thank you, san francisco. gracias, san francisco. -thank you. -[ speaks native language ] let's keep making a differene together. so then i said to him, you oughta customize your car insurance with liberty mutual, so you only pay for what you need.

hot dog or... chicken? only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ right now on msnbc reports, everything literally the day's big events, the news being made this hour. you're going to watch it unfold live here over the next 60 minutes starting in less than 15 minutes from now, when president biden and british prime minister boris johnson come face to face for the first time since the president took office trying to shore up their special relationship and looking to show a united threat against the threat from russia. our team following what's ahead. we are live in the uk and moscow. on capitol hill fbi director christopher wray about to face tough questions from house lawmakers. his first testimony since the senate january 6th report and

the first since the new ransomware attacks from russia. we're on supreme court watch. may be getting our first decision of the day any second, waiting on rulings around obamacare, religious freedoms and whether college athletes should be paid. our legal team of reporters and analysts standing by and we'll break in with any decision if we get it. i'm hallie jackson in washington. hope you are ready for a ride this morning. peter alexander is, live in england, matt is in moscow. peter, face to face, 15 minutes, president biden and boris johnson. what's the number one thing the president wants to get out of this? >> i think obviously the highlight between the two men is the special relationship you noted. they want to use this as an effort to try to fortify that relationship. there are complications there. as a candidate joe biden said of boris johnson that he was effectively the physical and emotional clone of mr. trump. put that stuff aside the effort today will be to sort of sign a refresher, a new atlantic

charter, that is the postwar declaration from 80 years ago, 1941, signed by fdr and winston churchhill and now a decades later there are differences in terms of the issues facing these two countries. they will focus on cyber threats, climate change, change and defense among them as well. but the pandemic is crucial. it is a backdrop to all of this year, the big announcement for president biden, hallie, as you know well today will focus on the announcement of the 500 million pfizer vaccines he will be donating, u.s. will purchase and donate to the 100 of the world's low-income nations, trying to galvanize the allies, most notably the british who are hosting the g7 this year. >> matt, you've got russia and president putin testing biden ahead of the meeting next week, not just the ransomware attacks but a russian court has banned basically the opposition

movement there led by alexei navalny. >> i think that's the right way to look at this. we've known this was coming for a few weeks now, several months even, but when they finally got down to it, they kind of rushed out the verdict, not rushed, took 12 hours, but what i mean to say, it seemed important to someone that a verdict was issued last night, very late, and 11:00 p.m. and something we've seen opposition leaders suggest as a way for the kremlin to kind of emphasize that it is not going to geneva with any intentions to crede grounds on the crackdown on the opposition, not just navalny or his movement, but independent journalists. one thing about this verdict it's one of the harshest things we've seen during the ongoing campaign and it has a bit of a retroactive effect even going back 12 months. anyone who has worked for

navalny's organization, anyone that has donated money, anyone who has gone to a protest and even russian journalists who have written about this organization are now exposed to some kinds of various degrees of legal repercussions when next m. it will be interesting to see what the authorities do with that, but more interesting wha . they are continuing moving forward keeping their fight ongoing and they heard from navalny last night in a statement, i believe we have it, i'll read it to you, quote, when corruption is the foundation of the government, fighters against corruption are cast as extremists. we will not abandon our goals or our ideas. it is our country and without it we do not have another one. there you have it, defiant as ever from mr. navalny. >> that's right. matt live in moscow, thank you. peter, back to you, can you pull back the curtain for our viewers of what we can expect to see

over the next 20 minutes, you would know better than i would, president biden might be running late, but we expect to see him greeting prime minister and then a sit down and the discussion. walk us through what we expect this hour. >> obviously this is the first opportunity these two men will have the chance to meet face to face, so that in itself is significant. they will meet in what is called a bilateral session. the two gathered with some of the aides as they talk through some of the policy issues. as it plays out, this is interesting, there have been technical challenges in terms today, they were supposed to go to an island off the coast here that was special to boris johnson, but weather was not allowing that to happen. instead they will meet at a different location. this is really a chance, though, for them to meet independently together ahead of the g7 summit that begins tomorrow even as many of those world leaders from the world's -- some of the 7 biggest economies in the world arrive here in the country. in terms of the signing

ceremony, we hope to show you that in some form later. among the issues they will focus on beyond those we've discussed here are some that are crucial to president biden himself. they will commit to a uk/u.s. cancer summit as it relates to american and british travelers, hoping to focus on the creation of a task force that would look into easing those covid-19 travel restrictions between the uk and the u.s. an agreement to science and technology and to open up a dialog as it relates to energy as well for both of these countries and the issue of climate change is so crucial, especially in the wake of president trump who had taken the u.s. out of the paris climate accord. the u.s. has now rejoined. this is the first chance to emphasize that shared relationship and shared vision together. >> if you can with what you're hearing from your sources looking to the putin summit, that is, you know, the backdrop to all of this, i don't want to call ate shadow hanging over the first part of the trip but it is certainly probably among the most anticipated pieces of this

and the white house press secretary this morning sort of plainly acknowledged that there aren't huge major goals for that summit and deliverables that they expect. this is an attempt to, i don't want to say reset the relationship, but get those two men face to face. >> yeah. i think that's exactly right. it is by design, hallie, president biden's first meetings in europe are going ob with those allies to try to embrace the allies together and have a shared vision, this cooperation as it relates to key policies, a rise in china and a disruptive china. it will be on the back end after president biden has met with the g7 allies, nato allies, eu allies, he will go face to face with vladimir putin in geneva, switzerland. the white house raised expectations in terms of the president's ability to deliver a tough message to the russian president, notably when president biden arrived here yesterday to deliver remarks, u.s. troops based in the uk,

often sort of viewed as pleasantries to rally the troops as you come over seas, the commander in chief, had a tough message, tougher than a lot anticipated, focussed in large part on vladimir putin among other things delivering a warning to him against harmful activities by the russians, most notably as it relates to the rise in the ransomware attacks, obviously targeting among other things the u.s. oil and food supply, jbs, one of the largest beef and pork producers, among those that was recently targeted there. the president with some tough language saying he doesn't want any conflict, he wants a stable and predictable relationship between the two countries. you know well that vladimir putin is anything but predictable. >> he's not predictable. >> that faces challenges here. >> sure does. peter and matt, thanks to you both. we know the president is on the move while peter was giving us the live report we expect that he will arrive for that meeting with prime minister boris johnson within the next four to five minutes and we're

going to stay on top of this. peter staying close to his camera. we will bring you updates as we get them. we've been talking about russia top of the agenda for president biden overseas, and for his administration here at home right now this hour. that's because fbi director chris wray as we speak, look at the live shot, getting ready to testify to the house judiciary committee almost certainly going to be asked about those cyber attacks believed to be carried out by russian criminal gangs including the newest one that forced the world's biggest meat supplier to temporarily shut down last week as the company overnight is revealing it did pay the ransom to those hackers, $11 million. we are watching to see if the fbi director may talk about companies paying ransom. the u.s. government recommendation that they do not do so, leigh ann caldwell is on capitol hill. we're joined by msnbc contributor chuck rosenberg, former fbi official and u.s. attorney and lee ann, this wray testimony is significant for a couple reasons. it's the first time we're hearing from him since the

ransomware attacks we mentioned and if we look at that live shot you saw he is there and he hasn't started speaking yet. number two, it's his first time in front of any lawmakers since that senate report on january 6th came out, lee ann? >> that's right, hallie. we don't have access to his opening statement yet so we don't know what he's specifically going to say, but my sources tell me that he is going to be grilled especially about ransomware. wray said a couple days ago that he equated the ransomware attacks to 9/11, talking about how importantly dangerous this is and it's something that the government has to get under control. not only responding to it, but preventing as well. so that is definitely going to be a topic today. as far as the january 6th report, that is going to be a topic because the senate report that was released a couple days ago indicated that the fbi and the department of justice did not fully cooperate in that

report in their investigation and as we know, the fbi has passed on intelligence to the capitol hill police leading up to january 6th, so hallie, those are going to be questions that lawmakers are going to give wray today. >> leigh ann caldwell live on the hill. chuck, let me bring you in here. what kind of pressure is director wray under given that u.s. government can only do so much when it comes to private companies getting hacked, needing to have some of the security according to experts on the front end to prevent things like this from happening and getting into the situation where some of them as you heard from the head of jbs overnight facing this decision as they describe it to go ahead and pay up oftentimes in bitcoin here. >> yeah. hallie, good question. fbi directors are always under pressure, but to your point, there's only so much you can do. i mean in other words if you had asked the fbi or local police department to ensure that no car in their jurisdiction got broken into overnight, then you would have to rely on citizens to lock

their cars. if they don't, the police or the fbi are only responding reactively. that's the problem that director wray has and the fbi has, to use a cliche as our weakest link or as weak as our weakest link. hackers will continue to look for unlocked cars or put it more bluntly, you know, vulnerable companies, companies that have exposed their inner workings on the internet. when they find one they exploit it and they seek ransom. that decision is left up to private actors whether or not to pay. there's only so much the fbi can do. but as corporate citizens, as citizens with cars parked on the street, lock the thing. make it as hard as we possibly can for people to get into our stuff. >> is it even realistic, chuck, to think that government could put in place, for example, requirements that companies cannot pay ransom or should at the least be required to report

when they are attacked at this point and do you expect that's a line of questioning for the director he may get today? >> yes. i expect he will get all those sorts of questions. they're all good questions. look, companies are in a bad pog when they get hacked. it's not like the head of colonial pipeline or head of the jbs meat producing company had a really good choice or really bad choice and took the really bad choice. they had two awful choices. >> they're both bad choices. >> continue to try and -- yeah, exactly. they're both awful choices, hallie. so you try to pick the least bad choice to get your operations up and running as quickly as possible. the fbi is really, really good at what it does and we are -- we should all be grateful for their work, but they can't lock down every company. that has to be on private industry to do that, just as we have to lock our cars, and so members of the house judiciary committee can ask director wray about what the fbi can and should do, but we have to rely

on citizens, corporate citizens, to do their part too. >> we're taking a live look at that hearing room, chuck, where director wray is getting ready to speak right now, and one thing my colleague leigh ann caldwell mentioned this is first time we're hearing from him since the january 6th senate report that found frankly failures before and during the insurrection at the capitol. how do you expect the director to respond to questions about that today? >> you know, i was critical of director wray and the fbi in part for its response to the january 6th insurrection. one of the things that drig wray said -- i admire him very much -- but one of the things he said the fbi provided intelligence in advance of the attack to the capitol police by e-mailing them an intelligence report and posting it on a law enforcement portal, which i thought was unsatisfactory. if your house is on fire and i see it you should expect me to

call and tell you, you shouldn't expect me to e-mail you or post it on a neighborhood blog. if that's all i did you have every right to be angry at me. while i know that fbi has pointed to its warnings as being sufficient, i guess, i don't think they're sufficient. this is not a knock on chris wray, an able and thoughtful director, but if we have something we think is really important and actionable then you pick up the phone and you call your counter apart and you tell her what's going on so she can prepare for it. that didn't happen on january 6th. >> speaking of able and thoughtful, chuck rosenberg, always a pleasure to have you on as always. thank you so much. we mentioned the supreme court at the top of the hour, today another decision day. only released one decision, not one of the big cases we're waiting on. we're going to try on monday 10:00 eastern right here this hour in a few days. 21 cases remain to be decided. among them, some real biggies. we're keeping a close eye on this show on the other stuff we talked about happening as we

speak this hour, not just the fbi director's very anticipated testimony, we're going to bring that to you live when it starts but more testimony happening today as well involving a potentially seismic change in the military on how sexual assault cases are handled. today might be a step forward. the secretary of defense testifying right now about how far the pentagon is willing to go to meet the demand for reform. newly released transcripts of don mcgahn's testimony to lawmaker show his role in donald trump's efforts to try to get rid of robert mueller. new details after the break. but not planters nuts. our dry roasted peanuts have an incredible ratio of size to substance a delicious, salty, crunchy ratio. planters. a nut above.

♪ every bubble ♪ ♪ every scrub ♪ ♪ every spray ♪ ♪ every day ♪ ♪ dove and degree fund local youth programs. ♪ every day u does good ♪ unilever welcome to allstate. ♪ ♪ you already pay for car insurance, why not take your home along for the ride? allstate.

here, better protection costs a whole lot less. you're in good hands. click or call to bundle today. this is the sound of change. it's the sound of low cash mode from pnc bank giving you the options and extra time needed to help you avoid an overdraft fee. low cash mode on virtual wallet from pnc bank. one way we're making a difference. keeping your oyster business growing has you swamped. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. when you sponsor a job, you immediately get your shortlist of quality candidates, whose resumes on indeed match your job criteria. visit indeed.com/hire and get started today.

we must not be afraid to try now approaches and to change our minds, so that we can truly and fully address the scourge of sexual assault in our force. clearly what we've been doing hasn't been working and one assault is too many.

>> i told you we had a lot going on this morning. that is part of it. defense secretary lloyd austin just a couple minutes ago signaling he might support some new approaches to how the military handles sexual assault. this could potentially be a huge deal, but here's the thing, so far the secretary has not said exactly what changes he might get behind. you're looking right now at senator kirsten gillibrand who has been a fierce advocate for these changes for years now. if this happens, these recommendations, they would amount to the biggest change to military rules in more than a decade. right now allegations of sexual assault are handled by commanding officers who decide whether or not to prosecute the case. experts say that often keeps service members from ever even coming forward. senator gillibrand has been trying to change that for eight years and after eight years from opposition from her own party, within the last month she got her bipartisan breakthrough as she shared with us alongside joni ernst on this show.

>> we're to the saying a decrease in -- seeing a decrease in sexuality assaults or the command climates change. >> the ones who will notice the change are the survivors, the men and women who are sexually assaulted who want to know that the person who makes a fundamental decision is unbiased and highly trained. >> i want to bring in pentagon correspondent courtney. let me see if we can pull up the live shot of the hearing. this is an interesting moment. you have senator gillibrand and the defense secretary and others obviously in the chain of command from the defense department and the joint chiefs. what is the deal, courtney? because the defense secretary signalled potential support for these recommendations. it doesn't sound like he definitively came out and said he's down with it. what's going on? >> right. so he didn't a very strong statement sayinger with going to change this. i spoke with a defense official and said what do his comments

actually mean. this is the strongest language where the secretary has signaled that he is in favor of changing this. the reason he didn't come out very strongly, he's not yet made those recommendations to the president. the defense official explained that this is where austin's head is. he plans to make the recommendation to president biden to change the way that sexual assault and sexual harassment are prosecuted in the military, and that would mean taking it out of the commander's hands, putting it into the hands of some sort of civilian authority. you've mentioned kirsten gillibrand. you would think this is what she wants, but we may hear or see fireworks from here at her exchange at this hearing today, because the defense official i spoke with said that most likely austin his recommendations will fall more in line with the pentagon's independent review e widespread sweeping changes for hows the code of justice is applied whereas the commission

and secretary austin want to change some things, sexual harassment, sexual assault, maybe some other issues like domestic abuse and child abuse, things that can lead to be linked to sexual assault and harassment, but not change and take everything out of the commander's authority under the ucmj. that's where this differs. it's not as widespread. also the official said that secretary austin is looking at a longer timeline. while his recommendation to the president will probably come in the next couple of weeks, the actual course of changing the ucmj, which by the way that's a law, that's something that has to come from congress. >> right. >> that's probably going to take months to do. it's not going to be as immediate as the senator wants to see. >> jill, explain how historic or historic this change would be if you have the defense secretary going ahead and making this

recommendation to the president? >> this would be a very big change. i served on a commission under the obama administration looking at sexual assault and how the pentagon handled it, how all the military services handled it, and we were to the allowed to look at whether the chain of command would be affected. anything that has to do with taking, reporting of sexual assault out of the chain of command, would be a very big deal and would be a major change to the uniform code of military justice. it is a question now of whether that would be essential and, of course, as courtney said, it requires a change in the law. the ucmj is part of our federal laws and congress would have to change that. that's what senator gillibrand has been pushing for for many years. jackie speier on the house side has been pushing for this and now joni ernst. there's a lot of support for it,

and it's a question of getting i think the commentary that austin has gotten from the services was from the trump appointees and he may be waiting to hear from the new biden appointees who are service secretaries in order to make his recommendations, which he said he would make by the end of the month. >> there is a timeline on this. we've been showing the woman who is at the senator of much of this as you've been speaking and in the last couple minutes she's actually talked with joint chiefs of staff head general milley who said that he reiterated basically asking him to reiterate his support. he said he is completely open-minded to significant change and said that is true for most of the senior leaders in uniform. i imagine this is a significant difference from what you heard when you were over the army? >> it absolutely, of course, is. i'm not sure that they're planning to take it to a civilian side, which would mean

reporting it just to law enforcement, off base. i think that this is to create something within the jag corps, judge advocate general corps, outside the chain of command of the affected person, so that in ord words a service member assaulted wouldn't go to their commander they would go to the judge advocate corps. >> thank you reporting live from the pentagon. we want to take you back to the other hearing room, fbi director chris wray testifying in front of the house judiciary committee about a couple key topics, the ransomware attacks and a new report from the senate on the january 6th insurrection. we're going to listen in. >> we do not investigate groups or individuals based on the exercise of first amendment protected activity alone, but when when encounter violence and threats to public safety the fbi will not hesitate to take

appropriate action. that is not a controversial issue that should force anyone to take sides. we can all agree that violence in any form some support of any set of beliefs cannot and will not be tolerated because violence undermine one of the most basic freedoms of all americans, the right to feel safe and secure in our own homes and communities. we saw this kind of extremist violence on january 6th when an angry mob used violence and the destruction of property to break into the u.s. capitol in a failed attempt to undermine our institutions of government and our democratic process. an assault where you, the members of congress, were victims, but where all americans were victimized and more than 100 law enforcement officers were injured in just a few hours. through the dogged work of fbi agents, analysts and professionals, working alongside

federal, state and local partners, we've been able to make close to 500 arrests so far, with more sure to come. we also saw extremist violence during last summer's civil unrest, and although most citizens made their voices heard through peaceful, lawful protests, others, far too many, persistently exploited those protests to pursue violent extremist agendas. in portland alone, hundreds of law enforcement officers sustained injury and damage to federal buildings was estimated in the millions of dollars. across the country, federal, state and local authorities arrested thousands of individuals who committed criminal acts surrounding those protests. nearly every one of the fbi's 56 field offices opened investigations amounting to hundreds of investigations involving violence and destructive conduct. more recently, we've seen an

alarming increase in hate crimeses across the country, many targeting members of the asian-american, pacific islander and jewish communities. some cases these crimes are carried out by individuals we darkize as ethnically moat vited extremist to confront this threat we've taken an approach focussing on our traditional investigative efforts through our civil rights program and domestic terrorism hate crimes fusion cell we created about a year and a half ago, but also enhancing our law enforcement training, public outreach, and support to our state and local partners. our efforts to stem extremist violence are on top of our continued and extensive work to disrupt violent gangs, drug organizations, and human traffickers whose criminal acts devastate families and communities. for many of you, violent crime remains the most significant and most pernicious threat you face

in your home district. in difficult times like these we must never forget the extraordinary bravery of our federal, state, local and tribal law enforcement members who risk life and safety every single day to protect the public and keep the peace. i say that because oefrt past year we've seen a troubling uptick in violence against members of the law enforcement community. in just the first five months of 2021, 36 officers have been feloniously killed on the job. that's far surpassing the number by this time last year. to put that in perspective, that's almost two law enforcement officers shot and killed every week. and that's not counting all those officers who have died in the line of duty facing the countless other inherent dangers of the job like racing in pursuit of a suspect and dying in a car accident or drowning in

an attempted rescue, or even the scores of officers who have died from covid-19 because law enforcement, of course, kept coming to work every day right through the teeth of the pandemic. nor is it counting all those officers who have been badly injured but thankfully survived and whose lives and families' lives have been changed. the loss of any agent or officer is heartbreaking for their families, for their departments, for their communities that they serve. we in the fbi know that all too well. with the terrible loss of special agents lauren and dan, this past february, shot and killed down near miami. each one of the officers and agents we've lost this year were people who got up one morning, picked up their badge, not knowing whether they would make it home that night and they did their jobs despite all the hardships they faced in this

almost epically difficult year. these dedicated public servants a debt of gratitude and our best efforts to stem the tide of ha shared responsibility to take a stand to protect our communities, to support those who serve in law enforcement and to condemn violence, regardless of its motivation. we in the fbi are ready to do that, exactly, to use all the tools at our disposal to uphold the rule of law and to fulfill our mission to protect every american because there is simply no place in this country for hatred, intolerance, or violence, regardless of its motivation, ideology or otherwise. thank you for taking time to hear from me and i look forward

to answering your questions. >> thank you for your testimony. we'll proceed under the five-minute rule with questions and i will recognize myself for five minutes. according to documents we've received from the bureau, the fbi was aware that several violent extremists already under investigation were preparing to travel to washington in january. in december, fbi atlanta issued an alert that certain militia groups were preparing for a significant event in january, perhaps on inauguration day. on january 5th a report from fbi norfolk warned about specific calls for violence at the capitol the next day, some of them graphic. congress needs to hear glass breaking, doors kicked in and blood being spilled. the report also noted individuals are sharing maps of the tunnels underneath the capitol complex and listed rally points where the attackers would gather before advancing on the building and the norfolk report made it to the washington field office in advance of the attack.

for days, the head of the field office insisted it had received no intelligence suggesting anything other than first amendment activity. kr director wyden, the warnings from around the country were clear, here in washington did the fbi miss the evidence or see the evidence and failed to piece it together? >> mr. chairman, as you can imagine, we are just as outraged by what happened on january 6th and just as determined to do our part to make sure that never happens again. now the norfolk report that you referenced was a specific piece of raw, unverified intelligence, that emerged on january 5th, the day before, from a source online unvetted, and despite the raw nature of it, it was quickly passed, not one, not two, but three different ways, to the capitol police. one an e-mail to their

representatives on our joint terrorism task force, two in a verbal briefing in our command post that included members of the capitol police, mpd, et cetera and third in our law enforcement portal which all law enforcement partners have access to. so we tried to make sure that we got that information to the right people. obviously any time there is an attack, especially one as significant as this one, you can be darn sure that we are going to be looking hard at how we can do better, how we can do more and things differently in terms of collecting analyzing and disseminating intelligence. you also mentioned individuals under investigation before january 6th. a couple things on that. first, the fbi did disseminate i think about a dozen intelligence products, including warning of domestic violence extremism

related to the election, some talking about it continuing past the election all the way through inauguration, including reports together with dhs put out in december, the month before. as far as individuals actually under investigation, now that we're close to 500 arrests into the matter, you may be surprised to learn that, in fact, almost none of the individuals charged and found to be involved with the attack on the capitol were, in fact, individuals who were previously -- >> okay. at 12:53 p.m. on january 6th, rioters broke through the outer barricades surrounding the capitol. after 1:45 they surged past the capitol police and at 1:49 officers officially declared there was a riot at the capitol. active attorney general rosen testified before the oversight committee he learned that fbi and the atf received a request for assistance from the capitol

police and were beginning to respond. when specifically in that timeline of events did capitol police request assistance from the fbi and how quickly was that help deployed? >> i don't have the specific time for you, so i don't want to misspeak. >> okay. the fbi's washington field office is one of the largest field offices in the country. the field office was reportedly founded by an internal review in 2019 to be both ineffective and inefficient. specifically, the review criticized the field office's mechanisms for analyzing threat intelligence and procedures for sharing intelligence with other law enforcement agencies including the capitol police. did the washington field office's domestic terrorism shortcomings lead to a delayed response in the lead up to and on january 6 audit or inspectio is that it was a while back and that we had recently changed the leadership of the washington field office and made a number

of reforms, so to my knowledge at least none of the issues discussed in that earlier report contributed to the response on january 6th. >> my time is short but one last question, in february the secretary of defense converted senior military officials and civilian leadership of the armed forces to assess the problems of extremist ideology in the military's ranks. in late april the department of homeland security announced it was conducting internal review to root out white supremacy and other extremist ideology in its ranks. there can be no question that law enforcement agencies across the country face a similar challenge. is the fbi conducting its own internal inspection or review to root out white supremacy and other extremist ideology and if not will you commit to conducting such a review? >> mr. chairman, obviously we take the prospect of what the intelligence community or law enforcement would refer to as an inviteder threat very seriously. we have a whole slew of procedures and internal reviews

that speak to that and i would be happy to see if we can provide you with more information separately. >> thank you very much. my time has expired. i recognize the gentleman from ohio mr. jordan. >> mr. mcclintock will go first. >> thank you, mr. chairman. director wray, last month 180,000 foreign nationals illegally crossed our border, 674% increase over last may, nearly 1 million so far this year. the leaders of mexico and the northern triangle countries say this is in direct response to the biden open border policies. i don't think there's any question that's the case. these policies have produced the largest human trafficking operation since the international slave trade. can you tell us how many persons on the terrorist watch list have been encountered this year crossing through our southern border? >> congressman, i'm not sure that i have that number but it may be we can provide the specifics separately.

i do know that our field offices down on the border work very closely with cbp, especially focused on so-called special interest aliens as well as potential -- >> but i -- >> i just don't have the numbers. >> the groups flagged straight to transportation hubs, how many persons with criminal records or criminal warrants have been encountered this year crossing our southern border? >> again, i don't have the specific figures, but i know that our field offices down there both of -- all of which have visit -- >> we're going to dip in the right side of your screen. president biden speaking with the prime minister. see if he's answering any questions. >> thanks, everybody. thank you. >> thank you. thank you. thank you, guys. thank you. thank you. let's go, thank you. >> well, he was speaking a moment ago. you heard the reporters shouting

questions including our own mike memory who is in that scrum as a member of the pool traveling with president biden overseas. we will get a moment, i was checking my phone to see if we had comments. let's go back and listen in to fbi director chris wray and his testimony on capitol hill with a warning if we see president biden again live, he may very well make some news. we're going to dip back in and show you that. bear with us. here's the fbi director. >> we may have already provided the briefing that you're referring to for leader mccarthy. >> will you provide that for all members of this committee? >> again, i'll be happy to see what information we can provide to be helpful. >> i hope you could provide me all the information. >> again, i have to see what information we can provide, but yes. >> is it true many of the foreign nationals trafficked across our border often arrive here deeply indebted to the mexican crime cartels? >> we have seen quite a number of such instances.

>> are those collected through servitude to the cartels? >> in some cases, definitely. we are pursuing -- we have a number of human trafficking task forces as well as working on certain task forces with dhs to try to address that issue, but there's to question that the cartel activity on the other side of the border is spilling over in all sorts of ways, and you put your finger on one that is extremely concerning to us all. >> we basically, 170 plus years after the 13th amendment, have slavery burgeoning in this country as a result of these policies? >> well, certainly i do consider human trafficking a form of -- >> a modern form of slavery. >> indentured servitude is. you mentioned out of the country but in this country how is that enforced? the cartels have gang affiliates who extract these debts?

>> well, it varies from case to case. certainly the cartels have -- different cartels have affiliations with different sorts of gangs here in the united states. there's not just human trafficking from a labor perspective -- >> this is -- >> but also -- >> this is a massive organized crime syndicate, burgeoning in this country because of these policies. what are you doing about it? >> so we are -- it's a team effort, right. obviously dhs has the primary responsibility for the border itself. but we have safe streets task forces that go after the gang activity, we have strike forces that go after the -- >> how many agents and how much money are you directing at this threat? >> again, i could see if i could give you specific numbers but i don't have those off the top of my head. i will tell you, which is sometimes surprising to people, that our criminal programs, our traditional criminal programs, which include exactly the kind

of thing you're talking about, remain even to this day with all the national security threats that get so much discussion, remain our biggest number of agents, our biggest allocation of resources. violent crimes, different sorts of violent crime within the criminal program is by far and away the biggest chunk. >> miss lofgren. >> thank you, chairman, and thanks to you, director wray, for your service to our country. i want to thank especially the bureau for diligence with which you have pursued those who attacked the capitol and the capitol police and essentially attacked our democratic system of government on january 6th. we wish you well in those efforts. i have a couple of questions about the rule of law. we all believe in the rule of law, and we think that -- and i

know you do too -- that the rule of law applies to the government as well it leads me to a question about section 702 of the fisa law. as you know, there has been a review by the court on the use of fisa and as you, i'm sure, know in its latest review, the foreign intelligence surveillance court, found a widespread violations of the fbi's internal rules and the law's restrictions on how and when the government may use the information it collects under section 702. for example, the court found and i, quote, compliance in incidents suggesting that fbi's failure to properly apply its standard with searching 702, acquired information was more pervasive than previously

believed. one case, fbi personnel quarried foreign intelligence databases, the names of over 100 business, religious, civic and community leaders who had applied to the fbi citizen academy. the court also found dozens of cases where agents had searched warrantless foreign intelligence collections in the course of criminal investigations. in summary the court expressed concerns about, quote, [ inaudible ] widespread violations of safeguards on the use of warrantless collections. in response to all of these criticisms and concerns, the fbi it seems to be, basically said they had been working on changes, but that had been suspended because of the covid pandemic protocols, but here's my question, director wray, section 702 was enacted in 2008.

the fbi and other intelligence agencies have had more than a decade to implement what the law requires -- >> it is a split screen kind of morning here on msnbc reports. you have congressman lofgren talking with fbi director chris wray, we will come back, but live overseas we're getting in as we speak the discussion now with the first lady who is also making her first overseas trip. we'll listen in. >> we're -- joe and i are both looking forward to meeting the queen and that's an exciting part of the visit for us. thank you all for being here. appreciate it. >> yes, i have. >> right this way. >> first lady dr. jill biden who has her own slate of events as she is overseas as well. we're going to take you back to capitol hill as we continue to ping-pong between all of the news of the morning. here's director wray. >> with and the confidence that

we earn with the court is of utmost importance to me. now, the opinion that you are referring to from the court does approve our procedures, did not, in fact, not, in fact, find abur misconduct. and has to deal specifically with the running of searches in our databases. we have taken -- >> you had used -- the fbi used data for internal domestic investigations. that's a violation of the purpose of 702. >> again, i'm not going to speak to the specific instances in the report. i think that would take longer than we have here. among other things. i would say that we have done a number of things to try to address the issues identified by the court. we have made significant changes to the documentation requirements to assure accountability, oversight requirements, guidance and training enhancements, systems

modifications which may not sound glamorous, but is incredibly important, because it helps prevent non-compliance. last but not least, something i particularly want to highlight, i created a new -- a new department in the fbi, office of internal audited, headed by a senior partner from a top -- a big four accounting firm who also had prior in his life been an fbi agent and is consulting with a premiere outside world class consulting firm to stand up an office of internal audit specifically focused on fisa to ensure we have a world class compliance program and auditing program to make sure we don't -- >> the time has expired. >> if i may, can we get the director to commit to have this individual brief the committee on those procedures? >> i would be happy to see if we can get the committee a briefing on what we're doing in this

space. >> thank you. >> i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will follow up on my colleague. apparently californians think alike today. in the 20 years that i have sat on the dias and looked at report after report of the fbi failure to comply with fisa and its long history of spying on americans using this legislation as a back door, we have seen a pattern, which is we are promised there were going to be changes and those changes have not occurred, at the gentle lady who just spoke would tell you, you coming up for reauthorization, if the reauthorization were today, based on -- correct me if i'm wrong -- the 2019 report by the inspector general that found 17 significant errors or omissions

and 51 wrong or unsupported factual assertions in carter page's domestic spying, if you will, using the statute alone, in addition to that, we have numerous people, including judges who say if they had known the truth rather than the false statements, they never would have granted those warrants. now the question is, should we -- first of all, do you agree with those findings that at least some of those 68 errors or omissions are accurate, including one of your own that was prosecuted for it? >> well, congressman, first, let me be clear, just in case there's any confusion to anybody watching. of course, all of these applications were filed before i became fbi director. to be clear. >> to be honest, director, the reason we're having this conversation is that it is your watch. organizations, no matter how great they are, are much like

airplane pilots. they are not judged on their safe landing. they are judged on their crashes. this was a crash, wouldn't you say? >> what i would say is that the inspector general's report describes conduct that i consider unacceptable, unrepresentative of who the fbi is and cannot -- cannot happen again, which is why i implemented over 40 corrective measures promptly after the inspector general's report came out, accepted every single finding in the inspector general's report, implemented every single recommendation in the report, went above and beyond, installed a new leadership team at the fbi, created this new office of internal auditing that i mentioned. i can go on and on. >> let me not let you go on because of short time and ask you, what assurances can you give us today that a current audit would not find current

failures? >> as somebody who has worked deeply with auditing firms for all sorts of organizations, the point of an audit is to find problems. so i can't sit here and tell you that no audit would find a problem. that's why we have an auditing process to find the problems and fix them. that's what we're going to do. >> sometime ago under your predecessor, he came before this congress and defended a warrant, an unusual one, one that ordered the company apple to develop software to allow for a back door -- to be on one iphone -- >> you have been listening to the fbi director testifying on capitol hill. headline so far, on defense, from some of the lines of questioning we have heard from democrats on the house judiciary committee so far about that senate report on the january 6 insurrection. i want to bring in correspondent

garrett haake joining us, chuck rosenberg back with us as well, former senior official and msnbc contributor. garrett? >> reporter: you heard him demand the handling of the memo we have heard talked about in the postscript of january 6, the raw intelligence raised to the internal email system, to the internal law enforcement system, potentially warning about violence on january 6. that, of course, came up in the senate report that came out as the only flag from the fbi. he pointed to i think he said a dozen attempts by the fbi to warn about possible violence in the lead-up and postscript to the election itself. this dovetails with what we learned from the report about the capitol police own knowledge about possible violence leading up to that day. there's been some fallout from that in the last 24 hours. the union is calling for the

acting chief to resign. she was in charge of that intel division on january 6. not a huge surprise here. she's lost a no confidence vote in the department. one of the recommendations of the report is that she be replaced with a permanent chief. it's clear she will not be that permanent chief. her deputy is in an acting role right now. a bit of a crisis of leadership at the capitol police. you hear from the fbi director defending the information that was presented to that body in the lead-up to the 6th. >> chuck, we heard something very interesting from the director for, i believe, the first time on camera, that comparison of domestic terror to what happened on 9/11, saying it's like cancer, he said the problem of domestic terrorism has been metastasizing and it's not going away any time soon. chuck? >> yeah. i was glad to hear him say that. although, as a citizen, i'm horrified to hear him say that. the fbi clearly recognizes the

problem. hallie, this terrorism, white lived in the shadows. the last president made it okay to be a white sue -- supremacist. it's never okay. people are crawling out of corners and espousing this horrific ideology. we have always had it. we have pushed back on it. we probably always will have it and have to push back on it. the notion that we have given it sustenance is literally horrifying. i'm glad the fbi is focused on it. it's a very difficult problem. it is metastasizing. it's going to take a keen effort from lots of government agencies

to push it back into the corners where it belongs. >> chuck, thank you for staying with us this hour. garrett, thank you for keeping an eye the testimony this hour. significant on a couple of fronts, not just here at home, at the capitol behind me, but also overseas, we dipped you into the first lady making some remarks to reporters. we came in right after she made some news there saying that her husband, president biden, in her words over prepared for the meeting with vladimir putin coming up in geneva in just about a week from now. we will have more coverage of what's happening overseas with our white house team and the reporters who are there. for now, that does it for a rock and roll show today. see you tomorrow. we will do it over again. right now, craig melvin picks up our coverage on "msnbc reports." ♪♪ good thursday morning to you. craig melvin here. it's another busy hour. right now, president biden is in

the united kingdom meeting with prime minister boris johnson. the bond between our two countries is long, it is storied, it is special. now updated with a new atlantic charter to be signed affirming longstanding beliefs like defending democracy. but also adding new goals. like addressing the global pandemic. security is tight ahead of the summit. the show of diplomatic force has been big implications for president biden's high steaks -- stakes face-to-face meeting with putin. president biden will be direct, candid. security threats continue to be the focus of the hear on capitol hill. the fbi director testifying. the chairman called for an fbi internal review of white