You dont want to miss that. Even as demonstrators continue to hit the streets over the Breonna Taylor case. Were watching it all. Live reports ahead, everybody. First nbc news has now learned a confirmation hearing is tentatively scheduled on october 12th, 16 days from now. An extremely aggressive time line to say the least. Want to start with White House Correspondent peter baker who has been reporting about the presumed nomination. Good to see you. Very much appreciate you joining us on this saturday. Talk to me about this most recent development that were hearing, this time line of october 12th for the beginnings of a confirmation hearing. Yeah. That would be, as you put it, a very accelerated time frame. Basically doing in two weeks what normally takes six weeks even under the best of circumstances for a Supreme Court nominee. Republicans are saying thats fine because she was vetted just recently in 2017 when President Trump appointed her to the Appeals Court on the 7th circuit. Therefore, a lot of the information you would want to research about a nominee is already fresh and recently available to them. The democrats are saying theyre rushing her onto the court in a power grab in order to avoid an election that the president currently looks like hes losing according to the polls. I think youre going to see a lot of hot, angry, passionate debate about this, not just about her nomination and her selection but about even just the process in which its going to be rushed to the senate. Lets talk, peter, a bit about your reporting and the calculus that went into the president s decision in deciding on Amy Coney Barrett versus the other top contender that was barbara laguoa. Yeah. Shes been judge barrett has been the president s frontrunner going back two years when Brett Kavanaugh was nominated to the court. When he looked like he was in trouble, barrett judge barrett was seen as sort of the alternative choice if they needed to pull a nomination or if the nomination failed in the senate. She was already kind of a backup candidate basically two years ago. The president told confidence to axios that he was saving her for ginsberg. Meaning once Ruth Bader Ginsberg left the court, he had this he had judge barrett in mind as her replacement. You couldnt think of a more polar opposite justice than Ruth Bader Ginsberg. She was a hero to the left, champion to womens rights and other liberal issues. Judge barrett is a hero to the right, a champion to their mind of the Antiabortion Movement and other conservative ideas. So you really have a very dramatic shift. In fact, judge barrett becomes the next justice of the Supreme Court. I want to read a portion of a piece that you wrote for the New York Times entitled trump selects Amy Coney Barrett to fill ginsbergs seat. They hope this will energize his conservative Political Base but it could rouz liberal voters afraid this could spell the end of roe v. Wade. I was listening to an interview, peter, with the head of the susan b. Anthony list. This is an organization that wants to overturn roe v. Wade. It has made it their sole purpose in life to overturn roe v. Wade and to get Supreme Court justices nominated to the bench who want to do that. Incidentally, Amy Coney Barrett is their number one choice. In this interview she was asked if it is worth it if, in fact, the Democrats Gain control of both the senate and the white house and after kind of wanting to avoid the question and answer event tiventually she said, yes would be worth it. I think thats right. There are conservatives who say it would be worth it. They want to win the election and they dont want to say it on the air. From your point of view, getting a sixth republican appointed justice on the ninemember court has a more lasting value than a single election cycle. You can argue this is more meaningful for the law and long range shake of the jurisprudence. Judge barrett is 48. She would be the youngest member of this particular court. I mean, she could serve in theory for decades. Because she is replacing a conservative for a liberal it would shift the balance of power rather dramatically. Weve seen with five republican appointees a willingness on a few occasions, not as many as his conservative critics say, to side with the four liberals. If judge barrett is on the court and shes anything like the other conservatives like kavanaugh and kneel gorsuch, he doesnt have the swing vote. Peter baker, thank you. Joe biden saying the only way to unite the parties is to get the president out of office. Here is what he told my colleague, stephanie ruhle. Republicans are trying to push, through, jam through while many are saying theyre going to vote no before they know this persons name. You said youre the one who can unite people. How are you going to do that . Look at how things are now. Number one, im not being facetious when i say this. Get rid of the worst president in american history, donald trump. He holds a lot of people at sway. With him gone, i think it opens up a different avenue. Joining me now, democratic senator from pennsylvania, john kasey. I want to get your reaction to joe biden saying hes the man to unite the government once again. I feel like its hard for americans to believe that sentiment seeing how divided it seems washington is right now. Yasmin, i think with the help of a lot of americans we can be united when you have a law like the Affordable Care act that has covered more than 20 million americans and gave protections, for example, with regard to preexisting conditions to now 135 million americans. At least we should unite around that and not destroy that law, but now you have the president saying back in may he wants to terminate, terminate health care under obamacare and thats why this Supreme Court fight is so consequential for Peoples Health care. Lets get into some of those issues, senator casey. I want to talk about your openness to a nomination like Amy Coney Barrett. You yourself as a democrat are opposed to roe v. Wade. Are you open to her nomination . Well, yasmin, i think when you look at what has happened just in the last two years, when you had two Supreme Court nominations, they were chosen from a list developed by the Federalist Society and the heritage foundation, two of probably the most right wing organizations in the history of the country, i dont want a Supreme Court chosen by those right wing groups and thats the determination i made with regard to mr. Gorsuch and the determination with regard to mr. Kavanaugh. Sounds like the president s headed down the same path. If he chooses judge Coney Barrett because shes on that list as well. This is a president and a party that is obsessed with doing one thing, at least initially. Theyre trying to do everything they can in the middle of a pandemic to wipe out, to destroy the Affordable Care act, and thats not something that i could ever support. Thats where theyre headed. Not to mention a lot of other cases. Are you a definite no for Amy Coney Barrett just to be clear to have you on the record for that . Well, if she is the choice, ive already set forth the basic test which is if youre on that list, developed by those two extreme groups by the way, heritage says unions are cartels, thats what youre talking about here, i cant support that kind of nomination. So youre a definite no. Theres a couple of things i want to get into here. First and foremost, you bring up the Affordable Care act. It seems like the democratic strategy Going Forward is talking to americans about the loss of health care if, in fact, the Affordable Care act is broken apart after the Supreme Court decision. There are 23 million americans at risk of losing health care. Lets talk about an article written by Amy Coney Barrett in regards to the decision made by chief Justice John Roberts back in 2012 keeping the Affordable Care act in place. In it she writes this, chief Justice Roberts pushing the Affordable Care act beyond the plausible meaning to save the statute she wrote. There is an overwhelming fear if Amy Coney Barrett were to get this nomination and it were to be a decidedly conservative court, 63, in fact the Affordable Care act would be overturned. What is the strategy Going Forward to make sure this doesnt happen . Well, first of all, i think its important we tell the American People very plainly what is at stake. A lot of americans dont even know the case is before the Supreme Court. It will be argued november 10th. Thats why theyre rushing it. Theyre rushing her nomination to get her confirmed so she can be the deciding vote on whether or not the Affordable Care act is upheld or not. What youre talking about here is not just roughly 23 million americans with coverage, newly gained coverage, but 135 million including 5. 5 million in my state with a preexisting condition. Those protections would be wiped out completely, in addition to so many other consequences. Look, this is the surefire way of putting Insurance Companies back in charge of every decision about your health care. They can drop you if you have a preexisting condition, they can charge you more if you have a preexisting condition. They can make life miserable once again for so many americans, and thats why weve got to make sure that people understand what is at stake. This case is probably the most consequential, significant case in front of the court in a quarter century. So i just want to be clear here so that americans understand the strategy Going Forward with democrats. If, in fact, you cannot stop the nomination process and the confirmation subsequently of judge barrett, then your second movie sensely is to get americans out to vote so you can possibly attempt to turn the senate to control to the democrats and win the white house . Is that what youre saying, to make them understand whats at stake here . Well, we actually want to do both. We want to make sure they know whats at stake with regard to what is a corporate chorus becoming a lot more corporate. 15 years, 70 of the cases decided for the big corporations, big business. We have to make sure thats clear to people with regard to where the court is and where it will be, much more conservative, much more far right. Also we obviously want to make sure we get as many people out to vote. The good news is when a lot of people vote, democrats do better. I would not want to be a member of a Political Party that was trying to shrink the vote to do better. Thats a pathetic Political Party. I want to get your reaction to the story that the Trump Administration has seized on of mailin ballot fraud. A small number of mailin ballots were incorrectly discarded by a temp worker at an Elections Bureau in luzerne county. The number, it was just nine ballots here. Federal officials, they said at least 7 were votes for the current president but county officials, they were unaware of who exactly the ballots were cast for until the Justice Department released the details as part of that investigation into this situation. What more are you learning about this . First of all, i think its important to say everything the president says about mailin ballots is a lie, everything. Everything he said for months now is a lie and the attorney general is catching up to him in the lies. Thats number one. There is no voter fraud problem in america. There is no voter fraud problem in the commonwealth of pennsylvania. In this case there is an Investigation Underway of the District Attorney who is a republican saying this wont affect a fair election. Number two, you have the fbi has investigated. Theyre going to investigate this. It sounds to me based upon whats on the public docket already, you had a contractor hired by the county who helped them with the large number of mailin ballots and they made a mistake. The sometimes the paperwork to request a mailin ballot looks very similar to the response they get from the voters. So theres going to be an investigation. I think its highly likely that these nine votes will be counted but this is not this is not evidence of voter fraud. Its a mistake that can be corrected and im sure a lot of counties will learn from it. The director of the fbi, christopher wright, the president s appointee has said repeated times that there is no widespread evidence of any voter fraud here. Senator bob casey of pennsylvania, thank you for your time. Appreciate it on this busy saturday afternoon. Want to turn to protests happening. There is heavy Police Presence in portland as a right wing proud boys rally in support of the president is expected to bring in very large crowds. Nbcs Steve Patterson is in portland. Thank you for joining us. Talk us through what youre seeing on the ground today. Yasmin, this is mirroring the fifth month of protesting straight here in portland. Every single night. Its been volatile since it started. Maybe today more volatile. First i want to show you around. This is a proud boys event so the normal things that you would see, the body armor, flags, some open carry long guns as well. But youre also seeing in some cases posters that have the name j. On it. That is for a far right member that was killed not too long ago following a protest shot by a selfdescribed antifa member. This also coming into today follows a lawsuit filed by left wing protesters against the proud boys for claiming that they were bear sprayed and assaulted. Pretty much any of these rallies have had some form of either unrest or violence today. Not expected to be any different. The hope is though is that because there are duelling rallies, theres one proud boy rally here and three miles away from this event there is an antifa rally, the hope is from city officials, police, those events will stay separated just because of the distance of the events and so far so good although it is just underway. Were starting to see some of the far right element filter in. Weve seen some counter protesters coming to this as well. They were booed, chanted out and followed briefly. They have so far left. But this is what were looking at right now. A powder keg situation again in the city of portland. Back to you. Nbcs Steve Patterson for us in portland, oregon. Thank you, steve. Stay with us as things do develop there. In louisville, bracing for yet another day of protests over the Deadly Police shooting of Breonna Taylor. Calls mounting for more information on just how a grand jury decided not to charge any of the officers with her death. Nbcs Shaq Brewster is with us. Good to see you. Talk us through what youre seeing and any movement with regards to the demand from Breonna Taylors family to release the report of the proceedings . Reporter lets start with the demand there that youre hearing from not only the family of Breonna Taylor and protestors who come out every night consistently in the name of Breonna Taylor. The main issue you hear from them is that there is so much evidence, so many details about the original shooting of bree on a taylor that has not been made public. We saw a video clip of officer mattingly in the moments after he was shot after breaking down that door back in march. We also heard yesterday, we saw a full autopsy report showing how many times Breonna Taylor was shot and where exactly she was shot. There are so many details that the grand jury might have been privy to but the family doesnt know what was presented to them. Thats whats been the call from the family and the family attorney. They called the grand jury process a sham. They say they dont know if anyone was there advocating on behalf of Breonna Taylor and her life. Listen to what the family attorney, benjamin crumb said, when we heard from the family after the grand jury announcement. What did Kentucky Attorney general Daniel Cameron present to the grand jury . Did he present any evidence on Breonna Taylors behalf or did he make a unilateral decision to put his thumb on the scales of justice to help try to exonerate and justify the killing of Breon