i think by nominating kavanaugh first, he said if you were with bush, you went to the right schools and you could be caricatured as a preppy. just think what they will do to the next that is in further to the right? and when she is nominated, he can just say look. it s not her, not anybody. and it s 90% of that small rubric, and i will take donald trump in the republican. laura: i will never get tired, i m going to take the
with the testimony. it s pathetic that someone hijacked their party and they are kind of deer in headlights. they don t know whether to be hip and go hard left or suffer the irrelevance of being old and in the way. laura: when i was at the white house, and, it s probably a pretty decent one. obviously, they had another support opening. bush staff secretary , and very mainstream. person and it judge. so can you imagine if ruth bader ginsburg is suddenly open, and what will they do then? bill marr as saying that the president doesn t have a right to appoint anyone else.
history. every time they go fall radical like this they lose at the ballot box. richard nixon, ronald reagan, bush 43 nl donald trump have all been beneficiaries of the leftist mama, their tactics and their intent to make this country great, our very foundational principles. they refuse to learn and they can t learn because they are at war, laura. they always have power and control. the one there is an actual debate to be had if people want to have it on what to do about china. like, what is our role vis-a-vis china, what are we going to do with nato down the road? what about the 20 trillion in debt we have? what about immigration, millions and millions of people coming into the country over the last number of years? that s actually really interesting stuff and i love that kind of debate. this is like eighth grade stuff.
think about this process. chris: we were talking before we came on the air and i see you have a list of all the people that the president said were on the list of potential nominees. what s your point? here s my point. this was a list compiled in november but he put it out during the campaign.there are twentysomething people on this list. i m asking chuck schumer, name five, name three, name one that would be okay with you. brett kavanaugh was a mainstream judge. i would have chosen him had i been president. bush supported him. everybody running for president on our side believed brett kavanaugh and neil gorsuch were outstanding conservative jurists. so chuck, you want someone new, look at this list and see if there s anyone you agree to. but what you want to do senator schumer is overturn the election. we will not let you pick the
these are democrats appointed by clinton and obama. from ginsberg with 96 votes to kagan with 63. now republican nominees by bush 43 and now president trump. from roberts with 78 to brett kavanaugh with 50.senate democrats have been much less likely to cross the aisle and vote for a republican nominee the republicans have been to vote for democratic nominees. let me also point out some of those were below 60. the filibuster was not used until neil gorsuch to change the number from 60-50. so the change senator mcconnell made to the rules on the supreme court, really caused us to be much more partisan in this. chris: but in fairness, you did it first in 2013. not for the supreme court but lower court judges. i agree. - - we go back and forth here.