durbin: well, that's a good question.o one has challenged them before and that's what we're doing next week in the senate judiciary committee. we're going to establish a code of ethics and requirements for disclosure of gifts and the like, as well as a standard for recusal of cases and standards to follow. it hasn't been done before, and it needs to be done now. and it's hard for me to understand why chief justice roberts can rationalize the disclosures before the public. when justice alito, for example, says, i do not have to report a trip on a private jet to a fishing vacation because the seat on the plane that i was going to occupy would have been vacant if i didn't sit in. think about the logic the hind that. the first five seats anytime he wishes or to meals in restaurant if the food is not going to be used. i mean, that's something that's not defensible and indicates the position many justices, at least some justices have taken. leigh ann: and i've mentioned clarence thomas and justice alito who are two of the subje

durbin: thank you. >> thank you for watching. you can watch the program again and our other programs at washington post live.com. until next time. >> >> order your copy of the 118th congressional directory now available at c-spanshop.org. it is your access to the federal government with bio and contact information for every house and senate member and important information on congressional committees, the president's cabinet, federal agencies, and state governors. scan the code at the right to order your copy today or go to c-anshop.org. it is $29.95 plus shipping a handling, and every purchase helps support our nonpfit operations. >> this week on the c-span network, the house and senate are in session with legislation to reauthorize the faa and its programs. the senate will work on its version of the 2024 defense program and a policy bill. coming up wednesday, israeli president will address a joint meeting of congress in commemoration of israel's 75th anniversary. on wednesday, two irs whistllowers will testify before the hsever

durbin: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority whip. mr. durbin: i have nine requests for committees to meet during today's session of the senate. they have the approval of the majority and minority leaders. the presiding officer: duly noted. mr. durbin: mr. president, just about every week now, we learn something new and deeply troubling about the justices serving on the supreme court. the highest court in the land in the united states and their conduct outside the courtroom. from unreported luxury getaways with billionaire benefactors who have business before the court, to donor-funded teaching positions that double as all expense paid vacations, to a political megadonor buying a home that belongs to a justice's relative and then allowing that relative to continue living there rent free. we've learned all of this in just a few months. and last week another troubling report. according to the associated press, justice sotomayor used her taxpayer funded court staff to help sell copies

and i told senator durbin, i'm trying to work with you as best i can. we've done a lot of good thing. but this is going to effect the operation of the committee down the road. reporter: so this -- you're saying this makes it less likely for you to support nominees? sen. graham: this makes it less likely for the committee to function. because one part of the committee is trying to destroy the court in a way that's constitutionally laughable and scary. thank you. yes, sir? reporter: what would you like to see roberts do to address some of the issues people are bringing up? sen. graham: i think the whole point of this conversation is to let him make that decision. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2023] >> if you ever miss any of c-span's coverage, you can find it any time online at c-span.org. videos of key hearings, debates and other events feature markers that guide you to interesting and news worthy h

we are speaking with the senate number two democrat senator durbin of illinois per senator durbin thanks so much for joining us today. >> good to be with you. >> it has been a big week for you. you just got back from the nato conference ever going to talk about that in a little bit but first i want to start with a very timely hot topic and that is supreme court ethics. you have announced that you will take up legislation next week as chair of the judiciary committee in your community that would require the supreme court to adopt an ethics plan so first of all, what sort of ethics do you think the supreme court should adopt? >> well, the bottom line is this. should have the same code of ethics as every other federal judge in america for those e members of the supreme court are being treated differently. in fact, there being exempt frm requirements to face members of congress and other federal judges. disclosures have come out recently, lavish gifts, circumstances that are hard to explain involving these justices really compel us to do something for thehe sake of the court initial reaction

senator durbin has decided to take up legislation that i think is fundamentally constitutionally flawed. should make every american afraid. what am i talking about. two things can be true at the same time. liberal democrats have been trying to destroy the roberts court for quite a wild because they don't like the outcome of certain decisions. their words, not mine. now we have a high profile case of justices taking a trip, taking trips, two things can be true. the court finally needs to address that issue. i think they do, i believe they will, and congress needs to stay out of the court's business. the supreme court was founded by the constitution of the united states. it was created as a separate branch of government. one thing we are going to do as republicans is stand up for the constitution's separation of powers when it comes to the supreme court. this is what schumer started. went in front of the supreme court and basically threatened by name members of the supreme court. won't know what hit you with this decision if you pay the price. this is the majority leader of the united sta

senator durbin thanks for joining us today. it good to be with you. >> and has been a big week for me and for you. you just got back from the nato conference and we'll talk about that and a little bit but first i want to start with a very timely hot topic and that is the supreme court ethics. you have announced that you will take up legislation next week as chair of the judiciary committee your committee would require the supreme court to adopt an ethics plan. first of all what sort of ethics do you think the supreme court should adopt? >> well the bottom line is the same code of ethics as every other federal judge in america for those nine members of the supreme court have been treated differently being exempt from requirements to face members of congress and other federal judges. disclosures that have come out recently gives and circumstances that are hard to explain involving these justices compel us to do something for the sake of the court. my initial reaction was to turn to the chief justice and say please rule on this no

had durbin not lobbied him about the bill? yeah, so let me ask you this.ing i would obviously look at. - i had to get this on the senator's radar. just to tell you, the 1998 higher education act passed unanimously. the higher education act, good bill-- at the very last minute, someone snuck in a two-line provision that said you can't discharge your student debt through bankruptcy. - really? - and we found-- - from some bank. - we were trying to figure out where it came from. - who? - it turns out the person whose idea it was, was a bureaucrat at the department of education. and that guy now is a truck driver in colorado. - oh, what a great thing. - so i mean, i thought i'd tell you that. but knowing what you know about d.c., does that surprise you, that story, that somebody like that-- - it still does. yeah, something like that, because that's really weird. - yeah. thank you so much for your time. - okay. let's take this off. - appreciate it. - i'm running late for my lunch. - so senator durbin has this bill that would reverse that provision. so now, you w

>> committee chairman durbin, committee ranking member graham and distinguished members of the senateiary committee, my name is michelle goodwin and i am a chancellor professor at the university of irvine and the abraham penske visiting professor at harvard law school. in its 2021 2022 term, the united states supreme court decisively undercut stare decisis and the rule of law when it overturned roe v. wade and planned parenthood v. casey. in doing, so the supreme court unleashed a torrent of unnecessary uncertainty, fear that the future of the protections for women's health and their rights to life, liberty and safety. justice thomas's concurring opinion placed all privacy rights on highlight, save for interracial marriage, a status enjoyed by the justice himself. it for all other privacy rights, including marriage equality, access to contraception, freedom from state imposed sterilization and more, his concurrence remains a cause for serious alarm. despite the promise protections articulated by the majority and justice kavanaugh, that freedom of travel would be preserved and that it'

chairman durbin. >> thanks, senator. mister chairman, when i heard them describe your background involving work of capitol hill with the house ethics committee? >> so let me give you a hypothetical and see if you can help me get to a conclusion. let's assume that, like the supreme court justices, our congressional recess starts somewhere in august, and a really good friend of mine of many years decides he wants to pay for my wife and myself to fly on his charter plane to a distant destination, and then spend a week or two on a very palatial yacht of his. and then he will return me home after i've had my vacation. what kind of responsibility do i have, as a member of congress, to disclose any of that? >> the first requirement you would have us to call the committee to seek approval to accept the travel in the first place. but then you would have to disclose the travel itself, if you were approved, the travel itself, the amount of the travel, and the source of -- who funded aspects of the travel. >> when you say disclosed,

durbin. ms. ernst. mrs. feinstein. mr. fetterman. mrs. fischer. mrs. gillibrand. mr. graham. mr. grassley. mr. hagerty. ms. hassan. mr. hawley. mr. heinrich. mr. hickenlooper. ms. hirono. mr. hoeven. mrs. hyde-smith. mr. johnson. mr. kaine. mr. kelly. mr. kennedy. mr. king. ms. klobuchar. mr. lankford. mr. lee. mr. lujan. ms. lummis. mr. manchin. mr. markey. mr. marshall. mr. mcconnell. mr. menendez. mr. merkley. mr. moran. mr. mullin. ms. murkowski. mr. murphy. mrs. murray. mr. ossoff. mr. padilla. mr. paul. mr. peters. mr. reed. mr. ricketts. mr. risch. mr. romney. ms. rosen. mr. rounds. mr. rubio. mr. sanders. mr. schatz. mr. schmitt. mr. schumer. mr. scott of florida. mr. scott of south carolina. mrs. shaheen. ms. sinema. ms. smith. ms. stabenow. mr. sullivan. mr. tester. mr. thune. mr. tillis. mr. tuberville. mr. van hollen. mr. vance. mr. warner. mr. warnock. ms. warren. mr. welch. mr. whitehouse. mr. wicker. mr. wyden. mr. young. the clerk: senators voting in the affirmative, braun, britt, collins, ernst, graham, hyde-smith, is kennedy, lee, lummis, marshall, mcconnell, pa

durbin, aye. ms. klobuchar, aye. ms. hirono, aye. the clerk: mrs. feinstein, aye. mr. menendez, aye. vote: the clerk: mr. padilla, aye. the presiding officer: the ayes are 53, the nays are 46. the nominee is confirmed. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table and the president will be immediately notified of the senate's action. under the previous order, the senate will resume legislative session for the consideration of s. 2226, which the the clerk will report. the clerk: calendar number 119, s. 22267 of 6, a bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2024 for the department of defense and so forth and for other purposes. a senator: mr. president. the presiding officer: the senator from texas. mr. cruz: i ask for six minutes for debate. borrow without objection. mr. cruz: i call up my amendment numbered 926. the presiding officer: roich. the clerk: senator from texas for himself and others proposes amendment 926. mr. cruz: this is a bipartisan bill. this is a cruz-manchin-ernst fetterman bill, which demonstrat

but this legislation that senator durbin and others are proposing is called. if it were more accurately named, it seems to me might be the kermit gosnell tribute act. it would eliminate all restrictions at the state or federal level on access to abortion. the bill says it supersedes and applies to all federal and state laws, and that no law and conflict with this shall be enforced. it allows the access to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, including late term abortions. it doesn't speak to infanticide, but we can imagine what would come next. the hyde amendment, which you alluded to, which has provided, for many years now, since the 70s, that no tax payer funds should be used, could be used to fund abortion would be overruled. all parental consent and parental notification laws if your child became, your adolescent child became pregnant, you would have no right to know of their seeking access to abortion or certainly no right to consent. if someone wanted to get an abortion because they had eight female baby and they wanted a male child, this law w

and i don't know whether dick durbin is here, he was supposed to be coming down as well as clark.e she is here as well. they were. ok. we are all set, then. -- there you are, we are all set then. look, folks. jill and i want to thank you and all of your family for coming. i hope you have a good time. there is nothing formal about this. this is your house, this is the people's house. this is, this is the night that my favorite picture. i will end with this. my favorite picture that we have in this residence as well as home is when our boys were seven and eight years old at one of the congressional picnics and their standing down there and they're both looking at the moment and the white house is in the background. it's my favorite picture of all time. and i just want to know, i hope you enjoy the night, and i hope you are able to spend some time with one another as well. you don't get a lot of opportunity to do that. it reminds me of the work that we have to do, you know, for all the disagreements we have. we have got to remember at the end of the day we are friends. that is how it

and dick durbin is here, he was supposed to be coming down as well as with clark. -- whip clark.l and i are here and we want to thank you and all the families for coming. there is nothing formal about this. this is your house, the people's house. my favorite picture that we have in this residence as well as home is when our boys were seven and eight years old. at one of the congressional picnics and they are standing down there and looking at the monument and the white house is in the background. what of my favorite pictures of all time. i hope you enjoy tonight and i hope you are able to spend time with one another as well. you don't get a lot of opportunity to do that. it reminds me of the work we have to do. for all the disagreements we have we have to remember at the end of the day we're friends. we have to be good to each other. i mean it. i think we are getting there. i want to thank you all for coming. i will not say anything more and do you want to say anything madame vice president? vp harris: thank you all, the sacrifices you make really does make a difference in the sa

thank you for joining with us today, we're speaking with the senator's number two democrat senator durbin of illinois. it been a big week for you, you just got back to the n.a.t.o. conference and we'll talk about that in a little bit. i want to talk about a timely hot topic, that's supreme court ethics. you have announced you'll take up legislation next week as chair of the judiciary committee in your committee, that would require the supreme court to adopt an ethics plan. so, first of all, what sort of ethics do you think that the supreme court should adopt? >> well, the bottom line is this, they should have the same code of ethics as every other federal judge in america. those nine members of the supreme court are being treated differently. in fact, they're being exempt from requirements that face members of congress and other federal judges and the disclosures have come out recently, lavish gifts and circumstances that are hard to explain, involving these justices, really compel us to do something for the sake of the court. my initial reaction was to turn to the chief justice and say p

we have senator durbin, the lead chair of the judiciary committee asking for a vote. we have dozens and dozens of senators who want to get this done. we need this vote. we have republicans, democrats, military and veterans groups, national security leaders, retired u.s. ambassadors to afghanistan and flag officers all on the same page. they're not debating the knew yangses of every -- nuances of every little word because that bill has been out there now for two years. we have strengthened it vastly in response to our colleagues. we have made changes to it. and it is ready to go. just like our afghan allies have been ready to go because they have been here for nearly two years waiting for us to keep our covenant. ones that have taken bullets to the face, ones that have lost legs, they are in our country waiting for us to keep our covenant. until we get this done, we are essentially asking our allies, those that took shrapnel across the body, those that took bullets to their face, to rebuild their lives on the top of a trap door that could fall out from under them any s

we'll see what happens when the senate comes back, and people are asking dick durbin some additional chris, let's talk about that affirmative action decision. now, since that decision came down that got rid of race conscious decision macon in college decisions, there has already been a complaint that was filed against harvard's legacy admissions policy, with the departments office of civil rights. how -- tell me a little bit about this process, how is this going to? eric >> yeah, this is already something that president biden has mentioned. this is something that comes up in justice sotomayor's dissent. this is something that even justice gorsuch mentioned in his concurrence. legacy admissions are increasingly unpopular with the public, with republicans, with the justices. so, we've got this complaint. but it does seem like there is a possibility that the education department, civil rights division, who is going to be tasked with looking into that under president biden already. so, we're going to have an investigation. they're going to look at legacy admissions, both under this compl

senator wicker who i note is the congress ranking republican on the armed services committee, senator durbinthe chair of the judiciary committee, senator tillis and senator mullen and, of course, this bill is supported by many, many other senators. in fact, the majority of the u.s. senate. which sounds to me like when you have the numbers, you should be able to have a vote. and that is what i am asking for today. i ami pushing this because this is our moment. we have had two years to show the world whether or not we're going to stand with those that stood with us. two years we have worked on this bill. ourav colleagues have had plenty of time to to look at it. they've had input. it was introduced year. but you know who else is watching?wh our military is watching every single one of the o senators in this chamber have been approached by apr member of our military whether it's on veterans day, whether it's on memorial day, whether it's just walking down the street. those that served in afghanistan have come to to us and said, hey, i wouldn't be here today if this guy hadn't stood with me on t

durbin, aye. the presiding officer: mr. cruz, no. the clerk: mr. cruz, no. the clerk: mr. tester, aye. the clerk: mr. daines, no. vote: the clerk: mr. markey, aye. the clerk: mr. van hollen, aye. the clerk: mr. booker, aye. the clerk: mr. risch, no. the clerk: mr. schatz, aye. the clerk: mr. menendez, aye. the presiding officer: the yeas are # 55, the nays are 44, the motion is agreed to. the clerk: nomination, environmental protection agency, david m. uhlmann, to be assistant administrator. the presiding officer: the senate will proceed to legislative session and be in a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak therein for up to ten minutes each. mr. schumer: i move to proceed to calendar number 119, s. 2226. the presiding officer: the clerk: , motion to proceed to calendar number 119, zest 226, a bill to authorize military activities at the department of defense. mr. schumer: i send a cloture motion to the desk. the presiding officer: the clerk will report. the clerk: cloture motion, we, the undersigned senators, in accordance with the provisions of ru

chair mary: senator durbin's. sen. durbin:'s thank you. i would like to address an announcement this week in chicago from northwestern university. there was a breakthrough in their research related to the brain. and it has a personal element to it. we lost two of the pillars of the united states senate to brain cancer, senator kaine and senator kennedy -- senator mccain and senator kennedy. i understand treatment is limited by and large to surgical intervention because of the blood brain barrier -- i will stop trying to seleka ever -- sound like i ever attended medical school. [laughter] knew that but in reading the news account of this northwestern university breakthrough, it appears that they have now opened the blood brain barrier to allow drugs to pass through to the brain, meaning that unusable chemotherapy drugs can now reach brain tumors. so there is an option beyond surgery, or there could be soon. i will not go any further to try to describe it. but it also said in the article, that this could have an application and parkinson's a

dick durbin and sheldon whitehouse are with us. thank you for taking the time. question i have had throughout the course of the debate, we saw the news reports and public response, we have seen no movement from republican senators on this issue. have you behind the scenes had any engagement about a way to try to bring republicans onboard? >> well, i'm surprised, in fact disappointed, because ethical issues involving the supreme court have been bipartisan in the recent past whether it's an issue of declaring stock ownership in making it a public disclosure or cameras in the courtroom. these have always been bipartisan issues. but yet, when it comes to the supreme court apparently the republicans in the senate are taking the same position as the supreme court. it's none of our business and we want nothing to do with it. the public knows better. that's why the opinion of the public on the court itself has plummeted. chief justice roberts has the power and opportunity now to take control of the situation. he has failed to do that. i hope he changes his mind soon. bu

led with senator graham, along with senators coons, moran, blumenthal, murkowski, shaheen, wicker, durbin, tillis, and mullin. those are just the people who are cosponsoring this bill and there is going to be -- there's many others that are supporting on both sides of the aisle. what is this about? well, it's about our national security. it's about a covenant -- a covenant that we have made and we must keep to those who stand with us on the battlefield. this bill does right by afghans who worked alongside our troops and shows the world that the united states of america, when we make a promise, we keep it. nearly 80,000 afghans who sought refuge in our country are currently in limbo. in just the last few weeks, one of them who was a translator for the military who was working two jobs to support his family who was living in legal lynne bow -- limbo was murdered in the middle of the night as a lyft driver. is that keeping our covenant? is that keeping our promise, many of those risked their own lives and their family's safety to protect servicemembers, that's why this pill is supported by t

durbin: mr. president, just about every week now, we learn something new and deeply troubling about the justices serving on the supreme court. the highest court in the land in the united states and their conduct outside the courtroom. from unreported luxury getaways with billionaire benefactors who have business before the court, to donor-funded teaching positions that double as all expense paid vacations, to a political megadonor buying a home that belongs to a justice's relative and then allowing that relative to continue living there rent free. we've learned all of this in just a few months. and last week another troubling report. according to the associated press, justice sotomayor used her taxpayer funded court staff to help sell copies of her book. in particular by pressing libraries, community colleges, and other public institutions to buy additional copies of her memoir and children's books in conjunction with her speaking engagements. let me tell you, if i or any member of the senate fai

congress, including benny thompson, senator tammy duckworth, represented danny davis and senator dick durbinecovery from covert. and who have long thought to honor the till family. it's not due to any of them to the till family, it's another to be with you again. you know, when i was preparing these remarks i quite frankly and my colleagues will understand this, i found myself trying to temper my anger as i was writing this. i'm not joking. i can't fathom, i can't fathom what it must've been like. it's hard to believe, i was 12 years old, and i just, i know no matter how much time has passed, how many birthdays, how many events, how many anniversaries, it's hard to relive this. brings it all back which we talked about wee talked about as if it happened yesterday for the images in your head, the things you remember. but it's inspiring to see how many of your family has continued as mothers courage to find the faith in pain, the purpose and pain. that's a remarkable thing, it seems to me. insisting on an open casket, if casket for her murdered, and i might add, maimed and mutilated son. 14 yea

thank you, chair durbin. and mister chairman, ranking member graham, members of the committee, it's an honor to be here, thank you for inviting me. i also want to acknowledge and say how honored i am to be here with my fellow witnesses. i think we all have something to contribute to this conversation. as chair durbin said, my name is jeremy fogel, retired judge of the northern district of california. i served as a federal judge for 20 years and for seven years as director of the federal judicial center. and relevant to it, we'll be discussing today, i worked very closely with the judicial conference and it's committees when i was ftc director. my primary responsibilities were overseeing policy related research and educational curriculum from the judicial branch, including judicial education about ethical standards and financial reporting requirements. the chief justice turner governing board. had regular contact with him and with the circuit and district courts. the leadership, very pleased to say i have coal

so after the, you know, the financial crisis in the late 2000s, senator durbin said let's punish banks reduce interchange on debit cards same exact thing now be on larger scale if we look back to history used to be able to earn, you know -- delta miles, continental airline miles all on debit cards and when senator durbin got his amendment passed it literally killed detect reward overnight you can no longer earn on a debit card and that impacted lower income american who is couldn't get debit credit cardsd banks raised fees on checking accounts used to get free checking so consumers saw a huge net loss no more points on debit cards, and you know the federal reserve did a study 98% of rea tailers did not save on to consumers they kept prices the same or raised them in many cases so it is the sail senators rying to do for all credit cardings you know he's in the pocket of the big box retailers, you know wal-mart and target stand to make billions of dollars. and consumers will lose. so it is basically like taking value we get today from our points and giving it to huge retailers i think, y

including a representative thompson, senator tammy duckworth, representative danny davis senator dick durbindy recovery from covid he's recovering from covid right now. who have long fought to honor the till family. it's not new to any of them. to the till family it's an honor to be with you again. what i was preparing these remarks i quite frankly and my colleagues will understand this, i found myself trying to temper my anger is i was writing it. i am not joking. i cannot fathom, i cannot fathom what it must have been like. it's hard to believe i was 12 years old. i know that no matter how much time has passed, how make birthdays, how many events, him a anniversaries it is hard to relive this. it brings it all back. but we were talking as if it happened yesterday the images in your head, the things you remember. but it is inspiring to see how many of your family have continues as a mother's have the courage to find faith and purpose in pain. that is a remarkable thing it seems to be. insisting on an open casket for her murdered and i might add a maimed and mutilated son. fourteen years old

chairman. >> thank you senator durbin. senator blumenthal. >> thank you senator ossoff for having this hearing. as one of the authors of the sesta fosta bill, i am proud of that legislation. what you are talking about needs to be addressed but that is not a reason not to address the victims of a plethora of people's that tech platforms no they are enabling and propagating and empowering. as somebody who has written a variety of legislation and enforced it, legislation can never be wholly good. we have to accept there will be other consequences intended or unintended that we need to safeguard against. let me just come right to the point here. we have had a number of hearings. one of them involving sam altman. you referred to it. in that hearing and in the subsequent hearing in the committee on intellectual property and copyright, everybody agreed section 230 does not apply to ai. do members of this panel disagree? and if so please -- >> i do not agree or disagree, i do not know. now, how do we interpret it from the legal pe

durbin, aye. mr. risch, aye. mr. braun, no. the clerk: mr. crapo, aye. mr. daines, aye. mrs.hyde-smith, aye. the clerk: mrs. capito, aye. mr. cornyn, no. the clerk: mr. warner, aye. the clerk: mr. romney, aye. the clerk: mr. boozman, no. mr. johnson, no. the clerk: mr. kelly, aye. the clerk: mr. wyden, aye. mr. van hollen, aye. mr. hagerty, aye. the clerk: mr. budd, no. mr. peters, aye. the clerk: mr. blumenthal, aye. the presiding officer: on this vote, the yeas are 65, the nays are 28, under the previous order requiring 60 votes for the adoption of this amendment, the amendment is agreed to. mr. schumer: mr. president. the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. schumer: again, i'll remind members, we closed the vote before everybody came. we're going to keep doing that. let's stay here and get as much done as we can this afternoon. thank you. the presiding officer: the senator from kentucky. mr. paul: i call up my amendment, 222, and i ask unanimous consent that the debate be four minutes and equally divided. the presiding officer: without objection, the clerk will rep

it was it was harlan crow's lawyer i wrote to durbin right? so i was getting done right there. what really struck me about that letter was the suggestion that congress no legitimate purpose in investigating anything crow might or might not have given the justice thomas and my response, that is actually the most important textual check on the supreme in the constitution is congress's express power to impeach supreme court justices. like maybe we don't all agree that that the the stories that the revelations and the propublica reporting gives rise to an impeachable offense. but the notion that congress lacks the authority to decide that question right and to actually investigate whether individual justices have engaged in impeach liable conduct if is both like horrifying to me as a separation of powers person. but such like perfect of the moment we're in and as a civics textbook person, i think texas civics textbook, no, just civics textbooks. it's going to make a generic the part that is striking to me is that in the case congress has made the decision to begin articles of impea

we have senator durbin, the lead chair of the judiciary committee asking for a vote. we have dozens and dozens of senators who want to get this done. we need this vote. we have republicans, democrats, military and veterans groups, national security leaders, retired u.s. ambassadors to afghanistan and flag officers all on the same page. they're not debating the knew yangses of every -- nuances of every little word because that bill has been out there now for two years. we have strengthened it vastly in response to our colleagues. we have made changes to it. and it is ready to go. just like our afghan allies have been ready to go because they have been here for nearly two years waiting for us to keep our covenant. ones that have taken bullets to the face, ones that have lost legs, they are in our country waiting for us to keep our covenant. until we get this done, we are essentially asking our allies, those that took shrapnel across the body, those that took bullets to their face, to rebuild their lives on the top of a trap door that could fall out from under them any s

unfortunately, this is why the congressional black caucus had to call on chairman durbin to reform thee slip process. not only for the military but for federal judges and other important positions. it is past time, it is long past time for these times of traditions which had a history in segregation and jim crow to still be used in the united states senate in 2023. we've called for that to end or to be drastically reformed, and we're hoping that chairman durbin will take us up on that request. >> and this defense bill has been described as dead on arrival in the senate. it goes to the senate where democrats are expected to strip out these hot button issues taxed to it. it still has to go back to the house. i'm curious, if some of those provisions somehow are left in the legislation coming out of the senate. back to the house. is there any chance you would vote for that? do you think the vast majority of democrats would have any hope of supporting that piece of legislation? or might we end up in a situation where this defense spending bill is really just held up for months on end becaus

i watched dick durbin, here's another beauty. i watched dick durbin saying i can't believe you took them. he couldn't even believe it. it's a very, it's a two-tiered system but it's worse, a very corrupt system. >> sean: my question to you is when you see hillary had top-secret classified information in the conclusion of jim comey, no prosecutor would ever prosecute. 33,000 subpoenaed emails deleted. devices destroyed. the fbi in early october of 2016 sent to agents over the pond to meet with christopher steele. they offered him million dollars to verify any part of that. >> mr. trump: to get trump. >> sean: they couldn't verify it. in late october even though it wasn't verified, they use that, according to andrew mccabe, deputy fbi director, without that dirty dossier, they would never have gotten those fisa warrant approved. they knew they couldn't verify it. the durham report confirm none of it was true and yet they would use it as a backdoor to spy on your campaign and your presidency. is it a dual system of justice? >> mr. t

a response from senator dick durbin to the court decision. durbin said, he was quite disappointed in the supreme court ruling, effectively barring the use of race. as a factor in college admissions. george wallace could not have said it better himself senator. it's almost impossible at this point to tell the difference between the racist rhetoric of the 1950s, segregationists and the self-styled antiracist of today. after the ruling, a new york city public school parent and cofounder of the advocacy group, asian wave alliance, she cheered the saying, saying, i told my daughter that today's a big day. they added affirmative action. is that we've always been fighting for, she asked? i said yes. and why would she celebrate? because prior to this decision, there was no group were subjected to discrimination in academics, then asian americans. according to data cited in this case, harvard applicants and top academic decile the top 10 percent, had different chances of admission depending on their race. 56 percent of black students in the top 10 per