, a number of democrats who voted for clarence thomas faced a very hostile crowd back home. hisof them in georgia, lost race. alan dixon was up for that she was trying to be reelected to his seat in illinois, he lost his seat to carol moseley braun over this particular issue. ,o, voters are paying attention particularly at the supreme court level. and because there is so much more engagement, so much more excitement, at least on the progressive side, i think this will be a huge issue. announcer: watch the entire newsmakers interview with nan ar >> c-span, where history unfold daily. in 19 79, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable television>> c-span, wherd daily. companies. today, we continue to bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events in washington, d.c. and around the country. yourn is brought to you by cable or satellite provider. >> the app industry is now 10 years old and there are nearly 4 million apps to choose from. morgan reed is the executive director of the d.c.-based app associatio

what they did to clarence thomas was a disgrace but it's going to happen.aying this for weeks. it's predictable. >> it doesn't matter who president trump would have nominated, these same smears would have occurred but i admire president trump. he had the courage to make the right choice notwithstanding the fact that he could have chosen somebody who would've been an easier confirmation but no. he made an important choice, the right choice, a brilliant dressed, no question. >> sean: what i read to you about his judicial philosophy, what he said. >> he is a textual list an end originalist. >> no doubt whatsoever. 300 opinions plus prove it. >> sean: this is why i keep saying, dr. gorka, we have less than a minute. this 2018 midterm election is the most important in our lifetime. all of those senate seats that could change hands and become republican, the republicans have a very slim margin and that means rand paul, ted cruz, susan collins, lisa murkowski. in that sense, do the president to make right call? >> i think he did. i think he absolutely did. you hea

and bork was in full play during the confirmation of now supreme court justice clarence thomas. by the way one of the best justices i think we have ever had on the court and in our lifetime. ama back in 1991 democrats rolled out a former colleague, anita hill to make allegations against him and it became so nasty that justice thomas called it a "high-tech lynching." watch this. >> this is a circus, it's a national disgrace. and from my standpoint, as a black american, as far as i am concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves or do for themselves, to have different ideas. it is a message that unless you cow town to an old order, this is what will happen to you. you will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the u.s. senate rather than hung from a tree. >> sean: it has already begun right now, by democrats, to judge kavanaugh and to his family. as we speak, it didn't matter who the president would have picked. and by the way, if you ever want to read a fantastic book, "my grandfather's son," it was written by

of democrats who voted for clarence thomas, faced a very hostile crowd,. one of them in georgia, lost his race. alan dixon was up for that she was trying to be reelected to a seat in illinois, he lost his seat to carol moseley over this issue. so, voters are paying attention, particularly at the supreme court level. and because there are so much ,ore engagement and excitement at least on the progressive side, i think this will be a huge issue. >> three minutes left, one last question from each of you. siobhan: i wonder if though, the risk is you end up energizing an already energized them aquatic base, but do not necessarily expand the pool of public that has concerns? nan: my assumption is, based on a lot of experience, that once people come to understand who brett kavanaugh is and what he stands for, and the threat that he would pose to all of our rights and liberties, not just for two years, four years, before a generation, i think people will come to understand just how important this debate is, this discussion is, and pressed their senators to vote ag

clarence thomas is a better originalists that justice scalia was because clarence thomas was more opens history books and historical scholarship and i think judge kavanaugh, when he's justice kavanaugh, when he does, will be very open to reading good historical scholarship, trying to give him a better sense and his colleagues 0 what the document really says. >> neil: so you want to get away from this idea that it goes, as you said, the ping-pong, hearings that prove nothing. you want them to prove something. you want them to elevate this debate. >> i think it would be amazing if the senate became a serious for serious confirmation. a nominee can show his chops and a precedent would be rewarded for a really good nomination that reflected glory and down to the present and the nominee. the american people would get a good lesson in a serious constitutionalism and where reasonable people actually disagree. i know it's a utopian, pie in the sky. we're deeply divided. i'm trying to find a way forward. >> neil: no, you offer a lot of good ideas, a way to bridge the gap and a hot and feisty ga

those days, in several separate confirmations processes for robert bork, justice kennedy, and clarence thomas. tell us first what you learned from those experiences on the committee as things progressed, and apply it to this current situation with brett kavanaugh. >> sure. i think what those hearings showed is that a nominee should be asked very specific questions and they should answer those specific questions. outside of -- with the exception of pending cases before the court, i think everything else is fair game. people tend to look at the bork hearings and say a nominee should not answer those questions because bork answered them and wasn't confirmed but i think the real lesson is from justice kennedy. he followed bork, his hearings did, he answered very specific questions and in fact he was confirmed 97-0. it seems quite extraordinary given today's environment, but not a single senator voted against him. >> you talk about specific questions. you write about the right questions in an opinion piece in the "washington post." asking the right questions. here's a look at it. what are the righ

of democrats who voted for clarence thomas faced a very hostile crowd back home. fowler in georgia lost his ace. alan dixon was up for trying to e re-elected in illinois and he lost his seat over this particular issue. so, voters are paying attention, particularly at the supreme court level. and because there is so much more engagement and more excitement, at least on the progressive side, i think that this will be a huge issue. host: three minutes left. last question from each of you. siobhan: i wonder if the risk is you end up energizing an already energized democratic base but don't expand the pool of the public that might have oncerns. nan: my assumption is based on a lot of experience in this is that, once people come to understand who brett kavanaugh is and what he stands for and the threats that he would pose to all of our rights and liberties, not just for two years, four years, but for a generation, i think people will come to understand just how important this debate is, this discussion is, and press their senators to vote against. mark: just to stay on

we also have clarence thomas out of that. that's one of my favorites, anyway. >> in 1992, the press called that year the year of the women, because there were so many women elected to congress, 24 women were elected to the house. what did that feel like for you to suddenly have more women in the ranks of the house? >> well, it was very exciting. and, of course, that was, i think, the fallout from the whole hearings that we just talked about. the hearings with clarence thomas. people were so mad about anita hill's treatment. so a lot of women got elected. and yet, even then, we were not 10% of the house. okay? and so i remember walking out there as they are swearing them all in. and one of my colleagues said to me, well, i hope you're happy, this place is starting to look like a shopping center. and i said to him, where do you shop? burlington -- 10% of the people are women. really, it looks like a shopping mall to you? yeah, so there were some people really kind of shocked by it. and when i first got elected, i was in this re

it started with the character assassination of robert bork and and culminated with clarence thomas. tensions seemed to subside for a time but then came the unprecedented filibuster of samuel alito and the public flagellation of neil gorsuch. the nominee had -- but in every case my colleagues sought to drag these men into the partisan gutter, asking questions designed to parse their political positions rather than their legal philosophy. mr. president, in my 42 years of senate service, i have witnessed the gradual deterioration of the judicial confirmation process. as the former chairman of the judiciary committee and now its longer serving member, i have taken an active role of every justice currently sit og and the supreme court -- sitting on the supreme court and those who retired. i participated in half of all article three judges who have ever served. throughout the process i have met some of the brightest legal minds that they have to offer. i watched as the on the other side of the aisle looked to undo their gain. this is merely a symptom of a much larger problem, the politica

your boss clarence thomas had similar problems and that they brought -- they threw everything it clarenceding the kitchen sink. he decided to respond with righteous indignation. this is another way to go. watch. >> this is a circus, a national disgrace. from my standpoint, as a black american, as far as i'm concerned, it's a high-tech lynching for uppity black who in any way deigned to think for themselves, do for themselves, have different ideas. it is the message that unless you count outward old order, this is what to you. >> laura: never have truer words been spoken to my former boss, clarence thomas. brilliant jurists, has had an amazing career on the court. ultimate revenge is life tenure. raymond arroyo, thank you. if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve both symptom relief and remission.

first of all, clarence thomas i was very aware of. mary, myself and gary each had submities and we had -- subcommittees and we put ours together to talk about equality and all of these things. and we had clarence thomas come to testify and he always laughed at us and told us it was a stupid law and blah, blah, blah. it was so frustrating to think this guy did not believe in what he was supposed to be doing so no wonder he was not doing it. so suddenly he is up and we had not heard much about what was going on and suddenly this wonderful woman says i would like to testify. we looked into her background and she was amazing. she was a southern baptist all the way through, very straight arrowed, straighter than straight. she had interesting stories to tell about the chairman. she had volunteered to testify and asked to testify. they said no. no thank you. so we got really upset and one morning we did one minute speeches, and a wonderful young woman who did my press i said what can we do and she said go outside and walk to the senate this

chappaquiddick was a disgrace to the senate and then what they did to clarence thomas was a disgraceo the senate. >> it will happen. i have said this for weeks. it is predictable. it doesn't matter who president trump would have nominated the same smears would have occurred. he has the courage to make the right choice as a president notwithstanding he could've chosen somebody to be an easier confirmation but he made an important choice in the right choice but with that judicial philosophy with statutes and and originalist with the constitution and with those opinions so this is why i keep saying this 2018 midterm election is the most important and that could change hands to become republican they have a very slim margin that means rand paul or susan collins or murkowski. and you heard him. i don't believe in legislation and that constitution is to be interpreted. and now it is even more important than the 2016 elections.s. >> judgege scalia said to make the considerations that the law demands. we will have much more tomorrow. heather: it is tuesday july 10th and this is "fox & friend

if you look back to anita hill, clarence thomas, after that huge bruising fight and hearing, a number of democrats who voted for clarence thomas, they stay -- they had a very hostile crowd back home. fowler from georgia lost his race. dixon was up- alan to be reelected to a seat in illinois and he lost his seat to carol moseley braun over this particular issue. voters are paying attention. particularly at the supreme court level and because there is so much more engagement and excitement, at least on the progressive side, i think this will be a huge issue. >> arch the entire newsmakers today at with nan aron 10:00 and 6:00 p.m. eastern on c-span. on friday, dan coats, director of national intelligence talked about cyber security, counterterrorism, and russian election interference at an event hosted by the hudson institute. this is 45 minutes. >> good afternoon and welcome to the betsy and walter's stern policy center here at the hudson institute. i am ken weinstein. hudson is a policy research center for a secure, free, and prosperous future. ouruld like to welcome audience as well a

my job was threat and after i testified in 1891 at the senate confirmation hearings for judge clarence thomas. her support was vocal and private and public settings at a university function days after my testimony she greeted me in her familiar manner and said anita, you are my kind of old men. i knew that i could weather the trials that laid ahead because 80 -- ada told me that i could she was my role model of strength and leadership and my inspiration to remain help -- hopeful and she still is. the question? >> so the first half of the question, was doing research on girls in the 50s and then to find out about the black girl so i just went to the library to pull out black cat copies of ebony and paged through the pages and whatever there was an article about desegregation it was about a girl and i thought why is this? maybe it is editorial bias. but then another part thought brown v board wires not on behalf of linda brown and ruby bridges desegregated so i just need to find out. so i went to the library of congress to look at the records of the naacp and i went through all the education re

of democrats who group -- who voted for clarence thomas faced a very hostile crowd back on. alan dixon was up for trying to be reelected to a seat in illinois. he lost his seat to carol moseley braun's over this particular issue. are paying attention. particularly at the supreme court level. and because there is so much more engagement, so much more on theent, at least progressive side, i think this will be a huge issue. entireer: watch the newsmaker interview with man aaron, sunday, at 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. tonight, it is my honor and privilege to announce that i will nominate judge pratt -- brett cavanaugh to the united states supreme court. [applause] >> mr. president, i am grateful to you. and i'm humbled by your confidence in me. announcer: brett kavanaugh of the united states courts of appeals is president trump's nominee for the supreme court. >> i am pleased with the nominee the president has chosen. after talking to him yesterday morning, i look forward to supporting his nomination and doing whatever i can to ensure his bipartisan confirma

now, whether kavanaugh is a clarence thomas or not a clarence thomas, again, you've got 100 organizationsto this evil devilish figure. the left has really, whether it's trump, whether it's supreme court nominees, whether it was reagan, whatever it is, the left has really become extremely hostile to even our political processes, don't you think? >> without a question, and i find it interesting that when kagan was nominated, republicans voted for kagan, not because they agreed with her, because she would rule as they wish but because the president has a right to make the decision under the constitution, soto mayor, the same thing, i don't want him to appoint a conservative or a liberal, i want him to appoint a constitutionalist. mark: exactly right. >> i want him to appoint a person who is i'll use the term, agnostic when it comes to political ideology, what it meant when it was written and apply whatever law to that constitution and strictly stay there. the supreme court and the entire judicial branch is exactly what you said. it is one of three equal branches but it is not a superior bran

again, clarence thomas, ginsberg and a llito and gorsuch and perhaps now cakavanaugh that's pretty evenspan over the presidents we've had. what we have to insist on in our daily politics, which is now minute-to-minute politics, is understanding that every vote counts. i understand why senator warren was out there with the quickly printed stop kavanaugh signs. i understand why senator booker was on television, senator harris. this is in many ways not the beginning of the 2020 race, but it certainly is related to it. but the court certainly does have a tendency to surprise. i say to those who are about to set their hair on fire, at least wait until morning. of the justices that nixon appointed justin renquist recused himself. the other three voted to make nixon turn over the tapes, which was the precipitating event that actually led to nixon's resignation. three of his appointees went that way. earl warren went in -- eisenhower wasn't quite sure what he was going to get. things do unfold. these are human institutions. if you're really concerned about judge kavanaugh, you need to get out a

kroft: scalia's fellow conservative, justice clarence thomas, grew up poor in georgia. use that we shared with some other families. >> welcome to your old neighborhood. >> sonia sotomayor: gracias. >> kroft: justice sonia sotomayor; her parents sh up in aublic hog projt in y >> pelou know, yr brother told us that, more than once in this neighborhood, he at up. >> sotomayor: alaughst)wi t >> why don't you just stop filming now? >> kroft: "60 minutes" has done its fair share of exposeÉs, lare and small. congressman! congressman! we blew the whistle on insider trading in congress. >> we'll make a deal, okay. >> kroft: and the never-ending parade of small-time cons, like turning back the odometers on used cars to get a better price. this is not exactly legal, right? >> bill whitlow: this is not exactly legal, no. ( laughter ) >> kroft: bill whitlow told us how it's done. i want to show you one thing. and, we showed him how we do it. see that picture? there's a tv camera back there. >> whitlow: yep. >> kroft: sometimes you have to ruin somebody's day, but it's always somebody

clarence thomas, ginsburg, breyer, alito, kagan, gorsuch, kavanaugh, that's an even span over the past four or five presidents we've had. what we need to insist on, in our daily politics, now minute to minute politics, i think, is understanding that every vote counts. i understand why senator warren was out there with the quickly printed stop kavanaugh signs. i understand why senator booker was on television, senator harris, this is in many ways not the beginning of the 2020 race, but it's certainly related to it. but the court does have a tendency to surprise. and what i would say to those who are about to set their hair on fire, at least wait until morning. of the four justices that richard nixon appointed, rehnquist had to recuse himself, but the others had nixon turn over the tapes. three of his appointees voted that way. warren did not go in as this remarkably progressive voice. eisenhower was not sure what he would get. so, things do unfold. these are human institutions. and if you are concerned about judge kavanaugh, get out and elect someone else president. >> john and david, t

clarence thomas forcefully defending his reputation in the face of weathering senate attacks. >> thiss a circus. it's a national disgrace. >> and elena kagan's lighthearted response in 2010 to what she was doing on christmas. >> like all jews i was probably at a chinese restaurant. kavanaugh already seems to have the humor part down cold. >> i have two spirited daughters, margaret and liza. margaret love sports and she loves to read. liza love sports and she loves to talk. >> sources close to the selection process tell it what it was kavanaugh's outgoing and engaging personality that really impressed president trump in their one-on-one meetings. it is that ability to connect with the power players and the public that will serve brett kavanaugh as he embarks on this journey. >> bret: shannon, thank you. joining us now, vice president mike pence. mr. vice president, thanks for the time. >> thank you. >> bret: europe you're obviously shepherding, if you will, at the new nominee for the u.s. supreme court. it's all about counting heads in the senate. it tonight as you sit here, how do you

he's closer to clarence thomas. that's significant when we're talking about the balance of this court. >> don't forget that anthony kennedy had two kinds of clerks. he had liberal clerks, but he also had conservative clerks. neil gorsuch was one of them. brett kavanaugh is one too. keep in mind, this establishment pick, he has over 300 opinions, as gloria was saying. and they're issues that the conservatives really like. issues of executive power and religious liberty. but there are some controversial ones too. he had a controversial opinion on the affordable care act and another one about some kinds of abortion restrictions. so those are out there, and these hearings are also going to feature george w. bush for his time there. some people wonder really, do they want to relitigate those issues, things that happened during the bush years, during those hearings. it's for sure going to come up. >> a classic washington insider from the george h.w. bush administration. all right, everyone. stick around. you can see arian

those days, in several separate confirmations processes for robert bork, justice kennedy, and clarence thomas. tell us first what you learned from those experiences on the committee as things progressed, and apply it to this current situation with brett kavanaugh. >> sure. i thinkt

served in the same court that produced supreme court justices ruth bader ginsburg, antonin scalia, clarence thomasvanaugh has been reliably conservative throughout most of his career dating back to 1989 when he was a student writing for the yale law journal. >> he ultimately was one of the authors of the starr report to congress that recommended a number of grounds for impeaching president clinton including, you know, a number of misstatements, obstruction of justice, things of that nature. >> reporter: kavanaugh went on to serve as counsel under the bush administration and is considered an establishment choice for the nomination. >> you'll find him to be a very calm and thoughtful man. >> reporter: tom bossert, former homeland security adviser under president trump, knows brett kavanaugh well from his time at the bush white house. >> what people will be most surprised about over the coming days and weeks will probably be the human side of judge kavanaugh. he is a very soft, very kind, very smart individual. >> reporter: despite overwhelming support tonight, his record has raised red flags for som

he's just not quite as conservative as clarence thomas and antonin scalia and probably neil gorsuch. i think i counted five cases where he sided with the liberals. you know, and none of them except for obamacare are the kind of ideological cases we think of. however, having said that, you know, for example, there's a case working its way up that tests -- it was brought by texas. that tests whether the pre-existing conditions mandate in the affordable care act that says you can't discriminate based on pre-existing conditions, whether that's unconstitutional. i have no idea where the members of the court stand on that. but it's a very big issue for lots of people who like the ban on discrimination against people who have pre-existing medical conditions. >> let me go back to cecile. it seems to me that we all watch the news, you watch particularly when it comes to reproductive rights. one of the causes out there is the 20-week limit. in other words, after 20 weeks of pregnancy you can't have an abortion. it seems to me that kind of a thing would be plausible, possibly accepted by the su

now only one has ever expressed specifically what they would do on roe versus wade and that's clarence thomas and he is willing to overturn roe versus wade the other eight are not on the seven plus now this nominee are not on the record we can speculate about it one of the questions is going to be what will the challenge be and this goes back to part of why kavanagh was attractive to conservatives attractive to the trump white house attractive to senate republicans and that is it's not about political preferences it's not about the outcome that you want it's not about a judge acting as a legislator or it is about textualism and originalism these are two terms that mean a lot in conservative legal circles and they have been gaining mostly because of the legacy and the lifetime of service of antonin scalia textualism refers to looking at statues as sandy mentioned earlier looking at the actual language what is the language of the last say and interpret ing it very specifically originalism looks at the intent of the founders at the time the constitution was written and so if you are an originali

that's what it means to be an originalist, that is what antonin scalia, clarence thomas, samuel alito clearly understand who they are and what it is they revere. their friends the left-wing media, none of this matters. judge kavanaugh's impressive track record and resume doesn't seem to matter at all. the left in this country they want what's called a judicial activist. someone who will throw the constitution to the wind and write laws and legislate from the bench. someone who will use international law, not our constitution as a basis for their findings. most of all, democrats want everybody not staffed by president trump who you the american people elected. they are attacking us in trump's take before they even knew who it was and they would've attacked anybody that he chose. take a look at how members of the left are already sharpening their spears before the president's announcement last night, take a look. >> you have to remember how extensive the conservative agenda is here for the supreme court. it's not rolling back abortion rights, is not willing back gay rights, is not elimi

real surprise to a lot of people is the most contentious battle over nomination in memory was clarence thomas in 1991. >> he is on the court because 11 democrats voted for his confirmation. >> sreenivasan: so what changed? >> in a word, polarittion. you doave any liberal republicans in the senate, you,u don't have any conservative democrats. they are in the d, becomes most all-encompassing in terms of how you will vote and what the base wants to consider, and that is why principles in most recent nominations, for instance, no republican voted against neil gorsuch, i think only four democrats voted for him, kagan, obama'sast nominee, only one democrat voted against her andewer thn half a dozen republicans voted for her, it is parts san in a way it never was before. >> sreenivasan: was there a nomination in particular? >> yes. i thk history is going to look back and say that the nomination of david sout in 1990 by the first real estate bush was the tipping point, for decades republican presidents nominated justices that turned out to be very liberal, earl warren, len than, black man, john paul

it was watching the clarence thomas hearings and seeing how my voice and the voices of people like me all across the country were not being heard that got me to run for the senate in the first place. and i believe it is one of the most important jobs we have on behalf of our constituents. mr. president, my time in the senate, i've had the opportunity to consider nominees from democrats

will he be conservative as clarence thomas? probably not. he will be more conservative than john roberts. >> he will be the fulcrum as kennedy? >> that seems very unlikely. >> hugh hewitt says he is roberts 2.0. harry, thank you. we'll check in with you in 20 minutes. >>> a federal judge says the justice department cannot limit reca rules on the detained families. all of this is happening because the president implemented a zero tolerance policy. the request was wholly without merit. the judge released a statement in the government's favor. the court does appear to acknowledge that parents who cross the border will not be released and must choose between remaining in family customdy. >> so far, 54 of 102 toddlers will be reunified today. on monday, the federal judge who set the deadline was said to be encouraged by the progress. the government has thousands more children who have to be reunited by july 26th. >>> missing that deadline. operation to rescue four pr remaining boys and soccer coach in thailand will resume. officials hope this eff

here with me know is ed and clarence thomas and director to the judicial crisis network kerry.d, let me start with you here. we have these four candidates in the flame. i'm just going to do a quick pen point. we have amy as the social conservative. raymond who is midwestern and a bit of a populous. tom is a strong conservative. the question i wanted to start with is what is more interesting is it the difference between them or similarities? how should the audience see it? >> it's is similarities. you can emphasis the differences. we have four outstanding can datas that recognize what the role is and committed to principal and have careers demonstrating those commitments. any of them will be outstanding. steve: kerry, what do you think? >> they are different flavors. they have different backgrounds. all different ways, you can see the left is getting ready with attacks. they are shoehorn in their different angles. i don't know who i would chose. it's a great problem to have. the president is having trouble deciding. steve: candace, what's your take? again, would you be happy wit

members of which included john roberts, scalia, clarence thomas, sam alito and gorsuch. when a u.s.enator says something as stupid as that that's why people are treating alan dershowitz the way they are. it's an embarrassment. the intellectual dishonest of these people is staggering. they are frightened of other ideas. >> sean: let's talk about this book in the context of where we are with the mueller investigation. because you have called this what it is from the beginning. it's very dangerous when we criminalize political difference. your words and not mine? >> right. i agree. mueller will end up not having accomplished very much. you can't indict a sitting president. kavanaugh agrees with. that you can't impeach a president unless he committed a crime. collusion is not a crime. the president can obstruct justice by exercising his authority under article 2. in the end this will just be a report. some people will be indict as d asked -- indicted and their families will be ruined. >> [overlapping talking]. >> and poor black people should not be in jail if they can't come up with bai

most when my job was threatened after i testified in 1991 at the senate confirmation for judge clarence thomas. her support was vocal in public and private setting and data university function days after my testimony she greeted me with the enthusiastic manner and said anita, you are my kind of woman i knew then i could weather the trials and she was my role model of strength is committed leadership in making ration to remain hopeful and she still is. any questions? female b9b9 [inaudible] >> so at first i was doing research and i wanted to find out about black girlhood so i went to the library pulled out copies of anthony and i would go through page by page. and whenever there was an article about segregation was a girl. and i thought why is this? maybe it is editorial bias? but then i thought brown v board was filed on behalf of and then movie bridges and just a little fast i thought i need to find out i went to the library of congress and looked at the records and as it turns out there were a multitude of lawsuits being filed equalization suit and desegregation equalization at equal number

senator tried to filibuster samuel alito , you had the barking of robert bork, the clarence thomas hearing, the judgment of miguel estrada blocked by a lower coin to portman if your republican use a democrat started this -- by a lower court of treatment. if you're a plug-in use a democrat started this. but if you're democrat you go back to mitch mcconnell by not allowing merits garlic -- merrick garland to get a shot. garland isrick certainly a qualified and pretty moderate judge by most accounts. it's not like he was some radical. republicans stopped him from getting confirmed and did not even give him the opportunity to prove himself. a situation where democrats feel that they won the popular vote this time, but lost the electoral college. now donald trump is about to it if amyyear-old, coney barrett were picked, would be on the supreme court for decades. you can understand why democrats feel like look, you have to fight this. ust: matt lewis will be with , if you want to asking questions about this process of choosing the next supreme court justice. for democrats (202) 748-8000, for rep

these posts have 35,000 shares, including one from ginni thomas, wife of supreme court justice, clarence thomas. memes are just how the thomas family communicates. we all remember justice thomas' opinion in "citizens united." "ermagerd! merney equals sperch!" or words to that effect. but it's not just supreme spouses sending these memes around, because recently, swarms of russian troll accounts made #walkaway one of the highest ranking hashtags on twitter. tr. that makes sense. i knew there was no way that many people were excited about a "frasier" reboot. ( laughter ) but still, it's impressive that there are so many young, diverse democrats willing to walk away from their party. it makes you wonder where they found them. well, it turns out it was on the stock photo website, shutterstock. i'm not surprised. i am not-- i am not in any way surprised. i've gone onto shutterstock and i found out all the stock photos are taking strong political stands. for example, this stirring call to action: "it's time to #walkaway in the most generically diverse way possible!" ( laughter ) and i was deeply move

let's bring in a former law clerk to justice clarence thomas and judge brett ka vau -- ka -- cavanaugh. >> thank you for having me. >> shannon: how has the relationship been. >> he's lot a long record as a principle jurists and has a great record and has gotten praise along the spectrum for his judicial record and character. >> shannon: 18 female clerked penned this letter how he's been more than they've even expected as a mentor with career advice no matter where they are on the political spectrum and said that's how he likes to hire because he likes different view points. >> and he keeps up with all his law clerks. you get a quick response from him. i check with him when there's a big professional opinion coming up and he annual reunions and has a lot of character and a great family person and has helped all of us quite a bit. >> shannon: and i'm behind in e-mails and it speaks well he makes the time for people. i want to play something hillary clinton said today in a speech talking about his nomination. here's what she said. >> it is a blatant attempt by this administration to shift

i will never forget ted kennedy coming out and saying the most god-awful things about clarence thomast were not true -- i -- borkut robert burke that is not true. he was a genius on the law. and democrats put up to the supreme court easily get confirmed. why? because republicans are an honest group of individuals and look at the credit -- credentials. at the credentials. even though elena kagan was not a judge, they approved her. and they approved the other pick by obama. problems, no demonstrations. but the democrat is a party -- it has become the party, even more so lately, of lawlessness. getting rid of i.c.e. -- wrong. open borders. and the reason why is because the spanish people, when they come up here, nor the democrats are helping them, they are going to vote democratic. and they really are trying to forget the white working class people of america, especially in midwestern states, where trump won the election. we will win with identity politics. are looking at video of the supreme court justices. this is the annual picture taken. if you look at this -- what is a sense about t

. >> they also have one more little thing which is clarence thomas is toying with leaving the court. that may be where after a bit of seasoning, for the religious right candidate, for the woman here, they have an opportunity to make that appointment. >> overall the kennedys that you have seen listed, how clean are they? you never know if there's a surprise, but are they going for an approval process what can democrats be hit with? >> judge cavanaugh is a circuit judge. he is ruled several times against agencies like the epa in favor of the ministration. they just do a lot of federal agency stuff and has a long track record in supporting conservative beliefs about agencies. >> that is not going to stop anyone. >> he does not have a terrible record on abortion. >> you have to know that he has been around for long enough period now. so every facet of how your asking for an effort he could give you that. >> he has been on the short list for a while. >> the bedding markets say that's who it is. of 41% if you look at the european betting markets. they believe it is going to be cavanaugh. b

or you have members like clarence thomas who may just be a little tired and doesn't want to serve onhe high court anymore. are the confirmation hearings going to get more contentious with he new no nation? >> i think so. i think everything in the trump era will be more contentious. when you look at how many democrats voted for these judges. kavanaugh was 95-0. these are just a voice vote. which is how merit garland went as well. if we remember back to the good ole days. everything more contentious. kennedy: chuck schumer is not president. you don't have to nominate someone to make the other party happy. jessica: ben shapiro is much more plugged into conservative circles. i heard james hardiman is in contention. kennedy: how important is roe versus wade? and is that a factor? you have the three liberal senators running for president in 2020 all talking about roe versus wade as if that is the one and only question on the litmus test. >> they can talk about it all they want. and they will probably ask all sorts of questions opening the confirmation. susan collins said i will nix anybody

they have said it with justice kennedy, they said it in 1990 with david souter about clarence thomas in 1991. justice john roberts and sam in 2005. they claim that "the wall street journal" rights that he might overturn roe vs wade because his wife was a roman catholic. they do it to intimidate republicans, moderate republicans, like susan collins to try to get those republicans to vote with them. >> so critical about what you are saying can we talk about this on speed to anyone with one of my guest yesterday. she does not think anyone would overturn roe vs wade. the whole talk against any potential candidates touching that issue rings hollow. >> jessica: i don't think so. susan collins was the hero of the democratic party when she voted against the g.o.p. health care will, bill. tax cuts on the individual mandate. democrats have a very shaky relationship with her. in terms of her showing respect, he wrote a whole book on it. we don't know what has happened. he read that list. but you did not address what happened. what would republicans think when they would not meet with them? scar

now you are a boss thomas, they grew everything in clarence thomas including the kitchen sink. he decided to respond with righteous indignation. this is another way to go. watch. >> this is a circus, it's a national disgrace. and from my standpoint as a black american, as far as i'm concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deigned to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas.e it is a message that is unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. >>: never have truer words been spoken by my former boss. brilliant jurist has had an amazing career on the court, >> laura: in the last 81 years. only three other justices have held thisseat. hugo black. lewis powell and anthony kennedy. and i think, i could take a solid bette on this that rick cavanagh will be confirmed by the u.s. senate. this fight will be something. we'll be with you covering it every step of the way. good night from the whitete hou. shannon bream is up next. >> this is the fox news alert. i'm shannon bream in washington. a historic night