tv Fox News Night With Shannon Bream FOX News September 6, 2018 12:00am-1:00am PDT
no. and they were off. and prayers to beth holtz. >> the wife of lou holtz. >> laura: our prayers to everyone at notre dame. that's all the time we have tonight. shannon bream who has been all over the kavanaugh story takes it over from here. hearing take from rom >> thank you very much, welcome to fox news at night. we begin with a fox news alert. marathon hearings going late into the evening, latebreaking highlights, brett kavanaugh's answers and analysis from across the legal spectrum including bush 43 administration lawyer john luna which took center stage in the hearing. and you will hear from the president's attorney live. we start with resistance from within a day after bob
woodward's allegations, anonymous new york times editorial does much the same and the president is not holding his fire. that is the top story. here is ed henry. >> the hunt is on for who this person is, the president calling the anonymous author a coward who is committing treason and should resign, the new york times should turn this official over to the government at once. that may be a bit of overkill, the president and his aides are furious over anonymous leaks, the scathing books and they are fighting back, the new york times not about to reveal the writer's identity, taking this extremely rare step of running anonymous op-ed to protect the job of this official, they believe it is in the public interest to deliver, despite what they claim is happening inside the administration, the official is revealed to be a male, he insists he and others
went the administration succeed, that have made the economy better and working from within to stop erratic decisions, the official writing this is not the work of the deep state but the steady state. the president's aids have gone to great lengths to keep bad decisions contained but are not always successful. it is cold comfort but americans should know there are adults in the room. interesting timing, just a day after details building at bob woodward administers that top of this like james madison expressed frustration about the commander-in-chief's intellect, presidential suggestions like ordering the pentagon to assassinate the syrian president, he stayed on to prevent the start of world war iii but the secondary put out a
blistering statement declaring the idea that he expressed contempt for the commander-in-chief is a product of someone else rich administration. the president thanked him for that and lashed out at the new york times. >> anonymous, meaning a gutless editorial. we are doing a great job. the poll numbers are through the roof, poll numbers are great and nobody is going to come close to beating me because of what we have done. >> the remarkable part of this op-ed were the anonymous author quotes an anonymous source inside the white house about an anonymous policy decision the president flip-flopped on at the last minute, anonymous with an anonymous so by calling this official a trump administration official it broadens out beyond the white house, could be dozens or hundreds of different officials in the government because there's dozens of government agencies so a senior official in the administration outside the white house, a lot of people. >> all of us are trying to track down this individual. i predict it is not going to take long. now for special coverage, fox news at night, the supreme court
nominee finally got to talk substance amid numerous outbursts and scrutiny about what kind of justice he would really be. >> i watched his performance and his statements and they have been totally brilliant. >> donald trump praising his second supreme court nominee as the judge runs a gauntlet marked by protesters. and senators jousting over document production. >> i ask the chairman, these are marked confidential. >> you could have been asking since august 25th. >> reporter: questions centering on guns. >> i'm interested in your thinking on assault weapons. >> reporter: abortion. >> what are you doing for lunch? let's overrule roe v wade.
it doesn't work that way. >> and his evolution whether a sitting president should be subjected to committal and civil investigations while in office. is a member of kenneth starr's team he advocated aggressively questioning then-president bill clinton and helped write the star report outlining the grounds for impeachment. years later he wrote an article questioning the wisdom of suggesting sitting president to invest of investigations while noting congress was the ultimate remedy, impeachment. >> what changed in september 11th. that is what changed, president bush said this will not happen again and he was of single-minded focus every morning for the next 7 years, september 12, 2001. >> this sparks numerous questions about whether he was involved in crafting warrantless surveillance programs or enhanced interrogation policies and legal memos used to justify them. >> i was not involved in
crafting that program nor crafting the legal justifications for that program. >> reporter: the same day the president praised him he was pressed about whether he could truly be independent from the man who would be responsible for his lifetime supreme court appointment. >> we are in and gender territory here. it is unprecedented for a supreme court nominee to be named by a president who is an unindicted co-conspirator. i would like to know that you will recuse yourself. >> to be consistent with the principle of independent judiciary i should not had may not make a commitment how i would handle a particular case. >> he was pushed on his philosophy about interpretation of statutes and the concept of legislating from the bench, he said it is not my role to update or modify statutes, that is up to lawmakers but i can write opinions that give guidance. tonight's legal eagles, attorney
general john you and former doj counsel jamil jasper and senior fellow at the center for american progress, thank you for being with us tonight. i went to start with you because you got name checked in the hearing, this is something from senator leahy. >> did you ever work on the constitutional implications of any warrantless surveillance program? >> i can't -- in the wake of september 11th it was all hands on deck on all fronts. >> do you expect this to come up in this hearing? >> senator leahy is practicing for when trump nominates me to the supreme court. >> if trump wanted to drive laid crazy that is one thing he could do but i can answer the question for brett cavanagh because he may not remember it as well as i did being there after 9/11 but i
can say categorically that brett kavanaugh was not working on or was in any meetings and did not work on any memos related to what became known as the terrorist surveillance program. i think he tried to mention that. he wasn't made into any program so senator leahy doesn't understand how classified programs work. if you are not read into something, that was the most sensitive program in the government at the time you are not told about it, you cannot work on it. you might have thoughts about something but -- i worked on that program. he was not part of the team that worked on it. he was not allowed to know about it. >> your name came up as well crafting legal policy or justification for enhanced interrogation. that was something he was not read into and didn't have power to control. we also heard from senator graham asking the judge about how he decides cases and if he
ever had to do something he was not happy about. >> of her made a legal decision that was upsetting to you? >> i'm sure i have. >> he went on to talk about justice kennedy having to write this opinion that upheld the legality or constitutionality of flagburning saying as a judge if you're going to call balls and strikes sometimes you get to the end result that might not line up with you personally, that should be the whole point. >> every judge is going to have some case where the law is so clear they have to decide things a certain way. the question is what you do when there's a play in the law. on abortion, net neutrality, campaign finance, issue after issue, when there's play in the law he takes the conservative pass but in some cases there just isn't play, no matter what judge you have on the case will decide what is what. >> even obamacare he has made decisions that made conservatives wary about where
he may be. many judges on the bench want to know about that. i want to ask about this one. he continues to refer to the president as an unindicted co-conspirator. is that really technically correct. >> we have not seen anything in documents from the justice department, oftentimes you would see that in a pleading and we have not seen that. that is a theory he has but not a fact that we know at this point. >> in asked senator blumenthal about whether or not he can be independent from the president, here's what he asked. we don't have it so i will tell you about it. he said this president, william a commitment that you are not going to take part in any civil or criminal case that comes before he was a justice if you make it to the bench, i want you
to commit to recusing yourself and what brett cavanagh said is any case that may come before me for or against in any other way, that is what nominees do. i studied them and i will stick by this president. >> brett cavanagh has come up with nominee precedent. back to thurgood marshall, no predictions or forecasts or hints, no thumbs-up or thumbs down. you don't ask nor should you ask a sitting judge or nominee to make any commitment. it is not appropriate and the senator knows that. >> you spent 12 years on the federal bench and he wakes up every day not every thinking how can i rewrite the law today but how can i apply it as it is written. do you buy that? >> some cases there's play in the law and other cases where there isn't. the constitution says you can't
have unreasonable searches and seniors -- seizures, doesn't define reasonable. there are things called privileges or immunities of citizenship, doesn't tell you what they are or what cruel and unusual punishment is. there are ambiguous phrases in the law that when a judge tells me i am going to do what is written why not to trust them because the words only get you so far. >> he has taught at harvard law. he has talked about telling students there's not as much ambiguity as folks want to think there is, don't look for ambiguity where there is clarity. a lot of folks taking issue with those things he said that a lot of folks budgeting themselves for 2020 as well. >> that is definitely what is going on. brett kavanaugh has two senators to thank, harry reid and chuck schumer. they got the filibuster for judicial appointment votes, no
matter what democrats do, the republicans have the votes on the floor and what you are seeing here democrats are not really trying to take down brett kavanaugh because they don't have the votes but they are using it for some other purpose whether appealing for their base or some people using it to establish a platform. >> the democrats took down the filibuster down to 51 for lower court nominees. it was republicans who decided they would do it for the supreme court as well and that got as neil gorsuch and possibly brett cavanagh. we will watch again tomorrow. thank you very much, good to see you. 13 progressive group stepping up criticism of chuck schumer. the liberal coalition says his efforts to stop brett kavanaugh are failing. that may be why chuck schumer failed to agree to a request from mitch mcconnell to allow the senate judiciary committee to continue meeting beyond the 2
hour limit while the senate is in session and republicans agenda the entire senate, which you saw a short time ago. i asked ben cardin if progressive complaints about democrats ineffective efforts to stop brett kavanaugh were fair. >> the process has been unfair. an outside group made the list, the way the president went about the nomination was wrong and certainly the failure of the documents is wrong. having said that important things to get the information out to the american people to deal with facts and circumstances, how this nomination will affect your rights. with this person stand up for the independence of the supreme court to protect your rights against the abuses of government, whether the president or congress, corporate america, there's a lot of material here we would like to talk about so it is important to
get that information out. >> how the respond to chairman grassley who says there's 5 times the documentation for this nominee as for numerous nominees before him? >> not a matter of the documents that whether there is full release of all information relevant to evaluate this nominee and the time brett kavanaugh spends in the white house there are important records for us to have the tell a lot about his use and issues that are important, that information is not been made available. >> thousands of documents have been released, i know it is not everything, which both sides of it may be nearly impossible to get at this point. he was pressed on executive power, guns. if you heard enough in his answers and what you have seen so far to answer the concerns you have? what you argue he's not qualified?
>> he certainly has the law school background and professional experience in a supreme court nominee. my concern is he looks like he has an agenda, he comes off of the list prepared by outside groups that he in many of his rulings rules on the side of powerful interests whether governmental interests or private-sector interests. i am concerned about the right of privacy and whether he will enforce the rights to protect individuals. i'm concerned about status of healthcare laws against preexisting conditions, consumer issues where he sides with powerful or whether he will side with consumers. those issues cause me concern and we are talking about a person who will affect decisions on the supreme court for the next decade. >> do you feel comfortable that he will adhere to the president on things like roe and others? he says it is not his decision to legislate from the bench but call balls and strikes, he laid
out his record. does it give you any comfort? >> we know the supreme court reversed precedent in the past and in some cases by unanimous decision, brown versus board of education which advanced constitutional rights. my concern is will he use the right of advancing constitutional protections and in some cases not be inhibited by the past make sure we advance the rights of individuals against the powerful. those types of decisions i'm not comforted when someone says they will follow the presidents of the court, we expect the nominee to say that. the question is where does he stand when it comes to your rights to protect your rights, your healthcare, to make your own health care decisions, protect your rights as a consumer to buy health insurance, protect the interest you have, how he will protect your rights against corporate america to make sure you have clean air and clean water.
that is what i'm concerned about. >> what you make a suggestion there's been a coordinated effort with senate democrats and protesters we see pop-up? >> i can assure you i knew nothing at all about that. individuals are here, i would prefer the proceedings be done in an orderly manner so you get the message out about issues i've talked about. >> will brett cavanagh look the other way in a case against the president who nominated him. we will talk to orrin hatch, and the attorney will give his thoughts on the brett kavanaugh hearing. allegations that he was flat-out denying. my name is jeff sheldon,
and i'm the founder of ugmonk. before shipstation it was crazy. it's great when you see a hundred orders come in, a hundred orders come in, but then you realize i've got a hundred orders i have to ship out. shipstation streamlined that wh the order data, the weights of , everything is seamlessly put into shipstation, so when we print the shipping ll everything's pretty much done. it's so much easier so now, we're ready, bring on t. shipstation. the number one ch of online sellers. go to shipstation.com/tv and get two months free. when the guy in frontd down the highway slams on his brakes out of nowhere. you do, too, but not in time. hey, no big deal. you've got a good record and liberty mutual won't hold a grudge by raising your rates over one mistake. you hear that, karen? liberty mutual doesn't hold grudges... how mature of them.
>> shannon: welcome back to fox news @ night. the kavanaugh hearings. both sides asking tough questions shannon: the kavanaugh hearings both sides asking tough questions about executive power under the russia probe. i asked orrin hatch if he was satisfied that the justice can be independent from the manner nominated him and democrats demanding more documents today. >> they have been willing to
give anything. they have been -- hardly in a position to criticize anybody but he has given thousands of pages of documents and you reach a point that they don't even read them, they look at them. who is making these arguments, but there are plenty of documents, plenty of judges -- is doing a great job. >> how did you like his answers about whether he will be independent. there have been others on the committee who suggested the president hand-picked and because he doesn't believe is sitting president should be subjected to criminal or civil investigations and they say brett cavanagh will be the president's get out of jail card. >> that is presuming too much, too many people hate donald trump, no question and will do anything to smear him him and to be honest we are light years away from that type of thing even if it is possible.
but i think this man is going to do what is right. is not going to be a lackey for donald trump or anybody else and that is what is great about him. he is intelligent, articulate, smart, he knows what he's doing and he has been an excellent judge on the circuit court of appeals. shannon: you are convinced of his independence? >> no question. i know him very well, he's like the guy next door. he plays basketball with kids and does a lot of things you would like your neighbors to do for your kids and it he is a very fine person. is religious, he believes in his religion. he fosters it, lives it, he is a good family man. his parents are great people. how do you ask for somebody
better than this. >> we talk to your counterpart to think he has an agenda and a lot of people protesting this week say the same thing. have you ever seen something like you have seen with the protesters? >> we have had pretty sour protesters with another supreme court nomination. it has been pretty bad here. i'm disgusted with some of these people that just don't seem to understand the gravity of these hearings and want to disrupt them and hurt them, they are not people who want to listen but just to disrupt. >> it was the president taking center stage during hearings for his supreme court nominee, personal attorney for the president and supreme court advocate j sec yellow. i want to play a little something with the ranking member, senator dianne feinstein with an interchange with the nominee. >> can a sitting president be
required to respond to a subpoena? >> going with the justice ginsburg principle, it is everyone's principle, on the current supreme court, it is a matter of judicial independence, can't give you an answer on that hypothetical question. >> he asked a lot of other questions including by senator blumenthal this i want you promised to recuse on any case involving the president. is a posturing or legitimate legal questions by democrats? >> they are not legitimate at all. i argued for over three decades, the idea that a nominee of a sitting president would have to recuse himself of cases that might involve the president or policies of the president would mean justices would be recusing themselves on every case so that is absurd. what is brett kavanaugh going to do? the case comes before him, he will review the briefs, listen to the oral arguments and make a decision to defend the constitution of the united states as he views the constitution. that is what we expect of
article 3 judges and supreme court justices. i noticed on the other networks they were talking about brett kavanaugh having a grilling is one of the networks said. you have been covering this for a long time and covering it today very thoroughly but there was no grilling of brett kavanaugh. dianne feinstein had to come in at one point to correct senator leahy who was trying to cross-examine brett kavanaugh with a document thing there was a reference to him in this document and when everybody looks at it and senator leahy was told it doesn't reference the nominee to the supreme court and it was senator feinstein cities not in it, it is not there. okay, let's go to the next document, the lack of preparation, this is a lot of show. under the constitution brett kavanaugh has a job to do when
he is concerned and he will be confirmed as justice of the supreme court and i suspect before the first monday in october he will be a justice on that court and the fact is he reviews the law, reviews the facts, listens to the arguments and make decisions like every other justice on the supreme court. >> i taught her to a member of the senate judiciary committee who questioned him on a number of issues and also talked about this story today about a senior trump official who has this anonymous piece in the new york times and whether it is fair to make these claims. here's what senator lee told me. >> kind of on for somebody to stand under false pretense that they are there to help to be part of the administration of they are undermining it. if they see things that are wrong, illegal, immoral they are to leave. >> are you worried people will work for the president don't have his best interests at heart? >> i'm not going to comment on anonymous. anonymous doing an op-ed. it is one thing, this is an anonymous op-ed. to me looking at this is the
president's lawyer, look what is going on, a nomination to the supreme court of the united states, international issues that are very significant involving china and russia, north korea and we are talking about anonymous, an anonymous op-ed in the new york times. think about this. we have been talking about a supreme court nominee that will serve for life, have an impact on the constitution of the united states for decades which is what they are supposed to do and instead we are talking about anonymous. my answer to anonymous is i'm not talking about anonymous. shannon: i prefer questions for my client, these are things your negotiating and can talk about this with the special counsel that can you give us a timeline this might be resolved one way or the other? >> i tell you what i don't give,
i don't give timelines. it needs to be wrapped up soon for the good of the country and national security interests, get this investigation done. this is been the most transparent inquiry of a white house in history, $1.4 million, 30 witnesses put forward by the administration. i don't think bob mueller would argue this is not transparent. when you get to the question of where we are now i'm not going to use that. we are not going to comment on ongoing dialogue with the office of special counsel, not going to breach that here but i will tell you this. there is a process you go through. we looked at this historical you. a lot of administrations have had these inquiries before and you handle it inappropriate way.
our job is to defend the president, what any lawyer would do in a situation like this and we will do what is in the best interests of the president and what we think is the appropriate review and i'm hopeful it will be resolved sooner rather than later. that is as good as i'm going to say, sooner rather than later. shannon: keep us updated. google stays home, social media takes a lashing on capitol hill, questions on free-speech and antitrust laws and this interruption in the hearings. >> $30 down, 35, 71/2, 40. the same? that's why capital one is building something completely different. capital one cafés. welcoming places with people here to help you, not sell you.
company stumbling amid another hearing that some say have the circus-like flavor of the brett kavanaugh hearings, kristin fisher is tracking that one. so much happening on capitol hill. >> the whole purpose of one of the hearings is for house republicans to get answers from twitter's ceo about the platform's anti-conservative bias. it had all the makings of what could have been a fiery back and forth but it was two far right firebrands with everyone on capitol hill asking did that really just happened. >> republican congressman and former auctioneer billy long drowning out a protest recusing twitter's ceo of censoring and shadow banning conservatives. on the other side of capitol hill. >> the frat boy here.
>> alex jones, marco rubio in the senate always. >> don't touch me. i don't want to be touched. >> the first amendment -- you will beat me up? >> marco rubio took aim at google's ceo who was a no-show in the 2016 election. >> we are not here today because they are arrogant. >> sales and break showed up. >> too slow to act. >> censoring people? >> know. >> twitter and shadow banning prominent republicans, bad. is that true? >> know. >> what did the algorithm take into account that led to prominent conservatives including members of the house of representatives not being included in auto search suggestions? >> we are using a signal of the behavior of people following the accounts.
on further consideration seeing the impact which was about 600,000 accounts. >> dorsey said democratic lawmakers have the same problem but the justice department isn't so sure. the attorney general scheduled a meeting with state attorneys general to discuss what he described as a growing concern these tech companies may be stifling the free exchange of ideas on their platform. it is not over yet. shannon: i'm still not over the bidding, thought auctioneer, marco rubio, alex jones, that could have been my whole story tonight. for more on this, leslie marshall and radio host in washington dc larry o'connor. there's a lot to unpack.
senator warner called out google, very unhappy they didn't send their top person to this hearing but this is what he said about challenges these companies face. >> the russians infiltrate and manipulate american social media to hijack our national conversation. you have gotten better and i'm pleased to see you take action but also the russians are getting better as well. >> giving them some credit for stepping forward but plenty of critique how they could be doing better and tough to keep up with a group like the russians who are very determined. >> yes. those are the things that bother me most, not the left or right. we have to realize there is no regulation of search engines on the internet and they are not under the umbrella of the first amendment currently, they can do what they want as private owners. what concerns me is not just russia and meddling but when there are fake movements left and right, the pedophilia thing
that could lead to danger. someone walking in with a gun wanting to harm someone, to be violence or take a life, that concerns me and meddling in our elections whether it is left or right i want it to be a fair level playing field so i'm glad that was brought up. shannon: a privacy expert, tech giants like facebook, google and twitter are so powerful that they can weather through intent or incompetence unleash serious threats to our society and political system but remain secretive and unaccountable, the time has come for a consideration of antitrust action against these companies, they are too big and too dangerous but these are private companies. >> i believe in the free market,
not necessarily big business, big businesses love to squelch the free market because they want to dominated these businesses are dominating. let's be clear, this is a serious issue. we had a federal judge tell the president he couldn't block people on twitter because of first amendment grounds was that establishes the idea the world of social media and intercourse on social media is connected to the first amendment. then you have this company twitter blocking in a capricious way with no terms or conditions that are explains, no criteria who gets blocked and who doesn't just doing it willy-nilly and it seems like one side of the political equation. they even said that normally they would block donald trump because he breaks the rules but they will let him continue to be on twitter because he is newsworthy. think about that. if you are not newsworthy twitter will block you but if you are newsworthy they will let you say stuff that apparently is against their rules. that's not the way to run an open form and the fact they block people for extolling
conservatives -- dennis prager blocked on youtube, an intellectual guy, people think of him as a rabbi of the content they are blocking is sound intellectual discourse about things that are important to america. that is a problem. >> we are out of time. twitter decides to block the president we will hear it from here, the white house is a few blocks away but what that would unleash. come back soon. coming up, the hearings get tense, brett cavanagh is viewed on roe v wade, guns and more, we go inside the numbers and look at what to expect tomorrow. a hotel can make or break a trip. and at expedia, we don't think you should be rushed into booking one. that's why we created expedia's add-on advantage. now after booking your flight, you unlock discounts on select hotels right until the day you leave. ♪ add-on advantage. discounted hotel rates when you add on to your trip.
who we are as people and making everybody feel welcome. ordering custom ink t-shirts has been a really smart decision for our business. - [narrator] custom ink has hundreds of products and free shipping. upload your logo or start your design today at customink.com. >> shannon: this is fox news >> south and north korean ws diplomat the emerging to report kim jong un is still committed to complete denuclearization of the korean peninsula. kim is insisting a rocket site
allegedly dismantled by the hermit kingdom is proof of the complete suspension of all future long-range missile tests. the trump administration says pyongyang must take more disarmament measures. democrats particularly drilling down on brett kavanaugh's decision in a case involving an illegal immigrant teenager who wanted an abortion after crossing into the us. this is getting a lot of attention. >> supreme court nominee brett kavanaugh said roe versus wade is still blind and repeatedly emphasized the importance of precedent noting since 1973 roe was reaffirmed many times but he won't say whether he believes roe was correctly decided and that has democrats probing for more insight into his views on abortion. illinois democratic senator dick durbin pressed him on his only
abortion ruling during his 12 years on the dc appellate court. the case last fall involves a pregnant 17-year-old illegal immigrant in federal custody. the trump administration argued it would break the law if the government facilitated the abortion and brett cavanagh ruled the procedure should be delayed citing the girl's age and noting the supreme court has upheld parental consent laws that can delay abortions. watch. >> he is from another country, she does not speak english, she is by herself. had she been an adult she would have a right to obtain the abortion immediately. >> senator durbin pushed back saying 13 had already been given permission by a texas judge to obtain the abortion. watch again. >> the clock is ticking. >> i am a judge. i'm not making a policy
decision. my job is to decide whether that policy is consistent with the law. >> brett cavanagh's ruling the delay between's abortion was overturned i the appeals court but connecticut senator richard blumenthal thinks brett cavanagh's ruling was a signal to the trump administration that he is willing to overturn roe v wade. the department of health and human services is in a legal battle whether pregnant illegal immigrant teens in federal custody have a constitutional right to abortion. >> just as many conservatives tell me they're worried about him because of the decision too. both sides not sure where he will go next. how many arrests, who is for and against brett kavanaugh next. i don't keep track of regrets.
demand. >> back by popular demand chad program with his brett kavanaugh by the numbers report. >> top issues for democrats during this hearing focus on executive power, dealing with abortion, guns, healthcare and presidential pardons. republicans had a different set of questions, they asked about his time at the bush white house under george w. bush, they had questions about judicial independence and what was going on in the post-9/11 period. democrats tried to pause these hearings earlier today, there's something in the senate called the 2:00 will which means no committee can meet after 2:00 and that you have the agreement of the majority leader in the minority leader. chuck schumer invoked this and mitch mcconnell counterpunch to, the committee hearing from brett cavanagh can meet as long as the senate is out. usually what the senate remain in session but he determined the brett kavanaugh hearing was more important. brett kavanaugh picked up a new
supporter, john kyle, republican was morning, the successor to john mccain. he will support brett kavanaugh unless there is a crazy comment from outer space. the balance of power, the breakdown, 33 republicans, 28 democratic days. the democrat, the most recent want to come out against brett kavanaugh. more protestant disruptions in the hearings today, more than 50 disruptions. if you are arrested and charged with disrupting congress you get charged $50, you can come back in and if they arrest you again they will probably take you out for a couple days, you have to make bail and appear before a judge. >> last august in santa rosa, california, they ran into a homeless woman he had met before on patrol, told couple she was pregnant on valentine's day, called and asked if they would adopt her baby, they were
honored, overcome some physical problems. our midnight he rose. most-watched, most trusted, most grateful you spent the evening with us. i am shannon bream. wrong. your insurance company is gonna raise your rate after the other car got a scratch so small you coulda fixed it with a pen. maybe you should take that pen and use it to sign up with a different insurance company. for drivers with accident forgiveness liberty mutual won't raise their rates because of their first accident. liberty mutual insurance. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty ♪
>> thursday, september 6th, this is "fox and friends first". another mole in the trump white house pending an explosive op-ed in the new york times, the president firing back saying this is beyond personal, this is a shot at our national security. >> i watched his statements and they have been totally brilliant. i think the other side is grasping at straws. jillian: nothing off the table, intense cross-examination of et