. >> and uncle tom, clarence thomas -- >> brother -- >> you said that, i didn't. >> and he wenthough justice thomas doesn't even like black people. he doesn't like being black because every decision or color had something to do with it he went against it. you caught one with him. >> he doubled down on the comments. i asked about the uncle tom comments what he said about clarence thomas. listen to what he said. >> calling him an uncle tom, though, isn't that a racially charged term? >> for some it is. but to others, it's the truth. >> because, you know, looking at that, and hearing that kind of language, that certainly wouldn't be, you know, appropriate if it was coming from somebody who was white. >> but i'm black. >> so it makes it okay? >> well, i mean, you asked me the question, and i'm giving you the response. >> jake, he went on to say people he represents in mississippi don't like what clarence thomas has done and the decisions that he has supported with regard to affirmative action, voter i.d., and the affordable care act. so that's the gist of what he's saying but he did

why didn't he follow clarence thomas? he would have eliminated all campaign finance restrictions. >> it was notable that in his opinion, he didn't actually, while he said that base limits, that is the amount that a single individual can donate to a single candidate, he did not affect those limits and he said he does not have confidence that it will survive in the future. there could be room for the limits to be considered in the future by the court. >> clarence thomas may be leading the court intellectually to a destination they could get to. what about the dissent, the justi justice bryar wrote about it and said, if the rich can give too much, it will drown out the collective speech, what is he getting at in. >> he has an instrumental view, it does not protect free speech, in and of its, protects free speech as the will of the people. so, he can stand it on his head. you have to restrict free speech in the name of free speech. it it it's orwelian. >> what if had they can give unlimited amounts of money to the parties thi

why didn't the chief follow clarence thomas? he would have eliminated all campaign finance restrictions. >> right. chief justice roberts in his opinion, while he said base limits, the amount a single individual can donate to a single candidate, while this doesn't affect that limit, he doesn't say, he isn't reassuring those will survive in the future. there may be room for the court to reconsider those limits in the future. >> clarence thomas may be leading the court intellectually to a destination. what about the descent? justice breyer wrote about collective speech, which he said if you allow the rich to give too much, it will drown out that collective speech. >> he has an instrumental view of the first amendment. it doesn't protect free speech because it isn't good in itself. it protects free speech as a means avenof achieving the will the people, good government. unless we have these regulations, free speech is going to thwart the will of the people. we have to restrict free speech in the name of free speech. >> what about th

they speak for themselves and the way he disparaged clarence thomas.forward for anybody there. >> gregory. >> you know what, i'm tired of this kind of race ping-pong. i'll throw you a bundy and smn somebody throws a sterling. what if your name really is uncle tom. >> i had an uncle tom. tom perino. >> i hope he didn't have any kids. >> oh. get over it. get over it. >> dana, i hate kids, perino. >> i wrote something similar to greg in terms of race ping-pong, i call it racism one upmanship. here's what i was thinking today. i think forget these older people. >> oh, my god, we're getting worse. >> and now you hate older people. >> what kind of quality -- equality are they looking for. i'm so hopeful about the youth of america because they are the most tolerant, inclusive people. we should focus more of our attention on them. they are going to be the future for us. >> krauthammer and i were having a discussion, look at the stage of -- at the age of sterling. >> you were in your 40s in 1960. >> one more thing, coming up. you can take we got a lot coming up

. >> justice clarence thomas wrote that he would go further that the majority opinion and would like to see contributions lowered overall. what is the thought on that. that there should be limits in place, that you talked about 2600 as how much a donor should give to one candidate. what do you think about that. >> i think the base limit is low, you can't do many ads with 2600. i understand the arguments that clarence thomas is making and i am sure the base limits will be challenged in the court system. >> will you challenge it? >> it will not be me. i'm spring court cases. i'm done. it's been a lot of fun. i am sure someone will challenge them. >> shaun mccues can, his case before the supreme court and he was victorious yesterday in the decision happened down. thank you for talking to us. >> next - character attack. did washington set up a twitter style social network to undermine cuba's government. we'll have the surprising report from cuba. >> picture this - master works of art found hanging in a kitch n, wait until you hear how they ended up >> welcome back to al jazeera america.

about justice clarence thomas, i recently read the book by professor hill about clarence thomas.at stated he received affirmative action and attended yale, i will just say this -- clarence thomas is a bright man. i do believe, based on the school that he came from, there was some sort of preference yes. to him, there is nothing wrong with that. he did not have access to the same type of schooling as other people. he did benefit from affirmative action policies. it is hypocritical for him to sit on the bench and to act as if affirmative action played no role in his success. >host: i will leave it there. laura on twitter. can voter bans on gay marriage be struck down but affirmative action bans be ok?" bob in philadelphia, independent. caller: good morning. another point is that gay marriage. if people were hearing out sharpton on tv after this, he was basically saying we need this because the people of the impoverished areas have learning disabilities. i don't think it is a learning disability, it is an indictment on the education system and the ch ine that tea low-income areas. t

justice clarence thomas has long opposed affirmative action. in the past he's reflected on it personally. back in 1982, he told "the new york times," i watched the operation of such affirmative action policies when i was in college, and i watched the destruction of many kids as a result. justice sotomayor wrote a scathing dissent that she read from the bench today. she wrote the sentiment of some of her colleagues was oit of touch with reality. race matters that cannot be discussed in i other way and it cannot be wished away. race matters to a young man's view of society when he spends his teenage years watching others tense up as he passes. no matter the neighborhood where he grew up. race matters to a woman's sense of self when she states her hometown and hears no, where are you really from? race matters because of the slights, the snickers, the silent judgments that reinforce that most crippling of thoughts, i do not belong here. this refusal to express the stark reality that race matters is regrettable. i note clarence thomas made those obs

. >> my understanding is that one justice, clarence thomas, our old friend clarence thomas was the only one to strike down the individual limit of $29,000, right? >> reporter: this gets back to a mid 1970 decision when the supreme court said you can't limit how much candidates can spend, but you can limit how much a person can contribute because that could lead to corruption, he thinks that decision was wrong, he would overrule it, he would have the supreme court stay out of the business of regulating money and politics. >>> for now, on what today's supreme court decision means for the future role of money and politics, i am very pleased to be joined by mr. and mrs. contributor heather mcgee. okay, heather, we now have essentially blown the cap on what people can give in these elections, what does that mean pragmatically for our elections process? >> it means that in some ways the lights are going out a little bit dimmer on the grand experiment that is the grand democracy, so the first amendment is -- the entire constitution is actually in service of something pretty bold and hard to ma

justice stephen breyer said the decision -- judge breyer went on to say -- meanwhile, justice clarence thomas said he agreed with the majority opinion, but he wrote separately to say he would have gone further and wiped away all contribution limits. for more we go to capitol hill where we are joined by senator bernie sanders, independent senator from vermont. last year he introduced a constitutional amendment to overturn the citizens united ruling that allowed unrestricted, secret campaign spending. sanders was elected to the u.s. senate in 2006 after serving 16 years and the house of representatives. back tosanders, welcome democracy now! can you first share your response to the supreme court decision? ,> it was a disastrous decision following on the footsteps of citizens united. amy, in my view, what the justices, what the right-wing justices are talking about is freedom of speech for billionaires and large corporations that own american democracy. at a time when we are ready have enormous income and wealth inequality in this country, what the justices are saying is that these very same peo

and conservatives, tea party and otherwise, were truly racist then they would have no use to clarence thomas criticized. the answer to that is he agrees with them on the policies. that's exactly the point. people disagree with barack obama on his policies and credit size him for that store the same reason that they agree with clarence thomas about his policies. the obama line is that's not about race. >> now, i'm going to ask you the same question i asked dr. carson, do you believe when attorney general holder got up there and said hey, they are treating me and the president differently because of my skin color, our skin color, that he, himself, really believes that? >> well, i kind of almost hope he doesn't. because if he does, that means he is very poorly informed about what has happened to prior attorneys general. alberto gonzales, himself a minority by the way was treated very roughly by the congress, scorned, looked down, con descended to and the rest of it john mitchell, of course, nixon's attorney general went to jail for good reason. other attorneys general have been harshly criticiz

wrung of is majority just as clarence thomas wrote, political speech is the primary object of first amendment protection and the life blood. a self-governing people. contributions to political campaigns no less than direct expenditures generate essential political speech by fosters discussion of public issues and candidate qualifications. the first ruling to lift expansions. since then there's been a rise in outside groups called super political committees or super packs. >> i never paid less than 13%. >> super packs are registered as nonprofits and can accept unlimited donations to influence voters. >> we took some emergency action, but that accounts for 10% of this increase. leaving critics to call it shadow money. one of those is billionaire casino owner of las vegas. he and his wife spent more than 93 million-dollars in the 2012 elections, last weekend three potential republican candidates were president showed up for one of the events. hey, listen, thank you for inviting me. >> hoping to win over his support and his checkbook. critics say the event in las vegas is proof of the increasing

use this case to strike down nearly all limits on campaign contributions, but only one justice, clarence thomas, seemed willing to go that far, brian. >> pete, back to the voice of the people as justice breyer put it, for the people who think what happened today was bad, looking for remedies, what would those be? >> reporter: well, there's not much congress can do because the court said this is based on the constitution, and there are indications in this ruling that the court seems willing to strike down more and more contribution limits as they come here. the john roberts court has yet to uphold a challenged contribution limit. >> pete williams at the supreme court where today's decision was handed down. pete, thanks. >>> day two of testimony for the new ceo of gm. she came under withering attack for the company's failure to order a recall over a decade ago in time to potentially save at least 13 lives, maybe more. general motors was today accused of criminal behavior by u.s. senators, many of them former prosecutors. but when they demanded more information from the ceo, mary barra, she didn't

jason, there was a dissent -- not a dissent -- excuse me, concurrence by justice scalia joined by clarence thomas that while they agreed in the result, didn't agree in the logic. >> right. they wanted the court to go further. as they have for the past 20 years-plus, paul. as you said, the court won't just come out and say that racial preferences are unconstitutional. and that's really what we need the court to do. and they keep punting on that issue. they keep saying, you can racially discriminate, you know, sort of if you're not too obvious about it. if it's for diversity sake or, you know, if there is some government compelling interest or -- but what we need the court to say is either you can take race into account or you can't. and they won't -- they won't just come out -- >> and your argument is they should do that because that's the plain language of the 14th amendment of the constitution. and post civil war amendment which said you cannot discriminate by race. that's your argument. >> they should do it, right, because i believe racial preferences are discriminatory, and unconstitutional. b

i very fairly say something nice about clarence thomas, but he voted on the 6-2 majority on the michigane. the kind of at which time -- twiters. calling him a tom, a self-hating negro. we don't need that kind of stuff. just dislike the guy what he says or stands for. don't bring race into it. it never does us any good. >>> don't forget to set your dvr so you never miss an episode of the "the five." >> it is thursday april 24th. a fox news alert. a deadly attack inside a busy hospital. when an afghan policeman turns violent. seconds ago we learned the victims three american doctors. >> just don't mess with texas. >> it's not a dare, it's a promise we are going to stand up for private property rights in the state of texas. >> texas governor rick perry's message to the federal government about a rancher's land battle. >> drugs at an elementary school. wait until you hear how young the dearlies are. "fox & friends first" starts right now. >> i am heather childers. >> i am ainsley earhardt. thank you for starting your day off with us. an african security guard opening fire inside a cable high

i very fairly say something nice about clarence thomas, but he voted on the 6-2 majority on the michiganof at which time -- twiters. calling him a tom, a self-hating negro. we don't need that kind of stuff. just dislike the guy what he says or stands for. don't bring race into it. it never does us any good. >>> don't forget to set your dvr so you never miss an episode of the "the five." sean hannity will be in the seat tomorrow night. special report on deck. >>> more get out of jail free cards from president obama. is it compassion or clever politics? this is "special report." >>> good evening. i'm shannon bream in for bret baier. the nation's top cop today outlined a plan to get more people out of prison. attorney general eric holder says thousands of inmates will soon be eligible for clemency. while the president characterizes this as righting a wrong, some seem a more cynical mova

first judge clarence thomas said he would like to see all restrictions on any campaign lifted. but stephen briar said if the court opened the door, today's decision we fear will open a flood gate. how accurate is that fear from judge breyer? >> it is accurate. they're chipping away at it. we've seen it at other types of defenses. if you look at roe v. wade you see the cases that come up against roe v. wade chipping away at it from partial-birth all the way to making it illegal to have federal funds in there. they chipped away and found a very forgiving court. justice thomas is right because the court could have taken away all of those restrictions. they've maintained as far as we can guess is to keep the restrictions in place so you can only give $2,600 to an individual campaign from an individual. you can now give to more than 18 candidates. >> some critics of unlimited game donation argue that lawmakers spend way more time fundraising than serving their elections. >> can i be one of those people who comes on tv and says yes. it's unquestionable that it will lead to more corru

. >> in a radio interview, mississippi congressman benny thompson called clarence thomas a uncle tom. >> now, all of a sudden government is the worst thing in the world, since a black man became president. >> monday night on the house floor, new york democrat charlie rangle dished out similar vin dicktives. >>> racist statements can ruin lives and damage reputations. recent bundy. >> i've wondered if they were better off being slaves or better off under government subsidy. >> while those men paid varying costs for their statements, thompson and rangle's statements went unnoticed. >> i think it's troubling when the only supreme court justice being called an uncle tom. we should be just as offended by that language. >> when blacks were asked what is most important to you, race is registered only 2%. it's the so-called leadership that keeps the fires of racism fanned in the public's eye. >> a poll from last july also suggested a media presents a distorted picture of racism. it found that 41% of blacks consider blacks racist. and a smaller percentage considers most whites racist. >>> firs

he says that clarence thomas, the african-american justice on the u.s. court, is an uncle tom. he says mitch commonly is a a -- mitch mcconnell is a racist. he says republicans are antiobamacare because he's black. that is not true. any way, here is the congressman from mississippi. >> mitch mcconnell will have the audacity to [inaudible] but the commander in chief that i don't care what you come up with, we're going to be against it. now, if that's not a racist statement, i don't know what is. >> there is uncle tom clarence thomas, this man doesn't even like black people. he doesn't likeç being black because every decision where color has something to do with it, he went against it. >> he also said he worked under three presidents, and they were never treated like this. really? george bush's intellect was slapped around every day. the majority leader called him a loser. bill clinton in particular was impeached. you saw the way bill clinton was treated in many respects. forget the way they're look at now. i don't think any of them had an easy time. >> h

justice clarence thomas wanted to wipe out all limits. speaking for the majority, chief justice john roberts wrote the government may no more restrict how many candidates or causes that a donor may support than it can tell a newspaper how many candidates it may endorse. john burton is the chair of california's democratic party. >> it used to be you voted for a certain political party and you knew what you got. now you just vote for, you know, whoever can spend the most money and tell the most lies on television. >> reporter: burton says looking ahead, today's decision would most certainly affect the upcoming midterm elections. in san francisco, lyanne melendez, abc 7 news. >>> there's much more ahead in our next half hour, including another protest against shuttle buses in san francisco. this time protesters took things a step further. >>> also, the concern in the east bay over a diesel spill and the team effort it took to keep the whole thing in check. >>> i'm spencer christian. live doppler 7 hd shows sunny skies around the bay area rig

if your name is clarence thomas or condoleezza rice where the faculty said she wasn't sufficiently inspirationaler a commencement address. what you see is, you get stuck in a box and get called nasty names, uncle tom and all sorts of other nastiness. the point is to shut you up. >> it's to intimidate and silence. you've been on the show and we've discussed this issue. how bad is it beyond this cont >> well, i think this is a controversy my dad would say highlighted an ongoing issue. i've had a lot of support from black liberals conservatives. guys like you, shawn. i've been emboldened because people say, raffi's out there working hard and doing the right thing. >> why do you think that it is still acceptable, like, for example, i would argue that christian conservatives can be a target with little in terms of repercussions. black conservatives can be called the worst names and there seems to be little to no repercussions? >> we're pushing back against that now. i think for so long we've been quiet because we're respectful people. now we realize enough is enough, and it's our time to speak up and

. >> just to follow up on that, justice clarence thomas said in his decision, let's just get rid of all. to some degree i guess my question is, doesn't that even the playing field? even though there's no preconceived notion that anybody is playing by any kind of rules? >> i don't know that it evens the playing field. that's a conventional argument of conservatives like let's get rid of all of the regulation and kind of even the playing field. the problem with that, though, is when a candidate puts that in his or her own campaign account, there's a real possibility of quid pro quo corruption. >> sure. >> we saw that with watergate and with nixon in terms of the watergate and things get tough in terms of democracy. setbacks in terms of the right of women to vote but people have pushed on. i think people will push on here. >> congressman, i want to talk about your legislation and how you are approaching this issue of campaign finance reform. give us an overview. >> well, our legislation started from the premise that the average person out there is completely fed up, frustrated, feels like

justice clarence thomas wanted to wipe out all limits. speaking for the majority, chief justice john roberts wrote the government may no more restrict how many candidates or causes that a donor may support than it can tell a newspaper how many candidates it may endorse. john burton is the chair of california's democratic party. >> it used to be you voted for a certain political party and you knew what you got. now you just vote for, you know, whoever can spend the most money and tell the most lies on television. >> reporter: burton says looking ahead, today's decision would most certainly affect the upcoming midterm elections. in san francisco, lyanne melendez, abc 7 news. >>> there's much more ahead in our next half hour, including another protest against shuttle buses in san francisco. this time protesters took things a step further. >>> also, the concern in the east bay over a diesel spill and the team effort it took to keep the whole thing in check. >>> i'm spencer christian. live doppler 7 hd shows sunny skies around the bay area rig

. >> the majority opinion, written by justice clarence thomas found that even though connick's officethheld evidence in the thompson case, that was not enough to prove a pattern. and yet a study done in 2008 reported that during harry connick sr.'s tenure, in one out of every four cases where the death penalty was imposed, evidence was withheld. >> that was crazy. if that is not a pattern, i don't know what is. so who is going to get the last laugh? jim williams. >> in the photo of jim williams with the electric chair, of the five faces visible, all of them were released from death row. >> and my mine, we should charge them with attempted murder. this district attorney using false information that he know is false to kill you. it's premeditated. so we're saying that he could get away with murder? what make him so special? the only thing he was hiding behind was district attorney badge. >> unfortunately, the thomas opinion is the law of the land. and it gives me great concern. >> make no bones about it. prosecutors are now a lot less accountable for what they do because they know that

. >> yeah, because you had one of the justices, clarence thomas, who would like to blow that cap, too$2,600 cap. scott, talk about the kind of donors, the kind of individual donors who could likely take advantage of something like this. the sun life foundation has identified some of them. they've identified some people they think are most likely big spenders. who are these big spenders and what in your view are they looking for for their money? >> well, i think what they're looking for, joy, is they're looking to have more influence in the political process than normal people like you and i have. there has been an orgy of spending, and consequently, with that has come a -- we are at a juncture where confidence in our elected officials is at an all-time low. this ruling is not going to do anything to help that. you know, this -- aggregate limits were put in place to stop essentially money laundering. and now with those aggregate limits thrown out, there's going to be much more opportunity for big donors, big influence pedalers to enact more of what they want on the public policy debate

do you understand that two weeks ago clarence thomas, in a that.on, said exactly that is where the republican is moving. in 2014 they want to and all restrictions on campaign financing. that means a handful of billionaires will sit in a room and say let's put $20 million into new hampshire, $30 million into vermont. in these guys, it is a drop the bucket. if you allow unlimited spending, we will certainly lose the foundations of american democracy. that is what they were talking about 34 years ago. that is what is happening today. the is another plank of 1980 libertarian party. we favor the abolition of medicare and medicaid. haven't succeeded, but they are trying. it would change medicare as we know it and move it towards a voucher-type program. in other words, what it would say is we're going to give you, when you're 65 or 67, and they probably want to raise the age for medicare eligibility, is we want to give you a check, and you can go to any private insurance company that you want. well, if you have cancer that will last you about one day, maybe. but that is their plan to how they want t

and in reading the supreme court opinions, it was clarence thomas who said that there's great inconsistency this and we ought to throw out all of these caps. so my preference, shy of the public financing of elections and maybe it's time for us to consider that, would be a system where individuals can spend whatever they want to spend so long as there is full and immediate disclosure. the headline that i'd have put on this story" maxed out no more." to the mystery of flight 370, malaysian officials announced changes to security aboard their planes. but is it enough? how security is that cockpit? [ male announcer ] this is joe woods' first day of work. and his new boss told him two things -- cook what you love, and save your money. joe doesn't know it yet, but he'll work his way up from busser to waiter to chef before opening a restaurant specializing in fish and game from the great northwest. he'll start investing early, he'll find some good people to help guide him, and he'll set money aside from his first day of work to his last, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense. from td

. >> stephen, one of the arguments you see being made by chief justice roberts and clarence thomas, inecause they raise doubt among even the people who get the opportunity that they belong there. did you feel somehow set back by affirmative action assistance to you to go to college? >> well, no. i think my career stands as an example of that lack of doubt. i mean, i've been able to do extraordinary things including becoming the first african-american correspondent at the supreme court some 36 years after the court itself was integrated. i've never felt like opportunity was a reason to doubt myself, if i was going to have doubts it would be about my work and i think most people feel that way. this is about opening doors and giving people a chance to actually perform, which is what didn't happen before affirmative action is that blacks who were qualified, blacks who have could have been great at things or in colleges were never let in. now, we've changed that and i think there are some people who are uncomfortable with it. >> absolutely. what about, michael, the codicile to the argument,

. >> what a legacy bush has in appointing clarence thomas to the supreme court. i think its unexplainable why we get some of the decisions out of that justice and out of the court that we get. >> charlie: how do you feel about public money for campaigns? >> well, i think an ideal situation would be public money, public financing. i think it would save the taxpayer a lot of money. i mean, if they could just prevent one or two major bad decisions, it would more than compensate for what public financing would do for our federal officers. i don't think it will happen because i just don't think the american people are there, but in my judgment there's great merit to the idea of having public financing for our federal offices. >> is obamacare the biggest issue of the 2014 campaign? >> well, perhaps. i shouldn't be. >> charlie: what is it that makes it so controversial? is it the individual mandate? is it people who argue that the cost of healthcare is going to go up because of this? businesses are complaining? is it because people feel like it's an intrusion or is it s

his colleague and judicial wonder twin clarence thomas is is it married to a tea party leader, swrimycare act attempt her husband was helping to decide the constitutionality of the law. justice stevens himself wrote the majority opinion in that 1997 case that allowed paula jones to oppose president clinton. he joined justice ginsburg and two other justices in december in perhaps the most famously political supreme court justice -- the supreme court decision in a generation. bush v gore. the same year that sandia day o'connor reportedly told friends she wanted to be sure she retired under a republican. yes, when the justices retire, it matters because the court is totally political. and that wraps things up for the reid report. i'll send you back here tomorrow at 2:00 p.m. eastern, and be sure to visit us on-line at the reader report.msnbc.com. the cycle is up next. hey, cycle it'ses. hey, one of i feel like i just saw. >> i wonder which one. any time you can mention them on any of these shows, it's a good thing. we're going to have a great show today. russell semons is going to be tal

the next step is the one that clarence thomas cited. candidates should be allowed to take unlimited amounts of money from anybody, and you would equalize the middle class and the rich. problem is, broomberg can spend -- >> this is a middle class play to allow people to give as much money without any limits? >> the donors hate this decision. it's a good excuse to say to a candidate, i'm maxing out. i can't help the campaign. it's good for the campaigns to get the money relative to the super pacs. sew this decision will help. but i think it's constitutionally correct. the supreme court will be a big issue in 2016. >> 5-4 decision. >> obamacare, same-sex marriage, now this. it would be decisions -- and more obamacare decisions coming, incidentally, i think, which could be interesting. so we are focused on foreign policy and obamacare and domestic issues. supreme court -- the next president will shape the direction of the supreme court. >> what the speaker said is the issue. this is a continuum. here you have the supreme court coming down a

but i think it raises the interesting question, too, clarence thomas -- >> he wanted to go further. >> right. he was saying not only did they say that money is speech and politics, they upheld limits. do away with those limits altogether. >> i'm afraid that's where things are headed. as you and all up against the clock fans know, this saturday it is championship saturday. >> go, krystal! >> i, krystal ball, will go up against kate and alex. i am favored, of course. >> going down! >> and steve the man. that's because of my training regimen caught on tape by krystal watchers. >> isn't until the end of the month. >> i know. i've got to get ready. >> we've been doing some flash card work. >> it's going to be a real cinderella story. you don't see stuff like that every day, thank god. see you saturday at 9:44-ish for the big game. we will be back with the regularly scheduled program next. but before we go, i want to thank all of our facebook fans who have been sending me all of your verbal encouragement. keep it up, fans, and i will do my best come saturday. guy around 2 percent to manage

benny thompson who was on the new nation of islam radio show and he called supreme court justice clarence thomasncle tom. what you have, greta, are these members of the congressional black caucus who have to create this strawman or this deception because they are really not dealing with the interests and the issues that are facing their constituencies. when you think about charlie rangel, he should be speaking out about mayor bill de blasio who is trying to dismantle it the charter school program in new york city. the academy right there in harlem. not talking about the 12% unemployment rate. not talking about the g.d.p. growth which obviously means that there is definitely not economic growth within our inner city and urban environments. this is politics as usual. >> why do they do that? because everybody goes into politics whether you agree with a person. i realize some politics an awful long time and lose that thought, but, i mean, why are they doing that? >> it's it's very simple. because you have a constituency that is trapped on a liberal/progressive plantation of the 21 st century. they w

and alito is going to be there for 30 years and clarence thomas is going there forever.ery young. democrats pick these seasoned people who don't have 30, 40 years to go. so it's going to take a real to a long time to get back the supreme court. but they have to work on it. they just got to get a presidential elections under their belt and hold on to as many seats and win as many as they can, because there are some decisions tonight supreme court that are just based upon sheer partisan politics like this one. they really are. >> chris matthews, thank you so much for your time tonight. >> hey, thank you, reverend. >> and of course, you can catch "hardball" with chris matthews weekdays at 7:00 p.m. eastern right here on msnbc. and as i mentioned, i'm honored that chris matthews will be joining us at the convention for my civil rights group the national action network. president obama is going to be one of our main speakers. we'll be talking about everything from criminal justice to women issues to economic equality. that's april 9th through the 12th, right here in new york

>> in most cases, every justice except clarence thomas asked questions.stices wrote separate opinions in another case, stephen breyer and ruth bader ginsburg. they had different views on the copyright law. this is not a case we are expecting to be ideologically divisive. they are both democratic appointees that may be on opposite sides of the case. >> for aereo, what is the end goal? what does barry diller want? >> they want to disrupt the cable industry. >> because they want to be acquired? not interested in going public, he is focused on winning the case in building the business. continuing the legal and building the business strategy. >> you believe it is true, if they don't win, they are done? >> that is what they both set. they are done and will cross their fingers someone else will be able to come in and follow through with that mandate they are looking to follow through with. >> thank you, alex and greg. cory, back to you in new york for what is still ahead on "in the loop." >> mcdonald's' comes up short. we will look at mcdonald's earnings when "i

and he asks a lot of questions but typically, every justice except for clarence thompsons -- clarence thomasuestions. >> what is your feeling on the closeness of this decision? >> this is hard to say, asking that question in terms of the finance case or the abortion case, we have seen enough cases to know where they come out. the court really has not had that many copyright cases in recent years and this is not something i would expect for the court to debate with a conservative liberal, anthony kennedy in the middle. they filed a brief in favor of the broadcasters, how much effect does this have on the supreme court's decision? >> it probably will have some, this is widely respected by the court as a neutral arbiter. that said, this court in particular, and in general under barack obama, have not always seen eye to eye. to court will not just defer these views but they will take them seriously. >> 2 appellate courts have ruled in favor of aereo. what is the new new for the supreme court? >> several district courts have ruled the other way, and this is definitely an area of law where forces

when justice scalia says nobody's going to cover my speech, what happens if someone tweets it or clarence thomas came to u.v.a. a couple of years ago, you were sworn to secrecy and every word was published the next day in politco with mistakes. justice alito goes to speak at a dinner and someone just takes a photo of him and suddenly the media has captured it so it seems to me that more and more when the court puts up barriers to transparency, what happens is what rushes in is less than what they would afford us if they would let us in so i wonder if anyone has thoughts about, is there a tipping point -- i'm thinking about the healthcare cases what they were handed down and for the first couple of minutes, it was wrong and maybe the court has no obligation to help us get it right. >> last friday, they got it wrong and in this case they did it to his benefit but it could have been to his detriment and it would have been better if someone could say, let's go to the videotape. >> i have screen shots of the front pages of fox news, msnbc and cnn on the day of the -- and the fox news said, obamacare

. >> justice clarence thomas who declared in the consent would have validated the supreme court decisionpheld the contribution limits. his view of the first amendment is money is speech, he should be able to spend your money in favor of whatever political speech you want. but the issues quickly speaking was not before the court today. those aggregate limits are now invalid as of about 47 minutes ago. a very big deal. they are just absolutely furious over this because they believed they need to balance the playing field to prevent wealthy people from being able to contribute to a large number of campaigns. stuart: the director of national intelligence, you know this very well, acknowledges the nsa searched american communications without warrants. he did that. >> is started june 6 continuing up to the present day. he told everybody about the metadata information. metadata has identifying information on it only. you called charles, what phone you called from, what phone charles received it on, how long you spoke but not the content. edward snowden says they have the content, they have the

for instance this week you had clarence thomas saying not only should the cap be done away with, themit but all limits, all of the spending limits imposed by the decision in 1976 should go away. anyone should be able to give any amount of money to a campaign that they want. do you think that's a problem if that's where we're going? >> i do. i do have a problem with the level of money that's being placed into the political system and the distortion of that system in many respects. but having said that, up have also been from day one, a believer that money is speech. it is property that i can use to express an opinion, how i feel about an issue by supporting you. the limits are in place, $2600. the fact that i can give $2600 to 100 people i don't distorts the system as greatly as, you know, my writing a $20 million check into one cam bane or on one issue necessarily. but again, it is part of the evolution of this. and i understand all of this, you know, highbrow disdain on the left. but then remember, then can date barack obama who was this, you know, champion of reform in the system b

i recently saw a documentary and reminded of when clarence thomas uses the term high-tech lynches tonce. . to use stop and frisk is problematic. it also alies the realities of individuals experiencing state sanction violence and harassment. the second thing about the article is the fact to be called racist as as problematic or devaluing themselves. so paula deen becomes a victim of racial injury that's as powerful and dehumanizing in the ways she was practicing racism every day as part of her power. both the elite and every day black people. for me the ways there's a stalemate about race is because there's so much towards barack obama as the first black president, it's literally stalemated conversations about racial injustice and the ways in which black people are trying to organize the platform into the presidency, and the ways we cannot. >> that's where i want to start when we come back. that idea -- and this goes back to your point about stymying the conversation. in part because the person of president obama ends up affecting what we think of as protecting him. and therefore mayb

when justice scalia says nobody's going to cover my speech, what happens if someone tweets it or clarence thomas came to u.v.a. a couple of years ago, you were sworn to secrecy and every word was published the next day in politco with mistakes. justice alito goes to speak at a dinner and someone just takes a photo of him and suddenly the media has captured it so it seems to me that more and more when the court puts up barriers to transparency, what happens is what rushes in is less than what they would afford us if they would let us in so i wonder if anyone has that's about, is there a tipping point -- i'm thinking about the healthcare cases what they were handed down and for the first couple of minutes, it was wrong and maybe the court has no obligation to help us get it right. >> last friday, they got it wrong and in this case they did it to his benefit but it could have been to his detriment and it would have been better if someone could say, let's go to the videotape. >> i have screen shots of the front pages of fox news, msnbc and cnn on the day of the -- and the fox news said, obamacare st

. >> i just saw a picture of you, hilla hillary, bill, and clarence thomas all of you went to law schoolies of classes. he was one class in advance of us. and hillary rodham in those days was a class behind bill clinton and i. but we were all in the same classes together. >> and you dated hillary, right? >> well, look. >> is this like bill dating janis joplin? >> this is undergraduate days. i was president of my sophomore class. she was president of her freshman class. we had a presidential summit. >> it was a mixer. >> we had a presidential summit. that's all it was. >> is she going to be our next president? >> i think there's a very, very good chance. the next two and a half years are going to be tough because she's got to manage the longest front runnerhood status in history. but she has the best campaign manager anybody's had. >> she does. mark mckinnon was here and said he would be post-partisan. because they've all been beaten up enough to understand what's going on in washington now doesn't work. but i asked him and i'll ask you as obviously a friend of the clintons for a very lon

statement was we have two members of the supreme court that were beneficiaries of affirmative action clarence thomas sonia soto mayor. thomas used to speak openly in support of the program that helped him get into the ivy league. later, he turned sharply against affirmative action. sonia soto mayor was very eloquent in her autobiography about how affirmative action opened the doors for her at princeton. doors where she would not have been aware of these avenues these possibilities, coming from the bronx. she wound up graduating as an honor student from their. what is important to me is not how they get into i'm disturbed by the high dropout rate. that wasn't the case with justice sotomayor. she made the most of it and wound up on the supreme court. she talks about that in her opinion. i think it's something that we need to pay attention to, because that's what it's supposed to be all about opening up opportunities not only for minorities to be able to move up and pursue the american dream, but also so that white americans can enjoy the benefits of diversity in our society. host: one other point, tho