conservative justices.henumbers, like conventional labels conservative and liberal tell us nothing about if he is performing well. maybe he is raking a new trail in which judges will be eventually persuade to follow it. -- decided a moment ago that they hold the double jeopardy for the same act under their criminal statutes. it was recognized for so long that it was surprising a case was taken up on the subject. it remains a mystery who voted to grant certiorari. there was no circuit split forcing the cortan. the 11th circuit's ruling on the question was affirmed in the case came down seven to two. justice ginsburg and gorsuch dissenting pre-with justice thomas plainly signaling in his concurrence that essay of his on stare decisis that his was the third vote, but he decided to reaffirm the precedents anyway. but do the math. who was the fourth vote? it's complete the mysterious who among the other six and the majority besides gorsuch -- besides alito provided that fourth vote. justice gorsuch's dissents fo

justice must satisfy the appearance of justice. both rules embody the understanding that the constitution's implicit promise of equal justice under law depends on at least two things that our court must be fair, independent and impartial and that we must also believe that our courts are fair, independent, and impartial. justice must satisfy the appearance of justice it might take a second but we intuitively understand that. it means that as the supreme court recently explained "both the appearance and reality of impartial justice are necessary to the public legitimacy of judicial pronouncements and thus the rule of law itself". i think that's why people are so surprised when they learned that the supreme court isn't bound by a code of ethics unlike nearly every other court in america. it just doesn't fit with their understanding of what it means to be a judge let alone a justice of the united states supreme court. that's why it's so concerning when a justice does something prohibited by the code of ethics they don't follow and that

the courts reasoning was criticized by justice thomas joined by justices gorsuch and cavanaugh. out that new york marked the first time ever that the court had invalidated an agency action solely because it questioned the sincerity of the agencies otherwise adequate rationale. the standards the ministry of procedure action required an agency to follow in its actions, findings and conclusions didn't even allow the court to inquire into the question of pretext. pretext could not make up a subset of arbitrary and capricious review which was the standard that was used here. because it had to be based on the existing admin strata of record as earlier cases that highlighted non-evidence that might come up on remand. the district court had already allowed an additional claim for discovery that went beyond the admin strata of record and that the supremes in new york recognized may have been ordered in error. up aourt's decision opened whole new avenue of attack on executive action. in future and argue believe eyelid the separation of powers by enabling judicial interference with the enf

justice feeling that ginsburg and justice breyer will hold on as long as they can. justice breyer turns 81 this month. i think it is not possible to predict what is going to happen. justice scalia was a relatively young man when he passed. >> >> by the standards of a supreme court justice. he was 79. >> nobody was looking at him. was a vibrant member of the court. he was full of life, it appeared. we don't know. that i don'te believe anyone on the left side of the court will leave voluntarily. it is far from clear what is going to happen in the 2020 election. we have all been surprised. i don't think the president is likely to get reelected on his own merits, but i have infinite faith in the ability of his opponents to get him reelected again. there you have it. >> i think one thing that there's thinking about is because here we are a year and a half away from a election. i think the prospect of the presidency and the senate being controlled by opposite parties, and what that would mean for judicial confirmations. usually when you're talking about the modern judicia

with justice alit o and justice thomas said. but i think his position was that may be true but that's not this case. in case is someone who came one a rationale, turned out not to be a valid rationale. he said it was his sole rationale. and that's just asking too much of in court to defer to. i think that's what was going on. i think that's the difference between the two cases. otherwise, there is one more sentence i know everybody wants to go after me that's fiep. big boy. >> john had a point. >> i'm sorry were you done i interrupted you it's like you were finished. >> i'll quit. >> okay. it's about time for audience questions but first john has something to add. >> if you go back to the march memo that secretary ross issued, that's not in there as his sole motivation i know he made that statement but that's not in the memo that way. >> just to show high a high degree of collegiality here i actually grooe with neil's points regarding the the ability to draw the difference between the travel ban cases and this case yes they did

you believe in that justice? the use of experience testify before congress had replied upon his wit and sharp argumentative skills to take on. never imperialist and your times porter wrote never taken by surprise he is ultimate unstoppable man. so far he had remained unruffled by thurman's inquest with the only son of it nervousness was too frugal with water on his desk. but nothing in his background has prepared him for his latest outburst. he brought up the constitutional limitation inhibiting him from responding, the senator interjected, mallory i want that word to ring in your ears. mallory thurman bellowed getting angrier. mallory, a man who raped a wom woman, admitted his guilt in the supreme court turn him loose on calculated to encourage people, can you as a justice of supreme court condone such a decision? visibly shaken for the first time fordyce resting his head in his hands glancing over to james. three years earlier he had thanked the judiciary committee chairman for his courtesy and understanding an

the justice department looking to decertify an immigration judge's union.y thought that judges don't have unions, but immigration judges do. that union has criticized the trump administration. at issue whether federal immigration judges can legally be in a union. the federal labor relations authority has criticize president plan to impose quotas and deadlines on the judges, you know to actually work and create results to deal with a massive backlog of immigration cases. joining us, former acting u.s. attorney general, matthew whitaker. great to to have you here. >> thank you. glad i could be here. lou: i it not realize that immigration judges have a union. >> they had a union, i was chief of staff and acting attorney general, the union resisted a lot of our plans to reduce backlog of 900 thousand pending asylum cases, all we were asking -- so average immigration judge carries over 700 a year, we asked to do less than average, we said less than average, that will be one of your management standards. and they resisted it. in the high volume districts. where w

with justice thomas on that side. let me and with another of the books main, it takes a certain kind of individual international character to be capable of liberty. thomas himself embodies precisely that character. that's why i've written a life and works book, which chapter two, recounting thomas his biography, his character is bound up with his in an exemplary way. one in a kerosene lit chanting, and a hamlet founded by freed slaves, thomas enjoyed a few look thin like childhood years until his divorced mother moved him and his younger brother to a savanna slum, a foul backyard toilet. on made wages, the children new hunger without the prospect of eating and cold without the prospect of. after a year of this, thomas his mother sent to doors away, to live with her father and and mother, and oliver twist like transformation. anderson, the self-made, if some are literate proprietor of a modest fuel oil business lived in a sparkling clean block house that boasted porcelain plumbing. a full fridge and a no excuses child

justice anymore.re is no conceivable way they could take five years to decide to do nothing. that's unacceptable from my point of view. we would not honor the request in the future. but lawrence, the key is not to have another eric garner case. to do things so differently that we never have this kind of tragedy again. and i think it's important for all your viewers to understand these situations can be changed through all deescalation. we retrained after the tragedy of eric garner to dekaes late any kind of situation that the community, dekaes late exactly what you saw on camera there. now that would be handled very differently. there's a body camera on every officer. that was not true at that time. every officer is getting implicit bias training to help weed out whatever biases are in all of us as humans. this is a very different city. this is a very different police force. it's very notable that the first place there was a public trial in this entire case, first time there was actually a trial, it w

the justice department does not deny that. the justice department says yes, but then you ratified others in advance. if that happens, we can litigate that. that has nothing to do with whether these subpoenas -- judge livingston: could you address the standard of review, because you begin by arguing likelihood of success on the merit should be our standard. i don't know if you made that argument very strenuously below and is that really the argument you're pressing? mr. letter: below, we thought what should happen is the same as masers, which is that it should combine and be the merits. these are legal questions. as an aside, mr. strawbridge says we might conduct discovery, he can't conduct discovery. this speech or debate clause says when the president sues, he cannot start collecting discovery of members of congress. that is absolutely forbidden by the united states constitution. there is no discovery of congress that is going to happen here. in addition, it would be inconsistent with the supreme court precedent. we have ille

>> so senator sanders released his criminal justice platform yesterday.one of 11 of the 23 candidates so far who has articulated that they as president would eliminate private prisons and, in fact, most of his candidates have gone further and said they would eliminate all profits from incarceration. now what a lot of these platforms are missing is that they're not focusing on the other special interest groups with a stake in keeping prisons filled like correctional officer unions. new york governor cuomo faced this in 2011 when he tried to close seven prisons in new york. the new york correctional union balked and said public safety will be greatly, you know, public safety will be a problem because of what's happening with the governor's aim to close private prisons. and we've seen a lot of the candidates really focusing on eliminating profit from incarceration. now that's important. we know that private firms and we know that all the companies that make money off incarceration are certainly a significant hurdle when it comes to down-sizing our prison pop

and going to get justice, they're finally going to be justice, i have confidence in that in the nextou know why? for the first time, we are not waiting on the federal justice department which told the city of new york we could not proceed because the justice department was pursuing their prosecution. back to that point. protesters also interrupted the candidates multiple times chanting fire pantalleo. >> to make sure it's a country that puts working people first. >> fire pantalleo! >> one of those activists tweeted, we could not sit silent while the mayor misrepresented his positions on stop and frisk the youngest daughter -- >> as i was watching that debate last night. >> to hear your father's name invoked as much as it was. stopping a debate that millions of people were watching, what did you think of that? did you know it would happen ahead of time in. >> i was not aware of any protests that would be happening at the debate. >> i was made aware when my phone started receiving text messages. >> i've been screaming for the past five years, so for it to be the reason why the presiden

the justice department has had their brief is hypothetical, the justice department does not deal with the history of this country. we pointed out some illustrative examples, george washington, abraham lincoln, harry truman, they had situations where congress was being very intrusive. they wanted to know, president lincoln, how are you carrying out the civil war? you are the commander-in-chief and you seem to be doing a bad job so we want to investigate how the war is being conducted. the historical record makes clear that president lincoln grumbled about this but cooperated, he talked to congress. you might say that's different and it shows voluntariness, but it's not, -- >> but that was president lincoln as president lincoln, not as a private individual. >> then we have president nixon as a private individual, congress asked for tax returns and he voluntarily surrendered some, congress asked for more, and indeed asked for tax returns of his family members and those were turned over. >> [indiscernible] >> it would have been ways and means. and it was discussed in our supplemental brie

department of justice refused to prosecute that person as well. i mean, take your analysis if you will of how this relates to general flynn because flynn is sitting here over on the sideline saying hey, what about me? i'm about to get sentence over here. you prosecuted me, how come you are not prosecuting them? >> yeah, and in general flynn his situation is interesting because both mccabe and comey were involved in it and comey even said that he took advantage of an early administration that it was just getting organized and went into a situation and told his investigators to go in and interview general flynn and then mccabe told flynn that they didn't need the white house counsel there and you know there's a lot of these names strzok, mccabe, that were all a part of this flynn investigation and now i see today's headlines that the new defense team is having a hard time getting some key documents in this and so i think we're going to learn a lot more about the flynn case and together with the origins of this investigation that you mentioned, durha

the justice department has to ensure speedy justice. it's right there in the constitution. there can be a process that goes on ever again i'm not going to go in private conversations. as i said, it's a legal matter. >> reporter: [indistinct question] again, i believe the process was fair and impartial. this is the first time we've seen a decision. i want to remind everyone, over five years, district attorney did not bring indictment. therefore there was no trial. the justice department did not bring an indictment, therefore there was no trial period for the first time, there was a trial. a fair and impartial trial, and a result. remember that point about justice delayed is justice denied, at least there was a trial and the results. i have faith it was a fair and impartial process. >> reporter: you said on the radio this morning -- do you regret waiting on the justice department and not going ahead with what was filed in 2015? >> absolutely. i can't understand how this happened. everything i've seen, my entire life, suggested the justice department believed it was his respon

remember that point about justice delayed is justice denied. at least there was a trial and a result. i have faith that it was a fair and impartial process. >> you said on the radio this morning that you won't wait on the justice department again. do you regret waiting on the justice department and not going ahead. >> absolutely. i cannot understand how this happened. everything i had seen my entire life suggested the justice department believed it was its responsibility to act when other levels of government had not. or at least to make a decision quickly for the benefit of justice. it's literally beyond any -- i cannot find any parallel to what happened here, and it's an unacceptable reality. i did not think it possible honestly. i didn't think it was possible under either administration federally. but now that we've experienced it, we will never allow that to happen again. >> mayor, have you spoken to him about the judge's recommendation, and why aren't you saying what your personal opinion is now that we have this recommendation from the ju

founders never, ever one of the system which supreme court justice or pending justice have to wait 239ppened to president obama. so in this country we have to think about how do we make the courts impartial and how do we do it well. >> shannon: knowing many of justices across the ideological spectrum, i feel like they will not respond well to this because they don't like being pushed were threatened by another branch. >> no, at the justice has already made it clear she thinks nine justices the right number e have had for 150 years. it was republicans, quite frankly, playing with those numbers right after the civil war. they did not want andrew johnson to have appointments when lincoln was assassinated so they cut the number of justices. when grant was elected president, they upped it. franklyn roosevelt trying to do it in a super majority in the congress by the way, he got pushed back readily. i think that will happen again. >> shannon: ten seconds. >> i think nine justices is the right number but the right question to ask yourself, should two justices be political as they are and you

justice ruth bader ginsburg.as had before issues with cancer and she's had radiation therapy before. this is radiation therapy at memorial sloan kettering cancer center in new york city and it began we are told on august 5th, was administered on an outpatient basis to treat her tumor on the pancreas. she is said to be recovering well. she was last seen in court in june. since then she's had some public appearances in which she did an interview with npr. she had been out and about and seen but this is something that obviously is a major concern for her health. she obviously is one of the oldest members of the u.s. supreme court and someone who in the past has had health issues. she had a fall in which she was recovering from months ago. this malignant tumor has been removed and the courts says she is spent recovering and is expected to come back. shannon bream is the anchor of fox news at night, she joins us now on the phone, she is also cover the court for us for years. chana what about this news and what you kno

, justice ginsburg and will do so again in new york, i interviewed justice breyer at one point, not about a book but generally. and then recently thomas the supreme court historical society event. these are all intelligent people who love the law and the law and they really are quite articulate and quite good interview subjects. i also interviewed buses kagan for an event at the library of congress so for my book, the market story i interviewed the chief justice and let me describe that, i got to know him reasonably well because i served as a smithsonian institution, the chancellor is the chief justice. i get a chance to interact from time to time. i thought it would be a good idea for the program i have at the library congress interview somebody who is not an author but someone who can be an interesting person for members of congress. i have done that twice in the series, one with bill gates who interviewed and one with the chief justice. the chief justice was a person -- i went through his life in a story which is recounted in the book, i said did you always want to be chief justice of

he has sent to the department of justice.ake a look. >> i believe what today is is another example. it's a building block. it's important information. so specifically, the house intelligence committee of republicans have referred to the department of justice criminal referrals based on conspiracy. now, with that said, looking at this, what do we now know today? a very important piece of evidence that i think was lost on a lot of people. james comey came and breached the conference in early july of 2017. he then went to brief the president-elect trump. the inspector general found that he was acting as parts of the investigation. so comey himself was involved in the investigation followed up with a cross fire hurricane team that was running the investigation of the president and his team. they actually determine the classification of this. so very important pieces of evidence that would build into the conspiracy complaints that we have sent to the department of justice. >> i think devin nunes makes a very good points. of course

they are waiting for justice and they're going to get justice. there's finally going to be justice.0 days in new york. >> was that response adequate? please respond. >> no, he should be fired. he should be fired now. if i was the mayor identifier him. as president i would make sure we had a full investigation, that the report would be made public and if i wasn't satisfied, we would have a consent decree. >> deblasio draws attention to the fact he doesn't have the technical legal authority to fire the officer himself. critics want him to exert influence over police department of his administration. what was also his decision to postpone the disciplinary proceedings till after a federal probe with barr after that finished. >> of don't touch me. >> no. no. >> all right. >> for the second time in as many weeks, a grand jury has found the evidence is just not there to charge a white police officer in connection with the death of a black civilian. >> i can't breathe. i can't breathe. i can't breathe. i can't breathe. i can't breathe. i can't breathe. i can't breathe. >> federal prosecutor

they are waiting on wanted to justices.he founders never ever wanted a system in which a supreme court justice would have to wait 239 days without getting a hearing which happened to merrick garland. we have to think about making courts impartial and how to do it very well. shannon: justices across the ideological spectrum are not going to respond well to this because they don't like being pushed or threatened by another branch. >> she thinks 9 justices the right number to the number we had with 150 years. republicans playing with those numbers after the civil war. they didn't want andrew johnson when lincoln was assassinated, they cut the number of justices. when grant was elected president they upped it and then it came to franklin roosevelt with a supermajority in the congress. he got pushed back readily. i think that will happen again. >> 9 justices is the right number. we should ask ourselves is our -- as political as they are? you know the case's decision before it comes out. shannon: we will see how this plays out. l

was an obstruction of justice but look at what happened. the acting attorney general bob bork within 11 days of leon jaworski of good baylor man i might say leon jaworski carried on the investigation and the rest of course is all history. the old system worked in a little bit more study of history, history is a great teacher. i'm airing because it's a great teacher. would tell us that ulysses s. grant fired special counsel of his time at the investigation went on. harry truman fired the attorney general who fired the special prosecutor in the early 1950s but the investigation went on. the investigation like the proverbial show will go on. they didn't need to do what it did in 1978. to restore the authority within the constitutional structure of article ii now under the regulations of which bob mueller was appointed the attorney general makes the appointment and in this instance the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein made this appointment as the acting attorney general when jeff sessions recused himself. the other thing that i would say

, so we could -- so finally, justice delayed could be justice served.t you've learned about exactly how this came about. >> sure, joe. i mean, it's not an exaggeration to say that jeffrey epstein was the most high-profile inmate in federal custody at the time. and it's important to drill down on that time line. if you consider the fact that he was found in his jail cell injured on july 25th. and that he was, according to our sources, put on suicide watch. we're then told by july 29th, he was taken off of suicide watch. and because of conversations that i've had with particularly one former federal warden at a number of prisons including the sister facility in brooklyn, the only way that happens, to be taken off of suicide watch, would be if a psychologist or psychiatrist determined and spoke with a program coordinator at the facility. and they decided that he should come off that watch. it would have had to have been a decision made by executives there at the prison. and this former official that i spoke to said, obviously, with an inmate like jeffrey e

the department of justice. the press. the white house. this is the story set at one of the most powerful capitals in the world a political and judicial conflict. a battle that has pitted tromp against those who believe he was an accomplice and russia's interference is. a battle for the truth about the president of the united states and for the principles of american democracy. according to top u.s. intelligence chiefs the russians interfered in the 2016 presidential election. puton they say developed a clear preference for trump over clinton so russia's intelligence services stole and leaked thousands of clinton's e-mails to discredit her. 2 weeks before his inauguration they brief trump. trump rejects their conclusions he does not want his victory to be questioned. the intelligence agencies maintain their findings and partially release them to the public they say putin ordered an influence campaign to help trump win the election. to control is immediately raised in congress which calls the chiefs of the intelligence community to testify.

o'connor, called telephone justice. taking orders from the party or are they trying to do the rule of law. and measure that way, i'm very, very, very sorry to say i think democracy is eroding somewhat. i don't think it's necessarily cat -- cataclysmic or can't be reversed. i'm not an expert. but signs after the great spread of democracy, it's sliding back. >> host: well, before we get into "ike's bluff," another one of your books, how would you describe the '50s? >> guest: well, confusing because we -- my generation, i grew up in the 1950s. he early 50s was boring. nice time, american prosperity. i think american incomes roughly doubled in the 1950s. the growth of the middle class. america did a spectacular job in the 1950s or creating and growing a middle class, washing machines and cars and houses and people just did great. so that's the sort of positive view of it. but of course it was also a scary time because the soviet union was building nuclear weapons to kill us maybe, and we didn't really know how many or what

in the book she tells the story of one of the most influential supreme court justices in american history in the american jurisprudence purpose review calls the top-notch turning the influential judges likened to a page turner seems a highly difficult task but he succeeds admirably everyone let us welcome stephen. [applause] >> thank you very much. it's very nice to be back here at politics and prose bookstore in washington, d.c.. can you hear me now is the microphone on? how about now. it's very nice to be back here at politics and prose bookstore in washington, d.c.. we keep reading predictions about how the publishing industry is going down the tubes and independent bookstores are doomed, but no one seems to have told politics and prose which goes from strength to strength and offers love coming here because there is always an audience of engaged interested readers so thank you to politics and prose for helping to keep her alive. it's always daunting to reach this point in the process of writing the book when you have to somehow distilled years of work into a speech and it's particular

several of the justices were talking about locker rooms in junior high school and justice ginsburg saido, you don't know what it's like the be a 13-year-old girl, you don't know how humiliating that kind of experience is. aknew 8-1 in the end that was an illegal search. having diversity on the court is essential for public confidence and the development of the law and an increasingly diverse america. >> thank you very much for being here tonight. >> thank you so much for having me. nk you so much forav hing me -guys, i want you to meet someone. this is jamie. you're going to be seeing a lot more of him now. -i'm not calling him "dad." -oh, n-no. -look, [sighs] i get it. some new guy comes in helping your mom bundle and save with progressive, but hey, we're all in this together. right, champ? -i'm getting more nuggets. -how about some carrots? you don't want to ruin your dinner. -you're not my dad! -that's fair. overstepped. -that's fair. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion, which mo

they're waiting for justice and they're going to get justice. there's going to be justice.ence in that. in the next 30 days in new york, you know why, because for the first time we are not waiting on the federal justice department which told the city of new york that we could not proceed because the justice department was pursuing their prosecution. and years went by and a lot of the pain accrued. and in the meantime, what i'm working on, and have i been for five years, there will never be another tragedy, there will never be another eric garner because we're changing fundamentally how we police. >> thank you. >> but there is one thing i have to say about the justice department. the vice president for two and a half years, mr. vice president, tell us what did you do to try and spur on the justice department to act in the garner case? >> thank you, mayor de blasio. vice president biden, you can respond to that. >> we did a lot. number one, we made sure we reduced the federal prison population by 38,000 people, number one. number two, we insisted that we change the roles that

up justice. these are some of the elements of the douglas plan which i contend is the most comprehensive yet offered by a 2020 candidate, to tackle systemic racism and serve black america . >> one minute 23 seconds in closing . >> there are a lot more details to these proposals that i hope you will take time to familiarize your site with a bye going to our website to learn about our message. we are taking this message everywhere and i invite you to watch me talk about systemic racism, not only when i am speaking to mostly black audiences but when i am speaking to mostly white audiences. [ cheering and applause ] as an urban mayor of a diverse city seeking to do the right thing, i have also encountered the limits and the pressures of our lack, nationwide of systems and structures that make it possible for everyone to succeed . it took intention to create the types of inequalities we are living through right now. it will therefore take intention and resources to reverse the inequalities and i am de

i've interviewed justice mayor, i've interviewed justice ginsburg and will do so again shortly at the 92nd and new york i've interviewed justice breyer, at one point not about a book but just generally. recently i interviewed justice thomas the supreme court society event. they are very intelligent people who love the law and live the law. they really are quite articulate and they really are quite good interview subjects. i've also interviewed justice kagan for a an event at the library of congress. i should've added that. i am for my book the american story, i interviewed the chief justice. we describe that. good to know the chief reasonably well because i currently serve as the chairman. the smithsonian's chancellor is the chief justice. i get the chance to interact with him from time to time. i thought it would be a good idea of the program i have the library of congress to interview somebody was maybe not another one is somebody who could be an interest in person as a member of the congress. i've done that twice now. bill gates interviewed and one is with the chief justice. the ch

[laughter] she would come out and say, i am justice o'connor, she's justice ginsburg. that happened not just occasion al a lawyers who showed up, but even the solicitor general -- [laughter] mortified as soon as he called me justice o'connor and realized the mistake that he had made. >> he said he wanted, he had -- wished that there was a trap door under his feet. [laughter] .. ask justice kagan on the other. people who have behind ad arguments at the court know that my two sisters in law are not shrinking violets. they're very active and there was a rivalry between justice scalia and justice sotomayor who could ask the most questions. >> several times she won. so it seems to me appropriate since we began this interview talking about justice scalia, we should end it in some way there, because the two of you were such pals for so many decades and such unlikely -- such an unlikely friendship. to people from the outside. what dead you love about him so much? >> he was a very funny man. he had been buddies on the d.c. circuit for some years before he was appointed to at th

the justice system failed him.failed him when they signed that agreement, they failed him again to make sure this man couldn't walk into his home and do business there, they failed him when they didn't have the appropriate people watching him to make sure he did not take his own life. in every single place, the government has failed him and they do deserve complete justice. >> let me read a couple statements by a victim. she said, i am angry jeffrey epstein won't have to face the survivors of his abuse in court. we have to live with the scars of his actions for the rest of our looifives while he will nev face the consequences of the crimes he committed the pain and trauma he caused so many people. epstein is gone, but justice must still be served. i hope the authorities will pursue and prosecute his accomplices and enablers and ensure redress for his victims. senator ben sasse said, as a prooifrt matter, our house is praying for both epstein's family and the many women who were denied justice in this life. but as a

that was referred to the justice department 18 months ago, gregg. unbelievable, you know? and juxtapose how quickly special counsel robert mueller was accusing people of crimes including michael flynn who committed no crime, and yet he facedded -- faced the doc. >> this is why we have judicial watch. gregg: thank you very much. good work. >> thank you. gregg: share your comments and follow lou on twitter @loudobbs like him on facebook, follow him on instagram @loudobbs tonight. coming up next, the wild claim made by one of the open border 2020 dems about daca ca recipients and u.s. citizens. we're going to share it with you when you come back. you will not believe it. ♪ ♪ fun fact: 1 in 4 of us millennials have debt we might die with. and most of that debt is actually from credit cards. it's just not right. but with sofi, you can get your credit cards right - by consolidating your credit card debt into one monthly payment. you can get your interest rate right - by locking in a fixed low rate today. and you can get your money right. with sofi. check

how difficult is tr a victim to wait for justice and in some cases never receive justice? wendy: the delay is probably the thing that causes the most harm to victims, second to sod times even more so than the underlying abuse. that may be hard for peoute to believe,t really is the secrecy and the lack of accountability that eats at the core of the victims and exacerbates their suffering. i want to say this as a hopeful observation -- the fact that the victims won't be able to look him in the eye in a court ofaw and say "you did this to me" is a weakness in terms of their quest for justice, but being heard is even more important, and theyill be heard. there will be no more secrecy, no more silence. they will have theiray in court, because they can still sue his estate. it is really important to emphasize the fact that being heard for victims, being respected, especially in a court of law, that is 90% of the goal here, in my opinion and in my experience.t the fact tffrey epstein is kedead does not oo much away from the fact that they will one day be heard. nada: wendy murphy

this individual and hoping we were finally bringing him to justice, it's basically justice denied. in one hand, everyone, including myself, and all the victims wanted to see him brought to justice and go through a trial, expose so many things that has not been exposed yet, that would come out during this trial. no one is going to have that now. >> we learned he was taken off of suicide watch at the end of july. he was taken off suicide watch after having marks on his net last month. now, we have multiple investigations into how this could have happened. do you have questions about the circumstances of his death? this was inevitable. jeffrey epstein lived his life not in a four-by-four cell. he knew he had two options. one, if he turned and cooperated against every person that indulged in his illegal behavior and he became a witness against these people, or he was going to spend -- he knew he was going to get convicted and spend the rest of his life in a cell. and there's no way, knowing this individual, knowing who he is and how he has lived, was going to do that. this was inevitab

>> the department of justice is right. we cannot ignore this when subpoenas are targeting the president because he is president. >> how is it -- how can the separation of powers be separated with his being in the individual capacity? >> the proceedings are against the banks. >> i think your point is that really doesn't matter and it is still the president's papers. >> that is correct. i think when you look in some of the comments -- in particular, we cite some of the comments that the chairs of the committee have made, we specifically are talking about the need to investigate and expose whether or not the president has ties to russia and whether there is for eign leverage over the president. chairman waters has specifically said that she is going to find out where the president's money is coming from. i don't think you can look at the basis of these and conclude that this is some kind of brought investigation into -- broad investigation into anybody who has significant real estate investment and money laundering practices.

bernie's big plan for america's justice system unveiled but could any of it actually become law? >> i'm in florida for a month without my family, i'm going enjoy this. yeah. >> can't wait to go on vacation, might be the only one. >> shocking number of wasted vacations americans aren't taking, "fox & friends first" continues right now. ♪ ♪ >> call yourself the man, i don't introduce myself saying good morning you're watching "fox & friends first" on monday morning i'm todd the man in for rob schmitt. [laughter] jillian: good morning, i'm jillian mele, always thank you for starting your day with us, let's begin with this, starting lawmakers reportedly for legislative action for top diplomat to the u.s., retaliation for israel's decision to ban congresswoman tlaib and omar. >> garrett tenney live with the president's response, garrett. >> good morning to you, the group of dozen or so democratic lawmakers considering a number of actions against israel's ambassador including issuing statement of no action, if that happens it would mark significant escalation and tensions within the de

nbc news has confirmed reports that the justice department's inspector general jim comey to the justiceartment. over the leaking of memos to the media. but the doj declined to file charges against him. nbc news justice correspondent pete williams is joining us now more with us. pete williams, what more do we know? >> well, we knew that james comey gave some of the memos that he wrote after his meetings with president trump that he gave some of them after he was fired to a friend to pass along to "the new york times" and that's where we first found out about these meetings that comey claimed he had with the president. what we didn't know is that the inspector general in looking into several questions about the origins of the fbi's investigation of the trump campaign referred to the justice department. in other words, suggested to the justice department that they should look at whether to prosecute comey for that. that's thing one. and thing two, the justice department having looked at it decided not to prosecute. now this is all part of an inspector general's report that we've been expec

the capital q c now is a bloody tyree vice president of the outgoing democratic party and a former justice minister with moldova now a by word for corruption you see ashamed of peace party's record in government. which i will tell you welcome to conflict zone. and place to be here to discussions your party lost the battle to hold on to power but you deserve to lose the way didn't you because democracy was increasingly undermined under your watch and there was massive corruption which you did very little about so you deserved to go didn't you really it depends how to look at that and i would disagree with something related to decryption sput yes indeed i can say that we have lots of critics related to democracy tens. well over the democratic party's been and while undertaking the mandate and governance in 2016 at youth a lot in social and economical performances being for example the salaries increased in the public area by 70 percent there are a salary still in the pensions of the last year you were sure in the world that the democratic party was implementing european standards at home tha

now back to "justice with judge jeanine."resident trump: whether you love me or hate me, you have to vote for me. you have the best unemployment and the most of successful state in the history of your state and in the history of our country. then you are going to vote for somebody else? oh, good. let's vote for elizabeth pocahontas warren. judge jeanine: president trump staying on his message of economic prosperity and taking aim at the person our fox news polling says is surging among the democrats, elizabeth warren. joining to us talk more about the race is trump 2020. katrina, the president is joking about pocahontas there. but the truth is, elizabeth warren is jumping leaps over bernie sanders and is second behind sleepily joe biden. i wouldn't be surprised if she passed him. we have to give her a little credit. but our own pox news polling says in addition to her taking these big leaps and vaulting into second place, some of her mess averages aren't all that left. some of what she is proposing sounds similar to the presi

that was referred to the justice department 18 months ago, gregg., you know? and juxtapose how quickly special counsel robert mueller was accusing people of crimes including michael flynn who committed no crime, and yet he facedded -- faced the doc. >> this is why we have judicial watch. gregg: thank you very much. good work. >> thank you. gregg: share your comments and follow lou on twitter @loudobbs like him on facebook, follow him on instagram @loudobbs tonight. coming up next, the wild claim made by one of the open border 2020 dems about daca ca recipients and u.s. citizens. we're going to share it with you when you come back. you will not believe it. ♪ ♪ ♪ here i go again on my own ♪ goin' down the only road i've ever known ♪ ♪ like a drifter i was-- ♪ born to walk alone! ...barb! you left me hangin' on the high harmony there. if you ride, you get it. geico motorcycle. 15 minutes could save you 15% or more. gregg: joe biden using a campaign event in south carolina to praise daca recipients, calling them more american than u.s. citizens. >> the

i think you will see the justice department continue to try to bring other people to justice in thisase. >> katie, can you just imagine what those alleged victims and previous victims are going through having not received justice so many years ago and now this happening now. >> so in the sexual abuse cases that i prosecuted, you know, the victimization that happens over and over again. these victims back in 2007, 2008 were not even made aware of the sweetheart deal jeffrey epstein was a beneficiary of and then fast forward to the fact that just this past year a few months ago a federal judge found the u.s. attorney's office, southern district of florida, violated the victim crimes rights act when they entered into that sweetheart deal with jeffrey epstein. the idea there was the opportunity to be able to face and confront jeffrey epstein has now completely been eradicated for these victims. there is as ashley said, the potential for civil exposure for the state of jeffrey epstein. but i'm concerned knowing the type of person, how secretive jeffrey epstein was, he did a very good job