department of justice launches an extensive investigation and they suspect the french company of using corrupt practices for more than ten years to with contracts in many countries initial suspicions concern bribes allegedly made to members of the indonesian government in return for the contracts to build a power station refuses to cooperate with the u.s. department of justice but the investigation continues. godless and extends to other suspected cases in taiwan saudi arabia egypt and the bahamas else dumb systematic and deliberately corrupt practices are revealed across the globe book with again if it's not. been given then me it's not do not go into the to answer it as soon as. that. is there to morrow. morning and difficult. to do now as you can i can then use them untrue for that eclipse. and then. get home. although we already condemned a broad it's surprising that all storm should simply brush the us prosecution of. corporate leaders are convinced that the us department of justice has no jurisdiction over events that occurred outside the us territory. you know i mean again. and

department of justice has no jurisdiction over events that occurred outside the u.s. territory. you know i mean i can. tell you on one of these . dogs. you as it is you need to be able when you take the a pleasurable u.s. law is the foreign corrupt practices act. you have sepia this allows the d.o.j. or department of justice to prosecute a foreign company for corrupt practices not on u.s. soil provided that the company has an identifiable connection to the united states after the moves it it. was. lumo was it easy example system to communicate you. know was it easy. example. do i step in with a muffled america if you. take it it will please keep boss. as it is unique. in its leaks was equal with tom's refusal to cooperate with the d.o.j. his prosecution intensified in april twenty fifth teen while traveling to the united states frederick a one time alstom executive was arrested. you won't believe. because you don't evade did you. do it security do you forgive i think did. we. need to. take over you. it's not just for the record ruchi who is under arrest three other former else do

this is not the first time that the department of justice has accused chinese state actors of stealing commercial information. since the indictment of five uniformed members of the people's liberation army in 2014, our department has repeatedly cast a spotlight on china for its state sponsored criminal activity, targeting american corporations. more than 90% of the department's cases alleging economic espionage or stenyears, involve china. more than two-thirds of the department's cases involving threats of trade secrets are connected to china. in the last few months of this year alone, our department has announced charges in three separate cases, alleging crimes committed at the behest of a branch of the communicates ministry of state security. it is unacceptable that we continue to uncover cyber crime committed by china, against members and other nations. in 2015, china promised to stop dealing trade secrets and other confidential business information through computer hacking with the intent of providing competitive advantage but the activity in this indictment violates the commit imm

department of justice has no jurisdiction over events that occurred outside. u.s. territory to take this to the extent that it early to do i mean again. and again can see their capital in one of these. dogs. that if you use it as you need it will be able when you take the a political us law or is the foreign corrupt practices act. you have sepia this allows the d.o.j. or department of justice to prosecute a foreign company for corrupt practices not on u.s. soil provided that the company has an identifiable connection to the united states after the moves it. was that. i mean they can make it although. it was a walk up to a limo was it easy for example system to communicate door. america after did you know was it easy. example or a sat phone. if you. get it please keep. it is unique. with tom's refusal to cooperate the d.o.j. is prosecution intensified in april twenty first team while traveling to the united states frederick a one time executive was arrested. you won't believe. as you just evaded. security. i think. we. were you. know it just for the record ruchi who

i told him the only information we have from the department of justice which he had already seen so thiswas already circulated throughout the government and was of knowledge at the national defense committee to make sure there is no further information at the department of justice i drafted the letter learning he obtained the data from the department of justice. this information that we were at a loss to understand but long story short to continue to supply the derogatory information to the white house during the campaign there is pretty good evidence it made its way to the press and elsewhere. examining the records of the family is that j edgar hoover did not tell him he was used by the soviets so that struck me as a very salient example of the kind of threat that i think trump is referring to so now how frequently does this happen quick so at this point i think it's difficult to say it is probably relatively rare but has or ever been in a comprehensive examination? >> that is a pretty good illustration that the entirety of post hoover post- watergate reform has instances far more egreg

department of justice with the attorney general and his team, but with the ag's from around the country bi-partisanly sitting down to have those conversations. very good bipartisan conversations, raising lots of concerns, a lot of issues were discussing trying to get a grip on what it means to have antitrust activity and trying to understand how that fits within this new world, this new digital world we are in. i think you are going to find ag's threat the country along with the hopefully u.s. department of justice will continue to examine what we need to go to make sure we are protecting consumers at the market place competition, the lets consumers have the best price possible. >> the justice department is under new leadership with acting attorney general matthew whitaker. i'm curious, have begun to speak with him and had these issues around antitrust, and what have those conversations been like, if so? >> guest: i have not had conversations with the acting ag. in fact, i hope very soon president trump moves to name a permanent attorney general so we can have some confidence and certai

department of justice launches an extensive investigation into. many countries initial suspicions bribes allegedly made to members of. contracts to build a power station. but the investigation continues regardless extends to other suspected cases in taiwan saudi arabia egypt has systematic. corrupt practices revealed across the globe. i'm fed. up until. the victim or do you think. accounting and political issue. to do next you can i can then yes them a new view but if you couldn't sit with. them then it would. have you. already condemned abroad it's surprising that alstom should simply brush the u.s. prosecution of storms corporate leaders are convinced that the u.s. department of justice has no jurisdiction over events that occurred outside u.s. territory to take this to be ecstatic to really to do i mean again. and again course in their capital you know more not of these. pop dogs. that if you use it as you need to be able when you take the a pleasurable u.s. law or is the foreign corrupt practices act home you have sepia this allows the d.o.j. o

>> the department of justice, i would disassemble. the department of justice. >> i think there are many important things the doj does, not least of which is consumer protection, making sure student loan people don't get ripped off and things we have lawyers and other people doing for the american people. >> they seize assets and levy penalties, one of the things they do. why not use the $14 billion they seized from elchapo and use a portion of that to pay for the wall. >> who we are hiring and what we are paying for, remember the billions lost in the state department when hillary clinton was secretary of state. the $700 million, maybe it is billion, in the pentagon that can't be found, the amount of money because the government is so large it becomes like water, you just lose it. >> toilet seats. >> we could do this with drones, personnel, create employment on the southern border, democrats are not about open borders, they care about sovereignty, they care about using money wisely so if we are concerned about 800,000 people, why aren't

the simple one is that the department of justice, the southern district of new york that reports to thettorney general that reports to the president, accuses the president in the most explicit ways of committing crimes. this is specifically the money that went to stormy daniels and the money that went to karen mcdougal. the president says that the crimes to which michael cohen pleaded guilty, illegal campaign contributions, were committed by the president, then the candidate, as well. what anyone is going to do about that i don't know, but it is a pretty extraordinary thing to see the department of justice make that accusation. point two, the document from the special counsel makes clear, at least according to michael cohen, that there were a lot more contacts between cohen as a representative of the trump organization and the trump campaign and russians than we had known previously, more opportunities for collusion, some of them, according to the document, including candidate trump himself, that candidate trump was involved in this outreach to the russians during the campaign. very sig

and to some extent, the department of justice. admit in the 302 document that the fbi agents -- lou: and the 302 -- >> sorry. 302 is the summary by the fbi of an interview. they admit that flynn told the truth. so the question that judge emmett sullivan should have on tuesday is, mr. mueller, why are you prosecuting, why did you charge a guy who your own agents interviewed and determined told the truth? and then i think if i were the judge, i would turn to general flynn and say, general flynn, why did you plead guilty to something you didn't do? were you coerced? was your son threatened by these special counsel operators over here at the other table? lou: how about why did the fbi director acknowledge, as he acknowledges, send over two agents thwarting what is policy, procedure -- >> right. lou: -- and the legal demand for representation for a formal interview? it wasn't just a little trek across town to the white house. >> well, you called comey cute. i'd call him cunning and corrupt. and also a liar. you know, this is -- lou: we

law requires. >> and we should be clear what you talk about represents those employees the department of justice who elect campaign contributions that is not necessarily an accurate reflection of the overall political worldview essentially of the department of justice as a whole talking samples we have to be careful. now we will take a 15 minute break give my friends a shout out. [applause]

what is that. >> he was somebody that was at the top of the justice department as attorney general andriminal division, and then when he left office after bill clinton was elected, he was working in private practice and really just missed the mission of the justice department. so he came back to the washington, d.c. u.s. attorney's office as a line assistant, and that would be equivalent of being a general and signing up to be a private because you want to be there when you're storming the beaches of normandy. who does that but somebody with humility and is all about the j job. >> it -- i think he loves his country and loves the justice department and he is a very inspiring person in terms of high ideals. >> as you watch it unfold, you see the developments that came out yesterday, big developments in all of this. what runs through your mind as you begin to bring it all to fruition? >> well, i'm not surprised. bob is a masterful prosecutor. the fec violations, the obstruction, russian interference, conspiracy to defraud, these are very complicated matters, very varied matters, and all o

montana state department of justice in 2017, 22 native american women went missing. omen make up 30% of all missing women in the state, even though they only account for 3% of the population. those statistics have prompted senator jon tester to take action in congress, not just for the women in his state, but across the country. senator, it's nice to have you with us. senator tester: it's great to be soledad: when you heard over the summer that nearly two dozen native women had gone missing and only one was actually found, what was your reaction to those statistics? senator tester: well, i couldn't believe it. the truth is that whenever you have that kind of a situation where people are murdered or missing, those kind of numbers and only one person has been found, you've got a problem. and so, we went to work and asked the indian affairs committee to have a hearing for a couple of reasons. number one, to find out what's going on with the fbi and the bia and the department of justice, and find out what's going on on the ground and really also raising awareness. soledad

that is why the department of justice announced an initiative to address a full range of threats.s been a leader in that effort. one tactic is to conduct foreign investment reviews to protect against china acquiring a sense of information through acquisition of american companies. a third is to find ways to better protect our telecommunications infrastructure choirn stands accused of engaging in criminal activity that victimizes individuals and companies in the united states, violates our laws and departs from international norms of responsible state behavior exposing these actions through the criminal justice system is a valuable tool in the department of justice arsenal faced with the detailed factual allegations today and the corroborating statements not just from the united states but from other victimized nations, china will find it difficult to pretend that it is not responsible for these action america and its ma m allies know what china is doing, why they're doing and in some cases we know exactly who is sitting at the keyboard perpetrating these crimes the alleged crimina

this is not the first time that the department of justice has accused chinese state actors of stealingrcial information. since the indictment of five uniformed members of the people's liberation army in 2014 , our department has repeatedly cast a spotlight on china for its state-sponsored criminal activity targeting american corporations. more than 90% of the departments cases alleging economic espionage involved china. more than two thirds of the departments cases involving thefts of trade secrets are connected to china. in the last few months of this year alone, our department has announced charges in three separate cases alleging crimes committed at the behest of a branch of the chinese ministry of state security. that weacceptable continue to uncover cybercrime committed by china. to stop china promised stealing trade secrets through a computer hacking with the intent of providing competitive advantage to companies in the commercial sector. what the activity alleged in this indictment violates the commitment china made, a commitment to members of the international community, the un

department. lots of people offer opinions to the department of justice, but they don't influence our own decision-making very experienced lawyers, and obviously our decisions are informed by our knowledge of the actual facts of the case, which mr. barr didn't have. i didn't share any confidential information with mr. barr. he never requested we provider any non-public information to him, and that memo had no impact on our investigation. >> very interesting. aaron, i know you've been working on reporting on this. what do you make from what we just heard? >> rod rosenstein is putting a good face on it. that memo goes beyond from what we saw with matthew whitaker and his public -- >> this memo that bill bar sent unsolicited over the summer to the department of justice blasting the mueller -- >> basically disasemiling the entire obstruction portion of it. i don't know how you become attorney general and allow this to proceed, if you say that portion of the probe is destructive to american government, which is exactly what he said. >> he's basically just saying i know this is going well. you need to get your

comey wasted no time in taking a shot at president trump and his criticism of the fbi and the justice department>> the president's attacks on the justice department broadly and the fbi, it's something no matter what political party you are in you should find deeply troubling and speak out about. lou: of course the former fbi director who refuses to answer questions of the congressional committee that has constitutional oversee it responsibilities. quite a fellow. comey's whining sounds like little more than frustration over the president's justified decision to fire him. the president said in june that removing comey was more than warranted. president trump: i think james comey was unfair to the people of this country. i think he goes down as the worst fbi director in the country, there is nobody even close. and i did the country a favor by firing him. former trump campaign chair paul manafort. congressman matt gaetz joins to us assess all that and more. turmoil in france. middle class, teachers, students taking to the streets to protest the policies of emmanuel macron. he himself has gone into

we need to come up because we are involved in so many different activities that involve the department of justice at the u.s. level. host: you spent 24 years in washington as a member of congress. as ag inof years california. what is the difference in pacing and what people know and when? minute i loved every was in the house of representatives. i have learned just how much foresight there was in the minds of our founders, and establishing this democracy. i would be there now if i did not feel like i was making a bigger difference as attorney general for the state of california. the biggest difference is that california, as i keep saying, is so forward leaning. we are not waiting for someone else to come up with the idea. that is why you see so many innovators coming to live and established businesses in california. we are moving forward, and it is a great thing to be part of that effort to move forward, and also to tell those who were willing to be the pioneers in our state, do not look back because i have got your back. california is not turning back, we are looking at what is coming up in the

>> it is usually the head of the criminal division of the department of justice. i was deputy at the time and he often had me attend the meetings. i'm not sure about what the history of the ig at the state department's. i know that the ig at the justice of -- justice department and i hold him in high regard. he is completely apolitical and dogged in the way he goes about his job. >> there are members on the republican side of the island capitol hill -- isle of capitol hill who want to investigate the clinton foundation. has mr. barr weighed in on that? >> at one point he said if you find that there is smoke suggesting collusion between the comp -- the trump campaign and the russians, that it exists with the clinton foundation and the uranium one deal. the department of justice said at one point they would look into the clinton foundation. i don't know if they were looking into the uranium one deal or if they would take it up if our was confirmed. >> a republican is up next. >> good morning. i have two questions. i just want to know why do democratic senators think

it is our duty and it is our intention that the department of justice to hold them responsible. that applies to the entire supply chain. manufacturers, distributors, doctors, pharmacies, organized crime, and street dealers. those who have spent years violating this nation's drug laws and profit off of addiction are going to be held accountable. the department will bring to this fight, all of its tools and resources. criminal prosecution will continue to be a large part of our effort. we will indict and prosecute those who manufacture, import and sell heroin and synthetic opioids and we will likewise prosecute doctors and pharmacists to misuse their controlled substance registration in the distribution and prescription of opioids. we will also use the full arsenal of the department's civil enforcement authority. for example, the false claims act provides that apartment with a powerful tool to pursue all of those in the opioid distribution chain that are responsible for improper marketing, distribution and diversion. much of our work in this area is not yet public, but i can assure

this is a man who plays fast and loose with the truth and now sitting behind the department of justicethe american people. melissa: but you know he is not in the position any longer. so what is the point of continuing down this path as opposed to, trying to either go into the department reform it, change who is there, change the rules around it? i mean seems like this path is not the most direct path in order to, you know, get to justice within the justice department? >> well, you know, sometimes you have to go to each of the areas that need to be discovered or reformed. in this case remember we're still spending, we, the american people, are still spending millions of dollars every month significanting collusion, if you will. and by the way that has clearly been understood is not a legal term. there is no such thing as collusion under the law. comey couldn't answer what collusion was because it is not a term that has a law attached to it. but the fact is, that we're still spending that money. the special investigator is investigating based on, these were a lot of our questions obvious

we have a letter that all of us have gotten on this letter to make sure the department of justice does its job do defend the law. the money was taken away with the tax cut bill as far as the fines that negated the entire piece of legislation in the affordable care act. and this bill is place. it is still illegal to not provide coverage to the people with pre-existing conditions and trying to unravel this entire thing is something we are going to fight. we are going to be resurrecting our request today. will be based on having the legal department intervening on behalf of the people of america to make sure we can fight this level at a level that we think needs to be fought and will be fair. right now, i'm happy to have my colleagues, senator murray and senator wyden who have the same scenes. and we were afraid this day was going to happen but we didn't expect it would happen with the judge in texas has been rendering over the course of his career. i present you senator murray. senator: thank you all for being here. families have been worried all year about republicans continued attempts

justice. we are goin going to go after ts here. lou: 16 fbi agents raiding the home of a protected department of justice whistleblower. >> that's whatfia do. that's what i seat fbi. i see our government being that by the way they are acting and treating people. how are you going in search of a crime. you are going in search of a crime because there was no crime. the russia and the trump and the election collusion. one that excluded this election right here is the hillary clinton camp, the dnc, the fbi, and i could keep going on and on and on. they interfered in this election right here. lou: i couldn't agree with you more, and it's always great to see you. the american way will prevail, truth, justice for all. >> for all. lou: diamond and silk. >> thank you for having us. lou: more signs of trouble in the european union. france preparing for another weekend of protests, demonstrations, and very likely much worse. we'll have that and a lot more after the break. stay with us. i'm 53, but in my mind i'm still 35. that's why i take osteo bi-flex to keep me moving the way i was made to. it nourishes and strengthens my joints for the long

from my understanding he had the liberty of a department of justice attorney who interrupted numerous times and told him not to answer questions. that's an interesting take. here is a guy who is supposedly one of the best and he mugged his ole jurisdiction particularly with the email scandal. rod rosenstein presented the documentation to fire him. he deserved to be fired. lou: it's the general view. it's certainly the republican view. my curiosity run to the republican confidence in the house the past few years. that time business to expire. you watched your leadership stall and subvert this president. particularly the judiciary committee helped democrats run out the clock on any kind of meaningful result from investigation. only the house intelligence committee can claim that. your thoughts as you reflect on these two years and what they mean for a president who will be encumbered buy a democratic house. >> we squandered two years. i have been one of those people who happily joined the fray in trying to hold our leadership accountable. trying to get stuff done regulatory or legislati

but i do think today was an extraordinary day at the department of justice. lined the two people hand-picked by the president to oversee the department of jurks both the acting attorney general matt whitaker and then the nominee to be attorney general bill barr had serious ethics questions swirling around them today. and that's not normal. do you think the president is trying to constrain the mueller investigation by putting its critics in charge of the justice department? >> look, i think especially with matt whitaker it's hard to come to a different conclusion. right? what you have is for the first time in d.o.j.'s history you have someone who came in to be acting attorney general who did not come from a senate confirmed post. the first time in history happening at the same time that the person in that position oversees an investigation into the president. then you have as you noted a commitment by doj that that person would follow the normal process and consult with the doj ethics professionals. and today we learned he did consult with the doj eggics offici

the department of justice has opine you cannot indict a sitting president. i think southern district's choices are these, they can try to indict him. they may not get permission from the department of justice to do that. we'll have litigation up to the supreme court about whether that can happen or not. or they can just wait till the democratic house takes over and i'm sure they will be interested in the evidence gathered for possible impeachment proceedings. that's really their choices. i don't think they have a lot of other choices here. sdp sdp >> the other interesting thing is not only true as jeff said, they are very careful in the words they use. they didn't have to make the statement about the president. it was not necessary in the document with respect to the sentencing of michael cohen to adopt the phrase in koorcoordinn with and the direction of. that something somebody decided to do, for reason that's not clear to me, but it's unnecessary for what that document was. >> the president dlieclared himself completely cleared. >> he's not completely clea

in the past nine months alone, the department of justice has investigated, charged, and convicted at ast 16 individuals and 4 corporate entities in eight separate cases involving theft of trade secrets over the past five years. six more individuals have been investigated, charged, and convicted by the department of justice for stealing research from american universities. one case involves a chinese intelligence officer who was a deputy division director from china's main spy agency. the is the first chinese intelligence officer to be brought to the united states and tried in open court. a slew of other chinese intelligence actors were charged in a multi-your plan to steal sensitive commercial aviation data. then there is a massive plot to steal usm a conductor technology. these cases in particular i like the threat of chinese state-controlled economic espionage. just last week, we saw the arrest of the chief financial officer of hauwei, the largest telecommunications company in china and a financial firm owned by chinese ministry of finance reportedly used various shell companies to

next, top officials of homeland security, the fbi and justice department talk about chinese spies and their efforts against the united states. sen. grassley: we welcome everybody to this hearing, but particularly those people that are testifying because it takes a lot of work to prepare for this. it even takes a lot of work for our staff to prepare for. i know for those that are both government and nongovernment have to work hard as well. we have heard a constant drumbeat about the national security threats posed by russia, attempt to sow discord and inflame partisan discord the social media and attempt to interfere with our elections through cyber intrusions. they are real threats that should not be underestimated. i have held seven hearings on election meddling, but the media his syria all things russia has distracted attention from an arguably greater, more existential threat and that happens to be china's effort to overtake united states as the world's preeminent superpower in all phases of society and economy. china has made no bones about doing this through any and all means, wh

arianne placenco, director of management at odni and senior castro at the department of justice. we've focused our thinking today in sort of two main subject areas. one issue is related to lawyer-client representation in federal government lawyering, which is something that i think we all have breadth of experience in, and then social media issues, which is kind of a new and scary frontier for federal government lawyers, particularly when we think about personal use of social media, which we have some familiarity with but maybe not as much as others. so we'll go into those kinds of subject matter areas. again, we also want to use this opportunity to answer questions that are important to you. so as you hear our remarks, as you think about other issues that maybe you've been ponderring ponder ipondering in your own careers, please go ahead and ask us questions in other areas as well. we'll start with lawyer-client relationships. who the client is is sometimes a very complicated question for national security lawyers, because the client can be any number of people or organizations o

ambassador and for as well the department of justice, the attorney general. your thought of both.are great choices. she is very articulate. she has learned a lot about foreign policy. she is fabulous. she'll be a great spokesperson. and that's a lot of what the u.n. ambassador does. the decisions are made by the president. lou: you wouldn't know that when people talk about the current u.n. ambassador. ed: the policy is set before that but you then go out and articulate it and she is first rate. william barr was the attorney general. he doesn't have a big ego. my sense is to go over there and straighten that place out and set a direction and get that place doing way it's supposed to be doing. lou: you just heard paul gosar, the congressman from arizona talking about the failed opportunities the last two years of this congress. it's a shame. it seems to be purely on both the conference who tolerated paul ryan who kept him there for 8 months after he resigned. ed: to let them control the campaign strategy. the money was the speaker's money and the strategy was the speaker's strategy.

however again i say there is three entities involved in this is not just the why does it is the department of justice and they're looking at this proof as i mentioned and then there's the state department which also will assess how much diplomatic damage or benefit a extradition of mr golan to turkey would gain for the united states since this is not just about mr gillon but also about the relationship between the united states and turkey when it comes to the u.s. support for example kurdish fighters in northern iraq and in syria as well as turkey's role in syria as well as turkey's purchase of as four hundred missile systems from russia so we could go in the weeds here but it's very complex and the point is the united states will take its good and does the time to check on all evidence presented by the turks and if this is current then maybe there is some movement there but as long as. it is not happy with what they have i don't think there is will be any movement any time soon during i'll come back to you if you'd be extradited what will this mean for taking. well this could be a complete game chan

. >> at the department of justice needs to investigate serious allegations of criminal conduct. one of the frustrating things over the last two years as we have not had sufficient accountability in the department of justice. i want a department that is faithful, and we will see that at the department of justice. we need to make sure that everyone is held accountable. >> sean: i had this woman alice marie johnson. how'd do you feel about the prison reform bill as long as violent felons are not included? >> i think we are about to have a major bipartisan victory. i'm a longtime advocate of criminal justice reform and i think reducing mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent drug offenders makes a lot of sense. there are far too many young black men in prison for decades for simple possession, and that's not right. my big concern, you just put your finger on it, we should not be releasing violent criminals. violent criminals are totally different. what happened last week, i drafted an amendment to this bill that excluded violent criminals that said we will focus nonviolent crimin

three panel judges, i think one might have been a little on the fence or leaning toward the department of justice'st least two seemed skeptical of the department of justice's, appealed and the argument seems to be quite in support of at&t's argument. take me through this, jennifer. you are a lawyer. i am a recovering lawyer. you know, welly told you prices were going up, prices are going up. normally these are just the facts. jennifer: the court of appeals looks at the trial court record, and they are meant to come up it is a matter of fact, as you explain, not a matter of the interpretation of the law, they have to give deference to the trial court judge. reason for that is in the trial court is when the documents are take theand witnesses stand in they are cross examined, and it had the opportunity to weight the exam and the cross exam, decide the porosity of the witness. -- voracity of the witness. the court of appeals do not get to do that. they rely on the trial court judges, interpretation of the evidence, and the facts. what they do is look at the facts, and they only reversed if there is cl

it the federal government is challenging federal - - california's right to do that and the department of justice i will defend that law because we don't think consumers should be treated differently because they may not be as wealthy to have access to that kind of information that should be available to anyone. >> so to set back with a net neutrality case why does your office come to the conclusion that was the right approach? . >> and then to defend net neutrality one is specific to california and what it is more general focused on net neutrality with the regulations we had in place under the sec previously that the trump administration decided to abandon. we push the pause button on our litigation with the net neutrality law to make sure we have a clear sense on the national effort. . . . . in the federal lawsuit on the net neutrality provisions that were undermined by the trump administration. >> host: the new democratic house of representatives is coming into session in january. i'm sure after many years you know a lot of the players there. do you expect action in this area? >> guest: i beli