sharyl: calls this week for congress to investigate president trump's ethics, but congress has a hard enough time investigating itself. is it accurate to say that all of the ethics bodies that oversee congress in some way are created by or beholden to congress? >> there's a built-in conflict of interest. sharyl: serious dysnfuction dates back to the late 1980's, when the ethics committees figured into an all-out partisan war. speaker wright: all of us, in both political parties, must resolve to bring this period of mindless cannibalism to an end. there has been enough of it. scott: in whatever form it

of jerusalem's story. 70 years ago, the state of israel was formed, but not accepted by all of its arab neighbors. in september of 2000, ariel sharon made a visit to the temple mount that inflamed the palestinians. it was called the second intifada. now, some believe, president trump's decision to move the u.s. embassy to jerusalem might trigger the third. is that the biggest fear? tzipi livni: there is no excuse for terror, there is no excuse for violence. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org] ♪ sharyl: welcome to "full measure." i'm sharyl attkisson. this week, democrats demanded president trump be investigated for alleged sexual misconduct. republicans demanded the special counsel on

conflicts of interest. meantime, new sexual harassment probes started up in congress in the past few weeks against congressmen blake farenthold and trent franks and senator al franken before he announced his resignation. today, we investigate what congress' ethics committees really do. are they hard core or a place in where ethics investigations a go to die? meredith mcgehee: people who live in glass houses don't like to throw stones. that's the truth on the house and the senate side. sharyl: meredith mcgehee is executive director of issue one, a nonprofit working to drain the washington swamp. that includes reforming how congress investigates misconduct within its own ranks. is it accurate to say that all in of the ethics bodies that oversee congress in some way are created by or beholden to congress? meredith: absolutely. in the people that sit on the ethics committees, one day they're judging whether or not their colleague has violated congressional ethics rules. the next day, they're probably going on the flo t

convince them to vote for one of their amendments. so there's a built-in conflict of interest. you sharyl: mcgehee first testified as an expert on the subject twenty years ago. meredith: well, we have a proposal that we've been talking about for a number of years. sharyl: she was invited to testify again ten years ago. meredith: at the moment, the proposal is not significantly strong to really make a difference. sharyl: neither effort, she says, fixed the broken system. the house and senate ethics committees were formed in the 1960's, equally divided between democrats and republicans. even for serious violations, harsh punishment is rare. when the house ethics committee found congressman charles rangel guilty of 11 violations, including to failing to pay significant taxes while he chaired the house tax committee, rangel received a censure, the equivalent of a strongly worded letter. the house members serve two-year terms, but these proceedings and ethics committees sometimes take a long time. so they're gti

their case is being deliberated? meredith: some of these investigations go on for month after month after month that stretch into years. sharyl: congressman david mckinley was re-elected twice during a house ethics committee probe that took five years. when they found he repeatedly "disregarded" their written advice and violated house rules regarding his private business, his punishment was merely the letter saying so. "now that this letter has been issued," the ethics committee wrote, "this matter is closed." the senate ethics committee, mcgehee says, is even more problematic, with the vast majority of 677 allegations over the past decade dismissed and only five letters of admonition. y sharyl: where does a letter of reprimand go for a member of congress? i guess into their file? meredith: i guess into their file, the circular file, i guess. and we don't even know in the public record exactly what that senate ethics committee has done. they make no public comment.

particular senator or staff and then at the end of the year put out a few numbers that are pretty meaningless. sharyl: mcgehee says serious dysfunction dates back to the late 1980's when the ethics committees figured into an all-out partisan war. meredith: some people may remember the days when there were allegations made against the house speaker, speaker wright. he had received some benefits from the books that he was trying to sell. lobbyists and others were buying them. sharyl: the house ethics committee cited speaker jim wright, a democrat, for five ethics violations. >> the chair recognizes the distinguished speaker of the house. sharyl: he became the first speaker to resign amid misconduct allegations. speaker wright: all of us, in both political parties, must resolve to bring this period of mindless cannibalism to an end. there has been enough of it. [applause] sharyl: de

who'd led the ethics assault against wright, newt gingrich. the house ethics committee investigated him for conflicts of interest when he became speaker in 1995. gingrich got slapped with a reprimand and a $300,000 fine. meantime, over in the senate, the ethics committee found five u.s. senators guilty of lapses ranging from poor judgment to improper interference with an investigation of the keating five savings and loan scandal. mcgehee says there was a ceasefire when both sides decided they were getting hurt. meredith: people referred to it for a long time as an ethics truce in which neither party would file an ethics complaint against the other because they were afraid if they did one, then the other side would do one, and so they just had a truce. sharyl: during that truce, a flurry of public scandals focused attention on congress' ethics challenges. republican leader tom delay, nicknamed "the hammer" for his tough party tactics, was caught

interest. but delay's conflicts netted nothing stronger from the house ethics committee than a letter stating, "it is clearly necessary for you to temper your future actions." meredith: from the ethics viewpoint, really, the hammer never came down on the hammer. sharyl: there were bribery scandals involving congressmen james traficant, duke cunningham, and william jefferson, all of whom went to prison. and congressman mark foley, who allegedly sent sexually explicit messages to teenaged boys, current and former congressional pages. amid the public outrage over congress behaving badly, the house created a new office of congressional ethics in 2008 to investigate complaints. notably, it doesn't have the power to punish. it can only refer cases to the house ethics committee, where fellow members of congress decide their colleagues' fate. meredith: they did not give the office of congressional ethics subpoena power.

good job when they have no subpoena power. what's happened now 10 years later is because they don't have subpoena power, the k street lawyers who are now representing members and staff, they're telling their clients, "don't cooperate." sharyl: during its 10 years, the house office of congressional ethics has received 182 complaints. most were dismissed. only a relative handful resulted in any discipline, which mcgehee says amounted to a slap on the wrist. how does it impact what we're looking at today when people hear members of congress being accused of improprieties that the ethics committees, whatever they are, will take care of this? meredith: well, it's interesting when the ethics committee feels like it's politically convenient, all of a sudden they can take on a case. some of your folks may recall senator vitter had been involved in a prostitution ring. the senate ethics committee had said, well, first, none of this occurred while he was a senator, so we have no jurisdicti

now comes senator franken. they want to investigate something that happened before senator franken was a senator. so suddenly they say, ok, we'll take the case, where they precisely had refused to take a case before that on exactly the same kinds of issues. sharyl: what do you conclude from that? meredith: what i conclude from this is that the senate ethics committee is a place where you go when you have political hot potato and you don't know what else to do with it. and that's not a republican or democratic issue. the senate ethics committee is the perfect place to let it go and cool off. sen. franken: i will be resigning. sharyl: mcgehee says only public pressure can change the dynamic that's long dominated the system congress set up to police itself. meredith: there is a tendency to want to go for a slap on the wrist to let something that's very heated and radioactive at the moment referred to the ethics committee and then let it cool down and maybe even be forgotten. and so it is kind of this dead letter office in many cases

where they're more interested in protecting each other than they are in ensuring high ethical standards. sharyl: and in the "you can't make this up" department, this week, a top congressional ethics official who oversees investigations into the misconduct of lawmakers was charged in a federal lawsuit of verbally abusing and physically assaulting women. omar ashmawy denies the charges that stemmed from a bar brawl in pennsylvania in 2015. ahead on "full measure" -- it's one of the world's oldest and most divisive cities. scott thuman reports from jerusalem on the history of the holy city and why moving the u.s. embassy is causing such a stir.

sharyl: vice president pence heads to israel soon. that after president trump's decision to move the u.s. embassy from tel aviv to the capital, jerusalem, a city long divided by religion, politics, and history. our scott thuman is in jerusalem. ♪ scott: in whatever form it takes, prayer is at the center of jerusalem's story. this ancient city settled 3000 years before christ is important to three religions. for jews, the focus is the western wall, a relic and physical link to one of their faith's earliest places of worship. for muslims, jerusalem is home to islam's third holiest site, from where the prophet mohammed ascended to heaven. and for christians, this is where jesus was crucified and resurrected.

integral to three major faiths and millions of followers that jerusalem has found itself destroyed at least twice, besieged dozens of times, attacked over 50 times, trading hands by empires in passing. 70 years ago, the state of israel was formed, but not accepted by all of its arab neighbors. in 1967, israel fought egypt, jordan, and syria in the six-day war, gaining territory and effective control of jerusalem. another brief, but bloody war in 1973, arab states fought back, though israel prevailed, its leaders came away understanding they might not continue winning wars against surrounding arab states. five years later, with america playing the role of mediator, an historic agreement. the

with a process to recognize the rights of the palestininans within five years. the palestinian issue is still part of the problem with jerusalem and, to a degree, where the middle east peace issue still lies. in september of 2000, ariel sharon, a famous israeli military leader and eventual prime minister, made a visit to the temple mount that inflamed the palestinians and began rioting and an ongoing uprising that lasted over four years and killed thousands. it was called the second intifada. now, some believe, president trump's decision to move the u.s. embassy to jerusalem might trigger the third. palestinian leaders called for three days of rage. while there were demonstrations and minor violence, so far mostly words, not war. tzipi livni is a member of the israeli parliament and former foreign minister. we've seen some relatively tense times over the last few days ever sin

how do you see this playing out? tzipi livni: now, basically, as an israeli and a jew, i was more than pleased. i understand that in israel it created joy and gratitude. on the other side you can see some frustration. but i do believe that the future will be defined not by the statement or the declaration, but the decisions that the leaders need to make right now. and i hope that their agenda will not be taken by the extremists in the region, the religious ideological islamists groups in the region. scott: that then leads right into the question of people who claim that perhaps this may spark the third intifada. the president's decision may do that, is that possible? tzipi livni: it's possible, but i hope not. and this is why i cited this as the role of leaders, because i believe that statement coming fr

palestinian side are very important. and the president made it clear in the delcaration that what he is doing is basically describing the realities. and he said in the speech and this is a very important message saying that this delcaration doesn't prejudize future agreements. that it's not about the borders between israel and the future palestinian state or the boundaries of jeruslaem or the soverignty of israel in jeruslaem. and this is the message that we should put a spotlight on today. saying okay, yes, we have this delcaration. jeruslaem is the capital of israel and for many years, since 1949. and yet, let's negotiate. scott: but that's what we're hearing from some on the palestinian side, they say, in fact, this damages peace negotiations. tzipi livni: it's their decision. the delcaration itself shouldn't and doesn't damage peace negotiations.

as long as the palestinians, instead of focusing on the declaration, would focus on how to relaunch peace negotiations. and there is no excuse for terror. there is no excuse for violence. scott: livni admits almost none of this is sitting well with the arab and muslim population. and, as a result, we have seen some rocket fire over the last few days. so in the coming weeks, we'll take a closer look at this issue from the palestinian side, as well. in jerusalem, i'm scott thuman for "full measure." sharyl: coming up on "full measure" -- one very simple fix to an immigration issue. what is it and why can't congress pass

whoa! the mercedes-benz winter event is back and you won't want to stop for anything else. [ barks ]

lease the gla 250 for $349 a month at your local mercedes-benz dealer. mercedes-benz. the best or nothing. . >> today at 10:30 on "government matters" the white house is boost the technology gets meat on the sharyl: a bill calling for american businesses to check the immigration status of all employees is moving through congress. it's called e-verify and congressman lamar smith, who'ste immigration issues, explains how it would work. rep. smith: e-verify system, where we check the status of

individuals, whether they're eligible to work in the united states or not by simply checking their social security number to see if it's a legitimate. it's virtually free, it's easy, it's simple, it's 99% effective, probably the most effective of any government program we could possibly have. and it saves jobs for american citizens and for legal immigrants who are entitled to work in this country, so we think it's a good system and very much needed. sharyl: e-verify is already available. what's the difference between employers being able to use the system now and what the bill calls for? rep. smith: well, right now about a third of all the workforce is under e-verify, and it's a voluntary program today. 1500 employers voluntarily sign up for it new every single week and the bill simply requires all employers to use e-verify. sharyl: this idea has been attempted before. rep. smith: it has. sharyl: how have you overcome the objections if you have to people who say they don't want their current illegal employees flagged by implementing the e-verify system?

rep. smith: this bill does not apply to current employees. it only applies to individuals who are new hires, who are applying for jobs in the future, so it's not going to impact the current workforce. sharyl: in the big picture, why do you think this is important to do? rep. smith: this is important for two reasons, if we have an e-verify program, it's going to turn down the attraction of the jobs magnet, and if illegal immigrants know they cannot get a job in the united states, then they are going to be less likely to come into the united states, so it's going to reduce illegal immigration. the other half is that it's going to save these jobs for unemployed and underemployed american citizens. right now, a lot of those jobs, illegal immigrants stole something like 6 million to 7 million jobs in the country today, and these jobs should be going to the unemployed american citizens. sharyl: so, you mentioned this being part, potentially, of an immigration package, so it's passed as a free-standing bill, but then incorporated into a package? rep. smith: it wouldn't surprise me if some kind of a final immigration package didn't have e-verify to make sure that only

american workers get jobs, didn't have some sort of border security in the sense of more structures along the border, maybe some form of immigration reform to reduce chain migration, where you have one individual today conceivably bringing in lots of family members who are not immediate family members, need to reduce that. it wouldn't surprise me if it didn't have some narrow form of what's called daca, which is a category of young people who came into the country at a very young age and have lived here most of their lives. that could be part of the package, as well. sharyl: that they would be allowed to stay? rep. smith: they would be allowed to stay in the united states. so it's four or five components of a larger, broader immigration package, and it wouldn't surprise me if we don't see that before the end of the year. the president would like to see it by december. sharyl: and, no offense, but as an outsider watching congress try to get some things done, it seems a lot hasn't gotten passed, even that which there was thought to be broad base support for so what do you.

what odds do you place on an immigration package? rep. smith: you're right, congress needs to produce, we need to show we can govern. i think congress will come back for healthcare reform. tax reform is coming up, i think that the house will pass tax reform by the end of the year. and i think the house will pass immigration reform by the end of the year. i cannot speak for, nor do i take any responsibility for what the senate does, and that's sometimes the problem. sharyl: what is earlier and it seems like immigration reform is definitely not happening before the end of this year. is supportedverify by a majority of americans, according to a poll. if employers use it, they cannot be prosecuted for accidentally hiring illegal immigrants. next on "full measure" -- five years after the benghazi atta

[ splash ] [ horn sounds ] dang! ok, i gotta run. hey, wait, there's something i need to tell you- dang. dang! dang! dang. dang. see zero in a whole new way. get zero down, zero deposit, zero first month's payment, and zero due at signing on select volkswagen models. now with the people first warranty.

sharyl: an update more than five years after terrorist attacks on u.s. compounds in benghazi, libya that claimed four american lives. believe it or not, i recently received some documents from the state department in response to my years' old freedom of information request that only reveal that more secrets are being obscured by the government. you might wonder what secrets could be left surrounding the islamic extremist terrorist attacks on americans in benghazi, libya on september 11, 2012. after all, there have been countless document leaks, hearings, and probes.

that state department security was lax despite many warnings, that rescues that could have been attempted were not, and that obama officials pursued a false narrative, blaming protesters for the attacks, while knowing from the start it was islamic extremist terrorists. >> was it because of a protest or guys out for a walk one night who decided they would go kill some americans? what difference, at this point, does it make? sharyl: in november, the libyan ringleader was convicted of terrorism charges, but he was not held directly responsible for the murders of four americans. five years after the attacks, the state department released to me these 11 outstanding documents with excisions. lots of them. one example is an email chain the morning after. "draft security council press statement on attacks against u.s. diplomatic personnel." the whole thing is blanked out. marked "importance high." state department official eric pelofsky writes numerous top government officials, including secretary of state aides philipe reines, victoria nuland, patrick kennedy, and thomas nides.

everything else is redacted. a reply to that email is also entirely blocked out except for the signature line, "thanks, alyce." several emails to and from benjamin fishman, who sat on president obama's national securtiy counsel, were blocked out entirely, including this one circulated to white house and state department officials denis mcdonough, jake sullivan, and w.j. burns september 12, 2012. and this call sheet for secretary of state clinton made before a phone call with turkey's foreign minister. under the law, responses to freedom of information requests are due within about 30 days. so five years is overdue to say the least. this foia response shows two things -- the foia process is broken and there are some secrets about benghazi that may never be revealed. this week, attorney general sessions called the dangerous gang ms-13 a transnational criminal organization. next week on "full measure," we report on ms-13. their motto is "kill, steal,

and they target the young. that is next week. until then, thanks for watching. i'm sharyl attkisson.

from washington d.c. and around the world, this is "government matters" with francis rose. >> thanks for watching the weekend edition of "government matters." the only show covering the latest news, trends, and topics that matter to the business of government. i'm your host francis rose. this week the white house rolled out tech focused initiatives, it released the i.t. modernization report. it released the center of excellence. it is