WEBVTT - What We Learned from Justice Barrett's First Arguments 0:00:00.560 --> 0:00:05.360 This is Bloomberg Law with June Grasso from Bloomberg Radio 0:00:06.280 --> 0:00:10.760 Judge Spirit Mr Really, if the Court construes a statute 0:00:10.760 --> 0:00:14.480 in a particular way in order to avoid a constitutional question, 0:00:15.000 --> 0:00:18.200 wouldn't Congress be free to come back and say no, no, no, 0:00:18.600 --> 0:00:21.880 that is what we meant, and in this case, for example, 0:00:22.000 --> 0:00:24.680 we did want to rely on the commerce power. Justice 0:00:24.720 --> 0:00:28.440 Amy Coney Barrett was direct when asking questions during her 0:00:28.480 --> 0:00:32.280 first week of Supreme Court oral arguments and perhaps less 0:00:32.280 --> 0:00:36.720 professorial than one might expect from a longtime academic. Of course, 0:00:36.800 --> 0:00:40.000 Barrett is no stranger to oral arguments after her time 0:00:40.040 --> 0:00:42.440 as a judge on the Seventh Circuit and as a 0:00:42.479 --> 0:00:45.839 clerk for the late Justice Anton and Scalia. Court watchers 0:00:45.960 --> 0:00:48.880 learned a little about Barrett from her questioning. With one 0:00:48.920 --> 0:00:53.040 exception joining me is Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson Bloomberg Law. Supreme 0:00:53.040 --> 0:00:57.240 Court reporter Kimberly explain how the first arguments are usually 0:00:57.240 --> 0:00:59.840 a chance for people to see how aggressive a new 0:01:00.040 --> 0:01:03.160 justice will be and the new dynamic on the court, 0:01:03.520 --> 0:01:06.399 and why that didn't happen with Justice Barrett right. So 0:01:06.480 --> 0:01:09.759 typically a new justice often kind of take the backseat 0:01:09.880 --> 0:01:12.720 during their first arguments you kind of lay low at 0:01:12.720 --> 0:01:15.200 the you know, and the hang of being a justice. 0:01:15.319 --> 0:01:19.120 But we have some notable exceptions. In particular justice such 0:01:19.200 --> 0:01:23.160 Mayor and Justice Courses were very vocal in their first sittings, 0:01:23.280 --> 0:01:27.399 and they remained so on the Supreme Court bench for 0:01:27.520 --> 0:01:30.160 Justice Sparrett, those things are a little different because the 0:01:30.200 --> 0:01:33.080 court is hearing arguments remotely and instead of having this 0:01:33.160 --> 0:01:35.560 kind of script for all style or justice just just 0:01:35.760 --> 0:01:38.759 jump in whenever they're ready. The justices are taking turns 0:01:38.800 --> 0:01:41.880 asking questions, and so we don't really know what kind 0:01:41.959 --> 0:01:45.040 of justice or what kind of question or justice Sparrett 0:01:45.080 --> 0:01:48.120 is going to be in fancy actually gets into the courtroom. Also, 0:01:48.160 --> 0:01:52.200 you missed the facial expressions that people who are actually 0:01:52.400 --> 0:01:57.280 in the room can see in body language. That's right, 0:01:57.320 --> 0:01:59.960 and some of the justices are very big on their 0:02:00.000 --> 0:02:02.600 body language. And so the justice that comes to my 0:02:02.680 --> 0:02:04.800 mind it is justice, so you know, you can often 0:02:04.880 --> 0:02:08.120 see exactly what he's thinking about an advocates argument or 0:02:08.160 --> 0:02:11.160 about another justice is questioning right on his face. He 0:02:11.200 --> 0:02:14.200 doesn't take any precautions to really cover that at all. 0:02:14.320 --> 0:02:16.320 And of course we missed that one while on the phone. 0:02:16.840 --> 0:02:21.400 And I remember Justice course a cutting in to correct 0:02:21.440 --> 0:02:25.280 the Chief Justice and then cutting in again to correct 0:02:25.400 --> 0:02:28.920 his correction of the Chief Justice. That's right. And so 0:02:29.000 --> 0:02:30.960 one thing that really stands out for me whenever I 0:02:30.960 --> 0:02:34.240 think about the kind of justice that Justice Courtshiches is 0:02:34.280 --> 0:02:37.200 one of these arguments from his first sitting, where as 0:02:37.240 --> 0:02:40.440 you mentioned, he interrupted the Chief Justice to correct him 0:02:40.440 --> 0:02:43.800 about which highway runs through Montana, and then later on 0:02:43.919 --> 0:02:46.360 in the argument he had to interrupt again to say 0:02:46.360 --> 0:02:48.160 that he had actually been wrong and the Chief Justice 0:02:48.200 --> 0:02:50.680 had been right. That sticks out to me just because 0:02:50.720 --> 0:02:53.519 that's the kind of justice that Justice courses. Has been 0:02:53.600 --> 0:02:56.560 on the bench since, very self assured, willing to interject 0:02:56.639 --> 0:02:59.359 whenever he has a question. And again we didn't get 0:02:59.360 --> 0:03:02.640 to get kind of personality from Justice Sparrett, just because 0:03:02.680 --> 0:03:05.280 of the way that these arguments are taking place. What's 0:03:05.280 --> 0:03:09.480 your impression of her questions generally, Well, she seems to 0:03:09.880 --> 0:03:12.960 be very direct. She's not really showing her cars on 0:03:13.040 --> 0:03:15.679 how she's going to rule in these cases. She is 0:03:15.680 --> 0:03:17.720 showing her cards in the sense that she wants to 0:03:17.760 --> 0:03:20.600 make it clear why she's asking a particular question of 0:03:20.639 --> 0:03:22.800 the advocate. She really wants to make sure that the 0:03:22.840 --> 0:03:25.880 advocate answers her question and has an opportunity to kind 0:03:25.919 --> 0:03:28.200 of address the things that she's been thinking about. At 0:03:28.280 --> 0:03:31.240 least that's the way it seems as an observer. She 0:03:31.400 --> 0:03:34.400 was a law professor for about fifteen years. But does 0:03:34.440 --> 0:03:37.120 she question like a law professor? For example, do we 0:03:37.160 --> 0:03:40.160 hear a lot of hypotheticals? We do not. And so 0:03:40.320 --> 0:03:42.280 one of the other justices on the Court who was 0:03:42.320 --> 0:03:45.640 a law professor is Justice Brier, and he is known 0:03:45.720 --> 0:03:48.800 for his varied, long and involved hypotheticals. But that she's 0:03:48.840 --> 0:03:51.360 not something we've seen from Justice Sparrett so far, and 0:03:51.480 --> 0:03:53.520 not something that we saw from her while she was 0:03:53.640 --> 0:03:55.560 sitting on the Seventh Circuits for a couple of years 0:03:55.600 --> 0:03:58.320 as well. You said she doesn't really tip her hand, 0:03:58.520 --> 0:04:01.040 and I wonder if that's calm men to most new 0:04:01.160 --> 0:04:04.760 justices on the Court. I remember thinking that Justice Kavanaugh 0:04:04.840 --> 0:04:07.600 didn't tip his hand very much during his first term 0:04:07.640 --> 0:04:10.680 on the bench. That's right. So Justice Kavanaugh was more 0:04:10.720 --> 0:04:12.960 along the lines of what we traditionally see from a 0:04:13.000 --> 0:04:15.960 new justice, somebody who kind of hunk back, laid low, 0:04:16.320 --> 0:04:19.080 didn't really to his hands, and we've seen that's really 0:04:19.080 --> 0:04:21.359 how he's been on the bench since then. But you know, 0:04:21.800 --> 0:04:24.320 there's a saying among the justices that it takes five 0:04:24.400 --> 0:04:27.000 years to really settling into being a Spreme Court justice. 0:04:27.000 --> 0:04:30.560 So Justice Kavanaugh is still pretty new. I hadn't heard 0:04:30.600 --> 0:04:33.159 that before. Is there a reason why they settled on five? 0:04:34.360 --> 0:04:36.240 I think five is just a nice round number. I 0:04:36.240 --> 0:04:39.120 think the point is just that it takes some time 0:04:39.200 --> 0:04:41.960 to really get into the rhythm of the court and 0:04:42.000 --> 0:04:45.440 get into the rhythm of hearing cases and writing opinions 0:04:45.520 --> 0:04:47.919 and considering what cases to come before you. It's a 0:04:47.960 --> 0:04:50.279 lot of work for a new justice. Now, there was 0:04:50.360 --> 0:04:53.600 one instance where Barrett may have tipped her hand in 0:04:53.600 --> 0:04:57.440 a case pitting religious freedom against gay rights. Barrett's signaled 0:04:57.480 --> 0:05:01.800 that she might be willing to overturn employ Division versus Smith, 0:05:02.160 --> 0:05:05.719 a thirty year old precedent written by Justice Scalia. What 0:05:05.800 --> 0:05:08.440 would you replace messwith? Would you just want to return 0:05:08.480 --> 0:05:11.240 to Sherbert versus Verner? Yes, she did, And so one 0:05:11.279 --> 0:05:14.560 of the questions that the petitioners specifically asked in this 0:05:14.600 --> 0:05:17.560 case is for the Court to overrule what's really been 0:05:17.600 --> 0:05:21.080 a very unpopular Supreme Court decision, and she seemed open 0:05:21.160 --> 0:05:23.520 to doing that. And of course that's important, not just 0:05:23.600 --> 0:05:26.640 because of the impact it would have on religious freedom, 0:05:26.800 --> 0:05:30.440 but also because of the implications for other precedents that 0:05:30.560 --> 0:05:34.040 she might be open to overruling things like ro versus 0:05:34.080 --> 0:05:37.280 Wade and things on a permanent action and similar more 0:05:37.320 --> 0:05:41.640 controversial issues. I've been talking to Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson Bloomberg Law, 0:05:41.720 --> 0:05:45.200 Supreme Court reporter. President elect Joe Biden has pledged to 0:05:45.240 --> 0:05:47.919 nominate a woman of color to the Supreme Court should 0:05:47.920 --> 0:05:51.359 the opportunity arise, but he's not said anything about his 0:05:51.480 --> 0:05:55.000 choice for Solicitor General, the country's top advocate of the 0:05:55.040 --> 0:05:59.080 Supreme Court, often called the tenth Justice. The office of 0:05:59.080 --> 0:06:01.920 the Solicitor General role argues by far the most High 0:06:01.920 --> 0:06:05.560 Court cases each term and has traditionally been a springboard 0:06:05.600 --> 0:06:09.440 for female and male litigators to build Supreme Court practices. 0:06:09.880 --> 0:06:12.800 But the Supreme Court bar is still largely made up 0:06:12.800 --> 0:06:16.920 of white males, so many female appellate litigators and progressive 0:06:16.960 --> 0:06:20.520 advocates are saying Biden should make diversity a priority in 0:06:20.560 --> 0:06:23.159 picking his solicitor general. And she was a woman for 0:06:23.200 --> 0:06:26.480 the post. I was actually surprised to learn from your 0:06:26.480 --> 0:06:30.680 piece that only one woman was ever confirmed to be 0:06:30.760 --> 0:06:33.760 Solicitor General, and she's sitting on the court right now. 0:06:34.839 --> 0:06:37.799 That's right, there's just Elena Kagan was the first woman 0:06:37.839 --> 0:06:41.279 confirmed to the post Barbara Underwood, who is now the 0:06:41.279 --> 0:06:44.880 Solicitor General of New York Head Circuit and acting role um. 0:06:45.080 --> 0:06:47.560 But an interesting note about Justice Kagan is that her 0:06:47.600 --> 0:06:52.039 first appellate argument came as the Solicitor General arguing on 0:06:52.120 --> 0:06:55.680 behalf of the federal government in citizens. So it was 0:06:55.720 --> 0:06:58.760 a good debut. I guess Biden hasn't, as far as 0:06:58.760 --> 0:07:01.880 I know of an any hints about who we might 0:07:01.880 --> 0:07:04.680 appointed to be solicitor general. So is there like a 0:07:04.760 --> 0:07:10.720 concerted effort to have him appoint a woman as listener general. Well, 0:07:10.760 --> 0:07:13.120 I think one of the things that's driving, uh, this 0:07:13.360 --> 0:07:16.240 push to a point a woman is that what really 0:07:16.280 --> 0:07:19.920 sees that the number of female advocates versus male advocates 0:07:20.040 --> 0:07:23.240 is really abysmal. Uh. It ranges between twelve and twenty 0:07:23.240 --> 0:07:26.040 one percent in recent terms, and it's been very low, 0:07:26.480 --> 0:07:29.280 uh recently under the Trump administration. And part of the 0:07:29.360 --> 0:07:32.680 RAM is the office of the Solicitor General. They argue 0:07:32.760 --> 0:07:35.720 by far more cases than anyone else in the Sucreme Court, 0:07:35.760 --> 0:07:37.960 and so having a woman in that top spot, and 0:07:38.000 --> 0:07:41.840 having more women in that office in general, would raise 0:07:41.920 --> 0:07:44.560 those numbers quite a bit and could go a long 0:07:44.600 --> 0:07:49.120 way to getting some parody among advocates. Is anyone actually 0:07:49.160 --> 0:07:51.400 making a plea to Biden to a point a woman 0:07:51.440 --> 0:07:53.600 a solicitor general. I think they think that it's in 0:07:53.680 --> 0:07:55.960 line with some of the goals that he's talked about. 0:07:56.000 --> 0:07:58.280 So we we see not only that he's looking for 0:07:58.440 --> 0:08:01.320 diversity in the Supreme Court, but in his transition team 0:08:01.320 --> 0:08:03.360 in general. As you look on their web page, and 0:08:03.440 --> 0:08:06.880 they talked a lot about how their transition team are 0:08:06.960 --> 0:08:10.600 really diverse, made up not only of you know, male 0:08:10.760 --> 0:08:14.440 and females, but of different ethnicities, races, uh, And so 0:08:14.560 --> 0:08:18.280 I think they're they're thinking that this is along what 0:08:18.320 --> 0:08:21.400 he's going to be thinking of anyway. So tell us 0:08:21.400 --> 0:08:23.640 about some of the women who are being sort of 0:08:23.680 --> 0:08:27.840 talked up for solicitor General. Well, I think most of 0:08:28.760 --> 0:08:31.200 the people we're seeing are people who have actually had 0:08:31.240 --> 0:08:35.000 some experience in the office serving as assistance to the 0:08:35.080 --> 0:08:38.400 solicitor General. There were a number of women who right 0:08:38.480 --> 0:08:41.960 at the beginning of the Trump administration left and took 0:08:41.960 --> 0:08:45.200 a lot of good experience with them into private practice 0:08:45.320 --> 0:08:50.000 and have been building their resumes there ever since. And uh, 0:08:50.400 --> 0:08:53.000 you know, I think court watchers think that it's probably 0:08:53.040 --> 0:08:55.720 going to be somebody with experience from the Solicitor General's 0:08:55.760 --> 0:08:59.640 Office just because the office has uh don't think the 0:08:59.679 --> 0:09:04.400 little differently under the Trump administration. And so the hope 0:09:04.440 --> 0:09:05.800 is that we'll be able to get back to some 0:09:05.840 --> 0:09:08.960 of the norms under that office under the Biden administration. 0:09:09.480 --> 0:09:12.560 What kind of norms are we talking about that were 0:09:13.080 --> 0:09:19.480 strayed from? I think most notably um this idea of 0:09:19.520 --> 0:09:22.880 trying to jump over the federal courts of appeals and 0:09:22.920 --> 0:09:25.480 get right into the Supreme Court. Not only has the 0:09:25.480 --> 0:09:29.800 Trump administration brought many of those requests more than any 0:09:29.800 --> 0:09:32.640 other administration, but the Supreme Court has been granting a 0:09:32.640 --> 0:09:36.760 lot of those requests. And so we saw even Justice 0:09:36.760 --> 0:09:40.840 so to Mayor right up blistering opinion to her colleagues 0:09:40.840 --> 0:09:44.600 and chiding them for allowing the Solicitor General's Office to 0:09:44.800 --> 0:09:47.640 jump over the federal courts and not allowing the system 0:09:47.679 --> 0:09:50.360 to work the way that it's intended to work. Is 0:09:50.400 --> 0:09:54.280 there one candidate or two candidates whose names sort of 0:09:54.280 --> 0:09:57.520 pop up a lot there are. I would say there 0:09:57.520 --> 0:10:02.199 are about ten kingdodates whose name uh pop up. All 0:10:02.280 --> 0:10:04.760 would be really great. I think some of the front runners, 0:10:04.840 --> 0:10:07.360 or at least one front runner in my mind, is 0:10:07.800 --> 0:10:11.199 a partner at Mayor Brown Nicole's the Harsky she asked 0:10:11.200 --> 0:10:16.080 me on her law firm. Bio mentions that she's argue 0:10:16.160 --> 0:10:19.040 the most cases of any woman in the last decade, 0:10:19.160 --> 0:10:21.800 and she was in the Solicitor General's office for quite 0:10:21.800 --> 0:10:24.440 a long time, uh, and so she has the experience. 0:10:24.480 --> 0:10:27.440 I think that people are looking uh for the newest 0:10:27.720 --> 0:10:31.160 SG to bring to the office. Does the Attorney General 0:10:31.240 --> 0:10:33.920 have a lot of say usually in who the solicitor 0:10:34.000 --> 0:10:37.959 general is? Yes, and so we'll probably see the Biden 0:10:38.000 --> 0:10:42.480 administration UM try to pick their attorney general and their 0:10:42.520 --> 0:10:45.920 deputy Attorney general before moving on to the solicitor general 0:10:46.040 --> 0:10:48.640 pick um. Right now in the office was being headed 0:10:48.679 --> 0:10:51.720 by an acting Solicitor General UM. But I would expect 0:10:51.840 --> 0:10:54.640 that to change, and first you know, staff attorney in 0:10:54.640 --> 0:10:58.599 the office to take over acting while the Biden administration 0:10:59.360 --> 0:11:02.880 exist too for the top federal government lawyer in the 0:11:02.960 --> 0:11:07.760 Supreme Court. Another factor is that there have been very 0:11:07.880 --> 0:11:12.600 few solicitor generals of color over the years, there really 0:11:12.640 --> 0:11:18.080 has only been a handful. Most notably is uh Lader 0:11:18.200 --> 0:11:22.440 Justice third Good Marshal who was Solicitor General before he 0:11:23.160 --> 0:11:25.920 sat on the bench. Um. But definitely, you know, there 0:11:25.960 --> 0:11:29.640 are a number of candidates who are both female and 0:11:29.800 --> 0:11:32.360 who are attorneys of color who would fit the bill. 0:11:32.480 --> 0:11:36.600 So uh, you know, we could see Joe Biden kind 0:11:36.600 --> 0:11:39.320 of killed two birds with one stone. I want to 0:11:39.360 --> 0:11:43.040 turn for a moment to just as Alido. Justice Alito 0:11:43.160 --> 0:11:47.720 spoke to the Federalist Society and his remarks got a 0:11:47.720 --> 0:11:51.160 lot of attention, much of it negative attention. Can you 0:11:51.200 --> 0:11:52.960 tell us a little bit about what he said that 0:11:53.040 --> 0:11:57.120 drew attention? Well, I think for me, the thing that 0:11:57.160 --> 0:11:59.520 really when I was watching the remarks that really stuck 0:11:59.520 --> 0:12:02.040 out to me both as he was talking about the 0:12:02.120 --> 0:12:05.400 COVID restrictions and he said that they had brought upon 0:12:05.640 --> 0:12:09.600 the most limitations on our civil rights than we've ever 0:12:09.640 --> 0:12:13.400 seen before. And he went into specifics. He talked about religion, 0:12:13.800 --> 0:12:17.360 he talked about free speech, he talked about gun rights. 0:12:17.880 --> 0:12:20.240 All of these things he said were under attacks under 0:12:20.440 --> 0:12:23.959 the under the COVID crisis. And we just to point 0:12:23.960 --> 0:12:27.480 out that he is and along with Clarence Thomas, is 0:12:27.760 --> 0:12:31.760 one of the most consistent conservative votes on the Court. 0:12:32.360 --> 0:12:35.200 He certainly is so. He's an appointee of George bush 0:12:35.640 --> 0:12:39.920 Um and has consistently been on the conservative side of issues. 0:12:40.160 --> 0:12:43.160 We've actually seen him a calling for certain cases to 0:12:43.200 --> 0:12:44.760 be brought in front of the Court so the court 0:12:44.840 --> 0:12:49.560 can overturn longstanding precedent. So it's not as if we 0:12:49.600 --> 0:12:53.760 didn't already know that Justice Alito was conservative. Um, So 0:12:53.800 --> 0:12:56.800 it was something to see when he was talking so 0:12:56.920 --> 0:13:01.000 forcefully about issues that seemed likely to before the court. 0:13:01.360 --> 0:13:05.080 UH sometimes do thanks for being on the Bloomberg Laws show, Kimberly, 0:13:05.480 --> 0:13:11.120 that's Bloomberg Law. Supreme Court reporter Kimberly Strawbridge Robinson. The 0:13:11.160 --> 0:13:14.160 stakes and the Georgia Senate runoffs in January, it couldn't 0:13:14.160 --> 0:13:17.680 be much higher. Control of the U. S. Senate. Republican 0:13:17.760 --> 0:13:21.200 senators David Purdue and Kelly Loffler are facing off against 0:13:21.240 --> 0:13:26.360 Democratic challengers John Ossoff and Raphael Warnuck. With Republicans holding 0:13:26.360 --> 0:13:29.720 a fifty to forty eight seat advantage following the general election, 0:13:29.960 --> 0:13:32.440 the GOP could have as many as fifty two seats 0:13:32.440 --> 0:13:35.559 in the next Congress. While Democrats are trying for an 0:13:35.600 --> 0:13:39.240 even split, which would give Vice President elect Kamala Harris 0:13:39.280 --> 0:13:42.440 the tie breaking vote. So what are the strategies of 0:13:42.440 --> 0:13:45.600 the candidates and their parties? Joining me as Kyle Triggs, 0:13:45.679 --> 0:13:49.440 Dad Politics editor a Bloomberg Government Kyle. They say turnout 0:13:49.600 --> 0:13:52.440 is the key in these runoffs. What are each party's 0:13:52.480 --> 0:13:57.040 prospects of getting their voters out well the birds in 0:13:57.440 --> 0:14:01.880 male voting, I think the benefit Democrats, who historically have 0:14:01.960 --> 0:14:05.880 done terribly in runoffs in Georgia. I'm not sure they've 0:14:05.920 --> 0:14:09.199 ever won one for a federal rate, but the fact 0:14:09.200 --> 0:14:12.640 that they can get their voters to either registered to 0:14:12.720 --> 0:14:15.640 vote and then to vote early or vote by mail 0:14:16.520 --> 0:14:20.880 before January five, I think in the big advantage for them, 0:14:20.920 --> 0:14:23.920 Whereas in the past getting all their voters to turn 0:14:23.960 --> 0:14:29.760 out on a specific day has proved not successful. UM. 0:14:29.840 --> 0:14:33.880 So the Republicans go into this with the advantage because 0:14:33.880 --> 0:14:36.880 their voters are more likely to turn out at odd 0:14:36.920 --> 0:14:41.000 times elections. The Democrats because of the pandemic and everything 0:14:41.000 --> 0:14:43.320 that's done on this year, UM and all the male 0:14:43.400 --> 0:14:47.240 voting that we saw in the November three elections. UM, 0:14:47.240 --> 0:14:49.640 it looks like this is a toss up brakes because 0:14:49.680 --> 0:14:53.560 of that. Has there been any analysis don about why 0:14:53.920 --> 0:14:57.800 Republicans have won these runoffs in Georgia, why their voters 0:14:57.840 --> 0:15:00.280 seem more willing to come out. I'm not sure that 0:15:00.320 --> 0:15:03.560 there has. I mean, obviously, the Democratic Coalition relies on 0:15:03.680 --> 0:15:07.120 voters who don't turn out as often as Republican voters do. 0:15:07.240 --> 0:15:10.200 And it's sort of as simple as that, UM and 0:15:10.280 --> 0:15:12.840 run off to putting place sort of to help the 0:15:12.880 --> 0:15:17.160 majority party. And so that's kind of the basis of it. 0:15:17.600 --> 0:15:23.440 The GOP, you have Perdue and Loffler aligned with President Trump, 0:15:23.720 --> 0:15:28.480 including aligned on obviously on his claims that the election 0:15:28.680 --> 0:15:32.560 is rigged. Well, it helped them or hurt them that 0:15:32.680 --> 0:15:36.960 by the time this runoff takes place, Biden will most 0:15:37.000 --> 0:15:40.000 likely be declared the winner by the Electoral College. So 0:15:40.080 --> 0:15:45.000 how does that affect the GOP voters. Well, I think 0:15:45.560 --> 0:15:50.160 the fact that more Republicans haven't come out to congratulate 0:15:50.360 --> 0:15:53.640 President elect Joe Biden or even recognize that he is 0:15:53.680 --> 0:15:57.480 the president elect. I think it's directly related to their 0:15:57.520 --> 0:16:01.920 turnout hope in Georgia. UM, they want Trump based to 0:16:02.000 --> 0:16:04.880 be angry and to think they got robbed and to 0:16:04.960 --> 0:16:09.080 take it out at the ballot box, frankly. And so 0:16:09.560 --> 0:16:11.920 that is why you're seeing them a line with Trump 0:16:12.400 --> 0:16:16.240 having said that they also have to gin up turn 0:16:16.280 --> 0:16:20.240 out now. UM, And so you know you'll see Leffler 0:16:20.720 --> 0:16:23.880 saying Republican parties relying on us to not only hold 0:16:23.880 --> 0:16:26.200 the Senate, but to save the country. You know, they're 0:16:26.200 --> 0:16:29.480 putting it in really big terms. But you know, given 0:16:29.520 --> 0:16:32.120 the way the math is, Republicans have fifty seats in 0:16:32.160 --> 0:16:36.640 the Senate right now, Democrats have and so that sort 0:16:36.640 --> 0:16:38.640 of sets up a quandary for Republicans who want to 0:16:38.640 --> 0:16:40.640 be able to express to their base, you know, the 0:16:40.760 --> 0:16:43.840 urgency of this vote. They want to say Democrats would 0:16:44.200 --> 0:16:46.760 take control of the Senate by winning both seats. But 0:16:46.800 --> 0:16:48.240 when you say that, you have to con see that 0:16:48.320 --> 0:16:51.960 President Trump has lost. And so they're struggling that. You know, 0:16:52.040 --> 0:16:55.600 they're on this weird line right now of saying President 0:16:55.600 --> 0:16:58.160 Trump hasn't lost yet and yet sort of having to 0:16:58.280 --> 0:17:01.920 concede that he has lost that they can um signify 0:17:02.000 --> 0:17:05.160 to their voters what the stakes are. Then if Democrats limbos, 0:17:05.200 --> 0:17:08.159 they will control the Senate, Chuck Schumer will control what 0:17:08.280 --> 0:17:11.120 bills come to the floor, UM, and the Republicans were 0:17:11.480 --> 0:17:15.920 the Democratic you know, radical agenda will take over. President 0:17:15.960 --> 0:17:21.959 Trump is notoriously unpredictable. What could or might President Trump 0:17:22.000 --> 0:17:25.359 do about Georgia? I mean, might he go down there 0:17:25.480 --> 0:17:28.199 and might he tweet about it? Or is he just 0:17:28.280 --> 0:17:31.040 not interested in it at this point? Yeah, it seems 0:17:31.080 --> 0:17:35.240 his interests are very much elsewhere, um, centered more on himself. 0:17:35.880 --> 0:17:39.119 Having said that Mike Pants is heading there. There is 0:17:39.160 --> 0:17:43.640 a huge Republican fundraising operation being run by Karl Rove 0:17:44.560 --> 0:17:48.120 which is separate from Trump. UM. But I'm not sure 0:17:48.119 --> 0:17:50.880 if we will see Trump his I think the White 0:17:50.880 --> 0:17:53.679 House said, you know it's you know, it fits in 0:17:53.760 --> 0:17:56.320 his schedule, he might go down there. That tells me 0:17:56.400 --> 0:17:58.639 he's probably not going to go down there. But we 0:17:58.680 --> 0:18:01.400 do know how much he enjoys rallies, and if there's 0:18:01.400 --> 0:18:04.680 an opportunity to get down there um and have supporters, 0:18:04.760 --> 0:18:08.600 you know, be behind him and and perhaps get a 0:18:08.600 --> 0:18:11.240 couple of wins before he leaves office, you know, maybe 0:18:11.280 --> 0:18:14.119 we will see him down there. Two things you mentioned 0:18:14.200 --> 0:18:17.800 bring up questions for me. First, bringing outsiders Senator Marco 0:18:17.960 --> 0:18:21.840 Rubio was down there and a save our Majority rally. 0:18:22.080 --> 0:18:26.119 Do Georgians really care that much about outsiders coming in 0:18:26.240 --> 0:18:30.520 and telling them what to do. UM. Not. You know, 0:18:31.320 --> 0:18:34.800 I think just generally speaking, uh, you know, having surrogates 0:18:34.840 --> 0:18:37.840 like that come to the trail probably doesn't do a lot. 0:18:38.160 --> 0:18:41.000 But you know, I think Marco Rubio was there for 0:18:41.040 --> 0:18:46.520 a specific reason, UM, specifically to highlight Republican rhetoric that 0:18:46.960 --> 0:18:50.240 you know, Democrats support a socialist agenda. UM. And we 0:18:50.280 --> 0:18:53.440 saw that really take hold in Miami Dade County and 0:18:53.600 --> 0:18:58.120 Marco Rubio's home state of Florida, were um. Trump arly 0:18:58.200 --> 0:19:02.680 overperformed comp to what he did in while Biden got 0:19:02.680 --> 0:19:06.040 basically the same amount of vot Hillary Clinton, and it 0:19:06.240 --> 0:19:09.560 led to Democrats losing two House peeps down there. And 0:19:09.640 --> 0:19:12.719 so we're going to see Republicans using that line a 0:19:12.760 --> 0:19:15.040 lot in this election, UM, and then for the next 0:19:15.080 --> 0:19:17.600 two years as well. No matter what happens in George. 0:19:17.880 --> 0:19:20.640 There was a lot of outside money poured into some 0:19:20.720 --> 0:19:24.920 Senate races, for example in South Carolina where Lindsay Graham. 0:19:25.000 --> 0:19:27.879 Eventually one are we likely to see a lot of 0:19:28.000 --> 0:19:32.480 outside money being poured in here to by campaign ads 0:19:32.560 --> 0:19:35.800 and the like. Oh yeah, I believe we've already seen 0:19:36.160 --> 0:19:38.680 more than a hundred and twenty million dollars in TV 0:19:38.880 --> 0:19:42.840 time be booked. The Democratic candidates have both reportedly brought 0:19:42.920 --> 0:19:46.679 in about forty million dollars since the election. Um, you know, 0:19:46.720 --> 0:19:50.120 the Democrats around the country, Uh, as soon as they 0:19:50.119 --> 0:19:54.040 saw Joe Biden um was winning or about you know, 0:19:54.080 --> 0:19:56.800 about to win, or what's the race was called. Uh, 0:19:57.000 --> 0:20:00.119 it looks like their attention immediately turned to George just 0:20:00.920 --> 0:20:03.280 to try to bring along the Senate with him and 0:20:03.640 --> 0:20:07.320 help him get his agenda across. So money is pouring in, 0:20:08.000 --> 0:20:11.000 you know, in states like South Carolina where Lindsay Graham 0:20:11.240 --> 0:20:14.000 obviously was reelected. Um, I think he was reelected by 0:20:14.040 --> 0:20:16.480 ten points. And um, you know, his opponent was the 0:20:16.520 --> 0:20:19.120 first candidate ever to raise more than a million dollars. 0:20:20.000 --> 0:20:23.440 So in deep red states we saw fundraising not really 0:20:23.440 --> 0:20:26.639 helps Democrats that much. Mitch McConnell's challenger raised you know, 0:20:26.680 --> 0:20:29.240 something like ninety million dollars and she lost by double 0:20:29.240 --> 0:20:32.480 digits as well. Um, but Georgia is a battleground state now, 0:20:32.560 --> 0:20:35.480 and so the money and the message that the money 0:20:35.520 --> 0:20:38.119 is going to be paying for um, could really make 0:20:38.160 --> 0:20:42.280 a difference. Here. Are we likely to see negative campaigning 0:20:42.840 --> 0:20:47.679 attack ads? Perhaps? Yeah, there's plenty of attack ads flying 0:20:47.800 --> 0:20:51.840 right now there. So you know the there's two different races. 0:20:51.880 --> 0:20:55.159 Of course. Raphael Warnock is challenging Kelly Lessler, who's the 0:20:55.200 --> 0:20:58.439 appointed senator UM, and they're running for to fill the 0:20:58.480 --> 0:21:02.359 final two years UM of Johnny isaac Le term he 0:21:02.800 --> 0:21:06.000 resigned at the beginning of the year. UM. So there's 0:21:06.040 --> 0:21:09.760 ads being run against Rossael Warrener, who's UM a longtime 0:21:09.760 --> 0:21:12.240 senior pastorate at the User of Baptist Church in Atlanta, 0:21:12.320 --> 0:21:15.840 which was Martin Luther King Jr's congregation. UM. But they're 0:21:16.040 --> 0:21:18.200 the ads are criticizing him for speaking up to the 0:21:18.240 --> 0:21:22.200 support of Jeremiah Wright, who was President Obama's controversial pastor 0:21:22.440 --> 0:21:26.159 in Chicago. UM, and then for even for working at 0:21:26.160 --> 0:21:28.800 a church twenty five years ago UM in New York. 0:21:28.840 --> 0:21:31.520 I believe UM that had invited to del Castro to 0:21:31.560 --> 0:21:35.840 speak UM. So they're they're attacking him for you know, 0:21:35.880 --> 0:21:38.920 things like that. UM. And then John off Left, the 0:21:38.920 --> 0:21:43.000 other Democrat who's challenging David Perdue, the Republican first term senator. 0:21:43.280 --> 0:21:46.840 I think they put him his picture of next to Bernie's, 0:21:46.960 --> 0:21:50.600 Nancy Pelosi's AOCS and Chuck Schumer's you know, with the 0:21:50.640 --> 0:21:54.200 big block letters, radical agenda, So you know those types 0:21:54.240 --> 0:21:56.719 of ads, and then it's it's going both ways as well. Um. 0:21:56.760 --> 0:22:00.560 Democrats are really hitting David Perdue and Kelly Lee Leffler 0:22:01.040 --> 0:22:06.000 um for the stock sales they made shortly after the 0:22:06.080 --> 0:22:09.399 Senate coronavirus briefing in January. So you're seeing that in 0:22:09.440 --> 0:22:13.960 both races. So looking at Kelly Loffler and I'm wondering, 0:22:14.359 --> 0:22:18.879 does she benefit from being sort of tied here to 0:22:19.400 --> 0:22:23.119 Purdue or we're going to see more of the I 0:22:23.160 --> 0:22:25.000 think one of the ads was like rich, out of 0:22:25.040 --> 0:22:29.119 touch white folks. Both of them seem like the same 0:22:29.240 --> 0:22:33.240 kind of candidate in certain ways. Does she benefit or 0:22:33.359 --> 0:22:37.120 is it a detriment to her to be tied to Purdue. Well, 0:22:37.119 --> 0:22:39.639 that's a good question. You know, as a as a woman, 0:22:39.680 --> 0:22:43.360 you would think she might have a better chance of 0:22:44.160 --> 0:22:47.680 appealing to some suburban Republican women who maybe had been 0:22:47.680 --> 0:22:50.840 turned off by Trump but would like to support a 0:22:50.840 --> 0:22:55.040 Republican down balance. Um, So you know, it's possible that 0:22:55.160 --> 0:22:59.000 being tied to Purdue, you know, may hurt that advantage 0:22:59.040 --> 0:23:01.199