and phil barr told him it came from the missing girls. from >> phil barr?e owner of the septic repair business that had been at tara's house the day she went missing. but was peewee telling the truth? would he ever tell the truth? >> he told multiple different stories. >> what did he say? >> he said a little more each time he was interview. and he changed his story to the point where it made him an and credible witness. he admitted that he had seen the body at some point. i was a little interesting in that particular area. terror spoons were recovered within a couple hundred yards of one of these favorite fishing spots. >> isn't that your connection? >> that was a great connection. but mr. st. john was a very incredible witness. >> that story about getting stolen jewelry from phil barr -- >> no jewelry from towers home was found in the possession of phil barr. >> anyway, barr investigators tower was fine when he and the his help her left her house that afternoon. the questions went on and on. and phil barr with, the business to run, didn't appreciate that k

attorney general bill barr back in 2019.eral judge now slamming barr as disingenuous for his spin on the mueller probe. the question is -- what more will we learn about barr's

barr had a huge megaphone at the time and it gave republicans the cover to say well, if bill barr is saying and he's essentially clearing trump then he's been cleared. >> and here we all are, michael schmitt, goldman, matt miller thank you for starting us off on that story. after the break, security concerns of domestic extremism to uphold a ban against donald trump and republicans apparently no longer the party of national or homeland security are lashing out. plus we'll talk to the republican candidate in texas who had the audacity to trump on an anti-trump platform. we'll ask him what he thinks about his race and about the future of the party and what's playing out right now with liz cheney in washington what the department of defense is considering an aggressive plan to defend against the white supremacist frifrnl. all of that after a quick break. don't go anywhere been ere been okay. mother and child in vehicle. mother is unable to exit the vehicle. injuries are unknown. thank you, onstar. ♪ my son, is he okay? your son's fine. thank you. there was something in the road... it's

the justice department under william barr withheld that. people filed requests for that, an oversight group called crew filed a foia lawsuit, the justice demurred, said, no we're not going to release that document, that's real legal advice, and we don't release those things to the public. the judge ruled that that document wasn't real legal advice. it wasn't anything. the trump era justice department said that that document was. she says they have been disingenuous about this part of the process, too. she says, in fact, william barr decided from the outset that president trump wouldn't be charged with any crimes, and what he had the justice cook up for him was an after the fact rationalization of that decision that he had already made. and if you do that, that's not some protected, privileged legal advice thing that can be shielded from the public. particularly if you lie to the court about it. because, you know, if you're the u.s. justice department, if you're the attorney general of the united states and you lie to a federal judge and the

the justice department under william barr had repelled that. people filed requests for, it oh oversight group called crew had filed a lawsuit seeking that document. the justice department had demurred, said no, we are not gonna release that document because that is real legal advice we don't release those things to the public. the judge ruled today that was not legal advice. she said it wasn't anything. the trump air justice said that document was. she said they have been disingenuous about this part of the process as well. in fact, william barr decided from the outset that president trump wouldn't be charged with any crimes. and what he had the justice department cook up for him was an after the fact rationalization of that decision he had already made. if you do that, that is not some protected privilege of legal advice thing that can be shielded from the public, particularly if you lie to the court about it because, if you are the u.s. justice department, the attorney general of the the united states, and you lied to a federal judge? and the

see this barr memo.memo to meet the attorney general that he wrote before he got the job in which he for 20 pages said there's no obstruction of justice prosecution. and that's what this document is that we are all wanting to see. and the justice department now is saying no, the people don't get to see it that's going to stay in the vault. and that to me is not the right call. >> neil, let me go back to what you and i would consider tradition in these circumstances. the norm in these circumstances. if this was, say, the clinton presidency after the george h. w. bush presidency nobody would blink an eye at something like this. they would consider this one responsibly run justice department being handed off to another responsibly run justice department, basically using the same values. the same approaches to the law and procedure to all of these things and they will cease things similarly. this comes after the most legally radical administration in history. the longest ongoing legally radical attorney gene

to call bill barr such things. you've had two different judges before, reggie walton and emmett sullivan saying similar things, both with regard to the mueller report as well as the claims that he dropped the case against michael flynn, for reasons that didn't seem credible. >> i want to spend a myth for the audience on this word disingenuous, and why the judge both went that far, but didn't go beyond that. didn't say what i would say, call it a lie. that is because a judges in a unique position, a finder of facts, and doesn't want to be in a position to be an accuser. she recognizes that prosecutors are in the business of accusing, not judges. that is about as strong a word as a judge in this situation could use, isn't it? >> exactly. she couldn't go further, because the specific question of the case was basically a public interest organization was seeking the memo that barr used to say that -- he claims that he said that i am not going to indict president trump, and that is something that the freedom act protects

wouldn't say that about barr. i would say he has distorted view of what the law requires, one that's self-serving and protects his pals, but two distinct concepts here. >> neal katyal, thanks for starting us off. really appreciate it. >>> coming up, liz cheney thinks the republican party is at a crossroads tonight. that's because she missed the crossroads in 2016 when donald trump got the republican nomination for president and the party became the cult of trump. that's next. mp that's next. what you need? i mean it... uh-oh, sorry... oh... what? i'm an emu! no, buddy! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty. ♪ it only takes a second for an everyday item to become dangerous. tide pods child-guard pack helps keep your laundry pacs in a safe place and your child safer. to close, twist until it clicks. tide pods child-guard packaging. with relapsing forms of ms, there's a lot to deal with. not just unpredictable relapses. all these other things too. who needs that kind of drama? kesimpta is a

see barr's memo. no on just of justice that should exist here. and that is what this document is that we are all wanting to see, and the justice department is saying no, the people don't get to see it. ws it's going to stay in the vault, and ta to me is not the right call. >> neil, let me go back to what you and i consider tradition in niece circumstances. this was say the clinton presidency after the george h.w. bush presidency, no one would blink an eye. they could consider it a once responsibly run justice department, basically using the same values, the same approaches to the law, to procedure, to all these things, and they would see things similarly. this comes after the most legally radical drags in administration, and the longest on going legally radical attorney general, richard nixon's attorney general went to prison. bill barr was not taking out of the job. so that's what's so striking about this. this is -- biden justice department is giving a normal frame to a stunningly abnormal period, a

bill barr lied about it.onder how it sits with you as a former law enforcement officer who you know, people who commit crimes, regular folks, get locked the hell up. >> it's great to be. but you're absolutely correct. i said it during the impeachment trial. i said it during my law enforcement career. that no one is above the law up to and including the president of the united states. we do know that the mueller report concluded that the collusion, the obstruction from the president and his enablers was sweeping and systematic. we started the mueller investigation out. i had the utmost confidence in mueller and his team. i had little confidence in william barr but that suddenly went to zero when he stepped on the stage day of the press conference and gave a summary of the mueller report, basically saying, there was nothing to see there. i thought that was odd. now we all know that was not odd. that was just a plain lie about the alternative facts, i guess you could say. that mueller, now judge who is reviewing

, his people telling barr, that they misrepresented the words. but this is for the books. this is not only for the history books, this is like in the courts now. a federal judge is saying that the attorney general of the united states lied to cover up for a president of the united states in an investigation regarding russian interference. russia hoax? that's what we hear this investigation after it's over, oh, it's just a russian hoax and point to bill barr. oh, it's a witch hunt. well, actually that's not what the special counsel thought and that's not what the federal court thinks now. >> and that's not what the mueller team thought in real team when the former attorney general stepped out. they thought it was being mischaracterized and the former attorney general is mischaracterizing their year's long study and the report they published. they thought his summary was not representative of his findings and thought he was running interference for the president from the word go and now we're hearing that from a federal judge. thank you for your re

barr said that didn't even come into play. he didn't have to factor that into his decision, because he said trump didn't need immunity. he said trump was innocent. barr said he consulted with justice department lawyers about all that evidence that was laid out by mueller, and he concluded on the basis of that evidence that none of that was a crime, none of that was all that serious. there was nothing to prosecute. trump didn't need immunity, he was innocent. earlier this month, a federal judge in washington, d.c. issued a scathing ruling that basically said, yeah, that's not what happened. in a case about whether the justice department has to release to the public some of their internal documents about the decision whether to prosecute trump, the judge ruled that the way bill barr described that decision, his supposed exoneration of trump, is not actually what happened. she ordered the justice department to release their internal memo about the potential prosecution of trump for obstruction of justice. she gave the justice dep

judge jackson called barr disingenuous and accused the barr justice department. not the first time a judge has questioned barr's credibility. last year a former judge said the former attorney general's summary in handling the mueller report was, quote, distorted and misleading. a lot to start off with this morning. >>> let's go to politics now. the battle between house minority leader kevin mccarthy and liz cheney. their feud appears to be at a boiling point. mccarthy was caught on a hot mike criticizing cheney ahead of fox news but his comments were different from what he said on the air. here is what he said off air, versus what he said live. >> there is no concern about how she voted on impeachment. that decision has been made. i have heard from members concerned about her ability to carry out the job as conference chair, to carry out the message. i haven't heard members concerned about her vote on impeachment. it's more concerned about the job ability to do and what is our best step forward that we can all work together instead of attacking one another. >> me

barr is a liar. you used the word "obfuscation," which jackson does too. >> that was not intentional. you tend to be reluctant to call someone a liar. i'm sorry, bill barr has had his chances. he's lied to the american public. we know that, for example, because robert mueller told us and misled the public about his report. now two federal judges have said the same thing. that is such an unusual and extreme thing for a federal judge to go on record and say the attorney general, you misled me. i was always taught as a prosecutor all you have is your creditability. you never lie or exaggerate or stretch the truth. to have multiple federal judges say you lierd, that's very rule >> very quickly, what are we going to see? >> merrick garland needs to get out of this litigation. doj has been fighting to protect bill barr's back ever since he did damage at doj. merrick garland needs to take the position, we're going to put it out there. merrick guardland has a decision to make at the heart of the report. that

that publicly called out barr for disporting the mueller report, and here's what is new.ill barr received the mueller report on a friday, march 2nd, 2019 and on a sunday he came out with his decision, he reviewed the 448-page document and concluded that donald trump was free and clear on obstruction of justice. a lot of people, myself included, looked at that and said there's no way he could have absorbed the whole memo and this was in the bag and bill barr did what we knew he would do all along, and turns out there was a memo from the doj and that doj tried to convince this judge, bill barr did reach a reasoned and careful conclusion but turns out that memo was not done until after barr reached his conclusion, and the judge did not appreciate that and said that doj was being disingenuous and misleading and that's a big deal. >> the bigger issue is what it says about the department of justice. they are supposed to be independent, right? >> yeah, i was taught as a young prosecutor, that's all you have, your independence and credibility, and i was taught every time you stan

look at what attorney general barr was doing.y thought they were going to get air cover for the next four-plus years. so trump senior adviser jason miller is telling axios that trump rallies are likely to start late spring. and you have frank luntz saying lies could cost the majority in the house 2022. is trump to help them take back the house or are the rallies for trump the candidate or trump the influencer? >> i think they're for trump the money maker. he's made a decision that these things make him money so he's going to be out there doing these things if he can to hit the cash register for himself under the ruse he's potentially running. liz cheney knows that data. the republican congressional committees that raise money for these congressional seats, they've seen that data as well. for some reason, however, they're very afraid of president trump. kevin mccarthy is obviously very afraid of him. they're willing to oust a mother of five, liz cheney, someone who speaks the truth and relace her with a sycophant. that gives you a

and one thing that seems certain is that under attorney general barr, doj strayed from the guidelinesal, around 2013, after investigations like this came under scrutiny. i'll tell you the doj point of view is that if you don't know who's leaking information, one way of finding it is seeing who talks to reporters. of course, there's also a finite universe of people who have access to this type of information, so it would also be a legitimate investigative strategy to focus on those people without focusing on journalists, which obviously carries an extraordinary risk of trampling on the first amendment and chilling the investigative access that journalists have. so it's not a clear picture yet, but it's never a good look for doj to have these kind of matters going on. >> let's stick with bill barr for a second. he came under fire from a federal judge, judge amy berman jackson calling barr disingenuous, arguing he never planned to prosecute trump. where could this lead for the former attorney general? >> at the center of this ruling is whether or not doj has to release a memo that was wr

certainly the -- i believe bill barr is barred in washington, d.c.hey could start a grievance to disbar him if they decide to do that. i suspect, though, that nothing will happen. he was fairly careful in his testimony. you know, even the judge talks about him being -- instead of saying making false statements so trying to prove there were actual lies here would be a tough one. >> jennifer rodgers, thank you very much for us. >>> still ahead -- the bitter battle between the truth and the big lie. could house republicans be closer to forcing out and replacing liz cheney from her number three position in the house republican caucus after her repeated willingness to say the president is lying. we're going to be live on the capitol hill -- on capitol hill next. >>> also taking a look at futures here just before the market opens on wall street. all pointing higher this morning. looking to rebound from the sell-off yesterday. obviously, treasury secretary janet yellen's comments on inflation really freaked out the markets. investors just got their hands on

it caused tension between him and robert mueller, barr and robert mueller. that was a huge moment for donald trump because it framed the way this was seen. this memo relats to how that took place. the judge is underscoring that they were not candid and up front with the court and that they were not candid and up front with the public. >> did any of this as far as you can tell put new jeopardy on those involved including the former president? >> look. i can't speak to what the level of jeopardy would be. as far as i can tell, so far this is literally about a memo and how the doj interacted with the court. i don't see how we, unless we come up with something, we, meaning the public record, told bill barr to do that. i don't see how this touches on donald trump other than donald trump was obviously pleased with the way bill barr put out the mueller report and he has said so. at the moment, however, it raises for us fresh question about bill barr and his justice department and why they handled it the way they did, and that's not going to go away. >> it makes you

must release the controversial justice department memo, that barr claims helped guide his decision ins report on his investigation into trump did not support a charge of obstruction which is not what mueller's report concluded. join cans now, former u.s. attorney for the northern district of alabama and the msnbc legal analyst joyce vance. good morning. thanks for getting up early with us. we appreciate it. i want to ask you about this story. what do you make of this fact, that the kind of records were these, and just how rare is it for a justice department to ask for this kind of information, and what does it say about bill barr? >> it's a fascinating situation, because there's a legitimate vote for the d.o.j. to obtain these kinds of records but there is a lot of red flags in this situation that mean we need to dig deeper. d.o.j. guidelines are very stringent regarding obtaining reporters' records an they require the attorney general's personal signoff. the records have to be essential to an ongoing investigation. and there has to be no other way to obtain the information. so as you

barr has no credibility. he had no credibility then and we will get to the truth of the matter, but in the meantime, what has been done to the folks of doj and to the american public in terms of disinformation is powerfully dangerous and sadly, those seeds we're seeing come to fruition even today. >> so clearly, this is serious. can anything be done now about it? >> certainly, and i look forward to attorney general merrick garland doing exactly what they're doing, being transparent under the rule of law, not as a department that represents a president or a person, but as a department that represents the rule of law for all america. so yes, we will get to the truth of it, and it will take a lot of time when you have a lot of complicit, elected officials that want to continue to spread big lies, but we will get to the bottom of it, thankfully and we will have the new administration that prizes the rule of law. >> let's take a look to january 6th and the capitol attack. nbc news is reporting that the fbi has the

coming up, a judge ruling that a previously secret memo from former attorney general bill barr must be released. that's next. >>> plus, making it easy. that's the goal as president biden aims to get more adults vaccinated fast, but the number of daily vaccinations in the u.s. is plummeting. stay with us. instead of burning our past for power, we can harness the energy of the tiny electron. we can create new ways to connect. rethinking how we communicate to be more inclusive than ever. with app, cloud and anywhere workspace solutions, vmware helps companies navigate change. faster. vmware. welcome change. >> tech: every customer has their own safelite story. this couple was on a camping trip... ...when their windshield got a chip. they drove to safelite for a same-day repair. and with their insurance, it was no cost to them. >> woman: really? >> tech: that's service you can trust. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ dignity. it demands a rapid covid test, because we all deserve an answer. it demands your heart stays connected to your doctor, so you know it's beating as it

a federal judge delivering a scathing rebuke of former attorney general bill barr. also demanding that the doj release a secret memo documenting an opinion to not charge former president trump with obstruction at the end of the mueller investigation. in a 35-page opinion, judge amy berman jackson accuses barr of being, quote, disingenuous and says the former a.g. misled lawmakers and the public about the decision not to charge former president trump with obstruction of justice. remember, bill barr released a misleading four-page summary of the mueller report and hosted a spin session to get out in front of that report. on obstruction, barr's initial summary claimed that mueller's report sets out evidence on both sides of the question of obstruction. but the mueller report specifically said it did not exonerate the president and mueller testified to congress that he did not. you'll remember at the time, mueller called barr out, writing a letter to him just after the summary was released saying it did not fully capture the context, nature and substance of the investig

it was clear that the attorney general, for large parts of the -- the last attorney general, bill barrs acting as the president's lawyer, not as the people's lawyer. that's why it's so important that president biden has put in place someone who's strongly apolitical, a former judge as the attorney general, and we see that in increasing ability the public has to have confidence in what's going on under this new administration at doj, which, after all, this entire story about "washington post" reporters came to light because doj permitted notification to go forward that these accounts had been scrutinized. it might have just been an accident of timing. i don't know. i do think it's curious that notification wasn't made earlier to these journalists. >> joyce, in fact, this week, a judge slammed former attorney general william barr for being disingenuous, saying that barr issued a memo that twisted the findings of the mueller report in order to clear then president trump on obstruction of justice charges. what's your reaction to this, and is it unusual for a federal judge to publicly scold

barr used a justice department memo to advise on his conclusions.ackson believes the outcome was predetermined and this memo was more strategic planning rather than any legal reasoning. she wrote in part this, the agency's redactions and incomplete inactions obfuscate the true purpose of the memorandum. she writes that the fact that trump would not be prosecuted was a given. joining me right now on this is cnn legal analyst. i'm curious what you think about this? >> i think this memo being ordered released by the judge, it demonstrates the severe lack of confidence that she developed not only in attorney general bar, but in the department. that's really the longer term consequence from attorney general barr's leadership of the department, the language you just read in her opinion and more of it that's through out the opinion, demonstrates in this foya case, a freedom of information act litigation, normally a judge would give the government a lot of deference regarding not releasing internal legal deliberations, and in this case the judge is saying,

here bill barr emerges as that person to help them do that.im and everybody working on critical race theory. cultural marxism is a secular religion. they're trying to replace that in our schools and trying to indoctrinate our children. parents need the tools to fight back. so glad he brought up this example about barack obama. i've been saying this for a long time. not only did he put his kids in to private schools, but brown and black kids that had to leave because of the scholarships that barack obama take away from them. so what we need to do is have options, but we also need to get to the root of the problem, which is our teachers, colleges and curriculums and textbooks. because our teachers colleges are infested with this cultural marxism. we don't do something about it, no matter what school your kids go to, they're going to come out of these colleges with these dangerous ideas. >> martha: it's a great argument for school choice in this country. we have breaking news. so we have to leave it there. thank you for being here. good to see yo

and a skating review from former attorney barr's actions. it says documents revealed he never intended to prosecute trump regardless of the findings. he released a four-page letter on the mueller report weeks before. and a judge is asked to appoint a special master about products taken from rudy giuliani's home. >>> we begin with rudy giuliani and my exclusive interview with a long time ukraine adviser. he was listening in by speaker phone for a stunning request to investigate joe biden and the claim that ukraine, not russia was responsible for the camp. >> what did you hear rudy giuliani saying to the president's top adviser? >> he wanted two things. basically it was all about a smear campaign on candidate biden, joe biden. basically, first request was multiple investigations. he wanted investigation. he wanted the situation with the ex-prosecutor general investigated. and he was especially interested in getting ukraine make a public statement and possibly back it up, this crazy allegation that it was ukraine, not russia that meddled in 201

any reaction from bill barr on being called disingenuous?s isn't the first time a federal judge has done that, and he didn't respond the last time, either, so, you know, the issue here, by the way, where the judge says he's disingenuous is she says when he said, because mueller didn't make a recommendation about whether to indict the president, that decision falls to me, she says that's not true. i must say, i'm not sure exactly why she says that. her decision is not at all clear on that. perhaps if we see the memo, then we'll understand why she says that. >> all right. pete williams. pete, thank you very much. >>> still ahead, the first family separated under donald trump's zero tolerance policy are reunited. >> it's just a really cruel experience that i just hope no one has to go through. >>> we also have news on the derek chauvin trial and what they want, the defense wants, and joe biden should be with us speaking live right after a break. stay with us. a break. stay with us 40,000 feet. instead of burning our past for power, we can harne

mueller to go back publicly at barr and say, "that's not what my report said" or whether it was barr lying to the american republic in the run up to the election saying the chinese are as aggressive in messing with the elections as the russian, we are putting a fine point on what we have always known, which is then-attorney general barr turned the department of justice into the donald trump defense firm. you know, that was a profound threat to our democracy. >> the other profound threat to our democracy, one that we probably didn't see coming before the election, is the crumbling of the republican party in front of us. president biden, in fact, lamented the idea that there's not a functioning republican party right now because he says america does need two parties. what is your take on what is going on? you retweeted liz cheney the other day in a tweet where she said the 2020 election wasn't stolen. this is getting her essentially fired from the leadership of the republican party. >> well, that's exactly right, ali. i will tell you, it is bad for at least two cataclysmic reasons. num

so what should happen to barr? >> well, you know, that's a tough question.st answer you know it's not evident that he committed a crime. if he committed a crime, i think he lied any number of times including about things like the chinese being involved in messing with the 2020 election. it went on and on and on the lies. but i think it's for history to judge. personally as the guy who has got to go up to the capitol every single day and hope for, you know, some ability to govern this country through compromise, through a future-looking let's move forward kind of thing. do we want to drag attorney general, former attorney general barr before the congress? do we want this to be the story? or do we want to move on in the way i think president biden is trying to move on. i would argue that let's let history judge attorney general barr and history will not judge him well. >> all right. congressman himes, we really appreciate you joining us in studio this morning. >> good to be with you. >> john? >>> we're following breaking news escalating violence in israel. jus

story overnight about the department of justice releasing in part doj memo under attorney general barrd also fighting to keep part of it under seal shows the apolitical nature of the current administration, meaning they are willing to -- part of this for the sake of executive privilege should apply whether it's a democratic or republican administration. i see them putting their money where their mouths are in terms of not putting politics over what the law should be. >> what does it mean for the country, though? what does it mean for the history books we might never know why trump era appointed doj officials chose not to charge him with obstruction of justice in the mueller investigation? >> well, i think that is important, but just remember that is something that what attorney general barr decided was not actually that question because a sitting president under doj policy cannot be indicted, so one of the questions for attorney general barr is why even bother issuing that statement, because what he was really saying is future attorney generals should make this decision. it really is f

who wrote -- who authored -- what kind of person and what kind of job wrote this memo to bill barr?the mueller prosecutors, is it? >> absolutely. it's steve engle, who runs the office of legal counsel, which is not a prosecutorial function, and someone -- i think a political appointee. when i say that, ordinarily the justice department would appeal such a decision, that does generally think about ordinary prosecutors, their files, their thinking and the light, but look, i can see the argument in an ordinary case. just in this case, you have bill barr and people like engle and the like who are hellbent on protecting donald trump. bill barr wrote a 20-page job interview memo, saying president trump can't be indicted for, you guessed it, obstruction of justice. that's exactly what these documents are about. >>> what they were hung up on is they thought robert mueller should have done a general declination. she refu -- he refused to. >>> why wouldn't they just dump the documents anyway, just to satisfy anyone who was concerned there was political influence? i guess this is my question f

he viewed bill barr as a tool of his political vendetta against the biden family. we also know that bill barr's public facing conduct was a botched effort to fire the new york -- u.s. attorney berman and the pardon just a couple stories that the reporters were working on at the time. jeff sessions discussed trump campaign related matters with russian ambassador. intercepts show another story that they wrote in that window, obama secret struggle to punish russia. i wonder what you make of the sort of through line of russia here once again. >> first, the real story here as everyone's touching on is the degree to which leadership in this case the attorney general of the united states are willing to break away from loyalty to the rule of law, democracy and do their own thing out of loyalty to an individual or some notion of cult-like thinking that is way outside the norm. i've led leak investigations. they're run by the counter intelligence division at fbi if fbi gets a chance to know what doj is doing under bill barr. i know what they look like when they're compliant

barr is gone. he is no longer in place to protect the president.t when the fbi raided rudy giuliani. they are going do things right way. in a letter unsealed yesterday, the justice department asked them to appoint an outside lawyer to review the information. that's something they did last time when they raided the former president's other lawyer, michael cohen. for his part, rudy giuliani and his allies are saying donald trump should pay for his legal bills. in other words, giuliani wants something of value from the person he might be asked to testify again. wonder if there's a legal term for that arraignment. katie benner has been covering this. cynthia alksney is joining me. katie, the special master issue. just because it's -- i'm not a full-time criminal justice reporter. the feds don't raid lawyers that often. they don't go through this process that often of getting someone to sift through the evidence with these sort of teams. it's a big deal. we have the second trump lawyer in a row go through this. >> you are right. it's unusual. what it im

called crew and they basically said we want to get the internal memos around that decision by bill barr's what we call a pre-decisional memo, meaning this is a memo that bill barr studied and relied on when he made his no obstruction finding. however, the judge, amy burrman jackson, was not having it at all. she found that not only was the attorney general disingenuous then when he mischaracterized the mueller report but doj is being disingenuous now in this court. i don't believe doj. they haven't shown me it have a pre-decisional memo. it's something they've done after the fact to paper over the record. >> i don't understand why the new doj with merrick garland at the head would be appealing this ruling by judge jackson. how do you make sense of it? >> i agree, i think it's a mistake by the current biden administration doj to appeal this. doj often inherits messes from the prior doj, that happens no matter what takes over and doj is famously or infamously secretive with its internal memos. why should merrick garland have anything to do with defending, supporting or apologizing for or

your group filed this suit literally the afternoon of attorney general barr's news conference.his struggle over this document whether to keep it secret or not, what does this represent to you sort of the larger implications of this struggle? >> absolutely. well, what it looked like happened back when the mueller report came out was that the attorney general and people at the justice department reporting to him -- this is bill barr -- set out not to do a real legal analysis of whether donald trump had obstructed justice, but rather to publicly defend donald trump and to make the case for why he hadn't done anything wrong, and that's why we wanted to see this memo that he said he relied on to make this announcement that there was no basis to say that donald trump had obstructed justice, and the justice department has fought for years to keep it from going public. i think, in large part because it does show that there was a whitewashing to protect the then president. >> reporter: what did we learn? we've got a page and a half, essentially, last night. what did we learn in that pag

a move approved by former attorney general bill barr. this was about russia. written a story based on u.s. classified intelligence intercepts involving then senator jeff sessions having a postelection conversation with russian ambassador sergei kislyak. it is illegal to leak such information. the justice department says it followed the procedures. the targets of the investigations are not news media recipients rather than those access information who provided media, failed to protect it as lawfully required. acting post-editor cameron barr, says the paper is deeply troubled by this use of government power. joining us mike emanuel, chief washington correspondent. the trump first administration is not the first administration to go after reporters leaked investigations. this was approved by bill barr, involved reporting of the russia probe aimed at president trump, his inner circle it could of course be viewed as political. >> we all remember the russia probe was a very sensitive topic with president trump and his senior team. it was meeting with campaign adviso

this is a judge who ruled that the trump administration attorney general william barr had been in the judge's word, quote, disingenuous. he had been disingenuous, he had effectively lied not just to the american people and to congress, but also to the court, which is a bad thing to do if you're anybody but particularly if you're the attorney general of the united states. in an angry ruling, or at least a ruling that appeared to be driven by some emotion, she very bluntly ordered the justice department to release a document that they've been trying to keep secret for years. this is the document that william barr when he was attorney general, he used this document to create a purported justification for the justice department not bringing criminal charges against former president donald trump. the robert mueller investigation into russia interfering in our election in 2016, that investigation when they produced their report, they published copious details of more than ten instances for which there was significant evidence that former president trump might have committed crimes, specific

but apparently before trump left office, under bill barr, the u.s. justice department decided that they would enlist themselves to help him out, to demand that twitter tell them who was being mean to devin. the justice department -- i mean needless to say, that is not what the u.s. department of justice is built for. and now that it's the biden administration, they've let it be known that they are dropping that and twitter does not need to answer that subpoena. the previous administration left behind also a dangling criminal investigation of former president trump's lawyer, rudy giuliani. a document unsealed in that case today reveals that the fbi seized 18 different electronic devices from giuliani's home and office when the fbi executed a search warrant against him last month. the lawyer for the previous president facing potential criminal indictment, having all his electronic devices seized by search warrant, that is not a normal thing that most justice departments have to deal with. just tonight, since we've been on the air, in a new court filing

this is the document that william barr when he was attorney general he used this document to create a purported justification for the justice department not bringing criminal charges against former president donald trump. the robert mueller investigation into russia interfering in our election in 2016, that investigation, when they produced the report, they published copious details of more than ten instances for which there was significant evidence that former president trump might have committed crimes, specifically he might have committed obstruction of justice. it was just a week and a half ago when this federal judge ruled that william barr contrary to his statements, contrary to his statements to the court, she rule that barr actually never substantively considered the evidence against trump. she rolled from her view of the record that william barr just determined from his out said, regardless of the evidence, that trump would not be charged. and in her ruling she has ordered the justice department to release documents about that, really soon. by monday. the justice department u

barr said that was guided by an internal memo from d.o.j. lawyers.government transparency group sued to get their handed on that secret memo and a judge now agrees. she says it should be released. that judge saying it appeared to fit into a pattern of the barr doj to miss lead or lie to congress and the public about the investigation. the justice department argued this memo was exempt from public records laws because it contained private avice from lawyers. pete, good morning to you, what else can you tell us here? >> this is all about the freedom of information act, you can ask for government documents under that law. but there are exceptions. one of them is advice or predecision on memoranda. that is why they release third degree to the group, and it applied for the freedom of information act. but judge jackson said i have seen the memo. it's written as a foregone conclusion that the justice department would not seek to prosecute the president for obstruction of justice and she includes in her opinion this handy guide to what the memo actually says

federal judge amy berman jackson says it was strategic planning, not legal reasoning, and believes barrdvisers already decided they would not charge a president with a crime and this memo can be released. first decision is if there's an appeal from the dodge under new leadership. >> she gave the department a chance to appeal. i don't know that we'll see an appeal. just reading -- and we're having to read basically public accounting of it, but read what she said, it looks like the memo was written essentially as a strategic discussion. for instance, if a lawyer writes to a client and says, you know, this is my advice about how to proceed with this case, that's clearly protected. if a lawyer writing and says, you know something? we have a tough time with this case, let's figure out how to bury the body. that's not legal vehicle, that's strategy and illegal . >>> we all remember when he cement rised allegedly the mueller investigation so -- i mean -- could we see something like that? >> i think it's more of a reference, and so we may very well seal how as oppose to how they reach the decis

sense nor does any influence of the investigation starting under the trump administration and bill barr justice department and being carried out by career prosecutors apologitical and non-partisan and following the evidence. rudy giuliani is trying to make this a political, you know, political circus but ultimately, we're dealing with the court of law. we're not dealing with a senate trial for impeachment and this kind of a defense does not work in a court of law. >> yeah, the fact that this started under bill barr's justice department is really a critical point. daniel gold man, appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you. >>> just ahead, another republican in legal jeopardy. the latest on matt gaetz and the report on a letter his associate sent during the final months of the administration about a pardon and we'll discuss what this possible new evidence means and new restrictions on travel to india and reports from new deli when we continue. doesn't require going to different lenders. sofi is a one-stop-shop for your finances- designed to work better together. get a home loan or hom

elizabeth: welcome back to the show kentucky congressman andy barr.abeth: it is good to see you. this is this new ad campaign calling out american airlines, nike, coca-cola for putting politics before customers. it is consumer research. what do you say to this? >> it is about time someone pointed out the hypocrisy which is quite astonishing, hypocrisy from woke corporate executives n the case of nike you have a situation where at the same time the corporate executives at nike are bowing to political pressure from colin kaepernick to cancel the betsy ross nike sneaker because of some reference or allusion to the slave era in the united states. we find out that they are sourcing from a bipartisan congressional report, nike is sourcing their sneakers from slave labor in the shenzhen province from the uyghurs. on top of that when congress passed overwhelming huge bipartisan vote, to ban prohibit products coming from slave labor, nike lobbied against that. it is about time someone pointed out this range hypocrisy. elizabeth: we should point out nike heeded

liz: that means william barr d.o.j. spied on him, that is also a story in cold. family committing money laundering. that's what rudy giuliani is claiming you heard the countries he was siding, this is a heavy charge, he says he has evidence on paper, what cannot be. >> i don't know, obviously as a personal attorney traveling the psword underworld and having meetings with foreign law enforcement they might've showed him documents are given them access to things. i'm stepping back to the big picture, this is a huge integrity to us for the attorney general and the director of the fbi. all of this what's can happen to rudy, will they treat him like any other individual in the criminal justice system and make decisions based on evidence or will this be the rudy rule, same thing for anything to do with hunterer biden. is this going to be the president's son and we all know what he wants to have happen or will he look at it and decide on evidence. i think within the next few months, maybe the next six months will have a real good gauge of this attorney general is politi