john ashcroft. >> always great to be with you. neil: in the meantime, are we about to see a republican rally. the dow, s&p moving like crazy into record territory yet again. obviously, big business honchos are taking this as a sign better things to come. a more friendly business environment is at hand. is it? we'll talk to some business titans with their own read of what comes next neil: all right. the dow, s&p hit records today after decisive republican win. it wasn't exclusively that, but it was the win that brought buyers back. they are convinced that good times are aheaa. former best buy ceo brad anderson of what they make of this rally. what do you think in whether the markets are right to seize on this? >> obviously the markets had a good day today. the question will be, are we going to see differences in the policy going forward? is this going to change the president's 6-year stance and will we have pro growth strategies. neil: i don't see that happening. >> it shouldn't. the campaign for 2016 started today there's no way t

hn ashcroft, his action to that after this. how can por consumion in china, textile prtion ispai from new zeald, we understanthe connections of a complex, global economy. it just one reason over 70% of our mutual funds bt thr 10-year lipper average. t. rowe price.invest e requt prospectus or summary prospectus with investment infoation, risks, fees and penseses tad and consider carelly before invesng. obama: i feel obliged to do everything i canawful with my executive authority to make sur thate don't keep on making the system worse. neil: all right. utive authority is one thing. signingn executive order that could potentially feeze the deportion of illegal here. john asscroft says tha coul be another thing. that would be an executive order on steroids wouldld i not? how would you explai it? >> icertainly uld be. thpresident has the authority, his execive authority to do l of things tt are totally agnst the pubc'ss% interest. the president could literally empty the prison'sf the unite states by aausing his power. if h wnted to

ashcroft. he said, "if racial elements consistently vote in separate blocks," which it's conceded they do in alabama, "decreasing the proportion of black voters would generally reduce the chance that the minority group's favored candidate would be elected." the majority opinion in georgia v. shcroft agreed with that as well. and the district court in georgia v. ashcroft, which i think that congress was trying to go back to, said, "if existing opportunities of minority voters to exercise their franchise are robust, a proposed plan that leaves those voters with merely a reasonable or fair chance of electing a candidate of choice may constitute retrogression." and the testimony from the plaintiffs' own expert here was that majority black districts in alabama that are only 55% black would only give those voters a reasonable opportunity to elect. >> suppose we, i don't know, i want to know what you think about the practicalities of sending this back. assume in the back of my mind just relying on sta

they just corralled me to come in, and coach peggy ashcroft and michael horgren. >> seth: how long do? >> i was like three or four weeks. >> wow. >> all day, every day. edward albee finally came and saw a run-through and his first note was "forget the accents." [ laughter ] so that was the beginning of my collaboration with edward albee. >> seth: you must have known, "well, this is where you're going to work, we're going to do great things together. he is known for having a ton of stage directions. very intricate, a lot of direction within the writing. >> yes. >> seth: do you find that restrictive, do you like it? >> it's good. i mean, with albee, all the help you can get. he writes very like, complex puzzles kind of like fred's maze. >> seth: yeah, yeah. [ laughter ] >> so all those adjectives and adverbs in his scripts, we grab on to them for dear life. they're fabulous plays. they're elusive, captivating, but somewhat puzzling. >> seth: and you -- this is previews. this is the time where you puzzle it out and you try and capture it. obviously, it's not just trying to refine the per

this is played by john ashcroft to reporter is with the audio off as an example of the u.s. making progress on the war on terror. it wasn't until much later that people recognized it's actually the opposite. so, with these sorts of instances happening -- this is taking place again and again and again. two consequences to this. one was that the warlords that we had aye alied with became ultra wealthy and essentially used the u.s. to eliminate they're rivals rivals and to consolidate their position. the second consequence you had two different afghanistans. the haves and have-notes. the haves were those afghan communes with commanders or warlords with links or good ties to the u.s. mary -- military and have nots did not have links to the tie, and if you look at the where the insurgency is stronger, this the latest places, those communities did not have a warlord or chapter with the ear of the u.s. military. and so this pattern became more or less entrenched by 2004 and 2005, and that's still the war we're fighting today. and i mentioned that the taliban had all surrendered and

being tortured by al qaeda, and they found his sort of forced confession, this was played by john ashcroft to reporters with the audio off as an example of the u.s. making progress on the war on terror. it wasn't until much later that people recognize it it was actually the opposite. so, with these sorts of instances happening -- i'm giving you three examples. this is taking place again and again and again. two consequences to this. one was that the warlords that we had alied with became ultra powerful and up extra -- ultra wealthy and used the u.s. to consolidate their position. the second consequence is you had two different afghanistans, the haves and have-notes. thes have were those afghan communities that had commander or warlords with links or good ties to the u.s. military, and the have-not were communities without the links or ties. if you look at today where the insurgencies i strongest it's in the latter places, the afghan communities without good ties or link0s are warlord or commander who had the ear of the u.s. military. the pattern became entrenched by 2004 and 2005 and that'

former attorney general john ashcroft on whether the president if he goes in that direction could be breaking the loss. but sheriff sam page says it will encourage more immigrants to break the law. he did seem to tip his hand that something big was coming up and sometime soon. what's your fear? what happens if he does? >> well, my fear would be that we'd anticipate another surge as we saw like this summer with thousands of persons coming across our border, particularly along the rio grande valley. >> so just people feel emboldened to come in because they've effectively been made permanent here? >> well, i think a lot of it was the messaging that persons in central america and mexico were messaged the wrong information and believing they could come once they got to the united states and they got into the united states they would be able to stay, less chance for deportation. a lot of it was poor messaging from this administration and also from news services in mexico and also from, of course, the mexican drug cartel. they were the ones who stood to profit on this. >> do you think it wa

. >> he also -- the government's view of this is set out in georgia versus ashcroft and in the oral argument of mr. stewart at the time, as they claimed it and this remains their view and consistent with the way the department has operated, until the numbers can fall, until it gets to the point where the ability to elect is in question. >> i have a problem. can i just go back to your shaw nonshaw? >> basically you're saying you don't have a shaw challenge? >> i have a shaw challenge. it's a emfemoral injury in the way that race played a part in the plan, without effect in a particular district. >> no. >> in a particular district, if it stayed essentially the same, they didn't move the boundaries much, they obviously -- they don't, it's an all white district if they moved the boumpbtd, it wasn't to include more blacks or anything else, it was just because of geographic divisions. so explain to me whi you don't have to prove that you are harmed specifically by the application of this policy. >> there's two things in response to that. first, the theory of shaw is that if black voters are for pr

. >> john ashcroft said fighting terrorism domestic and otherwise is the most important thing we canm. the tsa agent was upset about what happened to him but it was more global. it should have been a terrorism charge and we have to have equal treatment under the law. why don't we charge that case, charge this case as a deterrent to other people, when people come in with domestic terrorists acts, killing police officers, you know, with this, what he did was so reprehensible, it should have the death penalty and terrorism charge against him, if not more. >> anne's point on that issue, absolutely, you want to deter the conduct, right, so that it doesn't apply again and of course you want to punish it, and you know in terms of rehabilitation, when you're that far off the reservation it's really difficult to rehabilitate. >> i would say yes. joey jackson, anne bremner, thanks so much. >> thank you. >> i appreciate it. thank you so much. >>> still to come in "the newsroom," america's top general tells congress he's leaving the door open for u.s. ground forces to battle isis. we'll talk to

senator leahy could start in the lame duck session and it could move over into january as with john ashcroft>> that is just one of the issues that has already been causing contention as to whether or not the lame duck session is where this nomination will get started. bash remarks i want to get to the other big issue. immigration has already become a big issue before nomination process began. you had ted cruz and mike lee coming out saying they would like to have ms. lynch preemptively make a statement saying that she believes the president's executive amnesty plans, which we don't know the specifics are, whether or not she thinks they're constitutional and legal. within the civil rights community, do you expect the bigger fight to be over immigration or over things like voting rights? >> first of all, they're totally wrong about saying she should make a statement now. that's inappropriate. she's not the attorney general yet. that's attorney general eric holder's duty to speak on those matters. she's a nominee. until she's confirmed, she has no real authority to be the leader on that discuss

ashcroft and in the in the oral argument of mr. stewart at the time. as they explained then, and this remains their view, and consistent with the way the department has operated, until the numbers can fall until it gets to the point where the ability to elect is in question. the -- >> i have a problem. can i just go back to your shaw-non-shaw? >> yes. >> basically, you're saying i don't have a shaw challenge. >> i have a shaw challenge. >> all right. you're claiming it's a shaw challenge, but you don't have to describe the injury. it's a it's an ephemeral injury. race played a part in the overall plan, without an effect in a particular district. >> no, no. >> if a particular district -- >> no. >> i mean, if it stayed essentially the same, they didn't move the boundaries much, they obviously they don't it's an all-white district. if they moved the boundaries, it wasn't to include more blacks or anything else. it was just because of of geographic divisions. so explain to me why you don't have to prove that you were harmed specifically by the application

the governments of you to set out in some greater detail in the brief in georgia versus ashcroft andn the oral argument of mr. stewart at the time. this remains their view, and consistent with the way the department has operated, the numbers can fall into it gets to the point where the ability to elect is in question. >> i have a problem. can't i just go back to your shaw-nonshaw? basically you're saying i don't have a shaw challenge. >> i have a shaw challenge. >> you are claim it's a shaw challenge but you have to describe the injury. it's its an ephemeral injury, race played a part in the overall plan without any that any particular district. >> no, no. if a particular districts -- >> no. >> i mean, if it state essential the same, they did move the boundaries much. it's an all white district. if they move the boundaries it wasn't to include more blacks or anything else. it was just because of geographic divisions. so explain to me why you don't have to prove that you were harmed specifically by the application of this policy. >> let me say two things in response to that. first, th

. >> ashcroft, gonzalez, and they went forward in that way. going to do the same thing to loretta lynch that the republicans suffered under george w. bush? >> good question. >> doj spot is always the most controversial, always the lightning rod, always the toughest questions. will she fall victim or at least will she be delayed to the president's threatened action on immigration? i hope not. that's not good for the country. the president should wait for congress; at the same time, let's see if we can get her through now. that would be a great beginning of detente between the parties and gridlock in america. >> your first question was a good one, does she believe that executive amnesty is constitutional? stand by. >> i don't know. >> none of us do. >> i'm sure she reflects what the president reflects. >> i got a feeling you're right. thank you. >>> coming up on this monday, fema is supposed to be helping people whose lives were destroyed by hurricane sandy two years ago. so why are they asking for that money back? >>> and don't fall into spendi

the government's view of this has sat out in some greater detail in georgia versus ashcroft and in the argument of mr. stewart at the time. as they explained to them and this remains -- consistent with the way the department has operated, and so the numbers can fall, and delegates to the point where the ability to elect event question. >> can i just go back to your shaw not shaw. basically her thing i don't have a shaw challenge. >> i have a shaw challenge. >> you don't have to describe the injury. it is ephemeral and jury of race played a part in the overall plan. without an effect in a particular district. if a particular district -- if they stay potentially the same, they didn't move the boundaries much, they obviously -- it is the whole white history. if they move the boundaries, it was good to include more blacks or anything else. it was just because geographic divisions. so explain to me why you don't have to prove that you were harmed specifically by the application of this policy. >> two things in response to that. first, the theory of shaw is that it? voters are for prudhomme