that is the tenor of justice kavanaugh's musing.ost: you have history at the justice department, looking at the cases of civil rights and those that do will voting rights. talk about the history of yours. what has your work been on the subject and why are you interested? guest: i've been involved in voting rights led -- litigations in 1980 when i began serving as an expert witness in the two mobile cases on the supreme court after the court handed down the intent standard. in those days, cases of this nature, registered cases and other challenges to election practice were decided under the 14th amendment. court decided in 1980 that it was necessary in a 14th amendment challenge that the challenge practice was adopted whether racially discriminatory on purpose or was being maintained for the racially discriminatory purpose. i testified at trial under that standard in both cases. the evidence that i provided to the court based on historical research demonstrated that the city's at-large election plan for its city commission and the co

chief justicrts: justice kavanaugh? justice kavanaugh: you're asking us to le grutter, but i first want to understand what you think grutter itself means. - it had language in there decision was in 2003. thee current admissions cs for the class of '27. it's going to be too late to do anything about that cycle. th is the class of '28. to the extent you consider i -- and, more broadly, just how should we think about sentence which was part of four important paragraphs in grutte about the impo of race-conscious decision-making being time-limited and temp mr. strawbridge: so -- so we do understand the 25-year limit somehow to have been a -- hard-and-fast requirement. certainly, different justices of the co grutter took differing positions as to -- as to whether it should be -- e kavanaugh: so you think then?uld go for 35 or years mr. strawbridge: well, i think at the -- i think that the an aspirational element to it, but it was aspirl for a reason. and grutter definitely ie paragraphs that precede that -- that -- thate make

pis up on justice kavanaugh's.o in terms of what the federal content is to this state question, i'll tell you one way that i've been thinking about it and you can tell me if it's consistent or inconsistent with your view. just as say in the due process contexay property is a state law question but there's some core beyond which a state can't depart -- it'deral question and the state can't depart so greatly fromat it's no longer property for the purposes of the federal constitution. this federal content or the federal check, is it from the word legislature, so the clause says, "shall be prescribed in each state by the legislature ther some point if a state court adopts an interpretation of a statute or a constitutional adjective or adverb, you know, novel, egregious, it's no longer acting as a court sing the normal judicial review function but is acting like a -- like a legislature, is that how you would articulate the argument? mr. kaali think so in general. i have a couple of tweaks to it. i ulagree with you, the

justice kavanaugh: okay. i understa apex, but just to be clear, you're not saying no federal judicial review when ate court has interpreted the state constitution in a case of this nature, correct? mr. katyal: no, we think it should be under the highest standard of review -- if it's a state constitution, yes. justice kavanaugh: and i'll repeat the question, then. you're not saying no judicial -- federal judicial review of state court interpretation of state titutions in this area, correct? mr. katyal: right, we'reot saying that. it's just under a high -- sky high standard. chief justice roberts: justice rret justice barrett: my questi picks up on justice kavanaugh's. so in terms of what the federal content is to this s question, i'ell you one way that i've been thinking about it and you can tell me if it's consistent or inconsistent with your view. just as say in the due process context we say property is a state law question but there's some core beyond which a state 't depart -- it's a federal question and

president trump here nominates brett kavanaugh. to replace anthony kennedy. and that's a big deal because kennedy had always been the key swing vote. so this was really gonna change the balance of the court. i thank president trump for the honor of this nomination. the hearings seemed to be going just fine, and it doesn't look like there's any way for the democrats to stop it. [john] we're about to hear some of the most high-stakes congressional testimony in decades. the senate judiciary committee is about to question christine blasey ford. suddenly, we find out that there were allegations that he had sexually assaulted christine blasey ford when he was in high school, which he denied. the details about that night that bring me here today are the ones i will never forget. [chris] donald trump was watching it and was very shaken by her testimony, thought it was pretty credible. and the word went back from the white house to the people up on capitol hill with brett kavanaugh. if you wanna save your nomination, you're gonna have to fi

justice kavanaugh? justice kavanaugh: i interpreted your argument in the briefs similarly to justice kagan a justice alito, that you had a broad argument which struck me ing us to rewrite gingles in -- in a variety of ways, then a narrower argument focused on compactness, whether the new ty-minority district proposed here was reasonably compact. assume jr the sake of argument that we don't rewrite gingles and then focus on the compactness of the proposed majority-minority district. i mean, you get to this on page 66 of your brief, and you say wipect to compactness, "the question is whether the newly drawn district alone is sufficiently compact or whether the minority population is so sprawling that any majority-minority district cannot be reasonab configured." i agree completely that that is the question. i did not fi mh help on the answer. and this is your oppty to -- to -- to answer that question. y it -- why do you think it's so sprawling, given that it does respect a commuf interest in the black bel

justice kavanaugh would have said it looks something more like bush versus gore. i don't know if there are five votes for that. if the litigation continues, i don't know whether there would be agreement or consensus about that that's what he said just is that we look to that opinion in 2000 as a roadmap going forward preferred getting out -- for figuring out which way state courts go. host: republican line, good morning. caller: you talk about irrigating, democrats did that. they did everything they could to manipulate the last election and make sure biden one. you know it and i know it. they talked about what was going on in georgia and they recounted the votes. they recounted the same phony votes three times instead of finding out if there was any phony ones. host: we are focusing on the moore v harper decision and they also took up a case regarding the election map in alabama. what was the outcome of that? guest: in allen versus milligan, there is a question about the voting rights act and whether or not alabama had an appropriate congressional map. you think a

that is the tenor of justice kavanaugh's musing.ost: you have history at the justice department, looking at the cases of civil rights and those that do will voting rights. talk about the history of yours. what has your work been on the subject and why are you interested? guest: i've been involved in voting rights led -- litigations in 1980 when i began serving as an expert witness in the two mobile cases on the supreme court after the court handed down the intent standard. in those days, cases of this nature, registered cases and other challenges to election practice were decided under the 14th amendment. court decided in 1980 that it was necessary in a 14th amendment challenge that the challenge practice was adopted whether racially discriminatory on purpose or was being maintained for the racially discriminatory purpose. i testified at trial under that standard in both cases. the evidence that i provided to the court based on historical research demonstrated that the city's at-large election plan for its city commission and the co

professor, jim kavanaugh, thank you to the both of you for starting us off. we'll continue to cover the story and have more coverage of this tragedy in jacksonville throughout the night, and continue our conversation. we're going to take a quick break. after the break, we're going to shift gears. there are new indications that some georgia defendants are already placing the blame on donald trump. we're going to take that, next. donald trump we're going to take that, next we're going to take that, next meet the future. a chef. a designer. and, ooh, an engineer. all learning to save and spend their money with chase. the chef's cooking up firsts with her new debit card. hungry? -uhuh. the designer's eyeing sequins. uh no plaid. while mom is eyeing his spending. nice. and the engineer? she's taking control with her own account for college. three futures, all with chase. freedom for kids. control for parents. one bank for both. chase. make more of what's yours. white 80...! white 80...! hello patrick mahomes! hut...hut...? wait, who do you even play for? t-mobile!

professor eddie glaude junior, jim kavanaugh, thank you to both of you. we will continue the story have more coverage of this tragedy in jacksonville throughout the day and continue our conversation. we'll take a quick break, after the break we will shift gears though. there are new indications that some georgia defense already placing the blame on donald trump, we will talk about that next. stay with us. stay with us tv: try tide power pods with 85% more tide in every pod. who needs that much more tide? (crashing sounds) everyone's gonna need more tide. it's a mess out there. that's why there's 85% more tide in every power pod. -see? -baby: ah. (vo) ninety-two percent of students in high-needs schools can't that's why there's 85% more tide in every power pod. afford essential school supplies. subaru and our retailers are there to help by giving millions of dollars in funding along with school supplies students need. we call it “the subaru love promise” and we are proud to be the largest corporate supporter of adoptaclassroom.org. it's just one of the rea

professor, jim kavanaugh, thank you to the both of you for starting us off. we'll continue to cover the story and have more coverage of this tragedy in jacksonville throughout the night, and continue our conversation. we're going to take a quick break. after the break, we're going to shift gears. there are new indications that some georgia defendants are already placing the blame on donald trump. we're going to talk about that, next. but you know what is? myplan frizon. (vo) football season is here. get nfl sunday ticket from youtubetv on us. a $449 value. plus, get a free samsung galaxy z flip5. only on verizon. rsv is in for a surprise. meet arexvy. ( ♪♪ ) the first fda-approved rsv vaccine. arexvy is used to prevent lower respiratory disease from rsv in people 60 years and older. rsv can severely affect the lungs and lower airways. arexvy is proven to be over 82% effective in preventing lower respiratory disease from rsv and over 94% effective in those with these health conditions. ( ♪♪ ) arexvy does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe al

ran an editorial talking about how it was 5-4 in their efforts underway to try to intimidate the kavanaughsoften him. that seems very well sourced given what followed.d. dixie, like he was talking to "wall street journal" picked it doesn't account for how four days after the topic there's a story in the "washington post" specific identifies quote lawyers close to the conservative justices reporting on what was said in conference, and dobbs. conference where the only night people interim are the justices. so unless youer start to list ay dice in there, which by the way that would be pretty cool, right? so like the story of the dobbs leak to be is not just who leaked it but what we don't talk more about the clearlakes surrounding it that would've been on their own some of the most remarkable leaks out of the court in recent years. to question it chief justice roberts, sometimes you don't want to find out, and so i think there are two features of the course intro investigation. one is the chief was going to let the executive branch, investigate over his dead body, right? was a universe which

jim kavanaugh, let's have you back in this conversation. jim, background checks, is that something that uniformly across law enforcement they are in support of? in a situation like, this, granted we may still find more indications that 21-year-old bryan cristobal ryan palmeter who carried out this attack, a marketing use the word allied, she did it. he's on video doing, that he killed himself having done it. is there something that would indicate background checks could have been helpful in preventing these things from happening going forward? word is law enforcement stand on that? >> well, lot of force mints supports background checks. background checks are not an infringement on anyone second amendment rights. it's simply to check to see if you are a person who is a danger, who is prohibited from having the gun. you know, the pushback from the gun lobby is that it's too inconvenient. it's too inconvenient. you, know it's kind of inconvenient to walk through the metal detector at the airport, get wanda, take off your shoes, that's inconven

he appointed kavanaugh, he appointed barrett. the court looks the way the court does the composition. the court is the composition of the court, because of those four years, those things have had consequences, not only in terms of the outcome of decision, but also just in terms of the way the court operates. this is you writing in the book the court's new conservative majority has used obscure procedural orders to shift american jurisprudence to the right, said flatly. so is that two parts of two questions of this question? first is, is that what's going on here? trump appointed justices were more open to the idea of this procedural trick being used and this is the way it goes, or am i missing something? so the problem is we don't the counter the counter side of, that argument. right. we don't know whether a majority of democratic appointed in the same circumstance like justice garland, for instance, would behave the same. so i think two different things are true and. i think it's worth stressing both points. the first is i do th

. >> justice kavanaugh? >> from the brief is a lot of agreement, actually betwn e parties in this case on basic legal principles. page 15 you said hairstylists, landscapers, caterewelers, restaurants orly wouldn't first amendment free speech rights to decline to serve me-sex weddings at least is how i read it. you say artists fferent by publishing hand i think the other side, agree that artists are different. because of the first amendment right that artists possess. but then as i read the briefs the case comes down to a fairly narrow question of how do you characterize website designers? are they more kehe restaurants and the jewelers and the tailors? or are they more like you know the blhing houses and the other free-speech analogues that are raised on the other psych? th's what i took away from the briefs. a lot of agreement on broad legal principles and some agrees -- disagreement on how to characterize the wca designers so how do you characterizeebte designers? why are they different from say a restaura

the suspect told police he wanted to kill brett kavanaugh and himself because he was upset about theeaked draft opinion that overturned roe v. wade. and in october, a man that broke into the home of then house speaker nancy pelosi attacked her husband paul with a hammer. for the assault, he echoed a question shouted by many january 6th capitol rioters, where's nancy? boris, these are not isolated incidents. we're seeing them more and more often. >> it is part of a troubling pattern as jonathan just shared. >>> still ahead this hour, we're taking you to hawaii where more than 1,000 people are still missing and a handful of the victims that have been recovered have even been identified. the latest on the recovery efforts there. plus, what sales at walmart and target are telling us about the bigger picture with the economy. and more on the tuwys. what the couple is saying about former nfl michael orr. an awkward and icky fight bebetween these two when we com back. it's true, though - you won't overpay for glasses if you shop at america's best. they offer two pairs and a free, quality ey

for example, the majority leader of the senate, had strong words to say about josh's this justice kavanaugh and justice gorsuch that, i think, in some respects led directly to the sort of protests and danger that justice kavanaugh in particular was faced with. all those things are something to be watchful of. we can have strong debate in the political process. but we do have to be mindful that those actions have consequences. and then, at the outer edges, there is behavior that just simply is not acceptable. so, i guess, to answer your question, i think there are limits. and i think those limits will be policed. but i will also say that, in the political process, there is going to be a collision with regard to those varying interests as we get to trying to set trial dates, since it seems like the bulk of these prosecutors are anxious to get these trials started and completed before the 2024 election cycle concludes. i have my strong doubts about whether or not that is possible, or that it is in the country's best interest that those cases go forward prior to the election. >> so, what do you

as they were pointed and went right, replaces kennedy in 2181 of the big things that happened was kavanaugh is not nearly as pendulum swinging as kennedy other conservatives are little more confident about what they are going to do and justice ginsburg that marginalizes john roberts to have been the break of the shadow docket with the more liberal justices so part of it is who they are and i don't want to lose this point part of it is i think the shadow docket is a symptom ofof a broader thing whh is how remarkably and indefensibly unaccountable the current supreme court is and that would be true regardless of who is in office. we not be as troubled by the lack off accountability or he might have justices who are not reminding us every day of the unaccountability butat that wouldn't change the fact that it is in ways we have never seen before and accountable to congress trouble medicar because they are necessarily -- >> okay but i want to push you on this question that the court versus this court. let'seo say the ideological makp of the court is 6-3 in fed favor of the liberal justices not

to stop his vote for confirmation, you could just say i have it on authority that brett kavanaugh not only did the things we know about but he did things 10 times worse and he persuades them all to use his power, to use their constitutional powers. and that senator just made it up, is that not what fanni willis is accusing trap of doing? this is something that happens in politics. if that is true, can trump be charged? i am glad that penn state listen to him, but that does not mean what trump said was illegal. can we really call fraud what the trump campaign did with these electors? john m: rudy giuliani, you said he made statements that he knew were not true. if you knew they were not true and you could prove he knew he was lying and under oath, that could subject them to perjury. even if you suspect something is not true but you had some evidence or of people told you what you have something you can hang your hat on, that is not perjury. you had your example of the senator. if you started charging politicians for lying, you clean up congress. the soul called -- the so-called conting

conservatives to our federal courts at every level, including justice neil gorsuch, justice brett kavanaugh and justice amy coney barrett. i am just saying. those three justices have literally transformed the court, durable conservative majority. three justices and a new majority that gave america a new beginning for the right to life. beyond our record in washington dc, you may not know as i mentioned i was governor of the state of indiana. the hoosier state is a lot like iowa. we demonstrated their you can balance budgets and cut taxes. before that, i was a conservative leader in the congress of the united states. i served for 12 years in the house of representatives. it seemed longer. i was there during republican majorities and during democratic majorities. i was the leader of the house republican conference chair the first time we retire nancy pelosi and i want to thank you for helping retire nancy pelosi once and for all. thank you, congresswoman. she is gone. i have been a congressman, governor and your vice president. in this time in the life of the nation, it is that experience tha

justice kavanaugh would have said it looks something more like bush versus gore.now if there are five votes for that. if the litigation continues, i don't know whether there would be agreement or consensus about that that's what he said just is that we look to that opinion in 2000 as a roadmap going forward preferred getting out -- for figuring out which way state courts go. host: republican line, good morning. caller: you talk about irrigating, democrats did that. they did everything they could to manipulate the last election and make sure biden one. you know it and i know it. they talked about what was going on in georgia and they recounted the votes. they recounted the same phony votes three times instead of finding out if there was any phony ones. host: we are focusing on the moore v harper decision and they also took up a case regarding the election map in alabama. what was the outcome of that? guest: in allen versus milligan, there is a question about the voting rights act and whether or not alabama had an appropriate congressional map. you think about the f

pelosi's husband paul and an attempted assassination of conservative supreme court justice brett kavanaughe fbi has not released any details about what sparked today's deadly confrontation. no fbi agents were injured. lester >> peter, thank you. >>> now to the secret search warrant on former president trump's twitter account. tonight we've learned it's part of the federal investigation into his efforts to overturn the 2020 election garrett haake joins us garrett, this was a move by special counsel jack smith >> reporter: yeah, that's right, lester in court documents unsealed today reveal the special counsel obtained a warrant to seize the former president's twitter account data earlier this year with the judge okaying a search of the account for evidence of criminal offenses now, the documents also show the judge slapped twitter, now called x, with a $350,000 fine for delaying handing over this material as the company fought a nondisclosure order that prevented it from informing mr. trump about the warrant. the former president firing back posting, the doj secretly attacked my twitter acco

. >> retired atf special agent in charge, jim kavanaugh, jim, this may not be the last time we speak tonight. thanks for getting us started. we're going to keep a close eye out for developments out of jacksonville, and we'll bring you that press conference with local officials as it happens. now, to our other big story. donald trump -- alicia barrage of attacks today following the latest arrest in georgia. all in an effort to stoke fears, and raise money. on his knockoff twitter, or do we call it x these days? i don't even know. trump has been railing against fulton county d.a. fani willis. joe biden and the so-called radical left -- patriots to contribute, contribute. you would think being the first american president with his very own mugshot would be a symbol of shame. but the only signs he's seeing our dollar signs, putting his mug on all sorts of march. there are already signs trump is at odds with some of his 18 codefendants in georgia. at least five of them seeking to move the state case to federal court. some are already saying they were acting at the direction of the preside

brett kavanaugh attacker before that. the pelosi attacker before that. are determined, what we're seeing as determined individuals, not simply online chatter. and our surveys, this tracker of dangers to democracy, helped to give and inform the situational awareness and how it's changing in our country. >> with the older man in utah, this was online threat posting. but there are individuals around him who said he wasn't necessarily a threat. so there is some probing of whether the political rhetoric matches actual intent. >> how do you measure that? >> that will be the case in every single instance of a specific individual. there is always psycho social circumstances. there's always biographical constraints of being able to execute violence itself. those will be often very and become unique to every single individual. it's not the one individual case, margaret. it's this pattern that we're seeing now going back now years of determined -- normally the fbi, law enforcement knocks on your door and says we don't like this threat to the president, maybe you sh

you had the kavanaugh conversation, ruth bader ginsburg's untimely passing followed by amy coney barrett's confirmation, highly charged confirmation battle that focus the public attention on this issue. in the ensuing years, you had rulings like the overturning of roe v. wade that have really thrown the public for a loop, people who took that for granted that was 50 years old. we were trying to tell people that was on the line and a lot of people didn't believe it until it actually happened. i think you are now seeing that the issues have never been more salient especially among democratic voters. they tell us in polls more than republican voters that this is a voting issue for them in a complete flip from 2016. you also see it in the form of the low approval rating the court has. they have an historically low approval rating and this creates the supreme court as a highly charged political issue. more than it's ever been host: i want to talk about the election and the impact the supreme court decisions can have on the election. break that down a little more for us as far as where you think

was decided five four, the four dissenting justices were the chief justice, justice alito, justice kavanaughnd justice jackson. so the justices on the right were divided in the justices on the left were divided. it is a perfect talking point whether you like the decision or not, a perfect talking point to explain why the justices are actually doing something that the other two political branches are not. i think the more the court has cases like that the better it is for the court in the long run and the easier it makes our job of explaining what the court is doing. i have one other thing the court can do, and this is also self interested because it affects the case i have before the court next term but there is the numerator. the other part of the equation. it does seem like term after term the court is deciding some of the most divisive issues in society. the framers did not set it up that way. the impetuous vortex was not supposed to be the article three courts. that was supposed to be article one, congress. that was the powerful engine of potential infringement of liberty that most of th

laura: macy harono were one of the more prominent people in the impeachment trial or was it brett kavanaughlong investigation. >> raymond: you're right, it all runs together. >> laura: turning to pop culture, bradley cooper is a big liberal, now in the cross hairs for portraying leonard bernstein, what is happening, what is the problem? >> raymond: the trailer dropped, the actor is wearing a prosthetic nose. now the usa and guardian isim claing cooper is part of hollywood's jew face problem, prompting bernstein's children to defend the actor. it happens to be true that he has a nice big nose, bradley used that for resemblance and we are fine with that. the portrayal is certainly done with full consultation of the family. your friend helen mirian ran into the same thing this year. same routine. >> laura: any portrayal of barbara streisand, did they get upset? you are playing someone and trying to look like them, they are good looking people. >> raymond: actors play people that don't look like them and that is called being an actor. i guess the new rule, actors are not allowed to use make-up

in september 2018, coinciding with the supreme court confirmation hearings for justice brett kavanaugh, gabrielle blair tweeted the following i'm a mother of six and a mormon. i have a good understanding of arguments surrounding abortion, religion and otherwise. i've been listening to men grandstand about women's reproductive rights, and i'm convinced men actually have zero interest in stopping abortion. here's why. her 63 tweet thread quickly went viral and formed the basis for ejaculate responsibly, which became an instant new york times bestseller when it was published last year. up until that time, gabrielle was best known as the creator of the award winning blog design mom, which has been named a website of the year by time and led to her first bestselling book design mom how to live with kids. as an unexpected and vital new voice in the conversation around reprint active rights, we are thrilled to have gabrielle blair here tonight to continue the conversation sparked by ejaculate responsibly, which makes the case for shifting the burden of pregnancy prevention from women who are

how do you deal with answering justice kavanaugh's question of what constitutes adequacy? he seemed to imply that berkeley was already diverse. it had numbers that were close to the population. >> i would point to the brief file filed by the university of california system in this case and they have explained in detail how berkeley has experienced a substantial decline in the african-american student population. i think it has gone down to 3% and they have further explained the toll that has taken on their ability to offer the educational benefits and diversity as well as the glaring sense of racial isolation though students have on the berkeley campus. >> tha you. >> one of the three lines in the briefs in this case is -- is the first line of petitioners or something like it, it is essentially brown compares the overruling of greater. they actually haven't given a lot of attention to that argument but the idea is -- and some of the questioning has reflected this idea, we have this long and horrible history of racial discrimination and surely that functions here to prevent

football but now also in the ethic challenges that are smear attempts we sell it with a thomas then kavanaughrs to the city justice as well as an attempt to attack and control a court that they cannot control any other way. >> we saw with magill estrada and that was not even a supreme court nomination that was an appellate court. carrie severino thank you for loaning us your expertise. i have a suspicion the court is good to be in the news a lot. thank you for joining us on a sunday night. >> thank you. trey: one credit agency downgraded the u.s. readings siding governance issues. the stock market reacted to the downgrade about like you would imagine not well does the u.s. credit rating even matter? kevin o'leary is the chairman of o'leary ventures and investor himself. he joins us next on "sunday night in america". trying vapes to quit smoking might feel like progress, but with 3x more nicotine than a pack of cigarettes - vapes increase cravings - trapping you in an endless craving loop. nicorette reduces cravings until they're gone for good. (ambience of room, birds, scrolling content on ph

conservatives to our federal courts at every level including justus neil gorsuch, justice brett kavanaughe amy coney barrett. and that conservative majority gave america a new beginning and the right to life in the last six months. [applause] for me it was a privilege to have be a part of it i appreciate the fact that something else i'm trying to capture was the hailstorm of opposition that we face. from day one i tell a story in the book about i was with president trump on inauguration day 2017 we were in the oval office we started walking back to the white house down the portico, he turned and looked at me and said that's right, it's humbling. [laughter] as we walked into the residence the end of that chapter i capture the fact that back outside the oval office was a stack of newspapers. the headline in the washington post on january 20, 2017 was the campaign to impeach donald trump starts today. and they never let up 2.5 years of the russia hoax until it was no collusion or obstruction case closed impeached president for a phone call in the unrelenting attacks by democrats and their al

than 300 conservatives to our federal courts at every level included justice neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy coney barrett. that conservative majority gave america a new beginning and -- in the right to life in the last six months. [applause] to me, it was a privilege to be a part of it and i also appreciate the fact when something else i have tried to capture in "so help me god" was the hailstorm of opposition we faced from day one. i tell a story in the book about how i was with president trump on inauguration day in 2017 and we were at the oval office, just the two of us were there and we started walking back to the white house down the portico. and the bright lights were on the side wall, it was well lit. president trump looked at me and said, look at this. i said, it is humbling. he turned and looked at me and said, that's right it's humbling. [laughter] but as we walked into the residence, the end of that chapter i capture the fact that outside the oval office was a stack of newspapers. the headline in the washington post on january 20, 2017 was " the campaign to impeach donald

appointed more than 300 conservatives to our federal courts including justice neil gorsuch, brett kavanaugh and amy barrett and that gave america a new beginning in the right to life in the last six months. to me it was a privilege to be part of it and i appreciate the fact that something else i tried to capture in "so help me god" was the hailstorm of opposition that we faced from day one. i tell a story in the book about how i was with president trump on inauguration day 2017. we were in the oval office and just the two of us were there, we started walking and to the white house reported back and the bright green lights were onthe side of the wall. it was well lit . president trump looked at me and said look at this and i said it's humbling and he turned and looked at me and said that's right, it's humbling. but as we walked in to the resident at the end of that chapter i captured the fact that back outside the oval office was a stack of newspapers . the headline in the washington post on january 20 2017 was the campaign to impeach donald trump starts today. and they never let up. 2 and a

so one would think was it impeachment or was it brett kavanaugh? big long investigation. >> you are right. it all runs together. >> laura: all right. turning to pop culture, raymond, bradley cooper is kind of a big liberal but he finds himself now in the crosshairs for he is portraying leonard bernstein and what's happening? >> when the trailer dropped for cooper's new movie maestro it became clear the actor is wearing prosthetic nose so he looks more like bernstein "u.s.a. today" and the guardian are claiming cooper is part of, quote: hollywood's y jew's facd problem. it happens to be true that leonard bernstein had a nice big nose. bradley chose to use makeup to amplify the resemblance and we're perfectly fine with that they go on to say it was an act of respect and love. the portrayal here is certainly done with the full consultation of the family. your helen mirren ran into same problem. >> laura: was there any type of portrayal of barbra streisand? did they get upset about that? i don't remember if there was or not. you are playing someone and