apparently, it was two alito's full knowledge. left undisclosed according to our investigation. >> yeah, and the ways in which his recusal message distorts his accusations about other members of the court who have never done anything like what we are talking about in this case. >> yeah and i think this is just a particularly bad case because, you know, the core principle, the basic foundation of due process, the principle of which the supreme court is supposed to be our highest exemplar, is that you do a fair fact finding. and here he is writing this skinny, little 10% of the facts version of what went on, and leaving out what paul harvey would call the whole rest of the story, which is the meaningful part of the story. this was the most not ordinary interview of a supreme court justice ever. and the back story is what he left out deliberately. >> but we do have a step up here from silence, which is the previous method for these kinds of justices when it came to recusal, just absolute silence. >> that is true, and i hope we could

there is samuel alito talk about it.one passing legislation like this. >> yeah, he gorsuch quote is particularly telling because it's not just saying i can't genuinely offer an opinion on any merit that might come before the court. he specifically say, i can't offer an opinion on the prospect of ethics legislation being done before congress, because it will be wrong for me to offer an opinion. and he put that side by side with a little, a pining merrily away in the wall street journal editorial pages, of all places, to a lawyer, in the dispute, all people -- >> senator whitehouse, i'd like to squeeze in a commercial break here. when we come back, i want to get your reaction to justice clarence thomas revising, updating his financial disclosures and the most extraordinary way. we'll be right back with senator whitehouse. nator whitehouse being me. keep being you... and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i

court case in which one of the lawyers is a friend of justice alito, who helped justice alito and whatccusations of unethical conduct. the wall street journal published the defensive that alito so-called interview. and with justice alito now famously said, congress did not create the supreme court, the constitution did. i know this is a controversial view, but i'm willing to say it. no provision in the constitution gives them the authority to regulate the supreme court, period. that's not a controversial view. that is an incorrect view as many high school students could tell justice alito. that was in fact the single stupidest thing ever said publicly about the constitution by a supreme court justice. in his written statements on refusing to recuse, justice alito falsely accused other members of the court of participating in similar interviews, and then said, we have no control over the attorneys whom parties select to represent them, and as a result, we are often presented with cases in which one of the attorneys has spoken favorably or unfavourably about our work or character. simila

and here's where alito comes in. the objections by the billionaires' lawyers assert that congress has no constitutional authority to legislate in this area, hence no authority to investigate. they assert, in my view, plainly, wrongly that our constitutional separation of powers blocks any congressional action in this area, which in turn they assert also plainly, wrongly in my view, blocks any congressional investigation. set aside the demerits of that argument, for which i refer you to the lawyers' letters i added to the letter in my previous speech and my own takedown of that arrangement -- of that argument. sound or unsound, the proint is, it -- the point is it is their argument in that ongoing dispute. and in that ongoing dispute justice alito's "wall street journal" comments prop up that argument. the language is nearly identical. you can compare it for yourself. in fact, lawyers for some of the billionaires to whom we have sent information requests have actually quoted justice alito's comment in declining to res

after the slew of reporting on alito and thomas's lack of financial transparency.e's an author and editor at law dork news, as well as an msnbc columnist. chris, thank you for joining me. in so many jobs, and folks watching can relate to this. workers need to sign documents saying they have no conflicts of interest. why is the supreme court not treated like other workplaces? >> this is now a problem that we've seen how aggressively the justices protect their interest to handle their own ethics, without oversight. we've seen the way that even chief justice roberts, who has sort of portrayed himself as this great institutionalist for the past decade, and especially during the trump administration, he refused to even go to the hill for a senate hearing on a supreme court ethics. they really want to protect this interest with these reports that we saw from particularly from justice thomas, but also from justice alito, we are kind of seeing why they don't want other people to be too much in their business. >> let's dig in a little bit on some of the finer details of the

but also from justice alito. other people to be too much in their business. >> let's dig in a little bit on some of the finer details of the disclosure. jennie thomas, is also mentioned in justice thomas's disclosure. what do we know about those finances and bank accounts? >> i mean, we don't know much more than what he said in the report, which was that was a section that i mentioned another time, that the word inadvertently appears 16 times in justice thomas's addendum to his report, explaining these changes. and additions. but with a lot of those inadvertently's appeared in that section, talking about those bank accounts. basically, they said, oh, we didn't realize that they were supposed to be in these reports. so here they are. they had increased in their value over time, but we don't know what they, where that money came from. we don't know much more than what thomas told us. >> now, justice samuel alito also disclosed some of the favors he accepted from conservative donors. what can you tell us about what

alito says he's done nothing wrong. and under the new rules disclosed two trips paid for by law schools. while court ethics bills have been proposed in congress, it remains to be seen if either they or the court itself will oppose new oversight rules jessica? >> okay, brie, thank you >>> senate minority leader mitch mcconnell has been medically cleared to work following his latest health scare. h a he appeared to freeze and go silent he conferred with the neurology team, and it was determined that the 81-year-old can continue with his schedule as planned >> a shooting shattered the peace at a shopping center in austin, texas. police say they found two adults dead at the scene, and they think one them was the shooter three other people were hurt one taken to the hospital in critical condition >> there is no continuing threat to the public. that scene has been rendered safe at this time, the relationship between the suspect and the victim are unknown >> witnesses initially thought that they heard explosions, but no device

it is obvious that clarence thomas and samuel alito and to some extent perhaps gorsuch and cavanaugh have conducted themselves in ways that violated that law, but there's no enforcement mechanism, and right now, congress does not seem to have the spine to enact an enforcement mechanism, but i think both judge luttig and i believe it is consistent with the separation of powers for federal law to govern this area. i think we may not necessarily agree with the best way forward, but certainly there are things the court could do itself that would enhance public belief in its integrity, and it does not -- and it has not done it. it has repeatedly shot itself in the foot at the worst possible time when we need an independent court that we can respect and that we can turn to, especially in crisis time. it could be very difficult times, and we need a court people will respect. >> professor tribe and i both have testified that the congress of the united states has the constitutional power to adopt and enforce a code of ethical conduct for the supreme court. both of us testified that congress s

given this association, should justice alito also consider recusing himself from that very importantuld consider it. unfortunately he rejected calls to recuse himself. in an angry statement he released, you know, just a few weeks ago, in which he said, it's no big deal because every supreme court justice gives interviews to media outlets, even though none of those other parties did a justice give an on the record interview behind closed doors for several hours with a lawyer representing a party before the supreme court, and in another case the supreme court is going to hear this term involving the cfpb, the person who flew justice alito on a private jet to alaska has several millions of dollars of stake in companies that are regulated by the consumer financial protection bureau, the agency that is challengers are asking the supreme courts to hobble. there are several cases in which, again, the justices profession network that has cultivated influence and access to the justices has real interest at stake in cases that the supreme court is hearing. >> judge, i want to just play one mor

the other problem is after justice alito may those are maxima justice on mana kagan made the opposite remark saying do i think congress has the ability to put some sort of strictures on the supreme court, i think the answer is yes. sheldon whitehouse wants, to knock on of these justices out and asked him to read cues and ask two of them this is the real problem, for flavor of what he wants ethics legislation to do in the first place, to have these recusal conversations and kick justices off the cases he doesn't like. paul: justice clarence thomas updated his ethical filings this week along with statements from people representing him saying everything was kosher. anything new that presents any difficulties? >> no. i argue the latest financial disclosure vindicated james toronto who was pointing out the original stories on this were essentially bunk. i think it highlights the kind of impossible situation when they are under this attack. justice thomas didn't have to do this because the rules only changed recently about what you were required to report and offers additional disclosure a

right now for us, that's alito. alito, right. you guys like i wish i didn't know that. we'll talk about alito, i think, a little more as the night goes on. yes yes, we will. but but the personality is not supposed to matter. circuit justice. his job was to basically act as a proxy for the full court. and what that meant in the old is the circuit justice would often hold oral argument by themselves, sometimes commandeering the nearest local courtroom. if they weren't in d.c., they would often write opinions by themselves. and this meant that there was actually a modicum of transparency where the parties had an to be heard, where there was some for decisions that intervening. we're not intervening and we're no one would confuse a ruling by a single justice for some kind of broader pronouncement by the court. right. and that was the model all the way up to 1980? and it's the death penalty and the the the courts of concern about that model in capital that pushes the court started in 1980 to start all remotely divisive emergency application was resolved by the full court but

today justices thomas and alito officially disclosed what they got and from whom. ?lito's case it was a flight by private jet to a luxury fishing job hosted by a hedge billionaire and a trip to rome. in justice thomas' case, it was a whole lot more. >> reporter: a pair of private jet trips in 2022. a vacation at an adirondacks estate in 2014. those gifts to conservative justice clarence thomas from republican mega donor harlan crow are among the disclosures in a newly released financial statement from the justice. his lawyers say any earlier omissions were strictly inadvertent. but this latest news has court critics enraged. >> how it is possible that we do not have a code of ethics that is binding upon the highest court in the land? >> i come from regular stock. >> reporter: this film on thomas was funded by the billionaire real estate man crow, who says he met the justice in 1996. they became friends. both love motown music and never discuss cases. yet earlier reports from propublica name crow and three other big businessmen as ultra wealthy benefactors of the just

today, justices thomas and alito officially disclosed what they got in from whom.ight by private jet to a luxury fishing yacht -- billionaire -- trip to. rome and -- in a whole lot more. here's cnn's tom foreman. >> a pair of private jet trips in 2022, a vacation at an adirondack estate from -- those gifts to conservative justice clarence thomas from republican megadonor harlan crow among the disclosures in a newly-released financial statement from the justice. his lawyers say any earlier omissions or strictly inadvertent. this latest news has court critics enraged. >> how is it possible that we do not have a code of ethics that is binding upon the highest court in the land? >> i come from regular stock. >> this film on thomas was funded by the billionaire real estate man, harlan crow, who said he met the justice in 1996. they become became friends. both loved motown music never discussed cases. yet, earlier reports from propublica named harlan crow and three other big businessmen as ultra wealthy benefactors of the justice, giving him at least 38 destination vacat

propublica reported, for example, that justice alito went on vacation with a billionaire republican donorcuse himself from multiple cases involving that donor. and of course, there's all the goodies, billionaire harlan crow, bestowed upon justice thomas, from johns to his home with a private garden of eden, to buying clarence thomas house and making her his standup, while paying for his sons education. these friends of the court, we're talking folks with luxury yachts and billions at their disposal. and when you unpack the politics of being super rich and powerful in america, it is hard not to think about libertarian billionaire charles and david koch. david died in 2019 and his brother charles, chairman and ceo of coke industries, is worth 55 billion dollars, according to forbes. the coke network is a colossal sprawling political machine that has transformed american politics, helping to propel the tea party takeover during the obama years, and fight any form of climate change legislation that would diminish the demand for the familiar product, oil. one of their lasting legacies is turni

. >>> los jueces de la corte suprema, thomas y Álito divulgaron sus informes. por un grupo conservador religioso. >>> noticias telemundo, accediÓ en exclusiva a el informe final del ejÉrcito sobre la muerte de la soldado hispana ana basualdua.a. >>> > una de lasas 7 maravillol naturaleles que estatÁ en pelil. bas sisi pides unana dave's sisin, spicy chicicken sandwiwich, crcrispy nuggsgs o un frosos, te llelevas otro por r un dólar m más. ¡llegó elel día! el lucky d dollar te llelevas otro por r un dólar m más. de mi bibisabuelo hohoy se conviererte en... te llelevas otro por r un dólar m más. 10 nuggetsts. man, thahat lucky dodollar r tasteded so good.. elige e bien.. elige el bogogo$1 de wendndy's. ¿lista para cambiar? ¡rompe con las toallitas! garnier micellar cleansing water. las micelas actúan como un imán. sin frotar fuerte. probada para quitar el rímel a prueba de agua. mejor que las toallitas líderes. 9 de cada 10 usuarios de toallitas recomiendan. garnier micellar cleansing water. ¡de garnier, naturalmente! garnier micellar cleansing water. ¿tu ropa a

alito says he has done nothing wrong and under the new rules disclosed two trips paid for by law schools. >>> a shooting shattered the peace in texas three people were hurt, one taken to the hospital in critical condition >> there is no continuing threat to the public. that scene has been rendered safe at this time, the relationship between the suspect and the victims are unknown. >> witnesses say they initially thought they had heard explosions, but no devices were found. this investigation is still ongoing. >>> in pennsylvania, a convicted murderer is on the loose after escaping from a prison outside philadelphia authorities say he's extremely dangerous. he was sentenced to life without parole last week for stabbing his ex to death in front of her children >>> we'll get a pulse on the economy in just a few hours when the latest jobs numbers come out. and while hiring is expected to remain strong, americans are still struggling with inflation, falling behind on car loans and credit cards tom costello has more on dealing with this debt >> reporter: from the wgas pump to the grocery aisle

i want to start by going back about a month to something that samuel alito, justice alito, who's beenocal critic of efforts like people like you in "the wall street journal" said. he said, quote, no provision in the constitution gives them the authority to regulate the supreme court, period. them being you or anybody else who thinks it should be done. he's not wrong on the face of it. there are no words in the constitution that speak about the regulation of the supreme court, but with that logic nobody has a right to regulate anything. >> yeah, and with that logic you would not have a judicial conference which oversees these ethics issues and was established by congress. and in fact the disclosure requirements we're still fighting with the court over were also pursuant to a law passed by congress and the recusal issues we've been concerned about thomas' refusal to recuse in which he had a personal interest again go back to a law passed by congress. and for year after year after year these are not new laws. the supreme court has accepted those laws, abided by them. indeed, the chief ju

water, our experts and scientists and people to studied this their whole lives, and not just this alito who goes on about what he thinks environmental policy should be. the whole point of having an administrative state is that you deal with experts and scientists and facts. we have seen this move at the supreme court the last couple of terms, where the court irrigates into itself more and more power to decide issues. and i guess we are both landing at the same depressing place which is a supreme court that will seize power from state courts and from the executive branch and from the federal government, should be squeaky clean. >> yeah, it's not feeling all that squeaky clean today. nice to see you again, as always, thank you for this. dahlia lithwick and her book, lady justice, is out in paperback. i was talking to dahlia about it when it first came out. read it, it's really important. this much more ahead tonight, including the unusual guest who walked a picket line alongside the autoworkers on tuesday. but first, a jaw-dropping indictment of a sitting united states senator, bribery al

that case was decided five four, the four dissenting justices were the chief justice, justice alito, justice kavanaugh and 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 lib

alito has said, let me rapidly respond. it hasn't worked. approval ratings are lower than they were when we started paying a whole lot of attention to some of the investigative journalism that propublica started doing about the court. do any figures in and around the court try to engage with you on the facts? >> yeah, you know, it's interesting, the justice alito op-ed in "the wall street journal" you are referring to, i took objection to the headlines that propublica misleads readers. >> it's called rapid response. again, we can ask "the wall street journal" to plain why they're participating in this. >> it was a surprise to us to get that -- to see that about our story after they said they weren't going to comment. but i have to say, he did -- even if we don't agree on all the points, he did actually engage with a -- many ethics experts from both parties say he was wrong about it, but with justice thomas and i believe he's issued one short statement after our first story in april that just said, harlan crow is a dear friend that i have tak

propublica is just a journalism outlet, but they don't tell anybody anything. >> and justice alito, who gives an interview to the wall street journal, in which he asserts that congress has no authority. that's where we are. >> let's discuss that for a second, because when they said that, i sort of looked at the constitution and tried to make sense of this. our co-branches of government are supposed to be coequal and independent of one another. but we have mechanisms. they have been flawed over the last few years. but there are mechanisms. was there never one for the supreme court? what was meant to happen if the supreme court justices get involved in untoward behavior ethically? >> some version behavior happening to justice cordes, in which the courts into themselves, we have knighted the power nor the sword, we only have public legitimacy. if the american people want to just ignore rulings, they can. if congress wants to turn off the lights, they can. let's conduct ourselves as though we are above reproach. the other piece of this that i think is really heartbreaking is that these same

they went so far as to accuse justice alito of leaking the draft. and the american people knew that that was an likely. clearly it's not just harm public confidence in the court, it literally made the justices target. a target of the assassination, children, becoming targets. no member of the u.s. senate should be okay. with that type of targeting of our justices. and this amendment is simple. since it seems that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle a intent on pushing through this effort to delegitimized the supreme court, my amendment delays the implementation of this bill until the dogs is identified and publicly disclosed. this ought not to be -- and mister chairman, even yourself in january you sat, and i'm gonna quote here, you the lead of the majority draft opinion was an unacceptable breach of the supreme court confidentiality and trust. i'm gonna urge my colleagues to go -- on this amendment. >> thank, you senator. this woman will tie the date for the recusal and transparent say on the person who leaked the draft decision and dobbs

as justice alito explained, the religious causes of the constitution and to foster a society in which people can live together harmoniously. from a different perspective justice kagan emphasized the nation's pluralism and values of neutrality and inclusion was a first amendment demand. the fourteenth amendment extended the constitutional commitment to equality and pluralism that was promised but not fully realized in the original constitution. equal protection clause protects pluralism by inhibiting public dissemination and permitting the between citizens. supreme court decisions in this area have historically been mixed but last term, the court invalidated harvard's affirmative action program. chief justice roberts explained the equal protection clause prohibits disco nation on the basis of race and illuminating racial discrimination means illuminating all this. in the story concurrent justice thomas especially linked equal protection of the law to pluralism. he noted that our constitution protects individuals, not racial groups or classes. the declaration of independence set forth o

practices from across the ideological political spectrum, namely chief justice john roberts and samuel alito, to push appointees and the donald trump appointee ketanji brown jackson, joe biden of 20 concluded the state of mind these must be considered when deciding the threat. more specifically this is the rule the court created quote consciously disregarded a substantial risk communications could be viewed as threatening, three parts. consciously disregarded, and risk and threatened by recklessness. recklessness has done more than make the mistake and accepted substantial risk of harm because the jury was not asked to consider this, the court conviction back to colorado retried without the standard wheel or such, a lot of interesting matchups between the justices, believed a higher level of recklessness in this case specifically for believe the government must prove purpose to put a person in fear of violence. it's not enough the speaker was aware of substantial risk of harm will disregarded. in their view, the government must prove speaker actually intended to make the target feel threaten

to their credit most of the justices including roberts, brett kavanaugh, and alito, in the past as withtt kavanaugh and those four, scholars who are trying to help the court which is the self-professed originalists court after dobbs and after bruin the court committed itself to a historical approach, the court acknowledges it's not made up of professional historians. high quality and call it as you see it scholarship is increasingly helpful and important to the court and this is a good sign that they accepted that. don't know we will take questions but let me throw one out. a lot of people trash biden's analysis in biden versus nebraska and i am willing to accept it embraces massachusetts versus epa for government and not sure that's a bad thing but i'm not even sure why it is such exceptionally standing, the roberts says that the missouri loan processing entity which clearly would have standing on its own and everybody agreed with that, but let's just say they lost, they are losing money, classic injury. roberts says some of their money every year goes to public universities to help in

did no such thing and instead we're just getting a flurry of letters between senate democrats sam alito. it even doesn't amount to much in my book. it suggests to me that there's a lot of political theater here not a lot of action. and of course, christina this is bigger than just one justice. earlier this year he excess alito that if you are a conservative on the court, you have your billionaire benefactor. >> we would stand to benefit if the court rules against the consumer financial -- and where the democrats on this? where the attempts to reform the court. bring in the ethics code, put strings on money. they're ice expand and rebounds the court. joe biden, nancy pelosi both said they're against. >> the past justices have been based on norms in that law. we assume that people do the right thing and we've seen time and time again that the republican party and these right-wing justices have zero shame. so we can't shame them into doing the right thing therefore we need to use the powers of congress to make them do the right thing. democrats seem weak mouth when it comes to these things

alito participated in an interview with the "wall street journal" editor and one of the attorneys foris being asked to reverse an appellate ruling that would cut off mail order access to a drug used in the most common method of abortion in the country. the makers of mifepristone says the government should not second guess the food and drug administration's approval or suggestion for use. the first major abortion decided by the court citizens overturned roe v. wade last year. there is a bit of a tragic irony in minneapolis. a democratic party leader who had called for the dismantling of the police department is now demanding justice after being attacked outside her home. senior correspondent mike tobin has details from our midwest bureau tonight. good evening, mike. >> good evening, bret. in a sharp turn around came as democrat activist got caught up in the threatened of violent carjacking. the second vice chair of the democratic foreign labor party reported on tuesday she was carjacked right in the driveway of her home in north minneapolis. the picture she posted to social media showe

attacked the supreme court of the united states again demanding an investigation into justice samuel alito despite the fact that three liberal justices engaged in the same pattern of t behavior. the attacks with which they differ news and they have no standards little but today another strain challenges conservatism not from the democratic party but from within for control of the republican party. it takes thehe form of populism rather than progressivism. those ideologies are fellow travelerss on the same road to ruin. populist movement have long been a part of the fabric of american politics. they most often been led by democrats and more recently bernie sanders and other leftist who share this but today a populist movement is rising on the party, growing action with substitute in limited government and traditional values with an agenda stitched together with little a grievances and performative outrage. republican populist would abandon american leadership on the world stage embracing a passion of appeasement in the face of rising to freedom. republican populist would erode our constitut

practices from across the ideological political spectrum, namely chief justice john roberts and samuel alito, to push appointees and the donald trump appointee ketanji brown jackson, joe biden of 20 concluded the state of mind these must be considered when deciding the threat. more specifically this is the rule the court created quote consciously disregarded a substantial risk communications could be viewed as threatening, three parts. consciously disregarded, and risk and threatened by recklessness. recklessness has done more than make the mistake and accepted substantial risk of harm because the jury was not asked to consider this, the court conviction back to colorado retried without the standard wheel or such, a lot of interesting matchups between the justices, believed a higher level of recklessness in this case specifically for believe the government must prove purpose to put a person in fear of violence. it's not enough the speaker was aware of substantial risk of harm will disregarded. in their view, the government must prove speaker actually intended to make the target feel threaten

the thomas gift from billionaire harlan crow are one, but then alito went on his vacation with the trip billionaire, also not disclosed to anybody. so there's a lot that we still need to find out, and there's a lot of billionaire influence that needs to be exposed because it isn't how courts are supposed to work. >> well, the robes are supposed to be black, but increasingly they feel like they're either red or blue. the public trust in the supreme court right now really has plummeted in recent years. just this morning we gathered the figure that showed roughly like 40% approval rating according to gallup. is there any motivation in congress to get real reform done? is the capitol there for this to change, or are we just going to litigate it in congress like this and nothing actually moves? >> well, an interesting side bar to the politicization of the court is that congress is politicized about the court. republicans want to protect it as it is because it's delivering for their big donors so it's really hard to move, but i think it's -- if we focus on the facts, we will learn enough abou

attacked the supreme court of the united states again demanding an investigation into justice samuel alito despite the fact that three liberal justices on the court have engaged in the exact same pattern of behavior that he has. the attacks on our institutions with which they differ continues you know if democrats didn't have double standards they'd have no standards at all. but today another strain of this ideology challenges conservatism not from the democratic party but from within for control of the republican party. it takes the form of what's known as populism rather than progressivism but make no mistake about it those ideologies are fellow travelers on the same road to ruin. now populist movements have long been a part of the fabric of american politics. they've most often been led by democrats like william jennings brian huey long and more recently bernie sanders and other leftists who share the party's progressivism. but today a populist movement is rising in the republican party the growing faction would substitute our faith in limited government and traditional values with an a

earlier today supreme court justice samuel alito said he will not recuse himself from hearing a tax cased alito twice in opinion pieces in "the wall street journal" defending the justice against criticisms of, wait for it, his ethics. there's no valid reason for my recusal in this case when mr. rivk participated in the interviews and co-authored the articles. he did so as a journalist not an advocate. nothing to see here. alito was responding to chair richard durbin's questions over his participation which along with reporting about justice clarence thomas' financial relationship with right wing billionaire harlan crow has led to increasingly loud calls for court reform. another break for us. we'll be right back. it's easy to get lost in investment research. introducing j.p. morgan personal advisors. hey david. connect with an advisor to create your personalized plan. let's find the right investments for your goals okay, great. j.p. morgan wealth management. >>> but to the point of donald trump exaggerates and lies, there is a bigger issue that is the basis of the lawsuit. he incited the

i would move for unanimous consent limit op-ed to justice alito here himself, and then samuel alito'sife wife to an oil and gas firm while the injustice about the epa. and then a letter dated april 17 to honorable kevin mccarthy and honorable jim jordan it's from 35 plus members of the house. i would ask all of these be made part of the record. >> without objective gentleman you expect the jump from california's recognized. >> wall street journal column written by kristine wilson, she resigned from the ftc because of a range of concerns i have discharge her duties. but what caught my attention was the censoring of her dissent in the meta- acquisition case. severe disagreements around her far from the course we go to great lengths everyday on this committee to demonstrate that. but, we sort out our differences by freely exchanging our views. confident this process will separate truth from lies, wisdom from folly. a free society depends on people knowing the difference for themselves. censoring speeches utterly destructive in this process but can you explain why the commissioner critici