favor of pushing the legal limits on president clinton, in terms of the kind of process that ken starr could use against him. subsequently, he wrote that that was a bruising thing, and he changed his mind. he thinks that presidents should be immune from criminal trials, subpoenas, until after they're out of office. now, he did say that it would require a change in the law, that congress would have to change the law in order to give presidents that kind of legal immunity. nonetheless, it does show you sort of where he's thinking. it's not inconceivable that if robert mueller eventually decides to subpoena president trump, and this goes to court, it could up before the supreme court. if now-judge, eventually possibly justice kavanaugh votes on that and doesn't recuse, his views on the issue could be important. i think you're going to hear a lot of questions about that issue, which is unusual for a confirmation hearing. >> i think you're right. that discussion, that debate,