the details can be found in a new audit from doj's inspector general. at one conference held at the capitol hillton in washington, doj spent $4,200 on 250 muffins at a cost to taxpayers at $16 each. for a u.s. attorney summit, taxpayers shelled out $54,000 for meals, drinks and tips highlighted by beef wellington hors d'oeuvreses. costing more than $7 a serving. swedish meatballs served at another conference was $5 apiece. then the march 2009 meeting at a san francisco hilton to discuss violence against women. they provided snacks that cost $32 a person. coffee was also served at $8.24 a cup. officials explained those costs were high because san francisco is an expensive city. now, event planners apparently ignored the rules that prevent this kind of excessive spending. another crackdown has been ordered on excessive spending and doj says the expenses in this area are down for the first six months of this year. >> interesting. susan mcginnis in washington, thank you. >>> just ahead on the "morning news," google ceo faces a tough round of questions on ca

mccann, why did this plant filed its own lawsuit against the merger even after doj filed its suit? >> thank you. the department of justice is very capable and we have every confidence they will prevail in court what harm consumers and competition, and we filed suit to contribute our expertise and resources to prove that the transaction is illegal. >> also joining on the communicators this week is juliana gruenwald of the national journal. >> your decision to file a lawsuit does that reflect any concerns with the justice lawsuit? >> as i said, the doj coming and if you take a look at the complaint we have a very strong case and we have full confidence in its ability to prevail. >> you mentioned some of the concerns you and other critics have raised about setting competition, possible raising of prices, impact on innovation but what impact do you think it would have on sprint, on your company? >> the main concern that we have raised those with the department of justice and with the federal communications commission is if the transaction were allowed to go forward there would be to co

mccann, why did sprint file its own lawsuit against the merger even after doj filed its suit? >> guest: thank you. um, the department of justice, um, has, is very capable, and we have every confidence that they will prevail in court. but sprint has said from the very outset that this transaction would harm consumers and competition, and we filed suit to contribute our expertise and our resources to prove that the transaction is illegal. >> host: also joining us here on "the communicators" this week is juliana gruenwald of "the national journal." >> host: so your decision to file the lawsuit, does that reflect any concerns with the justice lawsuit? >> guest: oh, no. as i said, the doj, if you take a look at their complaint, they have a very strong case, and we have full confidence in its ability to prevail. >> host: now, you mentioned some of the concerns that you and other critics of this deal have raised about it, citing competition, possible raising of prices, impact on innovation. but what impact do you think this specifically would have on sprint, on your company? >> guest

the doj and federal judge object today that. and also the ftc forced google's ceo schmidt off of the apple board as an anti-competitive arrangement. >> host: now, turning specificically to the issue of yesterday's hearing which is google's search rankings, competitors have complained that google is integrating some of its outside services into its search results, thereby giving them an advantage over firms that appear lower in the rankings. in your view s this an antitrust violation and why? >> guest: it is under deceptive and unfair practices are illegal. it probably also could be a sherman violation, but advertising is a perfectly legitimate business, but you need to represent who your customer is, and that is google gets about $30 billion a year from advertisers. however, they always represent, and they represented under oath yesterday, that they always focus on the user. and so they have led users to believe that they can trust them, they've led web sites to believe that they can trust them by representing publicly that they

in a nutshell your concern is what, doj had this dangerous guy handed to it by atf, and doj left theuy go and now you're trying to figure out why they did that? >> we now see that he will in fact be brought to justice, which is the good part of the story. megyn: he's ultimately been apprehended. there were months there where he wasn't. >> absolutely. and this is part of a pattern we saw in fast and furious, and we saw in the southwest, which was atf wanted to grab the people at the first point in which they could get a legitimate prosecution and stop the guns, or in this case grenade from being trafficked. unfortunately the u.s. attorney's office, department of justice wanted to wait and wait and wait, and unfortunately they waited until precursors, basically bomb-making materials had already crossed into mexico and the mexicans had failed to intervene. that is not acceptable, it's what we need to make sure never happens again. megyn: but is this a case of you trying to exercise 20-250 hind sight? because as i understand it the justice department is saying, yes, atf arrested this guy

widespread file its own lawsuit against the merger, even after doj filed its suit? >> thank you. the departed justice -- the department of justice is very capable, and we have every confidence that they will prevail in court. but sprint has said from the very outset that this transaction would harm consumers and competition, and we filed suit to contribute our expertise and resources to prove that the transaction was illegal. >> also joining us this week is juliani grunwald of "the national journal." >> if you take a look at the doj's complaint, they have a very strong case, and we have full confidence in its ability to prevail. >> you mentioned some of the concerns that you and other critics of the deal have raised about it, citing competition, also raising the prices, impact on innovation. what impact would it physically have on sprint, on your company? >> the main concern have raised, both with the department of justice and the federal communications commission, is that if the transaction were allowed to go forward, there would be two companies, at&t, t- mobile, and horizon. t

have here is a colossal failure in leadership from within atf, the united states attorney's office and doj. >> this is one of the most shameful moments in our government's history. >> this is one of the saddest days. >> this is the moe, curly and larry show. and we are looking for larry. >> we will not rest until every person responsible for all of this, no matter where they are, are brought to justice. >> sean: welcome to this special edition of hannity. tonight we investigate operation fast and furious. the controversial program initiated by the justice department's bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms. it grew out of the border initiative call project gun runner. when the program began under the bush administration in 2006, the purpose was to reduce firearms and explosives related to violent crime associated with mexican criminal organizations operating in the u.s. and mexico by preventing these organizations if unlawfully acquiring and trafficking firearms and explosives. for the program that began with the best of intentions expanded after president obama took office and veered sha

did doj dispute any of the reported findings? >> actually the doj confirmed the findings. took place during the bush administration. not all of them, however. the conference where the $16 -- actually $16.80 to be precise muffins were served was actually in the early days of the obama administration. the doj agrees that this is exgre extravagant report. i ask the why. if the doj offered up someone to talk to you, did they give any kind of explanation as to why they needed these $16 and however many cents muffins? >> no, they didn't get specific about the muffins. i went oen my muff inquest to get more details like the kind of muffins and sizes. all i could find out was asorted muffins, 250 of them at a cost of $16. when the auditors divided it out, it was $16. much of these were held at high end hotels all of which jack the price up 20% with service charges. so that accounted for it. the doj said we shouldn't do it and we're going to try to not do it again. >> look, aren't we just blowing this out of proportion? these are high-end d.c. hotels, hotels in san francisco. it's

buzz scarry from doj but he may be running a few minutes late. the panel may be opening remarks and the civil rights issues we face and how we move forward and then we will engage in a conversation and discussion with the panelists. for the sake of time i say we just get going and dive right into it. so do you want to start off. >> thank you so much for inviting me. it is a pleasure to be at adc. this is certainly an organization that i support and have benefited from frankly directly as an arab-american. so despite the challenges that we all face, we are lucky to have adc. so i want to use my time today to really make two significant points are two major points. after reflecting on what do you talk about 10 years after 9/11? 10 years ago i was hoping we would have nothing to talk about in 9/11 would fade into history and we could just move on but unfortunately that doesn't seem to have happened from a civil liberties perspective. so the two i guess main takeaways i would like you to have this first that i really now have come to believe very gen

and we were supposed to have a representative from doj but he may be running late. the forum of the panel will be opening remarks, introduction of civil rights issues we face and we'll move forward and then we'll engage in a conversation and discussion with the panelists. i'd say we just get going and divert into it. so do you want to start off? thank you. >> thank you so much for inviting me it's always a pleasure to be at adc. this is certainly an organization that i support and have benefited from frankly directly as an arab-american so depot all the challenges we face we're lucky to have adc. i want to make two significant points or two major points. after reflecting on, you know, what do you talk about 10 years after 9/11. 10 years ago i was hoping we would have nothing to talk about and 9/11 would fade into history and we could just move on. but, unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have happened at least from the civil rights civil liberties perspective. so the two i guess main take-aways i'd like you to have is first that i really now have come to believe ver

opposed them on the settlement, google has illegally copied 15 million books and still counting the doj and federal judge object to that and also the ftc forced the google ceo schmidt of of the apple board as an anticompetitive arrangement. >> now, specifically to the issue of yesterday's hearing which is the search rankings, competitors complained and google was integrating some of its outside services to the search results thereby giving them an advantage on flow were in the rankings. in your view is this an antitrust violation and why? >> it is under section 5 of the ftc deceptive and unfair practices are illegal. it probably also could be a violation but google's problem, advertising was a perfectly legitimate business the eni to represent your customer is and that is google gets money every year from advertisers, however, they always represent and represented under oath yesterday that they always focus on the usurp. so they have led to users to believe they can trust them and they've had websites the contrast them by representing publicly that they don't have any of drearier motive

you need to contact the doj and "don't approve these laws." how do you do that? do, we cannot stop this, there -- so much else going on = the other fighting stratgery. say thta iu to am going to be part of this battle. i was talking about tennessee. one lady said "i am debutizing my self. i will register every black male that i can find. i will take the. i will help them getting an id." we have to reach out. in some cities, in milwaukee, 71% of black me do not have a drive's license. some will not give it to you if oyu have issues or do not pay child support. i want you to say that we will arm ourselves. let's remember. we are all gideons. the battlefield is huge. it is here. it is now. we are not about to retreat. thte only thing we know is to go forward and stand up. we are the cutting edge of the movement. we are the fiture. uture. nobody will roll over us. we are the future. i call on you to join in this battle. thankn you sk you so much. [applause] >>all right, barbara. >> one of our panelists that cannot be with us today is our own wade henderson. but we te

. >> reporter: the doj filed the lawsuit against the emergencier because it said the deal would decrease the competition in the wireless industry. >> at this point it's not -- it just said we have problems with it so we will file a lawsuit againstt. >> reporter: loyal team mobile customers happy. >> i prefer team mobile to at&t. i'm a little worried many. >> reporter: while at&t users were be looking forward to. >> better service, better towers. >> reporter: the merger would leave three major carriers. the critics say it would violate anti trust customers. >> fewer choices, if you are at&t and you don't have great service you can go to t mobile, sprint, verizon. >> that's not competition. >> reporter: at&t said it would add 5,000 new jobs, experts say that's not the whole story. >> consolidation. when you merge you will see job losses. >> they will kill more jobs than they generate. i don't believe at&t. >> reporter: now they said they will fight the lawsuit in court if they prevail they will control more than half of the market share. they still need the fcc's approval. the chairman sai

. >> doj is saying no. >> you have a conflict on that direction?>> right now, no. >> you read that from the vice president, right? >> vice president has cleared us to intercept traffic and shoot them down if they do not respond. >> we're all familiar with the constitution which gives the president executive authority as commander in chief and he designates that through the secretary of defense. that chain in command was in effect. looks like there was a little conflict in that air conversation in that transmission about the line of authority there. is that how you read it what was going in terms of the right of the vice president under the constitution to act in that regard? >> sure. the minute i gave the vice president information and he ordered right over to the national military command center a general officer was in the bunker at the pentagon. he said i want two 23 h 156s. let me know when they're airborne. this was no discussion. he seemed to have full control. he was in full combat mode. >> how does that work? we all know the constitution. t

you know this is the initiative it was about to be implemented and the forces came just to stop the doj from the it's implementation they're happy and are well ready to take the country into a diversion of a civil war so we know that we want as we have said we want to be treated the same way we have never seen the real place of underage until now as a relation i mean to say that unfortunately even for david i'm sorry for for peter our friends in russia had been killed two weeks three weeks ago are sending you know weapons to samarra this is something we're also seeing is it is easier said mohammed i am not a spokesperson for the russian government however there is was another me finish and you brought it up there's a lot of people in the world that are very very skeptical now of the united nations using these resolutions are no fly zone one day and then you had boots on the ground the second day ok there's a lot of people the majority of the people the world are very concerned about how western powers violate the sovereignty of other countries could you could you like to comment on that

from going under and since that time president obama and the democrats passed the doj frank wall street reform and consumer protection act now this law was am at regulating many of the practices that led the financial crisis in two thousand and eight but g.o.p. lawmakers say that this new law which most people with a brain would argue is not strong enough they say that it's hurting our economy and in fact michele bachmann made that exact same claim over the weekend and now i don't leave repealing obamacare also repealing dad frank which is killing the banking industry i've got the bill to repeal both of them. so michelle thinks the banks are hurting they're just getting killed you know maybe she's a little confused banks are not hurting when it comes to profits here in the u.s. if anything they're the ones that are making a killing of our good friends over at think progress pointed out over the weekend banks are enjoying quite a stellar year j.p. morgan chase the nation's second largest bank saw its second quarter profits rise thirteen percent compared to the same time period last year

and the doj spent $121 million on 2000 conferences held during 2008 and 2009 and the department says most were held when there were no strict limits on costs. ya think? >> that won't be hard to do. >> and governor brown defending a plan to redirect prisoners to county jails. and spoke in sacramento today. the shift will not mean a release of current state inmates, and they will serve time in county jails or alternative programs instead of being sent to state prison and said it will help the system. >> this is 70% of the people come back. within two years. so... it's not working now. we want it to not work, not so badly as it is now. in other words working better than i think waits. >> the law signed in wapz promptedly the state's fiscal problems and a court ruling requiring the state to reduce the prison population. >> georgia prison officials temporarily stayed the execution but one justice is considering right now where to-sh whether to issue a state. supporters have been holding vij yims this, is a live shot from justin herman plaza, organized by amnesty international. and there i

a new report found that the department of justice, the doj, spent $121 million on conferences over the past two years. some of those conferences right here in the bay area. the biggest offenders? muffins that cost $16 per $10 brownies and a cup of coffee that costs $8.24. a justice department spokeswoman said new limits have since gone into place to ensure that these problems don't happen again. a $16 muffin. i'd love to taste that. >> i know. and that $10 brownie? it better be loaded with chocolate chips. >> still to come, the bay area may boated the best and most expensive restaurants in the nation but we're the worst when it comes to one very important part of your meal. >>> also, that cocktail list of your favorite restaurant or bar just got more legal and longer. >>> all right. good evening. i'm chief meteorologist jeff ranieri. still very hot inland today with near record setting temperatures in livermore. 100. los gatos, 98. san jose, coming in at 93 degrees. we'll talk more about the cooling and, yes, what this fog rolling into san francisco has to do wira coming up. >>> for de

particularly since we have met repeatedly with the department of justice, and there was no indication from the doj that this action was being contemplated. i interviewed at&t's ceo randall stevenson back in march when the deal was announced and he argued at that time that this deal was good for consumers and the country. >> what this transaction does is allows us to go a step further. by putting these two companies together it allows us to do what neither could do independently is cover 95% of the country. here are 47 million rural americans who will have access. >> at&t has a lot of reasons to be upset about this. as part of the deal with deutsche at telecom at&t must pay a $3 billion break-up fee and give up spectrum if the t-mobile merger doesn't go through. that all but guarantees that at&t will fight hard in court. what we don't know is whether the telecom joint will be willing to give up more concessions and push this deal through. maggie lake, cnn new york. >> you're watching "world business today" on cnn. when we come back, this place sits at the center of the zur zone crisis. stay tuned t

and the state department of education an greeted -- an good to back off when you are facing doj and department of education it gets your attention. >> greta: one is diction, i admit a lot of viewers will tell me my diction is horrible. you could still be fluent in english and have poor diction. you can have an accent just means you speak differently than virtually everybody around you. if you are in new york you don't have an accent if you go to florida you have an accent. the third category is grammar. which is you have not mastered the english language even "the new york times" has not figured out that each takes the singular. it is diction, accent or grammar? >> it seems to be a combination. everyone agrees if you are teaching english grammar is critical that you understand as you point out is singular, are for plural. where it gets into the grey area, if you are teaching someone to speak english a spanish native speaker, is it necessary to use what has been called broadcast standard? or can you have a bostonian, brooklyn or florida accent or for that matter an accent if you are from nicara

but if somebody in doj is telling me this is legal and saving lives in the united states or abroad, i think... i think, yeah, maybe. again, yeah, maybe. because i know for a fact it didn't. >> coming up next on this edition of frontline... a special encore about the war on terror in your hometown. >> everybody is subject to investigation. >> we were described as terrorists, which is absurd on many levels. >> pulitzer prize-winning reporter dana priest investigates if it's working. >> are we safer? >> are we safe enough? >> narrator: it was just after midnight, september 9, 2001. >> a trooper was doing what a trooper would do. saw a speeder. pulled over the speeder. ( siren wailing ) >> narrator: the maryland state trooper ran the driver's name through the local police database... >> and he gave him a ticket. the driver, from all accounts, was polite. had proper registration, license. and there was nothing that the trooper could have done, other than to write the ticket, tell him "have a nice day"... or "have a nice night." that was it. >> narrator: the driver headed to newark. he was

mazen basrawi from doj ig may be running a few minutes late. format of the panel will be opening remarks, introduction with civil rights issues we face, and how we move forward and engage in a conversation and discussion with the panelists. so if we have enough time, let's get going. dive right into it. so therefore, do you want to start off? >> thank you. spent thank you so much, try one, for inviting me. it's always a pleasure to be at adc. this is an organization i support and have benefited from frankly directly as an arab-american. so despite the challenges that we all face, we are lucky to have adc. so i want to use my time today to really make two significant points, or two major points. after reflecting on, what do talk about 10 years after 9/11, 10 years ago i was hoping we would have nothing to talk about and 9/11 would fade into history and we could just move on. but, unfortunately, that doesn't seem to have happened, at least in the civil rights civil liberties perspective. so the to i guess me take ways i would like you to have it,

that's why we've seen the former number two in george bush's own doj come forward.seen the former ward of this death row come forward and all call for a stay. and my heart right now goes out. it goes out to the macphail family who lost a hero 22 years ago. it goes out to the davis family who is sitting here, feeling helpless as their loved with one is murdered inside those prison walls. and it goes out, really, to the children of this country, who deserve to grow up in a country knowing that justice is done here. and the reality is that, tonight, it is very hard to find that anything but that justice has failed us, the supreme court has failed us. >> naacp president, ben jealous, stay with us. let's bring in now jeremy skahill. jeremy, thanks for your time. what makes this case so unusual? what strikes you about this case? >> well, ed, you know, i got involved with this case about four or five years ago. i met troy davis' sister, martina kraya, and i spoke on a panel with her about wars at broad and wars at home, and i just spending an hour with her and her breaking

the former number two in george bush's doj has, which is there's too much doubt to execute. >> that seemserstanding. but what are the options now? it seems all the legal options have been exhausted? who can step in and stop this execution? >> frankly, the d.a. could, and the d.a. really should. if you know that you would not seek the death penalty today, then why do you sign the death warrant? that is the most sort of extreme option. he can go to the judge and say, please vacate this death warrant. he can say let's reopen this case. really it's tomorrow. >> tomorrow's it. ben jealous, good to have you here with me. i know you have a lot planned for tomorrow. we'll get word on troy davis. >> we definitely will by tuesday. >> ben jealous, good to see you. 12 minutes past the hour. we were mentioning mark macphail, the officer. there's another side to this story. the mother of mark macphail, she lost a son 20 years ago. she's still in her mind waiting for justice. i got a chance to talk to his mother. she says she is ready for this long ordeal to be over. >> it has been hell because i want l

there's also this e-mail that we want to bring up that was from doj attorneys, and we want to take a also suggests their understanding of how all of this is going, and it goes to the fact of, you know, trying not to make any correlation between what happened to brian terry and a gun that may have been traced back to this program and mr. hurley says this way we do not divulge our current case, fast and furious, or the border patrol shotting -- shooting case. i guess there's a number of ways this could be interpreted as to whether or not they are trying to maintain the integrity of perhaps what they thought may be a good program in items of finding these guys, the drug cartels, through these guns is that what do you make of this statement? >> i make of this statement that transparency brings accountability and the people making statements like that don't want to be held accountable for what they might know about this situation, and particularly if they were in a chain of command where they could have stopped something that went awry or where they weren't listening to whistleblowers dow

well, initially the doj said it had proof of 11 violent crimes committed with these guns? now we know their math was wrong, the clarification was issued, it could be as many as 28. >> everybody in america should be outraged. they were used as collateral. they could have cared less that guns were being handed to criminals, to people that should not have them, and they didn't take into account our lives, the mexican people's lives, our property and our safety. >> reporter: so the question is, where does this go now? well, the investigative committees of congress are looking at all the e-mails that, within the u.s. attorney's office of all the deputy u.s. attorneys, where that information may lead. just as important we have the white house connection now, what did they know, who knew about this? we have extensive e-mails, basically, between phoenix and the national security staff at the white house. they will continue to look into that connection as well. back to you. jenna: lots of questions and awaiting some answers. william, thank you. gregg: well, the feds going after the

bush's doj, larry thompson. joining jimmy carter, joining tutu and so many others.this time, the board will say, this is different. we need to take a step back. and you know, quite frankly, they would not with the first to do this. there have been three states this year who have done the exact same thing. who have set aside a death sentence in favor of a life sentence because there was just too much doubt. >> how frequently does your organization get behind so, you know, vehemently, behind this kind of death row case? >> it's been at least ten years. gary graham in texas was the last time we were pushing a case of doubt like this. reality is that we know people have been put to death -- but now that we see this waves and waves of people who come out based on dna, we know that before we had dna, the same types of mistakes must have been made and as you point out at the top, he was put there by nine people's word and seven of those say they lied and many more say that one of the two who has not recanted is the actually killer. >> in addition to the seven of the nine r

committee investigation was a committee investigation, not department of defense investigation or doj's; is that right? >> sir, it's source document, that's crect. >> i was disappointed to learn without further investigation, this went to a hearing, and then the army basically cut a deal with the trucking company. they claimed they hadn't understood what was going on in the investigation which i would pose as nonsense, but at any rate, i was disappointed the army didn't do its investigation to nail down facts not to allow for that determination. they said, well, it wasn't much of a punishment on that basis. according to task force 2010, a war lord, a bad actor, malign actor free to contract with the united states. you have watan free to interact. do you feel you fulfilled your promise to the committee? how do you feel about it? >> sir, when we came together we said we would take under advisement, and i used the term in your investigation, anhing that was in there was actionable, we'd deal with it immediately, and so the short term solutions, as you recall, there were issues with army, t

at the tremendous toll doj was referring the entire matter to the inspector general so we have reservedudgment of the report found. >> when were you made aware that guns, which were allowed to walk during fasting for his were used in the murder border patrol agent frank terry? >> sometime thereafter. i don't buy specific date, senator. >> may be despised for the record. we'd be interested. have you come to any conclusions , director mueller as to who was responsible for this operation? you're doing investigation, right? >> senator, we do the investigation of the killing on the border patrol agent and that has been pursued, but there have been submissions meaning court pursuant to the investigation. the investigation with regard to the operation itself is being connect it by the attorney general, but the inspector general's office at the department of justice. >> have you reaching a conclusion so far? >> i am not very to let the inspector general's investigation has shown at this juncture. i was concerned that they would be in terms of the extent to which there is fbi involvement in a re

becomes are they going to try and challenge it in the courts or are they going to deal do a deal with the dojlion cash breakup fee that at&t pays the germans if it doesn't go through. >> they better do it in person because they're not going to get through on the phone. simon, thank you very much. >> thank you, simon. >> we're going to talk to -- >> mike barnicle about the yankees and the red sox coming up next. >> really? again? >> they played last night? >> played last night. >> a team spends half a billion dollars to beat the sox beat them. >> the little engine that could came through again. >> i think i can. we are! got it. [ male announcer ] don't be the last to know. get it faster with 4g. it's the network of possibilities. at&t. it's the network of possibilities. a vacation on a budget with expedia. make it work. booking a flight by itself is an uh-oh. see if we can "stitch" together a better deal. that's a hint, antoine. ooh! see what anandra did? booking your flight and hotel at the same time gets you prices hotels and airlines won't let expedia show separately. book it. major wow fac

at the tremendous toll doj was referring the entire matter to the inspector general so we have reserved judgment of the report found. >> when were you made aware that guns, which were allowed to walk during fasting for his were used in the murder border patrol agent frank terry? >> sometime thereafter. i don't buy specific date, senator. >> may be despised for the record. we'd be interested. have you come to any conclusions , director mueller as to who was responsible for this operation? you're doing investigation, right? >> sator, we do the investigation of the killing on the border patrol agent and that has been pursued, but there have been submissions meaning court pursuant to the investigation. the investigation with regard to the operation itself is being connect it by the attorney general, but the inspector general's office at the department of justice. >> have u reaching a conclusion so far? >> i am not very to let the inspector general's investigation has shown at this juncture. i was concerned that they would be in terms of the extent to which there is fbi involvement in a reac

looking into the doj's expensive taste that included $16 muffins, $5 swedish meatballs and $5 a meatball and will join us live. so, how was school today ? i have to be a tree in the school play. good. you like trees. well, i like climbing them, but i've never been one. good point. ( captain ) this is your captain speaking. annie gets to be the princess. oh... but she has to kiss a boy. and he's dressed up like a big green frog ! ewww. ( announcer ) fly without putting your life on pause. be yourself nonstop. american airlines. my grocery bill isn't wasteful spending. my heart medication isn't some political game. our retirement isn't a simple budget line item. i worked hard. i paid into my medicare. and i earned my social security. now, instead of cutting waste and loopholes, washington wants to cut our benefits. that wasn't the agreement. join the members of aarp and tell washington to stop cuts to our medicare and social security benefits. it's real milk full of calcium and vitamin d. and tastes simply delicious. for those of us with lactose intolerance... lactaid® milk. the original 1

at the tremendous toll doj was referring the entire matter to the inspector general so we have reserved judgment of the report found. >> when were you made aware that guns, which were allowed to walk during fasting for his were used in the murder border patrol agent frank terry? >> sometime thereafter. i don't buy specific date, senator. >> may be despised for the record. we'd be interested. have you come to any conclusions , director mueller as to who was responsible for this operation? you're doing investigation, right? >> senator, we do the investigation of the killing on the border patrol agent and that has been pursued, but there have been submissions meaning court pursuant to the investigation. the investigation with regard to the operation itself is being connect it by the attorney general, but the inspector general's office at the department of justice. >> have you reaching a conclusion so far? >> i am not very to let the inspector general's investigation has shown at this juncture. i was concerned that they would be in terms of the extent to which there is fbi involvement in a

at the time i was told doj was referring the entire matter to the inspector general. so we have reserved judgment until the report comes about. >> when were you made aware that guns which were allowed to walk during fast and furious were used in the murder of border patrol agent bride and terry? >> some time thereafter. >> you could supply that for the record. we would be interested. have you come to any conclusions as to who is responsible for this operation? you are doing the investigation? >> we are doing the investigation of the killing of the border patrol agent. that has been pursued. there have been submissions made in court pursuant to that investigation. the investigation with regard to the operation itself and a fruitful of the operation is being conducted by the attorney general. not the attorney general but the inspector general of the department of justice. >> have you reached any conclusions of far? >> i am not privy to what the inspector general's investigation has shown at this juncture. i was concerned in terms of the extent to which there was fbi inv

committee investigation was a committee investigation, not department of defense investigation or doj's; is that right? >> sir, it's source document, that's correct. >> i was disappointed to learn without further investigation, this went to a hearing, and then the army basically cut a deal with the trucking company. they claimed they hadn't understood what was going on in the investigation which i would pose as nonsense, but at any rate, i was disappointed the army didn't do its investigation to nail down facts not to allow for that determination. they said, well, it wasn't much of a punishment on that basis. according to task force 2010, a war lord, a bad actor, malign actor free to contract with the united states. you have watan free to interact. do you feel you fulfilled your promise to the committee? how do you feel about it? >> sir, when we came together we said we would take under advisement, and i used the term in your investigation, anything that was in there was actionable, we'd deal with it immediately, and so the short term solutions, as you recall, there were issues with arm

doj cited for excessive spending.on event planning for only five conferences and that's just the start of it. stuart varney joins us to weigh in. bring down the numbers. 600 grand. >> part of it goes to $16 muffins, beef wellington hors d'oeuvres at $7 each. $10 cookies. coffee at $8.24 per cup. and a tip of 20% at all these gatherings organized by the justice department. that's where your money is going, eric. are you happy about it? >> 500 grand for food? >> yeah. look. this is the way government works, isn't it? government allocates money to a particular department. and they've got to spend it within that budgetary period. so off they go and they spend it because if they don't spend it, they don't get reallocated in the next budget period. i think people have a right to be outraged when this kind of thing comes to light. and it comes to light all the time because this is the way government works. we're being asked to pay more in taxes, more in fees, more in everything, we got to pay for this. i can understand the o

committee investigation was a committee investigation, not department of defense investigation or doj's; is that right? >> sir, it's source document, that's correct. >> i was disappointed to learn without further investigation, this went to a hearing, and then the army basically cut a deal with the trucking company. they claimed they hadn't understood what was going on in the investigation which i would pose as nonsense, but at any rate, i was disappointed the army didn't do its investigation to nail down facts not to allow for that determination. they said, well, it wasn't much of a punishment on that basis. according to task force 2010, a war lord, a bad actor, malign actor free to contract with the united states. you have watan free to interact. do you feel you fulfilled your promise to the committee? how do you feel about it? >> sir, when we came together we said we would take under advisement, and i used the term in your investigation, anything that was in there was actionable, we'd deal with it immediately, and so the short term solutions, as you recall, there were issues with arm

and it was not until when google became aware of the doj's investigation of its advertising practices in the on-line pharmacy area that google took a number of significant steps to prevent the unlawful sale of prescription drugs by on-line pharmacies to u.s. consumers. so i want to give you the opportunity, mr. schmidt, to put that in context so we can get a complete and accurate picture of google as a corporate citizen and i think it also speaks directly to the issue of trust? >> well, senator, thank you, and again, all of that is generally quite correct. we regret what happened, and we entered into the agreement that you named and cited from. unfortunately, as part of that agreement, and i have been advised very clearly by our lawyers, that we have an agreement with the department of justice that we are not to speak about any of the details of it, so i would have to ask you to speak to the department of justice for more of that. >> is that in the -page agreement? >> it's in there somewhere, yes, sir. so, in any case, the important thing for me to say is that the conduct that was cov

committee investigation was a committee investigation, not department of defense investigation or doj's; is that right? >> sir, it's source document, that's correct. >> i was disappointed to learn without further investigation, this went to a hearing, and then the army basically cut a deal with the trucking company. they claimed they hadn't understood what was going on in the investigation which i would pose as nonsense, but at any rate, i was disappoied the army didn't do its investigation to nail down facts not tollow for that determination. they said, well, it wasn't much of a punishment on that basis. according to task force 2010, a war lord, a bad actor, malign actor free to contract with the united states. you have watan free to interact. do you feel you fulfilled your promise to the committee? how do you feel about it? >> sir, when we came together we said we would take under advisement, and i used the term in your investigation, anything that was in there was actionable, we'd deal with it immediately, and so the short term solutions, as you recall, there were issues with army, t

>> the 500 cases we are identified we identified according to how the doj defines terrorism.they define terrorism cases according to two types. the first type is what you would imagine. someone trying to hijack an airplane, someone trying to use a weapon of mass destruction. that is type 1. type ii is when the fbi or the department of justice are able to charge someone with a crime that isn't related to terrorism such as money laundering or immigration violation. but that defendant in the fbi view has a link to international terrorism and so in some cases the department of justice isn't able to prove that the terrorism case so it settles for lesser charge such as money laundering. when we look at the 500 cases the actual number of cases that pose significant threats to property to people's lives were very few. the couple that come to mind are the one who came close to bombing the subway system and faisal shahzad who was unable to explode his car bomb in times square but those types of cases are by far the minority of terrorism cases that the federal government ultimately pros