what do you think about andy mccarthy's point a moment ago? was it, in hindsight, a mistake to reject republicans on this committee that may have offered them greater credibility, knowing that you have bill barr on videotape with his voice saying, "i went to the president numerous times and told him we can't win this." in other words, how would you question a witness once bill barr make statements like that? >> first i would remind everyone, again, that there are two republicans on this committee. this is not just democrats. but bill barr's words really stand for themselves. if we take a step back here, we have seen now several hours this morning largely of testimony from folks who were supportive of president trump. that is what is so extraordinary. the testimony this morning paints the picture of a president who is hearing from all of his top advisors -- not all, but many of his top advisors, the normal team, as bill stepian called them. saying that his claims are outrageous, they were b.s., not based in any fact. he went out to his supporte

andy mccarthy, fox news contributor, former assistant u.s.the southern district of new york. so andy, i want to lean hard on this. yes, there is movement, they want the house to do something. something on capitol hill. but we have 18 u.s. code 1503 and 1507 that are meant to protect all judges and jurors. why is this administration not leaning in and using the laws that are already on the book without the excuse of well, we just can't come together on capitol hill? they don't come together on everything. we already have law. >> we do have law. they aren't enforcing it and they aren't enforcing it because they're politically aligned with the people doing the protesting. they aren't upset about the protesting. they are upset about being asked why they don't enforce the law. in our system, the judiciary is the non-political branch, right? our line with respect to judicial proceedings is not violence. you are not allowed to protest outside the home of a justice, a juror, not just supreme court justices, judges, jurors, main witnesses in trials. t

let's go around the horn, andy mccarthy, jonathan turley carry severina! let's begin with you. hello. blood bill. look, it's a great day for life. it's a great day for the restoration of constitutional jurisprudence. um it's just a great day. i mean, the opinion is exactly what we had reason to expect it would be in early may. the court despite the terrible onslaught of protests and intimidation. attempts over the last seven weeks stood strong went through its ordinary process. i suspect the reason that it took seven weeks is because of what we're seeing as we're trying to read through this, which is, uh, you know that the judges on justices on both sides did. um you know their usual yeoman's work, trying to get this done and in a shape that be fit the grandeur of this occasion so i just think , you know, look, a lot of us have been working for this for decades. so it's just a it's a wonderful day. jonathan turley, let's get your overall reaction to this breaking and historic news. entry it is clearly historic. this decision has not changed, and it's critic

attorney andy mccarthy. byron was explaining to us, the significance of president biden saying that he would now be willing to do a one-time exception to the filibuster rule to codify roe. he's trying to appeal broader on the issue of privacy. how does that square with what you know about his positions in the past? >> dana, he has always been and certainly during his time in the senate, he was very strongly against a reform of any kind of filibuster. and, you know, the history of this is that when democrats and progressives kind of let their end in front of them and move up the filibuster for this or that thing, it tends to blow up on them in short order. i think this is one of these things where it is very shortsighted to broach this. i hope it doesn't go anywhere. people should understand, there is no one time break of the filibuster. as senator mcconnell has set any number of times, you know, the filibuster is an all-or-nothing proposition. and they are not going to selectively break it for one thing or a

andy mccarthy is standing by. first to aishah hasnie, reporting live on capitol hill where this has all been playing out over the past couple hours. aishah? >> martha, good afternoon to you. quite dramatic testimony that we just watched for a few hours here. cassidy hutchison right off the bat told the select committee that she was "scared and nervous" about what could happen on january 6th when her former boss, mark meadows, acknowledged that things could get bad on that day. key moments from this hearing. hutchison said the president was upset, that the elapse where he was about to speak on january 6th wasn't completely full and that he did not want the secret service because he said the people some of whom were armed are not there to harm him. she also testified that the president desperately wanted to go to the capitol and that she said kevin mccarthy at one point called her up and told him not to come. when the president was told by the secret service that he was not going, she was told that he had a very dra

andy mccarthy, thanks so much for waiting for us on the show today.ion of "mediabuzz." i'm howard kurtz. these battles are going to continue at the state level, the media have every responsibility to cover them and cover them fairly whether it's abortion, guns, whatever. check out my podcast, you can subscribe at apple itunes, on your amazon device, a lot of different places. we got it all in. most of it anyway. we're back here next sunday, we'll see you then with the latest buzz. ♪ ♪ ♪ ow, ow ♪ ♪ with a big, fresh carrot ♪ ♪ and a whole lot of cheese ♪ ♪ and the mirror from your van is halfway down the street ♪ ♪ well, you can say that -- ♪ wait, what? i said, "someone just clipped the side view mirror right off the delivery van." when owning a small business gets real, progressive gets you right back to living the dream. now, where were we? why, you were fixin' to peel me. [ laughter ] (music) why, you were fixin' to peel me. who said you have to starve yourself to lose weight? who said you can't do dinner? who said only this is good? and this is ba

to andy mccarthy now and your reaction, andy. >> well, i think this is a faithful rendition of what theerstood amendment in our public discourse, i think, bill. the second amendment is not a right to bear arms so much as it is an acknowledgement that there is a pre-existing right to bear arms that existed and was derived from natural rights at the time the constitution was ratified. so it is not a positive grant of a right, it is an acknowledgement of a right that already existed and a prohibition on government from regulating that right. so if you are within the right to keep and bear arms as it was understood, the idea is not the government's doing you a favor and allowing you to defend yourself, the point of the right is to limit the ability of government to disarm the public in terms of that and what the second amendment protects. so our discourse seems to presume that government has a right to regulate as long as it is reasonable and what the constitution says is no, you have a right to defend yourself and the second amendment is a limitation on the government, not a limitation on

andy mccarthy, jonathan turley, carrie severino. >> hello, it's a great day for life. a great day for the restoration of constitutional jurisprudence. it is just a great day. the opinion is exactly what we had reason to expect it would be in early may. the court, despite the terrible onslaught of protests and intimidation it sensed over the last seven weeks stood strong. went through its ordinary process. i suspect the reason that it took seven weeks is because of what we're seeing as we are trying to read through this, which is that each of the judges on both sides did the usual yeoman's work trying to get this done and in a shape that befits the grandeur of this occasion. a lot of us have been working for this for decades. it's a wonderful day. >> dana: jonathan turley, your overall reaction to this breaking and historic news. >> well, it is clearly historic. this decision has not changed in its critical respects. so all of these protests did not succeed. in fact, what we thought was happening did happen. it is clear that the chie

attorney, andy mccarthy, thank you for joining us.ant you to take us to law school, a master class. from cross exam nation so important. >> you could teach that mast master class yourself. it has two functions that are important, one is the vehicle by which we test evidence, so we know we're advancing the search for the truth, it prevents you from having a one sided version of events, 6 soakly secondly, protest important thing about your justice system, if your judicial proceedings or fact finding proceedings any kind of proceeding where ideas we have a clash of perspectives we believe that is how the truth comes how the. you have to convince people that set of rules is in place, that everyone gets their whether their day in congress or day in court, what gives proceeding integrity is that the other side has an opportunity to be heard, and make the points it believes need to be made in order to have a fullness proceeding that has integrity. if you don't have those things, i don't think that you -- i don't like to use the kangaroo cour

let's bring in andy mccarthy, fox news contributor. thank you for watching last night.at you saw. >> well, i think they have a very powerful story to tell, dana, but they've undercut it by not having a fair fact finding proceeding. i used to prosecute bad guys for a long time. we even let terrorists and scam artists have their own day in court where they get to present their own side of the story. here what you have is a committee that's all -- the only credential that unifies the whole committee is they're anti-trump. which is a perfectly fine attitude to have but there is another side to the story and in a normal fact finding process they would get the chance to tell their side of it. >> bill: i was going into it thinking about what the democratic member of the committee said a couple months ago he would blow the roof off. i was waiting for a blockbuster. perhaps some people perceived a blockbuster and others did not. but if you had a blockbuster would you not reveal it, given the considerably large audience that was watching on all the networks last night? >> yeah, i

attorney and fox news contributor, andy mccarthy is back, welcome back, andy. >> hi, kennedy.his case when you pointed out to me and i didn't know anything about it and you are right, i was shaking meaning it out angry it makes you but the one thing i noticed that's not in the story is there's nothing in there that says the biden justice department civil rights division is alarmed by what they've heard about the story and is now going to go down and open an investigation and poke around and find out what's going on in louisiana which i think we hear a lot of other context. kennedy: if this were your district, what would you be capable of doing here? >> there's a lot of elasticity as we find more and more with these civil rights laws and the biden justice department is trying to broaden them to encompass the idea that individuals are entitled to police protection and reduction of the courts and etc. it used to be that the idea was you had a right as a community to have police protection but that didn't extend to a right to a particular individual to have a particular crime inve

. >> dana: andy mccarthy former assistant district attorney and fox news contributor. york city crime from 2019 to 2022 and the increase -- these statistics are terrible. burglary up and robbery up. transit crime 53%. that's on your subway, for example. that means all these other things start to spiral down. people don't want to get on the train or not going to shops, restaurants or broadway. >> what people is forget we had very low crime, probably the low ebb was 2016, 2017. it took 30 years to get there. close to that. it won't take 30 years to get back up. last year was terrible. i think we had 485 homicides. that's bad compared to 2017. but in 1990 we had 2600. so i think every time you raise this what happens is people say well, you know, we're not in the bad old days of the 70s to 90s. we could get there in a hurry and particularly get there in a hurry if we don't have aggressive policing. you won't have that if you have officers leaving in droves. >> bill: one way to give officer's confidence is hearing it from the top. the president is saying now he has not fav

andy mccarthy is with us. former assistant u.s. attorney and fox news contributor. glad you're in "focus." break it down. what does this mean? >> harris, i think it means we get to a more constitutional understanding of the first amendment. the confusion is the court's juris pru dense over the years. in the first amendment the constitution does not give you freedom of religion. if it did it would be able to see here is your freedom of the religion and the limitations on it. the constitution says there is a freedom of religion that pre-existed the constitution which we are safeguarding. so that's not something the government gives you or the constitution gives you. it is something you have. what the constitution says is what the government can't do is infringe on that and it can't establish a state religion. so you can't be penalized for seeking benefits that are otherwise available because you are a religious believer. that is a penalty and a limitation on your freedom of religion. the court said today people can't be penalized and have a benefit that is otherwise a

the next steps in this emotional issue joining is now former assistant united states attorney andy mccarthy bream and the supreme court we heard a lot today about lawmakers saying we are going to fight this, working to try to codify roe v. wade. this ruling moves it to the states is anything in washington going to change that dynamic? >> you heard the president say that this is not to be the of the story he called on people to get out there and vote and are senate he said that they would be a better chance to codify on the hail. you know that anyone knows of what they try to do earlier this year was much more expansive and both sides could agree more radical than roe v. wade was. they didn't have to vote then and of the supreme court has made this decision will have to see what happens the midterm elections. it's doubtful that the get the numbers in both the senate and the house to make that happen, but we have seen this over the years with the supreme court make the decision i capitol hill this and like pass something a response. sometimes her some paying back and forth between the two bra

but andy mccarthy in a good piece today in the "new york post" points out that is all wrong. went along with the ruse and should be treated as accomplices, not suckers. quote: the fbi knew exactly who sussmann was. he represented the dnc when its servers were hacked and blocked the fbi from conducting its own forensic investigation. when sussmann pervade supposed evidence of a trump-russia communications back channel, the bureau knew full well that it was getting political information from a partisan source. but the bureau didn't care. if it meant taking down trump, sussmann's word was as good as gold. even if he was one of clinton's cronies. half the country still thinks trump is a russian asset and the people who framed him looked like they are getting away with it. bill barr is the author of one damn thing after another. and the former attorney general who appointed durham as special counsel to investigate the origins of the fbi russian probe. all right, so attorney general, do you feel any way responsible for how this durham situation is unfolding and are you disappointed

. >> bill: joining our coverage now andy mccarthy. welcome back getting the full work out of you today. kevin mccarthy it should be pointed out offered republican members to sit on this panel and was rejected by nancy pelosi. some are suggesting republicans were wrong sided not to pursue some sort of independent investigation but you have dealt with legal trials all your professional life and would it not perhaps be more interesting to viewers if you had, let's say, a prosecution and a defense presentation of sorts during a hearing like this so people could debate it among themselves? it might actually draw more interest. >> if that is what you were really interested in, which is drawing people in, obviously the tension of a confrontation between different perspectives is what is interesting. the more important thing, i think about our system, is that we believe our adversarial system is based on the conviction that when that clash happens each side's position gets sharper and how we figure out what happened. having put bad guys away

attorney and fox news contributor andy mccarthy.rd the news from david spunt, the fellow from simi valley, california, apparently tipped off police himself as to what he wanted to do. that to me as a layperson suggests a degree of mental instability maybe we had not considered prior to this. >> well, it could very well be, john. and could suggest that you know, they understand because the law has not been enforced that there is not sufficient security at the homes of the supreme court justices to the point that they are flaunting it. they know they can carry out the kind of demonstrations that we have seen and they do it with impunity, and moved from the state authorities to the federal authorities. i'll be interested to see what charge they bring in this case. but the fact of the matter is, at any point since the leaked opinion came out and these demonstrations started, the justice department could have conveyed a strong message to the public that it was protecting the supreme court justices, their families and their homes by simpl

andy mccarthy is standing by. first to aishah hasnie, reporting live on capitol hill where this has all been playing out over the past couple hours. aishah? >> martha, good afternoon to you. quite dramatic testimony that we just watched for a few hours here. cassidy hutchison right off the

now let's bring in our legal panel, andy mccarthy and jonathan turley, raffensperger and sterling haveown but are not yet ready to gavel back in. jonathan, pick up on the point that anita and martha were making. if we saw a more balanced composition to this committee, if speaker mccarthy had been able to get some of of the mike pence from his side of the aisle seated that he wanted seated, that nancy pelosi rejected, how would the tone and tenor of these hearings be different than what we are seeing? >> well, i think that they were absolutely right about how having opposing side, not on the riot itself or the elections, but just having questioning from the other side of the aisle would have added greater credibility and i don't think it would have undermind this powerful testimony. these are respected republicans like the speaker of the arizona house. and some of this was extraordinarily compelling, you know. as we watched the protests outside of the homes of justices, it is important to remember that this has come from both the left and the right, where people forget there are human b

andy mccarthy, thanks so much. jonathan turley, great to have you both with us today as we watch this hearing. so to all of you, stay tuned to fox news channel as fox station for continuing coverage of this story. i'm martha maccallum in new york. >> martha: all right. back now to our fox news audience. we had an hour of show prepared for you, but as you know, the january 6th hearings went a lot longer than we anticipated. so we want to squeeze in one segment here before we get to the end of the hour with you that we had planned. joining me on set here is pete hegseth, co-host of "fox and friends" and author of "battle for the american mind". very important story about our american school system and jason rantz, seattle talk show host. obviously we watched the end of that together here. one of the things that i'm very cognizant of is what is going on in the right-hand corner of everybody's screen. we have fully covered these hearings this afternoon. the market is down about 800 points. when we look at what voters a

and the impact of what we've heard, bret baier is with us, the "special report" host and we have andy mccarthy, fox news contributorer contributor to the u.s. attorney. jonathan turley as well. the g.w. law professor. jonathan, you have a damning tick tok on all of these gentlemen in a position of trying to answer a president who was saying what was going on was unfair and he wanted the justice department to get involved to pursue this and they did not. i'm wondering your take on these revelations. some are not new. maybe just the tone and timing -- >> hi. this is andy. are you talking to me? >> neil: andy, go ahead. maybe you're having trouble hearing me. jonathan, the significance of what you heard thus far. >> well, it is significant. as you know, it's more of an amplification than what we knew of before the hearings. we knew there were the confrontations. it's very disturbing. the letter that was drafted for the state legislatures was wildly inappropriate. these attorneys did the right thing in many respects we can take pride in the fact that so many consistently held firm and said this is

. >> kayleigh: will get to you in just one moment, we want to bring in andy mccarthy, one thing i wanted to quell is we are seeing a lot of apoplectic rhetoric on the other side, the end to certain marriage opinions, contraception opinions, but the majority in page 13, go look it up for yourself, those of you watching, it differentiates roe from those cases saying that to specifically abortion is different because it destroys what those decisions call fetal life, can you share with us why those specific rights are very much differentiated from those that are issues in roe? >> i actually think that the problem in strong's argument from the pro-abortion side is precisely that today are not that different, and the reason that the court needed to make an emphatic statement that what we are doing here does not affect that line of precedents is if you logically apply what the court is saying here, what they are saying is we are not going to derive our right unless it is a key part of the foundation in american history and the foundation of american law and basic to a system of order liberty. a

former federal prosecutor fox news contributor andy mccarthy is next.stern. billion dollar idea with ben at 9:00. you're watching mornings with maria live on fox business. ♪ ♪ ♪ you're a one-man stitchwork master. but your staffing plan needs to go up a size. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire lemons, lemons, lemons. the world is so full of lemons. when you become an expedia member, you can instantly start saving on your travels. so you can go and see all those lemons, for less. living with metastatic breast cancer means being relentless. so you can go and see all those lemons, for less. because every day matters. and having more of them is possible with verzenio. the only one of its kind proven to help you live significantly longer when taken with fulvestrant, regardless of menopause status. verzenio + fulvestrant is for hr+, her2- metastatic breast cancer that has progressed after hormone therapy. diarrhea is common, may be seve

senator john kennedy, andy mccarthy, jason chaffetz.president biden sitting down for his first interview since before the super bowl back in february. late night host jimmie kimmel hosting a friendly setting for the president. first sit down in 118 days. let's bring in joe concha from the hill. get your reaction to all that. wasn't much coverage i have to say. >> it didn't make a lot of news. i thought the biggest takeaway for me dana and bill was that a murder -- attempted murder of a supreme court justice was thwarted and the host nor a president during a 24 minute conversation didn't brick it up once. you look at the "new york times" no different from jimmie kimmel. the story on the attempt on kavanaugh was page not a1 but a20. one more take away from the interview with the president last night. he says the u.s. currently has the strongest economy of any of the developed nations in the world. that's not true. we retracted last quarter. we may be headed for a recession. jimmie kimmel who will never be confused with greg gutfeld in ter

. >> sandra: andy mccarthy, a final thought from you. >> i think, you know, can they make a criminal case. i think that is continuing. >> john: we still have a little bit of time. martha, you still with us here? >> martha: sure am, john. looks like the ten minutes is extended into 11, maybe 12, and even longer. let's look at your thoughts about this threat against the vice president. because some of the protestors who were there on january 6th erected a gallows outside, and not to say the vice president would have gotten near the gallows unless the mob was successful in finding him in the bowels of the capitol building, but there were concerns about him on that day. >> martha: there sure were, and we will see images of the video of the vice president being ushered down the stairs there, mark short was with him, greg jacob was with him as well, very, very unnerving moments and the protestor video and what they are saying on it "if pence caves we will drag him through the streets" is very, very unnerving, very unsettling stuff for any american. >> john: yeah, there's no question the pr

andy mccarthy, as always, good to talk to you. thanks for the analysis. jonathan turley in the next hour, by the way, with more on this. we saw jonathan was on with bill and dana and martha earlier. >> jacqui: both andy and jonathan have great points, and thinking earlier, not just a show to try to put this back in the minds of voters with 2024 in mind, but also a pressure campaign for garland to make a decision here and the likelihood if he chooses not to prosecute, the people will see that, some will see it as a choice. >> john: and people are looking at it as well saying isn't it ironic that garland is under the pressure to prosecute in the case of january 6th and post election debacle. but why is he not prosecuting people protesting outside the homes of the justices when we are clearly get overt threats against the lives of at least one. >> jacqui: we'll talk about that later in the show. crime in the big apple, though. is spiking under mayor adams. and could get worse, a mass exodus in the nypd. details next. >> john: attorney general merrick garland

. >> let's bring in andy mccarthy. fox news contributor.touched on the remaining mexico policy that is now before the court. we don't know that's going to be the decision. when you talk about remaining mexico, that biden administration took it out and a lower court put it back in. they are really not abiding by its tail. that is the whole point. now, we are learning by some of these parolees, they are not even being asked if they are seeking asylum much less being placed in mexico to wait out there asylum things. how would this is the court upholds this in favor of this remain in mexico policy, how would change immediate immediate implementation, andy? >> you know, trace, their biggest problem that the security side has with the remain in mexico case is that you're really running up against the limits of the court's authority. you know, there is a congressional statue that basically says that people who claim a legal entitlement to get admitted to the united states but don't have one as they come across. they are illegally in the country. t

andy mccarthy will be joining us. we'll take a quick break and be right back. >> this is amazing, probably the best day of american history in my lifetime. >> i have been devastated, furious. (mom allen) verizon just gave us all a brand new iphone 13. (dad allen) we've been customers for years. (dad brown) we got iphone 13s, too. switched two minutes ago, literally right before this. (vo) now everyone can get a new iphone 13 on us on america's most reliable 5g network. for every customer. current, new, everyone. to show the love. dad, when is the future? um, oh wow. um, the future is, uh, what's ahead of us. i don't get it. yeah. maybe this will help. so now we're in the present. and now... we're in the future. the all-electric chevy bolt euv with available super cruise™ for hands-free driving. - dad. - yeah? do fish get thirsty? eh. find new answers. find new roads. chevrolet. new projects means new project managers. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. when you sponsor a job, you immediately get your shor

as andy mccarthy wrote, roe was never law, to what i was saying earlier.troversial subject that should have never within rested from the people in the states has now been returned to them and as the wall street journal writes yesterday, it's in the paper today, the justices did not ban abortion. they said there's no constitutional right to abortion and left it up to the states to decide. the majority also did not set up other rights to disappear. they explicitly, including alito and concurring opinion from justice kavanaugh, they explicitly said abortion is unique. mike, what say you here and the outrage from the left? >> yeah, for some reason this is their sacred cow and even ruth bader ginsburg said the law behind this was on shaky grounds. look, if you can't win legitimately, you criticize legitimacy the other person's victory. like the left is talking about the problems with the supreme court but they're not talking about the crisis pregnancy centers getting fire bombed all over the country. we are on banana republic territory with the way the justice

andy biggs. those are the two from the the committee that sought pardons but the committee sought five pardons all together, kevin mccarthy, andy biggs, scott perry, jim jordan who mccarthy wanted on the committee in the first place and mo brooks who showed up in a bulletproof vest. seeking pardons, does it mean that you committed a crime does it mean that you think you did? >> it means you looked at your own actions and you saw what happened saying somebody might have a problem with what i just tried to do because what i just tried to do was overthrow the united states government and i almost got people killed so maybe i need some legal protection now. look, one of the things we saw last night, joy, is that liz cheney is going to dog walk for kevin mccarthy. it's going to be a bad five days for kevin mccarthy was scared and we know he was. a bunch of them were. they were frantically calling and trying to get the very one person that they all knew could stop it. lindsey graham called the vapors he was so scared, but now that the immediate physical dangers to their persons have passed, now they have this now -- now they ar

on a panel with andy mccarthy, this point they are making, the supreme court read the right to abortionecognizing gay marriage. i know justice thomas brought that up in his opinion while other justices distanced themselves from that potentiality. how does that play out? will they revisit those cases on the ground of substantive due process? >> the problem with that argument is the court repeatedly and expressly swats it down. the majority opinion deals with this question, this opinion will not extend rights like contraception, marriage, etc. . the majority of the court says we don't view this opinion as material to those other rights, and there is a fetal life at stake according to the courts. even justice thomas reaffirmed that saying it doesn't want to go there. i have rarely seen an open you know where the court repeatedly returns to this point and the court is quite open about it, there are people who will be making this argument fueling unease about this opinion but the court says it is not true. in writing this opinion we do not believe this undermines those rights and do not inte

to members of the congress, the five republicans that have been issued subpoenas here, kevin mccarthy and andy that understand the congressional process, why the committee is legitimate. article 1, section 5 of the constitution says that congress has the right to make its own rules. so that fuels everything that the house and senate does in committee, does on the floor. in june of last year, the house of representatives voted 222 to 190 to create this committee. if you read down to sub section 5 of that resolution, and this was massed in the house of representatives and a lot of republicans voted against it, it gives the committee subpoena power. it's there in black and white. republicans will argue that the committee wasn't properly populated, certain republicans weren't on the committee that kevin mccarthy wanted. it was done with the consultation of the speaker of the house. that is ill defined. that's the language in the resolution. but it's up to the speaker to determine who is on the committee. that's the justification that navarro and other republicans keep coming back to saying this co

ann key mccarthy with us -- andy mccar third with us right now.atie, this distinction that the chief justice raises, what did you make of that? >> is that for me, neil? [inaudible conversations] neil: katie, first. i'm sorry. >> sorry. i actually have given that some thought, and i think that there has been some thought that the court did not have to go so far to overrule roe entirely even if they were to uphold the mississippi law because it was asking to look at the 15-week ban. but i don't agree with that. i actually think that if the court was going to reanalyze roe at all, which they were being required to do even with the saw 15-week banker they were going to have to do a full constitutional analysis and go one way or the other with it. i don't think it could have been an incremental cutting back as chief justice roberts suggested. neil: so, andy, i was beginning to wonder at that and what's at issue here in the mississippi law, forbidding abortions after 15 weeks. i believe with roe v. wade it was concluded around 23, 24 weeks you have a vi

andy. you had adam kinzinger call out kevin mccarthy and said where is kevinen mccarthy?republican leader should say something. does mccarthy appreciate's mccain's war record? that's it. i wonder how did the proud boys which is an extremist group, western chauvinists whose leader is a black cuban who hates black lives matter so i don't get him at all but where do the proud boys come from and are they really connected to the republican party or using the republican party for their own ends? >> absolutely. well, listen, a number of proud boys are running for office even after their outsized role in january 6th running for office in this election. i think something like 30 of them are running for office and that's because they know that even if they don't win any seats that securing friendships, running for office, makes them look more political than the other street gangs you might have seen at unite the right which proud boys were at too by the way. but they know that the political aspect by gaining relationships in the gop, they look more like a political arm than a stree

kevin mccarthy who is set ago tough precedent if he is ever speaker to the congressman linked to white house efforts to overturn the election and the stop the steal rally, including jim jordan, andysome of these folks allegedly asked for preemptive presidential pardons while others have faced trump's wrath for not focusing enough on his election lies. for the hundreds of witnesses and thousand of hours of testimony it's important to remember who has been trying to hide from the truth and what other information they may have about the ex-president's attempted coupe. don't let obstruction blur into the background because accountability is the only way to ensure that this never happens to our country again. and that's your reality check. ♪ ♪ >>> good morning to viewers here in the united states and all around the world, it is wednesday, june 22nd. i'm john berma