the main part of american society who have violent feelings and are supporters of trump . he had informed about another man outside the place the residence of the president of the supreme court of the united states of america said to be the target of the president of the supreme court, but last year the united states announced that the country received more than 9,000 threats during this one year . they met. a 49-year-old man entered the office with a baseball bat, broke the windows and computers, and beat two of the employees. the people inside the office were scared and hid . my office staff did violent acts the latest case of an attack on the home or workplace of american officials became the media today. the entry into the home of us national security adviser jake sullivan has increased by 400% . the mouse says that you should not be tied, i made you for myself, the satisfaction of those creatures who devote themselves to god.

and votes, i was able to fulfill my commitment to put the first black woman on supreme court of the united states of america. by the way, she is better than the rest. she is one bright woman. because ofof you, more black women have been appointed to federal appellate courts than any other president in american history combined. by the way, i mean it i mean it. because ofi you, because of you. you turned out. you spoke up. you knew, you showed up when the votes counted. you made people say, wait a minute. what price will i pay if i don't. you feel the promise and peril of climate change. because of you we're making the biggest investment ever in w history of the world in climate change.me don't ever think youroe voice doesn't matter, i'm keeping my promise that no one should be in jail because of using and possessing marijuana. their record should be expunged. [applause] those on pel grants, 70% of black college students receive pel grants. many of you the savings would be significant and wiping out. this newga republican party is dead set against the it to stop you from getting student debt relief, same opp

i was able to fill my commitment to put the first black woman on the supreme court of the united states of america. [applause] she is brighter than the rest. she is one bright woman. because of you more black women have been appointed to the federal courts than under any other president in american history combined. [applause] i mean it. because it is you. you turned out, he spoke up. you knew, you showed up in the votes counted. you made people say whoa, wait a minute. at what price will i pay if i don't. you feel the promise and peril of climate change and because of you we are making the biggest investment ever in the history of the world and climate change. don't ever think your voice doesn't matter. i am keeping my promise that no one should be in jail merely because of the use of marijuana, their records should be expunged. [applause] my student debt relief plan. [applause] especially those on pell grants. 70% of black college students receive pell grants, many of you the savings would be significant. and even wiping out student debt completely for some. [applause] but this new republican pa

of the courts and the judges who serve on them. we are here today because the supreme court of the united states of america does not consider itself bound by these rules. i invited the chief justice to join this conversation. last week he sent me a letter declining to testify to this hearing and he said, " separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving the judicial independence." the reality is that sitting justices have testified at 92 congressional hearings since 1960. and i even offered to the chief justice the opportunity to designate someone else on the court to testify. but i'm more troubled by the suggestion that testifying to this committee would somehow infringe on the separation of powers or threaten judicial independence. in fact, answering legitimate questions from the people's elected representatives is one of the checks and balances that help preserve the separation of powers. in his letter last week, the chief also sent what he called a statement of ethical principles and practices. it was a document attached to his letter. it is an extraordinary document, not in a good way. it makes clear that while

of discomfort about the court that has to make that final decision. >> molly, what the hell is going on with the supreme court of the united states of america? new or we are just -- this is practice for -- you've got neil gorsuch, john roberts, now the subject of not-so-positive headlines. neil gorsuch, for selling property to the head of a law firm with business before the court, and roberts for his wife's finances. seriously, what is going on with this scotus conservatives? >> i think it's fair to say this exercise in self policing that the supreme court is supposed to be doing has failed. they don't have the same ethics laws that slightly lower courts do. and clearly, they can't stick to it. i would like to point out, in the same sort of court is elena kagan, who refused bagels from a -- >> right. >> -- because she felt it was ethically dicey. so, i don't think all the justices are doing this. but certainly, thomas is famous. and i would like to point out that thomas really changed the way he disclosed after 2000 for peace in the l.a. times, which took him to task for some of this. so, i do think this was conscious. and he certainly knows

of discomfort about the court that has made that final decision. >> molly, what the hell is going on the supreme court of the united states of america?on't know if this is newer for just finding out about this in this practice for years or decades. you've got neil gorsuch. john roberts. both not the subject of not-so-positive headlines. gorsuch for selling property to the head of a law firm with business before the court. roberts for his wife's finances. what is going on with the scotus conservatives. >> i think it's fair to say this exercise in self policing but the supreme court is what we doing has failed. they don't have the same laws that lower courts to. clearly, they can't stick to it. i would like to point out in the same sort of courage is alina keegan who refused bagels from a friend because she felt it was ethically dicey. i don't think all the justices are doing this. certainly, thomas -- i would like to point out the thomas really changed the way he disclosed after 2004 peace in the l.a. times. which took him to task for some of this. i think this was conscious. he certainly knows what he's doing. >> renato, now that dia

we're here today because the supreme court of the united states of america does not consider itself boundthe rules. >> ali vitali is on capitol hill and eugene robinson is back. ali, what ethical questions are being raised in this hearing? >> reporter: what we heard this refrain time and again from democratic lawmakers, the highest court in the land should be subjected to the highest ethical rules that govern it. that's not what they feel that they have right now and we know already that chairman dick durbin tried to invite chief justice john roberts to testify at this hearing, roberts, of course, responded in a letter saying he would decline that invitation. and in the wake of him saying no to coming to this, durbin proceeding as i imagine he would have even if the chief justice was there in that he and other democrats are highlighting the ways that ethics reforms need to take place here and that if the court won't do that themselves, congress is happy to step in, even though they're chagrinned to have to do so. but on the other side of this too, we have seen republicans, those who said

they're on the supreme court of the united states of america. on't think that the rules that apply to members of congress apply to them. and you know who's not happy about that? members of congress. >> yeah, the senate judiciary committee convened just this week to try to get a code of ethics put in place for the supreme court. chief justice roberts declined to attend. those efforts have been utterly stymied. some reporting about a gift favor given to justice gorsuch. but most of this surrounds justice thomas. the harlan crow reporting from earlier this week, just yesterday, we had propublica report talking about tuition payments for the child the thomases are raising as their son. it's worth spending a moment to emphasis who ginni thomas is. an important figure on the fright years. it was indeed her text messages to mark meadows that were so key. she was urging him in the wake of the 2020 election to keep fighting to overturn the democratic process. we're showing a few of them now here, talking about how media reporters should be arrested and de

of the courts and the judges who serve on them. we are here today because the supreme court of the united states of america does not consider itself bound by these rules. i invited the chief justice to join this conversation. last week he sent me a letter declining to testify to this hearing and he said, "separation of powers concerns and the importance of preserving the judicial independence." the reality is that sitting justices have testified at 92 congressional hearings since 1960. and i even offered to the chief justice the opportunity to designate someone else on the court to testify. but i'm more troubled by the suggestion that testifying to this committee would somehow infringe on the separation of powers or threaten judicial independence. in fact, answering legitimate questions from the people's elected representatives is one of the checks and balances that help preserve the separation of powers. in his letter last week, the chief also sent what he called a statement of ethical principles and practices. it was a document attached to his letter. it is an extraordinary document, not in a good way. it makes clear that while t

vladimirovich flew the other day he bent february a few months ago to the united states of america shared with the head of the us supreme court there. here is the struggle for democracy, and at that time the american naboo well, which already led it there, that's all. yes please, that's who tribute to what the americans are doing, of course, they also sneeze what will happen to democracy or honesty. there they are simply, this is he, yes, the prince, uh, and here's something, is there really no person with such a face. so at the same time , vasily, you remember when he was appointed. the main thing is that they wrote well, speaks english, the main achievement. what else, well? and for the growing up of the head of the supreme court of ukraine, all this pubic facial hair. this is how it is now accepted in ukraine because for some reason many ukrainian politicians. this is nonsense to us, but looked at all these michels and so on. there is such 3 million dollars. he has all the democracy. all brains melt. it is another question for me, not 300,000, where did the 300,000 go too. here they posted it, then listen. no, i agree, i w

vladimirovich flew the other day so-february a few months ago to the united states of america shared with the head of the us supreme courthich was already leading it there and that's it. yes, please, that's who it is clear why the americans are doing this, of course, they also sneeze what will happen to democracy or honestly. there they are simply, this is he, yes, the prince, uh, and that's something, isn't it right with such a person can be taken. at the same time, vasily vasil you remember when it was appointed. the main thing is that they wrote well, speaks english, the main thing is that they have achieved what else, for comparison, the heads of the supreme court of ukraine, this whole pubic facial hair. this is how it is now accepted in ukraine because for some reason many ukrainian politicians. this is nonsense we were looking at these michels, all sorts and so on. it's just that when a person here is 3 million dollars, he has all the democracy, all the brains manage it to me the question is another 300,000 and 300,000 too. here they posted it, then listen. no, i agree, i would like him even more yes, three millio