't just sit there. i thought what can i do when i started on my own going to the heel law student association. and the only judges do not assert any one of the few.ho and i just cold called them, cold e-mailed them as i'd like to speak about minority law clerk hiring because i'm told there is a problem there. i showed up the first time wondering how it would go and i explained and i got a good crowd and i said we need more law clerks. there's a problem. let me tell you how to do it. here's why you should clerk and here is how you clerk in here is how -- or as the classes you should take in the things you need. at the end of the meeting i gave them my phone number and e-mail

breyers. simplemente vainilla deliciosa.e ser sin estas muÑecas que han cumplido sueÑos. vamos a comenzar con la primera de las reinas. quiÉn serÁ? ♪ >> felicidades alejandra espinosa. [sonido ambiente] karla: ahÍ estÁ alejandra espinosa. serÁ la conductora de "nuestra belleza latina". muy guapa. ha cumplido todos sus sueÑos. bienvenida, ale. pasa por aquÍ. estÁ divina. muy bella. invitamos a que venga y se acomode. vamos a hablar toda juntas. vamos con la prÓxima. quiÉnes? [sonido ambiente] bravo! vanessa! [aplausos] preciosa. fue coronadacomo reina en 2012. creo que cumplido el sueÑo mÁs importante de que es ser madre. bienvenida. pasa a sentarte con nosotros. le damos pie a la prÓxima belleza. [sonido ambiente] >> aleida ortiz. [aplausos] [sonido ambiente] karla: ahÍ estÁ. coronada en el 2014. preciosa. a cumplido muchos sueÑos. bienvenida, muÑeca. pasa por aquÍ. la prÓxima, quÉ les puedo decir? yo la adoro. [sonido ambiente] >> francisca! [sonido ambien] karla: en nuestra reina preciosa. francisca se coronÓ en 2015. esta

breyers. simplemente vainilla deliciosa.aba totalmente el inundada, habÍa agua, no sabemos si estaba saliendo gasolina, y tambiÉn las instalaciones elÉctricas estÁn sin aislados. >>> por eso es complicado, porque las personas atoradas no saben quÉ tipos de quÍmicos, o estas estructuras que estÉn por allÍ se vuelve peligrosa. >>> el dueÑo de esta situaciÓn pues va a tardar bastante en reponerlas. >>> vamos a ver imÁgenes que querÍamos compartirles. >>> se van a ver oscuras, porque no tenemos energÍa. >>> en el hotel fue un centro de comando, habÍa policias y bomberos, y un poco a vela hacÍan los operativos, y estÁn funcionando de allÍ todavia. tenÍamos reservas de comida, mÁs snack para poder en un momento dado tener quÉ comer y agua. no sÉ si llegamos a esta parte del video, y llenar las tinas de agua, no fÁcil salir de aquÍ, porque el tema de la gasolina, por lo tanto hay un caos, pero la vida normal no va a comenzar acÁ hasta mucho tiempo. hasta que reinstalo en el servicio de energÍa y comenzar a funcionar, regreso con us

in the public, and you make a judgment based on that, whether this is the kind of rule, as justice breyereeling smaller parts of the statute, or a big social or economic decision. there are lots of factors you could look into to determine that. >> also, it seems to me, and relevant to a number of other comments that you have received, if the congressional statute that is passed, that is vague, overbroad, that the room for agency discretion is greater. does that play a role in the determination as to whether it is a major exception that would require a deeper review by the court? >> well, the question of ambiguity is something that applies in all of these chevron cases. but i do think as well in the major rule situation, what justice scalia said for the supreme court, if it's the rule of major economic or social significance, we expect congress to speak clearly. and it justice scalia's opinion for the court is quite important. in other words, we want to see and express authority to decide the major social or economic issues, that is going to be upheld as a rule by the courts. >> well thank

>> well, you know, i don't think that the justice breyer or justice ginsburg recused themselves from cases involving bill clinton, for example, supreme court case paula jones versus clinton went all the way to the court. they didn't recuse themselves from that. so i be would surprised if any j judicial nominee would say it's appropriate to recuse yourself as long as the president nominated you is still president. i also just have to course correct on one thing. i know that nina is a terrific reporter. but i disagree with one thing she said. judge kavanaugh called the nixon tapes case one of the three most important cases in the history of the american judiciary. so he is not an opponent of the nixon tapes case. he praised it multiple times. i really think his approach to executive power is a lot more maybe in the mainstream than -- >> but correct me if i'm wrong. he also suggested that the 8-0 decision was -- he suggested that perhaps it could have been overturned and didn't necessarily agree with it. that the tapes should have been handed over. >> that's really not. if you go back a

this all started with a great man doing a bad thing by borking robert bork. 75% voted for stephen breyerts voted for roberts. 10% of them voted for alito. that i would be shocked if more than one or two or three democrats voted for brett kavanaugh. >> chris: julie, do officials at the white house think that this allegation about something that happened decades ago, literally, could derail his confirmation? how confident are they even at this point that judge kavanaugh will be just as kavanaugh when the supreme court starts its new session in october? >> one of the things that give them confidence towards the end of last week was that you didn't see a lot of democrats really jumping on this. democrats have been looking for some way to slow it will 's load nomination. it felt like it could actually have an effect at holding office confirmation that you would see harris and booker and some of these other democrats really piling on and that hasn't happened. to your point earlier >> chris: we asked ten members on the committee and we assumed that one of them would want to come on. >> and it's

worse and worse and worse over the years. 95 of republicans voted for ginsburg, 75% voted for stephen breyerould be shocked if more than one or two or three democrats voted for brett kavanaugh, thus far the decline. wrist chris julie -- chris: julie, do officials at the white house think this allegation about something that happened decades ago, literallyq how confident are they even at this point that judge kavanaugh will be justice kavanaugh when the supreme court starts its new session in october? >> one of the things that gave them a bit of confidence toward the end of last week after this letter from feinstein came out was that you didn't see a lot of democrats really jumping on this. democrats have been looking for some way to slow down the nomination, and there was a sense if the letter from feinstein was real, if it could actually have an effect at holding a off his confirmation, that you would see harris and booker and some of these other democrats really piling on, and that hasn't happened, to your point earlier -- chris: we is asked every single member, ten democrats on the commit

and it has been embraced by every previous nominee -- by the way, justice breyer was nominated when president under investigation and it did not slow him down either. what matters most is the character and temperament of the judge and the decisions that they have handed down previous. and on those issues, both character and temperament, not a dplo glove was laid on him. and the democrats didn't even talk about their decisions. the they made a strategic choice to try to turn the absence of the papers into an issue. it fails miserably. every time that they try. they were not prepared to listen closely and go after him. chuck schumer may be under serious pressure to step aside, i think, in the new congress like nancy pelosi, because he has failed to do what mitch mcconnell is effectively. and i think what you saw was the collapse of the democratic resistance in the senate. and i think you'll see at least three, perhaps as many as five democrats vote for brett kavanaugh within three weeks, by the end of the month. because we -- >> well, we will see, but i think what you saw is that the republican

nominated ruth bader againstburg 95% of republicans voted to confirm her, 75% voted to confirm steve breyer. only 50% of democrats turned around and voted for judge roberts. 10%, only 10% of democrats voted for judge alito and then we saw with neil gorsuch, even though he was an incredibly accomplished individual almost every democrat voted against him. we are in a place that this hyper partisanship that was engendered first by ted kennedy in savaging robert bork and then further by harry flird tryin reid trying tp george w. bush trying to stop him from nominating people. is it's not in the best interest of our country. >> neil: thank you very much. >> thank you. >> neil: in the middle of this vacuum and craziness we had stocks selling off today. a lot more had to do with trade. taking look it corner of wall and broad. exploring this in more detail down 181 points. again concern that the trade thing is accelerating here and you will be looking at more expensive shopping prices as a result during the busy holiday season. that was weighing on things. a whole lot weighing on things after this.

breyer, 87. sonia sotomayor, 68. 68. kagan, 63.ere clearly liberal judges but all were clearly qualified. you went to law school with brett kavanaugh and you both law clerked in the same courthouse in delaware. i can understand that you don't like some of his opinions, but isn't he clearly qualified and isn't he clearly within the traditional mainstream? >> senator coons: as i said in a hearing i've known judge kavanaugh for 30 years and i know him to be an intelligent, decent, thoughtful person, good father, husband, neighbor. we heard a lot about what a good high school basketball coach he is and how he volunteers at a homeless culture with his parish. all of those are admirable qualities. i am concerned, as i said before and as i made the focus of my questioning of judge kavanaugh that he is well outside the judicial mainstream. in addition he rendered just this year he refused to follow settled precedent and he made it clear that his views on executive power would lead to a dangerous rewriting of the core policies for the core