guest: it's interesting about robert bork. i'm sure you remember who was the chairman of the judiciary committee. it is vice president ayden, who is now the democratic nominee for president. biden, who wasnt now democratic nominee for president. scalia, 99-0.in it was not an issue at all. he sailed through. they were both on the d.c. circuit court, bork and scalia. they are both originalists. there was not a dime's worth of difference between them. yet one got through virtually unanimously and the other one was defeated. bork was defeated. , barackward to today obama had nominated judge garland and the republicans refused to even give him hearings. he was never appointed to the court. he did not become a supreme court justice. then donald trump had put gorsuch up. --you listen to the rhetoric depending on which side you are -- gorsuch is the devil incarnate, then the left would say he is a wonderful justice, exactly what the court needed. gorsuch, the two sides flipped. i looked at those two candidates for the supreme court --

what's interesting about robert bork. i'm sure you remember who were the chairman of the judiciary committee at that time. it was our vice president biden who is now the democratic nominee for president. he's was on that committee. about a year earlier they had confirmed ant thony scalia. he sailed through. but they both came from the d.c. circuit court and bork and scalia. and if you look at their judicial temperament and the way they thought, they were originalists. there wasn't a dime's worth of difference between them. yet one got through, almost virtually unanimously, and the other one was defeated. bork was defeated. and if you fast forward to today, barack obama had nominated judge garland and the democrats -- the republicans refused to even give him hearings. and so he was never appointed to the court. he did not become a supreme court justice. and then donald trump had put gorsuch up. if you listen to all of the rhetoric, depending on which side you're on. garland was horrible, terrible justice. the devil incarna

i mean, they crucified robert bork. that was the beginning of a confirmation battle being turned into a political circus. but the only thing we didn't have, and harmeet is right, is the real threat of violence. they are preparing for civil unrest in washington. they are preparing for it in new york and l.a. authorities are preparing for it. >> i mean, i tend to think optimistically that we won't have that kind of civil unrest. i do think it's important -- >> laura: where have you been all summer, rob? i mean, have you seen what's happening in the country? it's already happening. >> there will definitely be protests and some of them will get out of hand. i don't think it will be quite to the level that some may fear. what i do think is important to emphasize is that we are a country that is literally divided over what the rule of law means. this is really the confirmation where it comes to a head. republicans and democrats have two totally different views on what the rule of law is. do you follow the text and the origina

justice thomas and robert bork. make no mistake. they will do it again and again no matter who the president nominates. here with reaction, author of the new book "the mind of a conservative woman: seeking the best for our family and country," senator marsha blackburn what did you make of dianne feinstein's attack on judge barrett? >> it is absolutely disgusting, sean. what the democrats are trying to do is disqualify you if you are a person of faith. so you have amy coney barrett and you have barbara lagoa, each are catholics. what they are going to do is try to disqualify them. their standard would be, if you're an atheist or a secularist, then you can be a judge. but look at where the left has gone on religion. look at some of the actions that they have taken lately. and this is what they are continuing to do. joe biden won't tell you who he's going to nominate because what they are looking for is activists that are going to rule against our freedoms. our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our second amendment rights. an

he mentioned robert bork, who joe biden had a large hand in blocking. i would argue that is the system working, because robert bork was an ideological supreme court pick. ultimately that seat he was nominated to fill after another tried fail, the third try was anthony kennedy. anthony kennedy i disagree with on a whole range of issues, but he was definitely more moderate than robert work. -- robert bork. my old boss, chuck schumer, in the mid-2000 see john -- he talked with john cornyn and brought up chuck schumer's role in blocking appointments under bush. heeone named miguel estrada, was nominated for the d.c. circuit court. chuck schumer worked to stop his nomination. it is a fair point that there have been efforts on both sides to filibuster and block nominees. i would argue that under barack obama's presidency got taken to new levels. literally the reason donald trump has had so many vacancies to fill -- we've talked about how he has gotten more than 200 judges on the federal bench. the reason that was made possible is because he hit -- he inherite

guest: it's interesting about robert bork.remember who was the chairman of the judiciary committee. it is vice president ayden, who is now the democratic nominee for president. biden, who wasnt now democratic nominee for president. scalia, 99-0.in it was not an issue at all. he sailed through. they were both on the d.c. circuit court, bork and scalia. they are both originalists. there was not a dime's worth of difference between them. yet one got through virtually unanimously and the other one was defeated. bork was defeated. , barackward to today obama had nominated judge garland and the republicans refused to even give him hearings. he was never appointed to the court. he did not become a supreme court justice. then donald trump had put gorsuch up. --you listen to the rhetoric depending on which side you are -- gorsuch is the devil incarnate, then the left would say he is a wonderful justice, exactly what the court needed. gorsuch, the two sides flipped. i looked at those two candidates for the supreme court -- they both ser

you had this with robert bork in the 80s. so just because you have a nominee doesn't mean there's something that means they're guaranteed a slot on the supreme court, especially to do it in a tight turning radius. so the chances of this happening before the election, you know, that is up in the air, laura. >> laura: chad, thanks so much. joining me now is charlie hurt, washington opinion editor, fox news contributor. scott rasmussen, pollster, and raymond arroyo. scott, your history in polling is among the top in the field. given what we know that voters think about this court, the importance of the court in the last election and most recent polling, morning consult did the last one, could this change the course of this election? >> well, look, the last election the decision about the supreme court, president trump's comments and putting out a list is the reason he's in the white house. 87% of evangelical voters cast their ballot for the president even though they had doubts about his own character. an important issue. this t

you could almost take it all the way back to the nomination of robert bork. be a process in which we won't have these arguments back and forth over has to the senate confirm a nominee from the white house or whether the democrats or republicans, whoever is in charge, can just block a president's nominee? the controversy we see over supreme court nominees in recent decades is related to what we expect from the court. increasingly, we expect the court to resolve the most controversial issues. today, people on the left and democrats are upset and they are worried and they should be in their perspective because they say this justice could affect what law is in this nation for the neck generation. that's got to be frightening to the american people because the court is something that is not susceptible to popular opinion. it cannot be held accountable in aresame way and justices for life. in a democratic republic, that is a very, very concerning thing where you make policy, you make of for an entire nation self-governing citizens by an institution that cannot real

if you look at what they did to robert bork, the washington post called it a sentence first verdict afterward. it led to the term board gang which is the obstruction of a nominee through systematic vilification of that individual. you look at what happened to clarence thomas which he had said is a high-tech lynching. that was joe biden at the helm of that character assassination. he led the way for the attack that unfortunately judge barrett is going to seek and certainly what we all witnessed happened to judge kavanaugh where you saw senate democrats literally accuse a father or a husband and a father of two of gang rape without a shred of evidence. >> i'm so glad you pointed that out. we will have more on joe biden's inflammatory language and hypocrisy. coming up just after the next break. very quickly, question two on healthcare because it looks like the democrats are zeroing in on that for their objection, and they want to make the affordable care act ruling that's coming up after the election, the centerpiece of their attack on this nomination. what's the best response from the republica

robert bork, kavanaugh, clarence thomas.and they can't do anything about it. >> dagen: they're going to look like a bunch of sexist, if it's a woman, juan. >> juan: i don't agree with that but i will say the media playing a tape in which the chairman of the judiciary committee says save the state. use this tape. to use my words against me. i won't do it. and then he doesn't. then you say the media is the problem. >> dagen: it went further than that, dana. >> dana: the media will glom onto this. there are few on the republican side of things suggesting republican should make a deal and not do the nominee in exchange for the democrats promising not to pack the court. i would never take that deal. >> jesse: no deal. >> dagen: no way. absolutely not. there is hypocrisy in politics and cabbage smells awful when you cook it. "one more thing" is next. >> tech: at safelite, we're committed to taking care of you and your car. >> tech: we'll fix it right with no-contact service you can trust. >> tech: so if you have auto glass damage,

it was the democrats originating the first time with the way they treat treated robert bork all thoseticization. now they're coming along saying let's put in these new rules in order to depoliticize it. fine. then argue for it the proper way, a constitutional amendment with all the thresholds you need to meet in order to secure that. you can't just write a piece of legislation on a friday afternoon to change the constitution like that. it's completely ridiculous. elizabeth: you probably need a constitutional amendment for what they're talking about when it comes to judges on the supreme court. you know, so you bring up, you know, it was joe biden who basically got the ball rolling in 1987 with robert bork hearings. coining the term forking because it was so nasty, so ideological, "the washington post" ended up saying, hey, joe biden, what are you doing? you're acting like a prosecutor, not a juror here. so it seems like can you stop things from progressing from that to where it is now, steve? how do you stop it? because now the democrats are talking about walking out of the hearings,

heated confirmation hearing like the ones for brett kavanaugh, samuel alito, clarence thomas and robert borkjason chaffetz on media analysts claiming a constitutional crisis. they demand and new action to tear up and undercut america's institutions like boycotting the senate vote, government shutdowns, packing the court, impeachment, get rid of the electoral college and more. leading to this simple question, instead of tearing up the sysm because you're not getting your way, isn't this really about the importance winning the elections in the first place with policies that voters want? attorney general william bar out with a big announcement. thousands of federal arrests in nine states as trump administration moves full throttle to help cities and states stop violence slamming u.s. cities. this is operation legend. this is the story of its success in just a short amount of time. tonight former acting attorney general matthew whitaker will break it down. republican doug collins from house judiciary as washington braces for that senate republican report. their probe into what could come out pos

there was the infamous case of robert bork — a ronald reagan appointee to the court — who was deniednfirmation. he was confirmed, you know, but there is a ritualised — ritualised approach to these confirmation hearings now. and i don't see it as having any impact at all in the upcoming election. i mean, i don't know what the democrats can do. i mean, mitch mcconnell is going to do everything in his power to getjustice — judge barrett seated — we are assuming that that's who the nominee will be — but whoever the nominee is, they will be seated on the court. and what can the democrats do? well, you can come out on the street in kind of massive demonstrations. we've seen massive demonstrations before at the heart of an election campaign. the polls have barely moved in months. no matter what happens, no matter how many more people die of covid, no matter that ruth bader ginsberg dies in a most inopportune moment, the polls remain the same. joe biden remain 7% to 8% ahead. donald trump's voters will absolutely come out and vote for him. those who want remove him will absolutely come out t

harriet myers, former white house counsel george bush nominated, she had to withdraw, they defeated robert bork, president reagan's nominee on the senate floor in 1987 and douglas ginsburg was nominated. he had to withdraw. that is how we ended up with anthony kennedy. if they do the bidding process, it does take a wild. to do that in 40 days or so it depends how quickly donald trump wants to move even though he put up a list of potential nominees. shannon: some of the nominees on his list including the old and new list, he met with them before they went through this process last time around, brett kavanaugh -- we will see if that impact so republicans hold to gather the vote with the issue of filibuster. >> it will be a question if they have the votes. the math is very important. the breakdown in the senate is 53 republicans, 47 senators who caucus with democrats and they can only lose two, getting down to 50, 51. if you lose another when you have a tie, you could have mike pence trying to break a tie, that has never happened with the supreme court nomination to confirm someone. as it pertains

. >> the character assassination we saw visit on robert bork, and even greater extent, more recently to horrible extent toward brett kavanaugh, something any person in his right mind would fear, might just be something they don't want to run that goblet. i think that's a distinct possibility. >> republicans have 42 days until election day to act. >> two people facing territory charges after being arrested prior to donald trump's ohio rally. police say john vicki davison, found walking on railroad tracks 20 miles from the rally site, had a gun, shovels and 200 rounds of ammo. it is unclear if they were targeting the president. the fbi and secret service are investigating. shannon: tropical storm beta make landfall on the texas coast unleashing heavy rains and massive flooding, stranded drivers force police to merge in water, some areas could see 15 inches of rain. beta is the ninth named storm to the continental us this year. that ties a record set in 1916. meantime hurricane teddy causing life-threatening recurrent on the east coast as it heads north to canada. shannon: the second ac

. >> if it were my family i would because the character assassination we saw visit on robert bork to some extent, clarence thomas to a greater extent and more recently to horrible extend toward brett kavanaugh is something any person in his right mind would feel might be something you don't want to run that gauntlet. that is a distinct possibility. look at what senator schumer said, wild exaggeration, judge barrett isn't someone wildly out of the mainstream and the complaint you heard from dianne feinstein basically was simply this, you take your religious faith too seriously as if that is now a place in contemporary america, and never has been but is now, that is the atmosphere in which you plunge your self you see why someone would be reluctant. shannon: at some point i will read part of a notre dame speech she gave in notre dame where she graduated on a full scholarship, your legal career is a means to a end and that is building the kingdom of god. if you keep in mind the fundamental purpose in life is not to be a lawyer but to know, love and serve god you will be a different kind

you start with robert bork when joe biden played an integral part and ted kennedy, they went after andared and defamed him. so much so that his name is now a verb. clarence thomas, it was despicable what they did to justice thomas. sam alito, they went after him and smeared him. justice kavanaugh and now, they are starting with judge barrett. i fully expect to the confirmation hearing to be a political circus and i expect the democratic t base demands ad we will see a cory booker spartacus moments. we are already seeing them target judge barrett's young kids which is really despicable. kids should be off-limits on the merits, she's a very strong choice. i'm sure that senate will confirm her and will do so by the end of the month. >> sean: 29 times in presidential years, there's been openings on the supreme court. you discuss this in the column anand i want you to expend what happened historically because all 29 times, the president's nominated people and that would be the norm. >> it that's exactly right and in our country history, 29 times there have been supreme court vacancies durin

so we wouldn't when. >> so biden found himself running two campaign, one against robert bork.fferent directions. >> my name's joe biden. i'd like to be the democratic nominee for president of the united states of america. >> in iowa, an early caucus state that mattered most, biden was bunched with others near the top of the polls but his attention was split. >> there was a miss match between the expectation of joe and what was going on in the campaign. the sort of basics stuff wasn't getting done. >> but that was nothing compared to what unfolded next. >> live from the iowa state fairground in des moines, election '88. >> at the end of a key debate at the iowa state fair, biden used some of his stump speech, which included quotes from british politician neil kinic. politically compelling but it wasn't biden's life and it was delivered without any attribution. >> why is it that joe biden -- >> what am i kinic in a thousand generations. >> the first in his family. >> to be at the university. >> ever to go to a university. >> i mean, he had given that speech 25, 30 times and in e

someone and obviously those that have been borked, obviously robert bork. clarence thomas, it's despicable what they did to him. al lita, they smear eed him andeoand eous -- justice kavanaugh. the democratic base demands they do everything they can. i think we'll see a corey booker spartacus moment, and we're already seeing them target judge barrett's young kids which is really despicable. kids should be off-limits. on the merits, she's a very strong candidate and i think the senate will confirm her by the end of the month. >> sean: 29 times there have been openings on the supreme court. you discuss this in a column. i want you to explain what's happened historically because all 29 times presidents nominated people that would be the norm. >> that's exactly right. in our country's history, 29 times there, have been supreme court vacancies during presidential election years. presidents always nominate someone. all 29 times, whether you're a republican or democrat, the president nominates someone, and what's interesting is what the senate does. there is a cle

>> i think is robert bork set all those years ago, that was really the turning point in soms ways ofhe turn to judicial activism, more so than getting rid of the concept of judicial restraint. that's when the court just made it up. due process clause of the 14th amendment, they read this right to abort into the constitution and it was just made up and a lot of states outlawed abortionu but not all of them. so they wanted to take that issue off the table. i think they realized it's like that old game, if you pull that little stick out of the game, the bunch of marbles come falling down and for them, that's really it for their whole judicial philosophy and they want to take power away from the people. they don't want the people in nebraska being ruled by their own morals. they want the morality of new york to supersede the morality of the rest of thede country. >> tucker: they don't have the power of life and death and they are not god and they can't fix that. >> precisely. >> tucker: laura ingraham, thank you for coming on sunday. >> great to see you. >> tucker: at least two senators

you that it traces back to then and you could go back to the very contentious clarence thomas, robert bork it has never happened in the past. >> john roberts god and without any fight at all. >> martha: used to be different. i just want to switch gears with both of you for a moment because this is becoming perhaps a more tightly contested state when you look at the suburbs and the changing nature of ohio, this is no longer replace the president can count on necessarily and he is working hard they are to counteract that. your thoughts? >> i think the president has made it clear that he is not going to take any state for granted, no voters for granted and watch him show up in states that he won into they don't forget that they put him into the white house last time around. ohio is one of those places you will have to fight for the votes, pennsylvania is another one but minnesota is one that joe biden is losing ground in so it can change very quickly and it has over the recent days. >> martha: about 20 seconds, your thoughts before we go? >> always run scared, has to run scared in ohio and ru

only his life in politics in delaware, but also chair of the senate judicial committee and the robert borke clarence thomas hearings and his vice presidency with barack obama and of course the tragedies when he was young that helped shape his life when he lost his wife and daughter just after he was elected to the senate. and then later in life, of course, when beau biden died. and those are book ends that have really shaped his life. and he never expected to run, brianna, this time, but he decided after he saw charlottesville and decided he had to throw his hat in the ring one more time. >> that really aggravated him. he was aggravated today too. and you could see how much it creates a fire in his belly. >> and bri, you know what beau served and when you heard him talk about beau biden, and his service, that is what brought his anger out today. because as he said, his son was not a sucker and his son was not a loser. >> yeah. gloria, thank you so much. i can't wait to see this. back-to-back documentary events. this will start monday night at 8:00 eastern only here on cnn. >>> and our spec

member of my family i certainly would because a character assassination that we saw visited on robert borkme extent, and then to an even greater extent and more recently to a horrible extent toward brett kavanaugh, it's something that you might fear. that's a distinct possibility. that's a wild exaggeration, judge barrett isn't someone wildly out of the mainstream. and the complaints that you heard from dianne feinstein basically was simply this. you take your religious faith too seriously. if that's the atmosphere into which you pleasure yourself you could see why someone is reluctant. >> shannon: i will read part of a notre dame speech that they gave to the law school graduating class. your legal career is but a means to an end, and that is building the kingdom of god if you can keep in mind you will truly will be a different kind of lawyer. really quickly, why does that scare the left? >> because they think that people of faith are to be feared. but you know the bible says render under seizure, that which is seizure, and render under god that which is god. and the disposition of law and

robert bork in 1987.e was defeated on the senate floor any hiccup could side track the aggressive timetable. back to you. eric: chad, thanks so much. arthel. arthel: let's look what a potential barrett confirmation would mean for critical past rulings like roe versus wade and affordable care act. jeff berman a supreme court reporter for "the wall street journal." jumping right in, it seems a foregone conclusion that amy coney barrett i will be the president's nominee. once confirmed what would a justice barrett mean for the affordable care act, obamacare and for women's reproductive acts, rights i should say, roe v. wade? because that could be on the line. >> sure. thanks, arthel. one way to think of judge barrett look at her mentor justice scalia. to the degree justice scalia applied specific approach interpreting the law, interpreting the constitution, judge barrett has endorsed it, follows it, elaborates on it. so i think that is the sort of a starting point to see. the affordable care act, what is on

we call it borking afterward senate democrats did to judge robert bork.aseless smear campaigns conducted against justice clarence thomas. we watch the repulsive statements and actions recently with justice kavanaugh. no matter who the president nominates, no matter who is qualified or how qualified or how reputable he or she apparently a she will be, democrats will wage smear, slander besmirching campaign the likes of which this country is never seen. what do they care? they've only drag the country through the mud for four years. they will claim abortion will be illegal. they will plan racial issues, mark my words. running is now senate judiciary committee chairman. he will be presiding over all of this, senator lindsey graham. welcome to the program. it's interesting how the president was broken by them, right? now they are threatening -- >> it's pretty obvious they want an outcome. they will destroy anybody's life to keep the seats open. they tried to destroy brett kavanaugh so they can fill the seat. they were dumb enough to say that. i've seen this m

the word bork is in major dictionaries what they did to robert bork, a jurist they destroyed with false. they have had no compunction, miguel estrada somebody i knew as well. miguel was blocking on d.c. circuit, they were concerned if they let a qualified latino on the bench. he would be immediately on the short list for the supreme court. that is how dirty they play. we saw it with justice kavanaugh. the democrats don't remember we're on to their game. so they already tried this with amy coney barrett, with senator feinstein saying absolutely disgustingly bigoted things about her faith. so what else are they going to do to her? they already rolled out the bigotry. i see what they have left. they have used it up. used up their goodwill. we're on to their game now. i hope republicans stand strong do their job, not swayed about rhetoric about dying wishes nothing which is in the constitution. elizabeth: snort schumer has been accused performance outrage taking to the steps of the supreme court building itself in march, threatening neil gorsuch and brett kavanaugh. i think we got the sound

robert bork in the 1980s, 1987 . just because you have this opening, even if they were to move expeditiously, it is far from clear that this is done ma be even during this term and if this term is somewhere over in january or past inauguration day , regardless as to who would be the president, shannon. >> chad, we will have a lot of questions for you in the coming weeks and months. thank you so much. >> thank you. as we continue to reflect on th life and legacy of justice ginsburg, let's bring in rhett barrick joining us on the phone. good to have you with a spirit where showing live this scene o the supreme court as a huge gathering of folks as they are flowers, they have been singing folks who are supporting each other in their grief over this loss. you and i have had many years i washington and had a chance to talk with justice ginsburg at various events and different things around washington part i know you got to know her a little bit and she really had a very funny personality and she was very spunky. i think t

in between with robert bork, he was treated horribly by senator kennedy and others.uld look at the breyer nomination. he too received a strong majority. he was wonderfully qualified. so was justice ginsburg. but so was sam alito. some senators, including one who became president, threatened a filibuster. john roberts got more grief than one would have expected from somebody that qualified. by contrast, justice photo mayor and justice kagan did not have the same kinds of problems. the process has gotten more difficult over time and certainly there are times when the republican senate has not treated particular nominees and i'm not going to comment on anyone in particular there have been times they have not treated them as you'd want. i have got to tell you i think that the democrats have been harder on republican presidential nominees over time. to your other point about the relationship that my father and justice ginsburg had. they were friends and they were friends for all kinds of reasons. they worked at the same place, have the same job, liked music. they were new

and if you think back to robert bork in the late 1980s or clarence thomas or justice kavanaugh, all these justices or nominees in the past, people thought when the nomination happened, it would move in a certain direction. the hearings happen. everything changes, curveball after curveball. this is a tight window, and it's hard to say -- when the republicans say they have the votes before the hearings, you should be dubious about that as a reporter and just as anyone watching all of this. >> counselor, back on over to you with a matter of the law. if a new justice is indeed confirmed, sworn in, and seated, tell the good folks watching exactly how conservative this court will now be. is there any comparison in even recent american history, starting with the fact that if the chief justice john roberts wants to cross over and vote with the liberals, they would still get swamped by a 5-4 court. l >> so very conservative. so i think, you know, the unifying theme between both of your dual crises today, brian, coronavirus and the supreme court nominee is kind of -- you know, i really wish they ha

bear in mind that fights over supreme court nominees going back to robert bork and possibly beyond haven about anything but exercises of raw power. the main reason is we have the supreme court decision in the matter of roe vs. wade which was a flimsy leader reasoned decision from the beginning. it was the invention of a right out of a right that the court had previously invented, nowhere found in the constitution. it hangs by a thread intellectually and i think legally and it's always been in danger of reversal. because the right is so strongly supported and desired by so many american women and others, it's been the source of all this trouble we've been having. it's poisoned our politics for a generation and a half and that's why we are seeing what we are seeing now. >> this president seems adamant he's moving forward and would like a vote before election day. >> absolutely. he wants to move quickly and there's a lot of republicans who join them because they know if your priority is getting another conservative leaning justice on the court, the period between now and election day is th

and he had the hearings for the confirmation of robert bork which he defeated then the clarence thomasars as vice president and how he served for barack obama and during that time how he juggled, and we all know about juggling in life. of course. but how he juggled this serious illness of his son with the job of being vice president. that's not easy. and talking to people who work for him about how he managed to kind of handle that kind of stress with the kind of stressful job he had. >> well, gloria, i know you've got some really special interviews and voices, not just the vice president but people who are close to him we don't hear from a lot and i personally know how hard you worked on this and i cannot wait to watch it. now everybody out there -- >> you do. >> -- should -- should set your dvr or put yourself in front of the television to watch this and also one following it on donald trump, but i know, again, how hard you worked on this. >> right. >> make sure that you watch this. losing gloria's signal there. i'll get right to the promo. watch this tomorrow night, "joe biden's lon

us the destruction of robert bork's reputation by people like senator ted kennedy.eaking that norm for democrats. they did the same thing to clarence thomas. he was smeared. it happened to samuel alito, accused of belonging to a racist club in his princeton days and we know what happened to brett kavanaugh. no such thing happened when sonia sotomayor was nominated to the supreme court. she got nine republican votes. nor did it happen to ruth bader ginsburg, steven breyer or kagan. that attacking supreme court justices personal on their character and so forth started with the democrats. let me quickly add as well the filibustering they did of george w. bush's appel yat court nominees. that broke another norm. followed by harry reid breaking the filibuster to pack the district court with three judges who were going to approve barack obama's regulatory changes, the famous pen and phone. the democrats have been breaking norms for several decades now, sandra. and the idea they would pack the court is just more of the same. >> sandra: dan, we heard from the president this

the nest person in line is the solicitor general who is robert bork. bork will carry out the order and fire cox. and forever be labelled by doing it. and a lot of people have missed in bork's action is the argument that both richardson and ruckle made to him that only chaos could ensue if he didn't act because after you leave the third man in charge of the department of justice, it is any man's bet who has the authority and indeed the janitor might be able to say that he could be the acting attorney general. it is a very unclear situation. so they put a lot of pressure on bork to do it and he did it. he would -- it would cost him a seat on the supreme court later when reagan nominated him because of the hard feelings that would continue amongst democrats for decades about bork's action in firing cox. here is a clip of what happened the night that cox was fired. all of the networks, i happen to be watching television, and learned about it that night. and i had just pled guilty a few days earlier, thinking that cox was going to do this right and i had ag

he was in charge of the robert bork confirmation hearing where he led the character assassination ofhe dynamics in the country that led to the politics of personal destruction and he did the same thing to clarence thomas as well when he was senate judiciary committee chairman. democrats accused romney of being sexist. not a lot of moral high ground from the left on that issue. there were a lot of substantive issues like the coronavirus and law and order that were addressed last night. i disagree with people like chris christie. >> sandra: two more big presidential debates and a v.p. debate next week. lisa boothe, great to get your reaction this morning. thank you. >> trace: developing this morning an investigation now underway after two military planes collided midair in california yesterday. cell phone video captures the moments a marine corps f-5 fighter jet crashed after clipping the wing of a refueling plane. lucas tomlinson is live at the pentagon. are the pilots okay here? >> nobody was killed when a $100 million stealth fighter jet was lost. eyewitness on the ground spoke to o

he said compare the treatment of robert bork, clarence thomas, samuel alito, and brett kavanaugh to that of ruth bader ginsburg, sonya sotomayor, and elena kagan, and it's clear that there is one set of rules for a republican president and another set of rules for a democratic president. this double standard is not just fiction or our imagination at play. two years ago, we saw the outrageous smear campaign that our democratic colleagues waged against justice brett kavanaugh and his family. i've noted that it's not just enough to defeat a nomination. they actually were out to destroy his reputation. and while i hope it's something no nominee will have to endure again, i worry that history will repeat itself. the president has yet to even announce his nominee for the supreme court for the vacancy created by the death of justice ginsburg, but our democratic colleagues are already reflexively taking pot shots at potential nominees. one of those potential nominees is judge amy coney barrett who is a well-respected federal judge with an impressive background as a legal scholar. while serving o

she writes in her letter, "most people dollar member the hearings on robert bork, but i do. was there during the four months of vicious political campaigning against this judicial nominee, my husband. in the senate hearing room, then, joe biden presided over a rigged hearing full of unprecedented levels of lying and distortion of a man known as integrity and judicial wisdom. democrats fragrant lee lied about his record of opinions. on day four, senator biden was accused of plagiarism and how to drop out of his presidential race. 33 years later, he is still a man without a compass guided now by prevailing progressive winds. will all have tears in our eyes if joe biden is elected president. host: about a half hour to go before we go to the house, that is your opportunity to call and let us know your thoughts. people texting this morning. anthony from riverside, illinois saying come up my take away from us night's debate is that there isn't a need for another. from north carolina -- ime trump's a potter, however, -- i am a trump supporter, however, disaster. was a i think a lot

it was senate democrats who began our modern challenges with the treatment of robert bork in 1987. but the acrimony really got going in the early 2000's when a group of senate democrats took the almost never-used tactic of filibustering nominations and turned it into a constant routine for the first time ever. so, madam president, who was the main driving force behind these tactics? let's consult some new york newspapers from the year 2003. quote, schumer decided to put ideology on the front burner in the confirmation process. i am the leader of the filibuster movement. and you know, i'm proud of it, said the senator from brooklyn. quote, mr. schumer urged democratic colleagues to use a tactic that some were initially reluctant to pursue, and that has since roiled the senate. throughout president bush 43's two terms, our colleague built an entire personal brand out of filibustering judicial nominees. talented, hardworking people's careers were destroyed. like the brilliant lawyer miguel estrada, a close friend of now-justice elena kagan who says he is extraordinary and thoughtful a

i mean, we all famously remember, many of us famously remember the robert bork confirmation hearingspolitical instrument of your politics, then you'd be willing to overthrow it to get what you want. and, stuart, that's essentially what packing the court is, adding more justices so that you get the political policy and moral outcomes that you desire. yeah, that question should definitely be put to mr. biden. stuart: got it. we'll be watching tuesday night. dan henninger, thank you very much, indeed. see you again real soon, good stuff. >>> all right, i'm going to go back to the electric vehicle makers. we spend a lot of time on them, justify justifiably so, all of them popular on robin hood, an online trading app. they're all the rage. >> well, they are. tesla's up 400%, workhorses, electric car stocks are hot. and even nikola was up 230% before some of these recent fraud allegations, and it's when we had web bush downgrading the stock, its outlook to underperform at just $15. but your not seeing the positives today despite the fact that, look, you had california pushing the electric