harry litman is of legal affairs columnist for the los angeles times newspaper.e's also a former u.s. attorney and previously served as a law clerk to thurgood marshall and anthony kennedy. in new york is vincent warrant, civil rights attorney and executive director at the center of constitutional rights. i would like to begin in fairfax virginia. it seems anathema to the rest of the world that the highest court in the u.s. has appointees that have a political opinion, a political slant. for most of the rest of the world when they think of u.s. justice, they think of it as being blind. but that's really not the case, is it? >> just in the introduction to this conversation i wrote down five words that were said that i think are misleading about how the courts in the united states operate. those words are policy, what the framers intended, conservative, ideological and to the right. those are all political terms and i think that's the wrong way to evaluate what courts do in the decisions that judges render. even the case involving the affordable care act. the decis

. >> joining me is harry litman, a former u.s. attorney and deputy assistant attorney general. good to have you with us. >> thanks, rosemary, good to be here. >> what stood out to you on the first day of hearings for judge amy coney barrett's nomination to the supreme court? >> i was actually struck by the democrats' discipline. they're often an unruly lot, and each person wants to be sure to get his or her points in. all of them had obviously caucused and determined to make a unified presentation about the consequences were the aca, obama care to be struck down. >> in a few hours from now, the second day of hearings gets underway with questions from senators. what do they need to ask the judge about her position on the affordable care act, roe v. wade and any possible effort by the president to contest election results and in the end, how much is she likely to reveal to them anyway? >> the last question is the easiest. nothing or next to nothing particularly since it really is something of a charade. everyone's vote is already committed. it's a razor thin margin for the republ

and joining me now is made police is melissa murray and harry litman. so good to see you both. i want to ask both of you what your interpretation is of her statement starting with you, melissa. >> i think that she goes a long way in the statement to answer questions that people have about her particular views. there is a statement of about her father selling her that anything boys can do girls can do better, maybe to sooth those who think that her views may be regressive for women. and there is also a statement about how closely she would follow the legal precedent set by her own mentor, justice scalia, saying that she would be a judge in the mold of justice scalia and that she would be faithful to the original meaning of the constitution as framged in frame and interpret it correspond to the words. >> harry, same question to you. >> i thought that it was really bland. she did mention scalia, but didn't elaborate much. and there is quite a lot about her family, her personal background, both her parents and children even relative to other previous nominees. it is a very sort of

former attorney general, harry litman and john yoo, welcome back.'s start there, because there have been declassification's in recent days, and the left said it is completely partisan's. john brennan is pushing back very hard on what the characterization, of what these are reportedly saying about his role in various things on the front end of the trump investigation. >> well first, i don't think there's anything wrong as long as they are not revealing intelligent sources and methods come about being transparent, putting all of the documents out there, and letting the american people of the side, because we are not going to have any investigation by john durham complete in time, doesn't look like we're going to have any kind of public report. when it comes to director brendan himself, the notes sort of speak for himself, when he was director of the cia, thought it was important enough in the summer of the election of 2016, to go to the president of united states states, barack obama, and brief them on intelligence that hillary clinton might have been