department of energy do? >> absent other authorities we recommended that the department of energy go seek and consult with the department of justicetation? >> in my experience with our client agencies, when there is a workout situation potentially developing, that the department of justice is consulted with. they have statutory authority over such matters. i do need to say, though, that some agencies have their own authorities so it's not a 100% call everytime. >> that's out of your agency or your area. that's one that you push for to make sure things are done correctly and follow the law. aim correct? >> i'm sorry? >> out of the treasury, that's something you practice to make sure that other deps are following the law? >> this was advice to a couple of colleagues on an area of law i was not sure they were aware of. >> thank you. were a treasury officials involved in the drafting draftit the e-mail you september to d.o.e.? >> yes. i'm part of a team and this was a group expert i was the person who transmilted the e-mail. >> why did triesry think it -- treasury think it was right to right to the department of energy and ask them to

of subordination? is a treasury department or department of energy? >> is certainly not treasury department. >> you know the department of energy? >> i'm not sure if it's department of energy or department of justice are exactly where the authority -- >> department of energy runs the program. and they heard from you, your department that there were concerns about the subordination issue. isn't that correct? >> i think we raised the issue of whether they could come to my saqlain bowed to government. it's not specifically whether there was subordination to be clear about the concern we raised. >> it was no legal decision or memorandum, just raising concern by the way look at what? >> no, we did not have legal conclusion are rendered legal judgment. we were fighting an issue to consider. >> you fact in issue for to consider. they heard what you have to say them and their lawyer issued a legal opinion. a legal opinion is a legal opinion. it's not statement of facts. its statement of what they think the law is. and that's the document returned to make public. this is a document to the republicans have had for months. in fact, at the very first hearing we had on solyndra, congressman kingery read a port

of subordination. is it the treasury department or the department of energy? >> certainly not the treasury department. >> department of energy? >> i am not sure if it is the department of energy or the department of justice -- >> they heard from you, your department that there were concerns about the subordination issue. is that correct? >> i think we raise the issue of whether they could compromise the claim to government debt not specifically whether there was subordination, to be clear about the concern raised. >> there was no legal decision or memorandum? >> no, we did not have or render a legal judgment. we were flagging an issue for them to consider. >> you flag an issue for them to consider. they heard what you had to say. and then a lawyer should the legal opinion. the legal opinion is a legal opinion. it is not a statement of fact, it is a statement of what they think the law is. hence the document we are trying to make public. this is a document that republicans have had for months. at the very first hearing we had on solyndra, congressman gingrey read a portion from this legal memo and ask you a question. the issue before us at this moment in the committee is whether we are going to make this

this is a bold move by the department of justice. k it's incorrect as a matter of policy and wrong as matter of law. megyn: you mention this section 552. this would tomorrow relate to a few select categories of document including active criminal investigations where the subject is not aware he's being investigated. the identity of confidential informants and doj records relating to terrorism. those those three good categories where they can tell prying eyes they don't exist? >> i think you have to say -- one group simply say we think these documents are exempt even if they exist or don't exist. if they exist we think they are exempt. when you sayer not existing you are affirmative live lying. so you have need to say we are not going to disclose the documents, period. what this is dock is giving the department of justice a free pass to avoid litigation. megyn: there has been a ruling where the judge said the government cannot affirmatively mislead the court. but, jay, shannon breen came on and said the doj is pointing out it was allowe

from earlier today. >> to your knowledge, do you believe today that the department of energy should have sought department of justicel? >> yeah. i've said that i believe that they -- that it would have been wise for them to seek department of justice approval. >> so there you have it. a veteran department of treasury employee saying they should have gone to the lawyers over at the department of justice before they went ahead with this idea of putting private investors ahead of the taxpayers. trace? >> trace: mike emanuel live for us on capitol hill. mike, thank you. let's have more on this with the anchor of "fox news sunday," chris wallace. he joins us live from washington, d.c. chris, we went to the trusty brain room on this. the brain room says technically it's not illegal to put the investors ahead of taxpayers, but just like you heard the lawmaker just say there it would have been best if you had run this by the doj. your thoughts? >> well, listen -- well, the department of treasury, not department of justice. you're right. this just adds to all the smoke. i'm not sure how much fire there i but it adds to all t

and we have not gotten that information from the department of justice. jenna: do you have any specific information that shows that the attorney general knew about this gun walking and ignored it? >> we have a lot of memos that -- it has the attorney general himself name on it where he got briefing papers, he got a number of memos and updates along the way, and so a lot of this information has been redacted. we think as a committee we should be able to see it, we are doing an investigation of the department of justice, so the more questions we ask, the more documents that come out, the more it appears as if the attorney general and landy brueur, did know about this and the question is why and when and when they came to the judiciary committee, did they say they hadn't heard about it. jenna: why the focus on the department of justice and why not the department of homeland security? >> well, in this particular case, you have the officers that were moving forward on this case, the atf, working with the u.s. attorney there in the phoenix office who then was go

we are going to hear from the department of justice this morning. but before that, there's going to be a huge protest by medical marijuana patients and advocates against what the department of justice is about to announce. >> thank you. >>> dramatic video. investigators have searching for the cause of a fiery train derailment. it happened about 100 miles west of chicago. it forced evacuations in the small community of tiskilwa that has about 800 people. the train was reportedly carrying ethanol. witnesses said they heard explosions, this is that video taken earlier. no word on any injuries. >>> killing three coworkers at a quarry in cupertino was not the first sign of violence from shareef allman. the "mercury news" reports his ex-wife got a restraining order against him in 1992 after he hit her with a brass lamp and knocked her out. the paper also reports allman used a walkie-talkie to threaten survivors on wednesday's shooting spree and that allman had hidden weapons along his getaway route. deputies shot and killed him in sunnyvale yesterday morni

wants to get rid of. >> rick perry, by the way, won't provide the race evidence, the data the department of justice needs. 600,000 people in the state of texas do not have photo identification. those are already registered voters. so we're trying to collect that data and prove to the department of justice they should stand with the voting rights act and protect voters and in some places where we think the laws -- we're going to see them again, in north carolina we think the legislature will pull it back and we're going to fight every step of the way. >> dick, how much cheating is there in voting right now? my experience is the way we monitor elections in the country, somebody -- local people sitting behind a desk. they all know everybody. you vote via your local neighborhood. everyone knows who you with. when you give your address, people know who you are. that's the way it's done. it isn't perfect. we need an i.d. card system. >> you're right on the money. not one reported case of voter fraud in this state in the last ten years. why all of a sudden -- it's going to cost $2 million to implement thi

we told them they need to consult with the departments of justice. again, this is mary miller above you expressing concern. at any point -- she even refers to a leader e-mail july 2010 concern that the department of treasury raised with the department of energy. any step of the way was there a feeling they are not going to comply with the law because you see this in your e-mail they are not following what we are saying about getting justice involved why didn't you will get justice and of course we're talking 530 million here there's another 4.7 billion that went out the door just a few weeks ago. >> this refers to a variety of e-mails here and obviously that's an important question and important question for the committee. it is not our role to interpret the department of energy's statutes and authorities and in no case were we ever doing that. we were never rendering a legal judgment as to whether they were complying with the law. >> you're telling them they should consult with the department of justice. >> we were asking a question. we were not answ

it wasn't within the department of homeland security. >> i am asking is a former prosecutor who did the cases the department of justicehas to approve the supplications, correct? >> that is the procedure, yes. >> in those applications is a narrative or summary of the case. >> that is correct. some one of the department of justice had to know about fast and furious 43 to ever have been approved, connect? >> i can't comment. i don't know that there ever was a t3 approved. sprigg if there were a t3 approved and fast and furious, and there were, the departments of justice would have had to have known about it; correct? >> i'm going to leave that for your own investigation, sir. i'm not going to go comment beyond what i know, and what i know is that after the death of agent terrie, the fast and furious legal became apparent and we became knowledgeable about it. obviously there were problems with the operation. obviously it did not succeed and the inspector general has that under investigation right now. from a law enforcement perspective, from a law enforcement perspective, yes, fast and furious is very troublesome. >> mr.

little video here where jake tapper asked barack obama last week he asked why hasn't your department of justice done anything against the banker fraudsters the ones that have stolen the economy are the ones who committed widescale subprime fraud and this is what barack obama answered on the issue of prosecutions on wall street. one of the biggest problems about. the collapse lehman's and the subsequent financial crisis and the whole subprime lending fiasco is that a lot of that stuff wasn't necessarily illegal it was just. immoral or. inappropriate or reckless well this is our barack obama is wrong the banks committed outright fraud they committed illegal acts of fraudulent inducement fraudulent risa characterization and fraudulent mis selling they've committed a whole show mortgage support of fraud and barack obama is completely wrong and the press is too stupid to ask him specific questions like well what about in the case of bank of america or j.p. morgan or goldman sachs lot number dot dot dot dot where on this day they broke it egregiously why did you not prosecute you shameless punk and a

wants to get rid of. >> and rick perry won't provide the race evidence, the data that the department of justice0 people in the state of texas do not have photo identification, and those are registered voters. we're trying to collect that data, prove to the department of justice that they should stand with the voting rights act and protect voters, and in some places where we think these laws, we're going to see them again in north carolina we think the legislature with pull it back and we'll be fighting it every step of the way. >> my experience is that the way we monitoring elections in this country, somebody -- local people sitting behind a desk, they all know everything, you vote by your local neighborhood, when you give your address, people know who you are. your thoughts. -- i think that's the way it's done. it isn't perfect, but do we need an i.d. system? >> you're right on the money. not one reporter case of voter fraud in the last ten years. and it will cost $2 million to implement this. as we said, this will disenfranchise people, so it's got nothing to do with integrity. >> it smells.

i want to show you a live picture from the department of justice. der will be speaking shortly and he may address this of course and we are waiting for the president to speak. he's in pittsburgh today. he may or may not address this as he also talks about jobs there as well. jill, what is the relationship, if any, if you know this between the iranian government, when you talk about them turning to the mexican drug cartels. have you ever heard of anything like this? is there any relationship there at all? >> i have not. but if this were to be carried out in the united states, you would have to say that that would be one way to do it, because, after all, drug cartels, as i said, have a lot of money and a lot of weapons. and there might be some way to do that. and, also, it could give some kind of deniability, but by using members of -- or some type of help from mexican drug cartels, it throws it pretty far away from iran, or at least would appear to, and then you might have some deniability. >> what would be the next step, once the president gets word

i hope you will stand up to the department of justice. i think it is another tired attack on san francisco values. thank you. [applause] supervisor avalos: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> hello. i am a patient advocate. i would like to say thank you for your time, first of all. second, i would like to say that safe access is no access if you cannot properly medicaid without the federal peppermint cracking down on the dispensaries, collectives, and co-ops, and people with low incomes and disability. please, doj, stand down. i urge you. people in high places, please protect medical cannabis. thank you very much. [applause] supervisor avalos: thank you. if there are no other members of the public who would like to comment -- anyone else, please come forward. >> how low. i just wanteto

government lawyers. >> absent other authorities, we recommended the department of energy go seek and consult with the department of justice. >> and newly released e-mails say no consultation took place. the treasury department official wrote in august, we requested in writing that he seek the department of justice's approval of any proposed restructuring. to our knowledge, that has never happened. >> they realize they made a bad loan. they are trying to figure out a way they made a bad loan. >> democrats say the gop probe isn't about taxpayer concern, but embarrassing president obama and snuffing out energy competition. >> they are not coal, competitors to those incumbent industries. that's what this is all about. kill the competition. >> but the questions over solydra show no sign of dying off any time soon. was any of this illegal? that question was left somewhat unclear at the end of today's hearing and the question about whether or not the energy's department failure to get the justice's department approval and whether or not that broke the law. those questions are going to be awaiting energy department officials, rep

we said doe needs to consult with the department of justice. this is mary miller above you expressing concerns. at any point, she even refers to in later e-mail a july 2010 concern that the department of treasury raised with the department of energy. at any step of the way was there, was there a feeling that they're not going to comply with the law? y'all say in your e-mails. they're not following about what we say about getting justice involved. why didn't y'all get justice involved? we're talking 535 million here. another $4.7 billion went out the door a fuse weeks ago. >> congressman i will answer that because this refers to variety of e-mails here and that is important question and important question for the committee. it is not our role to interpret the department of new york's statutes and authorities and in no case were we ever doing that we were never rendering a legal judgment as to whether they were complying with the law or -- >> you were telling them they should consult with the department of justice. >> we were identifying a issue a

they asked the department of energy to get justice department approval. instead, the doe sent a memo defending the legality of the loan. at that hearing today, that had some republic lawmakers livid. >> this was a document and it's a legal counsel opinion that basically says you can ignore the law. well, you can't ignore the law. the law is very clear. this is the law insubordination. just one sentence. says you can't do it. >> my recollection but i will refer to counsel to. >> trace: congressional democrats dismissing the hearing as a kangaroo court saying that house republicans only allowed treasury officials to testify today. nobody from the doe. >> instead of helping america lead the world in clean energy. the republic controlled house is doing everything possible to maintain our addiction to fossil fuels. >> trace: all this the day after relearned solyndra's ceo had stepped down. mike emanuel with the news. is he live on capitol hill tonight. mike, we're just now hearing about the white house's refusal to handover documents. >> that's right, trace. a

in the voting section of the justice department? 's right. >> tell us what that is. >> we enforce federal election law all around the country, whether it's the voting rights act, election day monitoring. improving of voting laws in 16 states under the section 5 voting acts. a lot of work. >> the voting rights act is obviously needed, and we have this whole issue that came up with the new black panthers outside a polling place in philadelphia, and what did the department of justice do? >> they dismissed it. the case went to default and they decided to dismiss the case in 2010. >> and that had an impact on you? >> i brought it. >> exactly. and why do you think they dismissed the case when you got these guys banging on these clubs, obviously a form of intimidation as people are trying to vote? >> look, everybody knows that the holder d.o.j. has become politicized. what they don't realize, and i detail this in injustice, parts of the d.o.j., particularly the civil rights acquisition where i was, has become radicalized. it's not just poli

the commission issued proposed standards and the department of justice is now finalizing national standards. in april i wrote a letter to attorney general eric holder emphasizing the importance of strong standards. what is it the department of homeless security doing to ensure immigration detainees are a -- free from the use -- abuse? >> when i took over we found there were little or no standard applied uniformly across all the detention facilities we use in the ice context. some of them are public jails, like weber county. others are privatized by companies like cca. we have to have beds, and particular given our priorities and how we are managing the system, we need beds that are near the southern border. we have, as part of that process, i brought in someone to actually look at standards and we redid our contracts with some of the providers. we do have a process by which we are regularly auditing and overseeing what is happening there. but that is not to say there are not cases that are particularly horrific. we also have, senator, we tried to emphasize the availability of visas for thos

the federal government, the department of justice, by its own admission, mission that was set out, the sheriff was a leader on the issue and spoke out against it. saying that they would not change. i believe that one of the things the sheriff has done that i respect him for. they go on a bus. it taken away. and until the government can resolve their issues, i support the sheriff's plan. >> one of the things that makes me very proud of san francisco was what sheriff hennessey did 18 months before any other elected official in the united states. he stood tall against officials for their reckless policies. only about one year later to the other governors follow suit. thanks to sharon hennessey showing what is in dispute. though i am not as happy with the obama administration by now -- not just for english-speaking only communities. it is about foster and trust collects always speak of -- we have to balance, as the sheriff, and will have to continue to balance between the concerns of the secure program, to keep us safe from dangerous and violent criminals, and the concerns of our sanctuary

last comment i'd make: there's been some dichotomy of views, shall we say, expressed by the department of justice and department of homeland security about whether they have what they need to secure the border. we've heard the secretary of homeland security say we have all we need. but we also know that the secretary has said we have to prioritize our detention policy, for example, because we don't have the facilities and the money we need to detain and deport all of the people who are deportable, so we have to focus just on the most serious crime, the felons primarily, who are now the top target for deportation. obviously, if you have to prioritize, we would agree with that prioritization. but twha means is that they don't have enough money to do all of the things that they're trying to do. and so on the wer one hand the department says we have all need and on the other hand, we don't have enough so we have to prioritize what we do. we're trying to attack the one part in this bill, has to help the u.s. marshals. i don't think there is a one of us here that wonk be supportive of that. i just want

the problem for eric holder is the department of justice has been withholding the full story on this from the beginning. first they told congress the operation didn't exist. not true. then d.o.j. had nothing to do with it. not true. then eric holder said he only learned about the operation in april or march of 2011. then they produced documents that show. >> bill: the documents came out. >> let me finish. this is an important point. ten months earlier he had been receiving briefings about t it. then the d.o.j. came out and told fox news there is a difference between knowing about an operation and knowing about the controversial aspects of the operation. okay, that is the explanation. no, it wasn't. eric holder comes out a couple of days after that and says no i'm sticking to my original statement that i didn't know even about the operation. they can't even get their story straight within the department of justice. >> bill: this is an important store arery. now, you, they say holder is done, he will have to resign. >> i don't know about that. >> bill: you don't -- >> i don't know abou

so it's important to us to find out when the department of justice, his department, when did the department of justice first learn of this ill conceived gun interdiction program or investigation, although i'm reluctant to use the word investigation. it was so flawed in its inception. he is going to have to -- president obama hired him, president obama can decide whether or not he's doing the job, and i suspect when he becomes -- when it becomes more of a political liability they'll have that conversation. jenna: you know, the president hired a lot of people. >> i'm not giving career advice. i want to get answers for the american people, who knew what, when. jenna: the president hired a quite a few people that had to testify. we just showed hillary clinton in other testimony, she talked about this, also the secretary of homeland security, as well as the attorney general, and there seems to be a similarity between all of their testimonies which seems to be a bigger story that i'd like your opinion on, congressman. it seems at this point that they all say gosh, we didn't know about it or i did

>> it can go very far nationally because there are some states who don't have department of justice oversighttice gets to have a say in their voter laws, but wisconsin, for example, doesn't have that kind of history but does have these kinds of laws. it can have a huge impact in swing states for the presidential election but also a huge impact in states like south carolina on congressional elections. look, carolina state and bennett college, two historically black colleges in south carolina are a situation where nearly everyone who votes in their precinct is now out of compliance with the ability to vote. that kind of disenfranchising impact, i think, is clear, but the goal here is to keep certain kinds of people from being able to cast a vote in 2012. >> melissa, great to see you. i want to give a programming note to everybody. you can catch melissa tonight for an entire hour when the brilliant melissa fills in for the brilliant rachel maddow. >>> a new book opens up details about steve jobs' life including his warning to president obama and what he really thought about bill gates. >>> shoul

other emails suggested some inside the administration thought the department of justice should be cult consulted on some of the loans because there were concerns they might have been illegal issue but the department of energy moved ahead with that deal, anyway. >> peter doocy, thanks so much. >> eric holder is pushing back against the heat he's been getting over the fast and furious scandal, the botched gun trafficking sting connect to the death of a border agent. the attorney general saying he was truthful when he testified before congress about when he first learned when the firearms were popping up at crime scenes and blasting comments from an arizona congressman that government officials were, quote, accessories to murder. >> folks from far away, as far as wisconsin and kansas turning out in nashville, tennessee, for the maker of an iconic guitar. supporters of gibson guitar saying they are unfairly being targeted in a federal investigation in nashville and memphis, after government officials seized what they say are illegal ebony and rosewood, shipped to the guitar maker. here's a

and i must say when one looks at the record of the defense -- the record of the justice department, in prosecuting these terrorists in civilian courts, prosecutions were achieved, convictions were obtained, and as the world watched it, justice was served. and i'm pretty proud of that and i would hope we would defeat the gentlelady's amendment but that we be united as a congress and a senate in making sure we prosecute those who engage in any predatory activity directed to the united states of america and its citizens. mr. president, -- madam president, i yield the floor. a senator: madam president. the presiding officer: the senator from missouri. mr. blunt: i ask unanimous consent to temporarily set aside the pending amendment to offer the grassley amendment number 860. the presiding officer: without objection. the clerk will report. mr. blunt: i ask consent to dispense with the reading of the amendment. the presiding officer: the clerk will report the amendment by number. the clerk: mr. blunt for mr. grassley proposes amendment 738. mr. blunt: i ask unanimous consent to dispense with

that was not within the department of homeland security. >> i am asking you as a former prosecutor. the department of justice has to approve those applications. in those applications is a narrative or a summary of the case. someone at the department of justice had to know about fast and furious for the t3 to ever have been approved. was ever't know if a t3 approved in fast and furious. >> if there was a t3, the department of justice would have to have known about it. >> i will leave that to your investigation. what i do know that after the death of agent terry, the fast and furious label became apparent. obviously, the operation did not succeed. the inspector general has been under investigation right now. from a law enforcement perspective, fast and furious was troublesome. >> mr. chairman, if i could have an additional 30 seconds, which may be custom this morning -- >> without objection. >> my point on fast and furious is that there were not just problems. there were -- it was wrong from its inception. what i take offense at is when the attorney general and others on the other side of the aisle say that on

weren't breaking state laws wasn't an efficient use of federal resources, but this month the department of justice started making the same kind of threats as in 2008, and the irs has joined in, demanding additional tax money. >> what the feds are being permitted to do is an atrocity. >> yes. >> and the fact that president obama has gone against his promise to us indicates to me just how deep his level of hypocrisy truly goes. >> reporter: president made it inside the hotel with very few of these protesters even seeing his car arrive which means he probably didn't see them either. clint werner still thinks this protest will make an impact. >> he's isolated, insulated from a lot of things, but i think what it does is it gives us a voice. >> reporter: now back in 2008 when san francisco patients cooperative went down a lot of other dispensaries, went down with it, that's what some people fear is going to happen this time, that the department of justice is just going to pick off one dispensary after another. live in san francisco, tracy grant, nbc "bay area news." >> thanks, tracy, back to our breakin