republican senators, a lot of them will -- very level-headed person. i think he is very eager to meet with the 12 senators who have said they will meet with them and hopefully, i think -- he did not say this -- but the number will grow. others on the subjects? ok. let us go to terrorism. >> ted cruz came out with a increase, we need to policing. another congressman said something similar. is not what: that we do in america. we do not to get race, religion, creed, color and say we are monitoring everyone. terror and we pursue it relentlessly. i think that is what the administration and america is doing. >> you mentioned the faa authorization. preference transit to as something you wanted to do. can you talk more specifically about what you are trying to do with the transit fees? sen. schumer: we do have some anti-terrorism dollars in transit. i think they should be increase. what we are talking malik thesportation in terms of airports. obviously, there are things we should do. it is harder to do it in mass transit because there are fewer, you know, entr

since the first day of the obama presidency, republicans senators have bowed to extremists who reject his legitimacy and abuse the rules in the senate in an all out effort to cripple his administration and to paralyze the federal courts. no matter how much it damages the nation. no matter how much it undermines the courts. no matter whether it cripples the government or lays waste to our constitution. senate republicans do pretty much everything they can to avoid acknowledging the legitimacy of our democratically elected president. for too long, the republicans in the senate have wanted to have it both ways. they want to feed the ugly lies and nullify the obama presidency while claiming that they can govern responsibly. that game is over. candidates motivated by bigotry and resentment, candidates unable to govern, candidates reflecting the same extremism that's been nursed along for seven years right here in the united states senate are on the verge of winning the republican party's nomination for president. now, republicans senators must make a decision because here's the deal. extre

here is republican senator jeff flake? >>> republicans are fully justified in doing with we are doing, waiting. but if we happen to lose the election we we ought to push him through quickly, if we can. >> senator, is jeff flake wrong? >> i think so. look, president obama calling this judge a moderate does not make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he is enthusely supported by www. moveonorg. i don't thing they would be enthusiastic about a liberal judge. the principle is the same whether it is before or after the election, the principle is, the membership are choosing their next president and their next president should pick this supreme court nominee >> final question you are saying no consideration of judge merrick garland by this conditioning even if hillary clinton wins the election, no consideration by this conditioning you are going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> i cannot imagine a republican majority in the united states senate with want to confirm in a l

republican senator hatch, then chairman of the senate judiciary committee, supported his nomination. back then, he said, in all honesty, i would like to see one person come to this floor and say one reason why merrick garland does not deserve this position. he actually accused fellow senate republicans, trying to obstruct merrick's confirmation, of playing politics with judges. he has since said that judge nominee for the supreme court, who would be very well supported by all sides and there would be no question that merrick would be confirmed with bipartisan support. ultimately, merrick was confirmed to the d.c. circuit. second highest court in the land. with votes from a majority of democrats and from republicans. three years ago, he was elevated to chief judge. in his 19 years on the d.c. circuit, judge garland has brought his trademark diligence, compassion and unwavering regard for the rule of law to his work. on a circuit court known for strong-minded judges, on both ends of the spectrum, judge garland has earned a track record of building consensus as a thoughtful, fair-minded

the misstep is an unprecedented decision by the senior senator from iowa and the republican leader to deny the president to fill the current supreme court vacancy. the editorial ends with this declaration -- and i quote -- "a few weeks back when the longest tenured senator from iowa passed a vote we lauded his service to us. we noted in casting votes on matters before the senate, he was doing what iowans elected him to do. we gave grassley an atta boy for that. we take it back. we take it back. that's a blistering statement. a revealing statement, a substantive statement. we take it back. there's a lesson that senator grassley and my republican colleagues should learn from this editorial. by refusing to give president obama's supreme court a meeting, a hearing, or a vote, they are banning the oath of office they swore when they became a united states senator. this abdication of their constitutional responsibilities will epitomize their work in the united states as a senator. whatever they may have accomplished through their careers will be secondary to their decision to place electora

here is republican senator jeff lake. >> i think republicans are fully justified in doing what we're doing. waiting. but if we happen to lose the election, then i think we ought to push him through quickly if we can. >> senator, is jeff lake wrong? >> yeah, i think so. look, barack obama calling judge -- this judge a moderate doesn't make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he's enthusiastically supported by moveon.org. i don't think they would be signing up and have all this enthusiasm about a liberal judge. the principle is the same. whether it's before the election or after the election. the principle is the american people are choosing their next president and their next president should pick this supreme court nominee. >> so, final question. just to make it clear. you're saying no consider -- no consideration of judge garland by this congress even if hillary clinton wins the election? no consideration by this congress? you're going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> yeah. i can't imagine that a republican majority in the un

there's a similar ad that started running against republican senator kelly ayotte of new hampshire asagainst the odds to hold onto her u.s. senate seat in that state. >> delay, delay, delay. >> donald trump wants the senate to delay filling the supreme court vacancy so he can choose the nominee next year. and senator kelly ayotte is right there to help. ayotte joined trump and party bosses in refusing to consider any nominee ignoring the constitution. newspapers call ayotte's actions appalling, wrong and disappointing. >> delay, delay, delay. >> kelly ayotte, ignoring the constitution, not doing her job. senate majority pac is responsible for the content of this advertising. senator kelly ayotte hit not just for her association with donald trump which every republican will have to figure out what to do with now. but specifically also now she's having to answer for will now be described as the donald trump plan for the supreme court. the republican plan to keep a seat on the supreme court vacant for more than a year rather than consider president obama's nominee to fill that position.

it won't get him anywhere with senate republicans. e senate majority leader instantly saying, it's the next president's pick. >> let's let the american people decide. >> reporter: in an interview with npr, obama shot back. >> well, in fact, the american people did decide. back in 2012, when they elected me president of the united states. >> reporter: and so, let the games begin. judge garland headed to the hill this week. here he is meeting with democrats thursday. some swing state republicans say they'll sit down with him, too. only a few are open to holding a vote before november. but, could there be a lame duck confirmation? what if hillary clinton wins the white house? >> i would rather have a less liberal nominee like merrick garland than a nominee that hillary clinton if she were president, would put forward. >> reporter: a final twist. the president may have public opinion on his side. americans by 63% to 32% said the president's nominee should get a hearing. but in this election year climate in washington, don't hold your breat

republicans feel that way. so let's face facts here. the senate republicans are floundering at this point. tor mcconnell put them on a strategy which is impossible to defend. many of them have to go back home and explain it and it's becoming more and more difficult. >> all right. senator dick durbin, thanks for taking the time to come on the show. appreciate it. >> thanks, chris. >> that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" begins "the rachel maddow show" begins right now. good evening, rachel. >> good evening, chris. thanks, my friend. >> you bet. >>> thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. we knew this day would come. we didn't not know exactly when. as recently as yesterday there are people paid to talk for a living that were assuring us this day would definitely not come today but it's come today. the time has, in fact, arrived. and my friends, we must now gather together to poof marco rubio. we started with 17, 17. 17 people all got in over the course of last spring and summer. nobody got out until september 11th when the first one we got to poof was rick perr

>> senator republicans best friend on this issue, ironically. the senate judiciary committee in 1992. he was addressing an issue then, of course, in an election year, but there was a hypothetical. there was a thought that perhaps harry blackman would retire that year and there could be a vacancy in an election year. that didn't end up happening but joe biden addressed the possibility and he made a very unequivocal statement which was, you know, i as chairman of the judiciary committee do not believe that president george h.w. bush should in this election year make a nomination and if he does i am -- i believe he said we should seriously consider were his words that the committee should not hold hearings on that nominee. so, obviously, that's republicans today see it as a perfectly amalagous situation and quote the words back to anybody that suggest they owe president obama's nominee consideration. and the democrats have in turn said, well, you know, that was a hypothetical. we're talking about an actual vacancy and this is not a planned vacancy o

that's a concern for the senate to hold its republican majority. certainly, democrat will make this case time and time again, putting a lot of pressure on those sort of swing state senators who are up for re-election. trying to get the advantage, to reclaim the senate. so this will be a huge political fight. if merrick garland cannot even be visited by the 54 republicans in the senate, that will bring up the political argument of stonewalling, obstruction for obstruction's sake. it will be a very strong argument for democrats. can they put a crack in that at all because he is so widely well thought of and as pete discussed at 63 and having been considered before, perhaps even the white house is considering this sort of a last opportunity for garland to be put in this position to be nominated for something that is certainly the highlight of his career. so we'll have to see. so far, republicans are not officially commenting on the selection of merrick garland. i suspect they will wait until the president makes it official. but the strategy for them wi

in addition to the people agreeing to meet, we have republican senators, senators that are veterans senatorsmaybe what we should do is do it in the lame duck. orrin hatch, lindsey graham -- >> four years from now if you're in the fourth year of a republican presidency, you don't think the democrats should do whatever it takes to prevent that republican president from appointing a supreme court justice in a presidential year before the election? >> not only do i think they shouldn't do it, they wouldn't do it. whoever is elected president has -- is elected for four years. obama was elected for four years. he filled that duty he had to the american people. he was re-elected. he has an obligation to do his job for four years, not three years. senators have an obligation to do their constitutional duty -- >> do you blame republicans though for wanting to do whatever it takes -- this is going to change the makeup of the court, and they believe this is worth fighting for. do you blame them for doing this? >> absolutely. when you have orrin hatch who was a chairman of the judicial committee, now is

senate. >> one of your republican this week. he said the senate should vote. listen. >> just man up and cast a vote. the tough thing about these senatorial jobs, you get yes or your whole job is to either say >> are you confident you'll hold republicans together? >> well, look. he's running this year in illinois. i'm confident he'll get re-elected. the schedule in the senate is set by the majority leader. most of my members are comfortable with letting the american people make the decision by electing the next president who will fill this vacancy next year. >> let me move on. on tuesday, you said you told donald trump he should condemn and discourage violent acts. 24 hours later, he made the statement at riots in the convention. you heard him this morning on the violence as well. are you worried he's not getting your message? >> well, regardless of who the candidate is, i think all of the candidates for president ought because the people in the audience tend to listen to those i think we ought to condemn this kind of violence. and encourage the american people

are republican voters going to buy that goods forward? >> i think that's why senatorsrepublican side framed it that way from the beginning so they could say safely it wasn't about the person, because we said it earlier. gop base voters certainly want them to stand strong. i think both sides can make decent arguments here, right? as you heard mitch mcconnell making the argument. he can use the words of then senator joe biden and then femme senator, now president obama. it's amusing to watch the two of them stand up and ask for fairness when then-senator obama voted to filibuster alito, and joe biden pioneered one of the most unprecedented methods in judicial obstruction ever. it's called borking. so welcome to your world, guys. >> charles, the president may have a lot of reactions to what the senate majority leader said, but surprise can't rightly be one of them. they had telegraphed what they were going to do, so the question remains what will the president do? how much is he willing to fight about this? will he make this a daily issue? >> i think he'll make it a consi

if the republicans in the senate want to continue to tie themselves to donald trump, so be it. donald trump won't make america great again, but he will make republicans the minority again. so the message from the american , people to senate republicans is simple -- do your job. the american people overwhelmingly believe republicans have the responsibility to do their job because people get up and go to work every day and do theirs. if people -- if the average person said i'm not going to do my job, they'd lose money, they'd get fired. why do the republican senators think there any different? and joining us today, we have someone who gets up and does her job every day, who will talk about what happened to her if she tried to do what republicans are doing now. so i would like to thank dr. , sharma for joining us today. >> thank you. good afternoon. i'm an every day doctor for every day people. i take my job very seriously. my patients' lives depend on our health team to fulfill our duty. my patients' families depend on our team to take responsibility and to do our jobs every day.

i think he would welcome working with republicans in the house and senate. that the republican establishment, long on dead. >> john cornyn is a ted cruz supporter, we think. the men who ran the last two republican presidential campaigns. stuart stevens and steve schmidt. gentlemen, welcome to you both. stu, prior to last tuesday, you wrote there was still time to stop trump. do you still believe that a week later? >> sure. 40% of the people haven't voted. we got upset in 2000 when they closed the polls in florida, they announced it when the panhandle was still open, 40% was still out there. i think it's going to be difficult for anybody else than donald trump to get to 1237. but there's credible scenarios out there, 40% of the oat vote out there that you could easily have donald trump with 1,000 votes, and ted cruz with 950. we've done this before. this is the ronald reagan strategy in 1976, against a sitting republican president. >> steve, the most expedient way to do this would be to rally and that seems to be something that washington republicans can't bring themselves to do. >> well, loo

senate republicans say there's though way he'll get a hearing before the election. we'll hear from senate leader mitch mcconnell and denis mcdonough after this report from terry morn. >> reporter: after weeks of waiting, a 63-year-old white male judge and a 20-year track record. >> the question occurs to the d.c. circuit court of appeals. >> safe to say that's not what washington was respecting. federal prosecutor in charge of the oklahoma city bombing race. it won't get him anywhere. it's the next president's pick. >> let's let the american people decide. >> reporter: in an interview with npr, obama shot back. >> well, in fact, the american people did decide. back in 201, when they elected me president of the united states. >> reporter: and so, let the games begin. judge garland headed to the hill this week. here he is meeting with democrats thursday. some swing state republicans say they'll sit down with him, too. only a few are open to holding a vote before november. but, could there be a lame duck confirmation? what if hillary clinton wins the white house? >> i w

court vacancies. >> in each of those occasions, senator, republicans at the time criticized those senate position. and frankly, that's what we're seeing here. it feels like there's hypocrisy on both sides. democrats essentially don't want to confirm a supreme court justice if republicans are doing it, and republicans don't want to confirm a democrat's. >> nobody has been entirely consistent. let's look at the history of it. it hasn't happened in 80 years and it won't happen in this year. the principle involved here, chuck, when an election is under way, when joe biden was talking in 1992, the american people are about to weigh in on who is going to be the president. and that's the person, whoever that may be, who ought to be making this appointment. >> you know, you said something, about, three months ago, you said, "my view is just because there is an election coming up doesn't mean you're not supposed to do everything. we've had an election every two years right on schedule since 1788." so i guess, when does a presidential term run out? when does a president lose his authority to make

some say why should senate republicans act any less politically than then senator obama did? >> the fact of the matter is that justice roberts is on the court today. the last time we were in an election year under president reagan, the chief justice was already there. we know that during reagan's election year 93-0 the nominee was approved. this is a time when vice president biden was chairman of the judiciary committee. and we were able to move forward. so we've done this in an election year before. there's no reason why we can't do it now. >> on the senate floor, majority leader mitch mcconnell invoked what he called the biden rule as previous precedent. you talked about when senator biden was chairman of the judiciary committee. take a listen to what then senator biden, chairman of the judiciary committee in 1982, argued about how president george h.w. bush should not name a nominee. listen. >> it would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is under way, and it is, action on a supreme court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign i

obama's supreme court nomination of judge merrick garland has triggered a political showdown with senate republicans who have vowed to block any supreme court nominee put forward by this president. according to our nbc news poll, only 28% approve of senate republicans' obstruction of the president's nominee and that number changes dramatically, depending on the political party you're talking about. only 8% of democrats approve of the obstruction versus 55% of republicans. the nomination hasn't only drawn a challenge from the gop. here is senator bernie sanders on what he would do with the garland nomination if elected president. >> if you get the democratic nomination and you were elected president in november, would you ask president obama to withdraw that nomination in the lame duck so you could name your own nominee? >> yes, i would. and i think i'm 100% prepared to support judge garland. i think he's clearly very knowledgeable. and can serve ably on the supreme court. but between you and me, i think there are some more progressive judges out there. >> and joining me now is radio host, and pollst