[applause] >> i, brett m kavanaugh, do solemnly swear. >> after judge kavanaugh became justice, not yete doors of the united states supreme court these 2-ton bronze doors with so mad about what is going on. >> so help me god. >> so help me god. [applause] >> these confirmations are very political and getting worse. >> hopefully this is the end of it but this is washington and i would not be surprised if it is now a good time for a flare-up? enough, crohn's. for adults with moderate to severe crohn's or ulcerative colitis, stelara® can provide relief, and is the only approved medication to reduce inflammation on and below the surface of the intestine in uc. you, getting on that flight? back off, uc. stelara® may increase your risk of infections, some serious, and cancer. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection, flu-like symptoms, sores, new skin growths, have had cancer, or if you need a vaccine. rpls, a rare, potentially fatal brain condition, may be possible. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. lasting remission can st

[applause] >> i, brett m kavanaugh, do solemnly swear. >> after judge kavanaugh became justice, not yet these 2-ton bronze doors with so mad about what is going on. >> so help me god. >> so help me god. [applause] >> these confirmations are very political and getting worse. >> hopefully this is the end of it but this is washington and i would not be surprised if it came back again. that does the same, the rx crafted by lexus. lease the 2020 rx350 for $409 a month for 36 months. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. lease the 2020 rx350 for $4- with spray moppingrk vacmop to lock away debrisuction and absorb wet messes, all in one disposable pad. just vacuum, spray mop, and toss. the shark vacmop, a complete clean all in one disposable pad. with priceline, you can get up to 60% off amazing hotels. and when you get a big deal... ...you feel like a big deal. ♪ priceline. every trip is a big deal. inflammation in your eye might be to blame.ck, ♪ looks like a great day for achy, burning eyes over-the-counter eye drops typically work by lubricating your eyes and may provide temporary relie

i didn't think her questioning was that effective of justice kavanaugh.the stakes for her, then? i hadn't thought about that. that's an excellent point. the stakes for her and them nomination and i you want to take a final word, we have five minutes left, but i'd like to let ilya have the last word. >> i agree, jan. i think kamala harris seemed to be using the kavanaugh nomination as an attempt to build her national -- there was a series of got gotcha questions where she talk but have you talked to anyone about the mueller investigation, this law firm and he is going this is a law firm of 300 people. she said i think we both know who you're talking about. seems leak she has something on it and turned out by the next day when kavanaugh had a chance to review this 300 person list of people at the law firm, he could confirm on -- under oath i didn't think i had talked to nobody and now i can confirm i had not talked to anyone and she was like, okay, just wanted to know. and so it was -- thought what was this fishing expedition she was going on. really fell f

it was condos who demanded a correction and got one from kavanaugh. talk about the significance of that and how rare that is. incredibly sloppy. supreme court justices have clerks for a reason. they are supposed to be factual in analysis and not only was brett kavanaugh wrong on the merits of this wisconsin case, he was factually inaccurate. he said, for example, states like vermont had not changed their election procedures in response to covid when impact vermont has sent ballots to all registered voters to make it very easy to vote by mail, which is the kind of thing that the trump campaign is opposing. ielievehat brett kavanaugh's opinion was a form of election interference. he was trying to delegitimize the counting of votes. the most disturbing part of his opinion in addition to the factual errs was when he said that votes counted after election day could lead to suspicions of impropriety. that is simply not true. every single state counts votes after election day. both are not certified until at least a week after the election in nearly every st

and then also waiting the judicial confirmation and network book about the recent fight of justice kavanaugh. so that conversation about the news of the day or the week or the month and justice ginsburg and on the upcoming part of the nomination with incredible experts so i will start with teethree who is head of the center for constitutional all studies because in june we stood in front of the supreme court waiting for the interns to the opinions in our hands and then we go for those before we break the news to be quick and a student sometimes even get the signature dry wet in their that he has written a terrific book is it is supreme disorder. and is something i think now more than ever so take us through what made you decide to write this book and the world has changed. >> the publisher had to pay it was in the back of my mind that something like this could happen and there is something a little odd and not too healthy of the morbid healthwatch of those vacancies when they appear if there is a better way is there a better way is why wrote the book in the wake of the kavanaugh hearings has

we saw what happened with justice kavanaugh. the democrats, had it not be so close to an election, would've smeared, slandered, besmirched. they would've done what they did to kavanaugh. and justice thomas who will administer the oath tonight and what they did to robert bork. if they could, they would have. instead, i want to get your take. we are going to pack the courts. everything is on the table. end the legislative filibuster. d.c., puerto rico statehood. full on amnesty. i assume something of value. they would appreciate votes in future elections. that to me now speaks of one-party rule and they'll do it. your thoughts. >> they're going to do it. the only reason they won't do it is that the american people stop them. we must maintain control within the united states senate. you have joni ernst on the ballot from iowa. you've got martha mcsally, two great conservative women. you got susan collins is been just terrific senator from maine. help judge kavanaugh, helped us with the tax cuts. help all of us. we cannot turn over

we look at the drama of brett kavanaugh's confirmation. the senate gears up for another contentious hearing. >> would you say you have been through hell? >> i have been through hell and then some. >> it's not a job interview. this is hell. sa that's what we're doing. we put our arm around the veterans. when i think of the veteran out there that needs to refi his home, he may want to purchase, we can help them and provide that financial solution for they and their families. it's a great rewarding feeling. everybody in the company, they have that deference and that respect and that love for the veteran that makes this company so unique. my wife and daughter had been killed in an automobile crash, and lying in the bed were my two little boys. i couldn't have imagined what it would've been like if i didn't have insurance to cover them immediately and fully. forty years later, one of those little boys, my son beau, was diagnosed with terminal cancer, given months to live. i can't fathom what would have happened if the insurance companies had th

. -- after the kavanaugh process a few years ago.s always been part of the nominations. george washington had a nominee rejected, the president had to balance regional concerns, then you become a matter of slavery and on and on. different things played a role. why we are where we now and what is new is that first of all you have big centralized government in washington over the course of decades. power has been amassed in the supreme court has played a part in that, and within washington, a skew away from congress that doesn't resolve controversy so much anymore but hunt it to the to thepunts them administration and executive branch, which are sued, and it goes to the court as well. that important decision-making process. at the same time, different interpretive theories map onto partisan preferences when the parties are more ideologically sorted than at least the civil war, if not ever. of course there's gonna be a fight every time there is a vacancy for one of these powerful seats. susan: one of the downsides is the public increasi

and a year later, it came time for kavanaugh.usan: let's play a clip from the judiciary committee hearing. between the theme two parties as they approach the brett kavanaugh nomination. [video clip] >> i am telling the truth. >> i want to new what you want to do. >> i am innocent of the charge. >> you are prepared for an fbi investigation? >> they don't reach conclusions, you reach conclusions. >> if there are no -- is no truth to the charges, the fbi will show that. are you afraid they might not? >> this is not a job interview. this is hell. this is going to destroy the ability of good people to come forward because of the scrap -- this crap. to my republican colleagues, if you vote no, you are legitimizing the most despicable thing i have seen in my time in politics. susan: nominees are still coming forward in the process is still happening. what has been the outcome of the cabin on nomination -- kavanaugh nomination? ilya: a poisoning of the well between the pointy -- the parties and supporters of the parties. i think the kava

roberts' concurrence as well as kavanaugh's dissent, both roberts and kavanaugh emphasized there was very little daylight between the majority dissenting opinions. >> another interesting audience question that i got, because clearly she is going to be attacked in certain quarters, that these are your personal beliefs and you are going to rule with your personal beliefs and not going to follow the law. can any of you think of any examples in which you have seen judge barrett take a position in a case in which you suspect that, had it been up to her personal beliefs or personal views, she would have come out differently rather than following the law to reach the results she reached. >> real briefly, if you look at her immigration cases, i would assume that she has a policy preference on immigration. i have no idea what it is, but she has written opinions that were very forgiving and helpful to immigrants, and some that were very stringent. the common denominator is that she followed with the law required. in one center or the other, she had to reach some results she didn't like. there

now there are some troubling signs from w trump-appointed justices and judges like justice brett kavanaugh on the supreme court that they'd be all too happy to play along with the president's plan to stay in power. w we're going to talk about that later. so if you're feeling anxious, you don't need me to tell you this, but i'll tell you this, t it's not crazy, okay? i know you're nervous. i'm nervous. we are too. this is stressful. what can you say? but here's the other thing. if it was not this race, all right, and if it was not this race and this guy and we hadn't had the trauma of 2016. if this was just, you know, an electoral contest in another wa country or a small municipal race in a town you didn't know much about and i came here to tell you the numbers and talk you through it, you'd have very little question as to who was winning, okay? by a lot. think about this. today, the democratic candidate for president, joe biden, was in the state of georgia, georgia, d seven days before the election. now, joe biden can easily win the election and the electoral college without winning the st

kavanaugh is one of three supreme court justices along with amy coney barrett and chief justice john who were part of bush's legal team during bush v. gore. it appears the model of that dubious victory is now on the minds of many on the right. ron klain bears the scars by the last presidential race decided by the supreme court. he was the general counsel, can you imagine that, on al gore's recount committee and he joins me now. ron, you have an interesting set of experiences being the recount dude in florida, the ebola czar. you're now part of the biden campaign. what's your reaction having been in the trenches of the last brutal fight to read those words by justice kavanaugh, this idea that, like, we have to know election night to watch what the president's doing. what's your reaction having lived through this? >> well, before justice brett kavanaugh took the position he took in that opinion yesterday, lawyer brett kavanaugh stood in florida and argued that votes could be added to the tally as late as thanksgiving. in fact, if lawyer brett kavanaugh had not gotten votes added to the

apparently, justice kavanaugh has graduated-- did you like that joke over there?e that one? i did, too. i did, too. apparently, justice kavanaugh has graduated from local microbrews to huffing paint thinner, because in "bush v. gore," that court specifically said "our consideration is limited to the present circumstances," which means this ruling could not function as a precedent. well, i guess it's too much to expect brett kavanaugh to listen to someone saying "stop, don't do this." in his opinion, kavanaugh wrote that states who try to count ballots that arrive after election day could be hit with "chaos and suspicions of impropriety." hey, brett, have you looked out the window? "chaos and impropriety" is the 2020 prom theme. three weeks ago, some pretend militia yahoos plotted to kidnap the governor of michigan, and we're like "oh, yeah, that happened." one person who wasn't having any of kavanaugh's argument was justice elena kagan, seen here imagining a 13-member supreme court. in her dissent, kagan wrote, "justice kavanaugh alleges that 'suspicions of improp

that is because the brett kavanaugh nominations were so contentious. it did go on for longer than normal. four days is about right. we will start monday with opening statements from senators. we will hear from a neat -- amy coney barrett. divebsequent days, we will into very intense questioning of her by the senators. finally, there will be an outside panel that the senators will question. that is the format. that is standard. what is not standard is that we are operating in a pandemic. this is going to be a hybrid hearing. at the start, some senators are going to appear remotely. two of them have tested positive for coronavirus. mike lee and tom tillis. a thirdsalad -- senator, ted cruz, had interactions with mike lee, so it is unlikely he will participate in person. however, a lot of democrats have said they are going to show up in person in spite of their reservations about safety practices of republicans, some pre--- the supreme court nomination they say is too important to participate virtually. in large part because there can frequently be techni

durbin: brett kavanaugh was an extraordinary situation. i have been through many of these and it was exceptional. the charges from outsiders and bringing in witnesses and such, it really was an unusual circumstance. what we saw with judge barrett in that room i thought was the more orderly process that i remember from previous nominees. gorsuch included. kavanaugh was a touch point for how this would go and this went back to what was the ordinary approach within the room. sen. blumenthal: i differ a little bit. as you and i have discussed, i think, i think we hit them hard and we hit her with those issues in a courteous way, which we did in brett kavanaugh too, but it turned out to be more confrontational because some of his reactions were therontational and i think orderly process should not be confused with hard-hitting issues. we brought out all of them. i don't think there are any that went unmentioned or unquestioned. sen. durbin: one point, doing at this quickly means that we are uncertain as to whether we have gathered the informati

i saw justice kavanaugh go through this process.t is the same person, the same judge whether they are before they are nominated and confirmed as they are after. i think judge barrett and her questionnaire testified that she had no discussions with anyone, i do not think she has at a -- has had a discussion with leonard leo and clearly she has not had a discussion about how she will rule on cases. you know, this is just senator whitehouse trying to demonize the process and the people who were involved. person --ence, this lawrence, kansas is next. jeremy opposes. go ahead. caller: we should be talking about article three section three in relationship with what sheldon whitehouse laid out, and i would like to point to three moments in the hearings that tell us exactly about it. first, what white house is actually pointing out, and to call it is a conspiracy theory in a court full of the theory of conspiracy, such things as racketeering, conspiracy, corruption, this is exactly what senator whitehouse laid out is who big, dark money pow

you tried to destroy kavanaugh. the good thing as there was no kavanaugh-like attack on judge barrett. i think they learned their lesson and i hope this sets the tone for the future the future. >> martha: as we all remember we were at this stage when the kavanaugh allegations began. now you talk about october 22nd, 7 long days when everyone looks at this process and says it was handled well. do you sense that there is anything in the works to try to gum up this boat? >> i don't know but after the kavanaugh experience i don't sleep well at night. i sleep with one eye open. there are groups out there who are attacking senator feinstein for showing common courtesy. only god knows what they would do. i can tell you this, when it comes to this election cycle, democrats have raised about $400 million since the passing of justice ginsburg to destroy people like me. my opponent raised $57 million because i dare stood up for kavanaugh and i'm helping trump. if you want to help me, lindsey graham.com, i've got amy's back. the

remember what happened with brett kavanaugh, every republican voted for brett kavanaugh and it boosted them. in the senate republicans knocked off four incumbents all of whom voted against kavanaugh. the worst thing a republican could do would be to oppose the judge. none of them are for that. they're for her on the merits. >> we're waiting for the technical difficulties to be worked out. well bring this hearing back to you as soon as it gets started again. shannon bream if you're still the there >>> i am. >> i wanted to ask you about tomorrow, look forward, because one of the things ari said, he brought up brett kavanaugh. the kavanaugh hearings were tough. but all the controversy came after the hearings concluded. do you anticipate anything like that on this go around? >>> yeah, you know dana you're so right to point that out. maybe we forget that what turned into the yelling and protestors and yelling that wasn't initially happening. we got through the first phase, and thought they were going to proceed to the vote. there is time when it goes to the senate floor and that's where sup

both justice courses and kavanaugh had a lot of notes.two ivy league rose could not keep up with judge barrett. >> our guests will be with us until 845. if you want to ask questions of them you can do so on the phone line if you wish this morning go ahead and call you can also post honored twitter feed our facebook page available to you as well ife you want. you can talk to mike davis of the article three project. mr. davis when he heard democratic senators particularly talk about judge baird over concerns about the future of the affordable care act, the future of women's rights. what came across your mind when you saw that quite of questioning? systemic thought it was a typical political nonsense you here at the supreme court hearings. these judges are going to do what judges do. which is look at the facts, look at the law, apply the law to those facts and let the chips fall where they may. it is just nonsense to think that judge amy kony barracks, a mother of seven kids including one with down syndrome is on some sort of mission from go

my democratic opponent voted to oppose brett kavanaugh. she raised a bunch of money overnight doing it. so, this really is a moment for me from which i would not shrink because the people of north dakota would be outraged if i did that. do you have any concerns -- host: do you have any concerns at all about voting for a nominee eight days before an election? guest: imagine if i told my constituents that i know you sent me here and i know we have been given this opportunity shortly before the election but maybe i should just wait to see if joe biden can name the supreme court justice? i would be recalled and rightfully so. i'm grateful for this moment and opportunity. i'm not going to shrink from it that i'm going to step up to it. the: do you agree with process in place for nominating justices to the supreme court? would you like to see any reforms? caller: not at all. the role of the senate is in the constitution. how the role plays out, you know , the rules of the senate are the senate's. the number of supreme court justices are a matter

justice gorsuch: justice kavanaugh? justice kavanaugh: i have two questions. google says in its reply brief that the undisputed fact in this case is that declarations could not be written in any other way and still properly respond to the calls used by java programmers. are they wrong in saying that? mr. stewart: i don't think they are wrong in saying that, but that argument is circular. applies invoking the it if it's only the way of getting a computer to perform a particular function but they are thening the function as code known to developers. that is wrong because section 3028 says copyright protection exists from the works creation. at the time the work was created, there were none known to developers. is as the chief justice pointed out in an earlier part of the argument, that would effectively penalize oracle for its success. the fact the calls were well-known was simply a function of the fact that the java platform was popular and a lot of people had written apps for it. saysce kavanaugh: google the -- it's a method of operation because they are for t

kavanaugh laste term talking about narrow separability. there is a presumption, even though it is not expressed, that a constitutional question can be separable. i think they could find it to be separable. >> justice kavanaugh had a decision last term in which he said constitutional litigation is not gotcha legislation for something that congress may have inadvertently done. anyone else have something on that? no? all right, well, that is our time. i want to thank you all for participating. if i had some way to show applause, i would do it. but perhaps lee knows better, so i will turn this back over to her. >> thanks, bob. >> thanks to all of our speakers. i think there is a way to do it, but i don't know how to do it. [laughter] icon i am not so , zoom proficient that i know how to do it, but i do want to thank all of you for a very stimulating discussion of the upcoming term, and for a very interesting discussion also about the potential impact of a justice barrett. thanks so much to all of you for watching, and we hope to see you soon a

he would have thought the democrats would have learned their lesson after the debacle of kavanaugh and that hearing. but about that episode continues to be a black cloud over their heads they lost senate seats as a result. amy coney barrett is an exceptional nobody into a terrific job on the court. she will be a model for many. look at the nominee. she is somebody ready to apply the law, legislate from the bench she was flooded in a bipartisan vote to a lower court. she deserves a dignified and respectable hearing. >> let me just of the president made an outstanding choice with indiana's own judge amy coney barrett as a nominee to serve as associate justice to the supreme court of the united states. we got to know amy through the seventh circuit court of appeals nomination process. a person of great integrity sharp intellect and a strong work ethic even with good humor. will need to prepare for that to make this anything but to serve on the highest court of the land. instead of the world try to scare americans those with pre-existing conditions. this is a mother of seven children and o

gorsuch and kavanaugh were my top recommendations. any republican president looking to nominate somebody to the supreme court would be looking at gorsuch and kavanaugh. these are not exotic pics. during sotomayor and elena kagan in terms of qualifications. so what happened? gorsuch was the first attempt at a partisan filibuster. we had three votes to get to 60 and we couldn't, so we changed the rules for the supreme court like they changed the rules in 2013 for the district court and court of appeals. if we had not, gorsuch would be on the a court and to say that he's not qualified as a joke. it's an insult to him and it says more about you than it does about judge gorsuch. if you can see he's qualified, you are blinded by your hatred bof trump. so he d had to do it because by any other time, gorsuch would have gottend the same type of votes is roberts because he is highly qualified. then comes along kavanaugh. nothing about the t process the. there's no process argument. right at the very end, the last day of the hearing when we thou

the left played their handmade tail out of fantasy, they did that with the kavanaugh thing, so thingssty early on. i think honestly what were going to be looking for tomorrow from this hearing is i think it's going to be pretty calm. don't really think there's going to be any theatrics. i think the left figured out very early on that they did not have any credible argument against amy comey barrett and i don't think there's any way they can stop this. timmy, what do you think, are they going to rustle up something from her past, i doubt it. >> there was no legitimate argument against judge kavanaugh either so they manufactured what or several so the left, i've always told people, having come from the left, i've watched them never know when to stop, they don't have any boundaries, they are disconnected from reality so while we see the damage that was done clearly to the democrats after the kavanaugh hearing, the gop control of the senate was expanded which was a statement that, if anything america wanted the republicans to charge the supreme court. it is telling that harris will not be

judge kavanaugh is your worst nightmare. >> not only do women like dr. ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed. if they need be believed. >> i just want to say to the men in this country, just shut up and step up. >> let's look at beach week ralph club biggest contributor club. >> that probably refers to throwing up. >> drinking is one thing, but the concern is about truthfulness and in your written testimony, you said sometimes you had too many drinks. it was there ever a time when you drank so much that you couldn't remember what happened or part of what happened the night before? >> sean: so will they ever apologize for the treatment of justice kavanaugh, apologize to his family? will they ever apologize for the high-tech lynching -- you remember what they did to justice clarence thomas. will they ever apologize to the family of robert bork and the false accusations made against him? of course not. for democrats, nothing is ever off the table. lies, smears, slander. it's all a means to an end. by the way, buckle

like donald trump, brett kavanaugh imagines there is some sort of magical result that occurs on tv on election night and that anything that changes that temporary number that you see on tv, brett kavanaugh thinks must be the result of something illegitimate. this is the kind of legal scholarship produced by the trump supreme court that would get you a failing grade in law school or high school. the biggest vote counter in the country, the state of california, will be counting votes for 17 days after election day. recounts in close elections can sometimes extend the time it takes to get a result by months, as happened in the first senate election of al franken, who won by 312 votes, eight months after election day when all the votes were counted. brett kavanaugh knows none of that and his ignorance poses a threat that democrats might have to contend with legally in lawsuits that donald trump is very likely to file to try to stop counting mail-in ballots after election day. the most authoritative guide yet published on what to expect on election day has been produced by senate democrats

>> kavanaugh.drinking -- >> was there ever a time when you drank so much you couldn't remember what happened or apartment of what happened the night before? >> no. i remember what happened. and i think you've probably had beers. about >> well our next two guests wrote the book on kavanaugh hearing and join us now with reaction to the first day of judge barrett's questioning. let's bring in coauthors of justice on trial the kavanaugh confirmation and future of the supreme court. we've got molly hemingway and carey whose name we heard yesterday and get to that. ladies good morning to you mollies it a much different confirmation hearing than kavanaugh, wasn't it? >> well, people remember how the kavanaugh confirmation hearings really deinvolved into a circus with day of testimony from christine and his first day of the original confirmation hearing was crazy it took then charm chuck grassley better part of an hour to get through his brief opening sames because he was interrupted so many times but outb

a 12 bedroom mansion across from brettcht club as kavanaugh was being voted on. gone very rich from his work trend of practice court with people he has put on the list that president trump chooses from. he recently launched a new effort earlier this year, per for-profitit operation that also advises donors on how to basically influence who gets on the supreme court and our state supreme court includingng the wisconsin n supreme court come d help pack thehese cords of pepee who o are very favorable to corporate agenda and far right wing social agenda which will repeal -- potentialally repepeaa lot of lawaws, the aca, roe v. wade, possibibly even -- [indiscernible] federalop our government from being able to mitigate climate change by putting up hurdles, judicial hurdles to our ability to enact legislation to regulate carbon. so everything is on the line and leonard leo represents an agenda both from a social standpoint and also from a corporate standpoint. a senator whitehouse said, this is an unreal situation where we have groups raising money from a small number

you said it after the kavanaugh meetings. not before the kavanaugh hearings. after the kavanaugh hearings. your promise was that no judicial nominee should be considered or approved or what have you, in the last year of an election. and you even named president trump when you set it. so this is my thing, my grandfather always taught me, a man is only as good as his word. senator, how good is your word? you made a promise to the american people and you made a promise to the folks in south carolina you would not be doing what you're doing right now, and that is the problem i have. i think the greatest heresy you could do as a public servant is to betray the trust of the people you took notes to serve. that is what you have -- you took it out to serve. and that is what you have done. or the amount and stand up and say i'm going to do something else. but don't go and blame it on something else for flip-flop you're making on yourself. said in august we will see what the market will bear if an opening comes about and we are going to do what we have the constitutiona

when it came to kavanaugh, who i have known for 20 years, mr.arrison cheered on the destruction of this good man. he has said publicly, one of the main reasons he got into the race was because of the way i behaved. one of the main reasons i'm going to get reelected is because i stood up for justice kavanaugh. people in this state are fair-minded. we are a bite of centerstage, we don't want a little supreme court, no matter what he says tonight. the people in charge of the democratic party -- he is the associate chairman of the national democratic party -- have in mind changing the court to make it liberal. don't be fooled. mr. harrison: senator graham, for i'm a democrat -- i am a democrat -- before i'm a democrat, i'm a self-care lien. before that, i'm an american. i believe in the constitution, in this entity of the building you work in. when i see that dome lit up at night, i get goosebumps because i know the power that that place has to improve the lives of folks. it can give the american dream to so many and it has. this is the thing. justi

judge kavanaugh had anything to do with it. this was a party in high school. dr. ford couldn't remember where it was, who was there, the people that were said to be there said they don't remember anything like it happened. judge kavanaugh hasn't lived a life like being described. he was accused by four or five people, three of them actually made it up. i hope some of them go to jail for lying to the committee and the country. and they were trying to make him a rapist and a drug and women and high school. and what was his annual all about? it was the most sickening episode in my time in the senate. they were hellbent on destroying this guy's life based on a bunch of manufactured lies and evidence that wouldn't get you out of the batter's box in any court of law in the land. and here we are. 50-48. and what i saw there was a turning point for me. we cannot continue to do this. you're going to drive good people away. and i'm hoping that the barrett hearings, which were far more civil, far more traditional, will be a turning point,

. >> that was senator kamala harris during brett kavanaugh's hearing two years ago, the vice presidentialndidate will step back into the spotlight this week when she questions judge amy coney barrett during her confirmation hearing, political strategists a harris needs to strike a delicate balance between grilling the judge and appealing to moderate voters, julia is in the political reporter for the hill, should we expect to see her be as direct or acerbic as she was in questioning brett kavanaugh? >> it's hard to say right now, she has to strike this. delegate on the one hand she wants to galvanize the liberal democratic base that wants intends on amy coney barrett in the confirmation hearing after all, this is a candidate who would replace ruth bader ginsburg on the supreme court. on the other hand i talked to a number of republican strategist who said this is definitely something that complained against her while she may galvanize liberal base by going after amy coney barrett in a particular direct way, she might turn off the moderate voters who are viewing the hearings and saying amy

kavanaugh hearings after the kavanaugh hearings in your words your promise was that no judicial nominee should be considered or proved or what have you in the last year of an election and you even named president trump when you said it. and so this was my thing you know my grandfather always taught me i said jamie is a man only as good as his word senator how good is your word when you made a a promise to american people and even more you made a promise to the folks in south carolina. that you wouldn't be doing what you're doing right now. and that's the problem that i have greatest i think the greatest that you could do as a public servant to betray trust of the people that you took to serve and that's what you have done. now just be a man of it and stand pup say you know whey change my mind i'll do something else but don't go back and blame it on somebody elsedo for a flip-flop that s you're making yourself. >> so if i may i said in august if an opening comes about, we'll see what market will bear bare this will get confirmed because president has the constitutional authority to do an

so judge kavanaugh would recuse where oralm cases argument was already heard. same for justice kagan. [indiscernible] 4-4, the individual mandate is upheld. the remand would still take effect, but it would go back to the district to determine separability so that there won't be indecision at the court with regard to the entire statute. thathen also, i think there's becoming a greater consensus as this case makes it way through the court that the constitutional question may not actually be that close. [indiscernible] they were very clear that in order to be a tax, the essential feature was that it must raise some revenue. if we are talking about a broad power, that would certainly be the taxing power with no requirement that there be any sort of revenue raising. but the sort of check on that is that the government is people will so the call the elected representatives to account. but if it does not meet the meaning of being a tax, than that check of power is absent. i could see the chief justice finding that problematic under it new 2017 statute, but really does

you set it after the kavanaugh hearings. that nomise was judicial nominee should be considered or proved in the last year of an election. you even made president -- named president trump. manrandfather taught me a is only as good as his word. how good is your word when you made a promise to the american people. you made a promise to the folks in south carolina that you wouldn't be doing what you're doing right now. that's the problem. you can dot heresy is a public servant is to betray her at the trust of the people. be a man instead of and say i changed my mind. don't go back and blame it on somebody else. if an opening comes about, we will see with the market will bear. she's going to get confirmed because the president has the authority to do it. when president obama was president i honor the fact that he won the election and i voted for two people i wouldn't have chosen. i've watched the party try to constrict -- destroy one conservative judge. he chaired on the destruction of brett kavanaugh. amy barrett is highly quali