mr. kavanaugh and he is obviously very qualified to be a supreme court justice.ne to school and works really hard. that at discount all. however, dr. ford was very much discounted and that is not ok. she had a story that she was telling her she had witnesses that were not interviewed. m not political but that is a great example of women voicing their experience. hey, this happened to me. and the politics got in the way. the politics of choosing to ignore her story, to put a person into office got in the w ay. again, i don't discount that mr. kavanaugh was qualified, but why was she ignored and why were there not further inquiry? we live in the united states of america where justice is supposed to prevail. this is a great example of what i was saying that his number one with anybody in organizations is trust. i think that we have really turned away people's trust with our government. and it's a shame. so, when things are out of our control the only thing we can control is us. we can control our attitude, our emotions, our choices we make value added choices, choic

mr. pecker, jim kavanaugh, a law enforcement analyst that has worked with his share of extorters. and mimi roker. i never thought i would have a quartet like this, but that is how strange this story is. let me start with the legal aspect of this and the idea of whether or not this is extortion or not. i will ask you first, what is the definition of extortion and does this fit it because i will be honest, i certainly had my share of back and forth that has saidly leaf that out if you're going to leave me this. this is not your typical source they would be dealing with on a typical story. where does this fit in the definition of extortion. >> i think reasonable minds and prosecutors could differ on whether or not the conduct that we know so far, what we know, fits within the definition of federal extortion and that is what i will focus on. federal extortion is simply somebody, you know, asking in a demanding or threatening way for something from someone else of value. and usually, right, the quintessential case is a mobster that says i will hurt you unless you give me a bag of money

kavanaugh. >> miss harris. mr. booker. >> they're not answering because this is so unfair, mr. chairman. >> they appear to have developed not just a strong political friendship over the years, but a strong personal friendship as well. >> dan shiner is a politics professor at uc berkeley and usc. he said keep your eye on the senate judiciary committee where harris and booker sit next to each other and they may have to throw some sharp elbows. >> every time the senate judiciary falls under the spotlights, between now and next year, in addition to the topic at hand, you're going to see at least two, if not more, democratic senators vying for the spotlight understanding how it can help them on the primary trail. >> he says harris and booker have similar political views, but they've approached their campaigns in very different ways. harris claims to be a fighter. >> and i'm prepared to fight. >> while booker says he's all about universal love. >> i'm not looking even to simplistically beat republicans. no, i'm looking to unite americans in this race. >> for democratic primary voters

mr. mcgahn: it came full circle. when justice kavanaugh tame in, i get to take the chair, so i sit in the front row. i had ed sit next to me in the front row. i thought that was a nice touch to remember where we came from and what inspired us to do what we are doing. it adds to the magic of today, for me to be able to speak in the reagan library, given what we are talking about and where we are. i will try to go through over what we did over the past two years and give a recap. this doesn't last forever, so i get to do a celebration in front of a fan -- a friendly crowd. judges are life tenure. we know the courts, unfortunately, have become more and more prominent. our view is that we ought to have them not to be as nearly as important as they are. increasingly, courts have drifted, over the past several years or decades, in varies that would be shocking to the founders. it is a very important thing to do judicial selection, but it should not nearly be as important. one thing it has done is made the federalist society a household name, whi

mrs. murray. the senator from michigan, ms. kavanaugh. the senator from massachusetts, ms. warren.he senator from minnesota, ms. clover char. and the senator from wisconsin, ms. baldwin. ms. pelosi: members of the escort committee will exit through the lobby doors. i do not see where that one is. [laughter] there it is, the lobby door. this is mine, this is yours. [indiscernible chatter] [indiscernible chatter] [applause] [indiscernible chatter] ms. pelosi: the associate justices of the supreme court. [applause] [indiscernible chatter] [applause] [indiscernible chatter] >> madam speaker, the president's cabinet. [applause] [indiscernible chatter] [applause]

kavanaugh. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: are there any further requests for time? under the speaker's announced the of january 3, 2019, gentleman from north carolina, mr. walker, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. walker: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and introduce extraneous material into the record on the topic of this special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. walker: -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. walker: thank you, mr. speaker. there has been a great deal of talk in the last few months on border security, what it takes to secure our border, and what it takes to protect the safety and the security of the american people. today, we're taking a few minutes with different members to share very powerful but very impactful stories from their district. this is not hyperbole or set up for historyonics. but this doesn't always cut outlets. th our media many of the folks they will be eferring today in this s

of whom, the brett kavanaugh nomination, incredibly, you know, controversial, but that moment began with mitch mcconnell on his own deciding no one is even going to get a hearing. mr. kane: i had asked senator mcconnell in december 2017 when i interviewed him what, if the tax law was about to pass that same day was the proudest achievement of his career. he said, no. neil gorsuch on the federal courts were. the tax law is a close second. many senate majority leaders have cut taxes. none have done what he did on a supreme court seat. basically held it open for 10 months, very clearly for the purpose of preserving an ideological balance on the supreme court. it would have swung rapidly. there would have been a five member democratic appointed majority on the court and put a lot of issues to the left. mcconnell rolled the dice. this is the contradiction within him. he is known as an institutionalist in many ways but is not afraid to do away with institutional norms and step on them quite clearly in a case like this. if it advances an ideological goal that he hopes dearly. -- holds dearly. host: you interviewed him in december of 2017. did he acknowledge his dice roll

kavanaugh during his hearing. here is list of these six. when asked about mr. politicians, the less you like them, you see how self-serving they are. what is good for the goose is good for the gander. brett kavanaugh was raked over the coals from allegation from the last century that he did these horrific things allegedly in a prep school, high school, 11th grade, in his youth. now you have the lieutenant governor at the democratic national convention in boston in 2004, this century, this allegation that he forced this woman to perform oral sex on him and there was nothing consensual about it. to respond so negatively to the republicans or so postively or reluck tanly to the democrats exposes what we all know, soil serving, hypocritical, care only about satisfying the agenda. party loyalty, that is what is gumming up the ability to move forward on the border issue. i'm sorry. steve: time's up. >> start a whole new topic. steve: no. you had the final word. absolutely zero chance. brian: geraldo see you later on radio. remember, you don't call a car on the way ho

kavanaugh nomination, incredibly controversial. that moment began with mitch mcconnell on his own deciding no one is even going to get a hearing. judge rakoff i have asked -- mr. kapur: i had asked senator mcconnell and 2017 about the tax law that was going to pass that same day. he said that was not the proudest thing of his same day -- of his career. he said neil gorsuch was his prose achievement. nobody had done what he is done on a supreme court seat. he held it open for 10 months. he did it to preserve it ideological balance on the supreme court. a fiveould have been member democratic appointed justice majority of the court. it would have put a lot of issues to the left. this is a contradiction within him. he is known as an institutionalist in every ways. do away withaid to his institutional norms and step on them quite clearly in a case like this, if it advances and ideological goal that he holds dearly. host: you interviewed him in the december of 2017. rolle acknowledge his dice in the sense on the merrick garland nomination? mr. kapur: he said the proudest achievement of his career was near -- neil gorsuch and the federal courts. we know exactly what