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 republicans (202) 748-8001, and for independents (202) 748-8002. host: you mention justice barrett, talk about the other two, robert cavanaugh and mr. tch?au lait --kefli question, is the huge i would think anyone who thinks that they can get inside donald trumphad an think of -- 's head and think about what he is going to do is probably a fool. guessf us do not try to or second-guess what the pr

raskin: one is merrick garland of about as they dark the chief judge of the d.c. circuit court of appeals, who was nominated to the supreme court in march of 2016. a celebrated judge who had more judicial experience under his belt than anyone ever nominated to the supreme court before, a graduate of harvard college andujar vard law school, judge garland was often described as the most qualified person ever nominated to the court. but senator mcconnell and the g.o.p. in the senate vowed they would have no hearings, no action and no vote on his nomination because there was an election coming up in nine months. and the people should be heard. this was unprecedented but fair enough if that's the new standard. now i have another constituent, brett kavanaugh of chevy chase, who serves on the exact same court as judge garland does, who has been nominated to the supreme court, only four months before a national election. he's a graduate of yale college and yale law school, but the senate now says that they're going to speed through hearings and a vote on judge cavanaugh's

whose name is -- merritt garland. who was nominated in the spring of 2016 to fill the supreme court seat vacated by the death of scalia. nominated by barack obama. because he was nominated by barack obama, republicans in the senate would not allow a hearing on the nomination. they cited the election coming later that year. close observers will note there is an election coming later this year but nobody knows if democrats will be able to apply the same standard this time to wait on the kavanaugh hearings the way republicans pushed the garland nomination to the horizon and ultimately off the edge. the democrats will apparently try to do that, but we don't know. after less than 18 months in office, donald trump is already making his second nomination to the supreme court. only nine people on the court. this comes at a time when the choice is fraught and consequential in ways that have never applied to any other u.s. president ever. the snapshot of what's going on right now includes the fact that the president's first nat

what do you expect of mcconnell, he said he won't even give us a hearing on merrick garland. he was, after eight years, worn down by republican obstructionism. >> we went to congress and said here is the evidence. here is what we know about the russians intervening in our election. rather than us make a statement we would like this to be a bipartisan expression of concern. mcconnell refused to sign on so there was no strong bipartisan statement about this. it's almost sad. i was shocked given this evidence mcconnell was look at this as a political calculation. i don't twoont look like i'm validating the reality that the russians are doing this. obama was so worn down on obstructionist, he said the guy won't even give me a hearing on merrick garland, why do you think he would do this? >> 202778801. the book the world as it is, a memoir of the obama white house. what was the president's world view coming in in 2008 and how did it change over the course of eight years? >> he saw his principle objective in the early years as drawing down the troops. and i think what he wanted to

whose name is -- merritt garland. who was nominated in the spring of 2016 to fill the supreme court seat vacated by the death of scalia. nominated by barack obama. because he was nominated by barack obama, republicans in the senate would not allow a hearing on the nomination. they cited the election coming later that year. close observers will note there is an election coming later this year but nobody knows if democrats will be able to apply the same standard this time to wait on the kavanaugh hearings the way republicans pushed the garland nomination to the horizon and ultimately off the edge. the democrats will apparently try to do that, but we don't know. after less than 18 months in office, donald trump is already making his second nomination to the supreme court. only nine people on the court. this comes at a time when the choice is fraught and consequential in ways that have never applied to any other u.s. president ever. the snapshot of what's going on right now includes the fact that the president's first nat

they would've probably had a resist garland sign. >> if he would have nominated garland, i would hearout how great a president donald trump is. but i will say this. merrick garland, it all comes back to it. that's what set this up, right? the left-wing of the democratic party, the democratic party as a whole has no choice but to resist this nominee. regardless of his qualifications, regardless of his background, because they feel like they're nominee was stolen by mitch mcconnell two years ago. as a result, we are in for probably the super bowl of all super bowls of battles in congress over the next couple weeks i think october 1 is a very aggressive deadline especially given the fact that he has 300 decisions that people are going to have to wade through and understand. going to get a lot of questions on those. i remember i heard mr. leo talk about odorless papers. my favorite is federalist 51. ambition much must counteract ambition. congress has lacked ambition and the court as a last resort. democrats have to take that into account when they look into his background. >> laura: bern

or jeannie also calls in of the five hundred clubs museum in garland. carlo giuliani is one of the rally organizers and he's created an exhibition here about the history of the car which helped change italian society. its introduction in one nine hundred fifty seven marked the beginning of rural mobility. for people a family with kids and the whole kit and caboodle could travel around italy in relative comfort. which in thought was the first. opportunity to tweet audience to prosper on the school to a real car. and that car was designed by done take your calls on the engineer had already created its predecessor the company no but got his big break in one nine hundred fifty seven with the fia five hundred new of. a new cinquecento launched by your close a successors in one nine hundred ninety one wasn't too popular only when brought out a ritual model in two thousand and seven did sales pick up. but in the car meeting garland they're all fans of the original and its timeless design. icon for a family with michael in the in the city the kids with come on

mcconnell mentioned that trump should let merrick garland.omeone that will go by the constitution. it should not matter if they are a democrat or republican. host: i have to jump in. mitch mcconnell is not recommending merrick garland and the republicans have the majority in the senate. caller: they need to have the democrats to help pass these laws. they are doing nothing. i think that is a shame. sicily with the vote on the daca situation. -- especially with the vote on the daca situation. forel a get is time democrats to come to the center and use their brains and not use their emotions when they are going to vote. host: thanks for the call. the brexit negotiator resigns from the position, britain to leave the european union in march. this is likely to be part of the conversation at the nato summit. the president meets with theresa may on thursday and friday. the president traveling to windsor castle to become the 12th u.s. president to meet with queen elizabeth ii. moran from virginia, democrats line, good morning. i would like to associa

merrick garland was an interesting circumstance. we had a supreme court justice prematurely died in an election year. we were very close to that presidential election year. given those circumstances, i think the argument was easier for mitch mcconnell to make. this is just sheer political power. control whato happens on the court, you need the senate and you need the white house. the republican party won both the senate and the white house in the 2016 election. if the shoe were on the other foot i have no doubt that chuck schumer would not be confirming judges. host: if in 2020 there is a vacancy on the high court and the democrats have the senate, the same thing will happen? guest: i think if they held the senate in 2020 and trump was replacing justice ginsburg, their position would be not to confirm the judge. the question is can they withstand that politically? that would be an open question and a conversation that would be had across the country. politics are so polarized right now around the supreme court that all the pressure

--ocrats, there will be host: you are referring to the nomination of president obama and merrick garland, who did not receive a hearing in the senate. , hi there, on c-span. what do you want to see happen? >> he is a good man. think there should be a from the law laid down and --ored years ago , do you think that was a good idea or a bad idea on the part of the senate? caller: i think that was a great idea. don't, theyou president in the office would hardly ever have a chance. of his own. again, the constitution. there that is the case, are to be a 100 to one vote anyway. host: the justice anthony kennedy was on the ninth circuit of appeals before he was nominated to the supreme court. our line for democrats in massachusetts. richard, you are on c-span. caller: how're you doing? i wish him well in my -- in his retirement. president trump was not properly voted in. general,lican party in they seem to post on facebook and a lot of other places, christian pastry it -- patriot. marking that abortion is against god. i don't agree with abortion, i am democratic, i believe in the choice because

the election process. >> as you know, i spoke out against prolonging the -- >> right. >> justice garland into the supreme court. i thought that vote should have been taken. i also believed it never should have been changd. there is a reason we want to see consensus. >> that being said though, elections have consequences. one of them is that the president gets to choose their supreme court pick. this justice, as much as you may disagree with them is a typical republican pick. there's very little doubt about that. the republicans have control of the senate. it means they call it the way they want to and go forward. what i think the democrats should do is come up with a consistent strategy probably within using it. there is very little you can do except to change that fact. >> one of the things they can raise is that this nominee, judge kavanaugh said he doesn't believe a president should be investigated or prosecuted while in office. they can ask him if he will recuse himself if any of the deliberation does implicate the president and he being appointed during the investigation should not

he actually supported merrick garland and don't be surprised if merrick garland supports him. >> neilise the possibility there's a different way of doing this. you talk about fair questions you could ask a judge kavanaugh about past writings and past judicial cases, roe v. wade should have been decided. an interesting way to take on this issue. all of these candidates askew anything having to do with how they would rule on something. you say what about going back in time and looking at a case. i thought that will never happen. those questions will never come up. if they do, no smart candidate in this case, you know, nobody will rerespond. >> i'm trying to move the confirmation process forward so it's not just a game of keep away and got-ya. doesn't degenerate to personal attacks. it's not a rubber stamp or a witch hunt. the candidate have asked questions about his legal views, not his personal views. he answers and gets the benefit of the doubt when he answers. that's his reward. everybody understands the answers are not promised or pledges. once confirmed, a justice has to call it as

democrats held on to a majority, you'd have supreme court justice garland.eing able to win in mid-term elections and presidential elections gets you control of the court. >> well said. >> exactly. >> okay. but, what does joe donnelly do? he's the only one of the three that has a democratic base to worry about. >> i'm very much in terms of winning elections being what democrats need to do. they're out of power. they're out of the white house. they're out of control of state legislature. they need to win elections. you let joe donnelly vote however he has to vote. >> if the choice is -- >> cortez, you know, she would vote her way. she can have her issues. let joe donnelly have his and vote his way. >> we have a lot of foreign policy to cover. i can't wait to hear what danielle thinks about what happened in north korea. >>> we'll be back with the russia investigation with russia investigation with president trump'smy mom's pain m moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis was intense. i wondered if she could do the stuff she does for us which is kinda, a lot. and

, judge garland to be a supreme court justice, and the republicans delayed it, even refused to meet with him for over a year. now we are where they have a nomination from president trump, and many on the left, including me, is saying the mcconnell rule. why don't they wait until january after the midterm elections? you have, i think, about a third of the senate up to decide on that. yet the numbers are very narrow in being able to pull this off. >> absolutely, reverend sharpton. i mean, we are going to see, i think, a big debate around this. and, you know, democrats watched in the 2016 cycle how there was a candidate, and merit garland was very qualified, he was a moderate, he could have passed. but senator mcconnell refused to hold a vote, and nothing happened, no hearings. >> wouldn't even meet with him. they wouldn't even have meetings. >> the meetings wouldn't even occur. so it is really going to be interesting. we've already seen how he's come out and said that there should be an appointment this fall. and we are in the midst of one of the biggest election cycles, i think. >> presid

they wouldn't let garland proceed in any way, shape or form. they said they wouldn't do it until after the election. democrats have made some noises about trying to hold the president to the same thing. this time it is even more so. what do you think about the chances of delaying, simply that that was the precedent set? >> well, the difference between the position now, the republicans healed majority when garland was nominated. all it took was mitch mcconnell wanting to delay. the minority has a lot of power in the senate. there are a lot of things they can do to delay this process as much as possible. and one interesting thing about kavanaugh in that front, he has a massive paper trail. y making sure that all the proper paperwork is delivered to the judiciary committee, the review the completed before the committee holds its hearings, there are ample opportunities. this is a man who has a massive, massive paper trail who is being nominated. he wants to hold a vote by september or october. that is a very, very fast track to put someone like kav

merrick garland.not stop the top democrat chuck schumer recommendinging that person to president trump. senate minority leader, the president, held a phone call. i am told when schumer warned the president not to nominate anyone who would be against the affordable care act, or against overturning roe vs. wade. schumer warned the president that would be, quote, cataclysmic. this was described to me as a check the box kind of phone call, considering that the president had already put out his short list. back to the top three, cavanagh, cavanagh, kethledge and comey barrett, if it is indeed cavanagh he would continue the trend of having an ivy leaguer, graduate of an ivy league school on the supreme court. the current eight supreme court justices fit that mold. if it is kethledge, he went to michigan. barrett went to notre dame. that would break tradition. michigan and notre dame talking about football. adam: i did not go to notre dame and i lived in south bend. i've been to the grotto. those are notre d

days merrick garland was not voted upon. it's the president who picks, not the senate. they either approve or disapprove. >> one last point. americans don't vote on process. they don't vote on process, it's a basis to argue, democrats are using it now. i would too if i were them. >> 50, 50 say it should happen before or after the election. >> does kagan kill the argument? they gave you okayingen during a midterm year. >> mcconnell is the one -- we never saw anything like mcconnell did with garland. you are the strict construction ist >> you say read the constitution, the constitution doesn't say the senate advises and consents on a supreme court justice. except in an election year. mcconnell established that principle. it's a stain on the court, whoever gets on there there's going to be an asterisk now. that has to be made right. that was one of the most uncivil political acts i've seen. it's not going to go away. you read the constitution, that was wrong we have to make it right, this should not be heard this year either. >> i'll tell you what's strange. >> it doesn't

joining us now is garland nixon, a radio talk show host and democratic strategists, along with actor and congressional candidate get it in california antonios about a junior, thank you for joining us paid i will start with you, as a member of that party, do you feel like the party of yesteryear is no longer the party of today, ae losing crucial blocks of support? >> yes, but i do feel that the party is moving in the direction, and not necessarily willingly. i do think that there are number of people who have been associated with the democratic party who have left because they were angry at thet direction. >> pete: you are agreeing with the thesis? >> furred totally different reasons, i think that the news, and the bernie sanders are moving in the right directionht which is a populist movement, based on policy and not identity politics. and that is why they are going to get their base to the polls coming in win by getting your base to the polls, not by running to republicans. >> pete: what you are acknowledging is that identity politics is not what worked. part of what is mentioned in

someone like justice suitor, who would have been a great supreme court associate justice, merrick garland. and a very important part of this fight is now, of course, you have the majority flip-flopping. that's going to be a big issue in all this. >> should they have seen what the decision is and then decide on the import. >> okayingen was done in similar days merrick garland was not voted upon. it's the president who picks, not the senate. they either approve or disapprove. >> one last point. americans don't vote on process. they don't vote on process, it's a basis to argue, democrats are using it now. i would too if i were them. >> 50, 50 say it should happen before or after the election. >> does kagan kill the argument? they gave you okayingen during a midterm year. >> mcconnell is the one -- we never saw anything like mcconnell did with garland. >> you say read the constitution, the constitution doesn't say the senate advises and consents on a supreme court justice. mcconnell established that principle. it's a stain on the court, whoever gets on there there's going to be an asterisk no

that was your point. >> juan: no democrats. >> greg: merrick garland?and. >> greg: the initial comments, the initial question was do these comments help or hurt. they have moved from calling people to not cease jihadists. these were the dopes who were offended when you called ms-13 gang members animals. oh, my god. how dare you. and yet this is what they do. cory booker and andrew cuomo, charles krauthammer's observation. the right things they are wrong or dumb but the left thinks you're evil. corey immediately deemed the avocet evil which makes me think he is dumb. >> jedediah: elizabeth warren does this all the time. this is all she knows how to do. i am always saying run her because this -- she has nothing to do but insulting throne names. there is no substance there ever. she was saying kavanaugh was hostile to health care for millions. based on what? what is that kind of language? i am telling democrats, throw her front and center. >> juan: it is a good thing the president is a role model on not bullying and using aggressive linkage. airline ceos f

and from garland to fort worth -- do you how far away garland's is from ft. worth? it is about an hour and a half drive. how bad does that cut into my pay? pretty bad. and look how much the gas has gone up. andrew, how much do construction salaries vary from state to state? there is a lot of variation in both what the salary is and what the job market look like. the top 10% of construction workers are bringing in $63,000. so this is a foreman, specifically for the folks on the site, about $63,000 annually , the top 10%. but you have a pretty large variation from community to community, state to state. the caller made some good points about what is happening in texas, and it might not be what is happening in the next of dust the rest of the country. i look, vermont, dakota, they have construction employment rates below 3% and in some cases to present. contrast that with alaska, mississippi, arkansas, those unemployment rates are much higher than the national average. so it really does very. -- vary. a lot of these are national statistics. by and large, what i am talk

host: the name of merrick garland came up again yesterday on "face the nation." [video clip] >> the republican majority refused to hear that hold hearing for 10 months about a nominated by president obama. we are for monthly from an election now, it and we should follow that same rule. i will do my job on the judiciary committee in advance of congressional elections this november. i assume the president will nominate someone from that short list prepared to him by the federal society and the heritage foundation, two right-wing groups. i will review the record and ask them tough questions to get to the core issue -- how will this next justice nominated by the president affect the rights and freedoms of the average american? this is a very important decision. it will affect the affordable care act. it will affect reproductive choice and individual freedom for millions of women. incrementalct protection, lgbt rights. justice kennedy was at the center of many key decisions. i will do my job on the judiciary committee. i hope folks who are watching will also speak up.

. >> what did you guys do wrong in the merrick garland situation? if you could redo it, how would you do it? >> i'm not sure we could have changed it. when it reached the pointhere the senate republican leader refused to even meet with the nominee of president obama, a man extremely well-qualified, it ixs clear that the was in. they were going to keep this vacant in hopes they could put a republican in the white house. it happened. now neil gorsuch, chosen by the federalist society, as well, has ne to the bench, is voting in lockstep on the republican conservative side. and they want to fill this vacancy to give them an advantage onny future rulings. >> i've got to ask you, though, now goingve backwards before garland, let's go to the harry reid decision back in 2013, when you decided to scrap it for everything but the sreme court. the filibuster. there were predictions this would slippery slope, a here we go. in hindsight, mistake? >> i think at that time harry reid faced an impossible decision. they had announced -- the republicans a not fill the

senator chuck schumer says nominating garland now would unify the country. the choice will be revealed monday night, 9:00 p.m., at the white house. pete williams, nbc news, washington. >> unrelenting weather is assaulting much of the united states with heavy flooding on the east coast, ravaging wildfires in the west and the first major dust storm of the monsoon season rolling through the phoenix area. experts are calling the massive blazes out west the worst in decades during an unusually active season. in colorado the spring creek fire, the largest in the state, burned 16 acres every minute. in wine country, the county fire is jeopardizing over 1500 homes and structures and in pittsburgh people there are suffering the onslaught as are stranded as th head out in the rains and doors extreme record flooding. the dust whippin across the state. temperatures shattered a record 115 degrees. >> wow. for some of us we're going to get a good drenching. let's check in with meteorologist bill karins. it's going to get wet. >> ending the heat wave in areas of the northe

they probably have a garland out there. what are your reactions? >> i -- if i have that i wouldn't be here talking about this tonight. but merrick garland, that all comes back to it, that's what set this up. the left wing of the democratic party and the democratic party as a whole has no choice but to resist this nominee, regardless of the qualification and regardless of his background. they feel that like their nominee was stolen by mitch mcconnell two years ago and as a result we are in for probably the super bowl of artists all super bowls in battles inn congress over the next couple weeks. i think october 1 is a very aggressive deadline, especially given the fact that he had 300 decisions that people will have to wade through and understand. remember, i heard of mr. leo talk about the papers, my favorite is ambition must counteract ambition and congress has blocked ambition to counteract the sky so court is probably the last resort. democrat will take that into account when they look at this background. >> bernie sanders with out there -- in fu

fierce, democrats contend that since majority leader mitch mcconnell stalled the nomination of merrick garland016, it's fair play. >> he said we will not allow supreme court justice during election year. what's good for goose is good for gandor. >> it's a low standard and it was a standard, i for one and i don't think others have forgotten so. as you sew, sew you wreath. >> report that is north korea is concealing aspects of nuclear program, renewed questions about u.s. troop levels in germany, fast-approaching nato summit and talks about one-on-one between president trump and russian president vladimir putin. with ukraine crimea and syria among many pop ticks on july 16th, chris. chris: kevin cork reporting from the white house, kevin, thanks for that. joining me now the president's national security adviser john bolton in his first interview since meeting with russian president vladimir putin this week in moscow. ambassador ballon welcome back to fox news sunday. >> glad to be with you. chris: what does president trump want from his summit with putin, is it beyond improving dialogue, does he

no and that's because the math matters in the senate at the time that merrick garland was nominated by president obama republicans held a majority in the senate so they had the ability to decide whether a supreme court nominee would be considered in the light in a presidential election year they continue to hold the majority and so this goes back to decisions that craddock leaders like harry reid and chuck schumer have made in recent years having the filibuster would be pretty valuable right now for the democrats that was gotten rid of chuck schumer decided to filibuster new of course it's a supreme lee qualified nominee to the supreme court and ultimately senate majority mcconnell got rid of the filibuster because of that and so that option doesn't exist anymore and so the democrats are actually pretty limited they're going to try to slow this down say you know demand every single document the history of his of his life everything he's ever looked at everything he's ever written everything he's ever said and given that he's done three hundred opinions he has a long legal career is in

i felt like we should have done that with merrick tkpwar -- garland almost two yearsing a. we treated him shamefully. we didn't, we didn't, but some in this body did. i will afford brett kavanaugh the opportunity my republican colleagues, at least most of them refused for merrick garland, chief judge of the d.c. circuit court of appeals, highly regarded by democrats and republicans alike. they abdicated their constitutional responsibilities. our colleagues, in 2016. now they want to rush through and literally within a couple of months, the nomination of brett kavanaugh. well, i look forward, to interviewing brett kavanaugh in the coming weeks and give him the opportunity to explain why he broke his pledges time and again, time and again. how could a person who seems that nice and that decent make so many wrongheaded and i think wrong-hearted decisions and support those decisions from the bench time and again? we're in a battle. we're in a battle on many fronts in this country. one of the battle fronts is with respect to our environment, the air that we breathe, the water we

the republicans didn't allow nominate merrick garland. guest: many people in the pro-life movement are active in churches and support pregnancy centers. there is an extensive network of people out there and i encourage you to get to know and become involved in this. there are four times as many pro-life centers as there are abortion centers. they are staffed by women who care hill, asow to capitol committee'sudiciary subcommittee on federal courts looks at the structure of the federal court system and potential ways to restructure it. law professors and a federal willls court judge testify. the hearing has been delayed as committee votea on spending for 2019. we expect to start in just a moment. live coverage from the dirksen senate office building on capitol hill, here on c-span. chatter] ible chapter] ible chatter]

clearly not on the short list, merit garland who as you know, was stymied by mitch mcconnell and the16 election. the reason why i bring him up is because a source familiar with the phone call tells me that the top democrat in the senate chuck schumer by phone with president trump tuesday afternoon and in mored the president to nominate merit garland however that source tells me that phone call was more like a check the box kind of phone call because as we all knew at that point garland who was appointed by a democrat was clearly not on the short list by this republican president, but schumer did warn the president that if he were to nominate someone whose hostile to the affordable care act, someone who is hostile to roe v. wade, that that would be "coolac lismac" just to give you a idea of what this nominee is walking into, by the way cheryl we should get this decision announced to the american public at some point on monday evening. cheryl: unless we see the tweet first, right, blake? >> right you never know around here as i always say that the timing can change but all things at le

they didn't hold meetings with merrick garland, they didn't have a hoet. it was vacant for over a year so president trump could nominate a justice instead of president obama nominating one. that's the remarkable and unprecedented way that donald trump got his first nomination for the united states supreme court. well, now we have started the battle royale over president trump's second nominee for the court. just like the first one had the unprecedented twist because republicans held open that seat so the democratic president couldn't advance a nominee, now there is an unprecedented twist, too. >> why did the president stick with kavanaugh? because he's worried. that mr. mueller will go to the court and ask that the president be subpoenaed and ask to do other things necessary to move the investigation forward and president trump knows that kavanaugh will be a barrier to preventing that investigation from going there. >> even before president trump picked his nominee last night, he was already saying no nominee should be considered until after the november e

over merrick garland. what's the best move for democrats?rst of all have to wage a fight. and the base, i think, demands a fight right now. they demand -- and also, you know, this is -- this has ban voting issue for republicans, much less so for democrats, and that asymmetry needs to be corrected to the extent that it can. so i think that -- you know, democrats need to be sensitized to the importance of these judicial appointments, especially supreme court appointments. that said, it should not be a fight that -- that costs red state democrats their seats. so if -- look, if something comes out in the hearings or in kavanaugh's paper trail that ca senator like susan collins or lisa murkowski to waiver, to balk, to say, gee, i just don't know about this guy kavanugh, then i think democrats need to be united on this because they potentially could have a chance of winning. but if they don't have a chance to win, and i kind of doubt that they will, because i think kavanugh is a pretty careful guy, and we'll see, but if the battle is already lost,

to the supreme court. >> merritt garland, mr.oderate. democrats say he's an ideal choice, but not so fast. the grand old party has their game faces on and are ready to play hardball. >> it is clear president obama has made his nomination to politicize it for purposes of the election. >> that's right, leadership marks precedent vowing not to confirm a nominee until the next president is sworn into office. my oh, my, what a time to be alive! honey, this gig-speed internet is ridiculously fast. i know, right. we are seriously keeping up with the joneses. i know, right. we are seriously keeping with the anderson's. we are finally keeping up with the ford's. keeping up with the garcia's. keeping up with the harvey's. keeping up with the wahh-the-wahh the romeros. carters. patels. the allens. wah... wolanske's. right, them. no one is going to have internet like this. no one is going to have internet like this. gig to more homes than anyone. not just the joneses'. over here. xfinity. the largest gig-speed network. >>> mr. rosenstein, wh

>> for the same reasons that judge garland would have been excellent. he is very well respected across the spectrum by lawyers, judges, scholars, the justices themselves. you'll hear from one of his clerks in a moment. he sends more clerks to the supreme court than anyone other than garland, and he sends them to justices across the political spectrum which suggests that the justices themselves across the spectrum respect him as do scholars. he is a scholar himself. i think he's very thoughtful and open-minded. and i say this to my friends and fellow democrats, be careful what you wish for even if you were able to derail this. i think you get someone good, perhaps, but not as good as brett kavanaugh. >> but what do you say to those like, you know, legal experts who say there's no doubt that this pick hues the court more to the conservative bent? he clerked for kennedy but is not a kennedy who would necessarily be a hero of liberals on social issues. >> well, i say to my friend steve ladic who was my student, again, be careful what you wish for because yo

time and time again, leader mcconnell justified his unjustifiable blockade of merrick garland by claiming the american people should have a voice in deciding the next supreme court justice. that was in february of an election year. it's now almost july. if the senate's constitutional duty to advise and consent is just as important as the president's right to nominate, which the constitution says it is, why should a midterm election be any less important than a presidential election? leader mcconnell is simply engaging in hypocrisy. whomever the president picks, it is all too likely they're going to overturn health care protections and roe v. wade. we don't need to guess. president trump has said time and time again he would appoint judges that would do those two things -- overturn roe v. wade, overturn health care protections. on november 11, 2016, then president-elect trump said, quote, i am pro-life. good judges will be pro-life. in a debate against secretary clinton, then-candidate trump said, because i am pro-life and i will be appointing pro-life judges, i think that we will go back

democrats who are still smarting after mitch mcconnell blocked the nomination of merrick garland in 2016 to be barack obama's selection on the court now says mitch mcconnell should wait until the elections are over and republicans say we will move through this quickly. guest 2: it is really brazen showmanship and democrats, especially dianne feinstein, who is the ranking member of the judiciary committee and chuck schumer of new york are making that pitch right now as hard as -- but mcconnell and the president are hard thatiners and i will think i think they will get their hearing whether democrats like it or not. host: this is what chuck schumer said about that and talked about hypocrisy by senate republicans. let's watch. [video clip] course, if republicans were consistent, they would wait to consider justice kennedy's successor until after the midterm elections. time and time again, leader mcconnell justified his unjustifiable blockade of merrick garland i claiming the american people should have voice in deciding the next supreme court justice. of anas in february election year. it i

we are joined by democratic strategist and radio talk show host garland nixon. great to see you. jason, things have gotten way out of hand. we can't have a person walk into a restaurant wearing a "make america great again" hat without being verbally assaulted. in some cases physically assaulted. if you support the president in a high school, you are called a racist, hater, xenophobic. there is free speech but there is not free speech. i think there are a lot of people who are just afraid. >> and they should be. after the gabby giffords incident, after steve scalise was shot and almost killed, other members that were targeted because they were republicans, then you have house members on the democratic side of the aisle basically, like maxine waters, inciting people to violence. this is the face of what the democrats are putting up. it is the resistance movement. it's antifa. it's targeted and aggressive and scorched earth. i have to tell you i was on the receiving end of lots of it. my family was subjected to things they should never be subjected to. diane black in the last few da

garland isrick certainly a qualified and pretty moderate judge by most accounts.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 republicans (202) 748-8001, and for independents (202) 748-8002. host: you mention justice barrett, talk about the other two, robert cavanaugh and mr. tch?au lait --kefli question, is the huge i would think anyone who thinks that they can get inside donald trumphad an think of -- 's head and think about what he is going to do is probably a fool. guessf us do not try to or second-guess what the presiden