jeff sessions and bill barr come and testify in front of senate judiciary. you would encourage them to cooperate with those senate investigations? >> well, i'm assuming if they have nothing to hide, they're going to be very cooperative because they will want to clear the name and clear the reputation of the department of justice. i would like, i would be hopeful, they would be cooperative. there may be issues with respect to presidential privilege if we're talking about direct conversations between the attorney general and the president of the united states. so these are all going to be issues that if not litigated, there's certainly going to be a lot of discussion about the sharing of information and what they feel comfortable with disclosing to congress. >> one of the things that cnn is reporting today and they have discovered is under jeff sessions, the doj launched this collection project and didn't find any tie to leaks, which was what they were supposedly looking for. and then when bill barr became the attorney general, he sent them back and said keep

new allegations of just how far donald trump, william barr, jeff sessions pushed into the senate to go, pushed into their personal lives and even their families. listen to this. trump and the justice department subpoenaed apple for communications data on at least two democrats. they went after certain iphone records of key democrats involved in the russia investigations. "the new york times" first published the stories that they were trying to find media contacts. even after investigators thought they hit a dead end and discussed closing the inquiry, william barr ctold them to keep digging. >> news of these subpoenas are just the latest evidence of trump's heavy-handed tactics when it comes to leak investigations, but it's also the most alarming, revealing the unprecedent lengths the trump administration went to as it targeted its political enemies. this comes after we learned they also obtained secret records from journalists. this includes barbara starr and other news organizations. let's get the latest from cnn's laura jarrett. you know, laura, i know sometimes these things can blen

that on the other side, in congress, chuck schumer and dick durbin are announcing jeff sessions and bill barr to testify under oath. they issued this statement. former attorneys barr and sessions and other officials involved must testify before the senate judiciary committee under oath. if they refuse, they are subject to being subpoenaed and compelled to testify under oath. in addition, the justice department must provide information and answers to the judiciary committee, which will vigorously investigate this abuse of power. we have reached out to former attorney generals barr and sessions and have not heard back. sources told us jeff sessions was not involved in any of these subpoenas related to the house intelligence committee. as you'll remember, he made a broad recusal from the russia investigation. because this investigation of the house intelligence committee members or staff or even their family members, this was all related to any possible leaks related to trump aide contacts with russian officials. so, jeff sessions, a source that is familiar with this, says he was recused fr

tonight, democrats are demanding former attorneys general jeff sessions and bill barr testify under oath after revelations of secret subpoenas served on apple to obtain meta data. the justice department's inspector general issuing its own review of records of two of former president trump's most outspoken adversaries, adam schiff and eric swalwell. >> i can't go into received those subpoenas or whose records were sought. i can say that it was extraordinarily broad. people having nothing to do with the intelligence matters that are at least being reported on. it just shows what a broad fishing expedition it was. >> reporter: cnn has learned members of the committee plus staff were part of the dragnet, but also family members, even one minor, people who had no connection to the intelligence committee's russia investigation like schiff's personal office staff were also caught up in the collection. the investigation was part of a leak hunt for whomever divulged information about contacts between trump associates and russia at the height of the russia probe. officials thought the leak investi

so it could be very embarrassing though for william bar or jeff sessions, if they are called in front of congress to testify about this. what ramifications they could face beyond embarrassment? it's a little unclear at this point, but the real question is, how much and how far do democrats want to pursue this? knowing that it was from the previous administration that is going to be the big question. moving forward then he thinks that gabriel alexandra there for us in washington dc. us attorney general merritt garlen has told staff that within the next month the justice department will double the number stuff, enforcing federal voting laws. and they've comes as republican politicians push a raft of new laws to ties and voting walls in several states. there are many things that are opened to debate in america. but the right of all eligible citizens to vote is not one of them. the right to vote is the cornerstone of our democracy, the right from which all other rights ultimately flow. ukraine will receive another $150000000.00 in military aid from the u. s. this month. it's a 2nd package

first, they'll request that bill barr and jeff sessions testify before congress. there's interest in getting more answer on why members of congress and staff might have been targeted, whether or not they were just sort of part of the widespread dragnet to get more information on met a data collected by the justice department under former president donald trump. one of the key questions is how far democrats want to actually go to pursue this. are they going to try to subpoena jeff sessions or bill barr, or are they making requests and see what happens. i think all of it has to be given time. this is the first time lawmakers are back on capitol hill this week after the news broke late thursday. i think that's what's going to happen here on capitol hill. meanwhile, democrats very clear they have some deep concerns about what is alleged to have happened. here's what they said. >> what has happened here are fingerprints of a dictatorship, not a democracy. >> what the administration did, justice department leadership as a former president goes beyond even richard nixon.

. >>> what did jeff sessions and bill barr know about secret investigations into democratic lawmakers? that's next. investigations into democratic lawmakers? that's next. pain hits fast. so get relief fast. only tylenol rapid release gels have laser-drilled holes. they release medicine fast for fast pain relief. tylenol rapid release gels. i'm ordering some burritos! oh, nice. burritos?! get a freshly made footlong from subway® instead. with crisp veggies on freshly baked bread. just order in the app! ditch the burgers! choose better, be better. subway®. eat fresh. ♪ ♪i've got the brains you've got the looks♪ ♪let's make lots of money♪ ♪you've got the brawn♪ ♪i've got the brains♪ ♪let's make lots of♪ ♪uh uh uh♪ ♪oohhh there's a lot of opportunities♪ with allstate, drivers who switched saved over $700. saving is easy when you're in good hands. allstate click or call to switch today. [sfx: kids laughing] [sfx: bikes passing] [sfx: fire truck siren] onstar, we see them. okay. mother and child in vehicle. mother is unable to exit the vehicle. injuries are unknown. thank you, onstar. ♪ my

we know that jeff sessions, rod rosenstein, bill barr said they didn't know about it.ind that hard to believe. we need to to know who did know, how high did it go? >> why the gag orders? is that commonplace? is that unusual to have the gag order and this level of secrecy. >> it's alarming and third thing we need answer to. why the secrecy? the reason we find out about it now it's been under sale. doj went to the courts and said we have to make sure the people we subpoenaed barbara starr, eric swalwell, the phone kompanys, apple you can't tell them that require a special court order. doj going into courts and say please keep it secret. why was that done, renewed several years? that's the next big question. >> as we learned in addition to journalists members of congress and staffers and families. now we learn about don mcgahn. how broad is this the things we don't know? >> this is a question for merrick garland how many other cases are there? there could be many other cases still under gag orders. gag orders could expire in two weeks, six months. if oom meeting with gero

bill barr and jeff sessions are denying knowledge of those secret subpoenas.se speaker nancy pelosi reacting to those reports saying, if they don't know anything, who does? >> how could it be that there could be an investigation of -- members in the other branch of government, and the attorneys general did not know? so, who are these people? are they still in the justice department? >> pelosi also seemingly drawing a line in the sand when it comes to a partisan commission investigating the january 6th attack on capitol hill saying what happens in the senate tomorrow could determine whether or not she appoints a select committee. >> we could go -- i was asked to give it another week, so i'll see by monday in the senate believes they could -- those who are working a bipartisan way can get three more votes. >> assuming the commission doesn't pass, are you saying by monday, which is tomorrow, you'll announce a select committee? >> no, i'm not going to announce anything tomorrow. i'll see their response and review -- >> it sounds like you're getting closer to it. >

prosecutors under the beleaguered trump attorney general, jeff sessions, were hunting for the sources behind news media reports about contacts between trump associates and russia. ultimately, the data and other evidence didn't tie the intelligence committee to any leaks. investigators then debated whether they'd hit a dead end. some even discussed closing the inquiry. but following the departure of jeff session' attorney general and the installation of william barr, as trump's new attorney general, mr. barr revived languishing leak investigations, once he became attorney general, according to three people with knowledge of his work, barr moved a trusted prosecutor from new jersey, who had little relevant experience to the main justice department in washington, to work on the congressman schiff-related case, and about a half dozen others. the zeal in the trump administration's efforts to hunt leakers led to the extraordinary step of subpoenaing communications metadata from members of congress. that is a nearly unheard-of move outside of corruption departments. while justice department

in fact, he fired jeff sessions because jeff sessions said, you know, i don't work for you. i work for the american people. >> maggie, there is so many, different angles to this and it's so, deeply serious. but there is, also, a present-and-future political angle here, as well. we are talking about the person who is still the de facto leader of the republican party. and i know that's in the future but he is, more or less, the current front-runner for republican nomination for president, too. so i am wondering how you think this will play into republican politics? are they, all, just going to line up behind him, at this point? >> i think the answer is yes, john. i mean, i think that we have seen is the -- the parties are so incredibly polarized. that essentially, much more so with republicans, at the moment. essentially, what happens is that when -- when the -- either, the former president says something or it's perceived that in -- in the mind of his supporters that the media is, somehow, against him. they, then, stick with his position. and in this case, it would be the pos

john, from jeff sessions to rod rosenstein and bill barr, one thing was consistent across all of them did everything he could to use the justice department for his personal aims, to fight his own political wars. >> it certainly was. and i must say that a lot of people are comparing that with nixon. nixon didn't have that kind of department of justice. i was just thinking as you were doing the setup piece that during the worst leak of nixon's presidency was the so-called pentagon papers, a massive leak of classified documents. i got a call from the oval office the day after he learned that and could the department of justice bring a criminal action for this? called over, found out the short answer was they could, but they won't. so nixon couldn't use the department as he wanted to. >> so in a sense, what you're saying is, or maybe not in a sense, you're saying this goes beyond what nixon did? >> it is beyond nixon, yes. it's nixon on stilts and steroids. >> so, you know, what do you make of how direct trump's involvement in this was? we know barr was happy to do trump's bidding many ti

you had jeff sessions saying he was gonna prosecute leaders and it's very possible that investigationn things were greenlight and then the prosecutors ran with it. that's at least the story that we're getting from people close to jeff sessions, rob, and bill barr and all of those said who they would never approve a subpoena from the intelligence committee. it appears that one democratic staffer was the focus of this investigation but we now have seen subpoenas that went to apple and microsoft looking for email addresses and phone records associated with more than 100 different mla dresses in phone numbers, including adam schiff and eric swallow to members of congress and that needs to be explained. i think your question is a good one but that theory needs to be prosecutors and they had a green light for things they just went ahead and did it. >> i have a question for you. i thought it was apple that notified these individuals and it wasn't a department of justice. isn't that unusual? >> yes this whole thing is unusual. the fact that the doj got a judge to order a gag order to prevent

it's not surprising that jeff sessions might not have known. he recused himself from the russia probe when this apparently was undertaken in 2017. it is not plausible, though, that some other political appointee, perhaps rod rosenstein did not know this. career people wouldn't take these steps without consulting higher ups. >> i was a career prosecutor, what a statement for us to be even be questioning the ecred credibility of an attorney general. biden is having to face a lot of the same discussion points we're talking about while he's backabroad. here's what vladimir putin told nbc about president biden. >> you once described president trump as a bright person, talented. how would you describe president biden? >> even now i believe former u.s. president mr. trump is an extraordinary individual, talented individual, otherwise he would not have become u.s. president. he's colorful individual. you may like him or not. he had not been in big-time politics before. some like it, some don't like it, but that's a fact. president biden, of course, is

and i'd like to see jeff sessions and bill barr testify under oath. i would be very interested in seeing if they say they had no idea that this investigation was going on and they did so under oath. >> these leak investigations began all the way back in 2017, when jeff sessions was the attorney general. but according to the new york times, they actually were revived by william barr when he became the attorney general. i want to play this exchange that now looks very different than it did then even. from may 2019, between then senator kamala harris and william barr. let's take a look. >> has the president or anyone at the white house ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone? yes or no please, sir? >> the president or anybody else -- because >> it seems you would remember something like that and be able to tell us. >> yeah, but i'm trying to grapple with the word suggest. there have been discussions of matters out there that, they've not asked me to investigate. >> perhaps they've suggested? >> i wouldn't say suggest. >> hinted?

he cannot probably get bill barr to cooperate or jeff sessions if sessions was involved. >> why not? department he has no subpoena power per se. he can't really force them to cooperate. the congress could get the answer to those questions. although they'll likely fight a subpoena from congress and with success. we just saw don mcgahn take over two years to before he would appear before congress when he decided to fight a congressional subpoena. i'm actually, fred, very surprised congress isn't busy working on that problem because it's a problem that affects both parties and they just don't seem to be able to get their act together to be able to really enforce oversight because of the weakness of their subpoena power. >> and in continuing to make comparisons and contrasts in the days of nixon, republicans, you know, did not embrace what that president had done and sought to reveal it, end it. do you see any potential for a similar course of action involving republicans of today now that the cat is so to speak out of the bag? >> there's a little myth around how much republicans actuall

this investigation started before bill barr when jeff sessions was a.g., he was recused.oj. however, one of the things that prosecutors did here was get a gag order. they went to a judge and said this is very seaccretive and we need to tell apple you can't tell eric swalwell or adam schiff we are looking for their phone records. then that gag order lasted a year, another year, and eventually bill barr said, yes, we need to reup that gag order and we need to keep it in place and the reporting is that even once the investigative trail had gone cold, bill barr said keep digging and if he didn't have a base for that that is an abusive power. >> these things don't happen in a vacuum and not only would that gag order have necessitated some level of judicial approval, but so, too, the initial subpoenas. so there had to be some kind of a showing which led to all of this. >> there should have been. one thing that is really important to understand. prosecutors have enormous power over subpoenas. i used to keep a stack of subpoenas on my desk and give them out to fbi agents. you don

jeff sessions saying the same. what do you make of that?in the broadest sense, pam, it is hard to believe, because of the rules and policies i mentioned. in this specific case, contradicted by other reporting we heard. "new york times" reported several individuals indicated that former deputy attorney general rosenstein was briefed on these matters twice a week. we heard william barr when he came into the justice department reviewed these cases, contradicted recommendation of the prosecutors, and brought in his own handpicked prosecutor from new jersey. those acts alone are simply inconsistent with statements, now that nobody was told anything. >> this happened to be a situation, again we don't know, which is a problem, where doj was investigating a staffer on a congressional committee and as part of the investigation swept up and snared sitting members of congress, does that raise new questions about how leak investigations should be handled, whether the justice department should ease up on leak investigations? >> leak investigations are a

they'll likely not get testimony from jeff sessions, rod rosenstein, bill barr.is up. congress has a job to do. now it's trickier in the senate because senate rules say you need bipartisan support for a subpoena. you'd need a republican to go along with this. i will note senator ben sasse is part of the senate judiciary committee. if he flips and joins with senate democrats, they can get it done. i'm looking at the house. they don't need any republican support. jerry nadler was ineffective in following up on the nadler report. nadler has to play hard ball. serve subpoenas and if barr or sessions defy them, he needs to go to court immediately. >> let me switch gears and ask you, there's a growing momentum among some democrats who would like to see justice stephen breyer retire at the end of this term in a few weeks. he's 82 years old and they want to ensure, given what mitch mcconnell said in the last 24 hours about not -- the senate not moving if they retake the senate to have a confirmation hearing for biden's next pick. they want to ensure against that. what ar

an investigation to understand, not only was this bill barr, jeff sessions and that whitaker? whoever was charged at the time. but rank and file prosecutors went along with this. and under what environment did they not think it was okay to resist having the communication records of a coequal branch of government surveilled? i'm not above the law, adam schiff is not above the law. but to me, knowing certainly i never leaked classified information, and there is no reason to believe that i would have, to do this it seems punitive. but it seems as a part of a pattern of donald trump abusing the department of justice to go after his enemies. >> there appears there's going to be an inspector general report. but i want to review the response that senator -- of hawaii said. i headed the tape to tell the other chamber how to conduct its business, but since we are in a 50/50 senate can issue subpoenas on republicans. i respectfully asked the house to not call for investigations of the executive branch, but rather do it themselves. what do you think of that? >> i like senator schatz, i d

the line is not did bill barr commit crimes, did jeff sessions did the president? the line is shut this have been done? was this wrong? was this wrong for them to do? i don't see how the -- how merrick garland could sit atop that bureaucracy without comment on what it did. >> and department policy is there for a reason, right? the policy about for example what you do with reporters is black letter policy. you could read the memos on that from the previous era of the justice department and those policies aren't rescinded. if senior members of the justice department and perhaps even career attorneys violate those policies and there is no consequence of, it then that policy no longer exists in real life because there's no consequences for breaking it. you can't do that. the department has office of legal counsel almost a treat as precedent. the black letter policy they treat as the rules. and when those things are broken, you can't just say we aren't going to do it that way anymore. we are going to go back to following the rules. it's not a self repairing machine. i'v

in fact, he fired jeff session because jeff sessions said, you know, i don't work for you. i work for the american people. >> maggie, there are so many different angles to this and it's deeply serious but there is a present and future political angle here, as well. we're talking about the person who facto leader of the republican party in the future but he's more or less the current front runner for the republican nomination for president, too. i'm wondering how you think this will play into republican politics? are they going to all line up behind him at this point? >> i think the answer is yes, john. i think what we have seen is the parties are so incredibly polarized that essentially, much more so with republicans at the moment what happens is that when the former president says something or it's perceived that in the mind of his supporters that the media somehow is against him, they then stick with his position and in this case, the position of the trump administration so i don't think you're going to hear a lot of out cry from republicans. there might be a little here

news comes as democrats on capitol hill are pushing for former attorneys general bill barr and jeff sessionse department seized data records of top democrats. barr and sessions are denying knowledge of these secret subpoenas. >> for the attorneys general, barr and sessions, at least two, to say they didn't know anything about it is beyond belief. so we will have to have them come under oath to testify about that. >> today i'm demanding that the senate republican party join democrats to subpoena both barr and sessions as well as john demmers, the assistant attorney general. they must testify, sessions and barr must testify under oath. >> so the justice department's inspector general has already announced an investigation into a hunt for leaks by trump's doj that demanded apple to hand over meta data from the accounts of congressman eric swalwell and adam schiff as well as their aides and family members. joining me is one of the members of the intel committee, democratic congressman peter welch of vermont. he's also part of the oversight and reform committee. congressman, thanks for joining us

will investigate and democrats are calling on barr and trump's other former attorney general, jeff sessions testify before congress. but really none of us should be surprised. remember, he literally called for this to happen. i call this receipts. roll the tape. >> they ought to investigate adam schiff for leaking that information. he should not be leaking information out of intelligence. they ought to investigate adam schiff. >> of course, congressman adam schiff is one of the democrats whose records were subpoenaed by trump's doj, of course. the enormity of the scandal could not be any clearer. donald trump used the office of the presidency to exact political retribution against his perceived enemies. in a word, it's nixonian. let's begin tonight with cynthia, an msnbc legal analyst and former federal prosecutor. thank you so much for taking the time out tonight. >> good evening. >> so what exactly was the department of justice doing here? what kind of information were they going after? and is spying the right word for what they were doing? >> well, they were going after what's called met

new reporting shows former attorney generals jeff sessions and bill barr are denying knowledge of those those reports saying if they don't know anything, who does? >> how could it be that there could be an investigation of members in the other branch of investigation and the press too, and the attorneys general did not know? so who are these people? and are they still in the justice department? >> joining me now, done callaway, democratic strategist and founder of the national voter protection action fund. susan del percio, republican strategist and msnbc political analyst. and david jolly, former congressman from florida and an msnbc political contributor. my sunday team. hi, kids, how are you? so susan, nancy pelosi there asking the big question. is it possible for two highest level members of trump's doj to not have knowledge about this, and if they don't, then who did? >> it seems extremely unlikely. i can't come up with a scenario where it would be the case. obviously i think you're going to see a lot of pushing off, no, he knew, no, he knew, and that may happen. the other thing th

opponents and as cnn's manu raju now reports, there are now growing calls for congress to bring in jeff sessions and bill barr to answer questions. >> reporter: former president donald trump's justice department under intense jewett any after new reflations suggested he deployed the department's awesome power to investigate enemies. deputy attorney general lisa monaco asking the inspector general to begin an investigation after news broke that records were sought on eric swalwell and adam schiff. >> it was extremely broad, nothing to do with the intelligence hearts in are at least being reported on. it just shows what a broad fishing expedition it was and so many norms were broken in connection with this. >> reporter: sources tell cnn the effort began in february 2018 when attorney general jeff sessions ran the department. the subpoenas were related to leaks of classified information regarding contacts between russians and trump associates. more than 100 accounts were affected casting a wide net that even swept up at least one minor. that included a gag order that was renewed three times before

the information provided told the senate democrats called on former attorney general's jeff sessions and william bar to testify before congress. as go to report a gabriel and his own de joy of life. washington dc. gabriel, so explained to us what is happening here. why is the justice department deciding to investigate itself? well, because more information has come to light, while we 1st turn it around 2018, that the white house allegedly ordered the justice department to look into records of journalists, trying to figure out what journalists were getting where they were getting information from. and then it came to light the perhaps the justice department was also ordered to then essentially try to get information on to congress. people that were very critical of donald trump, adam schiff, and eric's saw, well, these were to congress. people are to cause people that were investigating trunk back then around 2018 as part of the house judiciary committee and destination that was going into the potential impeachment. and essentially the allegations are, is a trumpet. the white house wa

it's not surprising, that jeff sessions might not have known. he recused himself from the russia probe, when this apparently was undertaken in 2017. it is not plausible, though, that some other political appointee, perhaps rod rosenstein, did not know this. career people would not take these steps without consulting higher-ups. >> i mean, i was a career prosecutor. i can't imagine this was taken without that. and what -- what a statement for us to even be questioning the credibility of an attorney general. i mean, that's just so telling right now. but, you know, john, i want to turn to president biden's overseas trip. he is undoubtedly having to face a lot of the same discussion points that we're talking about here, while he is abroad. and he's meeting with vladimir putin, next week. here's what putin told nbc about president biden. >> you once described president trump as a bright person, talented. how would you describe president biden? >> translator: even now, i believe that former-u.s. president, mr. trump, is an extraordinary individual. ta

these subpoenas, according to the timeline, would have gone out when jeff sessions was the attorney general and i spoke with mary mccord, who is a career justice department official who is the acting head of the national security division in the early part of the trump administration and she was a little bit careful in what she said. let me just read you what she said to me. she said attorney general sessions was very interested in pursuing leak investigations early in the new administration. and she added that under department practice, any investigation into an elected official would have been considered a sensitive matter that would have required high-level approval. ultrasensitive, aman, because we're talking about two members of the intelligence community which is entrusted with the nation's most closely guarded secrets. briefed on covert action and they are by definition trusted by the executive branch. you would think there would need to be a really significant piece of information to prompt this kind of investigation. >> all right, ken delaney and pete williams starting off this hou

leak investigations with trump. >> pierre, i know some democrats are calling for bill barr and jeff sessions and others to testify, even warning subpoenas could be issued. democrats on the senate judiciary committee would need at least one republican to make that happen, and we did hear from one republican today? >> reporter: republican senator charles grassley did weigh in saying he supports the investigation, but noted any talk of subpoenas is premature. david? >> pierre, thank you. >>> we have news from the current attorney general, merrick garland, revealing new action to protect voter rights in this country, calling it the central pillar of american democracy, committing the justice department to examining current laws at the federal and state levels to lack for discrimination against black voters, he said, and other voters of color. the attorney general vowing to double the civil rights division staff within 30 days. >>> now the remarkable honor, the pulitzer prize board today awarding a special citation to darnella frazier, the teenager who recorded the minneapolis police and george f

but, following the departure of jeff sessions, and the installation of william barr, trump's new attorney general, mr. barr revived languishing leak investigations once he became attorney general, according to three people with knowledge of his work. barr moved a trusted prosecutor from new jersey, who has little relevant experience to the main justice department in washington to work on the congressman schiff related case and half dozen others. the ceo trump administration's effort to halt leakers led to the extraordinary step of spinning communications data from members of congress. that's unheard of move outside of corruption investigations. justice department leak investigations are fairly routine. current and former congressional officials familiar with this inquiry said they could not recall any instance in which the records of lawmakers had been seized as part of one. n seized a part omoreover, just as it did n investigating his organizations the justice department under president trump secured a gag order on apple which expired this year. lawmakers did not know they were being inv

we've also reached out to jeff sessions and bill barr but have not heard back. we do know to take such aggressive action, seizing records of sitting members of congress and their families is an extraordinary step when they are conducting an investigation that is potentially damaging to the president. democrats on the house intelligence committee certainly want answers and right knew we know that some members are being briefed on the latest and later on in the show we'll speak with mcquigley, a mess of the house intelligence committee after he's been briefed. but we kick off with our team the nbc reporters. pete williams, capitol hill correspondent leigh ann caldwell and jake ward who is covering the tech angle will join us in a just a moment. pete, what do you know about what happened here and can you help us understand how significant this is and whether anything like it has ever happened before to our knowledge? >> well our understanding is as you laid out, that in 2018, the justice department sent a subpoena to apple looking for data on we think about 12 peop

you had jeff sessions saying he was going prosecute leakers.t approved and certain things were green lit, and then the prosecutors ran with it. that's the story we're getting from people close to jeff session, rod rosenstein and bill barr, all of whom say they never approved a subpoena for the records of the chairman of the house and intelligence committee. it appears that one democratic staffer was the focus of this investigation, but we now have seen subpoenas that went to apple and microsoft looking for email addresses and phone records associated with more than 100 different email addresses and phone numbers, including adam schiff and eric swalwell, two members of congress. so that needs to be explained. i think your question is a good one, but one theory is some prosecutors thought they had a green light to do things and they went ahead with it. >> i have a question for you. it's my understanding that apple that notified these individuals. it wasn't the department of justice. can you speak to that? and is that unusual? >> oh, yes. this who

both, jeff sessions, the first one. and bill barr, the second one.id, not it. that wasn't me. i can't recall doing anything like that. the subpoenas for members of congress, we now know, were first issued in 2017. the first year trump was in office. we know the justice department kept renewing the gag orders to keep them secret. year after year, after that. 2018, 2019, 2020. they did it. this is what the trump-justice department did. but both trump attorneys general, who were there at the time, are like i know nothing. i saw nothing. i don't remember anything. i can't recall. don't recall. can't remember anything like that. i remember a lot but not that. i mean, trump-administration officials involved in the worst abuses of that administration are not known for, like, their shyness about what they did. but when it's this bad, even jeff sessions and bill barr ares like, yeah, wow, i -- sure that wasn't me. except, maybe, i'm not sure of anything. did i mention i fell and hit my head? but if neither trump attorney general knew that the trump-justice de

jeff sessions and william barr denied knowing about the subpoenas. the former d.o.j., acting assistant attorney general says that would be unusual. >> i would say this is something that would have had to go all the way up to the highest levels of the department for approval. >> reporter: meanwhile the trump appointee who led the national security division through the end of the last administration has decided to leave the department of justice. this decision we are told was made before the secret subpoenas were made public. don't settle for products that give you a sort of white smile. try new crest whitening emulsions for 100% whiter teeth. its highly active peroxide droplets swipe on in seconds. better. faster. 100% whiter teeth. crestwhitesmile.com (jonathan) last year alone, over half a million americans age 50 to 85 called for information about the 995 plan. hi, i'm jonathan lawson, a manager here at colonial penn life insurance company. if you're like me, we have all experienced a lot of change and uncertainty in our lifetimes. security you can

actions occurred when justice department was led by two former attorneys joernl, bill barr and jeff sessionsuires immediate action. so today, i'm demanding that the senate republican party join democrats to subpoena both barr and sessions as well as john demers, the assistant attorney general. they must testify, sessions and barr must testify under oath as part of a formal congressional investigation. this was nothing less than a gross abuse of power, an assault on the separation of powers. i don't think we've ever had a record of this happening in the past. >> surprise, surprise. so far, the vast majority of elected republicans have stayed silent. joining our conversation, katie venner is here and matt miller and claire mccaskill is still with us. all three msnbc contributors. katie benner, this is knowable. so, a subpoena has to be signed off by someone, you're going to help us understand who and then taken to a judge and once a judge approves it, it comes back and that someone then puts in place the sweep of electronic records. who are the people who would have been involved in applying f

in 2018, this is before he took over the doj, and jeff sessions is claiming he was not aware and so is rod rosenstein. you have received any information, congressman, from doj or apple or any other information from lawmakers like yourself was handed over to doj? anything to help piece this together? >> i have not. that's why we want the inspector general to shoo this investigation. keep in mind barr hired cronies from outside the justice department to be a separate branch in effect that was dedicated to doing the political missions of donald trump. that's how serious barr got about containing it. their loyally was not to the constitution. their loyalty was to president biden a-- president trump and hs srepb denia. >> none of the doj leadership knew about this. even if they went to appearing and did not know who the numbers belonged to, and it raises questions either way. i wonder if you could talk to barr and sessions if they do testify, what questions would you ask them? >> what did they do and how did the subpoenas get issued? it's very straightforward. a subpoena does not issue itse

at the same time, though, former attorneys general jeff sessions and bill barr both distancing themselves this. you mentioned, this is true, democrats here on the hill are going to want to hear from those two men about what went on with these subpoenas and how this came to be, but again, those two men distancing themselves from that and really, alex, more broadly, revelations like these are part of a larger trend that we've already seen and probably will continue to see as we get further out from the trump administration. more people interested not just in undoing the policy of this administration but really going in behind the scenes and unwinding what went on during contentious, controversial moments throughout those four years. >> yeah, of which there were very many. thank you very much, ali vitali. back with me again, connecticut congressman jim himes. congressman, look, you have never been one to mince words. you're on the intel committee. have you been contacted about any sort of nefarious behavior with anyone, with you, your staff, family members such as we know happened with repre

the new york times" revealing in 2017 and 2018 the department of justice under the leadership of jeff sessions took the seemingly unprecedented step and successfully subpoenaed apple for data from the accounts of at least two democratic members of the house intelligence committee. then ranking member adam schiff, on the left, and representative eric swalwell on the right. in addition to aides and family members, one of whom was a minor. that was all part of trump's obsession with, quote, leakers and the administration's manic mission to find the sources behind reports in america's free press about contacts between donald trump's associates and russia, an important matter that the press was and should have been pursuing. the trump's department of justice even successfully secured a gag order on apple. the gag order expired last year or this year. that's why we know about this. in recent weeks the department of justice has disclosed other trump-era subpoenas for records from reporters at news organizations including "the washington post" and "the new york times". "the times" also reports that th

according to "the new york times," the justice department first under jeff sessions, subpoenaed apple in 2017 and early 2018 for the data of at least a dozen people tied to the house intelligence committee, including the top democrat, adam schiff. democratic congressman eric swalwell also confirms to nbc news his records were seized. "the times" reports the records of aides and family members of those connected to the committee also were collected, including those of a minor. no evidence was ever found tying the committee to the leaks. but that did not stop trump's next attorney general, william barr, from reviving the investigation a year later. "the times" citing three sources reports barr recruited about a half a dozen investigators to work on that case. after years of nothing to show for that investigation, "the times" reports some inspect department began to see it as politically motivated. you think? barr declined to comment as to the biden justice department, congressman adam schiff now is calling on the agency's inspector general to investigate. >> that is, i think, a terrible

unfortunately what we saw is that donald trump, bill barr and jeff sessions weaponized doj.hey weaponized it against their political opponents, and that's very dangerous. >> we do know the facts that donald trump publicly and privately had pushed doj to investigate his political rivals. we know that's happened, regardless of why they opened up these investigations. we do have that information. certainty there were some unprecedented moves from doj, and many more questions lingering tonight. congressman, thank you so much for coming on. >> thank you so much, pamela. >>> and coming up, joining me to discuss is former u.s. attorney and cnn legal analyst preet bharara. what was your reaction? >> on certain grounds, i'm on the same page with the congressman. it happened very quickly. that tells you something about the seriousness with which people are taking the questions that have arisen. sometimes inspector general investigations don't commence for some time until there's a gathering of more evidence, but that will take months and months, potentially. those are very rigorous ti

now a source familiar tells cnn that former attorney, jeff sessions, who was leading the justice departmentrod rosenstein, were unaware of the request for don mcgahn's records. something about that does not add up, and how would it be possible the two top officials did not know the department was making such an extraordinary request. a few weeks before the request was made, the president pressured don mcgahn to fire mue mueller, and mcgahn resisted and that was at the core of the investigation into former president trump. former special security spoke to jim acosta about all of this on sunday. here's his take. >> i am prepared to believe the worst. i think we are -- >> what does that mean, the worst? >> that trump would attempt to do things for political purposes and subvert the court of justice. >> now many are calling to hear from attorney general, jeff sessions and rod rosenstein and even want to hear from former attorney general bill barr and the head of the national security decision, john demers. they would like for them to come and testify voluntarily and if they refuse they could is

not only jeff sessions was doing the book i wanted to do but almost certainly better and it turns outhas. we did get to have a nice lunch out of it. it was a final product here. mercury rising is a wonderful book i read it last year. i urge everybody to go get it and i'm going to read the quote from doug brinkley historian [inaudible] a time that brings the story alive again with both nostalgia and a riveting fast-paced narrative it isn't our first conversation about john glenn. i guess it's our first public conversation and i am relieved and excited and disappointed i didn't get to write the book. thank you for joining me and the world affairs council for inviting us to have the conversation tonight. >> as everybody knows, he's the author of a number of other remarkable books on lbj and their fraught relationship. he wrote a fantastic book during the fdr era and this book tonight is fascinating because it comes at a time that it feels like heroes that are missing from our public sphere. it goes to the first point you made, peter, we all know john glenn is a hero, but i wanted to go a

now lawmakers want to hear directly from barr and his predecessor jeff sessions. >> reporter: democrats former barr and session to testify on seized records. the justice department's inspector general is initiating its own review what amounted to a roundup of noncontent records from at least two of former president trump's most spoken adversaries and adam schiff and eric -- >> can't go into who received these subpoenas. i can't say it was extraordinarily broad. people have nothing to do with intelligence matters that at least being reported on. it shows what a broad fishing expedition it was. >> reporter: schiff' personal office staff were caught up in the collection. "the new york times" reported the investigation was part of a leak hunt for whomever divulged information about contacts between trump associates and russia at the height of the russia probe. a source tells cnn officials thought the investigation with lend without charges but when barr took over at the justice department he continued to push leak probes and bringing in a prosecutor from new jersey. >> i hope trump supporte

senate majority leader chuck schumer wants former attorneys general jeff sessions and william barr to testify on the judiciary committee. i'm joined by correspondent ken delaney. ten, what do we know about this latest reporting from the new york times. the doj also obtaining phone records, don mcgahn. >> alicia, nbc news has not much that reporting but it's quite interesting and if true it shows that obviously wasn't just democratic members of congress who came under this doj dragnet where we're getting secret gag orders and subpoenas to get the phone records of high government officials. it's really unclear what was going on with mcgahn. obviously, around the time to subpoena would've gone out, donald trump was pressing him to fire robert mueller and he was resisting and so that was going on. there's also an issue with the investigation into trump campaign -- but the larger and more controversial issue has to do with the lawmakers who are the subject of this subpoena which is such a rare and unprecedented thing to happen and these members of the intelligence committee are trusted wit

. >> reporter: sources tell cnn the effort began in 2018, when attorney general jeff sessions ran the than 100 accounts were affected casting a wide net that swept up one minor that included a gag order which was renewed three times before expiring this year. it wasn't until may that apple notified customers that their records have been seized. in a private phone call sources tell cnn that committee members were animated behind getting behind the effort. they're now asking apple to provide them with more detail as to whether additional members were targeted. a source saying sessions was not involved in the subpoenas, even though it began under his tenure. and the effort continued untrump attorney general bill barr who had this explain with then senator kamala harris in 20 neeb. >> can you repeat that question? >> i will repeat it. has the president or anyone at the white house ever asked or suggested that you open an investigation of anyone, yes or no, please, sir. >> um, the president or anybody else? >> seems you'd remember something likend be able to tell us. >> yeah, but i'm tryin

. >>> in just the last half hour chuck schumer is calling on bill bar and jeff sessions to testify before the senate judiciary committee with a bombshell report that trump pushed for subpoenas to apple for subpoenas about aides and their families. both vocal trump critics accusing of russian interference. they seized their data as part of a leak investigation. they have reached out to sessions and barr without response. adam schiff is speaking out. >> it is extraordinary, untres dented for the department to see records like this. it is a shocking abuse of power. >> joining me now is leigh ann caldwell. you have some new reporting just in about what the democrats know was taken or looked at and what they don't. can you explain? >> they don't know a lot. that's part of the tension rising up right now. they don't know what sort of subpoena -- what sort of information was subpoenaed beyond the fact it is meta data which is a broad category. they can't get this information from the department of justice. they say they have asked department of justice many questions since they found out about t