Talked to his Attorney General yet. Thats right. Reporter i had a chance to catch up with kellyannec conway. I asked her whether or not the president views this decision as some sort of set back or defeat. She didnt exactly answer that question, but heres what she had to say. This is a defeat . Do you see this as a setback . He sees it as the statute provides a president with great latitude and authority to protect the citizens and protect the Nations National security. This was not argued on the merits. Now that well have an opportunity to argue on the merits, we look forward to doing that. I think his tweet was perfect when he said, well see you in court. There you go. Some confidence being expressed by Kellyanne Conway at the white
house. Not a lot new in terms of arguments being laid out by the white house in response to this, just the very tough talk that were going to see you in court. That is not exactly going to win the day at the Supreme Court. I asked Kellyanne Conway, is thi
his general philosophy. he went out of his way to say i m not commenting on a specific instance. reporter: that statement refuted by a spokesman and senate republican that met with the nominee and said they discussed the president s criticism. disheartening is a great world. the judge and i talked about that and frankly, he got pretty passion it about it. your answer about the context doesn t make sense when you think about what senator said this morning on tv. he said he asked judge gorsuch specifically about the president s so-called judge tweet and in response this is like the fourth time i ve asked and answered. this is a different context. i understand that. reporter: connecticut senator richard blumenthal said gorsuch made it clear he wanted concerns shared. in fact, judge gorsuch specifically said you should feel free to mention what i said about these attacks being disheartening and demoralizing. reporter: still, he and other democrats want gorsuch to go fur
i understand that, she has made it very clear over an over again. sean, your answer about the context doesn t make sense when you think about what senator ben sass today, this morning he said he asked judge gorsuch about the president s so-called judge tweet this is like the fourth time i ve asked and answered. but this is about i understand that. and i understand exactly what senator ayotte said about it. i understand it. thank you. i m going to continue on this line despite what s happening there. why isn t the president concerned about the influence or the appearance of the influence on the independent judiciary? he is free to speak his mind. where has this outrage been for the last 100 years. the obama administration or any other administration i m talking about this
judge gorsuch said to me that he found these attacks on the judiciary by the president to be disheartening and demoralizing. today, meeting with a bipartisan group of senators to discuss the nomination to the high court, the president denying gorsuch ever criticized him. his comments were misrepresented. white house press secretary sean spicer insisting gorsuch was talking in general terms, and not directly calling out the president. the judge was very clear that he was not commenting on any specific matter, right. then he was asked about his general philosophy. he literally went out of his way to say i m not commenting on a specific instance. reporter: but that statement refuted by gorsuch s white house appointed spokesman and a senate republican who met with the nominee and said they discussed the president s criticism. disheartening is a great word. judge gorsuch and i talked about that and frankly he got pretty fashion at about it. your answer about the context doesn
and that is she s made it very clear over and over again. sean, your answer about the context doesn t make sense when you think about what senator ben sasse said today and this morning on tv. he said that he asked judge gorsuch specifically about the president s so-called judge tweet and in response this is the fourth time i asked and answered. this is a different context. i understand that. this is directly about i have said what senator ayotte said about it. i understand. thank you. sean, i m going to continue on this line despite what is happening there. why isn t the white house why isn t the president concerned about the influence or the appearance of the influence on the independent judiciary? why isn t he he is free to speak his mind. where has this outrage been for the last 100 years? i m talking about this president. part of the reason the