CLAY: We’ve talked, obviously, about a ton of different stories here. But one that is continuing and will be a story for months to come is the Supreme Court. Biden has said that he would like to have his nominee announced by the end of February, and really there only appear to be about four or five candidates that are getting very much attention at all, and that is certainly predicated on the fact that Joe Biden has made unbelievable statement — in my opinion — that he’s only going to nominate a black woman, meaning he has eliminated 94% of the overall people in this country who could have been considered otherwise.

We talked a lot about that this week, that in addition to the fact that it is a awful example to set, it is undercutting whoever his nominee is because many people are gonna say, “Of course. The only reason you got nominated is because Biden said, ‘I’ll only take a black woman,’ and that automatically limited how people he could consider, and so you weren’t the top choice. You were the top choice of a limited number of people.

So, 94% of people are not being considered; 6% of America, black women, those are the only people. Obviously, you have to be a judge presumably to be on the Supreme Court, limits that number even more. Only about four or five people that are worthy of consideration. Let me say this. I have seen and am intrigued early on, Buck, by what is a bit of a stealth candidacy for a woman named Michelle Childs out of South Carolina.

Now, everyone out there who pays attention to the political primaries at all in 2020 knows that Representative James Clyburn from South Carolina effectively made Joe Biden president of the United States, at least effectively made him the Democratic nominee, because Biden was getting roasted everywhere. Remember, he got destroyed in New Hampshire, destroyed in Iowa, destroyed in Nevada.

He was on the ropes close to being knocked out when Clyburn came out and said, “Biden is my guy.” Biden won in South Carolina, swept through the rest of the way. Covid hit. It wasn’t allowing really robust debates anymore; Biden ends up the nominee. Now, Clyburn, Buck, has come out pretty clearly and said, “I want this woman from South Carolina,” that he wants this woman, Judge Childs, on the Supreme Court.

Now, she’s a little bit interesting because she went to two state schools, one in Florida, graduated from the University of South Carolina law school, is an under-the-radar choice. But I saw last night, Buck, I was doing prep reading, that both of the Republican senators in South Carolina — both Tim Scott and Lindsey Graham — sound like they would vote for her if she were the nominee.

She’s a bit more moderate, worked as a partner in a law firm, has a lived experience that is a bit unique. So the question to me is, “Is it possible,” I don’t know what the answer is, “that Biden is so desperate to appear bipartisan and in such thrall and he owes so much to Clyburn that he could allow Clyburn, effectively, to pick the next Supreme Court justice?”

And if he picked this woman, Buck, it seems to me that she would get somewhat a decent amount of Republican support, and she might not be — I say “might not,” might not be — the ideologue that most people are expecting Biden to pick. Do you think it’s possible that he takes this path which would be somewhat bipartisan given the options that are out there?

BUCK: I think that we’re at the early stage, and as we look at the possible candidates, one thing to remember is that you don’t have to be a radical jurist to give the left everything that it wants from the bench. So, one of the more left-wing choices out there right now, for example, who is being considered is Sherrilyn Ifill, I believe cousin of the former journalist who passed away, Gwen Ifill. Sherrilyn Ifill is somebody that’s the director council of the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, right?

Now, people are talking about her as a possibility. I don’t know that much about her, but she is known to be in legal analysis circles — and as Clay can tell you, those are some nerdy circles. But they get really, really deep into this stuff. But she’s known to be pretty left-wing, pretty left-wing ideologue, right? But even if you had someone like a Merrick Garland…

Remember Merrick Garland? They promised us in the Obama administration, “Oh, he’s so moderate! This is great for everybody.” Merrick Garland’s the one who’s putting out the “Hey, you better watch yourself, parents. I’ll send the FBI after you at these school board meetings.” Merrick Garland is a left-wing hack. So all you need is someone who is left of center in their jurisprudence, and you’re gonna get essentially what you get with — the same decisions you’d see in terms of voting on the court, up or down or whatever it may be from — Sotomayor and Kagan and Breyer.

So I don’t think it doesn’t make that much difference from that perspective. In terms of the politics of it and getting through the process, yeah. I don’t know, Clay. Help me find a place where I can place bets on this so I can put my money where mouth is. There will be Republican support in the Senate for whomever the nominee is. There will be a few at least.

I think you could see even five, six, seven, maybe more Republicans who break in favor of this nominee ’cause we still play — Republicans play — the game very differently than the left does, right? We saw it in the Kavanaugh situation, which can I ask you… I don’t want to divert. Did that have a profound effect on your perception of American politics that endures to this day? It was a bit of a sea change moment for me. That was when I was like, “Okay, I’m not just trying to win over the libs. These people are crazy commies. We have to defeat them.”

CLAY: Well, to me was a line of demarcation, right? Sort of Rubicon moment. And there are all sorts — and this is me talking from a legal perspective. Every single Supreme Court justice is going to decide cases differently than I would, right? If you had Supreme Court Justice Clay Travis, there’s not a single person out there on the court right now that would have the exact same opinions.

There’s nothing wrong with that. You come to your logic differently. So I have long believed that if a nominee is within the reasonable bounds, right, of being high-level legal scholar enough that you should defer to the president who is trying to put that person on the bench. What I saw with Kavanaugh was an unprecedented, illegitimate assault upon his nomination, and I gotta give credit to Mollie Hemingway who wrote a phenomenal book about the behind the scenes.

BUCK: Justice on Trial. I have it at home.

CLAY: It’s a phenomenal book she wrote about the behind the scenes. But as I watched — and I watched every minute of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings. As I watched those hearings, I was so incredibly appalled by what I saw from the Democrats that I couldn’t even believe I was watching a real examination in any way in the United States.

BUCK: And who was among the very worst?

CLAY: Kamala.

BUCK: Kamala Harris. Then-Senator Harris was an abject disgrace — not just as a senator, as a person — in what she was willing to do to the manifestly, obviously innocent Brett Kavanaugh. Everyone says “Oh, Buck, you don’t know that.” Really? Did they tell you about all the people who came out and said Brett Kavanaugh raped me too on a boat in Rhode Island, and then it comes out, “Oh, this is a crazy person; had never even been to Rhode Island”?

There are so many people coming out with the same smear. They found one that they thought they could actually make it happen with, end his nomination with. Anyone who went along with that should hang their heads in shame. It was disgraceful. But I do think it went to show just how the Democrats will go all the way. They’ll do whatever they have to do to maintain power, and they’ll do anything they have to do to feel like the Supreme Court is still their super legislature.

And you’re not gonna… I’m just preparing everybody right now, Clay, this is not what I think a lot of folks want to hear. Republicans aren’t even gonna put up a fight over this nomination. There are gonna be some questions. A couple people that want to get a little more time on TV might get a good sound bite heater or there from the right. That’ll be it.

CLAY: I will say this — and it’s an interesting discussion — I do feel like that going after her could play into the Democrats’ hands only because of so many other things that are going on wrong. However long you spend on the Supreme Court debate is time that’s not spent on inflation, on the border, on the crime rate, on covid, which are all failures of Biden. You know how this is going to end. She’s going to end up on the Supreme Court.

BUCK: So what’s the point?

CLAY: Why drag it on?

BUCK: Just so… I think that’s very true. I think that’s astute. So don’t expect there to be some big effort to block her, ’cause also, okay. Let’s say they block her. Who was the judge you brought up from South Carolina, Clay? I’m sorry the name?

CLAY: I’ve got it in front of me right now.

BUCK: Well, anyway, that judge, any number of the African-American female judges that they brought up —

CLAY: Childs. Judge Childs.

BUCK: Childs. If you were to — and let’s say Republicans went all out and they said, “This person’s too radical.” Well, you’re gonna get another left-wing ideologue on the court. It doesn’t really matter, ’cause they’re not gonna bend on this. They’re gonna put a left-wing, living-Constitution, legislate-from-the-bench ideologue on there. So it doesn’t make that much difference regardless.

And I think you’re right, actually. It could really play in the Democrats’ hands to be… Look, they should press on judicial philosophy. Get whoever… I think we can say “she.” We know it’s gonna be a woman, right? Get whoever she is to admit that she’s very left-wing, so we kind of get it on the record. But going to the mat to try to stop this the way they did Kavanaugh? Not gonna happen, and I think not gonna happen and probably not even good politics.

CLAY: Right, they thought going after Kavanaugh was good politics ’cause he’s a white guy and they wanted to make…

BUCK: Clay?

CLAY: Yeah?

BUCK: The White House was close to pulling the Kavanaugh nomination.

CLAY: So close to pulling it.

BUCK: It got close. Folks, this is not often talked about. They almost succeeded with the smear against Kavanaugh. They almost succeeded.