voted no, clarence thomas prevailed. was 43 years old. he vowed to stay on the court for 43 more years. in the years after thomas' confirmation, mcconnell watched as democratic and republican presidents tried to tip the balance of the court. >> president clinton nominated ruth bader ginsburg... >> narrator: with republicans in the minority, bill clintonba placed rutr ginsburg and stephen breyer on the bench. >> ...the president sent congress the name of his nominee to fill the seat... >> narrator: george w. bush,ca with a repubsenate, put john roberts and samuel alito on the court. >> barack obama is projected to be the next... >> narrator: with democrats back in control, barack obama anappointed sonia sotomayo elena kagan. >> still, many republicans are asking if she's the right person for the job... >> narrator: through it all,d mcconnell habeen climbing to power inside the senate. majority whip. republican leader.na and fiy, majority leader. >> there's nobody who's more focused on political conquest than he is. there

robert bork anged that, and clarence thomas confirmed it. odd with the clarence thomas nomination, everwasatching. >> this vote, the yeas are 52 and the nays are 48. the nomination of claren thomas of georgia is hereby confirmed. >> narrator: whi biden and most democrats voted no, clarence thomas prevailed. he vowed to stay on the court for 43 more yes. in the years after thoma confirmation, mcconnell watched as democratic and republican presidents tried to tip the balance of the court. >> president clion today nominated ruth bader ginsburg... >> narrator: with republicans in the minority, bill clinton pled ruth bader ginsburg a stephen breyer on the bench. >> ...the president senthe congress t name of his nominee to fill the seat... >> narrator: george w. bush, with republican senate, put john roberts and samuel alitort on the cou >> barack obama is projected to be the next... >> narrator: with democrats ck in control, barack obama appointed sonia tomayor and elena kagan. >> still, many republicans are asking if she's the right person for the job... >> narrator: through it all, mcconnell

as a white man, he felt uncomfortable taking clarence thomas, a black man, on about it. he whole subject matter just made him incredibly uncomfortable. >> another witness has come forward against thomas... >> news of a second woman who once worked for thomas... >> narrator: biden was at first reluctant have hill testify, but the story was exploding. er >> thereactually three other women, other than myself, who were willing to testify, wh tually said they called senator biden's office and, andt offered their own ony. >> narrator: angela wright offered her own stark allegations against thomas, which thomas denied. >> he asked me, in one situation, what size breasts, my breasts were. he told me he wanted to date mea this iwho has, who, in my opinion, has often spoken inappropriately to women.ma >> but committee chabiden conceded tonight that new information about the allegations has come in. >> narrator: with the pressure mounting, biden agreed to letme the testify. >> the hearing will come to order. >> welcome, professor hill. professor, do you swear to w tell tle truth, an

. >> president bush said he has no doubt clarence thomas will benf med to the u.s.court. >> thomas will try to persuade the senate that he has... e biden, now the powerful chairman of the senate judiciary committee, was facing his biggest crisis yet: allegationsg nst supreme court nominee clarence thomas. this affidavit charged that thomasexually harassed a former employee, anita hill. w >> good evening,begin tonight with the potential for political explosion on capitol ll. >> clarence thomas ran into trouble today... >> questions are growing over charges of sexual harassmentag ainst thomas... >> it seems to have been a nightmare for joe biden. as a man, he felt uncomfortable about it. as a white man, he felt uncomfortable taking clarencebl thomas, k man, on about it. um, and the whole subject matter just made him incrediblyta uncomfe. >> another witness has come forward against thomas... >> news of a second woman who once worked for thomas...>> arrator: biden was at first reluctant to have hill testify, but the story was ploding. >> there were actually three other

supreme court justice clarence thomas swore coney barrett in on monday night at a white house ceremony> the oath that i have solemnly taken tonight means at its core that i will do my job without any fear or favor and that i will do so independently of both the political branches and of my own preferences. amy: brett wasworn in just hours after e suprem crt's nservati moritrule wiscsin coulnot extets il-in baot deadle. she ll joijusticesn decing oth key votg righ casein theoming days, inuding decratic eorts to tend theeadline r counti ma-in balls in nor carona and pnsylvani later is wee the supme urt wi also coider wheer to hear key misssippi ortion ce that cld chlenge rov. wade. and e court set to ar arguments in a case that could scrap the affordable care act on november 10, one week after election day. for more on the consequences of amy coney barrett's confirmation and much more, we go to the bay area in california where we are joined by alicia garza, the principal of black futures lab and co-founder of supermajority. along with i jim who and cecille richards. is cofounder of the b

supreme court justices, clarence thomas and neal gore search all say along with alito that there is a strong likelihood, a pennsylvania court decision of separating mail in ballots, violated the u.s. constitution. well, i think that, that, i think i can't question the validity of what they're saying. as a matter of law act, i don't necessarily agree with that. it's a matter that has to be determined, but it is the one issue which is fundamental, is that even if the court or ultimately did get to determine that it violated the law, it would have to once again affect the number of ballots that would make a difference in the election, that's a fundamental principle that every court recognizes, including the united states supreme court. so as a matter of academic interest. and it may or may not have been in violation of u.s. constitution, but it would make any difference. i think that might be one of the things the court had in mind when it, when it analogues to wait until after the election. presumably going to tell me the number of dead people also who voted won't affect those margins.

a long history, dating back to 1999 when klain served as chief counsel, including during the clarence thomas nomination hearings and served as ebola czar. >> trump administration response to the crisis has clearly failed. >> bitdden continues to mull hi selections for cabinet secretaries. senator bernie sanders is ramping up his campaign to become labor secretary, telling cnn he would say yes if offered the position. >> if i had a portfolio that allowed me to stand up and fight for working families, would i do it, yes, i would. >> president-elect biden says he hopes to name some cabinet members by thanksgiving with more decisions coming later in the year. meanwhile, biden today spoke with pope francis as he is set to become only the second catholic president in u.s. history. as for ore foreither foreign le stack of congratulatory messages are sitting at the state department untouched as the trump administration continues to block the biden transition team from accessing those messages or using the department's resources. the biden transition team pushing back on comments from a board member

she clerked for supreme court justice clarence thomas and works at jones-day, one of the trump campaign mcgahn is a partner. she always has been a star at the lakeland florida christian school, her perfect english score on the act, four high school sports teams, took piano lessons for nine years, first in her class at university of florida law school, deeply religious and talks about her faith in a way that a lot of people agree with. she told her alumni magazine faith and living are not two separate parts of my life. i think of my work as work i am doing unto the lord and i want to do my best for him. i continue to strive to serve him, and i think that means giving your absolute best to whatever you are doing and serving with a focus, not to glorify yourself but to glorify christ. and at the age of 33 she is now a federal judge for life. part of a federal judiciary remade by graham, mcconnell and trump. the other four federal judges approved in the last 30 hours of senate work, they are ages 38, 45, 39, 40. all appointed for life. all with the power to reshape american law and life for

clarence thomas and the supreme court and the whole list and let me of public officials who offered cosmeticnge but not substance change. we are in a deep and disturbing set of crises and we need peopl who are gog to act to curb the greeof billiaires and provide relief to working people, but we also need people were going to speak out and stand up against racism and the resurgence of white nationalism. i am not confident biden is heading in that direction, which is what we need to continue to build a movement. juan: barbara ransby, i would ask about one person who has not yet been named but could be, someone who's record you know well as a chicagoan, that is rahm emanuel, the former mayor of chicago, who is being talked about, mention is the possible secretary of transportation. i'm wondering your thoughts on that and whether that would be a further mistake by president-elect and also that rahm emanuel, since he left office, has gone back into the corporate world in terms of advising companies on mergers and acquisitions. >> i think you probably know my answer to that. chicagoans come the ch

among the republican appointees in addition to antonin scalia and clarence thomas, were there any ofdeology? of textualist and originalist. david: no. justice kennedy and rehnquist were conservatives. but originalism were really justice scalia and thomas. justice o'connor and kennedy basically thought we had 200 years of unprecedented things like equal protection of the law and due process of law that were not defined in 1787, and they didn't have a lot of regard to figure out what the understanding was of all those questions. so no, it was not a court that was dominated by notions of originalism as it is now. susan: these questions are important in understanding how the decisions unfolded. we'll come back to them as the events play out. so just this week, the morning after the election in 2000, neither candidate al gore nor george bush had achieved 200 -- 270 electoral votes. president bush, then governor bush, won 29 states. 246 electoral votes. vice president al gore 18 states plus d.c. with 260. and the focus then turned to florida, which at the time had 25, now 29 electoral coll

amy: in addition to that, clarence thomas is the only remaining judge who gave the election to bush in 2000. he added that these three justices,ourt so to get to five they only need one more about any of the ultraconservate gorsuch and alito. >> it is not hard to imagine another bush v gore scenario. the really shocking thing about brett kavanaugh's opinions in the wisconsin case, which was so sloppy and so inaccurate, was that he actually cited bush v gore in his opinion in the supreme court supposedly said don't cite this as a precedent. he not only did that, it had only been coted once in 20 years by chris thomas. and kavanaugh sites bush v gore as a proceeded for potentially throwing out democratic votes in the future. they have been open about this plan here. the republican party wants to rerun bush v gore. they want to litigate this election in every way possible and they want to throw out votes cast by democrats and they want the supreme court to once again declare a republican president the winner of the election. i think that would lead to the vegas legitimacy crisis in americ

why is it always our people, clarence thomas, alito, kavanaugh, the left has declared war on all thingsonservative when it comes to the courts. as chairman of the committee, i have shepherded 220 nominations -- 135 nominations, judge barrett is on the court, i'm chairman and i was proud to do it. i have worked with democrats but they seem intent on destroying our nominees and would you vote for judge barrett's, yes or no? >> this next question is for mr. harrison. can you tell us whether there should be more than nine judges on the supreme court, would you support adding more justices? in terms of this -- i'm going to respond to him and then go to your question. what i hate is that you are talking about liberal judges and conservative judges. why should they be fair and impartial? waytics is getting in the -- i thought justices were supposed to be blind, not conservative -- you can see conservative but you can see liberal? that is why people hate politics. as it relates to packing the court -- i have been clear on this and i will be clear again. this is the stuff i pushed back on on my

not entirely clear, but let's say they get her, the most conservative justices on this court of clarence thomas both have sided with the plaintiffs in the past to overturn the aca. they'll need those two and two more. likely suspects are brett kavanaugh and neil gorsuch. two trump appointees who have not ruled on an aca case on the supreme court. it's not clear where they will stand. some have hopes of holding on to the vote of brett kavanaugh. he recently wrote skeptically attempts to railroad through, otherwise constitutional laws by looking at an obscure illegal provision in there. so they have to get all of those justices. they are probably not going to get chief justice roberts who believed the individual mandate was constitutional in 2012 to begin with. three democratic appointed justices also will be very difficult to get for them. chris? >> an incredibly fascinating and incredibly consequential debate about to start. sahil, thank you very much. >>> next, georgia's republican secretary of state says he isn't going anywhere. why senators from his own party want him to resign as votes in t

in fact, if you look at the difference between thurgood marshall and the other guy, clarence thomas,you will see it's not just a question of color. it's a question of viewpoint and belief. the other question is what happened? when did the white house lose and these are the places? interestingly enough, steve, and i love your take on this, they 50 -- 15 dollar minimum wage winds in florida. 15 dollars beat trump, beat biden, beat them all. the bottom line is peoples pay is -- has been stagnating for 40 years. people are struggling! we know that so much of what we call racism blows through the economy. if i am told i can't read this apartment, the reason might be racial, but the effect is my family budget. if i am not getting paid right because i'm getting underpaid because of my race, that affects my family budget. if i cannot get alone. so many things that we call racism have a direct economic impact that shows that this bifurcated thing of race versus class is nonsense. it's always been both, and we have to treat it like it's pope. now we get to the dnc. i will just say this. with n

two weeks later on october 14th, justice clarence thomas issued a statement that appeared to support the narrowing of the court's interpretation on section 230. the very next day the chair man announced they would seek to clarify the meaning of section 230. on that day senator graham announced they would post a subpoena to the companies over the content moderation and the context of this in addition to everything is that senator cruz is talking about a blockbuster story from "the new york post." senator holly is on fox and the floor and the committee itself is putting out a campaign style video that sort of alarmingly says hunter biden's e-mails and text censorship so they re- attempted to pass the bill on section 230 without going to any committee markup or vote and on friday, senator graham announced the ceos would testify before the senate judiciary committee on november 17th. this is for electoral purposes. do not let the united states senate bully you into carrying the water for those that want to advance misinformation and don't let the specter of the amendment to the antitrust

. >> at stake, a seat on the supreme court for clarence thomas. the man in charge?joe biden to have a fair hearing. joe biden's leadership was very weak. >> almost 30 years later, thomas sits on the supreme court. biden is president-elect. and even before the election, anita hill had made a decision. >> i think joe biden is the person who should be elected in november. >> so you're going to vote for joe biden? >> yes. >> would you be willing to work with him? >> my commitment is to finding solutions. i am more than willing to work with him. >> is it just about the fact that he's running against donald trump? or is it more about joe biden? >> actually, it's more about the survivors of gender violence. that's really what it's about. >> hill, an attorney, is a professor of gender politics. she was 35 when she testified before biden's committee. accusing thomas of sexually harassing her when she worked for him at the equal employment opportunity commission. her testimony was graphic. >> he referred to the size of his own penis as being larger than normal. >> her motives

why is it always our people, clarence thomas, alito, kavanaugh, the left has declared war on all thingsive when it comes to the courts. as chairman of the committee, i have shepherded 220 nominations -- 135 nominations, judge barrett is on the court, i'm chairman and i was proud to do it. i have worked with democrats but they seem intent on destroying our nominees and would you vote for judge barrett's, yes or no? >> this next question is for mr. harrison. can you tell us whether there should be more than nine judges on the supreme court, would you support adding more justices? in terms of this -- i'm going to respond to him and then go to your question. what i hate is that you are talking about liberal judges and conservative judges. why should they be fair and impartial? waytics is getting in the -- i thought justices were supposed to be blind, not conservative -- you can see conservative but you can see liberal? that is why people hate politics. as it relates to packing the court -- i have been clear on this and i will be clear again. this is the stuff i pushed back on on my own part

i remember when he was the head of judiciary, clarence thomas and aany a hill, a very -- anita hill, very difficult moment. and joe biden would show up. you are right, joe biden is not as sharp as he was in the early 90s or 2000s. he's 78 years old. but i thought it was an outright libel for the trump administration to go after him saying he's a dodd 'erring old man. when he comes out late at night he might be a tired imagine. throughout his life he has had a stutter. he befriended on thered people who have had that issue and told them not to let that define them. i just think if you look at it in that light you wouldn't necessarily question his leadership. i think he's been a strong hand in this campaign. dana point out the success of jennifer o'malley dillon. but make no doubt, joe biden is the one setting the tone. i don't think you will have a question about his leadership. someone suggests maybe he's a puppet of the far left and it will control him. but how will he deal with mitch mcconnell if the republicans take control of the senate. you look at merrick garland and obamacare,

i agree with justice clarence thomas. i think this law has been applied way too broadly.ess should tighten the language on it. if instagram is doing it that's news to me. if they're doing that, there's no way that they deserve that kind of protection because they're acting like publishers, which do not qualify tore the immunity that 230 provides. maria: facebook obviously owns instagram, lee. and the protection of this section 230 was given to these companies when they first came on-board and they first were created because they were telling everyone that they were bulletin boards, that everybody could just put their opinions up on the bulletin boards. but clearly, social media has taken a side. as you heard the president talk about hunter biden during the election, twitter refused to hear anything about hunter biden and the deals that he had done overseas, while his father was sitting vice president. in fact, they blocked out the new york post's twitter handle because the new york post broke the story. lee: i mean, there's a reason why only one in 10 americans trust the

judge clarence thomas has indicated under the current definition of the section 230 law, this would beem as a publication and could remove their protections. so certainly. and this is particularly concerning because president trump and former vice president biden, their campaigns know more about the election than twitter and facebook's fact checkers, they've been working on this stuff for at least a year now. they're better informed. it is really biased. it is editorialization, definitely. maria: i'm on parler right now. i love being on parler. and there's an article from the federalist on parler. and it says gop's 2020 wins make a projected trump loss look very fishy indeed. a lot of people are questioning it. no one flagged anything on parler. you're looking at parler and you've got an opportunity to see ideas from all sides of the aisle. and that's what parler does. so do you see parler as a bulletin board and not a content creator? >> yeah, i call our bulletin board a town square for information and right now a town square where people can talk and get things out and be transparent

and justice clarence thomson to thomas sounded critical.ng in the question, i assume in most places there is no penalty for wearing a face mask -- or a mask during covid, but there is some degree if one does not wear it in certain settings. what if someone violates that command? say it's in similar terms to the mandate here, but no penalty. would they have standing to challenge the mandate to wear a mask? >> reporter: but all eyes really over the next 90 minutes as the arguments continue, they'll likely be on the newest justice, amy coney barrett, as well as president trump's two other picks, justices gorsuch and kavanaugh. if the chief justice sides with the liberals to uphold the affordable care act, any of those three justices could be the crucial fifth vote to uphold it or strike it down. if the court allows this case to proceed, it does come down to the individual mandate. it's something the chief justice upheld as a tax in 2012 but now that congress has reduced the penalty for not buying insurance to zero dollars, the argument from th