models. there s the ken starr model. there s the watergate model. all we can ask is that both bob mueller and the congress do a thorough job and be able to present the american people with what they found and make a reasonable determination about what the consequences should be. we weren t allowed to do that in the congress. every time we went down a certain investigative lane, if it got too close to the president the republicans said let s stop in the house. in the house. i hear you on that. i hear your frustration on that. i hear your times when you ve been on. there is an issue of weaponizing investigations. do you prosecute your political enemies. senator sheldon whitehouse today talking about kavanaugh, said if we get the gavel well, why should i speak for him? here s what he said. this is such bad practice that even if they were to ram this guy through, as soon as democrats get gavels we re going to want to get to the bottom of this. the idea of kavanaugh as justice
party movement. and there are a lot of americans who feel like they have been treated as second class citizens. but i must tell you, we have never had a president who is lit the fire and put the country on boil more than this one. i think if, you know, the culture has been here for a long time. what has dramatically changed is the nature of our leadership. and the incivility in washington, incivility preceded donald trump to washington. it was there long before he got there, the polarization and all the breakdown of norms was there. but it is accelerated, deep and has become much more poisonous. we re beginning to see threats to the way we live with each other. we re beginning to see threats to the whole idea we hold a democracy, that we may have our disagreements, but we basically have the same values. you know, selena, former supreme court justice antonin scalia and current sitting justice ruth bader ginsburg could not have disagreed more when it came to the law and the
that s what happens. elections have consequences. i think this is more about, you know, how broken everything is. in past generations, it would be perfectly normal for a republican to appoint someone already, you know, a sitting justice. this isn t harriet myers with a giant question mark behind how they might rule. this is someone that should be familiar to people on both sides of the aisle. the politics are so broken, most people don t know the difference of going nuclear. it s a distinction known only in news rooms and political junkies. i understand the desire to take a hide for the hide of garland. i don t think it s going to help them. if donald trump is there and does it with 51 votes, it certainly lowers the standard in his mind. i only need 51 next time. greta, weigh in on what john mccain had to say.
of saying a lot of things when he s a retired justice that ruth bader ginsburg cannot say when she is sitting and being asked as a sitting justice, are you making a political calculation when you decide to retire or not to retire. of course her answer is going to be i m not making a political calculation. were she to say anything else, people would call for her head. clearly, she is thinking about this. she is the most savvy and i would say politically and ideologically savvy justice there is on the court on the left. so to think that this hasn t occurred to her or she s not lying awake thinking about this seems to me very, very silly. yeah, i think that makes sense. obviously people care a great deal about this because of the import of the decisions. and again, for folks who don t track the court super carefully, if she were if she or breyer were replaced with a conservative, it would have a tremendous tip in the balance. e.j., you spoke about john paul stevens when he retired. i
as a sitting justice, are you making a political calculation when you decide to retire or not to retire. of course her answer is going to be i m not making a political calculation. were she to say anything else, people would call for her head. clearly, she is thinking about this. she is the most savvy and i would say politically and ideologically savvy justice there is on the court on the left. so to think that this hasn t occurred to her or she s not lying awake thinking about this seems to me very, very silly. yeah, i think that makes sense. obviously people care a great deal about this because of the import of the decisions. and again, for folks who don t track the court super carefully, if she were if she or breyer were replaced with a conservative, it would have a tremendous tip in the balance. e.j., you spoke about john paul