host: joining us now is louie gohmert. it is texas morning after having representatives sheila jackson lee before you. i want to start with the story from "politico." to expect there to be some kind of agreement and that the content vote should go forward? guest: that depends on what is produced. the would not be a need for contempt. there has been an active contempt. continuing to simply provide some bolstluster and breath. they could go ahead with a vote. if he turns everything open, then i say there's no need for a vote. host: how political is this? guest: this could be a very political from the attorney general's standpoint. there are political aspects to justice. i spent time as a prosecutor, judge, chief justice. the statute of justice has a blinder on. you don't look at anybody's political persuasion or any of the things -- gender. that is not supposed to matter. to have the highest ranking just official in this country say that justice has political aspects was so offensive to me. i say there may be political aspec

let me ask you: we heard a second ago, rep louie gohmert, who as a fan of comedy i admire and respecthe said justice mayor should have recused himself. couldn't we say the same about clarence thomas's wife. >> justice kagan has been there long enough now that she has every right to be involved in whatever comes before the court. >> indeed. conservatives are now turning on chief justice john roberts. we are seeing people unhappy with him despite his long conservative voting record. do you think this will have any impact on future nominees to the court? are conservatives going to make sure it's got somebody really, really really right-wing before they will vote for them? >> maybe, but i think that when you get on the court, there is something about being a member of the supreme court that has to add a level of responsibility for every single thing you do, that a really, really, really right-wing person probably won't be able to live up to. and they they would make mistakes, too, because this is the supreme court. this is not supposed to be a political body. >> i think they got suder-bok

and louie gohmert who decided the blame lies with elena kagan because she served as solicitor general> it's important to look at justice kagan for potential i am paetschment . she lied in order to get onto the court. >> denny thomas papered up clarence thomas's study with 0 peel obama wallpaper. senator rand paul had this to say: just because a couple of people on the supreme court declare something to be constitutional does not make it so. >> that's brilliant, rand. yes, a couple of people on the court would not make it couldstitutional. however, and i only went to public school here five people on the court tends to do the trick. joining us now for more on the supreme court decision we are delighted to welcome congresswoman lynn wooley from the great state of california. good evening. >> thanks for having me. >>light delightful to have you here bain or and cantor say they are going to work on repealing this as soon as the house is back in session. i work in new york. we have a lot of theater here this isn't real theater? this won't create jobs? >> no. they are serious. i mean they a

unfortunately, he's right. >> host: representative louie gohmert, republican of texas. here's a story in "the new york times" today, american children now struggling to adjust to to life in mexico. jeffrey sat near the door of his fifth grade classroom staring outside through designer glasses that, like his nike sneakers and backpack, signaled a life lived almost entirely in the u.s. his parents are at home in mexico, jeffrey is not. it says never before has mexico seen so many jeffreys, jennifers and aidans it classrooms. tougher state laws and persistent unemployment have all created a mass exodus of mexican parents who are leaving with their american sons and daughters. what do you -- how do you feel when you hear stories like that? either because these children were born in america so they are considered citizens, or perhaps experienced time here in their youth and then are brought back to mexico where they may not even speak spanish. >> guest: yeah. and we have some of those situations in my district. and it is a problem. but, and there was a caller in to sheila ja

thankfully joined tonight by a great friend of liberty and a great advocate of liberty and that is louie gohmert from texas and i'd like to yield to the gentleman from texas. mr. gohmert: i sure do appreciate my friend from georgia, an absolute patriot, standing for truth, justice and what used to be the american way . according to the supreme court, not so much anymore. and i appreciate the gentleman for yielding. i've been going through this decision and, you know, having been an attorney and i've been a prosecutor and a judge and a chief justice, as a small three-judge court, but you learn things, you go to judicial conferences about how to write opinions and things. never to the level of the united states supreme court. but as a certified member of the united states supreme court bar, you follow the holdings of the courts and so it's been with great interest, after i got my wind back from having found that chief justice roberts wrote the opinion for the five-person majority, ok, so we start going through the opinion. let's see how in the world he came to this conclusion. well, i'll be very b

now the president, throwing his hat into the ring on this and invoking executive privilege and louie gohmert>> it will bring about a civil suit we'll file in federal court in d.c. and demand that they produce a log of all the documents they are claiming privilege. as a judge, i reviewed things like that in camera and you determine what is privileged and what isn't and there may not be anything that is privileged here but now, they'll end up having to produce the law they say is privileged. >> alisyn: so, the white house was hoping, by enacting executive privilege, that this would go away. the congressional investigation would be able to go forward and it seems to be doing the opposite and is opening a ball of wax, a civil lawsuit to find out if executive privilege was appropriate in this case, because it suggests that there was some sort of deliberative process, the exact wording, some sort of private discussion, that happened that you don't want the public to know about or don't want congress to be able to hear about. well, if there were private discussions, that is all the more reason cong

louie gohmert right?est knife in the drawer. >> bill: to say the least. chris wallace should know better. he was driving to work the other day on the phone to a talk show host. holding his cell phone in his hand. oops. >> number three. >> they say not expected to offer new jobs proposals in his economic address. and this is supposed -- >> i'm going to have a problem here. >> what's that buddy? >> talking to you on a cell phone and there is a policeman here. i probably shouldn't have been talking on the cell phone. so i'm about to get arrested. good-bye. >> the line's dead. >> bill: he's doing fox news sunday from the county jail by the way. president obama how's the economy doing? a week ago today he didn't put it quite the best way. >> number two. >> we created 4.3 million jobs over the last 27 months. over 800,000 just this year alone. the private sector is doing fine. >> bill: what he meant to say compared to the public sector. we know that. mitt romney met a real tall guy and so he figures he's gotta