>> when you say "independent," you mean outside of the department of justice? because the department of justice has an office, the professional responsibility advisory office known as preo which is there to entertain questions about the application of the disciplinary rules of the bar to the conduct of the prosecutors. as a matter of fact. >> in other words, if a prosecutor had a question about a brady matter, is there either that board or -- i don't think -- i guess you can't go to the judge? >> you can. >> can you go to the judge? >> you can. if i had an issue where i, again, a federal prosecutor and i said to myself, hmm, i've got this piece of evidence here. i'm not so sure whether i have to disclose this. well, first of all, i was taught when i was a young assistant u.s. attorney, if i had to think about that for more than ten seconds, turn it over. but if i didn't, i could go to the trial judge ex parte, make a -- >> you can do an ex parte -- >> make a submission to the judge in camera, say this is what i have. i don't know whether i'm obligated to turn th

i know that the department of justice has a strong, contrary view. namely that there should be legislation to achieve this. by guidance issued by then deputy attorney general in december of 2010, largely inspired by the stevens case, issued guidance which directs the prosecutors to disclose information that's impeachment or that's exculpatory regardless of the standard. in most cases recognizing that we're going to have prosecutors go beyond the requirement of the law. >> thank you. i'm going to include the written testimony of the department of justice, national association of criminal defense lawyers on discovery reformattoleey weinst >> thank you, mr. chairman. this is pretty awful hearing, frankly. i mean, high quality and thank you for holding it and thank you for your work, but this is some pretty awful conduct by the prosecutors, i think. just paappalling. i want to ask a couple of questions about how to -- you've just been talking about this, fixing this kinds of problems. one thing i would like to know, first of all, do you think what the pro

before entering teaching, she worked at the department of justice. joshua thompson is with the legal foundation. a public interest legal organizati organization. he was co- author of the foundation amecus brief in northwest austin municipal district. a case challenging the section five of the voting rights act. an issue that we know is about to return to the supreme court in a variety of ways. finally, nina paraez. in that role, among other things, she supervises the offices throughout the united states in the voting rights dockets. she is a particularly prominent voting rights attorney. she was the last winner of the section two case at the u.s. supreme court for the plaintiff's side. a case we discussed this morning. and she is one of the lead lawyers in the current texas redistricting case that is working through the western district of texas through the district of district of columbia and the supreme court. it's a trifecta. the panelists will speak for about 10 to 15 minutes. we'll turn to questions about changes in the world since the voting rig

attorney general, can you describe how the department. of justice will utilize n cedar and tdac. >> -- run chiefly by the fbi deals with the examination of ieds we see coming out of afghan stand and other places. n cedar in contrast run by the atf deals with -- i wouldn't want to call them the more common. >> more prevalent maybe. >> more prevalent explosive devices. the location of them in that place i think makes a whole lot of sglens could you describe the value of co-locating these facilities on a large federal arsenal with lots of range of space? >> there's a great deal of cross pollenation, the ability to talk to one other. the purpose is distinct. there will be scientific breakthroughs, perhaps, that you connection change information by having people who are relatively close by. i think that having the two agencies that are primarily responsible for explosives determination and prevention and having them close by even though they have distinct roles, they have been pretty well delineated. it's good to have them tlp and talking to one another.

he came to the department of justice in 1976, while the ford administration was still rolling alo along and saw the transition to the carter administration the following january and he was at the justice department all the way to 2005, retired about a year before i did. he and i were the founding codirectors of the office of information privacy. he was there as an acting director of one of theceprior t that. is more intellectual than he might look upon occasion, he has a b.a. from stanford. you got into stanford? >> it was a lot easier to get into. >> back then, yes, that's when joan baez's husband -- >> if i remember correctly -- >> here we go. >> -- all of this was set out in your bios so you didn't have to read much about any of the people here. [ applause ] huh, is that right? >> well, that was for other people, not for you. you're special. am i wrong? dick is special. b.a. from stanford and master, of st. mary's from the university of texas while in the army, j.d. from hastings law school which apparently the ranking hasn't improved tremendously since you graduated. >> it is now fu

where he essentially complained of the department of justice about some of the obvious what he considered obvious fraudulent behavior and the department of justice said to him you need to talk to louis freeh really just so you think louis freeh is the eyes and ears and building any kind of a fraud case against and a global yet he is there to get money back for the creditors and has been appointed by j.p. morgan who stands to lose if this is found to be fraud because customers will be prioritized over them which is how the law is written the law is written so that customer segregated accounts come for us so the law says customer segregated it segregated accounts before all else are you implying that regulators. the i guess the department of justice by putting louis freeh and charge of them being eyes and ears. as well as the trust in this case are doing the bidding of j.p. morgan essentially i don't want to too far and i don't want to be a conspiracy theorist. i don't either ok well you're building a case here let me preface it by saying there has been some signal. diffidentl

i didn't see that very often at the department of justice. it was pretty rare. dan, you've got a class here. these people are going to be cheated out of legislation which is going to be a lot more interesting than what i've got to say. >> this is an academic institution, dick. one more quick question. >> did your former office at justice have authority -- more authority over the foya people at fbi than at other agencies? >> oh, yes. by far. >> even though they carried guns. >> i would get an administrative appeal. we had a large amount of authority in terms of general policy. not total, but a very large amount. but on administrative appeal, if the fbi with held something or if the fbi took an inappropriate thing, i could go back and i could overrule them. there was one particular case i remember where they said this is protected under 7-d if you disclose this, it's going to result in some guy being shot out on the streets, some informant, and i would say why? explain to me why. because i've looked as hard as i can and i don't think it identifies him one way or th

attorney general, can you describe how the department. of justice will utilize ncetar and tedac. >> -- run chiefly by the fbi deals with the examination of ieds we see coming out of afghanistan and other places. ncetar in contrast run by the atf deals with -- i wouldn't want to call them the more common. >> more prevalent maybe. >> more prevalent explosive devices. and i think that you're right, they you're right. they have fundamentally different responsibilities, but they compliment one another. and the location of them in that place i think makes a great deal of sense. could you describe the value of co-locating these facilities on a large federal arsenal with lots of range of space? >> yeah. >> there's a great deal of cross pollenation, the ability to talk to one other. although the purposes are distinct, there are certainly going to be scientific things, breakthroughs perhaps that you can exchange information by having people who are relatively close by. i think that having the two agencies that are primarily responsible for explosives determin

, the department of justice applies. what i did conclude is that in several instances, two of the surviving prosecutors engaged in intentional misconduct. therefore, if the department were to come to the same conclusion or if they concluded that the conduct was reckless, they would per force conclude that the lawyers engaged in professional misconduct. >> your report finds that the prosecution was troubled by significant mismanagement, specif specifically the lack of supervision to attorneys prosecuting the case and the schedule of the prosecution was under. did you in any way, shape or form, consider whether the failures to disclose evidence were due at least in part to lack of time or to a misinterpretation or misunderstanding of what these disclosure duties entail? >> i did. and i found and concluded that there were a number of failures to disclose, impeachment information yowing to the compressed schedule, the absence of supervision and the fact that the decision was taken to permit fbi agents who were not s

department of justice, department of agriculture, department of defense, this is a team. this war require as team concept, and we're trying to

general eric holder has held a wide range of positions in his career as a federal prosecutor, united states attorney, a superior court judge, the justice department's deputy attorney general under janet reno and an attorney in private practice. a graduate of columbia university and law school, general holder joined the department of justice following graduation and was assigned to the newly formed public integrity section where he investigated and prosecuted corruption involving officials in local, state, and federal governments. in 1988, president reagan appointed mr. holder to the superior court of the district of columbia where he presided over hundreds of criminal and civil trials during his five years on the bench. he remained a judge until 1993 when president clinton appointed him to the post of u.s. attorney for the district of columbia. in 1997, president clinton promoted mr. holder to deputy attorney general of the united states, a position he held until the end of the clinton administration. in july, 2001, mr. holder joined the washington, d.c., law firm of covington and burling, representing clients in complex civil and criminal cases as

i do not discipline the standards but this -- that this department of justice applies. what i did conclude was that two of the surviving prosecutors engaged in intentional misconduct. therefore, if the department were to come to the same conclun or an if they concluded that the conduct was equus, they would conclude that the lawyers engaged in professional misconduct. >> your report finds that the prosecution was troubled by significant mismanagement, specifically the lack of supervision, which you point to what the attorneys prosecuting the case and the compressed schedule of the prosecution, that they were under. did you in any way, shape or form consider the failures were due at least in part to lack of time or to a misinterpretation or misunderstanding of what the disclosure duties entail? >> i did. i have found and concluded that there were a number of failures to disclose impeachment information, owing to the compressed schedule, the absence of effective supervision and the fact that the decision was taken to the permit fbi agents who were not schooled in radio and

obviously fitting words for today's hearing as we examine the conduct of the justice department prosecutors in an effort to understand what wendt wrong in the prosecution of ted stevens. the government's prosecution of senator stevens was arguably the highest profile case ever brought by the justice department's washington, d.c. based public integrity section. it had consequences far beyond the jury's guilty verdict and impacted the senate election in 2008. while all criminal cases should be handled with the jut most professionalism, cases of of this level of importance and publicity where elections can be swayed should be shining examples of the best of the justice department. they should have the best prosecutors, best agents and should be the centerpiece of america's criminal justice system. unfortunately, this case appears to be the opposite of the ideal. according to our witness today, the prosecution of senator ted stevens was "permeated by the systemic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence which would have independently corroborated his defense and his testimony and serious

well, that's when he was at the department of justice. dick started with foia way, way back. first i should say he spent seven years on active duty with the army, and as a consequence of that, followup to that, he's now a retired colonel in the army reserve. he came to the department of justice in 1976 while the ford administration was still rolling along and saw the transition into the carter administration the following january, and he was at the justice department all the way to 2005. he retired about a year before i did. he and i were the founding co-founders of the office of information privacy and was there as one of the predecessors of the office prior to that. dick is more intellectual than he might look upon occasion. he has a b.a. from stanford. you got into stanford? apparently so. >> it was a lot easier to get into. >> back then, yes. that's when joan baez husband -- >> if i remember correctly, dan, you said that all of this was set out in your bios there so you didn't have to read about any of the people here, huh, is that right? >> well, that was for other people

obviously fitting words for today's hearing as we examine the conduct of the justice department prosecutors in an effort to understand what went wrong in the prosecution of ted stevens. the government's prosecution of senator stevens was arguably the highest profile case ever brought by the justice department in d.c.-based public integrity section -- section. it had consequences far beyond the jury's guilty verdict and impacted the senate election in 2008. while all criminal cases should be handled with the utmost professionalism, cases of this level of importance and implicitly were elections can be swayed should be shining examples of the best of the justice department. they should have the best prosecutors, best agents, and should be the centerpiece of america's criminal-justice system. unfortunately this case appears to be the opposite of the ideal. according to our witness today the prosecutor the -- prosecution of senator ted stevens was both permeated by this is to make concealment of significant exculpatory evidence which would have independently corroborated his defense in this tes

through the efforts of our committee and the department of justice the department of justice revisited that issue and has reversed course and is hopefully working to announce very soon a new regulation which i think will be more consistent with transparency and open government. the chairman has also been very active in calling for transparency outside of foia. he has called obviously for government to proactively the obama administration has done a lot of wonderful initiatives putting more information out online that he continues to push agencies to do even more of that. he really believes that, you know, foia is one tool but not accessing information. so he remains very active in his oversight role in terms of encouraging kind of proactive disclosures. so i think that's a general overview of what we're doing. i guess my general theme would be again that this is something that he has done for three decades and as tom mentioned and i'm sure you'll hear as you hear from the rest of the panel, this is a bipartisan issue, something we have worked extremely well on over many, many years, it

and the department of justice has moved in to many of those situations on voter id, for example. the department of justice has found that it's discriminatory against blacks, against african-americans. in the redistricting there have been challenges that it's tilted, especially in the south. there has to be clearance. and the voting rights act was passed to give equal standing to every citizen. we reauthorized the voting rights act during my tenure as chairman of the judiciary committee, and the department of justice is enforcing it. but it's very hard to keep up with all of the maneuvers which were made in the southern states which tend to exclude african-americans. >> we'll go next to -- next phone call is from columbia. maryland, caller, go ahead. >> caller: good morning. >> morning. >> caller: i wanted to talk to you. i have a question based on a hypothetical scenario, if i can. let's say there was a republican-brokered convention and they actually drafted you, and you became the republican nominee. what would you have for your top few planks in your presidential, you know, cam

in fact, since the start of the administration the justice department has signaled an unwaveriommbatgnd preventing range of financial and health

all right so we want to talk now about a couple things going on with the department of justice first a quick interesting story do you remember earlier this year when the founder of the website mega upload it was arrested and thrown into jail his website was promptly shut down and all of his property seized that man was kim dot com and he spent about a month in jail accused of running a criminal enterprise made upload that helped millions of people pirate music and movies well guess what a court has now ruled that the restraining order obtained in part by the u.s. department of justice it allowed authorities in new zealand to seize his assets in the first place that was void essentially that means that those new zealand police illegally invaded dotcoms home and also illegally took all his things were talking jewelry cars electronics all without a valid court order to back them up needless to say. might be getting all his stuff back and the u.s. justice department is still trying to have him extradited to stand trial here and they say he made nearly two hundred million dollars illegally

back for the creditors and that's that's what he's assigned to do but my sources tell me the department of justice has given him the title of eyes and ears in global ok well if the department of justice is relying on louis freeh unintentionally because he's the bankruptcy trustee well it hasn't been officially announced by the department of justice a lawyer that i'm familiar with in the situation in in the customer rights fight has an e-mail from the department of justice where he essentially complain to the department of justice about some of the obvious what he considered obvious fraudulent behavior and apartment of justice said to him you need to talk to louie freeh really nice so you think louis freeh is the eyes and ears and building any kind of a fraud case against global yet he is there to get money back for the creditors and has been appointed by j.p. morgan who stands to lose if this is found to be fraud because customers will be prioritized over that which is how the law is written the law is written so that customer segregated accounts come for us so the law says customer segregated a s

of all, federal prisons. as i look at the department's budget, almost one-third of the justice department money is going in to federal prisons. that amount is now at $6 billion, and it is rapidly approaching almost what the fbi budget is which is $8 billion. now, my question is, what's going on with federal prisons? if people are incarcerated -- first of all, we want the bad guys and gals off the street. so we want you to prosecute and incarcerate particularly where there are people who constitute a danger to our country or to our communities. we -- i don't know if we can sustain this growth. and then i'm concerned about once we put them in, it's a resolving door and we keep expanding their prisons with the same people. they keep coming back. could you elaborate on your department's needs, but is there any recommendations you'd have to begin to contain the prison population? are we federalizing too many crimes? is recidivism the problem? again, safe streets, but this is really an ever-increasing part of our appropriations. >> i think there are a whole variety of reasons why we see the prison population expand

as chairman of this committee, though, and one that has the oversight of the department of justice, i realize this happened with the last department of justice, not the current one, i do agree with your assessment y. attorney general holder in dismissing this case. we both have known him for a lot of years before he was attorney general. and i have a great deal of respect for his ability. i'm concerned about what happened. it happened here. i also want to make sure, as others have suggest ed, ted smith, who nobody would know, innocent protection hearings and other others i view the prosecutor as the most important person in the criminal justice system, even more so than the judge, because the prosecutor can decide not to bring a case as well as to bring one. that's enormous power. the whole population is protected improperly. the whole system is damaged. so, that's why i'm holding these hearings. mr. schuelke, i thank you. >> if i may -- >> of course. >> just as a point of personal privilege, i should like to say that like senator whitehouse, i am a proud alumnis of the department of

department of justice, department of agriculture, department of defense, this is a team. this war require as team concept, and we're trying to reach out to the islamic world and create partnerships with lawyers and attorney generals and judges in the islamic world so we can understand them better and they can understand us. i'm excited about it and appreciate your support. now, justice scalia came out yesterday or the day before talking about, he thought it would be wise if we looked at our federal criminal code. particularly in the drug area. and see if we could reform it. i think he's right. i think we've federalized way too many crimes creating work for our judiciary that could probably be handled better at the state level. what do you think of the idea of revamping the federal criminal code and looking at maybe undoing some of the overfederalization? >> i've asked -- when i came into office, i've set in place a number of working groups to look at that problem. that issue. are we bringing the right people into the federal system? are the sentences that we have for the

proud to report that our nation's department of justice and so many of the consumer groups represented here have responded to these threats not with despair, but with resolve. and with decisive action. during the last fiscal year, the department's consumer protection branch achieved an astounding 95% conviction rate. recovered over $900 million in criminal and civil fines. and obtained sentences totaling, 125 years of imprisonment against more than 30 individuals. these achievements build on the remarkable success of the financial fraud enforcement task force which helped secure convictions against those responsible for a wide variety of consumer scams. including telemarketing schemes, fraudulent job training. and referral services. and even enterprise that generated over $75 million in loss. victimized 350,000 small businesses by placing charges on people's phone bills. since last april, when i established a new part of the task force, known as oil and gas price fraud working group. we have also been focussed on identifying civil or criminal violations in the oil and gasoline markets.

these individuals to -- to conduct such acts and then to learn that they're still within the department of justice doesn't give me much confidence. >> well, i mean, certainly one of the things that i think happens is that because the justice department can't represent these people and they have their own views of what happened. they want to be able to explain with counsel, defend themselves. that is why the expenditure of money actually occurred. that is why they were allowed to get outside counsel, and as i said, that has happened not frequently but it certainly happened in the past, and we acted with regard to them as we have done in the past with regard to the retention of outside counsel. >> i would think that $1.8 million to go to defend these attorneys who had engaged in intentional misconduct is -- is just stunning to me. i'd like to think there could be some recourse. madam chairman, i'm well over my time and thank you for your indulgence. >> it was important you had the opportunity to completely pursue your line of questioning. the situation that has been presented by you and senator hutc

joining us from the department of justice, chief of staff and counselor to the attorney general. a proud northwestern law alum from the class of 1976. [applause] we also welcome the senior counselor to the attorney- general for the civil division of the department of justice. i am also pleased to welcome northwestern university's president. professor lee, andr clos other senior officialsmany of the law schools and the university of distinguished alumni. we are very pleased you could join us. the students are at the center of everything we do here. in that regard, i want to give special thanks for general holder for meeting earlier this afternoon with a group of law students. a distinguished lawyer and devoted public servant, attorney general holder has held a wide range of positions in his career. as a federal prosecutor, united states attorney, superior court judge. a graduate of columbia university law school, the general joined the department of justice following graduation and was assigned to the newly formed public integrity section for investigated and prosecuted corruption

as i speak, the department of justice officials are believed to be meeting with the parents of the unarmed teen, trayvon martin, who was shot and killed just about a month ago by a neighborhood watch captain in sanford, florida. so keep that in mind. also in the next half hour we're expecting to hear from the city manager of sanford expected to make an announce meant in the case, so that happening 3:30 eastern time. we'll dip into that live. also, just last night, the city council in sanford voted 3-2 approving the vote of no confidence in the city's police chief bill lee who by the way is on the job for all of ten months. his officers have yet to arrest the watch captain, george zimmerman seen here in this exclusive photo that cnn obtained. joining me is legal analyst sunny hostin. first, a lot to talk about obviously as the story continues. what do you make of this vote of no confidence? what exactly does that do? ultimately it is the city manager who we will be hearing from perhaps he will make news in half an hour and ultimately his call whether or not the chiefs stays or goes. >> that

could be made that they should extend the hours, but that should not have been enough for the department of justicend any issues have received the objection of the holder department of justice. megyn: julian, there are those thinking i don't care about whether they have proven voter fraud in the past, i like the idea of an id. you need a photo id to get a beer -- for the viewers who feel that way, what is the argument that this is still wrong? >> well, i think the argument's a couple things. first of all, to just quickly push back on jay, voting places where you go to vote is different from where you go to get a dmv. you can vote someplace close to where you live. getting a driver's license is much different. the fact of the matter, megyn, is if you explain to people who think intuitively you should have some form of identification, for many people living in remote areas it is difficult to get identification, one, two, you are not curing a problem that exists even in states that don't have voter id laws, there is no spike, no increase in voter fraud to follow on what jay pointed out. and, you know,

of evidence casting suspicion on george zimmerman's self defense claim. allegations the sanford police department did a sloppy job, a vote of no confidence. a justice department investigation, a rally tonight and a national uproar. all of it, 25 days and counting since trayvon martin headed home from the store with a bag of skittles and iced tea and his whole life ahead of him. given all of that, given the national attention, the intense local pressure, a lot of people are asking not just at tonight's rally for two things, the arrest of george zimmerman and the firing of chief lee. he just stepped down today. one man tonight has the absolute power to do one of those things, fire the chief. he's not exercising it. sanford city manager norton bonaparte. earlier tonight i asked him why and why george zimmerman is not in custody. mr. bonaparte, i heard you do an interview with al sharpton this evening on msnbc and you said you want justice for the, quote, murder of trayvon martin. you used the word "murder" which is not a word one would use to describe an act of self defense or justifiable homicide or anything under the stand your ground law. if you be

and debt collectors are collecting stale debt with the greatest assistance of the justice department we settled a case against the largest debt buyer, asset acceptance, requiring it to let consumers know the debt is past statute of limitations before they collect on the debt. we are grateful for the justice department's help in this case. payday lending. payday lending abuse is on the ride. and lenders are now hiding offshore, or, residing on indian tribes and claiming tribal immunity. we filed a big case against one of these tribal, tribal payday loan, operations last week. there is more to come. job scams, business opportunities. with the unemployment rate still stubbornly high, people out of work or working -- want to find extra pay, job scams and business scams, proliferated. a panel on that later this afternoon. that we'll talk about our work. fake government scams. fake government grant scams. still ongoing even though -- the -- the stimulus program is over. we have talked about this before. but wire fraud scams. fake check. grandparent scams. lottery. sweepstak sweepstakes, con

the legal principles that guide and strengthen this work as well as the special role of the department of justice protecting the american people and upholding the constitution. now, before today's level of interagency cooperation was not common place. the government lacked the infrastructure as well as the imperative to share national security information quickly and effectively. domestic law enforcement and foreign intelligence operated in largely independent spheres, but those who attacked us on september 11th chose military and civilian target s and it became immediately clear that no single agency could address these threats because no single agency has all of the necessary tools. to counter this enemy aggressively and intelligently, the government had to draw on all of its resources and to radically update its ase result agencies are better postured to work together to address a range of emerging national rilawyers, analysts at the department of justice work closely with our colleagues across the national security community to detect and to disrupt terrorist plots, to prosecute suspected ter

>> the department of justice represents the entire united states of america whether it was departmentder president bush or president reagan or president clinton. they have an obligation to follow the law. that's what they did. let me explain that i have ever represent for difference of opinion. our own attorney general in the state of texas indicated in the last decade they only prosecuted and were able to prosecute 50 cases in the last decade. that's five cases per year. >> do you take offense? does that particularly bother you? >> it bothers me because of the lack of understanding. i don't waste time on people's opinion, but it bothers me because people will be denied the right to vote because of misunderstanding and mischaracterization. i'm enthusiastic about the department of justice decision and enthusiastic that they will pursue this in court. this gentleman will find out it's not race question when he sees millions and thousands upon thousands be denied the right to vote. we have a presidential election. i don't care whether the voters go out and vote republican or democratic o

>> dana: baseline is a major manufacturer controversial by the justice department and huge waste of timeeral taxpayers who have, who fund the justice department salaries and people in the state of texas who have to defend them. >> eric: very good. leave it there. coming up, hillary clinton says extremists are trained to marginalize women. the extremists are in america. we show you where when we come back. ♪ ♪ [ male announcer this is the network -- a living, breathing intelligence teaching data how to do more for business. [ beeping ] in here, data knows what to do. because the network finds it and tailors it across allhe right points, automating all the right actions... [ beeping ] ...to bring all the right results. it's the at&t network -- doing more with data to help business do more for customers. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> tamara: recently, hillary clinton was speaking at a women's summit in new york and has a warning for women in america and around the world. >> why extremists always focus on women remains a mystery to me. it doesn't matter what country they are in, or what religion they claim. they