been watching the second day of
questioning of amy coney barrett
the nominee that president trump has put
forward to be the next associate justice
of the united states supreme court we
are going to continue
monitoring that hearing we'll bring you
some more but we do want to give you a
little bit of
taste of what the five is thinking uh we
have everybody here today kennedy juan
jesse and greg gutfeld is here um
you know i do want to just jump in right
here greg and play a little sound from
earlier
from senator klobuchar of minnesota
global
if we could do maybe you know i just
felt like it was
pretty aggressive okay and that's just
fine and i think that
judge barrett handled it handled it well
let's play sought number three
and get greg's thoughts overall and on
this particular sound
did you have then a general
understanding that
one of the president's campaign promises
was to repeal the affordable care act
when you were nominated
um i as i said before i'm aware that the
president
opposes the affordable care act well i
know you're aware now but were you aware
back then
well when you were nominated
well senator klobuchar i think that
the republicans have kind of made that
clear it's just been part of the book
public discourse okay but it just it
then is the answer yes then
that you're welcome all these questions
you're you're
suggesting that i have animus or that i
cut a deal with the president
and i was very clear yesterday that that
isn't what happened
all right greg thoughts well i i mean
the one thing that i
i don't like about these hearings in
general is that
you learn about a person in in how they
wield their power when they have it
like if they have this authority to
treat you like crap
and they do then they're a terrible
person but if you have the authority to
to to hammer somebody but you do it with
some kind of grace that's different
and it seems to me watching uh klobuchar
and watching kamala harris these are
people that
they just come off smaller and they come
off petty they're like mean girls
and they're just jealous because this
person happens to be smarter and more
successful than they are that's that's
the impression i get when i
when i watch this um i think so far my
impression is that this
this this is one tough cookie and i i
i'm assuming like which this to her is
like a day off
like you know she's got seven kids and
you know it's like you know what i think
for fun i'll go stick around in a senate
hearing and let these
bozos bother me she's not above the law
but she's definitely above the fray
when it comes to watching her kind of
like she's
so relaxed i didn't like the fact that
when she was asked about
puppies she deflected to chinchillas
answer the damn question it's about
puppies not chinchillas
but lastly i want to i think she's she's
got the perfect
you guys are so silly face when she's
looking while people are talking you can
just see it on her face and that is
pretty impressive
she's playing chess and they're playing
kerplunk
but my last point is as a viewer
watching this i always feel like i'm in
line
at tsa and you're watching that
performative theater
of the tsa agents like searching forever
for a little
on a little old lady in a wheelchair you
know she's getting through
you know she's no threat but she's gonna
get through but they have to do this
performative karaoke
and everybody in line has to sit and
watch it that's what this is we know
she's going to get in
she's doing a great job they're not
going to get they're not going to get
her on anything but yet we have to do it
having said that i have been wrong about
people not wanting to watch this because
the ratings are insane
and i thought that no one would be
interested so i was wrong i do think
she's just so compelling that people
really wanted to watch it can i play for
you sought number six jesse
this is the one where um senator durbin
is pressing her
on whether the president has the right
to delay an election
does the constitution give the president
of the united states the authority
listen closely to what she asked you to
unilaterally delay
a general election under any
circumstances you didn't want to give
off the cuff
answers like a pundit but rather
approach matters
with an open mind i've given that
response to every hypothetical that i've
been asked in the hearings and as i
said yesterday i do that regardless
whether it's easy or hard i don't do
that to try to
whether the question i mean would be
easy or hard i don't try to do that to
signal it but i do that because it would
be inappropriate for me to make a
comment and i don't think i've
answered any legal hypotheticals in
keeping with the justice ginsburg rule
i mean she's just steady she answers
like just a steady hitter
she should have pulled the ginsburg rule
when she was asked about puppies
i would love that hey i don't want to
comment about puppies that might come
before the court
i hate to agree with juan but i have to
he made an excellent point the other day
i think it's for the last 30 years now
these nominees come up
and they're not going to say anything
about past cases
they're not going to say anything about
future litigation
and that's what the liberal justices
have done that's what all the justices
have done
so to watch these senators that don't
have the sharp of an intellect try to
pin this woman down who's brilliant
on these cases it's it's almost like
sport
watching her deflect some of these
senators the way they have and
some of these senators we talked about
who yesterday we don't want to go name
names again
but you can tell the people that have
lost their fastball and you can tell
others like like a durbin or a blue
menthol or
coons who are a little bit sharper with
their questioning but she's going to
sail through
no one's laid a glove on her and
according to the latest monmouth poll
a large portion of the country now
plurality want her confirmed
so if she was asked i think about
obamacare do we have the jenga
sound bite dana i would like to have a
great line by her as someone that plays
jenga
with my daughters this is a perfect
answer for how she would handle
obamacare if we don't have it the basic
answer is
the mandate may be able to come out but
it doesn't mean the entire
jenga castle falls down that's actually
kind of a conservative judicial
philosophy because it's judicial
restraint
you let the legislators legislate and
you don't overreach and i think a lot of
people
felt good about that on i think both
sides of the aisle because right now it
does look like
obamacare is such a disaster that
they're going to have to go back
and fix it ted cruz said it's raised
premiums for the average family
seven thousand dollars and insurance
companies are getting paid
hundreds and millions of dollars in
subsidies and it is ironic that some of
these centers ran
for president in the primary promising
to eradicate obamacare they want
to get rid of it and they want medicare
for all and now they're begging amy
coney barrett to keep it there it
doesn't make a lot of sense can i say
something that also
what you'll see is she'll get on the
court um right now the democrats really
want this issue
of several ability not to be included
right the jenga example was a very good
one
because of what you just said in terms
of judicial restraint but the democrats
want you to believe right that the whole
thing is going to fall
again but but then after the election
when she's on
the court if she says that the opposite
then that's what they're going to want
so they want one thing
here for politics but they would rather
have the opposite in reality
um kamala harris uh the former
former excuse me senator she's now
running for vice president
she's in the building but she didn't
come to the hearing room because she was
protesting kennedy the way that the
hearing was being conducted in terms of
covid protocols but how do you think she
did
in this questioning today i don't think
that she has come off particularly well
against
amy coney barrett and she has the kind
of background the prosecutorial
background
and especially as an attorney general
that she should be able to use more
tools
at her disposal and do a better job of
appealing to
the base and independent voters and
people who might have an issue with the
timing of this nomination
and instead i think she has come off
like she has during her lower points
during the debate and to jessie's point
she was one of those people who was
using the aca schtick
which you can see right through you know
exactly what each one of these senators
are doing
with you know this fallacious anecdotal
evidence trying to
show the worst case scenarios from their
state she was the one who not only
signed on as a co-sponsor for medicare
for all
she also proposed her own socialized
health care system which was running for
president
that as we've talked about is one of the
great undoings of her
campaign and she also talked about
completely demolishing
private health insurance so you know
here she is appealing to
save the aca as though acb is going to
be the one
uh to bring a sledgehammer to the law
single-handedly
but at the same time she could she could
do
the same sort of professorial job of
taking apart her arguments and and
twisting her words around in a way that
judge barrett would have to answer and
and i don't think she's done that
effectively
juan is there anything that has not come
up in these hearings that you wish had
is there something that she hasn't
answered that you think would have been
useful to for americans to hear mass
surveillance well i mean i
you know it's just so i'm repeating
myself jesse picked up on this that i
think it's both democrats and republican
nominees
basically don't answer questions but the
democrats
in this iteration have tried to say wait
a second hold on
there are people who have answered
questions and today in specific
what you saw was they said listen in the
griswold case which has to do with
contraception
chief justice roberts said that case was
properly decided
and of course you know for people who
don't know that case has lots to do with
privacy rights that then extend into
issues like roe v
wade so she says oh you know what
i can't answer that and so what you get
is senators like blumenthal
but also coons and others saying well
wait a second other
justices now sitting on the court did in
fact respond to us
that this case was properly decided
she wouldn't do it and i thought that
was disappointing i wish that she would
at least say yeah
of course that's properly decided the
only cases that she says were properly
decided
go back to the right of marbury the
right of the court to
interpret the constitution and secondly
brown the board of education with regard
to
uh school segregation yes that extends
from that but you know to me the the big
point here is look
we're playing a game in which we know
that if you look at
justice thomas justice scalia justice
alito
that every time an obama type of
legislation or law came before them they
said no
they're just like red team blue team no
and the republicans
are rushing this through because they
know she'll be a fourth vote and when we
think about something like
the affordable care act we know that
in fact president trump has said he
wants it undone
he has offered no replacement and he
thinks that she's going to be
another vote to absolutely undo the can
we play a little bit of sound from that
so
greg this is her talking about the
affordable care act in her position
i have certainly no agenda i'm not on a
mission i'm not hostile to the aca
at all and if i were on the court
and if a case involving the aca came
before me
i would approach it with an open mind
just like i do
every case and go through the process
that we've just discussed
can you i mean i don't know if you can
ask for more than that also i mean i
reject the idea that because you don't
like something
that makes you hostile to it we are
actually accepting the language
and the rhetoric of the left that
somehow that we've introduced this
monstrosity of a social program and
we're all supposed to say yeah it's here
with us for life
no we know there are problems with it
that doesn't make us hostile that just
makes us you know
human beings with brains the bigger
thing that i have about this whole
process is that you have a lot of
liberal left-wing women are using things
like this
an abortion to portray this wildly
successful female is somehow a slave to
patriarchy
comparing her to the handmaid's tale
dressing up like the handmaid's tale
she's
super religious so she must be you know
she must be subservient to men
meanwhile they peroni or whatever her
name is i can't remember
no no accuses her if she asks her
if she ever committed sexual assault
right
i think i think it's something that
hirono asks every single nod
i get it i understand but if you are
making the case
that that you know men persecute women
and you have to make this case in the in
the interests of equality
to ask that woman that question the
interest of equality is purely absurd
it's absolutely absurd you have her
family sitting there i don't know if
they were there at that time
before to ask that question in the
interest of quote equality
is a farce and so the irony of of her of
being
uh saying that she is subservient to men
she's in fact being treated worse by
women
than by men i don't think anybody brings
up the fact that she's
a woman with all these kids i mean we
have people on the court
who have families and children but i
think conservatives
like saying oh she's a she's just a
woman on twitter she's a feminist
feminists are all no directed over here
saying she cannot be a good mother
if she's working for i think that's
absurd of course i think i think from
all indications she's a great mother i
just don't think it's
really relevant to what we're doing here
which is we're confirming someone to a
lifetime position on the court this
woman says
no one's above the law kennedy no one's
above the law so they say
if you're the the member of the
democratic member of the committee you
say well okay
what about president trump pardoning
himself and then she says well i can't
speak to that because i've
been litigated you think to yourself
wait a second didn't you just say no
one's above the law that includes the
president in our democracy
and yet she plays a game in which she
says oh i can't speak them i mean at
that point you get frustrated i want to
play one
additional piece of sound this is
thought number two because i do think
that especially if you're a young
woman or any girls watching here tonight
here
is her talking about herself how she
sees herself take a listen
i hope that you aren't suggesting that i
don't have my own mind or that
i couldn't think independently or that i
would just decide like well let me see
what justice scalia has said about this
in the past because i assure you i have
my own mind
um but everything that he said
um is not necessarily what i would agree
with or what i would do
if i were justice barrett that was
justice scalia so i share his philosophy
but i've never said that i would always
reach the same
outcome as he did jesse last word it's
just quite insulting for
several democrat senators to constantly
say oh well you must agree with scalia
and
like she's not an independent thinker an
independent woman i think she handled it
brilliantly
and to juan's point she's being put here
because trump
won the election and she's not there to
knock down democratic legislation she's
there to interpret
the law as written in the constitution
and that's what the democrats are afraid
of
because this was mentioned they analyzed
how she ruled in
four fourth amendment issues illegal
search and seizure
and she came down equally on the side of
the defendant
on the side of the government she didn't
try to broaden the scope of the fourth
amendment she didn't try to narrow it
and that's
what originalists do they interpret the
law as written and i think that should
give everybody
a really strong feeling about how she'll
rule going forward
all right