you have come out in support of judge kavanaugh's nomination, and came out before the allegations, dr came to light. tell me what, where you are today on this given the one-week delay and the one-week investigation that senator flake and others were submittal on her? the first point is judge kavanaugh up until 12, 14 days ago with someone whose nomination i judge on the basis of how he viewed his role in the court. i believe the supreme court in the try of law. its job is not to decide public policy but to decide what the constitution says. is this all constitutional or not? and may not reach the policy, you disagree with but you're not trying a a case based on fact. you are a trier of law. i believe the constitution should be interpreted according to its intent and the words of the other because there exists a process to change the constitution if you want to change it. if the constitution adapt over time then it really becomes a meaningless document. that's the core argument between those who believe the constitution is a leading in preindictment visibly that should be interpreted a

that's what justice kavanaugh said we needed to do. that's exactly what this bill does, by the book. and yet the democrats still oppose it. to my democratic colleagues, i ask you, how many more laws with names attached to them do we need to pass before you take this crisis seriously? how many american citizens must die at the hands of illegal aliens before we all agree that these tragedies are all preventible? must the name of my child or your child be the one attached to a h.r. number before the democrats can vote yes on these commonsense bills? how much more blood must be shed before we all can join in calling for an absolute end to the democrats' reckless open borders and sanctuary cities policies that have threatened our safety, devastated our families, and are in the process of destroying our country? the american people have now spoken clearly on this issue. enough >> the house returns monday for speeches with legislative work later in the aft. a number of disaster-r measures are on the calendar. later in the week representatives

versus texas written by justice kavanaugh and joined by eight of nine justices on the court. in rejecting the state standing argument, the court observed among other things that lawsuits alleging insufficient arrests or prosecution run against the executive branch's exclusive article 2 authority to enforce immigration law. which includes the discretion to determine enforcement priorities in the face of a chronic lack of resources and shifting public safety, public welfare, and foreign policy needs and priorities. if this bill were to become law, both provisions would have the perverse effect of undermining the federal government's efforts to prioritize the detention and the deportation of the truly most dangerous convicted felons. with the vastly expanded new statutory scope and new short for states to get legal standing on steroids, the government can be sued by a state for not detaining everyone charged with or even arrested for the pettiest of crimes like shoplifting. this bill tries to give state standing to sue for harms as small as $100, dramatically shifting power from

you have come out and support judge kavanaugh's nomination and came out before the allegations tell me where you are today on this even the one week delay in the one week investigation. >> the first point is judge kavanaugh up until 12 to 14 days ago was someone who's nomination i judged on the basis of how he viewed his role in the court. i believe the supreme court is a trial of law. this job is not to decide public policy but to decide what the constitution says about a decision made by political branch. is the law constitutional or not it may not reach the policy outcome you disagree with but you're not trying a case based on facts you are trying it of law. i believe the constitution should be interpreted according to its intent obecause the process is to change the constitution if you want to change but if adapts nover time that it becomes a meaningless document. so that's the core argument between those who believe the constitution is a living and breathing document and those who believe it should be interpreted according to its original intent. so as a jurist i view him as someo

justice thomas, justice alito, justice gorsuch and kavanaugh would grant the application.tice alito did not recuse himself as we knew he would not despite having a phone conversation with donald trump tuesday. joining our discussion now is andrew weismann. an msnbc legal analyst, andrew, 5-4, what do you make of the supreme court's decision? >> the first is to step back and realize that ten days from now, the new president of the united states will come into office, somebody who is convicted of 34 felony counts. after a trial by his peers with all the due process of any defendant, in terms of the history of this country. in terms of how we are seeing internationally, in terms of how we think of ourselves as a country, this is a monumental moment in our history. and that is something you will witness tomorrow. obviously the main event was the jury verdict. but this brings us this to conclusion in terms of the trial phase. in terms of the 5-4 decision. the most interesting part here is the chief justice. chief justice roberts essentially flip-flopping from his presidential i

you have come out in support of judge kavanaugh's nomination, and came out before the allegations, drht. tell me what, where you are today on this given the one-week delay and the one-week investigation that senator flake and others were submittal on her? the first point is judge kavanaugh up until 12, 14 days ago with someone whose nomination i judge on the basis of how he viewed his role in the court. i believe the supreme court in the try of law. its job is not to decide public policy but to decide what the constitution says. is this all constitutional or not? and may not reach the policy, you disagree with but you're not trying a a case based on fact. you are a trier of law. i believe the constitution should be interpreted according to its intent and the words of the other because there exists a process to change the constitution if you want to change it. if the constitution adapt over time then it really becomes a meaningless document. that's the core argument between those who believe the constitution is a leading in preindictment visibly that should be interpreted according to

that's what justice kavanaugh said we needed to do. that's exactly what this bill does, by the book. and yet the democrats still oppose it. to my democratic colleagues, i ask you, how many more laws with names attached to them do we need to pass before you take this crisis seriously? how many american citizens must die at the hands of illegal aliens before we all agree that these tragedies are all preventible? must the name of my child or your child be the one attached to a h.r. number before the democrats can vote yes on these commonsense bills? how much more blood must be shed before we all can join in calling for an absolute end to the democrats' reckless open borders and sanctuary cities policies that have threatened our safety, devastated our families, and are in the process of destroying our country? the american people have now spoken clearly on this issue. enough is enough. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 5, the previous question is ordered on the bill. the qu

i think if the kavanaugh hearings had not gone -- kavanaugh may have shown some difference but especiallyy barrett and roberts, you have justices who are quite willing to not tow the trump line. >> in addition to vowing to make good to make america great again, he also aparentsly, the president-elect wants to make america bigger. he has talked about obtain guideline from denmark. he wants to reclaim greenland. and this is in addition to wanting to rename the gulf of mexico. it's not clear how serious he was. he talked about taking greenland in the first administration. what should we make of any of this, john? [laughter] >> look. i'm going to take a page out of rachel maddow's book. don't listen to what they say. pay attention to what they do. so he can talk all sorts of smack about greenland and gulf of america and making canada the 5 1st state. , but until he actually does something -- if he does try to take greenland, if he does try to rename the gulf of mexico, if he does try to act on these things he's talking about, then -- then i will take him seriously. this is the thing i learned

. >> molly, i'm old enough to remember that when brett kavanaugh was confirmed by the senate, a numberthe same senators who are currently sitting now, not all of them, but a number of them were members of congress. they were members of the senate, and they listened to much more substantiated, much more detailed allegations of sexual assault and wrongdoing, which were alleged against now supreme court justice brett kavanaugh and it did not seem to matter. is this a conversation that is as angeles smoke and mirrors as rick has pointed out to avoid the fact that at its core, pete hegseth does not have the resume that would be commiserate with being the secretary of defense? >> i think we will have to wait and see. look, the dod is a huge, huge, huge group of people. it is 3 million+ people. it is an enormous organization to lead and i think, certainly, a lot of his republican senators -- essay it is an enormous job and a person who has never led an organization this big. i think people really have this need. there is the issue, the kavanaugh issue is a bit different because you had a he s

if there's any doubt and i will quote my friend jim kavanaugh who was on here with me earlier. if there's any doubt, there's no doubt you should not move forward, number one. and then do we have the capacity to truly harden this down the way we want to. good news, the sugar bowl and the other major bowl games are already major security events. i would feel very secure if i personally held tickets and i heard government officials saying we've got this. i would not have any questions about going. but you're going to see lots of extra bodies for sure. we have already heard officials say we're bringing national guard police units. there will be a lot of extra bodies. a lot of pat downs. go early, you're going to be in a long line. they may push the perimeter farther out. it's not in the major crowd. it's not impacting the stadium. you're going to see all kinds of drones and aviation technology. actually things that are even perhaps classified which we are to detection of certain biochem and radiological devices. they will make the call if they say, we can't be certain that we round

justice thomas, justice alito, justice gorsuch and justice kavanaugh would grant the application.lito is not recuse himself despite having had a phone conversation with donald trump on tuesday before donald trump filed an appeal in which samuel alito was trying to get a job with donald trump for his former clerk. joining our discussion, andrew weissmann, former chief of the criminal division of the eastern division of new york. andrew, 5-4. what do you make of the supreme court's ruling? >> i think the first is to step back and realize that ten days from now the new president of the united states will come into office somebody who is convicted of 34 felony counts. after a trial by his peers, with all of the due process of any defendant. in terms of the history of this country, in terms of how we are seen internationally, in terms of how we think of ourselves as a country, this is a monumental moment in our history. and that is something you will witness tomorrow. obviously, the main event was the jury verdict. this brings this to a conclusion in terms of the trial phase. in terms

and you mentioned the brett kavanaugh hearings.ople and, you know... put kamala harris... harris. ..on the map, as you know, a pointed and smart prosecutor. and you have to remember, this is a party in flux. we've about this before. i've talked to several democrats who have said what resistance movement, and i think they're looking for something. they're looking for a fight, unify behind a common enemy. and i think these confirmation hearings are giving them something to fight for. something to fight for and try and pick up the pieces after the election. so, i agree, i think we'll hear loudly from some democratic senators. do you think there's any possibility that anything comes out in these confirmation hearings? for example, when tulsi gabbard is grilled about her meeting which also is quite interesting. but i don't know. i think donald trump has such a hold over the republican party at party at the moment. that would be an incredibly brave republican senator at this point to kind of go against him. i mean, we sawa big push from

and, you know, you mentioned the kavanaugh hearings.e of those clips were really made big deals of people and, you know. put kamala harris... harris. ..on the map, as you know, a pointed and smart prosecutor. right. and, you know, you have to remember, this is a party in flux. this is a party that has, you know, we've talked about this before, but, you know, there's i've talked to several democrats who have said what resistance movement, you know, and i think they're looking for something. they're looking for a fight, you know, unify behind a common enemy. and i think these confirmation hearings are giving them something to fight for. and, and try and, you know, pick up the pieces after the election. so i agree, i think we'll here, you know, loudly from some democratic senators. do you think there's any possibility that anything comes out in these confirmation hearings? for example, when tulsi gabbard is grilled about her meeting with the former syrian leader, bashar al—assad, that it could change some minds among republicans as well. o

i don't think that republicans in their heart of hearts, saw brett kavanaugh as a joke, that they wered to condone as a test of loyalty, whereas this is just such a farce. but i think that what you see is that what happened to christine blasey ford was a very powerful demonstration for anyone else who would come forward. and so when you think about the republican organizer who filed this police report accusing pete hegseth of sexual assault, you know, there is a i would assume that she looks at what's happened to women like christine blasey ford and thinks, no, thank you. and so there's a reason i would assume that she has not come forward. well, and i would say that same pressure campaign in a different way is being exerted upon republicans who might stand in line and potentially talk to that victim. you know, it is it is worth noting that the drivers behind this kind of neo christian, neo neo traditionalist christianity that people like pete hegseth are a part of is the drivers are really interesting and they are cultural. the usa today reports that the founder of pete hegseth church

nomination and what it means for the #metoo movement, you've come out in support of judge kavanaugh,e allegations came to light, tell me what -- where you are today given the delay in the investigation? >> judge kavanaugh was someone who's nomination i judged on his role in court, the job is not to decide policy but what the constitution says, it may not reach policy but not trying cases based on facts, it should be interpreted due to its intent but if it adapts over time it becomes meaningless is the core argument between those who believe it is a living document and those who believe it should be interpreted based on original intent. when these things come out i have to vote based on the facts and they may or may not change and lead to other people who have answers so if these things are corroborated it will be different but that is the process so far, based on what was before the committee, no cooperating evidence, what we know may or may not change. mo: if things change you are open to your mind being changed? >> that is the way we should approach everything, if something you did

it's going to be the brett kavanaugh playbook.book has been, in effect, an operative for so many candidates for office under under both administrations, actually just but the combativeness and the fight that the republican nominees bring to the table has changed american politics, slowly but surely over the past ten years. and now it's regarded as almost normal that you have someone completely ill equipped to be secretary of defense is on the precipice of becoming secretary of defense. shame on us. well, well, let's wait and see. there are republicans again that, if you look at their past record, would have absolutely no reason to confirm this nominee. and, you know, we i've spoken of todd young who's a very serious thinker on on foreign policy and national security and has dedicated much of his adult life to that. you have the dave mccormick, the new the new senator from the state of pennsylvania, who, by the way, is not up for reelection for six years. but again, he campaigned talking about military culture and being raised in a

you have come out in support of judge kavanaugh's nomination.e out before the allegations -- dr. ford's allegations came to light. tell me where you are today on this, given the one week delay and the one-week investigation that senator flake and others were instrumental in -- sen. rubio: on that one, the first point, is, judge kavanaugh, up until, what was it, 12, 14 days ago, was someone whose nomination i judged on the basis of how he viewed his role in the court. and i believe that the supreme court is a trier of law. that's what it is. its job is not to decide public policy but to decide what the constitution says about a decision made by the political branch. is this law constitutional or not? it may not reach the policy outcome you personally disagree with, but you're not trying a case based on facts, you're a trier of law. and i believe that the constitution should be interpreted according to its intent and the words that are on there, because there exists a process to change the constitution if you want to change it. but if the constitu

but there are moments we've seen now where she seems to be breaking a little from alito and kavanaugh. >> you know, i wanted to get your reaction to this news that actually broke as well, that justice samuel alito, it was revealed, you know, right before that he had this phone call with donald trump. you know, alito said they did not discuss the case. and the subject of the call was over. a former law clerk of his regarding his qualification to serve in the trump administration. he did not. alito did not recuse himself. i find it interesting that it's like the allegation that he was perhaps like calling alito or alito was calling trump, and then they spoke about the case like, no, no, that's not the source of the corruption. we're talking about another source of corruption, which is like, i have a law clerk and i and i want to assure you that he's very loyal to you. he is worthy of a job in your administration. he is going to be a good guy and he will serve you well. that's the like that. he's coming out and saying that, not the other one. >> well, and also, alito hadn't employed this

you have come out in support of judge kavanaugh's nomination. came out before the allegations -- dr. ford's allegations came to light. tell me where you are today on this, given the one-week delay and the one-week investigation that senator flake and others were instrumental in -- sen. rubio: so on that one, the first point, is, judge kavanaugh, up until, what was it, 12, 14 days ago, was someone whose nomination i judged on the basis of how he viewed his role in the court. and i believe that the supreme court is a trier of law. that's what it is. its job is not to decide public policy, but to decide what the constitution says about a decision made by the political branch. is this law constitutional or not? it may not reach the policy outcome you personally disagree with, but you're not trying a case based on facts, you're a trier of law. and i believe that the constitution should be interpreted according to its intent and the words that are on there, because there exists a process to change the constitution if you want to change it. but if the

brett kavanaugh may have shown some separation.y roberts -- coney barrett and roberts you have some not willing to toe the line. geoff: donald trump wants to make america bigger. he has talked about obtaining greenland from denmark and wants to reclaim the panama canal and wants to turn canada into the 51st state in addition to wanting to rename the gulf of mexico. it is unclear how serious he is. he talked about wanting to take greenland in the first administration. what should we make of this? >> [laughter] look, i'm going to take a page out of rachel maddox's book which is don't listen to what they say but pay attention to what they do. he can talk all sorts of smack about greenland and gulf of america and making canada the 51st state. but, until he actually does something, if he does try to take greenland were rename the gulf of mexico or if he does try to act on these things he is talking about, then i will take him seriously. this is what i learned from the first term, we will drive ourselves crazy if we react to everything h

, just walk in moments ago, along with a couple of other justices, justice elena kagan and brett kavanaugh. so expect people from both sides of the aisle, wolf, to honor jimmy carter's life and service. >> wolf, a a beautiful honor that's about to begin and will continue for a while. and we'll have extensive coverage and stick around. don't go too far away to all of our viewers. stay with us for the ceremonies. once the carter funeral procession arrives up here at the u.s. capitol, including eulogies delivered by the vice president, kamala harris, and top congressional leaders from both parties. and we'll be right back. >> the whole story with anderson cooper sunday at 8:00 on cnn. >> you'll be back. emus can't help people customize and save with liberty mutual. >> and, doug. >> well, i'll be only pay for what you need. >> liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty sore throat. >> got your tongue? mucinex. insidiosus. sore throat. medicated drops uniquely formulated for rapid relief that lasts and lasts. that's my baby. >> try our new sugar free cough drop. >> to soothe@drivetime.com. we've been h

four conservative justices thomas, alito, gain of function research and kavanaugh say they would have granted a stay. the court said quote the burden impose on the president-elect's impose a sentence of unconditional discharge after a brief after a brief virtual hearing. >> they called for an appeal. they acknowledged what the judge said we are going to appeal because frankly it's a grace. a judge that shouldn't have been on the case. is he a highly conflicted judge. and they called for an appeal, so i read it and i thought it was a fair decision, actually. >> the president-elect will not be here in person. he will be convicted last may 34 counts of filing false business instruments for paying off stormy daniels so voters would not find out about their alleged tryst during the 2016 presidential election. the lawyers argue the presidential immunity decision also covers him before he takes office. but, manhattan district attorney alvin bragg countered that presidential immunity, he said, does not apply because trump was not president when he broke the law. our function right now primari

>> justification kavanaugh ted a number of potential s. manipulation of the dat platforms that are being usedy youth today that would then make it more likely that people would turn into spies and do terrible ings to the united states. this is a hypothetical but you know what i'm sa >> i get it. justice calve nap was talking about the security arguments. the first argument and what i'm focusing on initially is the content manipulation argument our national security is imp my indicated if the content on ok is anti-democracy, undermines trust in our leaders. that is impermissible government fromhat pertains to the entire act. the'a secondary argument the government makes and we say you don't even get to that because once you have an issible motive like that, the law is unconstitutional. i do grant that data security and theay justice kavanaugh spelled it out is compelling but isn't the question. you don't just ask in the air and say can we be worried about data center you say can tt be based on data sy grounds and our answer has to be no. th

this was founded by mike davis, a sort of pugnacious right wing lawyer who helped shepherd brett kavanaugh through his confirmation hearings in 2018 as senior counsel for nominations to chuck grassley, who then ran the judiciary committee that was considering kavanaugh's nomination. he started this group. they have marshaled their followers through appearances on steve bannon's podcast or talking with other right wing influencers, talking with kimberly guilfoyle to have people go to their website, click through to call message or social media, you know, post at their republican senator charlie kirk has done something similar. the idea is to pressure gop senators into voting for hegseth or bear the consequences be primaried. that was one of the threats made very directly by charlie kirk to joni ernst on x, and it's been repeated by many others. kirk said he was going to start what he called an encouragement campaign, having live rallies in various states with senators that he thought maybe couldn't be counted on to support trump's cabinet. these are places like utah with john curtis. >> but

kavanaugh almost got murdered a couple years ago, back when an armed assassin showed up at his frontr. now we're finding out the kavanaugh hitman was inspired by the supreme court leak about overturning roe v wade. he told cops this. i've been suicidal for a long time, and when i saw leaked draft, made me upset, made me want to, i don't know, i was under the i was under the delusion that i could make the world a better place by killing him. the leaker was never caught, but i'm sure they tried really hard. why are all these assassins and terrorists slipping through the fbi's fingertips? because the bureau is fighting a political war instead of the real one. they're still focused on jan six today. merrick garland called the investigation, quote, one of the most complex and most resource intensive investigations in the justice department's history. andy mccabe called it, quote, a massive piece of the institutions work so massive it's distracting them from noticing cooler bombs and assassins. but the shadow government hasn't learned a thing. they're whining that trump should have been pu

brett kavanaugh literally had to ask an open court, what if the new president doesn't follow the law?ere donald trump refusing to enforce a law that was passed by congress and signed by his predecessor not eight months ago, that that's a legitimate question. what if trump just doesn't enforce and doesn't follow the law? well, sonia sotomayor mayor had an answer for kavanaugh and for donald trump the way the tiktok ban soft ban would actually work is that it kind of prevents american service providers. you know, the app, the apple app store, the google app store from promoting the service. right. and sotomayor pointed out that the statute of limitations for violating the law is not four years, it is five. so if you want to follow trump and ignore this law that was passed by congress in april, you better be sure that that trump or somebody just like him is going to still be there in 2029 and 2020 and 2030, because it's a five year statute of limitations for lawsuits, for violating this law that literally came up in, in the supreme court because we are literally at the point in this coun

pat kavanaugh was their first call.le t to mi smith who uses thermal drone technology to find lost pets. >> there's a lot of luck involved with this. we have to fly over the pet to find the pet. >> reporter: this past sunday, mike, cat, kate and david stood in the family's front yard hoping for a miracle. they hadn't seen charlie in seven days. after 50 minutes, mike's drone spotted him. >> come on, come on, come on. got it! we got him! we got him! >> oh, my god! >> oh, my god, we got him. oh, my god, we got him! >> stop, stop. >> oh, my god. >> i think that was the best new year's gift i ever had. >> reporter: on monday, charlie underwent surgery for a broken leg, but he's expected to be back in this big, gray dog bed. >> the minute he was walking to us, like, we're both, like, had this ugly crying going on, just had our arms out, and it was the best feeling ever. >> how could you not smile hearing that video, them finding him and seeing that reunion. our thanks to lexi sutter for that report. >>> coming up on "today",

what they did to brett kavanaugh. they did it to me during my election. when they can't argue on policy or substance, when they know that they are wrong with what the american people want, this is what the democrats do. they resort to smear anonymous allegations, character assassination, because they know they can't talk about the disgrace of the afghan withdrawal. they can't talk about the disgraceful state of our military recruitment. we can't build enough ships, can't build enough planes. we haven't won a war in a long time. and our military spending three times more on dei initiatives now than we were four years ago. so they know that on policy, the u.s. department of defense is in tatters right now, and therefore, they couldn't spend two seconds talking about policy, and they decided to smear this, this young man who's going to do a great job. we support him. and that's why my questions were directed the way they were. i wanted to remind people what this job was really about. and it's supporting the war fighter and protecting america. >> it was it wa

. >> justice kavanaugh present a numberf risks, right with foreign adversaries covert manipulation of data platforms used by youths today that would then make more likely that people would turn into spies and do terrible things to the united states. let me pull these aparts. thenment separating tm. what iocus on did the content manipulation argue. with national security manipulated. if theit content o tiktok is antidemocratcy. primary submission is that's an imperfect missable interest. there isss a secondary arfewment theen government makes. you don't geteco that because oncent you have motive like that the is unconstitutional. da security is compelling. could it be workried. can this act btained. the answer has to be no. n't lookfy farther. it says the content recommendation cannot be used in the future. >> that has nothing to do with datat secur the coree. future of the dives provision is content manipula you can't uphold t how is it stored. the contan sharedetween users oror created and posted to socialpedia. on't destitute it is an important thing and regulated dataurity in other

and of course, i mean, the experience that christine blasey ford had with kavanaugh had to have been weighing there. >> yeah, i think, you know, look, the way these hearings have been done and the way that the background checks have been done has not been acceptable, i think, to the american people. i think the democrats are doing the best that they can, knowing that they cannot really stop his confirmation and doing the best they can to bring some of this stuff to light. like you heard senator gillibrand doing that. you heard, uh, some, you know, elissa slotkin doing the same thing and doing that what they can here to make the best of it. but to your point, and we talked about this on monday, he is a media personality. he was very good at keeping his cool and doing and being right on his talking points and not letting it get under his skin. less trained people in media would not have been able to do that. and donald trump is not dumb. he knows that this is an optics game and he is playing to the optics here. >> the continual interrupting of the senators stood out to me. as someone w

that and the kavanaugh comparison. i mean, that is what the trump team has said in their favor, to say that he was unfairly scrutinized in the way that he was over over old allegations against him. but but when this all comes down and he gets a vote a week from from his hearing or when that's expected to believe, i believe the day of the inauguration, do you expect that pete hegseth will get a a single democratic vote? will you vote for him? >> oh, no, i think he is a very dangerous nominee. i will not be voting for him. i don't know about the votes of all the rest of my colleagues, but you know, it wasn't so long ago when, um, you know, republicans would have the courage to occasionally stand up to a president of their own party when somebody was sent to them that was uniquely disqualified. and it only takes 3 or 4 republicans for us to have another name to consider. so i certainly haven't given up on a handful of republicans saying, listen, you know, send us a different nominee, someone that is conservative, someone

as j kavanaugh touched on, there are a lot of teenagers using tiktok tight signal a warning like that and not ly care but they're going to grow up might become members of our military. they might come senior government officials, and for the chinese governmentve sensitive data about them ily think obvious exposes our nation as a whole to f espionage and blackmail. >> thank you. >> i did want to touch briefly and tradition because my friends have said several timeth communications back in 1934 which we think is roughly analogous to the type of restriction that congress was seeking to enact here, is justified entilyy concerns about scarcity, ho you cannot have suffienbandwidth, and i of course recognize that scartys what created the need for a licensing regime in tht place, but i think it is important to clarify the historicalord in choosing to limit foreign control of radio stations, a broadcast stations, ngress specifically cited a concern about national secury that is written into the statute. national defensee of the listed purposes of having that kind of restricso i don't think my

they saw pete hegseth getting brett kavanaughed yesterday in terms of the personal attacks and bringinghis time at fox. all i know is that the people that have gone on the record. people like will cain, rachel campos-duffy myself have been on for years. they were 100 percent false. if anybody really believed it, they would put their name and face to the quote instead of hiding behind as names source. yeah. it's great to see that his colleagues at fox have really backed him because they know who they worked with. somebody who was professional. someone who was friendly. great sense of humor. treated everybody with respect and came in laser focused to every four hour weekend show that he had to do. the personal stuff does not work. and right, carley you have worked with him and carley you have as well. >> todd: they came after pete they also came after carrie underwood. >> she says i love our country how do you love your country and support and normalize somebody who was a convicted felon who really wants to destroy the country in my opinion. i don't understand how you say you love your co

supreme court justice brett kavanaugh, and others.ice president kamala harris kamala harris, senate majority leader jon thelen, has, house speaker mike johnson, other to remember the 39th president of the united states y members continue to make their way in. chad, you're still us. let us know more about what we are about to see as a country says goodbye to the former president carter. >> this will take a couple of minutes to actually get the casket over. we talked about this wooden platform that was built for the first state funeral that they did in the rotunda. it was for abe lincoln in 1865. you're looking at some bipartisan senators, john barrasso, elizabeth warren the democrat from washington. excuse me, for massachusetts, to the left. that is muriel bowser, the mayor of washington, d.c. there will be a moment where they bring the casket in to the rotunda, right in the middle of the rotunda. the house and the senate, they don't do anything political inside the rotunda. it is reserved exclusively for events like this. as we said,

kavanaugh, alito, thomas and gorsuch, say no, no, essentially a matter of national importance, they thoughts important to step in even in interlog tore basis. were you surprised by that vote? >> i wasn't surprised by the result. i was a little surprised that it was close. keep in mind, all they wanted to do, the four dissenters was to hear the case. they thought that the motion should be heard. not necessarily what they would decide. but, one of the things chief justice roberts who wrote the opinion made it clear was that this would -- one of the reasons they weren't intervening is because they took judge merchan at his word, always a dangerous thing that there would be, you know, he would be unconditionally discharged, president trump, would not -- and would not go to jail. they pointed out that he still has the appellate process. >> laura: mike, real quick. >> sorry, go ahead. >> laura: let's get mike on that real fast. i think it's a travesty. this whole thing should have been thrown out. it was a sham and should have ended with the supreme court. if they are worried about their credibil

they didn't disrupt democracy, they had to wait two hours, same with kavanaugh hearings. >> maybe trumpything. i'll see you soon, i'll be right back with my last word. maya knows how quality care can bring out a smile. but it's been a few dog years since she was able to enjoy a smile of her own. good thing aspen dental offers affordable, complete care all in one place. and new patients without insurance get 29 dollar exams and xrays. plus 20% off treatment plans for everyone. loving our patients unconditionally. it's one more way aspen dental is in your corner. the average dog only lives to be ten. at the farmer's dog, we don't think that's long enough. that's why our food comes in personalized portions. because a dog at a healthy weight could live a longer, happier life. advil liqui-gels are faster and stronger than tylenol rapid release gels. ♪ also from advil, advil targeted relief, the only topical with 4 powerful pain fighting ingredients that start working on contact and lasts up to 8 hours. larry: that's it for kudlow, thanks for watching, folks. -(screaming) -♪ bad boys -♪ whatc

and a lot of cases they tried to kavanaugh him, they were trying to for example, they don't like fbieport because it didn't go deep enough, they didn't talk to enough people, all they -- questions about fbi report, and other w witnesses when they didn't talk to my person, they want some sort of a investigation that proves their narrative. and when that does not prove it they want more investigation. the investigation from o proven pete's narrative they were anonymous sources smear campaigns democrats launched on to it they looked weak today, i hope they can make a recovery, at end of day we have to get together and defend the nation as one. larry: democrat have to learn they are not no control of senate or white house. they are not in control of the house. and they are not in control of the policy either. mr. van ord everyone talked van orden talked about it, i love the dust on boots here, has been on the ground, in combat, dust on boots, now here is a senator tim sheehy quizzing pete hegseth. >> what is the diameter of rifle round fired out of m4. >> that is a 5, 5, 6. >> how much p

former fbi and assistant director for counterintelligence, jim kavanaugh and vice president for globals for the fbi. ken, i want to start with you. the suspect is deceased, but what more do we know, are we learning about him at this point? >> well, he's been identified as shamsud din jabbar, 42 years old. he was not the owner of that white pick up truck. we understand that was a rental. it had texas plates. he is a u.s. citizen as you said. unclear where he was born. the fbi says that they are investigating any potential terrorist links that he may have had. they're looking at his travel, his movements, who he was communicating with. any social media profile. we are also doing that, trying to determine anything we can about this person, but clearly now, they've established his identity and also the fact that he was flying what they say was an isis flag on the back of that pick up truck. so it's sort of their worst nightmare. appears to have been an isis inspired at the least attack. and the fact they've now postponed the sugar bowl suggests they don't have a handle on what this was. th

justices thomas, alito, gorsuch, and kavanaugh said they would have granted this. this decision comes one day after we learned justice alito spent time on the phone with donald trump this week discussing a former alito clerk who is now up for a position in the incoming trump administration. alito and trump did not discussi trump's request which had not no yet been filed. but the supreme court was not the only conservative bench to been. the 11th circuit court of appeals rejected his effort to block the release of special council jack smith's reports on trump's efforts to overturn theo 2020 election. trump's legal team was attempting to stop them releasing the report and it initially looked like they might succeed after a favorable ruling by his favorite judge, aileen cannon but the 11th circuit said it could be released as soon as this sunday. we now have two significant judicial rebukes of president- elect donald trump. from two conservative federal courts. and while these legal victories do not change the fact that donald trump will be sworn in as president, it p

the only positive was clarence thomas spent the two-hour hearing slapping brett kavanaugh with a a tortilla ] [ slap ] that's right. in six days, we may not have tiktok. but don't worry. once rfk jr. takes office, we'll still have plenty of things that go viral. [ laughter ] if the ban goes into effect, americans can still see tiktoks, but the app will stop working due to a lack of updates. it's pretty much what happened to president biden. [ laughter ] [ cheers and applause ] speaking of president biden, he now hahas just o more week left -- in office. [ laughter ] put that on the same card! don't put that on two cards. [ laughter ] one week left in office. >> steve: yes. >> jimmy: meanwhile, this weekend biden called pope francis and awarded him the presidential medal of freedom. yep, it's the highest honor a a civilian can receive except for being pope. [ laughter ] so more political news. today melania trump went on "fox & friends" and said she plans to live at the white house full time. >> steve: oh. >> jimmy: you know you got an interesting marriage when the big question is, "are you

go at it directly because the public woken up to woke, so what they are doing personal like brett kavanaugh did not have enough votes on abortion had to go at personally same playbook o gain credibility have to acknowledge lloyd austin has been disaster, no one even criticized eliminate for afghan withdrawal or anything else going to the hospital not telling the president he was having surgery. >> i don't think that is going to happen with pete hegseth going into the hospital not being seen not telling anybody, by the way, biden did not notice he had cabinet meetings lloyd austin was there isn't nobody said a word about it. >> the question i have is who did know about it? like in the hospital did anybody know about it. maria: no, i don't think so. >> nobody knew. >> one thing hegseth said i love warrior ethos, wonderful to hear that we did not here that during obama apology tour but we are hearing it now, it is -- it is not only okay, it is good it its wonderful embrace to be proud to be american to be strong. maria: meanwhile, president trump foreign policy team will sit for confirmation h