what do you expect of mcconnell, he said he won't even give us a hearing on merrick garland. he was, after eight years, worn down by republican obstructionism. >> we went to congress and said here is the evidence. here is what we know about the russians intervening in our election. rather than us make a statement we would like this to be a bipartisan expression of concern. mcconnell refused to sign on so there was no strong bipartisan statement about this. it's almost sad. i was shocked given this evidence mcconnell was look at this as a political calculation. i don't twoont look like i'm validating the reality that the russians are doing this. obama was so worn down on obstructionist, he said the guy won't even give me a hearing on merrick garland, why do you think he would do this? >> 202778801. the book the world as it is, a memoir of the obama white house. what was the president's world view coming in in 2008 and how did it change over the course of eight years? >> he saw his principle objective in the early years as drawing down the troops. and i think what he wanted to

but if you're democrat you go back to mitch mcconnell by not allowing merits garlic -- merrick garland to get a shot. garland isrick certainly a qualified and pretty moderate judge by most accounts. it's not like he was some radical. republicans stopped him from getting confirmed and did not even give him the opportunity to prove himself. a situation where democrats feel that they won the popular vote this time, but lost the electoral college. now donald trump is about to it if amyyear-old, coney barrett were picked, would be on the supreme court for decades. you can understand why democrats feel like look, you have to fight this. ust: matt lewis will be with , if you want to asking questions about this process of choosing the next supreme court justice. for democrats (202) 748-8000, for republicans (202) 748-8001, and for independents (202) 748-8002. host: you mention justice barrett, talk about the other two, robert cavanaugh and mr. tch?au lait --kefli question, is the huge i would think anyone who thinks that they can get inside donald trumphad an think of -- 's head and think abou

merrick garland was an interesting circumstance. we had a supreme court justice prematurely died in an election year. we were very close to that presidential election year. given those circumstances, i think the argument was easier for mitch mcconnell to make. this is just sheer political power. control whato happens on the court, you need the senate and you need the white house. the republican party won both the senate and the white house in the 2016 election. if the shoe were on the other foot i have no doubt that chuck schumer would not be confirming judges. host: if in 2020 there is a vacancy on the high court and the democrats have the senate, the same thing will happen? guest: i think if they held the senate in 2020 and trump was replacing justice ginsburg, their position would be not to confirm the judge. the question is can they withstand that politically? that would be an open question and a conversation that would be had across the country. politics are so polarized right now around the supreme court that all the pressure

mcconnell mentioned that trump should let merrick garland. someone that will go by the constitution. it should not matter if they are a democrat or republican. host: i have to jump in. mitch mcconnell is not recommending merrick garland and the republicans have the majority in the senate. caller: they need to have the democrats to help pass these laws. they are doing nothing. i think that is a shame. sicily with the vote on the daca situation. -- especially with the vote on the daca situation. forel a get is time democrats to come to the center and use their brains and not use their emotions when they are going to vote. host: thanks for the call. the brexit negotiator resigns from the position, britain to leave the european union in march. this is likely to be part of the conversation at the nato summit. the president meets with theresa may on thursday and friday. the president traveling to windsor castle to become the 12th u.s. president to meet with queen elizabeth ii. moran from virginia, democrats line, good morning. i would like to assoc

host: the name of merrick garland came up again yesterday on "face the nation." [video clip] >> the republican majority refused to hear that hold hearing for 10 months about a nominated by president obama. we are for monthly from an election now, it and we should follow that same rule. i will do my job on the judiciary committee in advance of congressional elections this november. i assume the president will nominate someone from that short list prepared to him by the federal society and the heritage foundation, two right-wing groups. i will review the record and ask them tough questions to get to the core issue -- how will this next justice nominated by the president affect the rights and freedoms of the average american? this is a very important decision. it will affect the affordable care act. it will affect reproductive choice and individual freedom for millions of women. incrementalct protection, lgbt rights. justice kennedy was at the center of many key decisions. i will do my job on the judiciary committee. i hope folks who are watching will also speak up.

he could have nominated merrick garland. they would've probably had a resist garland sign. >> if he would have nominated garland, i would hear talking about how great a president donald trump is. but i will say this. merrick garland, it all comes back to it. that's what set this up, right? the left-wing of the democratic party, the democratic party as a whole has no choice but to resist this nominee. regardless of his qualifications, regardless of his background, because they feel like they're nominee was stolen by mitch mcconnell two years ago. as a result, we are in for probably the super bowl of all super bowls of battles in congress over the next couple weeks i think october 1 is a very aggressive deadline especially given the fact that he has 300 decisions that people are going to have to wade through and understand. going to get a lot of questions on those. i remember i heard mr. leo talk about odorless papers. my favorite is federalist 51. ambition much must counteract ambition. congress has lacked ambition and the co

garland 2016, it's fair play. >> he said we will not allow supreme court justice during election year. what's good for goose is good for gandor. >> it's a low standard and it was a standard, i for one and i don't think others have forgotten so. as you sew, sew you wreath. >> report that is north korea is concealing aspects of nuclear program, renewed questions about u.s. troop levels in germany, fast-approaching nato summit and talks about one-on-one between president trump and russian president vladimir putin. with ukraine crimea and syria among many pop ticks on july 16th, chris. chris: kevin cork reporting from the white house, kevin, thanks for that. joining me now the president's national security adviser john bolton in his first interview since meeting with russian president vladimir putin this week in moscow. ambassador ballon welcome back to fox news sunday. >> glad to be with you. chris: what does president trump want from his summit with putin, is it beyond improving dialogue, does he realistically hope with breakthrough with ukraine, arms control? >> it's important to have

no and that's because the math matters in the senate at the time that merrick garland was nominated by president obama republicans held a majority in the senate so they had the ability to decide whether a supreme court nominee would be considered in the light in a presidential election year they continue to hold the majority and so this goes back to decisions that craddock leaders like harry reid and chuck schumer have made in recent years having the filibuster would be pretty valuable right now for the democrats that was gotten rid of chuck schumer decided to filibuster new of course it's a supreme lee qualified nominee to the supreme court and ultimately senate majority mcconnell got rid of the filibuster because of that and so that option doesn't exist anymore and so the democrats are actually pretty limited they're going to try to slow this down say you know demand every single document the history of his of his life everything he's ever looked at everything he's ever written everything he's ever said and given that he's done three hundred opinions he has a long legal career is in

he actually supported merrick garland and don't be surprised if merrick garland supports him. >> neil: you do raise the possibility there's a different way of doing this. you talk about fair questions you could ask a judge kavanaugh about past writings and past judicial cases, roe v. wade should have been decided. an interesting way to take on this issue. all of these candidates askew anything having to do with how they would rule on something. you say what about going back in time and looking at a case. i thought that will never happen. those questions will never come up. if they do, no smart candidate in this case, you know, nobody will rerespond. >> i'm trying to move the confirmation process forward so it's not just a game of keep away and got-ya. doesn't degenerate to personal attacks. it's not a rubber stamp or a witch hunt. the candidate have asked questions about his legal views, not his personal views. he answers and gets the benefit of the doubt when he answers. that's his reward. everybody understands the answers are not promised or pledges. once confirmed, a justice has to

the republicans didn't allow nominate merrick garland. guest: many people in the pro-life movement are active in churches and support pregnancy centers. there is an extensive network of people out there and i encourage you to get to know and become involved in this. there are four times as many pro-life centers as there are abortion centers. they are staffed by women who care hill, asow to capitol committee'sudiciary subcommittee on federal courts looks at the structure of the federal court system and potential ways to restructure it. law professors and a federal willls court judge testify. the hearing has been delayed as committee votea on spending for 2019. we expect to start in just a moment. live coverage from the dirksen senate office building on capitol hill, here on c-span. chatter] ible chapter] ible chatter]

time and time again, leader mcconnell justified his unjustifiable blockade of merrick garland by claiming the american people should have a voice in deciding the next supreme court justice. that was in february of an election year. it's now almost july. if the senate's constitutional duty to advise and consent is just as important as the president's right to nominate, which the constitution says it is, why should a midterm election be any less important than a presidential election? leader mcconnell is simply engaging in hypocrisy. whomever the president picks, it is all too likely they're going to overturn health care protections and roe v. wade. we don't need to guess. president trump has said time and time again he would appoint judges that would do those two things -- overturn roe v. wade, overturn health care protections. on november 11, 2016, then president-elect trump said, quote, i am pro-life. good judges will be pro-life. in a debate against secretary clinton, then-candidate trump said, because i am pro-life and i will be appointing pro-life judges, i think that we will go back

democrats who are still smarting after mitch mcconnell blocked the nomination of merrick garland in 2016 to be barack obama's selection on the court now says mitch mcconnell should wait until the elections are over and republicans say we will move through this quickly. guest 2: it is really brazen showmanship and democrats, especially dianne feinstein, who is the ranking member of the judiciary committee and chuck schumer of new york are making that pitch right now as hard as -- but mcconnell and the president are hard thatiners and i will think i think they will get their hearing whether democrats like it or not. host: this is what chuck schumer said about that and talked about hypocrisy by senate republicans. let's watch. [video clip] course, if republicans were consistent, they would wait to consider justice kennedy's successor until after the midterm elections. time and time again, leader mcconnell justified his unjustifiable blockade of merrick garland i claiming the american people should have voice in deciding the next supreme court justice. of anas in february election year. it i

that was your point. >> juan: no democrats. >> greg: merrick garland? >> juan: oh, garland. >> greg: the initial comments, the initial question was do these comments help or hurt. they have moved from calling people to not cease jihadists. these were the dopes who were offended when you called ms-13 gang members animals. oh, my god. how dare you. and yet this is what they do. cory booker and andrew cuomo, charles krauthammer's observation. the right things they are wrong or dumb but the left thinks you're evil. corey immediately deemed the avocet evil which makes me think he is dumb. >> jedediah: elizabeth warren does this all the time. this is all she knows how to do. i am always saying run her because this -- she has nothing to do but insulting throne names. there is no substance there ever. she was saying kavanaugh was hostile to health care for millions. based on what? what is that kind of language? i am telling democrats, throw her front and center. >> juan: it is a good thing the president is a role model on not bullying and using aggressive linka

could have nominated merrick garland and they would be convinced it is judge jeanine in a merrick garland mask. they would be trying to pull merrick garland's face off. i know it is judge jeanine. they need more than one speed. they need more than one gear. they have one variable. if it is from trump, it's evil. if that is the case, no one is going to take you seriously because it is so irrational. you have to vary your gears. >> jesse: when the hearing does commence, it's going to be kind of similar i think to what happened with john roberts when they just destroyed the guys character and his personality and you get this wholesome, calm demeanor. easily deflecting these harsh attacks. i think the same thing is going to happen with kavanaugh. >> kimberly: he's going to be well-prepared and he has excellent peppermint and he's going to be able to withstand the pressure. this is a justice, justice kennedy said he was always there, first thing early, always there late. to be able to put the time and effort in. he is quite studious and i like that. he is going to do a great job. they are goin

did you really mean that supreme court seat for merrick garland was stolen? >> absolutely. so, in 2016, just hours after antonin scalia passed away, mitch mcconnell came to the floor and he said, "there will be no debate, and there will be no vote on anyone that obama nominates." he said, "it's an election year." well, it's not in the constitution you don't debate and vote in an election year. listen, 15 times before we'd had an open seat during an election year. every single time -- every single time -- there was a debate and there was a vote. >> i'm willing to admit that senate norms were changed in a way that felt incredibly egregious, that merrick garland, in my view, should have gotten a vote. but -- and it was an enormously partisan set of circumstances that led to him being blocked. all i'm saying is no law was broken. >> well, no law was broken unless you respect the constitution as a law, and the constitution says "advice and consent," and it's always been the understanding of that when there's a supreme court nominee, and this is not a case days before the electio

what americans don't care muchh about is treatment of merrick garland when nominatede for the suprurt. so i think that fuels democratic rage. one of the problems they have with this s nomineeing to be all four of the finalists are members of federal appeals urts, all of them, judge barrett less, so have long experience. judge kavanaugh has a long history, mainstream conservative choice, so it makes it harder to make aoherent response. you can't oppose thesaying they're too conservative. that was a desid voters made when theelected president trump in 2016. >> our lisa desjardins said she had spoken to orrin hatch who said he knewho the pick was and said it would not be amy coney barrett. >> there was some concern among senate republics it would be too much of a hot button, given her track record especially on issues like abortion, would put that in the fore. that's what democrats are hoping to make the case about which is the issue of abortion and to energize and genete more enthusiasm from their base about this, regardless ofhether this person actually makes it through the process. it

raskin: one is merrick garland of about as they dark the chief judge of the d.c. circuit court of appeals, who was nominated to the supreme court in march of 2016. a celebrated judge who had more judicial experience under his belt than anyone ever nominated to the supreme court before, a graduate of harvard college andujar vard law school, judge garland was often described as the most qualified person ever nominated to the court. but senator mcconnell and the g.o.p. in the senate vowed they would have no hearings, no action and no vote on his nomination because there was an election coming up in nine months. and the people should be heard. this was unprecedented but fair enough if that's the new standard. now i have another constituent, brett kavanaugh of chevy chase, who serves on the exact same court as judge garland does, who has been nominated to the supreme court, only four months before a national election. he's a graduate of yale college and yale law school, but the senate now says that they're going to speed through hearings and a vote on judge cavanaugh's

>> you repeatedly called for fairness in this process, that it wreaks of hypocrisy that merrick garland couldn't even get a harg. >> let me go over this again for those of you who haven't heard it yet. the end of the eighth year of a two-term presidency in the middle of an election and the question was, was it appropriate to wait and see who the american people wanted to make the nomination? so let's look at a little history. you have to go back to 1888 to find the last time a vacancy created in a presidential election year was confirmed by a senate of a different party from the occupant of the white house. joe biden, when he was chairman of the judiciary committee said in 1992, presidential election year that if there were a vacancy, he wouldn't fill it. chuck schumer and harry reid said a year and a half before the end of bush 43's eight years that if a vacancy occurred, they wouldn't fill it. look, we know that the shoe was on the other foot, this was a republican president sending a nomination up to a democratic senate in the middle of a presidential election year, they would not ha

senator mcconnell invented this new rule, and wouldn't even consider a meeting with merrick garland and now says we have to hurry through. totally inconsistent. the net result is he's trying to play to his political advantage. >> what did you guys do wrong in the merrick garland situation? if you could redo it, how would you do it? >> i'm not sure we could have changed it. when it reached the point where the senate republican leader refused to even meet with the nominee of president obama, a man extremely well-qualified, it was clear that the fix was in. they were going to keep this vacant in hopes they could put a republican in the white house. it happened. now neil gorsuch, chosen by the federalist society, as well, has gone to the bench, is voting in lockstep on the republican conservative side. and they want to fill this vacancy to give them an advantage on any future rulings. >> i've got to ask you, though, now going backwards even before garland, let's go to the harry reid decision back in 2013, when you decided to scrap it for everything but the supreme court. the filibuster. the

garland, who did not receive a hearing in the senate. , hi there, on c-span. what do you want to see happen? >> he is a good man. think there should be a from the law laid down and --ored years ago , do you think that was a good idea or a bad idea on the part of the senate? caller: i think that was a great idea. don't, theyou president in the office would hardly ever have a chance. of his own. again, the constitution. there that is the case, are to be a 100 to one vote anyway. host: the justice anthony kennedy was on the ninth circuit of appeals before he was nominated to the supreme court. our line for democrats in massachusetts. richard, you are on c-span. caller: how're you doing? i wish him well in my -- in his retirement. president trump was not properly voted in. general,lican party in they seem to post on facebook and a lot of other places, christian pastry it -- patriot. marking that abortion is against god. i don't agree with abortion, i am democratic, i believe in the choice because we are not governed by god. you can be muslim, christian, catholic,

they know that this is a us years what mitchack tpltwo mcconnell did with merrick garland and barack obama's appointee in his final year and democrats don't w their democratic officeders back up here, they don't wanthe to relent and i think the pressure is going to b very tight. i think this is going toe tm test for020. >> brett kavanaugh leading 2 this lasoantdates that we have been hearing about reports t will likely however, thesident hasay. been very hd on the affordable care act and brett kavanaugh writing that opiniuphe essentially. is that something that may have some sort oom compre potentially that maybe both parties can agree on that pe single payer would we the solution. ave to how that is t the end of day. the obamacare wasri w complicatd fashion it's going to beo hard to pull out regardless of of judicial rev we have ofnd beyond that, i kind of think i thet tsi pre looking someone that can look at the big tough iues. we've got healthcare, i think we have thetr international e tariffs and welso h national security on the table so someone who really speaks to the types of

over merrick garland. what's the best move for democrats? >> democrats first of all have to wage a fight. and the base, i think, demands a fight right now. they demand -- and also, you know, this is -- this has ban voting issue for republicans, much less so for democrats, and that asymmetry needs to be corrected to the extent that it can. so i think that -- you know, democrats need to be sensitized to the importance of these judicial appointments, especially supreme court appointments. that said, it should not be a fight that -- that costs red state democrats their seats. so if -- look, if something comes out in the hearings or in kavanaugh's paper trail that ca senator like susan collins or lisa murkowski to waiver, to balk, to say, gee, i just don't know about this guy kavanugh, then i think democrats need to be united on this because they potentially could have a chance of winning. but if they don't have a chance to win, and i kind of doubt that they will, because i think kavanugh is a pretty careful guy, and we'll see, but if the battle

most relevant for today was merrick garland. eight months before the end of his term, obama nominated someone and didn't get a hearing on him. that is without precedent. host: you wrote that the refusal was staggeringly un-partisan and unpatriotic. the republican party spent eight years disbanding norms and -- what else do you mitch mcconnell, he was worn down by republican obstructionist. september 2016, we went to congress and said, here is the evidence and here's what we know about russians interfering with the election. and we would like this to be a bipartisan expression of concern about a foreign adversary meddling. mcconnell refused to sign off so ultimately there was no bipartisan statement. obama -- i was shocked and others were shocked that mitch mcconnell looked at statement,olitical admit it waso happening. , democrats.748-8000 (202) 748-8001, republicans. (202) 748-8002, independent collars. the book is called "the world as it is." what was the president's worldview coming in in 2008 and how did it change? coming in

well, when president obama did nominate merrick garland, they said, oh, wait a minute, we can't vote for somebody nominated by barack obama. and for the first time in the history of this country, they refused to have a vote. >> final question, just quickly. if you can't reject his nomination, do democrats -- will democrats attempt to delay the vote until after the midterm elections? >> i have no idea. let's -- we need to have time for a thorough hearing as required. he's got thousands of pages of memos he wrote when he was in a republican white house. he certainly has his other writings. we should review that. obviously the lobbying group that's for him has reviewed it because they basically told president trump you've got to nominate this person because among other things, he'll repeal roe versus wade. >> senator patrick leahy, thanks for taking the time. >> thank you. >>> well, under way right now, some of the immigrant children separated from their parents at the border are being reunited, but the trump administration likely will miss a key deadline, which is just hours away. >>>

garland case to even be considered that i think was a violation of the constitution but i don't think two wrongs make a right so i think this nomination should be considered on its merits when it happen after the midterm elections that would be better the american public would have an ability to speak but the democrats don't really have the ability to slow down and stop with the way the republicans that you know where democracy and good democracy winners of the past election get to establish a lot of the rules subject of course to the constitution what do you think of michael cohen hiring all friend lanny davis as his lawyer and this imbroglio him or is the smartest thing you ever did hiring lanny is a brilliant move lanny davis both great in court lawyer out of court where tech titian strategist media consultant he does it all and it's a brilliant brilliant move and he's a very very lucky man that lanny took this case ok we you confirm cavanaugh right today. you know why wouldn't confirm anybody today i mean if louis brandeis came forward what will they be but i will wait to hear how

thing that merrick garland didn't get approved, republicans controlled the senate. >> exactly. that's why senator schumer is in a box. thanks, charlie. and demonstrations in london. we'll have a live report from the ground coming up. the justice department announcing indictments against 12 russian nationals as president trump prepares for his big summit with vladimir putin. what could the latest charges mean for their meeting? i'm 85 ye i have to wear a giant hot dog suit. what? where's that coming from? i don't know. i started my 401k early, i diversified... i'm not a big spender. sounds like you're doing a lot. but i still feel like i'm not gonna have enough for retirement. like there's something else i should be doing. with the right conversation, you might find you're doing okay. so, no hot dog suit? not unless you want to. no. schedule a complimentary goal planning session today with td ameritrade®. it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're f

garland confirmed? >> yes. and president trump a year and half into the term is going to have two lifetime appointments to the supreme court, and one other point about the narrowness of the senate right now, and president trump has had a lot of the ire for john mccain and the health care vote, but remember, he was joined by susan collins and lisa murkowski for voting no on the health care and stymieing president for a major moment, and this is another one, and those two senators are the ones that he is most eager to win over, and who could have the fate of his next nomination in their hands. so, i think that watch those two very carefully, you know, over the next couple of weeks. >> and i wanted to remind everybody that they only need 50 votes to confirm the next supreme court justice because, if you will recall in the neil gorsuch's confirmation, they got rid of the filibuster, and mitch mcconnell used the nuclear option, and what are the options for democrats at that point, lynn? >> one option is to f

and the politicalization, excuse me, of this process now, did it start with merrick garland and when the republicans refused to vote on a barack obama nominee before the next president was elected? >> no, it started if anything with judge bork, and each side is blaming the other for the de-escalation, and it is like two sides of a bad marriage faulting the other all of the time. and we are where we are because the politics of each side is driving the scenter to where thy are, and a real significant debate over the judicial philosophy, and that is a good place to be. >> and the democrats out there, ed, who say that, or ak chactua chris, i want to put it to you that it is a lost cause, and that the republicans are going to be getting the nominee, and the president is going to be getting the nominee, and a conservative no matter what, and why is your group spending so much money to the oppose him? >> because these are the issues and the values that are important to us, and the fight that sfoing to be lasting for the impact of the fight that is go going to be lasting for generations. the

you refused to even meet with merrick garland. look at that sweet man. that's like refusing to pet a golden retriever. [ laughter ] "no thank you. i prefer a rattlesnake. [ light laughter ] i like to pet a good old rattlesnake. [ laughter ] come here now. nice snake." [ laughter ] here's the lesson. [ cheers and applause ] the gop isn't operating on arguments or principles. they don't care about being called hypocrites or liars. hypocrisy isn't their weakness, it's their platform. we saw that yet again during a congressional hearing on the russia investigation today. remember, republicans spent millions of dollars over four years investigating benghazi and came up with nothing. and yet today, they basically yelled at deputy attorney general rod rosenstein to end the russia investigation. here's retiring gop congressman trey gowdy freaking out at rosenstein today. >> we are two years into this investigation. we're a year and a half into the presidency. we are over a year in the special counsel. there is a presumption of guilt. there is a desire by democra

merrick garland. that did not stop the top democrat chuck schumer recommendinging that person to president trump. senate minority leader, the president, held a phone call. i am told when schumer warned the president not to nominate anyone who would be against the affordable care act, or against overturning roe vs. wade. schumer warned the president that would be, quote, cataclysmic. this was described to me as a check the box kind of phone call, considering that the president had already put out his short list. back to the top three, cavanagh, cavanagh, kethledge and comey barrett, if it is indeed cavanagh he would continue the trend of having an ivy leaguer, graduate of an ivy league school on the supreme court. the current eight supreme court justices fit that mold. if it is kethledge, he went to michigan. barrett went to notre dame. that would break tradition. michigan and notre dame talking about football. adam: i did not go to notre dame and i lived in south bend. i've been to the grotto. those a

garland, was oehme's nominee that mitch mcconnell didn't bring so that's why democrats are opposed to any nominee. >>> over the weekend president trump made an imprompt thank you promptu wedding in marijuana marijuana. he was at trump national golf course in new jersey, popped in on this young couple's wedding reception. the president congratulated the bride and grood and greeted the guests and posted for pictures. he popped in at another wedding held at that golf club last year. >>> more trouble for the battled company at the tra tech. they are now facing a lawsuit filed by thousands of people. >>> plus, the county fire crossing over into the bay area now. the new evacuation orders in place and for firefighters on the containment. >>> good morning, you can see traffic is moving along okay on highway four coming in through the willow pass grade and concord. >>> we're joined by low clouds at the coastline this morning. i think we will have the hayes and smoke with us for the afternoon. giving you a look at the cooler pattern in place for the days ahead, a look at what's going on and wh

they didn't hold meetings with merrick garland, they didn't have a hoet. it was vacant for over a year so president trump could nominate a justice instead of president obama nominating one. that's the remarkable and unprecedented way that donald trump got his first nomination for the united states supreme court. well, now we have started the battle royale over president trump's second nominee for the court. just like the first one had the unprecedented twist because republicans held open that seat so the democratic president couldn't advance a nominee, now there is an unprecedented twist, too. >> why did the president stick with kavanaugh? because he's worried. that mr. mueller will go to the court and ask that the president be subpoenaed and ask to do other things necessary to move the investigation forward and president trump knows that kavanaugh will be a barrier to preventing that investigation from going there. >> even before president trump picked his nominee last night, he was already saying no nominee should be considered until after the november e

. >> senator, on june 27th, you tweeted, i can assure you we have not forgotten about merrick garland. we know the abuses of what they did to president obama and his nominee for the supreme court was nothing short of outrageous. it's a sentiment many have expressed. what tools do you have? you cannot forget about merrick garland but what tools do you have at your disposal now that president says he's going to name a nominee next week and mitch mcconnell says he's going to have a vote on this before the elections? >> well, look, clearly the republican leader is being hypocritical saying we have enough time, even though you have a few months before an election where he denied president obama's choice where we had 11 months before the election. that's being hypocritical. we will use every tool at our disposal so the american people understand what's at stake here about the person nominated by the president. so i will take advantage of every opportunity i have in the united states senate to bring home the point to the american people that we need to evaluate this nominee, whether that per

this is a midterm election, and merrick garland was a presidential election. i hope they follow the ginsburg role, which was, i will not speculate on future cases ahead of me. that would not be faithful to the constitution, and whoever is the pick, i hope they will adhere to that, and i hope that the liberal senators who respect the ginsburg rule which is you can't speculate on cases that might come up ahead of you. >> why do you think he seems to pull back on brett kavanaugh support when he was reported to be the front runner? >> again, this is all just speculation until we know who it is. >> correct. >> i think the president wants to make sure he has looked at the 360 range of people from all across the board. so, you know, and i think again, the fact that hardiman was the runner-up in the first round is in his favor, but again. we don't know how he is going to ultimately come. primetime is how the president rolls. he is a master of optics, and he'll choose a judge who will uphold the constitution and uphold it as the founders determined and through the proc

as you all know, president obama nominee, merrick garland, he lasted a record 293 days. then of course, your boss was confirmed by were nominated and confirmed by the senate. will this take a long time? the next pick by president trump or will it get passed very quickly by the midterms? >> i think the republicans will try to get there as fast as possible. i think democrats will try to stall. at the end of the day for high qualified nominee, a good judge and a good lawyer you should get there in time for the session. >> thank you. >> thanks so much. >> a big day in mexico today. folks are choosing a new president. an historic election that something would reshape the country. and with the anti-trump populace, the likely winner of the election, the outcome could certainly further strained us/mexican relations. william longeness is live in mexico city. what is the latest that we have? >> they are expecting 90 percent turnout. the polls close at 6 pm. they have run out of ballots in some locations but you're right, the thing candidates, given what he said, but in this electi

schumer reportedly called the president and asked him to nominate merrick garland, the judge then president obama nominated to replace justice antonin scalia. the candidate republicans of course refused to hold a vote on, citing a presidential election year as their rationale. a source familiar with that call tells fox news schumer told president trump that he thought nominating merrick garland would be a good way to potentially to unite the country. julie? julie: i understand the president tweeted about the supreme court today. he also tweeted about the special counsel claiming the public is turning against its. is the president's legal team still considering an interview with robert mueller? >> they haven't ruled it out but at this point the likelihood of it happening seems to be decreasing a bit. the president tweeted about the special counsel two times today, most reclently 30 minutes ago. -- recently 30 minutes ago. the president's legal team says if the president is going to sit down for an interview, if he's going to sit down with mueller, the legal team says the special counsel has

days merrick garland was not voted upon. it's the president who picks, not the senate. they either approve or disapprove. >> one last point. americans don't vote on process. they don't vote on process, it's a basis to argue, democrats are using it now. i would too if i were them. >> 50, 50 say it should happen before or after the election. >> does kagan kill the argument? they gave you okayingen during a midterm year. >> mcconnell is the one -- we never saw anything like mcconnell did with garland. you are the strict construction ist >> you say read the constitution, the constitution doesn't say the senate advises and consents on a supreme court justice. except in an election year. mcconnell established that principle. it's a stain on the court, whoever gets on there there's going to be an asterisk now. that has to be made right. that was one of the most uncivil political acts i've seen. it's not going to go away. you read the constitution, that was wrong we have to make it right, this should not be heard this year either. >> i'll tell you what's strange. >> it doesn't

garland. and a very important part of this fight is now, of course, you have the majority flip-flopping. that's going to be a big issue in all this. >> should they have seen what the decision is and then decide on the import. >> okayingen was done in similar days merrick garland was not voted upon. it's the president who picks, not the senate. they either approve or disapprove. >> one last point. americans don't vote on process. they don't vote on process, it's a basis to argue, democrats are using it now. i would too if i were them. >> 50, 50 say it should happen before or after the election. >> does kagan kill the argument? they gave you okayingen during a midterm year. >> mcconnell is the one -- we never saw anything like mcconnell did with garland. >> you say read the constitution, the constitution doesn't say the senate advises and consents on a supreme court justice. mcconnell established that principle. it's a stain on the court, whoever gets on there there's going to be an asterisk now

it's merrick garland. how do you think he feels today? merrick garland is a class act. he's moved on with his life. the idea that he never got the moment that kavanaugh is going to get. he got the moment of being announced, but he never got -- the other person is -- >> trump's sister. >> trump's sister, whose advice was not taken. but hillary clinton. brett kavanaugh made his name by investigating not just whitewater but the monica lewinsky part, the sexual details. >> the tawdry, sorted, deep and dark stuff. >> making his name for himself got him on the trajectory he's on today. hillary clinton has to watch yet another supreme court nomination that she thought she was going to get. >> can i add one more name? that's thomas hardiman. last year, remember he was the runner-up. this year they kept talking about his star rising. obviously he's not the choice. it just seems like he was kind of hung out a little bit. i felt like brett kavanaugh always had the inside track, but a lot of the reporting that the white house was suggesting -- >> well, it's also insight into the fa