Herschel Walker: Dems pushing reparations are ‘pandering for a vote’

on Oct10
by | Comments Off on Herschel Walker: Dems pushing reparations are ‘pandering for a vote’ |

This is a rush transcript from “The Story with Martha MacCallum” October 1, 2020. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

MARTHA MACCALLUM, FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Are you ready for it? I think we all are. Thank you, Bret. Good to see you tonight. Good evening everybody. Good evening. So we’ve got 33 days ago and America will have a chance to make a very stark choice between two very different candidates deciding on what are the four next years are going to look like in this country.

What would four more years of President Trump looks like versus a new term under Biden and Harris. There’s a lot of noise out there. There’s a lot of emotion, rousing issues out there but these are actually the top five issues that people say they do care about in when they go to vote.

The economy, healthcare, Supreme Court, coronavirus and violent crime. And we begin tonight with the issue of race in America which is 8th on that list, came in at 52 percent so an important issue but it does have tentacles that extend to the economy, to healthcare, to crime.

All of those in the top five so we start this evening with a story out of California that could be a sign of things to come. A historic bill to consider reparations for black Americans to pay the debt of slavery, the first of its kind in any state in the country and it was signed yesterday by Governor Gavin Newsom.

It will begin to grapple with the question of how would you pay reparations and who would be entitled to them since the last living slave in America died in the 1970s. And California by the way, began its existence in 1850 as a free state. Here’s Governor Newsom.


GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM (R-CA): This is not just about California. This is about making an impact and a dent down across the rest of the country.

MACCALLUM: So at least three other places in the country have already taken up reparations on the local level. Asheville, North Carolina. Providence, Rhode Island has a plan and Evanston, Illinois where what they’re going to do is try to repay people for the sins of slavery with tax revenue from newly legal marijuana sales.


MACCALLUM: Reparations also got attention as you may remember this summer during the riots when some Black Lives Matter supporters claimed that the rioting and the looting and the burning of businesses what is actually a form of repayment.


ARIEL ATKINS, BLM CHICAGO ORGANIZER: So I don’t care if somebody decides to loot a Gucci or a Macys or a Nike because that makes sure that person eats.

That makes sure that that person has clothes. Not only that, that’s reparation. That is a reparation. Anything they want to take, take it because these businesses have insurance. They’re going to get their money back. My people aren’t getting anything.


MACCALLUM: So it may seem like a narrow issue but view points on it extend to the larger way that each side sees the road towards equality and leveling the playing field which is discussed a lot so President Trump has said that it is “an interesting debate” but he says he doesn’t see it happening. No.

Much earlier in his career than freshman senator Joe Biden said this, “I don’t feel responsible for the sins of my father and grandfather. I feel responsible for what the situation is today and I’ll be damned if I feel responsible to pay for what happened 300 years ago.” So here’s a look at what he said more recently, what his running mate has said and how the top Republican in the Senate use this issue.


JOE BIDEN (D), PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE: If in fact there are ways in which to get direct payments for reparations, I want to see it but why are we waiting around for the study.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: If you’re elected president, would you sign that bill if it came across your desk?

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS (D-CA): When I am elected president, I will sign it.

SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY): I don’t think reparations for something that happened 150 years ago for which none of us currently living are responsible is a good idea.


MACCALLUM: So the whole issue of equity, equality and increasing that across the country. I want to discuss that now with former NFL player Herschel Walker. Good to have you with us tonight Herschel. Thank you for being here.


MACCALLUM: So you just listened to all of that. You know the woman, the Black Lives Matter supporter talking about how Gucci stealing you know looting is a form of reparations and then sort of the history of what people have said about this and now it feels like it’s becoming more of a reality in terms of working on a plan to start this process, at least in some places in the country. What do you think?

WALKER: Well, I’m upset about it. I’m upset about it because all they’re doing is pandering for votes because let me tell you, why are you paying African Americans instead of empowering African-Americans? They don’t have an answer for what Donald Trump is saying is trying to empower African- Americans by putting jobs in those areas, by putting better education in those areas, by going out putting small businesses, African-American owned businesses in those areas.

What they’re trying to do is not pander for a vote. You know it is sad that they’re going to say I’m going to give you money. Who are you going to give the money to? What about the people that freed you as a slave? What about the white people that fought to free you as a slave? Who is considered blight only if you vote democratic like Joe Biden said and now you got the Vice President, Ms. Harris who maybe the vice president who locked up African-Americans and brown people up in jail.

Now she’s talking about you know you want to pay reparation. Hey, let’s get serious here. You don’t give people a job. Why don’t you teach him how to work? That’s what I want to say. Don’t give them a fish, you teach them how to fish. That’s what is going to make African Americans better and I hope every African American wake up and realize that’s what they’re doing right now.

They have these lawless cities. The people are breaking the law. The young lady is saying take whatever you want, they have insurance. You don’t know if they have riot insurance because I never heard of that. In the end, we have these people saying oh I’m going to pay you off. I’m going to give you reparation.

We may have Bloomberg in Florida. I’m going to get you out of jail that want to pay you for a vote. What about empowering you to run your own businesses? What about empowering you to become a doctor, to become a lawyer? No one thought about that. Everyone thought – thinking about let’s pay you off. That’s what they used to do years ago. Let’s get out of there.

I thought we wanted to change.

MACCALLUM: So, but you know, I mean it seems to be working in a lot of places you know. I mean you look at the polls right now and it does seem as if the side that believes that there’s a different way to go about that and I think you’re touching on something that’s really important.

There’s sort of two different ways to help people no matter what their color is and one is to sort of give them an opportunity and the other is to say you know we owe you something, we want to compensate you and then you can you know sort of figure out what you want to do with that money.

Do you feel like that is the side that is winning more people over right now just 30 some days from this election?

WALKER: Well, you know it may win some people over but I think one thing and I think that they are concerned about is that I think they know that this president right now is starting to get some African-American and also Hispanic-American to come around and see what’s going on.

What’s going on is that this president has done things for these communities that they didn’t do a long time ago. How can you ask former Vice President Biden to do anything when you have 47 years to have done this? He could have done this a long time ago.

How can you ask Kamala Harris who could have changed the law, she could have put a law in to change things to give people a better education, to do different things for people? They never did it. So now they want to do it and I hate to use this term. Don’t keep telling me you’re going to do it, you never done it.

This president here has done almost everything he set out to do and I’m not saying I’m touting his horn but he has and one thing about it is they don’t have anything to fight against it so now let’s pay you for the vote.

There’s other people also. Are you going to pay the Latinos?

You have to pay everybody. You can’t just pay African Americans. They’re not only one that’s out there. There’s other people out there also that is suffering. Well and then, think about there’s a homeless problem in California. There are fires going on in California.

But we’re going to worry about this right now? Just think about it.

MACCALLUM: All right, you know I don’t want let you go without asking about the other issue that came up at the debate the other night with regard to condemning white supremacist organizations. The president was asked about proud boys which is a fairly small – there’s you know several hundred they think across the country perhaps group and they say they’re not white supremacists but there’s also some indications that they have cohorted with some of these neo-Nazi groups.

Anyway, well when you look at this and you hear what the president has said about it. He says I have condemned them. I’ve been clear about it but it’s

– you know some are finding his answers on it not convincing so what do you say that?

WALKER: Well, as an African American man, it’s kind of insulting to me.

This president has denounced any kind of white supremacist. He’s denounced everything but because they don’t have anything to fight what he’s done for African Americans, they keep using the word racist.

And I’ve said many times this guy’s not a racist. President Trump is not a racist. Why don’t you guys decide to put a plan together that you can do something to help the African Americans instead of trying to call this president a racist because think about this.

In the debate the other night, if somebody had called President Obama that they had told him to shut up, if they had said hey, you’re a clown. If they had said that you know, you’re stupid, what would have happened?

But yet this president has been – been going over these obstacles all the time so I want the African-American people to realize this, I want the Hispanic people to realize this, the native American, I want America to realize this president has done a great deal for the African-American community for America and one last thing I would like to say, this is what is so interesting and I said it the other day.

This president here has been nominated for three Nobel Peace Prize not from anyone from the United States, these are people outside of the United States that don’t have a dog in this fight.

They don’t have a dog in this fight but they realize what he’s done for the world and we need to realize what he’s done for America and maybe then we’ll know who should be President of the United States.

MACCALLUM: Herschel Walker, always good to speak with you. You have an interesting take on things and we always like to hear from you. Thank you very much Sir. Thanks for being here tonight, we appreciate it.

WALKER: Thank you and God bless you now.

MACCALLUM: And you as well Sir. So Joe Biden won’t say if he would add justices and rapid fire confirm them to cancel out the current conservative majority. It’s pretty big deal. It’s called packing the court. Is it fair to say that America should know where he stands on that before they go to the voting booth? Coming up next Senator Ted Cruz.


BIDEN: The focus should stay on the fact that the constitution provides the American public one opportunity to weigh in on lifetime appointments.



MACCALLUM: For more than a century, Congress has had to build consensus from both parties to pass legislation. Ending the filibuster would mean that the minority would get – the minority I should say will get no say, might as well go home. Also, we’ve had nine justices for over 150 years but that could change.

The National Review Editorial Board would like to know where Joe Biden stands on this issue. “For a presidential candidate to refuse to answer in the hope that he could turn around after election and with a razor thin majority in the Senate, both abolish the filibuster and pack the Supreme Court would represent a political deception of historic proportions,” they write  but it doesn’t seem the American people will get the answer anytime soon. Watch this.


CRISPIN HAVENER, INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER, WJAC-TV: Do you support the idea of packing the court?

BIDEN: I’m not dodging the question. What I’m doing is staying focused. You know and I’m not being critical of you at all. I’ve given my word. But if I answer the question no matter which way I answer it then that becomes the headline tomorrow, that becomes the headline for the next three days, the presidential nominee says he’s going to or not going to do the following.

Instead of focusing on the violation of the principle of the constitution which is going on right now.


MACCALLUM: Here now Republican Senator Ted Cruz, a member of the Judiciary Committee and author of the upcoming book ‘One Vote Away: How A Single Supreme Court Seat Can Change History.’ Senator Cruz, thank you for being here. And so he says he doesn’t want that to become an issue but it is an issue so you know I mean it is an issue.

So it needs to be addressed one way or the other, doesn’t it?

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): It does and when he says he’s not dodging the question, what he means is he’s dodging the question. The answer is of course yes. If the Democrats win, their side, the radical left, they’re angry, they’re enraged. They hate the president. If the Democrats win the presidency and they win the Senate, within a couple of weeks, Chuck Schumer will act to end the filibuster.

And I’ll tell you, I serve with these Democrats, they have the votes, they’ll abolish the filibuster which means the minority would not be able to stop any of their radical objectives. Not only that though, I believe if they win a majority, they will act to try to pack the Supreme Court, to try to increase the number of justices from 9 to 11 or 13.

I can tell you just last week I debated Chuck Schumer on the Senate floor about it. The Senate was taking up a resolution to honor Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Typically, when a justice passes, we pass a bipartisan resolution to honor them.

Schumer wanted to make it a partisan resolution by inserting that the vacancy should be held open through the election. I objected to that but I suggested including – so Ginsburg actually said before she passed that packing the court was a bad idea, that she thought nine was the right number and it was a mistake when FDR, a Democratic President tried to pack it and Chuck Schumer and the Democrats objected.

Joe Biden just doesn’t want to be honest with the American people but that’s absolutely part of the radical agenda of the far-left Democrats.

MACCALLUM: Or maybe he’s just afraid that he’ll lose some of those folks, if he is honest about it. He has said in the past that he thought it was a bad idea to pack the court but now he says he doesn’t know what he thinks at this point or he won’t say.

CRUZ: Well, he won’t say, and he won’t say because he doesn’t want people to realize that I can tell you, the people driving the Biden agenda are the extreme left. It’s Bernie Sanders, it’s AOC, it’s Elizabeth Warren.

MACCALLUM: But he said I’m the party. You heard him the other night. He said no, no, no, that’s not true. He said I’m the party and I’m a moderate.

CRUZ: He was Marie Antoinette (foreign language) and you know what baloney.

Joe Biden does not have the strength to stand up to the rage and fury in his party on the left, he’s not going to do it and to understand really the stakes of what this election is about, you mentioned my book, ‘One Vote Away.’

It came out Tuesday, two days ago and it is – it is all about the Supreme Court and each chapter talks about a constitutional liberty that’s hanging in the balance. That is being – that has been decided 5-4.

So it talks about there’s a chapter on free speech, a chapter on religious liberty, a chapter on the second amendment and what I do in each of the chapters is actually tell the inside story of landmark cases at the court that I helped litigate.

MACCALLUM: Interesting.

CRUZ: And every one of them is just one vote away from being taken away.

MACCALLUM: It is. I mean that’s why it ranks so high I think, so highly as in terms of what people care about when they vote. Before I let you go, Dianne Feinstein, the ranking member. She sent a letter to Lindsey Graham asking for a delay of the Amy Coney Barrett nomination. She said, “the timeline for consideration is incompatible with the Senate’s constitutional role. We again urge you to delay consideration of this nomination till after the presidential inauguration. The Senate and the American public deserve the deliberative thorough process and this falls short.”

What do you think is actually going to happen? This hearing is already scheduled so what do you project will happen when the – when the gavel comes down here?

CRUZ: The hearing will begin on October 12. We will have a full and fair consideration of Judge Barrett and I believe the Senate will confirm her.

We will confirm her by the end of the month before Election Day and we’ve got a responsibility to do that. You know one of the chapters in my book talks about Bush versus Gore.

I helped represent George W. Bush in that case and we saw 36 days of electoral uncertainty. This election could easily be contested, could easily be litigated and we have a responsibility to fill that seat so there’s a nine justice Supreme Court to decide the case and give us certainty.

So I would encourage folks go to Amazon, go to Barnes and Noble, go to any bookseller. The book is available right now to help tell you the inside story of what’s going on at the court and what the fight over Judge Barrett is all about.

MACCALLUM: All right and it’s a big issue, packing the court. You might have to change the name to one vote to maybe two or three votes or four or five or six votes on the next round. Congratulations on the book, Senator Cruz. Thank you. Good to have you here tonight.

So, we’ve got exactly two weeks until round two. We get to go back in there again and watch them slug it out. Joe Biden’s campaign says that the next debate should come with a mute button. The Trump campaign says no dice to that idea. Lisa Boothe when The Story continues.


REP. NANCY PELOSI (D-CA): People say well, they should have a button to turn one microphone off while the other person is speaking. Whatever it is, I think one and done, one and done.



BIDEN: I’m not going to answer the question.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Why wouldn’t you answer the question.

BIDEN: Because the question is –

TRUMP: – about the Supreme Court justices, the radical left?

BIDEN: Would you shut up man.

TRUMP: Who is on your list? Who’s on the list of Nancy Pelosi?

BIDEN: Well, he is just –

TRUMP: Don’t use the word smart with me. Don’t ever use that word.

BIDEN: Oh, give me a break.

TRUMP: Because you know what, there’s nothing smart about you Joe. 47 years, you’ve done nothing.

BIDEN: Well, it’s hard to get word in with this clown. Excuse me.

TRUMP: Hey let me just tell you Joe.


MACCALLUM: OK so after that discussion ensued about maybe adding some new rules, a source close to the negotiations tells Fox that the Biden campaign is asking for a mute button, the moderator could use if either candidate violates a rule. President Trump responded to the idea tweeting this. “Why would I allow the Debate Commission to change the rules for the second and third to base when I easily won last time?”

And when asked if he supports muting mics, Joe Biden had this to say just a short time ago.


BIDEN: As long as we have an opportunity to respond to the questions of the people in the audience. And I think it’s appropriate when a person, a constituent is considering how they’re going to vote this year when they ask the question, whomever they ask that question, gets an opportunity to answer it fully.


MACCALLUM: OK, so joining me now Fox News Contributor Lisa Boothe and Richard Goodstein, Democratic strategist and former adviser to the Bill and Hillary Clinton presidential campaigns. Welcome to both of you. Good to have you here.

I just want to give everybody a look at what this –



MACCALLUM: Hi there. What this might look and feel like. They’re in the Wisconsin governor’s race, they employed this mute button and here’s what it looked like.


FORMER GOVERNOR SCOTT WALKER (R-WI): The programs and as far as the technical colleges go, the reality is we saved the technical college, the schools more than $3 billion.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Governor Walker, time is up. Ms. Burke. Ms. Burke, your rebuttal.


MACCALLUM: Oh my gosh, that’s terrible, Richard.

BOOTHE: Hopefully you don’t have to use it on us.

MACCALLUM: Yes. The voice kind of fades off and you know Richard, what do you think.

GOODSTEIN: I don’t know why Joe Biden would want to change the rules of the debate that according to all the scientific polls, he won handily. CNBC showed – and CNN, basically 60 to 30 according to the people who watched the debate so look, the reason that Joe Biden is not going to duck debates and he’s not going to want to change the rules is a couple.

One, he knows that Donald Trump won’t abide by the rules. We saw that in bold relief. Frank Luntz you know did a focus group with people who were undecided who referred to Donald Trump as unhinged, arrogant, a bully, chaotic and unamerican and the terms they used for Joe Biden were actually rather positive.

And the one polls come out since that debate has Biden up 13 points. Why in the world he’d want to change the rules, I don’t know.

MACCALLUM: All right, so you think he going to want the same thing. I mean the dynamic – I just doubt Lisa, that the dynamic will ever be the way that it was the other night. I think that both sides know that they made mistakes. Joe Biden you know leveled names at the President of United States that should never be leveled.

The president was by most accounts you know overly aggressive and not always effective in leaning some of those punches. What should change and should there be a mute button?

BOOTHE: No, absolutely not and I think if the Biden campaign, if they were so confident in their candidate’s abilities and what he did the other night, why would they want a mute button? They would want things to go on as is. But this is what Democrats do.

It should be no surprise to anyone at home. This is what Democrats do. When they lose they try to change the rules of the game. This is what they did in 2016 when they lost the presidential race, they called for the abolishment of the Electoral College. They call for faithless electors.

This is what they’re doing now with the Supreme Court and calling for court packing because they didn’t win the Senate in the 2018 election. If I’m Joe Biden, I’m happy with what happened the other night because he didn’t have to answer to his lies about his support for the Green New deal.

He didn’t have to answer to the fact that his corrupt son took $3.5 million from a Russian oligarch and Joe Biden knew about his son’s overseas business dealings but lied to the American people last year and he also didn’t have to take a stance on an incredibly important issue to the American people which is court packing.

So if I’m Joe Biden, he actually didn’t get pressed on many hard things at all so he should be happy with the way things went.

GOODSTEIN: Listen, there was one question — there was one question — one question that Donald Trump didn’t answer, is why do not disavow white supremacists with every Republican senator said was painful the next day.

BOOTHE:  Spare me.


Listen, and there’s a reason —


BOOTHE:  You know,

GOODSTEIN:  — excuse me –there’s a reason he won’t disavow them.


BOOTHE:  You know, can I —

GOODSTEIN:  Hold on, Lisa. Hold on. I didn’t interrupt you. The reason he won’t disavow white’s premises, he got 46 percent of the vote in 2016. Not every Trump voter was a racist but every racist was a Trump voter and he can’t afford to lose them. That’s why he won’t disavow them.

MACCALLUM:  Every voter — come on.

GOODSTEIN:  It’s clear. It’s obvious.

MACCALLUM:  I mean, give me a break. Lisa, go ahead.

BOOTHE:  Well, Martha, Martha, can I please — I have to —


GOODSTEIN:  Who else do they vote for?

BOOTHE:  I have to — Richard, stop. Let me talk.


MACCALLUM:  OK. Lisa, go ahead, you had your moment, go ahead, Lisa.

BOOTHE:  Yes, you need to move on for a moment, Richard.

MACCALLUM:  Then I got to go.

BOOTHE:  Well, first of all, I respect Chris Wallace, but his question to President Trump about the very fine people is a fallacy and a lie that unfortunately shouldn’t be repeated in the line of a question.

Secondly, President Trump has denounced white supremacy more than probably any other human being in the history of this country. Further, only one candidate in this race —


GOODSTEIN:  Why not repeat them?

BOOTHE:  — (Inaudible) with segregationist, eulogized a KKK —

MACCALLUM:  Al right.

BOOTHE:  — recruiter and also said that he didn’t want his kids to go to a racial jungle due to immigration. Only one candidate in the race has that history. So, please spare me, Richard, with your lies.

MACCALLUM:  All right, guys. We need a mute button for my debates here.


BOOTHE:  We do. We do, unfortunately.

MACCALLUM:  We would never mute either one of you. We would never mute you Richard, and we would never mute you, Lisa.

BOOTHE:  Thank you.

MACCALLUM:  That’s why we have you here. Thank you so much, good to see you both tonight as always. Thanks, guys.

GOODSTEIN:  Thank you.

BOOTHE:  Thank you.

MACCALLUM:  All right, a former Black Panther activist convicted of murdering two New York City police officers in cold blood is now set to be released from prison in just a few weeks. Congressman Peter King says the parole board has become politicized and he wants to explain why and why he thinks it’s time for a change.


DIANE PIAGENTINI, WIDOW OF MURDERED OFFICER:  They were assassinated only because they wore the blue uniforms. No other reason, just because they wore blue.



MACCALLUM:  So, tonight, the suspected shooter of these two police officers in Los Angeles, remember this horrific moment in that video. So, he’s in custody now and has been charged. Deonte Lee Murray pleaded not guilty to attempted murder and other charges on Wednesday and faces life in prison if he is convicted. Those two police officers thankfully survived.

But on the opposite coast, a man who did the same thing but killed both of the police officers is now set to become a free man. He has served 49 years for the assassination of two New York City police officers.

In 1971, Anthony Bottom and accomplice Herman Bell, members of the Black Liberation Army, lured Officers Joseph Piagentini and Waverly Jones into a public housing project in Harlem with a phony 911 call. And then when they got them into the building, they murdered them both in cold blood.

Bell was paroled two years ago and now Bottom is set for release in the next couple of weeks. The widow of Officer Piagentini is horrified by the release of her husband’s killers.


PIAGENTINI:  Unbelievable. Unbelievable that this is happening in this day and age. When Bottom’s gun was empty, he took Joe’s revolver out of the holster and proceeded to continue to shoot him. Twenty-two bullet holes.


MACCALLUM:  Also paroled this month, Samuel Ayala who raped and murdered two women in front of their children in 1977. This recent string of all parole approvals prompting calls for oversight and overhaul from Republican New York State lawmakers.

Joining me now, New York Congressman Peter King. Congressman King, thank you very much for being here.

REP. PETER KING (R-NY):  Thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM:  You’ve been a champion for police officers and for the men and women who wear blue. They’ve been under an enormous amount of pressure all across the country over the course of this whole summer and you have been sticking up for them pretty much every step of the way, so now you’re bringing this situation to life. What do you think — what’s going on here?

What’s underneath this? Why are these people getting out?

KING:  Mainly the New York State parole board has gone far to the left.

Governor Cuomo has appointed the most severe left-wing advocates of all, one of the members of the board she was actually — is actually married to a convicted killer who is himself paroled just several years ago.

There have been 16 cop killers alone in the last three years who have been paroled. The murders of Officers Piagentini and Jones were among the most despicable ever. As Mrs. Piagentini said, she’s a very brave woman, I was with her when a dedicated Deer Park community to Officer Piagentini. He stood over them and shot — Officer Piagentini was still alive as Bell and Jones fired — I’m sorry, Bell and Bottom fired their guns into them.

Absolute disgrace.

Bottom is getting out I guess within the week. Bell got out two years ago.

I was talking to a commissioner who was on the parole board several years ago when they were denied parole and she voted against him getting parole because to this day they show no remorse, they say they were freedom fighters and they have the right and the obligation to kill New York City police officers.

These are horrible, terrible people, they should never see the light of day on the parole board is disgracing — Governor Cuomo disappointing more and more of these left-wing parole board members.

MACCALLUM:  What can be done? I mean, is this just sort of — you know, is this out of the bag? Or is there anything that can change the course of what looks like is definitely going to happen in the next couple of weeks?

KING:  No. Right now, nothing will be done to stop Bottom. What we have to do is try to prevent more of this from happening in the future. And really, as long as Governor Cuomo is there, he’s going to nominate these left-wing advocates, these prisoner advocates to the parole board and they said it unfortunately right now is controlled by Democrats. And they were rubber- stamped whatever nomination gives them.

So, I’m not trying to make this political but either we get some Democrats with guts to the state Senate or we will elect some Republican state senators to stop these nominations. I mean, it’s really all in the last I say several years. This got out of control.

For many years, the parole board was looked upon as being very much common sense, very legitimate. They address each case on its facts. Each parole request on its facts. Now the whole assumption is that these people should be paroled. They look at how long they’ve been in jail and feel sorry for them.


KING:  And they overlook the important — the other important fact is supposed to be looked at, though, is what impact this has, does this encourage disrespect for law? And at a time, we’ve had the very (Inaudible) in New York which is turning criminals loose. At a time when we see shootings up 90 percent in New York City and then on top of that releasing these convicted murderers who have no remorse, it’s an absolute disgrace.

MACCALLUM:  So tough on these families who have been through too much all of those years ago and now have the fresh wound of having to deal with the killers being back out on the streets.

Congressman Peter King, thank you for bringing this to our attention. It’s always good to see you, sir.

KING:  Thank you, Martha.

MACCALLUM:  Thank you very much.

KING:  Thank you. My pleasure.

MACCALLUM:  You bet.


So, an anti-abortion ad from 14 years ago now coming to the forefront in Amy Barrett — Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation battle. Critics say that it’s the clearest sign yet of how she would rule on anything having to do with Roe v. Wade. But colleague and Notre Dame law professor Carter Snead insists that we have nothing to fear. He is next.


KAYLEIGH MCENANY, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY:  A Notre Dame law professor Carter Snead said, there is just consensus. Amy Barrett is the best student, the smartest and most talented person to ever come through the University of Notre Dame Law School.



MACCALLUM:  A 2006 newspaper ad opposing abortion on demand, supporting the right to life from fertilization to natural death and calling for an end to the barbaric legacy of Roe v. Wade. Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett was one of hundreds of signatures on the ad under the words — her signature was under the words we, the following citizens of Michiana opposed abortion on demand and defend the right to life. The White House saying that’s about it today. Watch.


MCENANY:  Judge Amy Coney Barrett has on multiple occasions said it is never appropriate for a judge to impose that judge’s personal convictions, whether they derive from faith or anywhere else under the law.


MACCALLUM:  Joining me now is someone who has worked with Amy Coney Barrett for 15 years. Carter Snead is a professor of law at the University of Notre Dame and head of the Nicholas Center for Ethics and culture at Notre Dame.

And of course, you attended Notre Dame with Amy Coney Barrett, she was there as well, she went to Rhodes College in Tennessee and then Notre Dame Law School and she was a professor there as well. Carter, good to see you, thanks for being here tonight.

CARTER SNEAD, LAW PROFESSOR, UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME:  Good to see you, Martha. I’m glad — I’m glad to join you.

MACCALLUM:  Thank you. So, what was your reaction when you saw this ad get picked up today and highlighted and it’s just probably the first of several things that she is going to have to face and answer to in one way or another?

SNEAD:  Sure. This is — this ad is a distraction. Ramesh Ponnuru from National Review today reported that the only statement that these people signed was what you read on the air a moment ago. Expressing a general concern for the right to life of the unborn child and opposition to abortion.

The business about Roe v. Wade was a separate part of the ad, none of the signatories saw. Every year the Michiana Right to Life puts these out and they just collect signatures and then they produce the ads themselves without consulting people who signed them.

So, it’s still the case that Judge Barrett has never written or spoken, as far as I know, about Roe v. Wade as a precedent for either in its original sense or in terms of reviewing it with respect to stare decisis], but you know, people are entitled to their own personal opinions.

As you said, Judge Barrett testified under oath in 2017 that her personal views, her religious views, her political views are not relevant to her role as a judge. She sees her job is narrowly focused on the original meaning of the Constitution and the plain language and text of the statutes.


SNEAD:  You know, when you look back, Justice Ginsburg actually had an excellent — had an excellent comment on this years ago when she was nominated President Clinton to the court. She said if you’re electing a politician, if you’re electing a senator or president, these kinds of questions about personal commitments matter.

If you’re — if you’re appointing a Supreme Court justice, they don’t. And Justice Ginsburg took many very unique positions, let’s say, in the 1970s, suggesting perhaps that the Constitution require — protected bigamy and prostitution, and the Congress should get rid of Mother’s Day and Father’s Day and replace them with parent’s day.

But appropriately no one talked about that during her hearings in the early 90s because everyone understood based on her comments that are identical to Judge Barrett’s comments, that these are simply not related to the role of a judge.

MACCALLUM:  So, you know, we all know how ugly these proceedings can get and I’m sure that Judge Barrett and everybody who is supporting her is preparing her and thinking about, you know, what to expect during this process. She’s got a lot of composure. I think she’s going to be very cool under fire from what we have seen here.

But this is from Alan Dershowitz in a Hill op-ed today and he says Barrett coauthored an article on the issue of whether and when orthodox Catholic judges should be recused or recused themselves. Barrett said she was unwilling to commit to, resolve conflicts between the law and the — the law and the church in favor of the law.

She should not be asked will she recuse herself from all such cases, and then he went on to say she should be asked whether she believes a fetus has a constitutional right to life. What do you think about that and what do you think her answer would be to those questions?

SNEAD:  So, the first, the first point is, this article was written in 19 –

– was published in 1998. It was written when Judge Barrett was a law student, coauthored with John Garvey, the president of Catholic University of America. And this came up in 2017 in her hearings. And she said she saw no conflict at all between her role as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, it would extend also to the Supreme Court and her faithfulness as a Catholic.

And the big question that came up in 2017 was a question of the death penalty and whether she would have to recuse herself. And that question has been answered, she has sat on multiple death penalty panels on the seventh circuit and has voted to affirm the death sentences below.

So, it’s clear that she sees no conflict at all. Professor Dershowitz’s question has really already been answered.

MACCALLUM:  All right.

SNEAD:  And the answer to the question as to whether or not a fetus has a constitutional right, that’s a question that no judge can answer during a confirmation hearing because those are the kinds of questions that might very well come before them on the court.

MACCALLUM:  Yes. I would imagine that would be the answer there and I also think — you know, it’s no surprised the way that she — that she would signed that original, the document that was in the ad, she made it quite clear that she’s a Catholic, a practicing Catholic who believes in the tenets of the Catholic Church.

So, it’s not like, you know, it’s a big surprise that she believes that abortion is a problem and an issue, but it is separate from the way that you would rule on cases with regard to Roe v. Wade and other issues. But all right, we will see. Carter, thank you very much. Good to have you here tonight.

SNEAD:  Thanks, Martha. Good to talk to you.

MACCALLUM:  You too. So why Fox and Friends host Steve Doocy stayed up late to come visit tonight us on The Story, coming up next.


MACCALLUM:  All right. Now for something fun. A little fun. So many Americans working and learning from home, cooking has been an outlet during all of this. My good friend, Steve Doocy and his wife Kathy serving up some fresh options in their new cookbook and Fox Nation show. They have a show.


STEVE DOOCY, FOX NEWS HOST:  We all have foods that make us happy. When I was growing up, I love my mom’s pot roast. My wife makes it, I walk into the doors of this house, and I smell it, it triggered something in the official nostalgia the department of my brain that takes me back to that happy time.


MACCALLUM:  Look at your mom. I love my mom’s pot roast, too. I want to make it right now. Steve Doocy joins me, co-host of Fox and Friends and author of “The Happy in a Hurry Cookbook” which has my name all over it, because we don’t have a lot of time. So, what is — what did you make for us, Steve?

DOOCY:  This is, you know our friend, Christie de Nicola?

MACCALLUM:  I do. I just mentioned him.

DOOCY:  When she got married to Tony in, I think ’87, her mother at a baby shower presented all of the family’s recipes a little index cards in a box.

She still has it. This is from a Michigan church lady group back in like the ’60s.


DOOCY:  It is the best pie you will ever have in your life. It’s a Ritz cracker crust peanut butter pie.

MACCALLUM:  Yum. Should we wait to eat it?

DOOCY:  Go ahead.

MACCALLUM:  All right. I’m going to have a bite.

DOOCY:  Have a taste.

MACCALLUM:  So, this is Christie’s family recipe?

DOOCY:  It is.

MACCALLUM:  Christie de Nicola?

DOOCY:  Right. Right? Right?

MACCALLUM:  My God. What’s in there?

DOOCY:  Well, I’ll tell you. You’ve got –


MACCALLUM:  It’s just fluffy and light, it’s not like a heavy pie that’s why I like it.

DOOCY:  Everything — look, it made you happy in a hurry.

MACCALLUM:  It made me happy in a hurry.

DOOCY:  It’s got cool whip, it’s got some cream cheese, it’s got some milk, and it’s got Ritz crackers. It’s so easy to make.

MACCALLUM:  It’s delicious.

DOOCY:  It is.

MACCALLUM:  So, you know, you and Kathy have put together — and this is number one on Amazon right now.

DOOCY:  It is.


DOOCY:  Number one book in the world.

MACCALLUM:  So why do you need to come here and see me? I’m glad you did.

DOOCY:  You are in your first cookbook.

MACCALLUM:  I’m so glad.

DOOCY:  Nobody understands happy food better than you.

MACCALLUM:  I do. Because mine has a little bourbon in it and that makes everyone happy. Just put a little bourbon in it and it will be good. You know, the one I made — so Steve gave me a copy of this and it was really nice. I made the lemony pasta.

DOOCY:  Isn’t that good?

MACCALLUM:  Really, really good. And it was really fast.

DOOCY:  Right.

MACCALLUM:  It’s really fast. So, who — I know that Dana’s grandfather’s dressing recipe is in here.

DOOCY:  Right. Judge Jeanine has a soup in there. Brian has got a family artichoke pie, Ainsley got her grandmother Mimi’s southern corn bread stuffing — or dressing she calls it. Marcus Luttrell has his mama’s prime rib, and Sean Hannity has, and it is one of the tastiest things as well. He has got mac and cheese egg rolls. You love mac and cheese —

MACCALLUM:  I saw those.

DOOCY:  Right?

MACCALLUM:  I was like wow. Who would’ve thought that? mac and cheese inside — that’s Sean Hannity’s recipe.

DOOCY:  Yes.

MACCALLUM:  All right. So, I just watched — I actually just watched Lone Survivor last night again, the movie with my family.

DOOCY:  Right. I know.

MACCALLUM:  And I was thinking about Marcus Luttrell. So, and you have, it’s a rib recipe?

DOOCY:  It’s his mother’s prime rib recipe.


DOOCY:  And it’s fantastic. The whole idea behind the first book was, you know, people like food that reminds them of happy times. We are on the book tour two years ago, so many people said we loved — we loved the idea of happy food, but you know it, we don’t have time to cook.


DOOCY:  So, Kathy goes, then we need happy in a hurry.


MACCALLUM:  I got a new book idea. No, it’s such a great idea. Because everybody wants to make things that don’t have a huge long list of ingredients.

DOOCY:  Right. This is made with stuff that you probably have at your house already.

MACCALLUM:  You know what, I just — I love all the pictures of the Doocy family. There are so many great pictures and stories of the Doocy family, and we love all the Doocy’s.

DOOCY:  Look, you know, this is —


MACCALLUM:  Like more of the other ones more than Steve, but that’s OK.

DOOCY:  These are challenging times these days. What do you have to look forward to at the end of the day?

MACCALLUM:  So true.

DOOCY:  Maybe some peanut butter pie.

MACCALLUM:  Yes. I will be taking this home. This is so delicious. Steve, thank you very much.

DOOCY:  My pleasure.

MACCALLUM:  Congratulations to you and Kathy on this awesome book.

DOOCY:  Thank you.

MACCALLUM:  And — so now everyone is happy, right? And that is The Story, happy in a hurry. Thursday night, October 1st already. The Story goes on as you know, so I will be back here with you tomorrow night at 7. Have some peanut pie. Bye-bye.

Content and Programming Copyright 2020 Fox News Network, LLC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Copyright 2020 ASC Services II Media, LLC.  All materials herein are protected by United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written permission of ASC Services II Media, LLC. You may not alter or remove any trademark, copyright or other notice from copies of the content.

Source link

Previous postStevie Nicks says coronavirus pandemic is 'stealing my last youthful years' as she releases new song Next postBarrett to praise Scalia in opening hearing statement, say court should not make policy

Chicago Financial Times

Copyright © 2022 Chicago Financial Times

Updates via RSS
or Email