in the aftermath of the tet offensive by then eugene mccarthy senator, eugene mccarthy of minnesota had already begun and insurgent campaign for the democratic nomination for president. mccarthy was out there as a candidate as an option as an anti-war option to lyndon johnson. and in march of 1968 in the first half of march 1968. johnson fared poorly surprisingly poorly in the new hampshire primary election eugene mccarthy won perhaps 42% of the vote a surprising number an astonishing result mccarthy didn't win the election. johnson whose name wasn't on the ballot. received about 49% of the votes it was clear though that johnson was wounded politically if eugene mccarthy could score that high of a percentage. an unexpected fashion in the first in the nation primary state, what was is what were his chances going to be later on johnson was looking at a real rough political road ahead of him. it was complicated by the emergence of the candidacy of robert f kennedy senator, robert f kennedy a younger brother of president john f kennedy and robert kennedy announced in mid-march 1968 that he

senator eugene mccarthy of minnesota had already begun an insurging campaign for president. mccarthy was out there as a candidate, as an anti-war option to lyndon johnson. in march of 1968 in first half of march, johnson fared surprisingly poorly in the new hampshire primary election. an astonishing result. he didn't win the election. johnson, whose name wasn't on the ballot received about 49% of the votes. it was clear though that johnson was wounded politically. if eugene mccarthy could score that high of a percentage in unexpected fashion in first of the nation primary state, what were his chances going to be later on. johnson was looking at a real rough political road ahead of him. it was complicated by the emergence of the candidacy of robert f. kennedy. senator robert f. kennedy, the younger brother of john kennedy. he announced he would join the presidential sweep stakes. he was going to present himself as a candidate for the democratic nomination. he declared the vietnam policy as bankrupt. the final factor that swung johnson was the counsel of an informal group of a

he had a big battle with eugene mccarthy who was strong in new york. that would have been a real tussle. hubert humphrey was backed by the establishment of the party. i do not know where to would have been gone -- where dale what have gone. -- would have gone. i think he could have. the convention in 68 was controlled by the bosses and old system of governors picking delegations. it would have been hard. it would have been better for the country to help bobby kennedy walk into that tall and red ligh-- rally the antiwar forces. it would have been great to have a real battle in the convention instead of on the streets of chicago. i am thrilled at the prospect that he would have lived and there would have been a debate over the war. it might have gone the right direction. it would have been a battle which we needed in the party and country. i hoped he would win. i can only predict -- i am pretty good at predicting elections thursday following tuesday. 2022 is going to be a cliffhanger. 2024 is going to be a cliffhanger. in our current situation, the 50-50

not a major figure in the united states congress named eugene mccarthy. but he steps forward. he turns on the sitting president of the united states, the head of his party, lyndon johnson and says i will run against johnson, i will stand as an anti-war candidate. and he shocks the punditry and probably most voters in the united states by almost defeating lyndon johnson in the first democratic primary in new hampshire in early 1968. he doesn't quite win, but he almost wins. suddenly it's like, huh, even in conservative new hampshire, people don't like the war in vietnam. not protesters, not radicals, not passivistings not new lefters. not black people -- i don't know if there were any black people in new hampshire in 1968, but kind of just regular folks don't like this war. well, into the fray jumps the junior but very well known senator from new york. bobby kennedy. the dead president's brother, who also says i, too, will stand against this war in vietnam, i, too, will challenge the seated president of the united states. johnson is horrified at what he sees as detrayal by his

eugene mccarthy. he steps forward. he turns on the sitting president of the united states, the head of his party when johnston said i will run against johnson. i will stand is the anti war candidate. he shocks the punditry and probably most voters in the united states. almost defeated lyndon johnson in the first democratic primary in new hampshire in early 1968. that's when he almost wins and suddenly it's like wow even in conservative new hampshire, people don't like the war in vietnam. not protesters, not radicals, not pacifists, new left or, black people, while there weren't black people in new hampshire in 1968, but kind of just regular folks. they don't like this war. into the frame jumps the senator from new york, bobby kennedy. the president's brother. he also says i too will stand against this war in vietnam. i too will challenge the sitting presidents of the united states. . johnson is horrified. he sees this is a betrayal by his own parties senatorial representatives. and it's a real moment of truth for him.

eugene, am i missing anything deeper here, or does mccarthy pretty much take orders from trump? the republicans really at the end of the day worried about what a 1/6 investigation might turn up? >> oh, absolutely. i think you're right on all counts there. i mean, it's just astounding. there was an insurrection at the capitol that threatened the lives of all members of congress, of the vice president on january 6th. that's to me and to any sensible person what needs to be investigated. yet the republicans have no interest in investigating that. they want to investigate everything else. they want to investigate black lives matter protests the previous summer. congressman jim banks from indiana, one of the two congressmen that nancy pelosi kicked off the committee while he was still on the committee sent out a release saying we're going to get to the bottom of the responsibility of capitol leadership and the biden administration. there was no biden administration on january 6th because joe biden hadn't taken office yet. but he said the trump administration's response. that's who re

eugene, talk to us about gop leader kevin mccarthy.mittee assignments from any republican who goes on to this panel. and also, do we have any sense yet as to whether he'll follow through on those threats and who he might pick for the gop side of this committee? >> i mean it's hard to say who he's going to pick. he has a couple ways he could go here. he could pick people who are kind of in the middle of the road, who might take this a little bit more seriously, but the sources i'm talking to on the hill what they expect is for him to pick people who are going to be a little bit more trumpy the best way to put it, push back on some of the things that are going to happen, and kind of continue this whitewashing that we've seen over the last few months. it's also one of those things, when it comes to whether or not he's going to pull liz cheney from any of her committees, he is being coy, as mccarthy wants to do and has been the last few months, and hasn't shown his cards just yet. it's hard to say. i think the one thing is that liz cheney

eugene scott. good morning. >> good morning. >> kevin mccarthy deciding, okay, it's better if i participate in this. right now we don't get the sense there are going to be any of the most inflammatory supporters named to it, but that doesn't mean trump supporters aren't going to be named to the panel. what's your sense of what mccarthy is thinking here? >> he wants to help save the narrative that republican lawmakers in addition to president trump were not in cahoots or involved or turned a blind eye to what happened on january 6th, which is what so many democrats, especially those farther to the left, have been arguing the past six months. i think what we know kevin mccarthy is going to want to do is perhaps preserve some sense of reputation for his party as we head into midterms next year and show they are taking this issue very seriously, but they're not taking responsibility for this issue despite what so many of their critics have said. at least this gives them some eyes and ears potentially in the background proceedings. let's talk about infrastructure for a second. now the white house is sayi

eugene, am i missing anything deeper here or does mccarthy pretty much take orders from trump and otherthe republicans at the end of the day worried about the one six investigation might turn out? >> absolutely, i think you're right on all counts there. it is astounding. there was an insurrection at the capitol that threaten the lives of fellow members of congress on january 6th. that, to me, and to any sensible person, but needs to be investigated. yet, the republicans have no interest in investigating that. they want to investigate everything else. they want to investigate black protests, the previous summer, they want to investigate congressman john bash won from indiana wanted to -- nancy pelosi kicked off the post committee, while he was still on the committee senator really saying, we're gonna get to the bottom of the responsibility of capital leadership and the biden administration. there was no biden administration on january six because biden hadn't taken office yet. but he did bring himself to say the trump administration response, that's who responded or failed to respond. it

eugene robinson. elise, joe was using a kind word i think, stupidity, but to me these republicans like kevin mccarthy are making a choice that i think goes beyond stupidity. they know the facts and they were even there. so, where do we go from here? how does one deliver the truth to the american people when they have such a loud force propelled by donald trump and existing on capitol hill in republican leaders who refuse to actually face the truth? >> i do think that this commission and the hearings and the truth that is going to be heard from the testimony, especially today, of police officers who witnessed the hand-to-hand combat that happened, and it happened on january 6th when there was an insurrection at the capitol at the behest of donald trump. i think it's going to be powerful and i think it's important and i think that republicans might have overshot a bit in refusing to cooperate. because they are going to allow democrats to dominate the message and headlines, whether they like it or not. there's only so much avoidance that fox news and other outlets can do of covering what's actually happ

eugene just set up about politics not entering into this. the public supports this congressional investigation, this select committee appointed by nancy pelosi. two republicans sitting on it, her rejection of kevin mccarthy's farcical clowns. 58% of the company supports them. 29% oppose it. and i'm going to just put up some video of something that shows irony can't be killed even by this version of the republican party. peaceful protesters, i don't know, counter programming event yesterday, were ushered away. they're out there attacking an investigation into deadly protests on january 6th. but they couldn't handle peaceful protesters. here is my question for you, ben rhodes. this is absolutely political. these are the political supporters of the most prominent politicians in the republican party. of course this is political. and i'm not arguing this was a good idea, but september 11th was in the foreground of the midterm elections in '02 when bush's party held the -- held congress. i think the security questions of the republican party as a domestic terror threat that were raised by the police officers whose political affiliation is unknown should be front and center in these elections. >> the democrats in

washington post", eugene robinson, and curt bar della, a columnist for "usa today" and "the new york times." good morning to all of you. jonathan let me start with you. kevin mccarthy was going to nod to the base we knew that. but three of the five, majority of his picks, voted to contest the november election. >> three of the picks, willie, did so and they did so after the insurrection. the vote came after the rioters breached the capitol. so it's a clear signal here from republican leader kevin mccarthy as to which direction he wants to take the hearings. sure two of the members there, didn't do that. they didn't vote to decertify. they did go along with the democratic process and acknowledge that joe biden was indeed elected president. jim jordan, as we know, is one of former president trump's most vocal defenders and has been willing to say untruths in order to defend the president, and we know he still speaks to the former president frequently. so there's no sense that the house speaker nancy pelosi will object to these picks but we will learn more in the next day or so if that were to be the case. but i think there are real fears among democrats this is going