department of justice. when president obama was elected in 2008 and organized the department of justice in 2009, he created the most politicized part of justice we had at least since the nixon administration if not before hand. and this isn't just opinion. it's a sixpack. think about this for a second. the department of justice is an entity that is the signed to interpret and enforce the law. when president obama appointed the attorney general he appointed eric holder who had been the campaign chairman and anti-campaign bumbler a large dollar fundraiser for his election and for other senior fr spots at the department of justice also occupied by campaign bumbler's. that is unprecedented in american history. and during the last four years what you've seen in the department of justice is a centrally enforce the law in such a way as to where they go after the political opponents of the president and they lay off the political friends and supporters of the president. it's a centrally using the department of justi

during my time at the national security council as well as department of justice, i worked with many lawyers across the interagency community. i strongly value such interagency cooperation. cooperation with general counsel for director of national intelligence is especially important for general counsel of the cia and i have a strong and productive working relationship with that office as well as with the most senior lawyers at the department of justice, state and defense. third, the general counsel must lead and supervise the lawyers in the office of general counsel. over the years i've already worked with many of these lawyers. i've been impressed by dedication to rigorously applying the law as well as to the mission of the agency. maintaining high moral is particularly important especially in the time of budgetary uncertainty, particularly providing opportunities for professional development and growth. equally necessary is making sure that the legal advice provided by the office of general counsel is uniformly of excellent quality. i would bring to the job the leadership experienc

cia interrogations and you know the report and this includes the representations due to the department of justiceof coercive interrogations and indicating the you had read the report. so does it appear to you that the cia provided the justice department's office of legal counsel with acceptably accurate information about the course of interrogation programs? >> i agree with what steven preston said. >> the information was part of this as well the was provided to us. >> the other question that i want to ask you about deals with the matter of this opinion i believe it needs to be withdrawn. and this is a senior government attorney, would you rely on this opinion? >> at your request i didn't review that in this address it at the time, an issue of first impressions as well as the evolving technology that we are discussing as well as the evolution of case law. and so i want to make sure that no one else ever allies on that particular opinion. and this includes we have tried to get attorney general eric holder to withdraw. so let the justice department has the authority to withdraw the opinion? do you

during my time at the national security counsel, as well as at the department of justice, i worked on many -- with many lawyers from across the interagency community. i strongly value such inter agency cooperation. cooperation with the director of national intelligence is especially important for the general counsel of the c.i.a., and i have a strong and productive working relationship with that office, as well as with the most senior lawyers at the departments of justice, state, and defense. third, the general counsel must lead and supervise in the office of general counts self over the years, i have already worked with many lawyers, and i have been impressed by their dedication to rigorous al flying the law, as well as to the mission of the agency. maintaining high morale is particularly important, especially in this time of budgetary uncertainty, including by providing opportunities for professional development and growth. equal necessary is making sthure the legal advice provided by the office of general counsel is uniformly of excellent quality. i would bring to the job the leade

that is where we have come to the department of justice today. the final point to make as it relates to extortion is the money flowing into washington d.c. is not just about winning elections and winning reelection but that is part of it. increasingly campaign funds at least for some, lifestyle subsidies and enrichment and use creative techniques and methods for doing this. as was mentioned in the introduction there was a special we had on 60 minutes a couple weeks ago, i don't know if people had a chance to seize that but if you look at the creativity that takes place, that would be a place to begin. let me give you a couple examples of things that have been done. we highlighted a congresswoman from california, from los angeles, very creative techniques that she developed for self enrichment, she ran for office in 1998 and in the midst of that first campaign she loaned her own campaign $150,000 cash but she thought it would probably be a good idea to charge her own campaign 18% interest for that loan and decided i am going to wait a while, maybe

>> if the nsa and the department of justice were able to make a showing to the fisa court that the collection of internet meta data in bulk, which, of course, is a category of information that's not protected by the fourth amendment, that if it were relevant to an authorized investigation and could convince the fisa court of that, then,

. >> james cole first joined the department of justice in 1979. served for 13 years in the colonel division. he later become deputy chief of the division's public integrity section before entering private practice. and was sworn as the deputy attorney general on january 3rd, 2011. please go ahead, mr. cole. >> thank you, chairman leahy, ranking member grassley and distinguished members of the committee for inviting us here to talk about the foreign intelligence surveillance act. i'm going to focus my opening remarks just on the 215 program. as has been mentioned, it involves the collection of meta data from telephone calls, including the number that was dialed, the date and the time of the call and the length of the call. it does not include the content of any phone calls, any names, addresses or financial information of any party to the call. and under 215, it does not include any cell site location information. the government can search this data only if it has a reasonable arctic ewe labl suspicion that the phone number being searched is associa

but this is really the department of justice, just saber rattling, why? t the country to think that they are on the front edge of this knockout phenomena. it's a waste of time. it's a waste of money. who is involved in this case? the u.s. attorney's office, department of justice, civil rights division. the fbi, and the dea. an absolute utter waste of money. why? because katy, texas, i'm sure, has seen a crime like this before. and they can prosecute it and put this guy in jail. we don't need all this sort of pomp and circumstance at the department of justice engaging. in one more point. let's see if the department of justice is connected to reality. the agent in charge said this: it is unimaginable in this day and age that one could be drawn to violently attack another based on the color of their skin. this is the agent in charge and i'm asking that he be drug-tested. how in the world you can actually think that? it's scary. >> fred, let's get your thoughts on this. do you think the justice department made the right call or the wrong call? >> well, you kno

. >> the white house deferred action to the department of justice. they put out a statement, saying they have seen the court ruling, they are studying it: >> this is the secret court in the center the of the controversy, that hears appeals when the intelligence community wants to go for warrants and other tools to look into potential terrorist or security threats, they go to the court, and the department of justice points out on 35 separate occasions they authorised just the sort of telephonic metadata collection that the court addressed today. now, the man at the center of this controversy, edward snowden, has released a statement that reads in part: >> there'll be many more court cases like that that strike down what the n.s.a. has been doing, and what he is fighting against in allowing the leaks to go forward. we should point out another item is president obama posting heavy hitters from the technology world, including the ceos of apple, twitter, netflix, and they'll talk about healthcare.gov, and the technological challenges that has had. the issu

to the department of justice, to the courts and to congress. we made a mistake. these were not intentional. they were significant and you've read the court things and read some of those. but i think we should take great pride in the fact this agency in every case reports on itself, tells you what it did wrong and does everything we can to correct it. >> thank you. i apologize to the next panel that i'm -- i may not be able to get back. >> let me take a little bit of time with this panel before they are excused. at a time , we are where we have entered a new technological rare, the era of big data. and i'll loosely define big data as the ability to aggregate enormous amounts of information that don't get looked at and then figure out ways to search for things in that big heap of data. and that raises questions whether the aggregation say search or whether it's not a search until a human being asks a question and the information gets to another human mind. some of these are pretty difficult questions we have to work through. the attention the committee is paying to

she's previously held several national security related positions with the department of justice and the office of director of national intelligence. she's also testified before this committee before. welcome back, professor. please proceed. >> mr. chairman, thanks very much. thanks for the opportunity to return to the committee. since the october hearing, the conversation, i would suggest, has shifted somewhat from where it first was. first, i would suggest that the conversation has evolved from objections to specific programs to a discussion of our understanding of intolerance for foreign intelligence surveillance activities more broadly. second, the legislative proposals are coming closer to scaling back national security legal authorities in a way that might take the country back to pre-9/11 standards. and third, the path forward on authorized public disclosure in a way that's responsive to the concerns of the previous sector remains a worthy goal but still a significant challenge. with respect to the metadata collection under the business records provision of fisa, the power of m

. >> we spent nine months investigating our story and asked the justice department about the state of their own investigations. the perception-- i mean, it doesn't seem like you're trying. >> well-- >> it doesn't seem like you're making an effort, that the justice department does not have the will to take on these big wall street banks. [ticking] >> anton valukas was the man in charge of investigating the collapse of lehman brothers, the fourth-largest investment bank in the world. >> isn't the government supposed to protect the investors? >> yes. >> aren't they charged with informing investors? >> yes. >> why didn't they do it? >> welcome to 60 minutes on cnbc. i'm bob simon. even though fraud played a significant role in the 2008 meltdown of the american economy, as of late 2012, there have been several civil suits filed against major wall street financial firms, but not a single criminal prosecution. in this edition, we look back at the 2008 financial crisis and the failure of government regulators to prosecute those who might be criminally responsible. later, lehman brothers bankr

prosecutorial discretion, professor turley says, is a case-by-case decision that is made by the department of justice. when the department of justice starts to say we are going to extend that to whole sections of law, then they are engaging in a legislative act, not an act of prosecutorial discretion. wherever the line is drawn has got to be drawn somewhere from here. it can't include categorical rejections of the application of law to millions of people." close quote. great scott, he is so correct. prosecutors have discretion. they don't have to prosecute every case that comes before them. there are factors that enter into that, but the president doesn't have power just to eviscerate whole sections of law that affect millions of people. professor turley hit that exactly correct. he goes on to say -- quote -- "many of these questions are not close, in my view. the president is outside the line. that's where we have the most serious constitutional crisis i view in my lifetime, and that is this body is becoming less and less really vonetta." close quote. he's talking to the house, house of representati

the department of justice called the security breach at target the second-largest in u.s. history. was stolen between november 27 and december 15. target says it is cooperating with a probe by the department of justice. more than a dozen people have filed class-action lawsuits. some claim that target was negligent and should have done a better job protecting customer data. a last-minute extension means you have more time to help -- sign up for health insurance. the deadline is for those who want insurance starting january 1. the deadline was to be today but it has been pushed off till december 24. the obama administration granted the extension because it anticipates a last-minute rush. they are concerned about technical problems with the website which has been plagued with leeches. of thes another example administration worried about the implementation and to critics another example of unilateral thege. >> if you do miss deadline you can still sign up. health coverage must be in place by the end of march or you will face a penalty. after months of revelations from the nsa edward sno

payments were illegal in the united states, that's when they decided to self-disclose to the department of justiceself-disclose, he means chiquita, on the advice of its attorneys, turned itself in to the justice department, and one of the first things aguirre did when he became ceo was to stop the payments and sell the company's colombian subsidiary. the company pled guilty to a felony and agreed to pay a $25 million fine, but that wasn't the end of its legal problems. [ticking] chiquita faces angry victims and their lawyers. and you believe that chiquita knew that this money that they were paying was being used to go in the villages and massacre people? >> if they didn't, they would be the only ones in the whole country of colombia who didn't think that. >> when 60 minutes on cnbc continues. [ticking] announcer: where can an investor be a name and not a number? scottrade. ron: i'm never alone with scottrade. i can always call or stop by my local office. they're nearby and ready to help. so when i have questions, i can talk to someone who knows exactly how i trade. because i don't trade like every

he first joined department of justice in 1979. he served for 13 years. he later became deputy chief of the division cost public integrity section and then entered private practice and was sworn in as a deputy attorney general in 2011. go ahead mr. cole. >> thank you for inviting us here to talk about foreign intelligence surveillance act. i will focus my opening remarks on the two .15 program. as it has been mentioned, it involves the collection of metadata and telephone calls, including the number that was filed, the date, and he linked of the call. -- the length of the call. it does not include names, addresses, or financial information of either party in the call. under 2.15, it does not include any location information. the government can search this data only if it has a reasonable suspicion that the phone number being searched is associated with certain terrorist organizations. only a small number of analysts can make that determination, and that determination must be documented so it can be reviewed by a supervisor and later reviewed for compliance

department of justice. when president obama was elected in 2008 and organized the department of justice in 2009, he created the most politicized part of justice we had at least since the nixon administration if not before hand. and this isn't just opinion. it's a sixpack. think about this for a second. the department of justice is an entity that is the signed to interpret and enforce the law. when president obama appointed the attorney general he appointed eric holder who had been the campaign chairman and anti-campaign bumbler a large dollar fundraiser for his election and for other senior fr spots at the department of justice also occupied by campaign bumbler's. that is unprecedented in american history. and during the last four years what you've seen in the department of justice is a centrally enforce the law in such a way as to where they go after the political opponents of the president and they lay off the political friends and supporters of the president. it's a centrally using the department of justi

>> senator grassley, sent the department of justice at the age of the conduct the litigation before the fisa court, i am going to do for the answer that to deputy attorney general cole, although there's a lot of interagency discussion about the appropriate approach, which i think he can layout. >> senator grassley, we set a member number of occasions we find it there is a use and value to having an independent legal representative in the fisa court process in the appropriate circumstances. we would not advocate or recommend having one for all of the procedures that go on there. many of them like a normal criminal cases are routinely done in an expert databases. they are done usually with a fair degree of asked etienne and efficiency and we think a permanent public advocate might impede that process if it is applied to every single thing that they are. they would also be some constitutional issues facing our public advocate on every single issue. we would propose that it be an amicus appointed by the court when the court feels that they have the need for another event another point of vi

. >> since we're talking spectrum auctions, did the department of justice -- the department of justice has raised concerns and wants to see limits on an at&t and verizon to bid in this auction. do you think that as a loyal member of his party and the administration that there's going to be a big break between what the doj is recommending and where the fcc's ultimately going to come down on these issues? >> guest: i think that there's always a balancing of interests. so you lay out the priorities. maximizing the return to the people of the united states, making sure that there is a full and fair competition for the spectrum assets and making sure that at the end of the day that consumers have choice with regard to wireless providers i think all go into the mix. and there's going to be ample time for comment and discussion as to how those auctions are eventually structured. but what i do think is that, you know, a political axiom that you have to have con census on the problem before you have consensus on the solution. i think that everybody's -- there's a pretty clear consensus on what

the department of justice, for example, is an executive branch agency, correct? >> yes. >> and federal prosecutors within the department of justice are exercising executive branch action in the context of their participation in the criminal justice system, correct? >> exercising executive authority, yes. >> executive of 40. now, when prosecutors make a decision, after initially charging someone with a serious offense and then agree to a plea bargain to a lesser included offense, short of what they may have concluded the evidence provide that particular defendant was guilty of -- is that an appropriate exercise of prosecutorial discretion within the four corners of the constitution? >> well, i figured depends on the circumstances under hypothetical. it would not be appropriate if it were motivated i race for something, but on the facts you describe, if the prosecutor thought he didn't have the resources to prosecute a particular crim crime for perhas a sure hit the evidence for a particular element of the crime, then yes, that's an appropriate exercise of discretio

public is going to just simply continue to allow individuals to be treated this way by the department of justice and it's going to intimidate people and people be afraid of coming out for the next round of protests that to occur absolutely and thank you so much you look so bright investigative journalist on the ground covering this case really appreciate you coming in. thank you. yesterday the world lost a hero. former south african president and anti-apartheid leader nelson mandela passed away at the age of ninety five mandela was an inspiring revolutionary who not only changed his country he changed the entire world because the young south african living under full apartheid mandela became involved in and to clone a politics that worked to dismantle the oppressive system of institutionalized racism as a young man mandela got involved in politics rose quickly in the ranks of the african national congress and as a lawyer he oversaw the one nine hundred fifty five congress of the people that produced a charter that later became a manifesto for the liberation movement in one hundred sixty two mand

during the trial this afternoon us department of justice lawyers argued that the searches were introduced to combat security concerns after a detainee is were discovered with contraband and after one of them committed suicide in two thousand twelve after importing medications attorneys say they are concerned that the back of detainees could pick up things like nails on the ground and no saying this could be used as weapons while outside of their residence and it's the justice department says that the judges don't have jurisdiction to hear the case because it centers on issues that can finance lawyers for the detainee is instead argue that they need to protect the rights of their plants and access to counsel. today government lawyers compare the practice to a tsa searched at the airport and said quote it's not as bad as that sounds fun to see if it kills the court agrees well offended if late to vote on a bill today that would ban the plastic guns for another decade was locked and loaded the date has been in a teasing three d printer technology is against national security fence that comes

possible criminal charges possible criminal acts from the department of justice because the the premise as been proven to be wrong in fact we've learned from a federal court disk decision earlier this week in and a review panel that was appointed by. president obama that that in fact the n.s.a. had overreached its bounds in that and that it a lot of the actions of the mass surveillance that the n.s.a. and other intelligence communities are involved with have been indeed beyond gone beyond the constitution and violate violation of our rights so i think the d.o.j. should just drop the charges and let's you know did to me thing whatever when we don't meet we don't know that it's not going to happen we all know that isn't going to happen i mean in the best of all possible worlds that would be a great likely a great outcome but it's not going to happen mary if i go to you in seattle again you know cutting a deal is where everybody wins ok is this possible in the case of mr snowden. i'll be the dissenting voice was that's why you're here. it's. the man has broken the laws these arguments that

prosecuted at the most elite levels in the past so this is the greatest strategic failure by the department of justice in its history and certainly i judged jed rakoff ugly agrees he wrote recently a scathing essay in the new york review of books. saying that the lack of prosecution for the great recession must be judged as one of the most egregious failures of the criminal justice system in many years so obviously you agree with that right so that's going to set the stage for the next far larger crises very very interesting thank you so much for bringing us your opinions on that and for weighing in and really breaking down this complex kind of financial scandal that's going on william k. black associate professor of economics and law at the university of missouri kansas city thank you so much thank you amnesty international released a report today describing a series of abuses and human rights violations that were committed in detention facilities run by the islamic state of iraq and al shabab or the i asked us for a closer look at the report r.t. correspondent celina nasser is a researcher for amnes

department of justice. manus cranny is here. will be the end of swiss banks? >> we have a turning point. from told thousand seven, the u.s. -- from 2007, the u.s. has pursued tax evaders by whistleblowers. we are entering a new spectrum with the u.s. justice department going after them. protecting you are and who you are trying to protect from taxing. with tax a little bit more leniently with you. you have anonymity. the germans are saying, no. the u.s. is going after identity, identity. that is the critical part for the u.s. authorities. invadedlion was being off taxation by u.s. citizens. this is the point. since the whistleblowers' admissions started, citizens are in swiss.have money they declared. you see the amount of money by 70%. 68 tax evaders have been charged. banks have been fined. >> what could be the penalties? >> 16 banks under investigation at the moment. no plea bargaining for them. could face up to $10 billion in administrative cost. she -- think about what that could do to dividends. 20% of the00 and 8, value could be up for a county. by8-2009

judge leon also said the department of justice failed to demonstrate how collecting . data actually warrants terror plots joining me now to talk about this is rachel levinson wildman counsel to the brennan center is a liberty and national security program rachel thank you so much for joining me so let's start off by talking about this ruling how important how long your mental is it this is a really important ruling this is a ruling that says that the justification that the government has been using that collecting this huge quantity of information about americans phone calls is no different from collecting small amounts of information on a very targeted person and it doesn't i understand it and i say originally tried to say that this metadata is protected under previous laws i think were made back in the seventy's or late sixty's but this judge ruled that that's not the case right so what the n.s.a. has relied on what the department of justice has relied on is this one thousand nine hundred seventy nine supreme court opinion called smith versus maryland and in that cas

among other things, the department of justice was cited for its mistreatment of whistle-blowers and its efforts to undermine freedom of information law. speaking of whistle-blowers, we know that the state department has also punished u.s. diplomats for cooperating with congressional investigators looking into the september 2012 terrorist attack that killed four americans at benghazi, libya. you know, this is so outrageous that it bears recall that susan rice, the president's u.n. ambassador, showed up at, on five, i believe it was, sunday morning talk shows and claimed that the attack at the american consolate in benghazi that took the life of four americans was precipitated by a video that was deemed to be disrespectful of the religion of islam. well, it turns out that that wasn't true. and for a long time the administration denied this was even a terrorist attack, something which it now acknowledges. but when people come forward, like the whistle-blowers, diplomats that knew the ambassador and those who lost their lives on that terrible night in september 2012, then they're punished,

of evolution. >> some are accusing the justice department of a double standard. ing us now from houston, attorney, who are was cooper and nicole deboard, also an attorney and former prosecutor. clearly evidence of a double standard. look on the department of justice web site you can't find one press release regarding this knockout problem. liberal allies in the media try to down play it now all of a sudden the very first time they get a chance to weigh in on the matter, they find the one white guy out of the dozens and dozens of dozens of cases where this is has overwhelmingly been a problem where black thugs have been preying on others and too many instances people who were innocent, minding their own business who happened to be white. >> well, ms. deboard, i'm not convinced that every case is is a knockout game case, but didn't barrett really give the government this case on a plattedder because he videotaped it and he spoke about racial an moss and, therefore, i think, hate crime. >> he does the thing on video, which he then shows to witnesses and he comments o

the discretion is on a case-by- case basis by the department of justice. when the department of justice said they will extend it to all sections of loss, they are engaging in a legislative act and not an act of prosecutorial discretion. it has to be drawn from here and include categorical rejections to millions of people. >> i was thought this was an individual prosecutor determining whether or not they have enough facts to substantially result in a conviction on a case-by-case basis. if a president is ignoring entire categories of the law, whether it is immigration, mandatory minimums, the aca, what is the remedy? >> as you know, i do criminal defense work and i would never go to a prosecutor and say, i want you to contact the entire class of which my client belongs. the prosecutor would look at me and say, are you insane. i am not congress. in terms of where we go from here, i'm not too sure. the concern i have is that this body is being circumvented and being denied the ability to enforce its inherent powers. many of these questions are not close any pre

our guys were under the military cold of the department of justice. the state department didn't want us under that rule. we would have preferred it -- >> jon: doesn't that create though by not knowing having the same chain of command, doesn't that create so much difficulties within that they're tefer operation is that the unintended consequences of that would it be better for the money to be put towards increasing the actual military force? >> when you, you know the u.s. military rolled from kuwait to iraq and when you stop it and turn night a counter insurgency force it's a different mix. it creates gaps. that's what we were there to fill. you could ramp up the capability, use it for a few years and when we don't need it anymore it goes away. you don't have legacy insurance, retirements all the rest. >> jon: the cbo says it's the same. they say the same. >> the gao i saw showed us being far cheaper. >> jon: i'm going with cbo. >> okay. >> jon: you want to arm wrestle for it. >> sure. >> jon: wait, i just made a terrible mistake. will you stick around

within the executive branch, numerous entities and nsa, the department of justice and the office of the director of national intelligence are involved in assessing compliance. we report any compliance incidents to the fisa court immediately. with respect to congress, we have reported any significant compliance problems such as those uncovered in 2009 to the intelligence and judiciary committees of both houses. documents related to those 2009 problems have since been declassified and have been released at the dnr. over the past several months, we've gone to great things to better explain publicly why the program is lawful. under section 215, there must be reasonable grounds that the records collected are relevant to an authorized investigation to protect against international terrorism. as both the fisa courts opinions and our own 22 page white paper explains, relevant is a very broad term. in its ordinary sense, information is relevant to an investigation. if it bears upon or is pertinent to that investigation. courts have held that large repositories of information can satisfy relevant

. >> why did a.t.f., department of justice, have operation like fast and furious?rybody. it's been one year since the nation mourned the loss in new-up to, connecticut. today, president obama and the first lady are remembering the 26 victims of that horrific school shooting. first couple, lighting cappeddals for each of the victims and pausing for a moment of silence. connecticut governor dan malloy is asking churches to ring their bells 26 times today. newtown officials and the victims' families are asking to us mark today with acts of kindness. ♪ ♪ >>> shifting gears now. three years later and the family of border patrol agent brian terry is still looking for answers. fast and furious program has left hundreds of guns missing in terry's killers still on the loose. william la jeunesse has the latest. >> three years have gone by and we still wonder why. >> from the death in the desert to contempt hearings on capitol hill. three years after border patrol agent brian terry died the family still has questions. >> we know who an a.t.f. and the u.s. attorney's office we

department of justice, 10% of americans have been the victims of credit card fraud making america the world's leader. the biggest leader is reliance on old technology, dating back to the days of 8-track dates. >> news that 40 million target shoppers are vulnerable to identity theft would make shoppers nervous. >> target says it fixed the problem, but doesn't know how the breach happened. the large-scale security failures are turning into regular occurrences. tj max suffered a breach twice the size of targets. bonds was hit last year. adding to all of this uneasy innocence is the fact that credit card fraud is more prevalent in the u.s. than any other place in the world. one analyst says it results in an increase in high-tech fraud. >> the magnetic stripe in the existing credit card based in the u.s. is old school. it's antiquated. the data is in plain text and can be easily compromised. >> this makes american shoppers vulnerable. according to nielsen, a company that packs payment systems. the u.s. accounts for 47% of global credit card fraud. the u.s. uses swipe technology, other coun