, republican senators are reluctant to join it in. they know one thing. american people are overwhelmingly on our side in the polls are tilting further in our favor every week. in the week after justice scalia's unfortunate passing, you had 54% saying the senate should act. a week later, it picked up to 62%. 70 percent ofhat, voters in battleground states and the senate should do its job and vote on the nominee and yesterday's poll showed nearly thinkin 10 americans republicans are playing politics with the supreme court, including a whopping 62% of republicans and conservatives. seven in 10 said the senate should hold hearings. 68% said who sits on the supreme court is important to them. so the idea that senator ,cconnell can make this go away they are holding a bad position here when it comes to the american people's views. that is not working because 68% to said on the court say it is important to them and only 16% believe the republican argument that they are holding out for the principle of letting the next president decide. day

here is republican senator jeff flake? >>> republicans are fully justified in doing with we are doing, waiting. but if we happen to lose the election we we ought to push him through quickly, if we can. >> senator, is jeff flake wrong? >> i think so. look, president obama calling this judge a moderate does not make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he is enthusely supported by www. moveonorg. i don't thing they would be enthusiastic about a liberal judge. the principle is the same whether it is before or after the election, the principle is, the membership are choosing their next president and their next president should pick this supreme court nominee >> final question you are saying no consideration of judge merrick garland by this conditioning even if hillary clinton wins the election, no consideration by this conditioning you are going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> i cannot imagine a republican majority in the united states senate with want to confirm in a

reason to want the republicans to control the senate. they can't defund planned parenthood, they can't repeal obamacare. they can stand up and say we can actually do something. second, this is a way they say of protesting executive overreach by the president. although this is a clear constitutional right and duty of the president to nominate people to the federal judiciary. what's puzzling is the republican senate leaders who are saying this have all said of course they will support donald trump if he's the party's nominee. they're saying we're quite content to have judicial nominations made by mr. trump whose qualifications are foggy. and it's puzzling to hear mitch mcconnell saying that we must follow the biden rule. a biden rule endorsed by harry reid. the biden rule was he said no confirmations during a political season. when are we not in a political season? it's just not an election year. by what principle do we decide when a president's ability to nominate people becomes progressively attenuated? after the midterm elections of the

senate republicans aren't planning on doing that. that's such a radical decision it will be hard to defend. that's the case being made by the loudest and most influential voice who is not either in the white house or running get there this year. >> their response to one of the most solemn and consequential tasks that our government performs, the confirmation of a supreme court justice to pretend that the nominee and president obama do not exist. cannot see them, cannot hear them. at the same time, that they are blocking all possible supreme court nominees, senate republicans are in panic because their party seems to be on the verge of nominating one of two extremists for president. two candidates who think nothing about attacking the legitimacy of their political opponents and demeaning millions of americans. two candidates whose extremism, republicans worries will lead their party to defeat in november. these are not separate issues. they are the same issue. if republican senators want to sustained up to extremists running for presi

senate republicans aren't planning on doing that. that's such a radical decision it will be hard to defend. that's the case being made by the loudest and most influential voice who is not either in the white house or running get there this year. >> their response to one of the most solemn and consequent shl tasks that our government performs, the confirmation of a supreme court justice to pretend that the nominee and president obama do not exist. cannot see them, cannot hear them. at the same time, that they are blocking all possible supreme court nominees, senate republicans are in panic because their party seems to be on the verge of nominating one of two extremists for president. two candidates who think nothing about attacking the legitimacy of their political opponents and demeaning millions of americans. two candidates whose extremism, republicans worries will lead their party to defeat in november. these are not separate issues. they are the same issue. if republican senators want to sustained up to extremists running for pres

senate. >> one of your republican senators, mark kirk spoke out this week. he said the senate should vote. listen. >> just man up and cast a vote. the tough thing about these senatorial jobs, you get yes or no votes. your whole job is to either say yes or not and explain why. >> are you confident you'll hold republicans together? >> well, look. mark kirk is a great senator. he's running this year in illinois. i'm confident he'll get re-elected. the schedule in the senate is set by the majority leader. most of my members are comfortable with letting the american people make the decision by electing the next president who will fill this vacancy next year. >> let me move on. on tuesday, you said you told donald trump he should condemn and discourage violent acts. 24 hours later, he made the statement at riots in the convention. you heard him this morning on the violence as well. are you worried he's not getting your message? >> well, regardless of who the candidate is, i think all of the candidates for president ought to be discouraging that kind of activity. b

senate. >> one of your republican senators, mark kirk spoke out this week. he said the senate should vote. listen. >> just man up and cast a vote. the tough thing about these senatorial jobs, you get yes or no votes. yes or not and explain why. >> are you confident you'll hold republicans together? >> well, look. mark kirk is a great senator. he's running this year in illinois. i'm confident he'll get re-elected. the schedule in the senate is set by the majority leader. most of my members are comfortable with letting the american people make the decision by electing the next president who will fill this vacancy next year. >> let me move on. on tuesday, you said you told donald trump he should condemn and discourage violent acts. 24 hours later, he made the statement at riots in the convention. you heard him this morning on the violence as well. are you worried he's not getting your message? >> well, regardless of who the candidate is, i think all of the candidates fory president ough to be discouraging that kind of because the people in the audience tend to

and that's what identifies them as extremists and why republicans, republicans in the senate are breaking apart over this. and, yet, what if republicans i in the senate been doing since the very day that barack obama was sworn in. they have given in to their extremists. they have nursed their extremists along so there's been fights and delays over the basic things that happen in government. the president tries to get his team out. starting this 2012, after he had been re-elected by 5 million votes. we all come back and first thing that happens is the republicans in the senate want to shut it down. they don't want anybody to go forward to be the head of the nlrb. why? they are trying to shut down the nlrb. they don't want anybody appointed to the head of consumer protection financial bureau. why, because they don't want anybody to be the or the consumer protection financial bureau to function. they don't want a secretary of labor. they don't want anybody confirmed over the environmental protection agency. they don't want the president of the united states to be able to fill any, any of the

so the stakes should even be higher for senator grassley than the other republican senators. why? because as judiciary chairman, senator grassley presides over one of the most important and prestigious committees in the entire united states senate. this has been the case for 200 years. 200 years. the senate judiciary committee was established 200 years ago. in 1816 it was one of the original 118 standing committees 20 decades passed, that's how long the committee's been in operation. throughout history judiciary committee chairs have wielded immense power and president martin van buren, when he was in the senate, senator ted kennedy, senator arlen specter, senator joe biden, judiciary chairmen have prized their independence and guarded it from being man handled. the past chairmen stood firm and faced opposition from presidents and senate leadership. at crucial times in american history, the senate and the nation have looked to the judiciary committee to do the right thing. during the civil war, chairman liman trumble and his committee authored the 13th amendment. the 13th amendmen

reason to want the republicans to control the senate. they can't defund planned parenthood, they can't repeal obama care. this they can stand up and say we can actually do something. second, this is a way they say of protesting executive overreach by the president. although this is a clear the president to nominate people to the federal judiciary. what's puz slg zling is they all said he'll support donald trump if he's the nominee. we're quite content to have judicial nominations made by mr. trump whose quaufgss lifications are fogy. and it's puzzling to hear mitch mcconnell saying that we must follow the biden rule. a biden rule endorsed by harry reid. the biden rule was he said no confirmations during a political season. when are we not in a political season? it's just not an election year. by what principle do we decide when a president's ability to nominate people becomes progressively obtained? after the midterm elections of the second term of a president? when is it? i don't understand. >> we asked you for questions for the panel.

reason to want the republicans to control the senate. they can't defund planned parenthood, they can't repeal obama care. this they can stand up and say we can actually do something. second, this is a way they say of protesting executive overreach by the president. although this is a clear constitutional right and duty of the president to nominate people to the federal judiciary. what's puz szling is they all sd he'll support donald trump if he's the nominee. we're quite content to have judicial nominations made by mr. trump whose quaufglifications a fogy. and it's puzzling to hear mitch mcconnell saying that we must follow the biden rule. a biden rule endorsed by harry reid. the biden rule was he said no confirmations during a political season. when are we not in a political season? it's just not an election year. by what principle do we decide when a president's ability to nominate people becomes progressively obtained? after the midterm elections of the second term of a president? when is it? i don't understand. >> we asked you for qu

reason to want the republicans to control the senate. they can't defund planned parenthood, they can't repeal obama care. this they can stand up and say we can actually do something. second, this is a way they say of protesting executive overreach by the president. although this is a clear constitutional right and duty of the president to nominate people what's puz slgzling is they all said he'll support donald trump if he's the nominee. we're quite content to have judicial nominations made by mr. trump whose quaufgsslifications are fogy. and it's puzzling to hear mitch mcconnell saying that we must follow the biden rule. a biden rule endorsed by harry reid. the biden rule was he said no confirmations during a political season. when are we not in a political season? it's just not an election year. by what principle do we decide when a president's ability to nominate people becomes progressively obtained? after the midterm elections of the second term of a president? when is it? i don't understand. >> we asked you for questions for the pa

that's a concern for the senate to hold its republican majority. certainly, democrat will make this case time and time again, putting a lot of pressure on those sort of swing state senators who are up for re-election. trying to get the advantage, to reclaim the senate. so this will be a huge political fight. if merrick garland cannot even be visited by the 54 republicans in the senate, that will bring up the political argument of stonewalling, obstruction for obstruction's sake. it will be a very strong argument for democrats. can they put a crack in that at all because he is so widely well thought of and as pete discussed at 63 and having been considered before, perhaps even the white house is considering this sort of a last opportunity for garland to be put in this position to be nominated for something that is certainly the highlight of his career. so we'll have to see. so far, republicans are not officially commenting on the selection of merrick garland. i suspect they will wait until the president makes it official. but the strategy for them w

here is republican senator jeff lake. >> i think republicans are fully justified in doing what we're doing. waiting. but if we happen to lose the election, then i think we ought to push him through quickly if we can. >> senator, is jeff lake wrong? >> yeah, i think so. look, barack obama calling judge -- this judge a moderate doesn't make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he's enthusiastically supported by moveon.org. i don't think they would be signing up and have all this enthusiasm about a liberal judge. the principle is the same. whether it's before the election or after the election. the principle is the american people are choosing their next president and their next president should pick this supreme court nominee. >> so, final question. you're saying no consider -- no consideration of judge garland by this congress even if hillary clinton wins the election? no consideration by this congress? you're going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> yeah. i can't imagine that a republican majority in the united states senate wou

senate. >> one of your republican this week. he said the senate should vote. listen. >> just man up and cast a vote. the tough thing about these senatorial jobs, you get yes or your whole job is to either say >> are you confident you'll hold republicans together? >> well, look. he's running this year in illinois. i'm confident he'll get re-elected. the schedule in the senate is set by the majority leader. most of my members are comfortable with letting the american people make the decision by electing the next president who will fill this vacancy next year. >> let me move on. on tuesday, you said you told donald trump he should condemn and discourage violent acts. 24 hours later, he made the statement at riots in the convention. you heard him this morning on the violence as well. are you worried he's not getting your message? >> well, regardless of who the candidate is, i think all of the candidates for president ought because the people in the audience tend to listen to those i think we ought to condemn this kind of violence. and encourage the american people

lo and behold, president obama has to deal with a republican senate. probably the best way to compare him, this is the democratic party's version of kennedy, center left. as we were discussing, he didn't check a political box with this one. being 63, this is the president not trying to change the court for an entire generation. he is putting real pressure on the republicans to stick by the pledge, that they're not going to even have a hearing. >> not even have a hearing, not even have a courtesy call meeting. what, pete, does judge garland do? does he go up to capitol hill and knock on doors? >> he'll probably do that, yes. there's been -- he will be well-coached now by an entire white house operation with outside support to try to push this nominee through the senate. anyway. that'll be an extra -- of extra importance with this one. republicans won't meet with him, much less hold a confirmation hearing or a floor vote. they'll try to get the difference. maybe pictures of him knocking on doors that won't open. but they'll certainly show the courtesy ca

here is republican senator jeff lake. >> i think republicans are fully justified in doing what we're doing. waiting. but if we happen to lose the election, then i think we ought to push him through quickly if we can. >> senator, is jeff lake wrong? >> yeah, i think so. look, barack obama calling judge -- this judge a moderate doesn't make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he's enthusiastically supported by moveon.org. i don't think they would be signing up and have all this enthusiasm about a liberal judge. the principle is the same. whether it's before the election or after the election. the principle is the american people are choosing their next president and their next supreme court nominee. >> so, final question. just to make it clear. you're saying no consider -- no consideration of judge garland by this congress even if hillary clinton wins the election? no consideration by this congress? you're going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> yeah. i can't imagine that a republican majority in the united states senate would w

the republicans in the senate are acting as if he doesn't have the power. the reality is, as a professor myself, the constitution says he has the power to make the appointment. and the senate has to do its job, advice and consent. they're acting like they don't have to do that. >> here's one thing. we don't give the republicans sometimes credit for strategiry. senator jeff lake of arizona made a statement on fox news on thursday that signals that there is a possibility that the president, if his calculation was they're not going to seat him anyway, he won't get through and maybe a more progressive nominee by a bernie sanders or hillary clinton, what if that doesn't work out? let's listen to jeff lake real quick. >> if the republicans are not successful in the november election, i hope we are, but if we're not, then we ought to look it at this nomination in a lame duck session in november. i would rather have a less liberal nominee like merrick garland than a nominee that hillary clinton, if she were president, would put forward. >> help me out. could they t

now it is time for the senate republicans to do theirs. judge garland puts the law above ideology, exactly the type of nominee that republicans profess to love when it comes to the supreme court. you simply can't lay a glove on him. so, if republicans continue to stand in the way and refuse to do their job, it will only be because they want donald trump to pick the next nominee. [laughter] occasionally republicans may try , to distance themselves from him with their words, but their failure to do their job and give judge garland the consideration he deserves ties them to trump in a way they cannot untangle. if the republicans in the senate want to continue to tie themselves to donald trump, so be it. donald trump won't make america great again, but he will make republicans the minority again. so the message from the american , people to senate republicans is simple -- do your job. the american people overwhelmingly believe republicans have the responsibility to do their job because people get up and go to work every day and do theirs. if p

and of course also, the republican senate majority hangs in the balance here. and it's tough to see how senate republicans maintain that majority if the 35 to 40% of these trump voters are feeling disenfranchised from the process and they take a walk. >> okay. but then you have 10 to 15% of the party, maybe more of that. look at those numbers i showed in the exit polls, battlegrounds, ohio, florida, republican primary voters who say they prefer a third party option than to pick between trump and clinton. >> yeah, trump is a disaster. politics is ultimately about addition, not subtraction. the whole idea of trump is not that he's going to take these romney voters and add to them. he's losing romney voters. just look at republican hispanics. there's not tons of hispanics in the republican party. he already has 60% negatives with republican hispanics. it's going to be very tough for any nominee to do better than romney, against hillary clinton. he's going to do worse. >> we ran the numbers using the exit polls from 2012 in ohio and wisconsin, just on the white vot

the senate republicans are floundering at this point. senator mcconnell put them on a strategy which is impossible to defend. many of them have to go back home and explain it and it's becoming more and more difficult. >> all right. senator dick durbin, thanks for taking the time to come on the show. appreciate it. >> thanks, chris. >> that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" begins "the rachel maddow show" begins right now. good evening, rachel. >> good evening, chris. thanks, my friend. >> you bet. >>> thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. we knew this day would come. we didn't not know exactly when. as recently as yesterday there are people paid to talk for a living that were assuring us this day would definitely not come today but it's come today. the time has, in fact, arrived. and my friends, we must now gather together to poof marco rubio. we started with 17, 17. 17 people all got in over the course of last spring and summer. nobody got out until september 11th when the first one we got to poof was rick

here is republican senator jeff lake. >> i think republicans are fully justified in doing what we're doing. waiting. but if we happen to lose the election, then i think we ought to push him through quickly if we can. >> senator, is jeff lake wrong? >> yeah, i think so. look, barack obama calling judge -- this judge a moderate doesn't make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he's enthusiastically supported by moveon.org. i don't think they would be signing up and have all this enthusiasm about a liberal judge. the principle is the same. whether it's before the election or after the election. the principle is the american people are choosing their next president and their next president should pick this supreme court nominee. >> so, final question. just to make it clear. consideration of judge garland by this congress even if hillary clinton wins the election? no consideration by this congress? you're going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> yeah. i can't imagine that a republican majority in the united states senate would want t

senate. >> one of your republican senators, mark kirk spoke out this week. he said the senate should vote. listen. the tough thing about these senatorial jobs, you get yes or no votes. your whole job is to either say yes or not and explain why. >> are you confident you'll hold republicans together? >> well, look. mark kirk is a great senator. he's running this year in illinois. i'm confident he'll get re-elected. the schedule in the senate is set by the majority leader. most of my members are comfortable with letting the american people make the decision by electing the next president who will fill this vacancy next year. >> you said on tuesday you told donald trump he should condemn and discourage violent acts. 24 hours later, he made the statement at riots in the convention. are you worried he's not getting your message? >> well, regardless of who the candidate is, i think all of the candidates for president all to be discouraging that kind of the audience tend to listen to those who are speaking. i think we ought to condemn this kind of violence. and enco

the senate republicans are floundering at this point. senator mcconnell put them on a strategy which is impossible to defend. many of them have to go back home and explain it and it's becoming more and more difficult. >> all right. senator dick durbin, thanks for taking the time to come on the show. appreciate it. >> thanks, chris. >> that is "all in" for this evening. "the rachel maddow show" begins right now. good evening, rachel. >> good evening, chris. thanks, my friend. >> you bet. >>> thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. we knew this day would come. we didn't not know exactly when. as recently as yesterday there are people paid to talk for a living that were assuring us this day would definitely not come today but it's come today. the time has, in fact, arrived. and my friends, we must now gather together to poof marco rubio. we started with 17, 17. 17 people all got in over the course of last spring and summer. nobody got out until september 11th when the first one we got to poof was rick perry. ten days later we got to

and of course also, the republican senate majority hangs in the balance here. and it's tough to see how senate republicans maintain that majority if the 35 to 40% of these trump voters are feeling disenfranchised from the process and they take a walk. >> okay. but then you have 10 to 15% of the party, maybe more of that. look at those numbers i showed in the exit polls, battlegrounds, ohio, florida, north carolina, these were republican primary voters who say they prefer a third party option than to pick between trump and clinton. >> yeah, trump is a disaster. politics is ultimately about addition, not subtraction. the whole i romney voters and add to them. he's losing romney voters. just look at republican hispanics. there's not tons of hispanics in the republican party. he already has 60% negatives with republican hispanics. it's going to be very tough for any nominee to do better than romney, against hillary clinton. he's going to do worse. >> we ran the numbers using the exit polls from 2012 in ohio and wisconsin, just on the white vote. and assuming all th

and of course also, the republican senate majority hangs in the balance here. and it's tough to see how senate republicans maintain that majority if the 35 to 40% of these trump voters are feeling disenfranchised from the process and they take a walk. >> okay. but then you have 10 to 15% of the party, maybe more of that. look at those numbers i showed in the exit polls, battlegrounds, ohio, florida, north carolina, these were republican primary voters who say they prefer a third party option than to pick between trump and clinton. >> yeah, trump is a disaster. politics is ultimately about addition, not subtraction. the whole idea of trump is not that he's going to take these romney voters and add to them. he's losing romney voters. just look at republican hispanics. there's not tons of hispanics in the republican party. he already has 60% negatives with republican hispanics. it's going to be very tough for any nominee to do better than romney, against hillary clinton. he's going to do worse. >> we ran the numbers using the exit polls from 2012 in ohio and wisco

in addition to people agreeing to meet, we have republican senators, senators who are veteran senators, saying maybe the lame duck. orren hatch, lindsey graham. if you're going to do it in a lame duck, do it now. >> four years from now, if you're in the fourth year of a republican presidency, you don't think the democrats should do whatever it takes to prevent that republican president from appointing a supreme court justice in a presidential year before the election? >> not only do i think they shouldn't do it, they wouldn't do it. whoever is elected president is elected for four years. obama was elected for four years. he filled that duty he had to the american people. he was reelected. he has an obligation to do his job for four years, not three years. senators have an obligation to do their constitutional duty for the time that the person is in. >> do you blame republicans for wanting to do whatever it takes? this is going to change the makeup of the court. they believe this is worth fighting for. do you blame them for doing this? when you have oren hatch, chairman of the judiciary

some say why should senate republicans act any less politically than then senator obama did? >> the fact of the matter is that justice roberts is on the court today. the last time we were in an election year under president reagan, the chief justice was already there. we know that during reagan's election year 93-0 the nominee was approved. this is a time when vice president biden was chairman of the judiciary committee. and we were able to move forward. so we've done this in an election year before. there's no reason why we can't do it now. >> on the senate floor, majority leader mitch mcconnell invoked what he called the biden rule as previous precedent. you talked about when senator biden was chairman of the judiciary committee. take a listen to what then senator biden, chairman of the judiciary committee in 1982, argued about how president george h.w. bush should not name a nominee. listen. >> it would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is under way, and it is, action on a supreme court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign i

and of course also, the republican senate majority hangs in the balance here. and it's tough to see how senate republicans maintain that majority if the 35 to 40% of these trump voters are feeling disenfranchised from the process and they take a walk. >> okay. but then you have 10 to 15% of the party, maybe more of that. look at those numbers i showed in the exit polls, battlegrounds, ohio, florida, north carolina, these were republican primary voters who say they prefer a third party option than to pick between trump and clinton. >> yeah, trump is a disaster. politics is ultimately about the whole idea of trump is not that he's going to take these romney voters and add to them. he's losing romney voters. just look at republican hispanics. there's not tons of hispanics in the republican party. he already has 60% negatives with republican hispanics. it's going to be very tough for any nominee to do better than romney, against hillary clinton. he's going to do worse. >> we ran the numbers using the exit polls from 2012 in ohio and wisconsin, just on the white vot

senate. >> one of your republican senators, mark kirk spoke out this week. he said the senate should vote. listen. >> just man up and cast a vote. the tough thing about these senatorial jobs, you get yes or no votes. your whole job is to either say yes or not and explain why. >> are you confident you'll hold republicans together? >> well, look. mark kirk is a great senator. he's running this year in illinois. i'm confident he'll get re-elected. the schedule in the senate is set by the majority leader. comfortable with letting the american people make the decision by electing the next president who will fill this vacancy next year. >> let me move on. on tuesday, you said you told donald trump he should condemn and discourage violent acts. 24 hours later, he made the statement at riots in the convention. you heard him this morning on the violence as well. are you worried he's not getting your message? >> well, regardless of who the candidate is, i think all of the candidates for president ought to be discouraging that kind of activity. because the people in th

reason to want the republicans to control the senate. they can't defund planned parenthood, they can't repeal obama care. this they can stand up and say we can actually do something. second, this is a way they say of protesting executive overreach by the president. although this is a clear constitutional right and duty of the president to nominate people to the federal judiciary. what's puz slgzling is they all said he's the nominee. we're quite content to have judicial nominations made by mr. trump whose quaufgsslifications are fogy. and it's puzzling to hear mitch mcconnell saying that we must follow the biden rule. a biden rule endorsed by harry reid. the biden rule was he said no confirmations during a political season. when are we not in a political season? it's just not an election year. by what principle do we decide when a president's ability to nominate people becomes progressively obtained? after the midterm elections of the second term of a president? when is it? i don't understand. >> we asked you for questions for the panel.

in addition to the people agreeing to meet, we have republican senators, senators that are veterans senators saying maybe what we should do is do it in the lame duck. orrin hatch, lindsey graham -- >> four years from now if you're in the fourth year of a republican presidency, you don't think the democrats should do whatever it takes to prevent that republican president from appointing a supreme court justice in a presidential year before the election? >> not only do i think they shouldn't do it, they wouldn't do it. whoever is elected president has -- is elected for four years. obama was elected for four years. he filled that duty he had to the american people. he was re-elected. he has an obligation to do his job for four years, not three years. senators have an obligation to do their constitutional duty -- >> do you blame republicans though for wanting to do whatever it takes -- this is going to change the makeup of the court, and they believe this is worth fighting for. do you blame them for doing this? >> absolutely. when you have orrin hatch who was a chairman of the judicial committee

reason to want the republicans to control the senate. they can't defund planned parenthood, they can't repeal obama care. this they can stand up and say we can actually do something. second, this is a of protesting executive overreach by the president. although this is a clear constitutional right and duty of the president to nominate people to the federal judiciary. what's puz szling is they all sd he'll support donald trump if he's the nominee. we're quite content to have judicial nominations made by mr. trump whose quaufglifications a fogy. and it's puzzling to hear mitch mcconnell saying that we must follow the bidenrule. a biden rule endorsed by harry reid. the biden rule was he said no confirmations during a political season. when are we not in a political season? it's just not an election year. by what principle do we decide when a president's ability to nominate people becomes progressivel after the midterm elections of the second term of a president? when is it? i don't understand. >> we asked you for questions for the panel. an

i think he would welcome working with republicans in the house and senate. that the republican establishment, long on dead. >> john cornyn is a ted cruz supporter, we think. the men who ran the last two republican presidential campaigns. stuart stevens and steve schmidt. gentlemen, welcome to you both. stu, prior to last tuesday, you wrote there was still time to stop trump. do you still believe that a week later? >> sure. 40% of the people haven't voted. we got upset in 2000 when they closed the polls in florida, they announced it when the panhandle was still open, 40% was still out there. i think it's going to be difficult for anybody else than donald trump to get to 1237. but there's credible scenarios out there, 40% of the oat vote out there that you could easily have donald trump with 1,000 votes, and ted cruz with 950. we've done this before. this is the ronald reagan strategy in 1976, against a sitting republican president. >> steve, the most expedient way to do this would be to rally and that seems to be something that washington republicans can't bring themselves to do. >> well, loo

so the stakes should even be higher for senator grassley and the other republican senators, why? because as chairman he has one of the most important proceeding committees in the united states senate. this has is been the case for 200 years. 200 years. the senate judiciary committee was established 200 years ago. in 1816 it was one of the original 11 standing committees, decades past, throughout history president martin van buren when he was president, senator ted kennedy, joe biden, they regarded at all costs. so independent in fact past chairman stood firm to face opposition from presidents and senate leadership. their crucial times in history they looked at the judicial committee to do the right thing. during the civil war chairman of illinois authored the 13th amendment to abolish slavery. during the civil war. we know during the period of time there is great turmoil about what should be done. during the early days of this illegal board. in a 289 -- 1889 -- in 1937 of nevada led the committee to stand against franklin roosevelt the chairman was a democrat just like roosevelt

here is republican senator jeff lake. >> i think republicans are fully justified in doing what we're doing. waiting. but if we happen to lose the election, then i think we ought to push him through quickly if we can. >> senator, is jeff lake wrong? >> yeah, i think so. look, barack obama calling judge -- this judge a moderate doesn't make him a moderate. this judge would move the court dramatically to the left. he's enthusiastically supported by moveon.org. i don't think they would be signing up and have all this judge. the principle is the same. whether it's before the election or after the election. the principle is the american people are choosing their next president and their next president should pick this >> so, final question. just to make it clear. you're saying no consider -- no consideration of judge garland by this congress even if hillary clinton wins the election? no consideration by this congress? you're going to stand firm on that even in a lame duck session? >> yeah. i can't imagine that a republican majority in the united states senate would want to confirm in a lam

so senate republicans have done this here. not only have they unconstitutionally changed a president's term from four years to three years, not only are they renouncing their advice and consent rule, not only are they effectively suggesting the constitution be amended to popularly elect supreme court justices, but even more lame are the lengths the republicans went to in order to rationalize their decision." no more excuses. the senate judiciary committee in the senate should do its job. when the president submits a nominee, we should give that nominee a fair and thorough hearing, a fair respectful and thorough hearing, as one republican said over and over again, in full view of the american people and then vote. fair warning to my senate republicans. they say the american people should decide. they will decide. they'll decide in november that the republicans in the senate should do their job. i yield the floor. mr. leahy: will the senator yield for a question? the presiding officer: the senator from vermont. mr. leahy: mr. pr

reason to want the republicans to control the senate. ttey can't defund planned parenthood, they can't repeal obama care. this they can stata up and say we can actually do something. second, this is a way they say of protesting executive overreach by the president. although this is a clear constitutional right and duty of the president to nominate people to the federal judiciary. what's puz slgzling is they all said he'' support donald trump if he's the nominee. we're quite content to have jicial nominations made by mr. trump whose quaufgsslifications are fogy. and it's puzzling to hear mitch follow the biden rule. a biden rule endorsed by harry reid. the biden rule was he said no confirmations during a political season. when are we not in a political season? it's just not an election year. by what principle do we decide when a president's ability to nominate people becomes progressively obtained? after the midterm elections of the second term of a president? when is it? i don't understand. >> we asked you forquestions for the panel. and

by the republican senate majority leader, mitch mcconnell. senator mcconnell, welcome back to "meet the press," sir. >> good morning. glad to be with you. >> i want to start with something you said in 2008 about judicial vacancies. here it is. >> our democratic colleagues continually talk about the so-called thurmond rule under which the senate supposedly stops confirming judges in a presidential election year. it's a seeming obsession with this rule that doesn't exist. it's just an excuse for our colleagues to run out the clock on qualified nominees who are waiting to fill badly-needed vacancies. >> senator mcconnell, i started my interview with harry reid back during the bush years too. essentially you guys have changed places in your position on supreme court vacancies. and it seems to me the only difference is the political party affiliation of the white house. >> well, there was no supreme court vacancy in 2008. that's what we're talking about here, chuck. you have to go back 80 years to find the last time a vacancy on the supreme court

and virtually every senate republican say, mr. president, it's a hopeless cause. don't bother nominating a nominee. we are not going to take that person up. some people went so far to say we won't have a courtesy meeting. so since then, you know, not a lot has changed, although there have been, you know, sort of maneuverings in the background and everyone's sort of gaming out the various scenarios and whether, you know, mitch mcconnell and the rest of the republicans in the senate will have the resolve to blockade whoever president obama ends up nominating. >> play out the scenarios then. what might happen in this process? >> well, you know, i think that, you know, the democrats sort of have a nose under the camel's tent sort of attitude towards this if we can just get a hearing, if we can get -- you know, if we can just take that first step and then we'll go from there. and i think for instance right now you saw last week on wednesday harry reid the minority leader taking a pretty hard run at charles grassley, the chairman of the

the senate under republican leadership can do no less. mr. president, i yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum. the presiding officer: the clerk will call the roll. quorum call: quorum call: a senator: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from connecticut. a senator: thank you, mr. president. i ask that the quorum call be lifted. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: i ask that i be permitted to speak for up to 15 minutes. the presiding officer: without objection. a senator: thank you, mr. president. mr. blumenthal: i'm pleased to be here today to speak again in support of the comprehensive addiction and recovery act which the senate will consider and i hope approve this week. it is a long overdue measure to address the public health hurricane, a crisis that we face in this country every bit as real and threatening as threats there abroad. in fact, i've come today just now from a hearing at the armed services committee where i had the opportunity to question some of our nation's leading military expert

senate. >> one of your republican senators, mark kirk spoke out this week. he said the senate should vote. listen. >> just man up and cast a vote. the tough thing about these senatorial jobs, you get yes or no votes. your whole job is to either say yes or not and explain why. >> are you confident you'll hold republicans together? >> well, look. mark kirk is a great senator. he's running this year in illinois. i'm confident he'll get re-elected. the schedule in the senate is most of my members are comfortable with letting the american people make the decision by electing the next president who will fill this vacancy next year. >> you said on tuesday you told donald trump he should condemn and discourage violent acts. 24 hours later, he made the statement at riots in the convention. are you worried he's not getting your message? >> well, regardless of who the candidate is, i think all of the candidates for president all to be discouraging that kind of activity, because the people in the audience tend to listen to those who are speaking. i think we ought to con

that's the tradeoff that senate republicans are facing. it certainly seems at the moment that they are happy to just kick the can down the road, think that a republican may be elected president, something that has happened. they have put their line in the sand about this nominee. so this is a very interesting ceremony coming up. but the idea that merrick garland will be on the supreme court anytime, perhaps ever, seems remote. >> that's a fair point. dana, you spent time looking at the various contingencies out there. it seems extremely doubtful after all the public comments, since antonin's sudden death, that they are going to change their mind at all. this is going to be a nice ceremony but it probably won't be much more than that. >> that would be an about-face of epic proportions at this point. and talking to the republicans up until the time i came on with you, it doesn't seem like there's any desire to change. in fact, one senior senate republican, who i just spoke with, said that their take on it is that the president knows he has n