nonpartisan leadership to the department of justice. jim cole is that type of person. he has the experience, he has the character, he has the commitment to fill this very important position in our nation. 13 years in the department of justice. experience in public interest law. his career has been devoted to the public interest in community service. i was listening to my colleague and friend, senator grassley, talk about his concerns about some of the private law practices of jim cole. here is a person who has devoted his life basically to community and career and public interest law. he has been a prosecutor, he has been a person who has dealt with white-collar criminals, and yes, he is an effective attorney. as we all know, those of us who are lawyers, we'll represent our clients aggressively but we don't lose sight of our system. that's been jim cole throughout his career. he will bring that expertise that he has had in his previous experience to represent our nation well. these are tough times. we're dealing with threats around the w

he has directed the office of the inspector general at the justice department to review this matter in order to answer questions like the ones -- >> if that's the case, then why are we any burden at all? isn't every one of our requests consistent with what the inspector general and the attorney general should be looking at in this case? >> i don't know for a fact that everything you've asked for is what they're looking at. >> i hope you came here to answer questions like that. we're asking for things related to the above the field level almost exclusively. our questions are about who authorized this, why did it happen, why did it continue. our question to you today is the president said he didn't authorize it. he said the attorney general didn't authorize it. he didn't say he didn't know about it. he said he didn't authorize it. who at justice authorized this program? >> as i've said, mr. chairman, the office of the inspector general -- >> who at justice and if you know, i ask you to answer who do you know was involved in the authorization of this today? do you know? do you know? >> we

in hearings this week, lawmakers have directed most of their anger at the justice department. do we know i mean who approve this? do we know what level at the justice department was involved in all this? >> the frustration on capitol hill this week centers around the department of justice because the senators, the congressmen, believe the department of justice is stone walling. five months now and the department of justice can't tell you who authorized this program. a program this size, this quote unquote groundbreaking, it should take five minutes, anderson. keep in mind this was what they call a t 3 investigation, size and scope would require approval from headquarters. and congressman darrel isa released e-mails, republican from california, which seems to insinuate the atf acting director, kenneth nelson, was watching these sales, knowing about these sales in real time. so for the department of justice to still not be able to tell us who authorized and at what level seems pretty ridiculous to the congress and the senators who are asking these questions. >> also, atf agents h

departments regarding that and the city as a hole. also impacted by the state corrections realignment impact. and the eventual closing of the department of juvenile justice, the division of juvenile facilities would have an impact on our department. as you knowing our department takes great lengths to reduce and limit the number of youth that we send to secure correctional facilities. we only have five youth in the correctional facility right now that costs the city about $25,000 a year for each of these five. but in five years most of those youth will be out and on a regular basis the department rarely sends more than two of these youth to this state correctional facility. but one of the things we're seeing is the formulases that are proposed by the state to date fall very short of the actual cost to provide the necessary rehabilitative programming for youth who would otherwise go to the department of juvenile justice. while re-entry efforts are key across the board in relation to the re-alignment program, i want to make mention of the fact that fully funded probation which is a nonentry program the much cheaper in the long run than any re-entry program

but the department of justice has said repeatedly that fighting criminal activity along the southwestng the illegal trafficking of guns to mexico, has been and is a priority of the department. >> and attorney general holder, last month told the oversight committee he'd only heard of the operation a few weeks ago -- or a few weeks before even though a federal agent had die as a result of it months before that. >> now that you've been briefed on it, the president has said on march 22nd that he didn't authorize it. did your deputy attorney general james cole authorize it? >> my guess would be no. >> how about the head of the criminal division, lanny brewer? did he authorize it? >> i'm not sure whether mr. brewer authorized it. >> well, he went on to say he'd wait to see more until an atf inspector general finishes investigating. we put drew griffin and the cnn special investigations unit on the story keeping them honest. >> reporter: december 14th of last year, border patrol agent brian terry, approaches what looks like a routine scene. men gathered along the arizona-mexico border. it tu

>> certainly we're already actively discussing this with the department of justice. and are open to further conversation. >> okay. thank you. now, what about you, mr. katz? >> we are in active dialogue with the department of justice, and they are reviewing all of the material that we have presented to them, and we would be pleased to have a follow-up review with this committee, if that becomes necessary. >> well, it will become necessary, because we don't know what you're in deep discussion about. i mean, they don't come back and tell us what they're talking to you about. the only way we can find out is to get a report from them when they're finished, and then to talk with you about it after it. how do you feel about the securities and exchange coming before this committee to give us their impressions of what the effects of such a merger might be on the markets in the united states and in the world? >> we would be very comfortable -- >> you're okay with it? >> yes. with having the s.e.c. come before this committee. >> you're okay with it, mr. liebowitz? >> with all du

department. the justice department asked i emphasize to things in my response. first of all, that the justice department has told litigating authority and is the sole decision maker on any federal government involvement in this matter. >> but you can and apparently did make a recommendation to the department justice, correct? >> there are interagency -- the litigation posture of the united states is under active deliberation by the justice department and a half asked will not comment any further. >> i will not waste a lot of time by asking all the commissioners. i suspect i get the same answer and i find it a disturbing answer. let me ask the chairman if he could tell me what the non- partisan general counsel's office recommend to the commission about this matter. >> in order to preserve the integrity, i'd rather not comment. i would rather just say that personally i think historically it has been rare for the agency to get involved in preemption issues. it's a very high threshold for us to get involved and i think it should be. >> my last question, i'm running out of ti

how can you and the department of justice and people who take responsibility for this allow the lies to continue to come to congress? why did this obama administration purposely allow the illegal transfer of more than 2,000 weapons that they knew, according to this memo, were going to go to mexico? >> congressman, you have asked questions that the office of the inspector general is looking at, that this committee is looking at -- >> i want answers from you. that's why you're here. you have this document. you know that this is true. this memo goes on to continue to say again in january, to date, there have been five notable seizure events connected with the group. approximately 53 firearms originally purchased by this group have been recovered. three of these seizures have been in the country of mexico. we knew that this was -- these were going south. yet in your letter, that you state quote, it remains the understanding -- our understanding that atf's operation fast and furious did not knowingly permit straw purchase buyers to take guns into mexico. that is patently and totally false.

justice department makes mr. melson the only fall guy for this disastrous straeblg. there's plenty oft both the atf and justice department. a resignation by the acting director would be by no means the end of our inquiry". grassley also said he'd be interested in hearing what melson has to say to him after he is kicked out of justice as we all believe will happen. >> and when president obama and eric holder were asked about the program, they both pointed to an investigation that's being conducted by the inspector general of the justice department. do we have any idea when the findings of that are going to be released? >> we don't. the members of congress think they're being stone walled. we've gone over this, why does it take five, six months to find out who in your own department approved anything. that should be a decision that you can come back with in five minutes. but the stonewalling, according to congress, continues while atf, the department of justice try to fix this. >> all right, drew, appreciate the followup. we'll continue to follow it. >>> why the alleged mistress of case

department. the justice department asked that i emphasize two things in my response. first of all that the justice department is -- has the litigating authority is sand the sole decision maker on any government involvement in this matter. >> but you can and apparently did make a recommendation to the d.o.j. is that correct? >> there are interagency -- the litigation posture of the united states is under active deliberation by the justice department and they have asked that in our testimony today we not comment any further. >> i won't waste a whole lot of time by asking all of the commissioners. i suspect i will get the same answer and i find that a disturbing answer. let me ask chairman jaczko, if he could tell me what did the nonpartisan office recommend to the commission about this matter? >> again, in order to preserve the integrity of their advice, i would rather not comment. i would just say personally, i do think historically, it has been very rare for the agency to get involved in pre-emption issues. it is a very high threshold for us to get involved and i think it shou

and omissions of each employee remains vested with their employing agency and that us-doj, department of justice, made its discretion, whether that individual should be afforded legal representation, legal defense or indemnification of the civil action. given your past experience within the department, are you aware that any cases wherein the department has made a co-defendant, along with the other federal agencies with respect to third party claims? >> i am not aware of such a circumstance, no. commissioner chan: my concern here is that the defense of participating sfpd members in the jttf appears largely as a matter of grace to the federal bureau of investigation or the attorney general of the united states. since it's discretionary rather than mandatory. they apparently on the m.o.u. have preserved that determination on case by case basis as it states there. has this section of the m.o.u. ever been reviewed by department council? >> i believe that the 8.10 g.o. was reviewed by department council as was the m.o.u. from 2002. i think that the most recent m.o.u., as has been discussed, there was

that is one of the questions the department of justice will crumble with. when reid and i got to the fcc the first time, we have a regulated duopoly. it really was not working. a lot of things went into changing that, but it worked much better when we had a deregulated, competitive market. i hope to keep that. guest: if he will not give us an answer, maybe you will tell us if you'd like to be the next commissioner at the fcc. guest: the next commissioner? i am working on some stuff now that would be more fun than being commissioner. i think commissioner baker's leaving does a funny thing to what happens to her seat, what happens to the cop seat. i think there are some great people who could go there. i would prefer to keep working on some of the stuff i am working on at aspen. host: blair levin, you said at the beginning that you thought that the national broadband plan was successful in some areas and not others. overall, was of far reaching enough? guest: i think the implementation -- two steps forward, one step back. there is a variety of different factor

i think that's one of the questions that the department of justice will grapple with, but when rita and i got to the fcc my first time, we had essentially a regulated dualopoly, and it was not working for the country, and a lot of things went into changing that, but worked better when we had a deregulated market, and i hope we keep that. >> guest: if you don't give a an answer, would you like to be the next commissioner at the fcc? >> guest: the next commissioner? i'm working on stuff that would be more fun than being the next commissioner. i think commissioner baker's leaving actually does a funny thing to what happens to her seat and what happens to the cop's seat. i think that there's some great people who could go there, and i think i prefer to keep working on the stuff i'm working at at aspen. that's more important for me right now. >> host: blair levin you thought the plan was successful in some areas and not so much in others. overall, in your view was it far reaching enough? >> guest: first of all, i think the implementation is two steps forward and one step back. there's a vari

but that is not the position of this department of justice. they have been populated by people who have a different view of it, i think a wrong view, and so although i have great respect for mr. verrilli and his record, it seems to be a good record. the fact that he is another voice in the department for a wrong philosophy is something that i will protest against by voting "no." and i thank the chair and will yield the floor. the presiding officer: time has expired. mr. leahy: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: question is on the nomination. mr. leahy: i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be a second. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote: vote: vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, on this nomination the ayes are 72. the nays are 16. the nomination is confirmed. under the previous order, the president shall be immediately notified of the senate's action and the senate shall resume legislative. mr. reid:

the department of justice contested the validity of the authorizing resolution and defended the notion of absolute immunity. the court upheld the validity of the authorizing resolution, finding that the longstanding supreme court recognition of implied power to investigate and to compel production of information including, included an implied cause of action to redress the institutional injury caused by the deprivation of the information that was being sought. it also rejected out of hand the absolute immunity claim of the president. the miers case, i believe, is a dog that hasn't barked. it is a two-edged sword. while it recognizes the house's right to seek judicial assistance of constitutional-based right to secure information from the executive and refutes the notion that the president can cloak subordinate official with absolute immunity from compulsory process, it leaves open the door for executive judicialization of the congressional subpoena enforcement power. current doj dogma is that it is unconstitutional for either house of congress to use the criminal contempt statute or th

department. the justice department asked that i emphasize two things in my response. first of all, the justice department has the litigating authority and is the sole decision making for the federal government in this matter -- >> but you can and apparently did make a recommendation to the d.o.j., is that correct? >> there are interagency -- the litigation posture of the united states is under active deliberation by the justice department, and they have asked in our testimony today we not comment any further. >> madam chair, i won't waste time by asking all the commissions. i find that a disturbing answer. let me ask the chairman if he could tell me what did the non-partisan general counsel's office recommend to the commission about this matter? >> again, in order to preserve the integrity of their advice, i would rather not comment. i would just say personally i do think historically it has been very rare for the agency to get involved in preemption issues. it is a very high threshold for us to get involved, and it should be. >> i am running out of time now. let me ask the ch

what had happened is that the edwards defense team realized that the department of justice was goingds serve some jail time. now in return he would not have faced any felony charges. it would have been misdemeanors. it was reported on by the raleigh newsroom observer ease kevin vaughn confirmed that. goes on to say a source close to the talk says that reason why john edwards decided not to take the deal and serve jail time is because he is the primary care giver to his children and he did not want to spend an extended amount of time away from them. what could colorado have been a deal reached in not have seen six indictments charged against against john edwards on friday is now likely to turn into a long case between the department of justice and john edwards as they fight this one out. >> mark preston with the new developments on john edwards. good stuff, mark, thank you very much. >>> can we turn to the campaign trail -- i guess the campaign trail. i want to talk to you about sarah palin. she is not running, she says, but it looks like she is. >> she talked on fox news where she is

the department of justice just broken a major story about a month ago, fred telehealth this departmentof justice eric holder department of justice throughout cases against muslim brotherhood operatives in america, threw out the window and said we are not going to pursue. why? >> host: i'm going to close this out by going back to your dad because it seems to me one of the things that may be competing with our ability to fully understand this threat is there are not enough guys like your dad, not enough people that fought for this country, were received well when they came back or even had to deal with at first politics. is that true? are we missing a generation now who have perhaps so enshrined in our freedom that we don't appreciate what they 14? >> guest: i am a young guy 35-years-old but raised right. a strong family units and influences and raised the right way. nothing was handed to me. today there is a sense of entitlement in this country and so many distractions with video games, the internet, text messaging, everything, people are not as grounded. you and i are sitting here talk

shooting fish in a barrel. >> it's the politicization, frankly, it is the politicization of the department of justice, the attorney general's offices, the lack of independence of the regional offices to bring cases. it is, you know, frankly, on the other side this political pressure that comes from a notion that we've, unfortunately, had to learn to live with. i don't agree that we have to, but we've had to. which is, gosh, if you do anything like that, you'll risk destabilizing these very same institutions that we have spent so much effort trying to make look like they're solvent. >> this has never guided the fraud section of the department of justice in the past, and i want to know what's happened now. is the fix in? i mean, is that what you're suggesting? >> well, it's hard to draw any other conclusion, honestly. i don't know the answer, i am not the party to these e-mails going back and forth, you know? but it's difficult to draw any other conclusion that a debacle this large creating this much pain and this trillions in losses, that it was nobody's fault. and that there wasn't a crime committed.

i think that's one of the questions that the department of justice will grapple with. but when reed and i got to the fcc my first time, we had, essentially, a regulated duopoly. and it really wasn't working for the country. and a lot of things went into changing that, but it worked much better when we actually had a deregulated, competitive market, and i hope we keep that. >> host: if you won't give us an answer, maybe you'll tell us if you would like to be the next commissioner at the fcc. >> guest: the next commissioner? >> host: yes. >> guest: i'm working on some stuff now that i think actually would be more money than being the next commissioner. i think commissioner's baker's leave -- commissioner baker's leaving does a funny thing to what happens to her seat, what happens to the copps seat. there's some great people that could go there, and i prefer to work on the stuff i'm working on at aspen. that's more important for me now. >> host: you thought the additional broadband plan was successful in some areas, not so in some areas. overall, was it -- >> guest: well,

not to worry, folks, the house oversight committee has launched an investigation, and the department of justice, of which the a.t.f. is a subsidiary, is fully cooperating with it. they handed in a 900-page report to the congressional committee detailing the entire buying of assault rifles operation. >> sir, if you're going to count pages like this as discovery, you should be ashamed of yourself. the pages go on like this forever. you have given us black paper instead of white paper. you might of well has given us a ream still in its original binder. >> jon: what? no, no, you don't get it. you're upset? they gave you... those are prized mondrians from his famed black period. they're priceless. i mean worthless. actually, you know what, let's check something. if we run a graphics filter to remove the redaction, maybe we can see what the d.o.j. is hiding. ah. we'll be right back. [cheeran [cheering and applause] >> jon: hey, welcome back. so as we've been discussing this week, i chatted with chris wallace sunday about "south park," president obama, and i may have during the interview mentioned tha

department of justice is investigating home depot for possible violation of the buy american act. a san francisco attorney filed a lawsuit against home depot claiming the company provides chinese-made products in violation of the act. then 1933 law is aimed at protecting u.s. jobs. it requires that all materials used in construction of public projects originate in the united states or designated countries. home depot is accused of providing chinese-made products to government customers. a company spokesman says home depot, quote, would never knowingly sell prohibited goods under any circumstances. >>> president obama will meet separately with demcat crack and republican senate leaders to find common ground in the debate over raising the nation's debt ceiling. their goal is to jump start talks that broke down last week when republicans walked away from the bar -- bargaining table. democrats want to increase the number of money the government canny to pay pills. the republicans want less money. >> the whole business of raising taxes, regardless how you do it, is something this congr

you must have to have some trust going on here to get to the point of negotiations, that is between the committee and the justice department it is that a reasonable conclusion? >> i certainly think the justice department should try hard to earn the committees trust, but yes, it has a relationship of trust. >> just one more question, mr. chairman. i don't see any harm in taking this debt. our decision is better informed in the task and have other committees sought the department before releasing documents public we? >> very much so. >> i didn't hear you. >> guess. before releasing documents publicly, if there's a stated justice department concerned there has been this consultation about how the committee which has the authority to decide should exercise that authority. yes. >> my time has expired. thank you. >> no problem. the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz for five minutes. >> thank you all for being here. if a president and/or and attorney general states that mistakes were potentially made, that something went awry, does that give the committee and added need or imperative to pursue these documents? does that add weigh

we spend a tremendous amount of time doing basic password resets for other department of justice agencies. and we have a very small team of people. the top item that you see is the big strategic project for the year. it is a data warehouse. today, if you want to know something very simple such as if there was a robbery in your apartment building, you would think that we could just look on a system that. we cannot do that today. we have the information, somebody entered the information, but it has been printed and put in a large room with other paper documents. what we hope to do is to simply automate that so that we can create searchable data for crime reports. from that, it will be san francisco data that will be community crime reports, so back to what the commissioner was asking, there is committed the crime reports that are available in 20 languages. that will be searchable as well. we will add the bay area crime reports. if i wanted to know the person walked with a limp, had a long, silver-barrelled handgun, i can pull up that day in an automated fashion. we have completed the first

representation of african- americans and latinos in the justice system has resulted in discrimination of communities of color. according to the department of justice, one-third of felony arrests leads to a conviction. the human rights commission has a concern boat. it is despite whether the crime is a violent are non-violent, a misdemeanor or not, that they are not fit to join the work force. this is contrary to those who have served their time and paid their debt to society. background checks. often people do not know that they have incorrect information on their background reports, and it may take significant time to correct them. in adopting this type of nondiscrimination ordinance. i will talk about this in more detail in a minute, and now i want to highlight that it is already prohibited to discriminate against people with conviction records under title 7 of the discrimination act. it already requires, federal legislation, it already requires an individual assessment. employers will be complying with the san francisco ordinance because it requires an assessment, much like title 7, and performing the background check after the indiv

from 2000 until 2007 i served as an assistant united states attorney with the united states department of justice. working in the united states attorney's office for the district of california. in 2005, i became involved in the investigation and prosecution of a group of individuals who were involved in a seditious conspiracy to wage a war of terrorism against the united states government by murdering u.s. military personnel and jewish persons in southern california. these individuals were members of a group that was created within the present system in california. today, i intend to discuss this group and their seditious conspiracy. let me begin by discussing kevin james and j.i.f. in 1997, he founded j.i.f. while serving a prison sentence in california. james remained in prison throughout the conspiracy and the resulting investigation. james priest that it was the duty of members to target for violent attacks any enemies of islam or infidels. james identified these infidels as the u.s. government and jewish and non-jewish supporters of israel. james recruited fellow prison inmates to join j.i.f

. >> reporter: the department of justice is asked to look into possible civil rights violations in this case. the concern, of course, in the past has been for those who weren't part of the actual protest causing problems like we saw last summer. so far we can tell you things here are quiet. live in oakland, eric rasmussen, ktvu, channel 2 news. >>> and it is calm tonight, too, downtown where that march ended. a rally blocked broadway for a time. but when organizers called it a night, well, everyone went home. ktvu's deborah villalon is live now with what made the difference. deborah? >> reporter: well, they had free bus rides back to fruitvale bart that helped disperse the crime. so calm at this pizza restaurant here on broadway which had planned to close early and board up is open as usual. there has been only one arrest all night. that's vandalism during the march someone tagged a building. but tonight's rally just didn't have the heat of the past. hundreds of people poured on to broadway spreading a banner reading "justice denied." the police escorts stood by. officers made no move t

department of justice is investigating retail chain home depot for possible violations of the buy meshy american act. a san francisco attorney filed a lawsuit saying the company provides chinese-made products in violation of the act. the law is aimed at protecting u.s. jobs and requires all material used in construction of public projects originate in the united states or designated countries. home depot is accused of providing chinese-made mukilteos to government customers. a company spokesman says home depot would never knowingly provide unapproved goods. >> michelle bachmann is going to announce her kansas -- coined si tomorrow. bachmann and mitt romney are stack which statistic which i td among voters. host chris wallace asked her a surprisingly blunt question. >> are you a flake? >> well, i think that would be insulting to say something lick that, because i'm a serious person. >> you do understand when i say that, that's what the rap on you is. >> alan: wallace later apologized in a fox news web video. >>> a group of well-known hackers say they're disbanding. lulzsec carried out c

we always concerned about whether the department of justice, which is a legal entity, has the expertise to really understand the competition aspects of various businesses. what role does the securities and exchange commission play with the department of justice, in this evaluation? mr. lebowitz, or whichever one of you feels like you're best equipped to answer that. >> sure. i'll start and then mr. katz can chime in here. in this case, the s.e.c. provides a consultative and advisory role. answering questions as to how the industry functions and what the s.e.c.'s role is in regulating the industry. and how they, that would affect the resulting competition. so the doj leads the investigation, asks a lot of questions, gathers information. >> and they're the ones that actually make the final decision about whether this is anti-competitive, antitrust implications. but they get input from the securities and exchange commission. and you said that you were submitting a bunch of paperwork and answering a bunch of questions from various agencies. 30, 40 you said. in response to mr. conyers questi

is putting up a big fight they say the research is biased and skewed they point to a 2007 department of justice report, that shows violent crime by youth is down since the early 1990s. this rating here is at stake this is a new video game this has not been rated yet but most games rated m for mature content, gaming industry experts say 45% of those games are bought by parents. there is a lot of concern there as well. so, the supreme court will decide today whether or not banning the sale is constitutional. frank. >>> okay. thanks for that live report. >>> well, drivers -- >> sorry. >> come on over here. >> it is monday. >> come on over here michelle. >> i know. >> 6:05 a.m., drivers are finally able to get a little more money. >> and it is a happy story. >> gas prices have dropped 11¢ in the past two weeks according to the lindberg survey of fuel prices the national average is $3.58, oakland 3 .8 $2, san jose 3 .8 $4 san francisco, $3.93 not do bad there. >>> less pain at the pump for all drivers, hybrid owners may soon spend more time on their commute these yellow stickers that allow hybrid ow

that said, the position he has taken as it relates to the department of justice fighting the defense mous step forward for a president and his department of justice to come out against a law that was passed by the congress is a very powerful statement. so, you know, although i want perfect soon, i am very gratified because i think that is another important step forward. a step that we've never really seen before or certainly haven't seen in a really long time. so he's headed in the right direction. >> headed in the right direction. you are a politician. you understand compromise. you are also perhaps a little more patient than the president than some might be who aren't involved in politics. i want you to listen to the reaction as the president started to discuss related issues at a fund-raiser just last week. >> that's why i ordered federal agencies to extend the same benefits to gay couples that go to straight couples. we're going to keep fighting until the law no longer -- i heard you guys. >> so you hear people in the crowd chanting marriage when the president is talking about som

. >> you are currently aware and have for some time that department of justice has had lawsuits against arizona. were you aware of any biases within your scope at atf or comments versus arizona by the atf or by doj in regards to them? >> no, sir. you're sure? >> i don't recall. >> seems like this whole lacks attitude from jurisdiction from timely and aggressive law enforcement that would create this. am getting this opinion because you said you couldn't get a jurisdictional aspect of oversite in arizona and you took it to new york, did you not, sir? >> yes, i did. >> seems like continued dismissal of acting charges and we have a problem in arizona. we have seen a concerted effort that we have called out law enforcement on the border. i think specifically sheriff devers. i see a lack of cooperation all the way across, so does arizona. we see a very defunct uniform -- from arizona, we see an organized, orchestrated plan or lack of plan from doj, particularly with arizona. >> interesting, sir, what i will add, one thing i will say emphatically is i have had limited dealings with tucson off

county courthouse to protest the release of mehserle and then they will march to the department of justice demanded that they get involved in this case. in las angeles, dan kerman, kron 4 news. >> pass after the break we will hear from oscar grant young daughter who attended the protest. we will be right back. >> there was a small voice in the midst of a large crowd, the daughter of dr. graf was asked the protest. -- the seven year-old daughter of oscar grant was at the process. >> this is seven year-old tatiana grant. parker >> i feel sad because, i miss him a lot. why do not like that the police shot him. >> she was with her mother and other family members and was not shy. >> you were yelling and chanting earlier. what are you saying? >> leave my dad alone. kirk >> tatiana shared one of her favorite memories of her father. >> when i gave him a lollipop, i was sitting on his lap, i put my lollipop in his mouth and he was laughing. that is the only figure i like. >> what you think about all of these people here? >> i am happy because everyone is coming here to join because i miss my dad a