The Left Launches Attacks on Amy Coney Barrett's Family & Religion | TBN

The Left Launches Attacks on Amy Coney Barrett's Family & Religion

Watch The Left Launches Attacks on Amy Coney Barrett's Family & Religion
October 13, 2020
25:28

Jay Sekulow speaks about the protection of religious freedoms in America.

Closed captions

The Left Launches Attacks on Amy Coney Barrett's Family & Religion

Show timecode
Hide timecode
  • (light upbeat music)
  • 00:00:01.409 --> 00:00:04.479
  • - Welcome to "Jay Sekulow Live,"
  • 00:00:22.630 --> 00:00:23.631
  • This is Jordan Sekulow.
  • 00:00:23.631 --> 00:00:25.033
  • So you know, now, PresidentTrump has nominated
  • 00:00:25.033 --> 00:00:27.335
  • to be the next associate justice
  • 00:00:27.335 --> 00:00:29.137
  • on the Supreme Court of theUnited States States, a judge
  • 00:00:29.137 --> 00:00:32.173
  • Amy Coney Barrett of the SeventhCircuit Court of Appeals.
  • 00:00:32.173 --> 00:00:35.143
  • He originally nominated
  • 00:00:35.143 --> 00:00:36.644
  • for that position aboutthree and a half years ago,
  • 00:00:36.644 --> 00:00:39.247
  • she formerly was a professorof law at Notre Dame.
  • 00:00:39.247 --> 00:00:42.584
  • And again, this is someone
  • 00:00:42.584 --> 00:00:43.918
  • who has a longacademic background
  • 00:00:43.918 --> 00:00:46.754
  • and, of course, has now gotthe judicial experience.
  • 00:00:48.156 --> 00:00:50.992
  • So the Senate JudiciaryCommittee process
  • 00:00:50.992 --> 00:00:53.194
  • is gonna start October 12th.
  • 00:00:53.194 --> 00:00:55.029
  • Senator Graham wants towrap it up by October 22nd,
  • 00:00:55.029 --> 00:00:57.765
  • there'll only be twodays of questioning.
  • 00:00:57.765 --> 00:00:59.400
  • In the meantime, she'llbe meeting with senators
  • 00:00:59.400 --> 00:01:01.603
  • of the attacks will heat up.
  • 00:01:01.603 --> 00:01:04.205
  • Some Democrats are sayingthey won't meet with her at all.
  • 00:01:04.205 --> 00:01:06.074
  • I say, that's great.
  • 00:01:06.074 --> 00:01:07.542
  • 'Cause they were so nastyto her the first time.
  • 00:01:07.542 --> 00:01:09.043
  • Diane Feinstein isnearly 90 years old,
  • 00:01:09.043 --> 00:01:11.146
  • she is the ranking Democrat.
  • 00:01:11.146 --> 00:01:12.881
  • So she's the highestranking Democrat.
  • 00:01:12.881 --> 00:01:14.349
  • I think they're very, theyhave said they're very nervous
  • 00:01:14.349 --> 00:01:16.684
  • about having her bethe one in charge
  • 00:01:16.684 --> 00:01:18.753
  • of the Judiciary Committee.
  • 00:01:18.753 --> 00:01:20.221
  • So there is some talk thatthey may not go at all
  • 00:01:20.221 --> 00:01:22.390
  • to the hearings, which Ithink would be wonderful
  • 00:01:22.390 --> 00:01:23.892
  • for Judge Barrett.
  • 00:01:23.892 --> 00:01:25.126
  • Please do it because wedon't need your votes
  • 00:01:25.126 --> 00:01:28.263
  • and we don't need,your, just harassment
  • 00:01:28.263 --> 00:01:30.965
  • of the next SupremeCourt Justice.
  • 00:01:30.965 --> 00:01:33.668
  • She, again, I thinkfor all of you
  • 00:01:33.668 --> 00:01:36.137
  • out there who want toknow more about her
  • 00:01:36.137 --> 00:01:38.806
  • judicial philosophy, we'regoing to bring Harry Hutchison
  • 00:01:38.806 --> 00:01:40.642
  • on to talk about thatlater in the broadcast.
  • 00:01:40.642 --> 00:01:43.578
  • But she said, "I clerkedfor Justice Scalia
  • 00:01:43.578 --> 00:01:46.181
  • and his judicial philosophyis my judicial philosophy.
  • 00:01:46.181 --> 00:01:49.017
  • That is exactlythe kind of nominee
  • 00:01:49.017 --> 00:01:50.985
  • President Trump hasbeen looking for is,
  • 00:01:50.985 --> 00:01:52.887
  • in the mold of the lateJustice Antonin Scalia,
  • 00:01:52.887 --> 00:01:55.757
  • people like Justice Alito.
  • 00:01:55.757 --> 00:01:57.192
  • These are true originaliststo the constitution.
  • 00:01:57.192 --> 00:02:00.228
  • - Judge Barrett hasauthored 94 opinions
  • 00:02:00.228 --> 00:02:02.931
  • since she's gone on the bench.
  • 00:02:02.931 --> 00:02:04.199
  • She clerked inaddition to clerking
  • 00:02:04.199 --> 00:02:06.334
  • for Associate JusticeAntonin Scalia,
  • 00:02:07.535 --> 00:02:08.937
  • the late great Justice Scalia.
  • 00:02:08.937 --> 00:02:10.505
  • She also clerked forthe former chief judge
  • 00:02:10.505 --> 00:02:13.041
  • of the D.C. Court of Appeals,Judge Laurence Silberman.
  • 00:02:13.041 --> 00:02:15.343
  • So she has really sterlingcredentials in that regard,
  • 00:02:15.343 --> 00:02:18.880
  • she's well-respected.
  • 00:02:18.880 --> 00:02:20.348
  • During her clerkshipshe obviously worked
  • 00:02:20.348 --> 00:02:22.884
  • with, you come in asa year, basically,
  • 00:02:22.884 --> 00:02:24.752
  • and in that year, everybodythat worked with her,
  • 00:02:24.752 --> 00:02:27.755
  • including people in JusticeGinsburg's chambers,
  • 00:02:27.755 --> 00:02:29.824
  • the law clerks therewrote a previous letter
  • 00:02:29.824 --> 00:02:32.026
  • saying, she's imminentlywell-qualified,
  • 00:02:32.026 --> 00:02:34.629
  • one of the smartest peoplethat they've ever met,
  • 00:02:34.629 --> 00:02:37.265
  • and that she will do afair honest, and great job
  • 00:02:37.265 --> 00:02:41.069
  • as a supreme court justice,
  • 00:02:41.069 --> 00:02:43.171
  • even though theydon't agree with the
  • 00:02:43.171 --> 00:02:44.138
  • position she was advocating,
  • 00:02:44.138 --> 00:02:45.907
  • so I think this bodes well.
  • 00:02:45.907 --> 00:02:47.408
  • Look, they're gonna trythe religious harassment,
  • 00:02:47.408 --> 00:02:49.077
  • that's gonna be the thing.
  • 00:02:49.077 --> 00:02:50.011
  • We come back from the break,
  • 00:02:50.011 --> 00:02:51.246
  • I'm gonna play youwhat Jeff Toobin
  • 00:02:51.246 --> 00:02:52.714
  • from CNN said about that.
  • 00:02:52.714 --> 00:02:54.215
  • I think what Toobin saidis absolutely fascinating.
  • 00:02:54.215 --> 00:02:57.952
  • Let me give you a little hint.
  • 00:02:58.886 --> 00:03:00.455
  • You're gonna go afterher faith again?
  • 00:03:00.455 --> 00:03:02.857
  • You did that last time.
  • 00:03:02.857 --> 00:03:04.058
  • Didn't work out so well,good luck with that.
  • 00:03:04.058 --> 00:03:06.427
  • Those are gonna be thewords of Jeff Toobin.
  • 00:03:06.427 --> 00:03:07.762
  • We'll be back withmore in just a minute.
  • 00:03:07.762 --> 00:03:09.464
  • (light upbeat music)
  • 00:03:09.464 --> 00:03:12.533
  • (light upbeat music)
  • 00:03:13.725 --> 00:03:16.428
  • - So now, you know, we know,
  • 00:03:16.428 --> 00:03:18.063
  • it has been confirmed
  • 00:03:18.063 --> 00:03:19.297
  • it will be judgeAmy Coney Barrett
  • 00:03:19.297 --> 00:03:21.032
  • from the SeventhCircuit Court of Appeals
  • 00:03:21.032 --> 00:03:22.701
  • who was the nominee to fill
  • 00:03:22.701 --> 00:03:24.870
  • the late Justice Ginsburg'sseat on the Supreme Court.
  • 00:03:24.870 --> 00:03:27.372
  • She in her announcementspeech, she said this
  • 00:03:27.372 --> 00:03:30.208
  • about her judicial philosophy.
  • 00:03:30.208 --> 00:03:31.676
  • I think this is key foreveryone listening right now
  • 00:03:31.676 --> 00:03:34.446
  • because if you wonderabout like where she comes,
  • 00:03:34.446 --> 00:03:37.649
  • looking at the constitution,she made it really clear
  • 00:03:37.649 --> 00:03:40.886
  • in this statement.
  • 00:03:40.886 --> 00:03:42.087
  • I think this almost,kind of, says everything
  • 00:03:42.087 --> 00:03:43.855
  • you need to know.
  • 00:03:43.855 --> 00:03:45.290
  • - I clerked for JusticeScalia more than 20 years ago,
  • 00:03:45.290 --> 00:03:48.193
  • but the lessons Ilearned still resonate.
  • 00:03:48.193 --> 00:03:51.429
  • His judicialphilosophy is mine too.
  • 00:03:51.429 --> 00:03:55.166
  • A judge must applythe law as written.
  • 00:03:55.166 --> 00:03:59.137
  • Judges are not policymakersand they must be resolute
  • 00:03:59.137 --> 00:04:03.642
  • in setting aside any policyviews they might hold.
  • 00:04:03.642 --> 00:04:07.045
  • - So, I mean, there you go,
  • 00:04:07.045 --> 00:04:08.280
  • "His judicialphilosophy is mine too."
  • 00:04:08.280 --> 00:04:10.548
  • Harry Hutchison is joiningus, we're gonna talk
  • 00:04:10.548 --> 00:04:12.384
  • about some of these nastyattacks on Judge Barrett.
  • 00:04:12.384 --> 00:04:14.452
  • But first I wannatalk the positive.
  • 00:04:14.452 --> 00:04:16.254
  • For all theconservatives out there,
  • 00:04:17.255 --> 00:04:18.490
  • they're very excited about this,
  • 00:04:18.490 --> 00:04:19.624
  • you're seeing widespread praise.
  • 00:04:19.624 --> 00:04:21.059
  • The White Houseput out a document
  • 00:04:21.059 --> 00:04:22.360
  • that had our statement in it,
  • 00:04:22.360 --> 00:04:23.828
  • it had all of the senator'sstatements and it,
  • 00:04:23.828 --> 00:04:25.997
  • it had all of the even housemembers and groups like ACLJ,
  • 00:04:25.997 --> 00:04:29.401
  • so we're all listed inthere with this praise.
  • 00:04:29.401 --> 00:04:31.703
  • This is the kind of nomineethat gets people excited
  • 00:04:31.703 --> 00:04:34.973
  • about where theirphilosophy comes from Harry.
  • 00:04:34.973 --> 00:04:38.143
  • And by making the statementabout Justice Scalia,
  • 00:04:38.143 --> 00:04:41.046
  • the late justice Scalia,
  • 00:04:41.046 --> 00:04:42.547
  • that, "His judicial philosophyis my judicial philosophy."
  • 00:04:42.547 --> 00:04:45.317
  • That is very telling becausehe has got a long time
  • 00:04:45.317 --> 00:04:48.553
  • you know, he servedon the Circuit Court
  • 00:04:48.553 --> 00:04:50.055
  • and then in theU.S. Supreme Court.
  • 00:04:50.055 --> 00:04:51.890
  • And as a clerk for himshe knows how to apply
  • 00:04:51.890 --> 00:04:54.092
  • that philosophy as well.
  • 00:04:54.092 --> 00:04:55.627
  • That statement should makeconservatives very excited
  • 00:04:55.627 --> 00:04:57.796
  • about Judge Barrett.
  • 00:04:57.796 --> 00:04:58.997
  • - I think you'reabsolutely correct.
  • 00:04:58.997 --> 00:05:00.899
  • I think Judge Barrett bringsto the court and originalist,
  • 00:05:00.899 --> 00:05:05.403
  • textualist understandingof both the constitution
  • 00:05:05.403 --> 00:05:10.141
  • and the rule of law.
  • 00:05:10.141 --> 00:05:12.510
  • She understands for thenation to remain together
  • 00:05:12.510 --> 00:05:16.581
  • as a union that the ruleof law must be enforced.
  • 00:05:16.581 --> 00:05:21.586
  • Now that approachis quite different
  • 00:05:22.988 --> 00:05:26.124
  • from the approachfavored by left-wingers.
  • 00:05:26.124 --> 00:05:29.828
  • And if you look at specificdecisions that Amy Coney Barrett
  • 00:05:29.828 --> 00:05:34.833
  • has reached, particularlyin a gun rights case
  • 00:05:36.201 --> 00:05:39.537
  • called Kanter versus Barr,
  • 00:05:39.537 --> 00:05:41.673
  • also in a caseinvolving due process
  • 00:05:41.673 --> 00:05:44.943
  • involving John Doeversus Purdue University,
  • 00:05:46.277 --> 00:05:49.881
  • and thirdly in a pro-lifecase Planned Parenthood
  • 00:05:49.881 --> 00:05:53.752
  • versus Commissionersshe took the position
  • 00:05:53.752 --> 00:05:57.922
  • that the constitutiontrumps policy analysis
  • 00:05:57.922 --> 00:06:02.927
  • from judges, and certainlyin the pro-life case
  • 00:06:04.295 --> 00:06:06.765
  • Planned Parenthoodversus Commissioner,
  • 00:06:06.765 --> 00:06:09.701
  • in that particular casean evenly divided a vote
  • 00:06:09.701 --> 00:06:14.105
  • of the Seventh Circuitdenied Indiana's requests
  • 00:06:14.105 --> 00:06:17.642
  • that it review athree-judge panels ruling
  • 00:06:17.642 --> 00:06:20.879
  • that invalidated state provisionregulating the disposal
  • 00:06:20.879 --> 00:06:25.583
  • of fetal remains.
  • 00:06:25.583 --> 00:06:27.552
  • That lower panel orthe three-judge panel
  • 00:06:27.552 --> 00:06:31.790
  • held that the Indiana lawviolated the constitution.
  • 00:06:31.790 --> 00:06:36.795
  • Judge Amy Coney Barrett said no,
  • 00:06:37.662 --> 00:06:40.265
  • and she dissented fromthe en banc panel,
  • 00:06:40.265 --> 00:06:43.868
  • and in a seven to two ruling
  • 00:06:43.868 --> 00:06:46.137
  • by the UnitedStates Supreme Court
  • 00:06:46.137 --> 00:06:48.073
  • a summary disposition judgment,a seven to two ruling,
  • 00:06:48.073 --> 00:06:52.944
  • Judge Barrett'sanalysis was upheld.
  • 00:06:52.944 --> 00:06:56.014
  • In other words, JudgeBarrett is saying,
  • 00:06:56.014 --> 00:06:58.716
  • "You must treat fetalremains just like
  • 00:06:58.716 --> 00:07:02.821
  • "or at least as good as theremains of cats and gerbils.
  • 00:07:02.821 --> 00:07:07.759
  • - Is there any indication, Harry
  • 00:07:09.127 --> 00:07:10.929
  • a lot of people askedus on Roe versus Wade,
  • 00:07:10.929 --> 00:07:12.831
  • where she stands on that,on those kind of issues?
  • 00:07:12.831 --> 00:07:14.933
  • Do we have any prettyclear analysis from her?
  • 00:07:14.933 --> 00:07:18.770
  • - Well, I think therecord is a little bare
  • 00:07:18.770 --> 00:07:22.073
  • on that, but in about, Ithink it's three cases,
  • 00:07:22.073 --> 00:07:26.044
  • she did at leasttouch on the analysis
  • 00:07:26.044 --> 00:07:29.681
  • which might lead to adecision in Roe v. Wade,
  • 00:07:29.681 --> 00:07:34.486
  • and she basicallysteered very close
  • 00:07:34.486 --> 00:07:38.490
  • to the UnitedStates constitution
  • 00:07:38.490 --> 00:07:40.725
  • and to an originalistunderstanding of the text.
  • 00:07:40.725 --> 00:07:43.862
  • And if you look at theconstitution, there is nothing
  • 00:07:43.862 --> 00:07:47.932
  • in the constitutionthat says that abortion
  • 00:07:47.932 --> 00:07:52.837
  • is controlled by theUnited States Constitution.
  • 00:07:52.837 --> 00:07:56.741
  • So then I think this issuegoes back to the states.
  • 00:07:56.741 --> 00:08:00.178
  • - Yeah, there'sanother thing here,
  • 00:08:00.178 --> 00:08:01.346
  • I think, that's important
  • 00:08:01.346 --> 00:08:02.547
  • and that is, thelast time she was up
  • 00:08:02.547 --> 00:08:03.648
  • she was reallyattacked for her faith.
  • 00:08:03.648 --> 00:08:04.983
  • I mean, Dianne Feinsteinand Dick Durbin,
  • 00:08:04.983 --> 00:08:08.486
  • let me play the Dianne Feinsteinattack about her dogma.
  • 00:08:10.655 --> 00:08:14.692
  • - I think whatever a religionis, it has its own dogma.
  • 00:08:14.692 --> 00:08:19.664
  • The law is totally different.
  • 00:08:19.664 --> 00:08:22.433
  • And I think, inyour case professor,
  • 00:08:23.601 --> 00:08:28.506
  • when you read your speeches
  • 00:08:30.642 --> 00:08:32.877
  • the conclusion one draws
  • 00:08:34.412 --> 00:08:37.315
  • is that the dogma livesloudly within you,
  • 00:08:37.315 --> 00:08:42.220
  • and that's of concern.
  • 00:08:44.389 --> 00:08:46.791
  • - The dogma lives loudly withinyou, which I think sounds
  • 00:08:46.791 --> 00:08:50.528
  • like something outof "Star Wars,"
  • 00:08:50.528 --> 00:08:51.996
  • but the fact that she evensaid that created a firestorm.
  • 00:08:51.996 --> 00:08:55.934
  • In fact CNN commentator,Jeff Toobin said
  • 00:08:55.934 --> 00:08:59.470
  • "You can thank DianeFeinstein for your
  • 00:08:59.470 --> 00:09:02.373
  • "next Supreme CourtJustice, Amy Coney Barrett."
  • 00:09:02.373 --> 00:09:05.977
  • Here's what hesaid, number eight.
  • 00:09:05.977 --> 00:09:07.745
  • - [Toobin] You know, oneperson who was not thanked
  • 00:09:07.745 --> 00:09:10.281
  • during this ceremonywas one of the people
  • 00:09:10.281 --> 00:09:14.485
  • who was most responsiblefor Amy Coney Barrett
  • 00:09:14.485 --> 00:09:17.155
  • being nominated tothe Supreme Court,
  • 00:09:17.155 --> 00:09:19.591
  • and that's Senator DianneFeinstein, who in 2017
  • 00:09:19.591 --> 00:09:24.295
  • when she was the rankingDemocrat on the committee
  • 00:09:24.295 --> 00:09:28.399
  • engaged in questioningof of now Judge Barrett,
  • 00:09:28.399 --> 00:09:32.203
  • that was soincompetent, so inept,
  • 00:09:32.203 --> 00:09:35.440
  • so, apparentlyreligiously discriminatory
  • 00:09:35.440 --> 00:09:38.710
  • that Amy ConeyBarrett became a hero
  • 00:09:38.710 --> 00:09:41.713
  • to religious conservative.
  • 00:09:41.713 --> 00:09:43.715
  • - So there you go.
  • 00:09:43.715 --> 00:09:44.983
  • So was that line ofquestioning created
  • 00:09:44.983 --> 00:09:46.718
  • this entire problem.
  • 00:09:46.718 --> 00:09:48.186
  • Now to complicate it more,
  • 00:09:48.186 --> 00:09:50.488
  • and, I think, goodfor Amy Barrett,
  • 00:09:50.488 --> 00:09:51.823
  • I think she's gonna be confirmed
  • 00:09:51.823 --> 00:09:53.258
  • and I don't think shewill be confirmed.
  • 00:09:53.258 --> 00:09:55.126
  • She will be seatedbefore the election
  • 00:09:55.126 --> 00:09:58.229
  • and we will have a fullnine-panel, full Supreme Court
  • 00:09:58.229 --> 00:10:02.333
  • in place for what islikely to be multiple
  • 00:10:03.501 --> 00:10:06.537
  • cases that we'll be involvedin at the Supreme Court
  • 00:10:06.537 --> 00:10:08.606
  • of the United States.
  • 00:10:08.606 --> 00:10:10.108
  • But Toobin went on to say,this is again, focusing
  • 00:10:10.108 --> 00:10:14.445
  • on Feinstein, who is theleader of the opposition here
  • 00:10:14.445 --> 00:10:17.715
  • she's the Democraticranking member
  • 00:10:19.284 --> 00:10:22.553
  • of the JudiciaryCommittee in the Senate,
  • 00:10:22.553 --> 00:10:24.822
  • here's also what hesaid about the continued
  • 00:10:24.822 --> 00:10:28.226
  • attacks on herfaith number nine.
  • 00:10:28.226 --> 00:10:30.561
  • - [Toobin] Dianne Feinsteinwas and is a distinguished
  • 00:10:30.561 --> 00:10:33.931
  • public servant who has served
  • 00:10:33.931 --> 00:10:35.667
  • for many years onthe Supreme Court.
  • 00:10:35.667 --> 00:10:37.468
  • She is now 87 years old, andshe has repeatedly engaged
  • 00:10:37.468 --> 00:10:41.739
  • in behavior, in recentmonths, that seem out of step
  • 00:10:41.739 --> 00:10:46.210
  • with what Democrats wanna do.
  • 00:10:46.210 --> 00:10:49.080
  • And you know, she isgonna be the leader
  • 00:10:49.080 --> 00:10:51.449
  • of the Democratic forceson the Judiciary Committee.
  • 00:10:51.449 --> 00:10:55.219
  • And all I can say is goodluck with that Democrats.
  • 00:10:55.219 --> 00:10:57.889
  • - I don't wanna saymuch more than that.
  • 00:10:59.357 --> 00:11:01.693
  • - Listen, they areburied themselves.
  • 00:11:01.693 --> 00:11:03.861
  • They already hadburied themselves.
  • 00:11:03.861 --> 00:11:04.996
  • Like Toobin said and admitted
  • 00:11:04.996 --> 00:11:06.898
  • that because they made her aname amongst conservatives,
  • 00:11:06.898 --> 00:11:09.901
  • remember she came inof the academic world.
  • 00:11:09.901 --> 00:11:12.370
  • So she wasn't, she was madea judge by President Trump
  • 00:11:12.370 --> 00:11:15.239
  • to the Seventh Circuit.
  • 00:11:15.239 --> 00:11:16.607
  • That hearing highlighted her
  • 00:11:16.607 --> 00:11:18.743
  • "The dogma lives deeplywithin," you know
  • 00:11:18.743 --> 00:11:20.378
  • that has become a phraseconservatives understand
  • 00:11:20.378 --> 00:11:23.614
  • that that means a key votingblock to get them out, to vote.
  • 00:11:23.614 --> 00:11:26.551
  • These are the kindof notices they make,
  • 00:11:26.551 --> 00:11:28.920
  • that you're gonna tochoose that person
  • 00:11:28.920 --> 00:11:30.321
  • that came to attentionbecause of Democrats' attacks.
  • 00:11:30.321 --> 00:11:33.224
  • But now they're attackingher for having adopted kids.
  • 00:11:33.224 --> 00:11:35.660
  • So you have IbramKendi, he is a professor
  • 00:11:35.660 --> 00:11:37.929
  • at BU and he wrote thenow pretty famous book
  • 00:11:37.929 --> 00:11:41.899
  • "How to Be an Antiracist,"
  • 00:11:41.899 --> 00:11:43.401
  • like a number one seller onAmazon for the last year.
  • 00:11:43.401 --> 00:11:47.405
  • But he tweeted out."Some white colonizers
  • 00:11:47.405 --> 00:11:50.174
  • "adopted black children."
  • 00:11:50.174 --> 00:11:51.409
  • "They civilize thesesavage children
  • 00:11:51.409 --> 00:11:53.878
  • "in the superior ways ofwhite people while using them
  • 00:11:53.878 --> 00:11:56.748
  • "as props in theirlifelong pictures of denial
  • 00:11:56.748 --> 00:11:59.183
  • "while cutting thebiological parents
  • 00:11:59.183 --> 00:12:00.718
  • "of these children out ofthe picture of humanity."
  • 00:12:00.718 --> 00:12:02.920
  • That is in responseto Jenny Beth Martin
  • 00:12:02.920 --> 00:12:05.523
  • from the Tea PartyPatriots, friend of ours,
  • 00:12:05.523 --> 00:12:07.625
  • who wrote, "There were twoadopted children from Haiti.
  • 00:12:07.625 --> 00:12:09.727
  • "It's going to beinteresting to watch
  • 00:12:09.727 --> 00:12:11.229
  • "Democrats try to smear AmyConey Barrett as racist."
  • 00:12:11.229 --> 00:12:14.232
  • Then we saw a Professor,Harry, from BU
  • 00:12:14.232 --> 00:12:17.001
  • who wrote "How to Bean Antiracist" bookdo exactly that.
  • 00:12:17.001 --> 00:12:19.470
  • How do we make her racist?
  • 00:12:19.470 --> 00:12:21.072
  • She adopted blackchildren from Haiti,
  • 00:12:21.072 --> 00:12:23.808
  • she must be a white colonizer.
  • 00:12:23.808 --> 00:12:26.144
  • - Yes, it's highly ironicin terms of looking
  • 00:12:26.144 --> 00:12:29.347
  • at Ibram Kendi, becausehe has written a book
  • 00:12:29.347 --> 00:12:33.518
  • on how to fight racism.
  • 00:12:33.518 --> 00:12:36.354
  • But in reality, if you thinkabout his book carefully,
  • 00:12:36.354 --> 00:12:41.359
  • if you read his book,
  • 00:12:42.093 --> 00:12:43.294
  • if you read what thesocial justice warriors
  • 00:12:43.294 --> 00:12:46.531
  • are actually saying,
  • 00:12:46.531 --> 00:12:48.399
  • they believe in fightingracism through racism,
  • 00:12:48.399 --> 00:12:53.404
  • and his statement attacking
  • 00:12:54.272 --> 00:12:55.773
  • Amy Coney Barrett is quitefrankly a racist statement.
  • 00:12:55.773 --> 00:13:00.611
  • And it's too badthat individuals
  • 00:13:01.546 --> 00:13:03.581
  • like Kendi are able to furtheradvance their own racism
  • 00:13:03.581 --> 00:13:08.586
  • because they receive hugecontributions from the left.
  • 00:13:10.021 --> 00:13:12.156
  • - Now what's interestingis that he is getting,
  • 00:13:12.156 --> 00:13:14.025
  • like, contributionsfrom the left
  • 00:13:14.025 --> 00:13:15.326
  • but it looks like he'sgonna lose his job
  • 00:13:15.326 --> 00:13:16.828
  • as a professor at BU, thatthis attack went too far
  • 00:13:16.828 --> 00:13:20.331
  • and his commentshave gone too far
  • 00:13:20.331 --> 00:13:22.266
  • too radical, almost too racist.
  • 00:13:22.266 --> 00:13:24.435
  • He's becoming racist andusing this kind of rhetoric,
  • 00:13:24.435 --> 00:13:28.105
  • not what they want fromtheir university professors.
  • 00:13:28.105 --> 00:13:30.141
  • So even at, you know,mainstream institutions,
  • 00:13:30.141 --> 00:13:33.311
  • I don't know ifit's say liberal,
  • 00:13:33.311 --> 00:13:35.046
  • but BU certainly has lotsof liberal professors at it.
  • 00:13:35.046 --> 00:13:37.615
  • He crossed theline on his attack.
  • 00:13:37.615 --> 00:13:39.817
  • These are line crossing wherepeople are losing their jobs
  • 00:13:39.817 --> 00:13:42.153
  • in their response.
  • 00:13:42.153 --> 00:13:43.621
  • They're losing their minds, butwho is really to blame here?
  • 00:13:43.621 --> 00:13:45.923
  • I think, you know, youlook at Dianne Feinstein,
  • 00:13:45.923 --> 00:13:47.291
  • you look at the lateJustice Ginsburg too,
  • 00:13:47.291 --> 00:13:49.126
  • who did not resign underObama when she was in her 80s,
  • 00:13:49.126 --> 00:13:52.563
  • and had been sick, sheleft it up to politics.
  • 00:13:52.563 --> 00:13:56.000
  • You leave it up to chance then.
  • 00:13:56.000 --> 00:13:57.468
  • This is what happens,we'll be back.
  • 00:13:57.468 --> 00:13:59.937
  • (upbeat music)
  • 00:13:59.937 --> 00:14:02.507
  • (upbeat music)
  • 00:14:03.283 --> 00:14:05.485
  • The timeline is interesting too.
  • 00:14:05.485 --> 00:14:07.353
  • so the hearings willstart October 12th.
  • 00:14:07.353 --> 00:14:09.856
  • You might say, "Well,that's kind of late
  • 00:14:09.856 --> 00:14:11.357
  • "if they wanna get thisdone before the election."
  • 00:14:11.357 --> 00:14:13.660
  • But here's whatthey're thinking,
  • 00:14:13.660 --> 00:14:15.128
  • and this would be of course,Chairman Lindsey Graham
  • 00:14:15.128 --> 00:14:16.930
  • So they're gonnahave the hearings,
  • 00:14:16.930 --> 00:14:17.864
  • will start on October 12th,
  • 00:14:17.864 --> 00:14:19.032
  • they will be donewithin 16 days or less.
  • 00:14:19.032 --> 00:14:23.069
  • And that includes the one weekbefore they allow the markup.
  • 00:14:23.069 --> 00:14:26.673
  • So basically hearingsTuesday and Wednesday,
  • 00:14:26.673 --> 00:14:29.275
  • and on the 15th they'llbegin their markup,
  • 00:14:29.275 --> 00:14:30.877
  • they'll hold itover to the 22nd.
  • 00:14:30.877 --> 00:14:32.645
  • Then on the 22nd it we'llgo to Mitch McConnell,
  • 00:14:32.645 --> 00:14:34.614
  • he can have the vote bythe 26th, 27th, 28th.
  • 00:14:34.614 --> 00:14:37.317
  • That means, before theelection Judge Barrett
  • 00:14:37.317 --> 00:14:39.452
  • if all the peoplewho are out will be
  • 00:14:39.452 --> 00:14:41.254
  • on the Supreme Courtby full nine justices
  • 00:14:41.254 --> 00:14:43.222
  • on the Court beforethe election.
  • 00:14:43.222 --> 00:14:44.724
  • So of any election issues--- Which is likely--
  • 00:14:44.724 --> 00:14:48.328
  • - Yeah, and I, youknow, they focus a lot
  • 00:14:48.328 --> 00:14:49.796
  • on the president, but there wasan article over the weekend.
  • 00:14:49.796 --> 00:14:52.365
  • And I don't know if itwas "New York Times"
  • 00:14:52.365 --> 00:14:53.299
  • or "Wall Street Journal,"
  • 00:14:53.299 --> 00:14:54.100
  • about or maybe POLITICO
  • 00:14:54.100 --> 00:14:55.568
  • how the left islawyering up and how
  • 00:14:55.568 --> 00:14:57.437
  • even Nancy Pelosi is figuringout there's the options on,
  • 00:14:57.437 --> 00:15:00.540
  • right now, see the problemgoes to constitutionally.
  • 00:15:00.540 --> 00:15:02.775
  • If you go to the house
  • 00:15:02.775 --> 00:15:04.243
  • the Democrats, even thoughthey have the majority
  • 00:15:04.243 --> 00:15:05.712
  • if the house, don'thave the majority
  • 00:15:05.712 --> 00:15:07.213
  • when it comes to the statedelegations, it's 26 to 22.
  • 00:15:07.213 --> 00:15:10.416
  • And there's twoStates that are--
  • 00:15:10.416 --> 00:15:11.884
  • - [Jay] 26, 24, Ithink right now.
  • 00:15:11.884 --> 00:15:13.319
  • - 26, 22 because Pennsylvaniaand Wisconsin are tied.
  • 00:15:13.319 --> 00:15:16.089
  • - [Jay] That's right.
  • 00:15:16.089 --> 00:15:17.523
  • - So they would actually,if no changes there
  • 00:15:17.523 --> 00:15:18.992
  • in the house, they wouldkind of take themselves out.
  • 00:15:18.992 --> 00:15:20.960
  • - But there's alsoa legal question
  • 00:15:20.960 --> 00:15:22.095
  • of whether it's the new house
  • 00:15:22.095 --> 00:15:23.229
  • or whether it's the old house
  • 00:15:23.229 --> 00:15:24.464
  • and they have to dothis verification.
  • 00:15:24.464 --> 00:15:25.298
  • - But she's now saying,
  • 00:15:25.298 --> 00:15:26.733
  • "We've got to target ourraces based off of house races
  • 00:15:26.733 --> 00:15:28.901
  • based off getting back
  • 00:15:28.901 --> 00:15:30.336
  • you know, making up thedeficit we have in the house,
  • 00:15:30.336 --> 00:15:32.639
  • not by seats, but by states.
  • 00:15:32.639 --> 00:15:34.307
  • - Which means, Ithink that's why
  • 00:15:34.307 --> 00:15:35.842
  • I think the AmyBarrett nomination
  • 00:15:35.842 --> 00:15:38.444
  • Jordan and Harry, I thinkis gonna go pretty quickly.
  • 00:15:38.444 --> 00:15:40.780
  • I think there'll be ranker
  • 00:15:40.780 --> 00:15:42.615
  • but it's going toget right through,
  • 00:15:42.615 --> 00:15:43.850
  • and she will be seatedbefore the beginning
  • 00:15:43.850 --> 00:15:46.285
  • of the first Monday in October.
  • 00:15:46.285 --> 00:15:48.121
  • Now having said that, I do think
  • 00:15:48.121 --> 00:15:50.356
  • and I mean, we would knowthis on firsthand basis.
  • 00:15:50.356 --> 00:15:51.991
  • There will be a seriesof cases that ultimately
  • 00:15:51.991 --> 00:15:54.727
  • on a very quick basis willmove to the Supreme Court
  • 00:15:54.727 --> 00:15:57.230
  • of the United Stateson election issues,
  • 00:15:57.230 --> 00:15:59.232
  • maybe electors, itmay be the issue
  • 00:15:59.232 --> 00:16:01.167
  • of how ballots are verified,
  • 00:16:01.167 --> 00:16:03.202
  • absentee ballots are verified
  • 00:16:03.202 --> 00:16:04.504
  • or mail in ballots are verified.
  • 00:16:04.504 --> 00:16:05.805
  • It may be issues of harvesting,
  • 00:16:05.805 --> 00:16:07.006
  • you're already seeingthose developing.
  • 00:16:07.006 --> 00:16:09.676
  • Now there's a case out of,
  • 00:16:09.676 --> 00:16:11.678
  • we're keeping avery close eye on,
  • 00:16:11.678 --> 00:16:12.845
  • out of the FourthCircuit Court of Appeals
  • 00:16:12.845 --> 00:16:14.480
  • involving South Carolina.
  • 00:16:14.480 --> 00:16:15.782
  • There's a situationin North Carolina.
  • 00:16:15.782 --> 00:16:17.383
  • Pennsylvania had theone just a few days ago.
  • 00:16:17.383 --> 00:16:19.752
  • So there's a number of thesecases that are developing
  • 00:16:19.752 --> 00:16:23.556
  • and look there's significantconstitutional issues
  • 00:16:23.556 --> 00:16:25.892
  • with each and every one of them.
  • 00:16:25.892 --> 00:16:27.293
  • So having nine members
  • 00:16:27.293 --> 00:16:28.928
  • of the Supreme Court in placebecomes very, very important
  • 00:16:28.928 --> 00:16:32.198
  • as you move theseissues forward.
  • 00:16:32.198 --> 00:16:33.800
  • Now, having said that
  • 00:16:33.800 --> 00:16:35.234
  • let, let me tell you something,they're gonna attack.
  • 00:16:35.234 --> 00:16:38.404
  • I think they're gonnahave to stay away
  • 00:16:38.404 --> 00:16:39.772
  • from her faith because,as Jeff Toobin said,
  • 00:16:39.772 --> 00:16:42.141
  • "Good luck with that,
  • 00:16:42.141 --> 00:16:43.076
  • "that didn't work out so well."
  • 00:16:43.076 --> 00:16:44.010
  • - They're gonna go back to it.
  • 00:16:44.010 --> 00:16:45.111
  • - [Jay] They may, they may.
  • 00:16:45.111 --> 00:16:46.612
  • - And putting out tweetsof her with a dog collar.
  • 00:16:46.612 --> 00:16:49.348
  • So they're sayingthat RBG, you know,
  • 00:16:49.348 --> 00:16:50.950
  • with her lacecollar, that's fine.
  • 00:16:50.950 --> 00:16:54.053
  • - That was her collar--- Yeah, that's right.
  • 00:16:54.053 --> 00:16:56.322
  • But for Amy Coney Barrett
  • 00:16:56.322 --> 00:16:57.990
  • they tweeted out, youknow, the meme that's going
  • 00:16:57.990 --> 00:16:59.625
  • around the liberalworld is a dog collar
  • 00:16:59.625 --> 00:17:01.694
  • "And let me ask my husband."
  • 00:17:01.694 --> 00:17:03.529
  • So by the way
  • 00:17:03.529 --> 00:17:04.363
  • let me ask you guys,
  • 00:17:04.363 --> 00:17:05.364
  • it's just a joke right?
  • 00:17:05.364 --> 00:17:06.299
  • Like she she's the judge,
  • 00:17:06.299 --> 00:17:07.934
  • her husband's attorney, theyhave seven kids, two adopted.
  • 00:17:07.934 --> 00:17:12.038
  • But who do you think is probably
  • 00:17:12.038 --> 00:17:13.372
  • having to run a lot ofthe household there?
  • 00:17:13.372 --> 00:17:15.341
  • - [Jay] She said it.
  • 00:17:15.341 --> 00:17:16.409
  • - Yes, her husband.
  • 00:17:16.409 --> 00:17:17.977
  • I mean, so this is, it is agame they're trying to play.
  • 00:17:17.977 --> 00:17:20.880
  • They only care about feminismand women succeeding,
  • 00:17:20.880 --> 00:17:24.717
  • if they're liberal women.
  • 00:17:24.717 --> 00:17:25.952
  • Do you understand that?
  • 00:17:25.952 --> 00:17:26.886
  • That's not feminism.
  • 00:17:26.886 --> 00:17:28.221
  • That's anti-woman.
  • 00:17:28.221 --> 00:17:29.489
  • That's anti-woman, thatmeans you have to pick
  • 00:17:29.489 --> 00:17:31.023
  • and choose what woman is okay
  • 00:17:31.023 --> 00:17:33.693
  • to be excited aboutas a feminist.
  • 00:17:33.693 --> 00:17:35.995
  • That's gross, that's disgusting,
  • 00:17:35.995 --> 00:17:37.797
  • but that's thesame thing on race.
  • 00:17:37.797 --> 00:17:39.098
  • They're the racist.
  • 00:17:39.098 --> 00:17:40.233
  • The liberals are the racist.
  • 00:17:40.233 --> 00:17:42.034
  • The liberals are the oneswho aren't actually feminist
  • 00:17:42.034 --> 00:17:45.772
  • because they judgepeople based on politics
  • 00:17:45.772 --> 00:17:48.641
  • not based off of qualifications,
  • 00:17:48.641 --> 00:17:50.877
  • or even the factthat you could say,
  • 00:17:50.877 --> 00:17:53.045
  • "Feminist should mean all women
  • 00:17:53.045 --> 00:17:54.514
  • "if they're moving up topower, that's a good thing,
  • 00:17:54.514 --> 00:17:57.083
  • "regardless, if they're moreconservative or liberal."
  • 00:17:57.083 --> 00:17:59.752
  • They can't go there becausethey're so tied to ideology,
  • 00:17:59.752 --> 00:18:02.655
  • they'll be racist,there'll be sexist,
  • 00:18:02.655 --> 00:18:05.091
  • they'll be bigots,
  • 00:18:05.091 --> 00:18:06.292
  • like they havewith the religion.
  • 00:18:06.292 --> 00:18:07.593
  • So they've beenall three of those.
  • 00:18:07.593 --> 00:18:09.195
  • That is them.
  • 00:18:09.195 --> 00:18:10.763
  • They'll call you those threenames, but really in reality
  • 00:18:10.763 --> 00:18:14.066
  • who are the racist, theDemocrats Joe Biden.
  • 00:18:14.066 --> 00:18:17.703
  • Look at his time in office.
  • 00:18:17.703 --> 00:18:19.739
  • I mean, he's the worst.
  • 00:18:19.739 --> 00:18:21.174
  • He's one of the worstoffenders of all politicians.
  • 00:18:21.174 --> 00:18:23.176
  • Who are the sexist?
  • 00:18:23.176 --> 00:18:25.678
  • Look at the look at thedog collar, for instance.
  • 00:18:25.678 --> 00:18:29.248
  • Who are the bigots?
  • 00:18:29.248 --> 00:18:30.550
  • Look at what DianneFeinstein did.
  • 00:18:30.550 --> 00:18:32.852
  • All Democrats, not just liberal.
  • 00:18:32.852 --> 00:18:34.887
  • Let me say more specifically
  • 00:18:34.887 --> 00:18:36.088
  • Democrats are the racistbigots and sexist.
  • 00:18:36.088 --> 00:18:40.693
  • Republicans have beenfighting that for decades.
  • 00:18:40.693 --> 00:18:43.830
  • And it's not to say
  • 00:18:43.830 --> 00:18:45.298
  • that Republicans are gonnachoose people because of that.
  • 00:18:45.298 --> 00:18:46.866
  • She was just extremely qualified
  • 00:18:46.866 --> 00:18:48.901
  • and she became more high profile
  • 00:18:48.901 --> 00:18:51.304
  • because of whatDemocrats did to her.
  • 00:18:51.304 --> 00:18:52.805
  • So it was twofold.
  • 00:18:52.805 --> 00:18:54.774
  • She had the qualifications
  • 00:18:54.774 --> 00:18:56.075
  • to be a Supreme CourtJustice, she does.
  • 00:18:56.075 --> 00:18:57.977
  • And, they gave hera bigger profile
  • 00:18:57.977 --> 00:19:00.613
  • which is typically what thesepeople came to know her.
  • 00:19:00.613 --> 00:19:03.816
  • She wasn't necessarily DCinsider like Kavanaugh.
  • 00:19:03.816 --> 00:19:07.186
  • She wasn't so like Gorsuch
  • 00:19:07.186 --> 00:19:08.688
  • who had maybe a decade ofexperience on the court,
  • 00:19:08.688 --> 00:19:10.523
  • but because of heracademic experience
  • 00:19:10.523 --> 00:19:12.625
  • her clerkships, whatpeople said about her,
  • 00:19:12.625 --> 00:19:15.928
  • and then of course her time
  • 00:19:15.928 --> 00:19:17.463
  • as a circuit court judge andthe attack on her qualified.
  • 00:19:17.463 --> 00:19:21.133
  • - Harry, this is aquestion I have for you,
  • 00:19:21.133 --> 00:19:23.936
  • and that is, on the legal issues
  • 00:19:23.936 --> 00:19:27.173
  • where are they gonnago for the attack?
  • 00:19:27.173 --> 00:19:28.608
  • What's gonna be, whereare they gonna say
  • 00:19:28.608 --> 00:19:30.776
  • she's out of the mainstreamof judicial thought,
  • 00:19:30.776 --> 00:19:32.678
  • which is always their line?
  • 00:19:32.678 --> 00:19:34.347
  • - Well, I thinkone line of attack
  • 00:19:34.347 --> 00:19:36.682
  • which Joe Biden alreadyhighlighted is to argue
  • 00:19:36.682 --> 00:19:40.186
  • that she would invalidate theAffordable Healthcare Act.
  • 00:19:40.186 --> 00:19:45.057
  • She has written a law review
  • 00:19:45.057 --> 00:19:47.260
  • article questioning,Judge Roberts' analysis,
  • 00:19:47.260 --> 00:19:51.797
  • and I think a firstyear law student
  • 00:19:51.797 --> 00:19:54.166
  • could write a similar review
  • 00:19:54.166 --> 00:19:56.235
  • of his analysis in theAffordable Care Act case
  • 00:19:56.235 --> 00:20:00.273
  • because it was poorly written.
  • 00:20:00.273 --> 00:20:02.575
  • It was poorly--
  • 00:20:02.575 --> 00:20:04.110
  • - I mean, politically also, Imean it's not just the cases,
  • 00:20:04.110 --> 00:20:06.212
  • they're using that aspolitical rhetoric.
  • 00:20:06.212 --> 00:20:08.214
  • - Absolutely, sothey are going to use
  • 00:20:08.214 --> 00:20:09.448
  • that particular fear tactic.
  • 00:20:09.448 --> 00:20:11.984
  • They are also going toattack her on grounds
  • 00:20:11.984 --> 00:20:15.354
  • that she will necessarilyoverturn Roe v. Wade,
  • 00:20:15.354 --> 00:20:20.126
  • and it's far from clearfrom her judicial record
  • 00:20:20.126 --> 00:20:23.062
  • that she will necessarily,she may carve it back a bit
  • 00:20:23.062 --> 00:20:27.667
  • because she believesin originalism.
  • 00:20:27.667 --> 00:20:30.169
  • But I think at the end ofthe day, because of Amy Coney
  • 00:20:30.169 --> 00:20:34.473
  • Barrett's impeccablequalifications
  • 00:20:34.473 --> 00:20:36.776
  • and those qualifications
  • 00:20:36.776 --> 00:20:38.244
  • by the way, resonatewith the American people.
  • 00:20:38.244 --> 00:20:40.780
  • And because of her judicialphilosophy is unimpeachable,
  • 00:20:40.780 --> 00:20:45.785
  • and because even left wingHarvard law professors
  • 00:20:47.186 --> 00:20:49.422
  • like Noah Feldman agree thatshe is brilliant, conscientious
  • 00:20:49.422 --> 00:20:54.427
  • and that she will analyzedecisions in good faith.
  • 00:20:55.861 --> 00:20:57.697
  • I think the leftis essentially left
  • 00:20:57.697 --> 00:21:00.366
  • with the following approach.
  • 00:21:00.366 --> 00:21:02.735
  • Attack Judge Coney Barrett
  • 00:21:02.735 --> 00:21:05.538
  • largely on the basis offictional claims, including
  • 00:21:05.538 --> 00:21:09.842
  • either her affiliationwith a Catholic group
  • 00:21:09.842 --> 00:21:12.745
  • called People of Praise orthe fact that she's adopted
  • 00:21:12.745 --> 00:21:15.681
  • two children from Haiti.
  • 00:21:15.681 --> 00:21:17.450
  • As a consequence, for instance
  • 00:21:17.450 --> 00:21:19.051
  • Newsweek magazine has publisheda highly fictional claim
  • 00:21:19.051 --> 00:21:22.989
  • that Margaret Atwood's book
  • 00:21:22.989 --> 00:21:24.991
  • the "Handmaid's Tale" isbased on People of Praise.
  • 00:21:24.991 --> 00:21:28.928
  • The left maintains this boguscharge, despite the fact
  • 00:21:28.928 --> 00:21:32.798
  • that the author of the bookdenies that she based her novel
  • 00:21:32.798 --> 00:21:37.636
  • on Amy Coney Barrett'sreligious affiliation.
  • 00:21:37.636 --> 00:21:42.575
  • So there is no
  • 00:21:43.175 --> 00:21:45.478
  • factual basis to claim
  • 00:21:46.679 --> 00:21:49.215
  • that Amy Coney Barrettand her husband engaged
  • 00:21:49.215 --> 00:21:52.985
  • for instance, in anillegal adoption.
  • 00:21:52.985 --> 00:21:55.321
  • But if you look at you, ifyou look at the Twitter verse
  • 00:21:55.321 --> 00:21:59.492
  • you will find plenty of claims
  • 00:21:59.492 --> 00:22:02.161
  • that they're something thatdemands an investigation.
  • 00:22:02.161 --> 00:22:05.431
  • So I think at the end of the day
  • 00:22:05.431 --> 00:22:07.800
  • this is a concession that JudgeBarrett is highly qualified.
  • 00:22:07.800 --> 00:22:12.538
  • - Every president in thepast has at least nominated,
  • 00:22:12.538 --> 00:22:15.307
  • including President Obama.
  • 00:22:15.307 --> 00:22:17.376
  • And then it's up to the Senate
  • 00:22:17.376 --> 00:22:18.878
  • the Senate that can, orcan't take the nomination.
  • 00:22:18.878 --> 00:22:21.147
  • What is it?
  • 00:22:22.348 --> 00:22:23.482
  • 17 out of the 19 times
  • 00:22:23.482 --> 00:22:24.884
  • the Senate and the presidentwere the same party
  • 00:22:24.884 --> 00:22:26.685
  • Harry, 17 out of the 18 times.
  • 00:22:26.685 --> 00:22:29.121
  • The president has alwaysnominated where there's vacancy
  • 00:22:29.121 --> 00:22:32.324
  • and it's 17 of the 19times when you know
  • 00:22:32.324 --> 00:22:33.993
  • both were Democratsare both Republicans.
  • 00:22:33.993 --> 00:22:36.829
  • The nominee was confirmedin the election year.
  • 00:22:36.829 --> 00:22:39.298
  • Sometimes you have35 days, 36 days out.
  • 00:22:39.298 --> 00:22:42.068
  • - I think, the source ofthe discomfort for Democrats
  • 00:22:42.068 --> 00:22:45.604
  • is the fact that indeed theyhave read the constitution
  • 00:22:45.604 --> 00:22:50.609
  • but they are truly afraid
  • 00:22:51.477 --> 00:22:53.045
  • of anyone who wants to enforcethe text of the constitution.
  • 00:22:53.045 --> 00:22:57.349
  • Why?
  • 00:22:57.349 --> 00:22:58.284
  • Because it limits their power.
  • 00:22:58.284 --> 00:23:00.886
  • And that is clearly the case
  • 00:23:00.886 --> 00:23:02.755
  • with respect toAmy Coney Barrett.
  • 00:23:02.755 --> 00:23:05.224
  • She has read theconstitution very carefully
  • 00:23:05.224 --> 00:23:08.594
  • and it places clear andunmistakable limitations
  • 00:23:08.594 --> 00:23:12.331
  • on both judges and oncongressional power.
  • 00:23:12.331 --> 00:23:17.069
  • It is clear also beyondquestion that the Democrats
  • 00:23:17.069 --> 00:23:20.406
  • when they have elections,they have looked
  • 00:23:20.406 --> 00:23:24.543
  • to the Supreme Court tolegislate on their behalf.
  • 00:23:24.543 --> 00:23:29.548
  • And so Amy Coney Barrettis prepared to carve
  • 00:23:30.683 --> 00:23:33.352
  • back those types ofinitiatives in the future.
  • 00:23:33.352 --> 00:23:36.689
  • And so I think the Democratsare rightly afraid of her.
  • 00:23:36.689 --> 00:23:39.758
  • - I want you to listen to this.
  • 00:23:39.758 --> 00:23:41.293
  • So a Laurence Tribe, aliberal law professor,
  • 00:23:43.963 --> 00:23:45.431
  • Harvard law professor,constitutional law,
  • 00:23:45.431 --> 00:23:49.034
  • so he gets askedthe direct question,
  • 00:23:49.034 --> 00:23:50.469
  • he goes out Fox NewsSunday, let me go to by 27th
  • 00:23:50.469 --> 00:23:52.872
  • because Brit Hume hostedFox News Sunday, yesterday,
  • 00:23:52.872 --> 00:23:55.274
  • and he had Laurence Tribe,and here's the question.
  • 00:23:55.274 --> 00:23:57.409
  • - [Hume] Speaking ofthe constitution sir,
  • 00:23:57.409 --> 00:23:59.545
  • do you find any supportfor your argument
  • 00:23:59.545 --> 00:24:01.280
  • in the constitution itself?
  • 00:24:01.280 --> 00:24:03.015
  • - [Tribe] Oh, I'm notsuggesting it's unconstitutional
  • 00:24:03.015 --> 00:24:05.217
  • to go ahead, it'sperfectly constitutional,
  • 00:24:05.217 --> 00:24:07.653
  • but a lot of things that areconstitutional are stupid.
  • 00:24:07.653 --> 00:24:11.056
  • - This is the point.
  • 00:24:11.056 --> 00:24:12.558
  • So it's, you've got the rightto do it, but you're stupid.
  • 00:24:12.558 --> 00:24:14.460
  • This is where LaurenceTribe has come to now,
  • 00:24:14.460 --> 00:24:17.963
  • calling people stupid fordoing things that are legal.
  • 00:24:17.963 --> 00:24:20.332
  • - Absolutely, so what you have
  • 00:24:20.332 --> 00:24:22.601
  • is Laurence Tribe an elitists,
  • 00:24:22.601 --> 00:24:25.371
  • a globalized member of theelite hierarchy who believes
  • 00:24:25.371 --> 00:24:30.376
  • that his wisdom is superiorto the wisdom of the founders,
  • 00:24:31.810 --> 00:24:35.981
  • to the individuals whoactually wrote the constitution
  • 00:24:37.283 --> 00:24:39.485
  • and ratified the constitution.
  • 00:24:39.485 --> 00:24:41.887
  • No one has electedLaurence Tribe king.
  • 00:24:41.887 --> 00:24:45.391
  • And I think the Americanpeople are much better off
  • 00:24:45.391 --> 00:24:48.961
  • because he doesn't control theUnited States Constitution.
  • 00:24:48.961 --> 00:24:52.865
  • And he doesn't control
  • 00:24:52.865 --> 00:24:54.667
  • the nation as hemight like to do.
  • 00:24:56.101 --> 00:24:59.838
  • (light upbeat music)
  • 00:24:59.838 --> 00:25:02.908