it is about the department of justice. have the guts and the oppressor of parents to get to the bottom of this. we have nearly 2000 weapons purposely given to drug cartels. we have hundreds of dead people in mexico. we have a dead border patrol agents. we have a government that is withholding information so that we can fix this and make sure it never happens again. something is fundamentally wrong. it is not about 140,000 documents that the department of justice knows they have. it is not about those numbers. it is the fact that we do not have all of them. many have someone like the director of the atf say it is very frustrating to all of them. they're trying to figure out a way to push the information away from their political appointees. these are things we should be concerned about. no one wants to but this to conclusion more to this than chairman issa. when these problems cannot comment they dealt with them. we have not gotten to the bottom of this. we have a duty and moral obligation to get to the bottom of this. the d

to date the department of justice has provided over 7,600 pages of documents to the congress. you made additional law enforcement sensitive materials available to us in dozens of briefings. you permitted us to question senior department officials in hearing and in transcribed interviews and you yourself have appeared before this committee once every six months since the controversy became public. i hope that the tone of today's discussion reflects the many courtesies that you and the department of justice have shown us in the past months. i also want to commend you and the department of justice on a series of important accomplishments in the field of civil rights and voting rights. a couple of issues that i have paid special attention since i first became a member of the house judiciary committee. enforcing section five of the voting rights act. the department has aggressively enforced section five, which ensures that states with a history of discrimination can't create additional barriers to minority access through the ballot box. the department has already block blocked discr

department's official inaccurate denials about gun walking were part of a broader effort by the department to obstruct a government allal investigation. in contrast, during the course of the investigation the department of justice has repeatedly made significant efforts to accommodate this committee's legitimate oversight interest. it has made 26 individuals available for interviews and hearings and provided the committee with thousands of documents. the attorney general has testified before congress regarding fast and furious a total of nine times. as the investigation progressed the the department of leadership realized that their official denials that gun walking occurred were based on faulty information that they received from atf and the phoenix u.s. attorney's office. at that point the department not only acknowledged the actions and withdrew the letter, but provided documents that showed how the inaccurate letter to congress was drafted. those documents clearly showed that the officials in the department's headquarters had no intent to mislead congress. despite this evidence the chairman continues to accuse the department officials of obstructing the committee's investigation and seeks additional interna

welcome to the department of justice. regrettably the obama administration has shown a disregard for the constitution and rule of law in an effort to impose their agenda on the american people. and there are many examples. efforts to block congressional inquiries about the administration's actions undermine the balance of power on which our nation is founded. the department of justice still has not provided enough information about operation "fast and furious" so that the american public and congress can judge who in the department bears responsibility for the decisions that led to agent brian terry's death. the justice department refuses to comply with congressional subpoenas that may shed light on why this program was authorized and who had knowledge of the inappropriate tactics. the department of justice also has failed to provide relevant information that would have revealed the extent of justice kagan's involvement in the development of the affordable care act when she was solicitor general. if she did give counsel on

quote, it is equally troubling the department of justice delayed action and withheld information from congressional inquiries, end quote. later again a laert from 31 democrats to the president june 3rd of 2011. quote, while the department of justice can and should continue its investigation, those activities should not curtail the ability of congress to fulfill its oversight duties, end quote and last quote i will take from that we urge you to instruct the department of justice to provide complete answers to all congressional inquiries on this issue. end quote. none of that has happened. it is sad. it is disappointing. it shouldn't have come to this. nobody likes doing this. this is not about eric holder. it is about the department of justice and justice in the united states of america. have the guts, i hope we have the guts and the perseverance to get to the bottom of this. we have nearly 2,000 weapons purposely given to drug cartels. we have hundreds of dead people in mexico. we have a dead united states border parole agent. we have a government that's withholding information so tha

i would add that we have 31 democrats that signed a letter to the department of justice and to the white house in the aftermath of agent terry's death to fully cooperate in this investigation. however, i rise in strong opposition to this contempt resolution. while criticism of the department of justice for oversight of the so-called gun walking operation during both the bush administration and the current administration, criticism may be warranted, a finding of contempt against a sitting attorney general of the united states is most certainly not. and determining whether this house should hold our highest ranking national law enforcement officer in contempt of congress, let us remember that up until last week, the majori of our committee had been demanding the production of documents that our attorney general is legally prohibited from disclosing. and that has caused much of the delay here. in other words, mr. holder would have broken the law and likely compromised existing crimin prosecutions if he adhered to the majority's unreasonable request for materials relating to ongoing criminal

it is about the department of justice and justice in the united states of america. have the guts, i hope we have the guts and the perseverance to get to the bottom of this. we have nearly 2,000 weapons purposely -- purposely given to drug cartels. we have hundreds of dead people in mexico. we have a dead united states border patrol agent and we have a government that's withholding information so that we can not only get to the bottom of it, but that we can fix it and make sure it never, ever happens again, and when we're issued a letter and ten months later they have to pull it back and say that's not true, something is fundamentally wrong. it's also not about 140,000 documents that the department of justice knowingly says that they have and we have less than 8,000 of them. it's not about those numbers, it's the fact that we don't have all of them, whatever that number is. and when you have somebody like the former acting director of the atf say under oath, quote, it was very frustrating to all of us and it appears thoroughly to us that the department is really tryi

attorney in the phoenix area and then went to the department of justice, not to the head of a.t.f. but to the department of justice, to d.o.j. and their leadership to be approved. it is essential we know what was done there and who did it in the process. so this is not some ancillary thing that's added to it. this is an important part of this process. now, there's all this saying this is bush's fault, this is political, there is not enough witnesses. the issue of this contempt deals with the documents that on february 4 of last year, the department of justice sent us a letter that said they had no idea about this and then by december, after all year long saying, no, we didn't know, we didn't know, come back in december and say, oops, we did. this is what eric holder is calling the evolving truth. there is 130,000 documents that they say they have. they've turned over a little over 7,000 of those documents. that is not the prerogative for them to continue to hold and conceal those documents. fast and furious has moved slow. mr. nugent: i yield 15 seconds. mr. lankford: fast and furio

we cannot look at the evidence if the department of justice refuses to turnover those facts. internally they reviewed 80,000 documents. they have actually turned over to our committee 7,000. i have no doubt that if the department of justice subpoenaed document from someone, they would not patiently wait seven months for those documents to be produced. no u.s. attorney would allow someone to review their own documents until doj what they think is relevant or to do this, i will just brief the attorney on what those documents might include rather than turn the documents over. no u.s. attorney would go for that deal. yesterday attorney general holder admitted that he had additional documents consistent with our subpoena request but instead of turning those documents over, he tried to use them as a bargaining chip to control this investigation. it begs the question, what is in those internal documents that the department of justice so self incriminating that the d o.j. would with not release them? why would they rather use them as a negotiating tool? prior to today we have not had

the department of justice has provided thousand and thousands of dumonts about gun walking. the attorney general has testified nine times. the department has provided over 1,000 pages of dumonts about the letter sent to senator grassley. so this isn't about getting to the truth. this is about politics. it is about politics. this is about the republicans refusing to take yes for an answer. this is about doing whatever it takes to attack the obama administration, no matter the issue, no matter the cost. during the committee's, quote, investigation, the republican majority refused all democratic requests for witnesses and hearings. as well as requests to interview any bush administration appointees. all of them were denied. the republicans refused democratic requests to hold a hearing with kennelson, the head of a.t.f. if you're interested in learning about the a.t.f. operation, don't you think you'd want to talk to the leader shirp at the a.t.f. republicans refused democratic requests to hold a hearing with former attorney general casey who was briefed on botched a.t.f. operati

the department of justice is not just another agency with the federal government. the department of justice is responsible for safeguarding the fundamental found dagdz of this republic which was respect for the rule of law. the department has symbolized mr. chairman by nothing more than a blindfolded woman holding a set of scales and a sword. she doesn't care about political agendas. she doesn't care about whether her decisions helped or hurt people's re-election bids. she doesn't care about race, gender, socioeconomic status, just the equal application of the law so all citizens can have confidence and the decisions that she makes. so it is against that backdrop, mr. chairman, that we look at the facts surrounding this investigation. fast and furious was fundamentally flawed in its conception, flawed in its execution and flawed in its explanation afterward. and this is not, mr. chairman as was initially the administration mantra, an arizona investigation. senior-level officials within the department of justice in washington knew about fast and furious, well before

. >> why has no one from the department of justice said, in fast and furious, there was no gun running -- gun walking. excuse me. why has no one from the department of justice said, in fast and furious, there was no gun walking? period, end of story. that's what your article says but they have not said that. why not? >> i don't know exactly why. one sense is that, you know, when this scandal first broke and congress made these allegations, the justice department went to all their political folks to ask what happened. they never went to dave voth, the group supervisor and said, sit us down and tell us exactly what happened. in fact, he was never questioned in any detail from the atf and to this day has not been. so there's a sense that the justice department immediately wanted to deal with the political repercussions without necessarily grappling with the substantive question of what actually happened. now, i think they would say that they have turned to the inspector general to do a thorough investigation and they are withholding judgment pending that review. but, in fact, i think anyo

however not a conflict of interest on the justice department? -- how is the not a conflict of interest on the justice department? >> well, i think that this committee and the american people can have great faith in the two people that i have asked to leave the investigation. rod rosenstein and ronald machen are both familiar with these kinds of cases. ronald machen is doing a lot of work right now with the d.c. government. president obama asked rod rosenstein to stay on as attorney general for a maryland. they have shown an ability to be thorough and to have the guts to ask the tough questions, and to follow the leads, wherever they are. i have great faith in their abilities. >> in the anthrax leak, you relied upon prosecutors to dismiss the cases. what did you assign political appointees as opposed to career prosecutors in this investigation? >> the people who left to leave these investigations have to be sufficiently high in the department to be able to command high people and the launch of people are united states attorney's. this has been don

trust me when i say the head of the criminal division, the department of justice, is that at the highest levels. .. how the united states attorney devotee tell the information that would be contained in an affidavit of probable cause that has to be forwarded to the department of justice as a matter of policy so that they may be able to oversee it not just for come efficiency but the conformity policy again to the highest levels. explicit detail for what is going on. we see this red herring that occurs on often occasions which suggest that somehow it's happened in a forward administration. it may have had an informal administration the prosecution did not and that is the essence of the discretion used to the ninth this very process yet this administration sends an atf prosecutor to help them reopen this case and some subtle messages that this process is endorsed. that is the essence of what we have to get to the bottom of. there is a great deal more here and i urge that my colleagues do not be afraid to ask the important questions on behalf of the united states of america and on behalf of

>> well, what we should do, first of all, is make certain that the department of justice isn't buying those weapons and supplying them to drug dealers and murderers and those weapons are used against an agent, find out what went wrong, make certain that with an agency of the united states government, that this never happens again. and furthermore, that the people responsible for one of the most horrendous acts we've ever seen out of the department of justice, our chief prosecutorial office is held accountable. >> why not a database that would be able to track gun sales in realtime? because according to this article, if you had that, the atf agents wouldn't have to go by hand and track that. the nra has been working against that. so why not support a gun sales database? >> well, a gun sale database is just trying to get the department of justice to keep track of the guns that they are purchasing and supplying to drug dealers and murderers. i mean, why, let's get the government under control before we start to restrict the rights of innocent citizens. come on, you have so many periphera

the department of justice even threatened to sue florida for trying to remove ineligible noncitizens from its voter rolls. why would the department of justice not want states to remove ineligible felons, ineligible noncitizens, and of the dead from their voter rolls? the administration's actions aren't just wrong. they are arrogant, and democratic, and an insult to the rule of law. the administration's disregard for the constitution and rule of law not only undermines our democracy, it threatens our national security. the justice department has not taken the initiative to prosecute leaks of national security secrets.

and that the united states department of justice, the u.s. department of justice, actually cares about protecting the constitutional rights, the constitutional rights of american citizens that are now being threatened by this illegal voter purge in florida. isn't that correct? >> that's correct. a base, we have to enforce the law, a law that was designed by this congress, or its predecessor, to protect the rights of american citizens. that's what our action is all about. to protect the rights of american citizens. >> thank you. i yield back. >> gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from arizona, mr. quayle, is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you for being here, mr. attorney general. i want to get back to how the wiretap application is approved in the process that it is. you said that basically whoever it was just reads the summary, determines whether there's probable cause, and if there is probable cause, then they send it off to get approval by the courts. is that basically what you're saying the process is? >> yeah,

department of justice. that might have been the first time that i am aware of the the department of justice has backed down on pursuing evidence relevant to an investigation because it touched on the white house. that was an unhappy and not representative of the department of justice. i stand with you in arguing that not only should the department of justice be able to do these kinds of investigations, but if they are not, we have a problem on our hands. the attorney general and the u.s. attorney generals have the ability to do that. if we do not think they can, we should not confirm them. that is a point i wanted to make. let's change to another topic for a minute. two points on this. one is that we are looking at trying to do something serious in terms of legislation to help protect our nation from the cyber attacks that are increasingly prevalent and increasingly sophisticated and dangerous. the core target for foreign and terrorist elements are our infrastructure. our electric grid and the servers and el

, funded by the department of justice. executed by the department of justice. where weapons were distributed to drug dealers and murders. and we can't get to the core of it. i'm very disappointed that people would say there is any type of politics involved in this. this is not october pre-election surprise or anything. this is not against eric holder, you know, you know, probably a respected individual in my quarters. this is trying to get basic information on who was responsible, what went wrong. make certain that this doesn't happen again. >> bret: congressman, last thing. how long do you think it will last? you criminally held him in contempt and will likely hold him civilly in contempt. what is next? what can voters expect? >> the committee has some options. obvious, there are two contempt charges here. one is a possible criminal. and the other one is civil. both within the jurisdiction of the committee to act and congress to act. given that people in fact died as a result of this program. the other thing is just basic

this is a possible criminal act, and actions by the department of justice in which an agent of the uniteds killed by weapons supplied by the department of justice. so, executive privilege, we'll contest that every hour of the day. >> representative mica, we'll let you go and get back to work. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> we'll be back with much more. [ male announcer ] this is rudy. his morning starts with arthritis pain. and two pills. afternoon's overhaul starts with more pain. more pills. triple checking hydraulics. the evening brings more pain. so, back to more pills. almost done, when... hang on. stan's doctor recommended aleve. it can keep pain away all day with fewer pills than tylenol. this is rudy. who switched to aleve. and two pills for a day free of pain. ♪ and get the all day pain relief of aleve in liquid gels. you won't just find us online, you'll also find us in person, with dedicated support teams at over 500 branches nationwide. so when you call or visit, you can ask for a name you know. because personal service starts with a real person. [ rodger ] at scott

executive privilege and to stop and try to stop the investigation of this committee into the department of justice, bringing about one of the worst besmirchments on the history of the department of justice is indeed an injustice to the congress, and to the american people and this important investigative arm of the house of representatives. this is a very sad day for the united states of america, when the president when it gauged himself at the last minute and tried to exert executive privilege, when the attorney general who again -- and, you know, our job is to find out what went wrong. maybe he is innocent. maybe people are innocent in this, but there is no reason in the world or under the law or under the proceedings of congress and our constitution, the way this government is set up that this committee is not entitled to this information in this investigation to again maintain the integrity of this important office. i don't know, maybe i'm idealistic. i didn't think this could go on in a department of justice in the united states of america in this day and age. it's a very sad day. the gentle

and in this case, of the department of justice or any of its personnel that relate to this. we know there are more than 100,000 documents. we received about 7,000 or 8,000. that's about 7% or 8%. okay? >> this is almost a joke to say we should rely on some article in some magazine. >> i don't think she considers it a joke at all, sir. >> i do because i think this is making a farce out of the investigative process. under the soviet union, under the laws of the united states. >> she is reporting -- >> i don't care what she's reporting. she has nothing to do with our committee or our responsibili responsibilities on the committee. >> sir, may i ask a question? >> if it's not turned over by tomorrow, we will hold in contempt the house of representatives, eric holder, the attorney general of the united states. >> so she's saying she has spoken to people at the atf who said gun walking did not happen. >> you just told me a tape where the attorney general testified -- >> let me finish, if i may. her article said there is no gun walking. what evidence do you have that there was gun

the gentleman is suggesting that the cost at the department of justice to track down those jobs also be part of the accounting that was botched by the department of justice. >> we want to know much things cost on a bunch of different issues. this has been a really olympic investigation, it's gone far beyond what i think any of us anticipated when this started out. and i think the costs are going to turn out to be staggering if we look at what these individual departments actually expended in this effort. and i'm just trying to look, i'm trying to balance out what we might get between what we cost and again, i repeat, this is only a partial accounting of what was -- what the costs are. there's also the opportunity costs of us grappling with some other issues that are desperately needed to be addressed in this country and we are focusing an overwhelming amount of our time on this one issue. and i would just like to try to have a balancing out of our expenditures versus the benefits that might be accrued as a result of this investigation. >> would the gentleman yield? >> i certainly woul

accurate at all, you'd never had any enemies with him regarding any hiring decisions at the department of justice? >> no, we talked about, that's not a hiring thing. without the ways in which we might improve the ability of the justice department to respond to political attacks that were coming my way. david axelrod and i are good friends, he is a close friend of my. we have a great relationship. he's a person i respect a great deal. work together on the campaign while he was at the white house. but he's never been anything that i would consider inappropriate. >> but then what you're saying is you have had contact with mr. axelrod, campaign strategist, about how you should handle different attacks come at you as attorney general, kurt? >> there's a political dimension to the job that i have as attorney general. the reality is that i don't set up in an ivory tower and just do law enforcement. i am the subject of a tactic i'm a person he was seen by some as pretty controversial, and there are times, at least that was at that time, when i was looking for some help in that regard. >> so you have had

it is about the department of justice. have the guts and the oppressor of parents to get to the bottom of this. we have nearly 2000 weapons purposely given to drug cartels. we have hundreds of dead people in mexico. we have a dead border patrol agents. we have a government that is withholding information so that we can fix this and make sure it never happens again. something is fundamentally wrong. it is not about 140,000 documents that the department of justice knows they have. it is not about those numbers. it is the fact that we do not have all of them. many have someone like the director of the atf say it is very frustrating to all of them. they're trying to figure out a way to push the information away from their political appointees. these are things we should be concerned about. no one wants to but this to conclusion more to this and chairthan chairman issa. when these problems cannot comment they dealt with them. we have not gotten to the bottom of this. we have a duty and moral obligation to get to the bottom of th

well, arguably a prosecution by the department of justice. is the head of the department of justice. we'll talk more about the president invoking executive privilege. we'll be right back. the experts at imperial can convert your long-term payout into a lump sum of cash today. your doctor will say get smart about your weight. that's why there's glucerna hunger smart shakes. they have carb steady, with carbs that digest slowly to help minimize blood sugar spikes. [ male announcer ] glucerna hunger smart. a smart way to help manage hunger and diabetes. gregg: welcome back. the president of the united states invoking executive privilege to protect his attorney general from turning over subpoenaed documents to the committee you see on the left hand side of your screen, a committee that is about to make a vote on whether to hold the ag in contempt of congress. joining us now on the phone, douglas brinkley, political and presidential historian and a professor at rice university. douglas, thanks for being with us. look, president bush, president clint

the department of justice, even itself, acknowledged. chairman of the committee wants documents. he wants to know who what when and who approved the operation and who knew it went awry. why did you give inaccurate information to congress? he's drying to drill down on that. now we know that the department of justice through the president, they are asserting executive privilege over this information. and in the letter sent from the attorney general to the president, he says that these documents were not generated at the course of their investigation and fast and furious. he says that they were created after the investigative tactics at issue in that operation terminated and this was in the course of the department's deliberative process concerning how to respond to congressional and related media inquiries into this. he says that this is basically -- they are asking for documents about how we do our job and advise you on -- he says that should be under the purview of executive privilege. lot inside baseball but very important what's going o

that is not the purview of the justice department. certainly, no longer having them on the payroll of the justice department would be a good step in the right direction. >> again, there are a number of premises is better here that are inconsistent with the fact. his case was brought by the prior administration. it was not dismissed by the court. i dismissed the dismiss the case. this attorney general dismissed the case after we had concerns about the way in which we failed to turn over information that the defense had a right to. the opr report looked at the matter and made a determination of that they did not do so intentionally. it is inconsistent -- the report that was done by mr. henry schuelke and the recommendation made by those people charged with responsibility is that those penalties should be imposed at 40 days and 15 days. it is not something to be deputy attorney general is involved in. the determination as to how -- what punishment should be made for finding people who are career within the department. the same thing happe

trying to figure out a way to push the information away from their political appointees at the department of justice, end quote. i added the justice part in there when he was talking about the department, he was talking about the department of justice. these things have been available for 11 months. they are part of the justification for this committee to get to the other documents that would provide and shed further light and information about what is going on in this situation. >> will the gentleman yield? >> yes. >> i mean i just want to check with the other side. is it -- it's your position that the head of the phoenix atf that ran this program should not be called before this committee? >> no, i'm talking about mr. melson, who's the acting director of the atf in washington, d.c. is the one -- >> the transfer, but during this program, he was down there. >> would the yes man yield? >> go ahead. >> for the record, he was in washington, he did not run this program, it was an osdef program, he said in his testimony when he read the very wiretaps that you all have had an opportunity to read, he becam

this department of justice has not been afraid to act. nor have i been. some of these enforcement decisions were not popular. and help to explain the actions that were taken today by the house. as attorney general, i do not look to that which is politically expedient. on behalf of the american people where privilege to serve, i seek justice. in recent weeks, the justice department secured its seventh conviction in the most serious plot our nation faced since 9/11 and two days ago, the department awarded more than $100 million in grants to save or create law enforcement jobs including more than 600 jobs for recent veterans. this is the kind of work that leaders in washington should be striving together to of advance. the time when so many americans are in need of our help, i refuse to be deterred from it. will not let election-year politics and gamesmanship stand in the way of continued progress. today's vote may make for good political theater in the minds of some but it is that base both a crass effort and a grave disservice to the american people. they e

i would add that we have 31 democrats that signed a letter to the department of justice and to the white house in the aftermath of agent terry's death to fully cooperate in this investigation. however, i rise in strong opposition to this contempt resolution. while criticism of the department of justice for oversight of the so-called gun walking operation during both the bush administration and the current administration, criticism may be warranted, a finding of contempt against a sitting attorney general of the united states is most certainly not. and dermining whether this house should hold our highest ranking national law enforcement officer in contempt of congress, let us remember that up until last week, the majority of our committee had been demanding the production of documents that our attorney general is legally prohibited from disclosing. and that has caused much of the delay here. in other words, mr. holder would have broken the law and likely compromised existing criminal prosecutions if he adhered to the majority's unreasonable request for materials relating to ongoing crimin

and, so, perhaps for the good of the country and the good of the department of justice, i'm going to resign. >> well, because it wouldn't be for the good of the country. what happened is the investigation has been such a distraction from the really important law enforcement work the department of justice does and the attorney general does. and that is what he wants to get back to doing but what he has said is the people that were responsible for this, they will be held accountable and you expect that from someone who leads the department like the department of justice. you can't know everything that is going on every day with 110,000 people and you can ask of people like the attorney general when they find wrongdoing, they act on it and he said that he will. >> rick: i know, you and i spoke earlier today, that you do believe the full house will vote and find him in contempt of congress. along party lines, you said. but you do believe that that vote will go down, later, next week, in the middle of next week. how can eric holder be effective as an attorney general, having been held in c

department of justice. -- when i walk through the halls of the department of justice. the is holding terrorist accountable. he has been remarkable. results can be seen in the growing number of sentences handed down by the court. we have to shore that our national security tools is a way that is consistent with our laws and values. i remain concerned that congress requested this in the target to killing of u.s. citizens overseas. as of the council be provided. i do appreciate this. as they recognize they say let's provisions, we're working to ensure the privacy interest of all americans. the time of economic crises and shrinking law enforcement budgets, many expect a violent crime to explode but they have declined, one bright light throughout our country. the commitment to the department along with the president's to provide assistance has been critical to the successes. the department is trying to keep crime rate low. good advice will help women by domestic and sexual assault. it is crucial to helping those

did you know the department of justice is suing a third of the states over voter i.d.en as more states report problems with their voting systems and why florida's governor is refusing to back down. >> we don't want non-u.s. citizens voting. we have found 100 non-citizens are on our voter rolls. over 50 have voted in past elections. i have got to enforce the law of the land. i have to make sure florida voters aren't delude by non-u.s. citizens. i'm new ensure clear. clear, huh? my nutritional standards are high. i'm not juice or fancy water, i'm different. i've got nine grams of protein. twist my lid. that's three times more than me! twenty-one vitamins and minerals and zero fat! hmmm. you'll bring a lot to the party. [ all ] yay! [ female announcer ] new ensure clear. nine grams protein. zero fat. twenty-one vitamins and minerals. in blueberry/pomegranate and peach. refreshing nutrition in charge! that's a good thing, but it doesn't cover everything. only about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance

in october 2008 the department of justice approved the -- of northwest airlines. the department of justice issued a statement indy may not remember this, quote the proposed merger for the dells and northwest is like you to produce substantial credible if deficiencies that will benefit u.s. consumers and does not like we to substantially lessen competition unquote. unfortunately that forecast has in many peoples minds in memphis in particular, proved to be grossly inaccurate. many of the promises made by in front of this committee have been broken and anybody in memphis can attest to flying out of this -- is much much higher than it does in flying out of other states and you can fly to cities through memphis at cheaper prices than you can from memphis if you go from another city to memphis through a city it's cheaper and memphis. this has caused the city the loss of conventions, the loss of businesses and use a we left memphis because the price to fly and endowed was too with two was too great so they moved to atlanta. the convention moved to kansas city and another

that's not the purview of the justice department. but certainly no longer having them on the payroll of the justice department is a step in the right direction, wouldn't it? >> again, there are a number of premises there that are inconsistent with facts. this is a case brought by the prior administration. it wasn't dismissed by the court. i dismissed the case. this attorney general dismissed that case after we had concerns about how we failed to turn over information that the defense had a right to. the opr report looked at the matter and made a determination that they did not do so intentionally. it's inconsistent or it's intention with the report done by mr. shulky and a recommendation made by those people charged with the responsibilities that those penalties should be imposed, 40 days and 15 days. this is not something that the attorney general, the deputy attorney general is involved in, determinations as to how those cases, what punishment should be made or findings of fact is done by people who are careered within the departmen

now that the merger's in place, what type of enforcele mechanisms does your department of justice to ensure competition or try to get competition and break up what is in essence a monopoly? >> i think we have been appropriately aggressive in our enforcement efforts. there are a number of cases we have brought, everything from ebooks, to the way in which telecommunications industry has tried to consolidate. and in those cases where we have not brought suit, we have extracted from the parties who have sought to join. promises or concrete divestitures of assets so that we would maximize the chances that the consumer would benefit. i think we have focused appropriately on what the impact will be on consumers and i think that the -- >> but in the airline industry, have we done anything -- airline industry has gotten to be basically three major carriers. they've divided up the middle cities and the middle cities are hostages. they are company towns. and the people in the cities have to pay whatever they're charged. can we do anything about that? >> well, i mean, there's a certain amount of

i want to say two things about the department of justice that caught my eye. the fast and furious, i was a junior federal prosecutor, i was 28 years of age. i did a lot of drug and gun cases. i never got to work in the department of justice. we had a lot of basic principle. don't let guns and drugs walk. okay. for those of you who don't watch cop shows in the room. do your deal but don't let the bad guys leave with guns or drugs. i had to understand that when i was 29 years old. and i probably would have gotten fired if i had gotten that wrong. so i have a hard time understanding how if i had to get all of that right as a 29-year-old why people who are more experienced seem confused about all of it. i don't understand how it came to be and i think the republicans on the hill are right to get to the bottom of it. and the second thing that bothers me. i have no idea how you may relate to this. i have no idea why we spent millions of dollars trying to figure out if roger clemens should be in the hall-of-fame. i happen to be a big fan of baseball. i care a lot abou