research they picked it up $250 million, further research said the money was actually $400 million. we have a recent report that we haven t backtracked at the number is even higher than that. i $400 million funding conservative activists behind-the-scenes campaign to remake the nation s courts. that operation is a very different thing than a group rooting for somebody. i want to make sure that difference is clear since our friends at the republican side made dark money such a big focus of their attention already. there is a drastic difference
that if she s confirmed she s in fact going to prevent you from receiving health care. she in fact did end up holding aca. it was predicted that she wed, but it was a narrative in which she was described as someone who is going to present tell mike prevent the sick from getting health care pay that was one example of all of the sick way she was portrayed in the limelight by the media. kathy i was actually with you, we were working at the presidential national committee when brett kavanaugh incident happened. an absolute disgrace to the process bit i give republicans a lot of credit to the way they are handling this but voters deserve full transparency in the folder process of this confirmation hearing. i hope they will get that as does unfold sandra right onto the senators of reminding the american people and their friends on the other side of the aisle how they should really work. jonathan we haven t about 30 seconds. to make the point that these hearings should be respectful bu
0 christianity, judaism, islam, embraces traditional definition of marriage, correct? i am aware that there are various religious faiths that define marriage in a traditional way. do you see that when the supreme court makes a dramatic pronouncement about the invalidity of state marriage laws, that it will inevitably sit in conflict between those who ascribe to the supreme court s edict and those who have a firmly held religious belief that marriage is between a man and a woman? woman? well, senator, these issues are being litigated, as you know, throughout the courts as people raise issues. i am limited with what i can say about them. i m aware there are cases i m not asking you to decide a case or predict how you would decide to, i m just asking isn t it apparent that when the supreme court decides that something that is not even in the constitution is a fundamental right, and no state can pass any law that conflicts with the supreme court s edict, particularly in an area w