CHUCK TODD:
This Sunday: Another political crisis in a year of crises. The death of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg --
RUTH BADER GINSBURG:
I have said many times that I will do this job as long as I can do it full steam.
CHUCK TODD:
-- and the epic Supreme Court fight ahead.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
I will be putting forth a nominee next week. It will be a woman.
CHUCK TODD:
President Trump says he wants to replace Ginsburg "without delay."
SEN. THOM TILLIS:
He's going to nominate one of those justices and I'm going to vote for their confirmation.
CHUCK TODD:
But Democrats insist the Senate should wait.
JOE BIDEN:
The voters should pick the president and the president should pick the justice.
CHUCK TODD:
President Trump hopes this will upend a race he's losing. But is there any evidence it will? I'll talk to former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar of the Judiciary Committee, and the third-ranking Republican in the Senate, John Barrasso. Plus: An administration at war with itself. Covid deaths hit 200,000, and President Trump fighting his own experts, on vaccines and on face masks ---
ROBERT REFIELD:
This face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against Covid than when I take a covid vaccine.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
It is not more effective by any means than a vaccine and I called him about that.
CHUCK TODD:
I'll talk to Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar. Also: How the coronavirus is impacting President Trump's re-election chances. Our brand news NBC News - Wall Street Journal poll on Covid, leadership and where the presidential race stands with six weeks to go. Welcome to Sunday and a special edition of Meet the Press.
ANNOUNCER:
From NBC News in Washington, the longest-running show in television history. This is a special edition of Meet the Press with Chuck Todd.
CHUCK TODD:
Good Sunday morning and a Happy Rosh Hashanah. In a year of crises -- impeachment, a pandemic, social unrest, a collapsed economy -- the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has now set off a ferocious political battle that could only add to a year of turmoil. Ginsburg, the second woman ever on the Court, a powerful advocate for women's rights and an unlikely cultural icon, died Friday night. Days before her death, she dictated a statement to her granddaughter: "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed." She may not get that wish. Faced with a challenging political environment, both President Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell seized the moment. The president moved to replace Ginsburg immediately, promising to nominate a woman this week. Leader McConnell quickly reversed his 2016 position, taken after Justice Antonin Scalia died in February, that any nominee named during a presidential campaign should await the results of the election, putting out a statement Friday night saying: "President Trump's nominee will receive a vote on the floor of the United States Senate." Minority Leader Chuck Schumer put out his own statement that was word for word what McConnell said in 2016: "This vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president." There is so much at stake: Will this upend a presidential election where nothing yet has moved the numbers? What effect could this have on close Senate races particularly in Republican-leaning states? And do Senate Republicans even have the votes to confirm a nominee immediately? I'm going to be talking to Hillary Clinton in just a few minutes, but we're going to begin with NBC News Justice correspondent Pete Williams at the Supreme Court. And, Pete, Justice Ginsburg passed away less than 48 hours ago, but it seems as if this is moving very fast and we could have a nominee very soon. What can you tell us?
PETE WILLIAMS:
Well, I think that's right. And, of course, remember, the Supreme Court term is going to start in just two weeks. And the week after the election in November, the court will hear one of the most important cases of the term, the big showdown on Obamacare, which the Supreme Court has twice before rescued. Now led by a coalition of red states, there's a new challenge to it. A couple of thoughts about that, Chuck. Number one: With her death, it leaves the court with just eight justices, which raises the possibility of tie votes. If the Supreme Court were to tie on the Obamacare case, it would leave the lower court ruling intact, which went against Obamacare. Whether they'll be a tie or not, I don't know. The big question in that case is: Does the whole law have to fall if one part of it is infirm? I think the second question is: How soon can the Senate act on a nominee? Normally, the time from a president's nomination of a candidate all the way to confirmation is 70 days. We are what, 44 days till the election. So that could mean a Senate vote if they follow the normal schedule after the election. And of course it's possible we don't even know who the president is going to be if there are contentious fights in the states over the election, which could end up before the Supreme Court, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
Pete, there seems to be two names we're hearing the most about. One, a judge named Amy Coney Barrett. And another, a judge named Barbara Lagoa. What can you tell us about these two women?
PETE WILLIAMS:
Well, Amy Coney Barrett would -- of course any person that the president nominates is going to be more conservative than Justice Ginsburg was. But in some ways, she would be the polar opposite of Ruth Bader Ginsburg because she's a pretty clear opponent of abortion. And that may be a key point for the president. He'll want to nominate somebody who is determined to overturn Roe v. Wade. Remember, Chuck, we're going to have five conservatives now. If the president gets another nominee, six conservatives. So the court would be solidly conservative for decades to come.
CHUCK TODD:
Pete Williams at the Supreme Court this morning. Pete Williams, thank you. And joining me now is NBC News Capitol Hill Correspondent Kasie Hunt. So, Kasie, what's realistic here? You heard Pete Williams say the average time is over -- we're 44 days from the election. Ironically, the last time somebody got nominated and confirmed in less than 44 days was Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who actually -- it happened in 42 days. What's the realistic timeline on Capitol Hill?
KASIE HUNT:
Well, Chuck, I think that the person you want to watch in this is obviously Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader. And while there are practical questions about the timing, there are also political questions. And I think that is going to drive every conversation and every decision about this. There are two things Mitch McConnell cares about: maintaining the Republican control of the Senate, which of course is on the line coming up on Election Day, and getting a conservative Supreme Court. So if you think about it in those terms, there are some political arguments for waiting until after the election to have a vote on the floor of the Senate. There are also political reasons to try and have a confirmation hearing before Election Day that would keep this in the news on the front burner. It's something that traditional Republicans, perhaps Republicans who have problems with President Trump but have supported the party for a long time, it's something that matters to them quite a bit. And many of these Republican Senate candidates have been running a couple points in polls behind where President Trump is against Joe Biden. And Republicans see this issue as something that could help them there. But of course the outcome of the election could then also drive this. Because the next question is: Does Mitch McConnell have the votes? And there is a certain element of risk in waiting until after Election Day. Because if Joe Biden were to win in a landslide and many of these Republicans were to lose their seats, that may take McConnell's two goals out of tension. He would maybe no longer have to worry about maintaining the Senate majority. But it might mean that some of those Republicans who lost would have a difficult calculation about how to handle this, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
Kasie Hunt, I think you laid it out there very well. The timeline that we're headed for, I think is hearings first. And then we'll see what happens on Election Day. Kasie Hunt, thank you.
KASIE HUNT:
Thanks Chuck.
CHUCK TODD
And joining us now is Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Senator Klobuchar, welcome back to Meet the Press. And, first off --
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Thanks, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
-- my condolences to you. And as an attorney, what do you believe is Justice Ginsburg's most important legacy that she'll be remembered for?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
She was a hero, an icon, a woman way ahead of her time. You know, when people told her, "Oh, you can't even go to law school," she shows them and graduates number one in her class. She made landmark decisions, Chuck, on equal rights for women when people said, "Oh no. You should have a man argue that case." And then she ends up on the very court that she argued in front of. And, again, became really an international rock star in her 80s. That is not easy to do with the name "Notorious RBG." My daughter, like so many young people, just worshipped her. And we at one point had photos taken together. And she said to me, "Mom, I hope you don't mind. I'm going to cut you out of this photo. I just want the picture to be me and the Notorious RBG when I put it on my Facebook page." She is someone that we must continue her fight. That's what this is about for me.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. Well, let's talk about the current politics of this moment. Besides campaigning, besides political pressure, is there a mechanical way that Senate Democrats, something in the Senate rules, could somehow prevent this nomination from going forward?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
I'm not even getting to the Senate rules right now, Chuck, for a very important reason. I'm not going to concede that when you already have several of my colleagues saying that the way this happened, so close to the election, that the next president should be able to make the decision. The people pick the president, and the president picks the justice. That is how this works. Look at what Abraham Lincoln did the last time someone died this close to the election. He waited. He waited until after the election. To me, the fact that you've got people voting right now, including in my state, everything is on the line here. Health care is on the line. There's literally going to be an argument on the Affordable Care Act, whether or not people will continue to have health care and not get kicked off for preexisting conditions, on November 10th. So I think my Republican colleagues are the ones. They have to decide, based on what they said before. They set this new precedent in the last -- in 2016, and they've got to follow their own words.
CHUCK TODD:
But in your mind, which precedent is wrong: the one they set in 2016 or the one they're trying to create now?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
For me, whatever happened before ancient rules, whatever it is, what matters right now is that they just made these statements. They're not beholden to Mitch McConnell. They're beholden to the people that voted for them in their own states. And as people genuinely -- literally these hearts broken by Justice Ginsburg's death, showing up at the courthouse. I'm telling you, people are voting in record numbers. They were doing this before she died. We know this. We know how many people have been asking for mail-in ballots. We know the numbers. We know that Joe Biden is leading in states some people never thought he could even win because people have had it. They've had it with a president that divides people. They've had it -- we've reached 200,000 deaths with this pandemic. So if my colleagues want to look themselves in the mirror and say, "What did I just say the last time this happened? What's the precedent I set? What should I follow?." They each have to make an individual decision. And so for me, that's what this is about. It's about justice. It's about moving --
CHUCK TODD:
Well.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
-- forward as a Senate and a democracy.
CHUCK TODD:
All right. But let me ask you this. Senator Schumer told you guys on a conference call last night nothing is off the table for next year if Leader McConnell pushes through this nomination. What does that mean to you? What is "nothing off the table"? Is this packing the court? Is this getting rid of the filibuster? Is this D.C. statehood and Puerto Rico statehood? What is "nothing off the table"? What is that -- define that for us.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
I think he is talking about the fact that there's reforms that we've all looked at that you could consider. You and I have talked about this before on the show. But, again, I'm not going to concede this. This is the position of a woman who never gave up, right? When people told her she couldn't do things, she kept going. Well, I'm not going to give up that some of my colleagues here, when we already have three of them, three of them, having said that they believe that the next president, whoever wins the election. They're not saying who that's going to be. Whoever wins the election should be able to pick the justice. Then we can talk about the reforms. Because what this matters right now is what mattered three days ago before she died. And that is that people have to vote. And they vote. And they have to vote, as Michelle Obama said, like their life depends on it.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, I think you think they're going to do that. But as you know, trying to get some folks to stick by their word is something that seems to be very hard these days. So, again, assuming you don't get that, there's going to be confirmation hearings before Election Day. Do you think you can stop a confirmation vote before Election Day?
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Again, as Senator Schumer says, there's a lot of things we can try to do. But in the end, I'm not going to concede any of that because my colleagues and I have -- I do have some facts on my side here, you have a number of them that haven't said what they're going to do. You have a number of them that have already said that the next president should make the decision. You have the precedent of the only time a justice died this close to an election, Abraham Lincoln was president and he made a decision to wait until after the election. And you have the fact that the people are voting right now. And I think that creates pressure on my colleagues honestly. That's what a democracy is about. They don't want to have the Affordable Care Act thrown out when you have hundreds of millions of Americans with preexisting conditions. Are you kidding me? That's in front of us. They don't want to have more money thrown into our elections. Or while the fires are blazing on the West Coast, they don't want to have other justices that are so conservative that they literally have said, "well, you know, maybe agencies can't make decisions to regulate air and water." No, they want to have an America that reflects them.
CHUCK TODD:
Senator Klobuchar, Democrat from Minnesota, on the Senate Judiciary Committee. So if there's hearings, we'll be seeing a lot of you. Thanks for coming on and sharing your perspective.
SEN. AMY KLOBUCHAR:
Look forward to seeing you again, Chuck. Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
Four years ago, when Antonin Scalia's death nine months before the presidential election left a vacancy at the court, Republican senators were very clear: Confirmation of a new justice had to wait for voters to decide the next president.
[BEGIN TAPE]
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL:
The American people are about to weigh in.
SEN. THOM TILLIS:
The campaign is already underway.
SEN. MARCO RUBIO:
Voters are going to get to weigh in.
SEN. TOM CORNYN:
It's about the principle.
SEN. TED CRUZ:
You don't do this in an election year.
SEN. ROGER WICKER:
The American people will choose.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
Let the American people consider it as part of deciding who to support in November.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
That was when Democrat Barack Obama was in the White House. Now, many of the same senators you just saw are saying, "Don't wait. President Trump should get to choose Ginsburg's successor immediately." That does include my next guest. He's the chair of the Republican conference in the Senate. It's John Barrasso of Wyoming. Senator Barrasso, welcome back to Meet the Press. And before we get started on the politics, I want to give you a chance. What do you think Justice Ginsburg's legacy is in your mind?
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
Really a heroic and historic figure. This is a great loss for our country. You know, here in Wyoming we think of her as a trailblazer in so many ways because she had the Western spirit of grit and endurance and determination. She showed that every day. She was a role model for many. And you might not believe this, Chuck. But for young women on my staff who went into the law, she was an inspiration for many of them. She inspired a generation. And I think she is going to be long remembered for the trail that she blazed.
CHUCK TODD:
Senator, I want to get into the politics. Four years ago, you were emphatic on various ways you said it. You heard it in that list of clips. You would at different times, "I want to give the American people a voice in this." Why don't you want to give the American people a voice this time?
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
Well, first, let's be very clear. If the shoe were on the other foot and the Democrats had the White House and the Senate, they would right now be trying to confirm another member of the Supreme Court. What we're proposing --
CHUCK TODD:
You don't know that.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- is completely consistent, completely consistent with the precedent. What happened in 2016, and let's go back, we were following the Joe Biden rule. Joe Biden was clearly -- was clear when he was chairman of the Judiciary Committee. And he said, "When there is a Senate of one party and a White House of the other," and he said this to George Herbert Walker Bush, he said, "if there's a vacancy in that final year, we will not confirm." And that's what we did --
CHUCK TODD:
Senator.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- with Merrick Garland. But 29 times, Chuck, there have been vacancies in the year of a presidential election. And if both the White House and the Senate are of the same party, they go forward with the confirmation.
CHUCK TODD:
So, you know, I scoured -- I have scoured all of these 2016 notes looking for these footnotes that have been added now. You guys have this new explanation. Never once -- on the Senate floor, "When an election is just months away in 2016," you said that, "people should be allowed to consider possible Supreme Court nominees as one factor in deciding who they'll support for president. This shouldn't even really be controversial." Then you said, "This is not about the person. It's about the principle involved, and I want to give the American people a voice in this." Republicans have said there should not be a bitter political fight. "We have called on the president to spare the country this fight. The best way to avoid the fight is to agree to let the people decide." Senator, these are your words. Not once did you say, "Oh, it depends on what party the Senate holds versus the party of the president." This just sounds like a power grab, pure and simple.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
Well, it is the Biden rule. And this is the way, this is the precedent of the country. You haven't had --
CHUCK TODD:
There is no Biden rule.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- Merrick Garland -- you haven't had since 1888 when a party of the Senate and the White House were of different parties that anyone was confirmed. And that was the situation with Merrick Garland. Chuck Schumer said the same thing at the end of George W. Bush's term, that if the vacancy occurred with President Bush, a Republican in the White House, and the Democrats under Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer in charge of the Senate that they would not confirm. But now when you have both parties in the White House and the Senate, historically the confirmation goes forward. And that's what's going to happen here. I'll tell you what's going to happen here. I’ll tell you what’s going to happen --
CHUCK TODD:
Senator, I want to play --
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- the Senate is going to be back in session and the president's going to make a nomination I believe this week.
CHUCK TODD:
I understand, look, I get that. But, Senator, nobody, nobody in the Senate Republican conference was arguing these fine footnote points that you and your other colleagues are arguing now. I want to play a clip for you from 2018 from Lindsey Graham. Lake a listen.
[BEGIN TAPE]
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump's term and the primary process has started, we'll wait till the next election. And I've got a pretty good chance of being the Judiciary --
JEFFREY GOLDBERG:
You're on the record.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Yeah.
JEFFREY GOLDBERG:
All right.
SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM:
Hold the tape.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Senator, I guess the question is: Should viewers -- when should -- should viewers just not believe anything you're saying today because whatever you're saying today will change depending on the politics of the moment?
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
Well, I can tell you what's going to happen, Chuck. For viewers who are watching, the president is going to make a nomination. I believe it's going to be this week. And Lindsey Graham, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, we will hold hearings. And there will be a vote on the floor of the United States Senate this year. The president has a list of 20 potential nominees. He's mentioned several of them last night. And I think, I really do think that if the president really wanted to make a powerful positive statement by coming forth with a woman nominee, there are many qualified women on his list, somebody who could then be a role model for future attorneys, for young women and young men looking into the law --
CHUCK TODD:
Let me --
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- I think that would be the right move for this president, soon.
CHUCK TODD:
Senator, I want to just quote you back to yourself one more time. "We have called on the president to spare the country this fight. The best way to avoid this fight is to agree to let the people decide, give the people a voice." Why is it that this, this principle only matters when a Democrat is in the White House?
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
It's not that at all, Chuck. If we did something different now, we would be breaking with the precedent that has long been established. That if the president and the Senate are of the same party --
CHUCK TODD:
What precedent?
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- you move along with confirmation. But, Chuck, let me just say this one thing because you brought this up with Amy and Chuck Schumer last night. Look, Chuck Schumer's been very clear. The Democrats have been very clear. If they win the White House and the Senate, all bets are off. They are going to blow up the filibuster. They are going to use the nuclear option. They are going to stack the Supreme Court. They've talked about raising the number of members --
CHUCK TODD:
Do you believe that --
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- of the Supreme Court --
CHUCK TODD:
All right.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- even though Ruth Bader --
CHUCK TODD:
Senator.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- Ginsburg said it's a bad idea. She said it would politicize the court. And she said nine is the right number. You ask me if I believe it. The Democrats and Schumer have a war room. They have been at this for a long time.
CHUCK TODD:
Why --
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
These are the promises that they have made, including stacking the Senate--
CHUCK TODD:
So you have --
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
-- by making the District of Columbia. You asked the question --
CHUCK TODD:
You have no regrets? Yeah.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
Go ahead.
CHUCK TODD:
But you have no regrets that Senate Republicans are going to look like hypocrites 44 days before the election for just a complete flip-flop to the average American? I mean, I know you're trying to come up with these caveats. Nothing about it makes any sort of sense to the average person.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
This is the consistent principle and policies that have been followed through the history of the United States when 29 vacancies occurred in years of presidential elections. We're going to be consistent with all of that. But you're right. There's an election coming up. Every Senate candidate and every senator speaks for himself or herself. As chairman of the conference, I have great respect for that. But each one is going to be called upon to make a decision in their role as advise and consent. The president is going to nominate, and we're going to vote this year, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
Senator Barrasso, Republican from Wyoming, number three in the Senate, I appreciate you coming on and sharing your perspective with us. Thank you, sir.
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO:
Thanks, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
When we come back, I'll talk to the person who suggested Bill Clinton name Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the Supreme Court. It's former first lady, secretary of state, and Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. As you probably know by now, it was President Bill Clinton who introduced Ruth Bader Ginsburg to the general public and named her to the Supreme Court. But what -- do you know who introduced Bill Clinton to Ruth Bader Ginsburg? Well, it was then-First Lady Hillary Clinton, who had been closely following Ginsburg's career and thought she'd make a fine Supreme Court justice. Well, the former secretary of state and Democratic presidential nominee joins me now. Secretary Clinton, welcome back to Meet the Press. And I'd love for you to take us, take us back to those conversations you were having with President Clinton at that time and just what made you advocate for Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
HILLARY CLINTON:
Well, Chuck, I had known Ruth Bader Ginsburg for a number of years, and I had followed her work. I was a great admirer of her groundbreaking litigation, both as a lawyer and a law professor. And I knew that she had served on the court of appeals, appointed by President Carter, with great distinction, not only because of her razor sharp intellect and her ability to frame arguments to make them effective, but how well she got along with her colleagues, including at that time Judge Scalia before he was elevated to the Supreme Court. She just seemed to me to have all the attributes that Bill was looking for -- someone who could get to work right away, someone who could work with the other justices, someone who could really break ground as a Supreme Court justice. So you're right, I recommended that in addition to the long list of names that he was being presented with, he take a very hard look at Judge Ginsburg. And I want to add that probably her most effective advocate was her husband Marty. A lot has been written and said in the last days about Justice Ginsburg's stellar record as a lawyer, but her love affair, her long marriage with her partner, Marty, was really a sight to behold. And he was, he was in her corner from the very moment he met her at Cornell to the very end. And I was delighted when Bill said, "Well, I'd like to meet her and sit and talk with her." And so we arranged for her to come in very carefully under the radar on a Sunday. And they had the best conversation. It was like a master class in constitutional analysis. And at the end, he told me, "Wow, she, she really is the real deal."
CHUCK TODD:
Let me go to the politics of the court, but I don't want to just do it through the last four years. I want to go back to -- because one title I didn't use was "former senator." You were there for eight years of these judicial wars, which now seem so, they look like little skirmishes to where we are today. How broken is this process?
HILLARY CLINTON:
Oh, it's absolutely broken, Chuck. And I was able to watch your previous interviews with Senators Klobuchar and Barrasso. And Senator Barrasso is, you know, doing an epic job trying to defend the indefensible. The system has been broken for quite a while. But clearly, the decision that Mitch McConnell made back in 2016 in the midst of that presidential election but at a much earlier time when Justice Scalia unexpectedly passed away is what should be the standard now. They talk about, "Well, you know, we had other standards before." Well, they made a new precedent. And that new precedent, which they all defended incredibly passionately, is to wait for the next president, whoever that is, to make the nomination. But as you clearly heard, that is not what they are intending. And it's another blow to our institutions. You know, what's happening in our country is incredibly dangerous. Our institutions are being basically undermined by the lust for power, power for personal gain in the case of the president or power for institutional gain in the case of Mitch McConnell at the cost of ensuring that our institutions withstand whatever the political winds might be. But they made this decision back in 2016, and they should be held account for it.
CHUCK TODD:
You know, I'm curious. Can we ever get to a point where there'll be a detente in this? Because you heard Senator Barrasso's rationale. He's predicting future behavior. You know, it reminded me of the movie Minority Report, and that's a scary process. If we start anticipating future behavior, that, that leads us into horrible directions. But when you rationalize based on that, how do you ever get a detente in these political wars?
HILLARY CLINTON:
Chuck, look, I think we're at a very dangerous point in American history. And there's been a concerted effort, as you well know, going back decades now to turn the clock back on progress that has opened doors to people otherwise left out and marginalized: women, minorities obviously. There has been a very well-funded effort led by groups like the Federalist Society and others to use the courts to undo going back to the Board of Education, the Brown v. Board of Education decision. If you listened carefully -- and of course there was so much going on, people didn't necessarily pay attention -- to a lot of the hearings of the nominees for district and circuit court judgeships, it was shocking. Not only did an unfortunate number of them have absolutely no experience that would qualify them for the federal bench, but a number of them would not even say they agreed with Brown v. Board of Education or with other precedents. And it's not just a question of choice. It's a question of whether we're going to continue the move toward progress by which we mean a more perfect union that everyone has a place in and the rights to participate or not. And I think people need to understand that this court decision is critical to that future.
CHUCK TODD:
Secretary Clinton, I appreciate you coming on, sharing your own personal memories of Justice Ginsburg and your perspective in all of this. Thank you very much.
HILLARY CLINTON:
Thank you.
CHUCK TODD:
And when we come back, two women who knew Justice Ginsburg as well as they know Washington and who have some thoughts about what might happen next: my colleague Andrea Mitchell and NPR's Nina Totenberg.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. I'm joined right now by two people who knew Ruth Bader Ginsburg very well and have a pretty good idea of how Washington works too. Nina Totenberg is the American legal affairs correspondent for National Public Radio. She's a leading expert on the Supreme Court and was very close, a very close friend of Ginsburg. And, of course, Andrea Mitchell is the chief foreign affairs correspondent, as well as the senior Washington correspondent for NBC News, and she was also good friends with Ginsburg. Welcome to both of you. Nina, first, I'm sorry, I know this has been very hard on you. In fact, you were with her last week, delivering food. Just tell us a little something about these last few weeks that Justice Ginsburg was fighting here.
NINA TOTENBERG:
Well, she was very weak in the last few weeks. Suddenly, she really seemed to deteriorate and -- but I did have dinner with her not two weeks ago. We brought dinner over to the apartment and she was still very much herself. You know, in the last days, when she knew she was, the end was near, she dictated this statement to her granddaughter. And there were other non-familial witnesses in the room, so this isn't just a granddaughter's view, but the, her granddaughter, Clara, took it down and it said, "My most fervent wish is that I not be replaced until after the election and the installation of a new president," meaning whoever that is from the election. And it was, I think she was really worried about what's happening now, about the maelstrom, the election maelstrom that puts the court in the center of things. And that is what I think scared her.
CHUCK TODD:
Andrea Mitchell, you said this could be, I think we were quoting you earlier, basically the most ferocious political fight in the history of Washington. Explain.
ANDREA MITCHELL:
Well, and picking up on what Nina said, this is exactly what she had hoped to avoid. This is what she was trying to outlive, frankly. And she loved the Court more than anything. She was an institutionalist. And she loved collegiality. She said, memorably, in a 2016 op-ed for the New York Times, which the Times reprinted just today, that collegiality was central to the mission of the court. That was, of course, her relationship with Justice Scalia and with other justices. Note the statements, the statements that they all issued yesterday were so personal. These were not pro forma. Clarence Thomas and his wife, all of them, on opposite intellectual poles and political poles, but this was a really close relationship. And I think she would just hate this, but I think this fight, when you have the hypocrisy that the Democrats are pointing out — you were saying to Senator Barrasso, "Look at Lindsey Graham. Look at all the things that they said." There's no precedent, going back to Abraham Lincoln, of anything happening this quickly.
CHUCK TODD:
Nina, I want to talk about what a four-four court and the, for the short term here, particularly post-election in the health care lawsuit. I'm curious, does this make John Roberts even more powerful? I mean a Chief Justice is already pretty powerful, but considering he seems to be the only one that might swing on anything?
NINA TOTENBERG:
Well, a four-four court would include him to uphold the Affordable Care Act, but he's powerful in the sense that he could, I suppose, suggest to the court, and I think they might likely go along with it, that they would wait until the next, the next person is installed, the next justice is installed. And in that case, in all likelihood, although nothing is certain, that individual would be the deciding vote. There have been -- this is essentially the third major challenge to the Affordable Care Act. In every other one, Roberts wasn't the only one. Roberts was, in the first case, upheld the mandate, not the mandate, but the mandate as a tax. And then, in the second case, it was six to three, with Justice Kennedy joining Roberts. But Justice Kennedy is retired. Now the court, if Roberts stuck to it, would be four-four. As Pete said earlier, the lower court decision would stick, but that wouldn't necessarily mean anything. It might not stick for long. A lot depends on who gets elected, whether there's a new law. Republicans have not proposed a new law. I mean, it’s -- and people would be without those kinds of assurances in the law.
CHUCK TODD:
Andrea Mitchell, conventional wisdom is big court fights help Republicans because it fires up their base. I saw released overnight that in 28 hours, Democratic campaigns of all sorts, by Act Blue, I think they raised some $91 million in 28 hours. Is that conventional wisdom going to be flipped on its head?
ANDREA MITCHELL:
It could well be. Look at the thousands of people who have been turning out on the Supreme Court steps. And it became a national movement last night, the prayers, the songs, the flowers. The young people -- this could galvanize young women. Look at the celebrity of “Notorious RBG.” And you know, also when I think about her, I think so much about Marty Ginsburg. I think about what he meant to her and what she said early, earlier in her life was that he was the first boy who ever cared about the fact that she had a brain. That is so central to who she was, the discrimination she faced, the discrimination she shared with Sandra Day O'Connor, what bonded them, her loneliness as the only woman on the court. Women react to that. So this could galvanize the suburban women that Donald Trump really needs.
CHUCK TODD:
Andrea Mitchell, Nina Totenberg --
NINA TOTENBERG:
You know --
CHUCK TODD:
I really appreciate both of you coming on here. I apologize, Nina, I'm a little, little tight for time.
NINA TOTENBERG:
That’s okay.
CHUCK TODD:
But I'll tell you one thing you convinced me, I wish more, more of our elected officials acted like members of the Supreme Court. They clearly are a bit more collegial than the rest of our politics.
ANDREA MITCHELL:
Absolutely. Yes.
CHUCK TODD:
Anyway, thank you both. When we come back, we're going to change gears a little bit. I'll talk to HHS Secretary Alex Azar about the coronavirus death toll hitting 200,000 in the U.S. and about the war between President Trump and some of his scientists. Plus our brand new NBC News Wall Street Journal poll on where the presidential race stands.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. We have a brand new NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll out this morning just over six weeks before election day. Joe Biden is maintaining a very durable eight point lead among registered voters, 51 to 43 over President Trump. While that's down slightly from July, it's still outside the margin of error. By a huge margin, 57 to 40, voters disapprove of President Trump's handling or mishandling of the coronavirus. Our poll shows the highest level of interest ever though for a presidential election campaign, ever, 80%. And just 11% say their vote is still up for grabs. And that has left only 29% who say the three upcoming debates will be important in helping them decide their vote. That's the lowest number we've ever recorded on this question. One of the most remarkable things about this campaign is how resistant it is to events. In our polling, Joe Biden's lead has held steady most of the year, and here's why. Going back more than two years, nothing has moved President Trump's approval rating in our poll -- not his siding with Vladimir Putin over his own intelligence agencies in Helsinki, not impeachment, not the growing toll of deaths from the coronavirus and not the economy, whether it was booming or collapsing. Through it all, President Trump's approval rating has sat consistently, for two or three years, between 43% and 46%, which may suggest that no matter how ferocious the fight over Justice Ginsburg's seat may get, it may have very little impact on the voting, which by the way, has already begun. When we come back, 200,000 Americans are dead from COVID-19 and the Trump administration is still arguing with itself over science. HHS Secretary Alex Azar joins me next.
CHUCK TODD:
Welcome back. Lost in all the news about Justice Ginsburg was the fact that confirmed deaths in the United States from the Coronavirus sadly hit 200,000 officially yesterday. And with roughly 40,000 new cases a day, the administration still seems to be arguing with itself. Last week, President Trump contradicted his own CDC director on the timeline for a vaccine and on the value of face masks. And we also learned that the White House scuttled a plan to deliver 650 million face masks to hard hit areas in the spring because at the time they thought it was going to create panic. And there was a report that looser guidelines for testing, that were written by Health and Human Services officials over the objections of CDC scientists, though those guidelines were reversed on Friday after those -- a couple of those officials have been dismissed. So joining me now is the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Alex Azar. Secretary Azar, I really appreciate you coming on this morning. Thank you.
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
Glad to be with you, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
I want to start with something you said to me the last time you were on, on June 28th. Take a listen.
[BEGIN TAPE]
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
The window is closing. We have to act and people, as individuals, have to act responsibly. We need to social distance. We need to wear our face coverings if we're in settings where we can't social distance, particularly in these hot zones.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
So you said that on June 28th. We were at approximately 121,000 deaths then. We've had 80,000 more since. Has the window closed?
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
Absolutely not, Chuck. In fact, we've seen incredible progress thanks to the vigilance of the American people. They responded to that call to practice the three Ws of wash your hands, watch your distance, wear your face coverings. We've seen an almost 50 percent decline in cases, 50 percent decline in hospitalizations, and an even greater decline in fatalities since the high point. So the American people have stepped up to the plate and responded to President Trump's and my call to action to individual responsibility, and that's what is bridging us to now the real promise that we have of next-generation therapeutics and FDA gold-standard vaccines in the months ahead.
CHUCK TODD:
It sounds like you consider the death toll, which sits at 200,000 looks like -- you know -- and I'm curious what you believe it will be at the end of the year -- is that a sign of a successful strategy by this administration? You believe that that is a, that is a sign of a successful pandemic response?
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
Chuck, those are your words. I mourn the death of any American from this absolutely unprecedented pandemic. I remember though that Dr. Birx and Dr. Fauci have said that if the president had not taken the aggressive actions that we took, we could have lost as many as two million Americans. So, we don't want anyone to die in this country from this disease, but the aggressive actions, closing our borders, shutting down our economy, controlling most of the global supply of Remdesivir, bringing convalescent plasma to people, changing the death rate of people 70 and over in hospitalization in April from over 30 percent to now down near five percent, these are the changes that should bring people hope for the future as we look to monoclonal antibodies and FDA approved gold-standard vaccines in the months ahead.
CHUCK TODD:
Mr. Secretary, I want you to see if you can clear something up for us. As you know, there was that report this week due to a Freedom of Information Act request. We got a copy of a press release that the United States Postal Service was going to be sending out in April, that said in conjunction with your agency, HHS, there was going to be up to 650 million reusable masks sent to the hardest hit areas. And then the implication was the White House decided against this. You eventually -- the masks were sent to various organizations, but that the White House decided to nix the idea of mailing masks essentially to the American people. Was that a mistake?
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
Well, Chuck, I'm actually glad you asked about that. You know, thanks to the incredible foresight of Dr. Bob Kadlec, our Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, in the early days of the pandemic we worked with Hanes and other clothing manufacturers to retool their equipment and actually start pumping out these reusable cloth face masks. And we distributed 650 million of those to the hardest hit areas. At one point, we thought about shipping them to every American through the postal service, but the decision of the task force, instead, was send them where they can be used most, to the hottest, most active areas. So we got 650 million masks out. It was just through a different mechanism, getting them where they're needed most. And we just recently got about 60 million face coverings, these cloth face coverings in a smaller size, out to kids especially in schools in under-served areas.
CHUCK TODD:
Well, one of the assets of sending masks to everybody would have been it would have sent the message that masks are important at a time when the president was disputing whether he should be wearing a mask.
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
Well, Chuck, we got 650 million masks out to where they're needed most. I think that's what matters. Get them to the hot spots and get them where they can add the absolute most value. And you know, we've been calling for the use of face coverings since the middle of April when the president put out his guidelines for reopening America. We've been emphatic about the three Ws, wash your hands, watch your distance, and wear your face coverings when you can't watch your distance.
CHUCK TODD:
Secretary Azar, you have done that but I want to play for you a quick exchange here between Dr. Redfield and then President Trump. Take a listen.
[BEGIN TAPE]
ROBERT REDFIELD:
I might even go so far as to say that this face mask is more guaranteed to protect me against COVID than when I take a COVID vaccine. If I don't get an immune response, the vaccine's not going to protect me. This face mask will.
PRES. DONALD TRUMP:
No, I think he made a mistake when he said that. It's just incorrect information. And I called him and he didn't tell me that. And I think he got the message maybe confused.
[END TAPE]
CHUCK TODD:
Who should the American public listen to when it comes to masks? You and Dr. Redfield, or the president?
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
So, Dr. Redfield, I think, has made clear that he really believes in the value of a vaccine that's safe and effective, that masks are not the equivalent -- masks are important. They're an important part of the strategy, especially in dealing with asymptomatic disease. The president has made that clear. I think the point the president was making is there's not an equivalence between masks and vaccines. We use masks as we do mitigation tactics, to bridge to the day of those vaccines, but the vaccines are still the end game that we're headed towards. And we have just made absolutely historic progress towards getting these vaccines. You know, if we had said back in January that by the end of this year we'd have 100 million doses likely of FDA gold standard vaccine in the United States, people would have laughed at that, and yet we have mobilized the entire government and the public and private sector and this is a realistic possibility for this country now. And we should be celebrating that we are on the cusp of that level of hope and achievement for this country.
CHUCK TODD:
Very quickly, Secretary Azar, Michael Caputo, who is your spokesperson or the agency spokesperson over there. His background -- he had no background in public health, not really a lot of scientific background. Was that your decision to hire him, or did the White House make you hire him?
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
Well, I'm not going to get into personnel matters and Mr. Caputo is now on medical leave for a physical condition and our thoughts and prayers are with Michael. He added value and helped with our COVID response, but we've got a great team in our public affairs group and we're going to charge forward with providing fair, balanced, accurate information to the American people about the coronavirus response and preparedness activities.
CHUCK TODD:
Secretary Azar, I really appreciate you coming on. It's been a busy day, a busy weekend, and I appreciate your time you're spending with us. Thank you, sir.
SEC. ALEX AZAR:
Thank you, Chuck.
CHUCK TODD:
And that's all we have for today. As I said, it's been a busy one. Thank you for watching. Thank you for trusting us. We'll be back next week because if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press.