former justice sandra day o'connor on bush v. gore. and the president knocks them down at the white house correspondents' dinner. why don't you get a drink with mitch mcconnell, they ask? really? why don't you get a drink with mitch mcconnell? [laughter] >> 18 years ago after newt gingrich said republicans had tan over congress, president bill clinton famously said, the president is still relevant here. we were reminded of that moment this week at obama's news conference when an abc correspondent asked the president if he still had the juice to get the rest of it agenda through congress. the president paraphrase mark twain in saying that the rumors demise might be- exaggerated, and then added this. >> you seem to suggest somehow these folks over there have no responsibilities and that my job is to somehow get them to behave. that is their job. >> the president thought it was a gunss's job to pass control bill, the senate failed to do so. he is struggling to get something done and immigration. heat fromng republicans on everything from

chicago tribune over the weekend this is fast and sandra day o'connor suggested that taking on bush v gore the supreme court taking on bush v gore was a mistake she said it took the case and decided it time when it was still a bit of lection issue maybe the court should have said we're not going to take it by turns out the election authorities in florida hadn't done a real good job there and kind of messed it up and probably. supreme court added to the problem at the end of the day but the reality is that the court the supreme court in florida had ordered a statewide recount it was ongoing it would have been done in about a week and a half had the u.s. supreme court not stopped it by taking this case and at the end of a day when you know a year later when the news consortium the new york times usa today were supposed actually counted all the ballots in florida the new york times concluded quote if all the ballots had been reviewed under any of seven the single standards which was all of the standards that were used hanging chads chads pregnant chads people chads with them and combined with

set us back generations sometimes undermining the very principles of democracy case in point to bush v gore you may remember this infamous case back in two thousand when gore won the presidential election with the popular vote but florida was still up for grabs until full recount was made so essentially in the supreme court dictatorially ruled in favor of the archaic institution of the electoral college over the popular vote when george w. bush the presidency and a more recent history we can point to the most controversial ruling of all citizens united the federal elections commission which granted corporations. essentially equating money with speech now while we may not have a say in who is chosen to the supreme court it's at least worth noting who these people are and what interests may be motivating some of those decisions that define this country so who are they can use and queens of the court well i'm going to go over a few of the most controversial first as mr lehrer instalments was appointed by george bush sr and nine hundred ninety this man's been referred to as our rock but no not

he successfully argued bush v. gore and he will talk about how he believes there is an enemies' list at the white house and this has been going on. he rarely gives interviews. he is here today. >>. >>> eric holder as attorney general, he does his job with integrity and i expect he will continue to do so. >> megyn: that was president obama responding to questions about the attorney general. eric holder and the department of justice and decision to order a controversial grab of phone records behind closed doors without advance notice to the a.p.. no objection was involved, no opportunity was given. doj says it made the decision as part of a probe who leaked classified information to the associated press a year or so ago. frustrated lawmakers tried to get details from an attorney general on capitol hill who suggested that he couldn't say much about this. watch. >> did you seek the a.p.'s assistance in the first place and why not? >> again, i don't know about the interaction between the a.p. and the justice departments. i w

. >> what did you rule on bush v. gore? >> i represented the vice president. i had the great opportunity to work with lawrence tribe, the famous harvard law school professor who was working deeply with the case and worked with david boies and i second chaired the case. i managed it along with amy for the vice president. i was in charge of lot of the logistics. >> what is your won and lost record? >> 15 and 13. >> 15 won and 13 loss. >> they were split pretty evenly. there were cases that are 9-0 one way or the other. it means that my 6-year-old could have won the case and i lost my share of 9-0 cases. the one that you sweat are the ones that's 5-4. >> lot of justices suggest the oral arguments make a difference. >> it depends on what we're talking about. if you say how often does a justice change their mind because of the oral argument. probably not terribly infrequent. to make a difference in the outcome it has to be a justice who is in that group of five switching over to a group that was four. the oral argument can make a big difference how they decide the

you mention sandra day o'connor, i was stubbed a week or so ago when she said looking back at bush v. gorehouldn't have voted the way they did they shouldn't have even taken the case she believes now. it is kind of too late. >> it's long late. but it's not unusual that justices will have second thoughts. you remember, bill, justice powell, last year, he left the bench. he said he regretted what he did in bowers versus hardlick, the case where the court upheld georgia's sodomy law and the supreme court later overruled that. so with hindsight sometimes they feel they made mistakes. >> bill: so the cases that you pick out, i love the fact you just kind of -- guns, money race and healthcare. >> try to keep it simple. >> bill: but those are four blockbuster cases. we learn from each one of those cases, not all of which have been decided so far. start with money. some have called citizens united the second worst decision in the history of the supreme court. >> in fact the lawyer who won that case thinks it is the most hated decision since bush v. gore. >> bill: is that right? >> he admits that i

we have no national right to vote is the supreme court affirmed this in bush v gore they said there is no right to vote for the president the united states and basically we have no right to vote in united states afghanistan and iraq countries that we created both have in their constitutions chris an affirmative right to vote isn't it time for us to put one into law well i don't know i think the wording of that document is very loose it says nothing about felons that says you know nothing about that and then it says congress gets to legislate about what that is so what if congress controlled by a bunch of radical right wing earth say anyone who belongs to a left wing group can't run suddenly the constitution in trying to congress gets that right is that language is once you've established the words right yet but then you give congress the right to legislate into in force into in no that sat that section two you'll find that in constitutional in a yes but that every constitutional amendment says drive a mack truck through but the no no no it's just you're missing the constitutional momen

strong sense to have this nationally and that's why we're proposing it wasn't to a certain extent bush v gore the wake up call for all of us and if so how please explain share with our viewers and listeners how so sure it was explicitly said during the court case that there is not a right to vote in the constitution which really probably was when what started some of these bills really fast tracking realized you know there might be a little bit of a a loophole in the law of how to you know pull forward ways to inhibit that right to vote so that court cases really fundamental and coming from the state of wisconsin you know wisconsin minnesota and maine are usually one two and three in different you know order depending on the year for the turnout we have some of the greatest turnout so we're really proud of people being able to vote early we have same day registration and other measures that make sure someone has that ability but you know when we you hear that court decision we see what was decided we certainly saw the negative effect and now what we're seeing in thirty states just this year a

. >> stephanie: yes, well god forbid if sandy day o'connor passes, should haven't taken bush v gore. ng ] [♪ mysterious music ♪] >> well, let's see everything. >> stephanie: exactly. . we were talking about rhode island. this rhode island bishop that just hours before coming the tenth state to approve marriage equality his flock received a stern warning from the bishop, he issued an oral letter suggesting they might want to decline invitations. >> that's an excellent protest i think. >> stephanie: yes, very family centered. >> so the idea is just not to go to a gay wedding -- >> stephanie: right. even if it was a family member that you loved. that would be what jesus would do. >> it sounds like it. >> stephanie: catholics should examine their consciouses very carefully before deciding whether or not to attend same-sex marriages realizing that by doing so it could harm his relationship with god or promote scandal. that's funny a catholic bishop talking about scandal. the church can and does reverse itself which may same day his comments look foolish -- a mere 359 years after branning h

regarding the scandal, other in 2001, gore v. bushhere have been specials on tv showing how easy it is to program the outcome. who recently believes that mark sanford won? what you think about covering , having anike this investigation into this? to me, this is a big deal. democrats seem to be asleep at the wheel. i love yahoo!. it is easy and i love being on. thank you for your question. covered the integrity of the elections is important and public officials work hard to make sure that is done. we have of accountability locally and nationally to make sure that the integrity of our elections are sound. i have not been able to let them specifically in the past, but with so many reporters and bloggers, campaign watchers looking at these things, it would be difficult to get something passed all of us watching eyes. experience moody's crewmember,ng a fishing up in alaska. he is currently at john hopkins university. we are spending the morning visiting the yahoo! newsroom, the washington bureau. chris moody, political reporter is our midd