the fbi and the justice department civil rights division are investigating. t of homeland security is continuing to work with some of these centers on training for situations like this. luckily we have not seen anymore threats since that fifth wave we saw on monday. all of these have turned out to be hoaxes. i can tell you, talking to one of the directors, when they get one of these waves of threats, one center gets a call and they all communicate with each other. this one director told me he goes into work expecting possibly they're next, they're going to get a threat. every time the phone rings, they have anxiety. >> the fact there have been five waves speaks volumes. >> you can see why it's complicated. >> brynn gingras, thanks so much. >>> attorney general jeff sessions this morning facing mounting calls for him to recuse himself from investigating alleged ties between russia and the trump campaign. it's not just the democrats this morning laying on the heat. it is republicans as well. coming up next, democratic senator patrick leahy will join us. he's amo

the justice department has been my profession home for almost three decades. i served under five presidents and under nine attorney generals. i want to assure you senators, based on my personal experience, our department is filled with professionals, devoted public servants who conduct independent investigations 365 day as year. i was fortunate to join them in 1990 and had the privilege of working directly with the attorney general at the time. i served in other positions around the justice department and in 2005 i expected to serve for four years. i am so grateful to president obama to demonstrating his confidence and allowing me to serve for eight years in his administration with the support of our home state, senior senators, cardin, mccull ski and scar bane. political affiliation is irrelevant to my work. our goals of protecting crime and national security require us to work are all partners, be vigilant and proactive. we also need to be role models because contacts with the police create memories for citizens. as deputy attorney general i will draw on my p

the justice department has been my professional home for almost three decades. i've served under five presidents and under nine attorneys general. i want to assure you, senators, based on my personal experience that our department is filled with exemplary professionals, devoted public servants who conduct independent investigations 365 days a year. i was fortunate to join them in 1990 and during the clinton administration i had the privilege of working directly for the deputy attorney general at that time, phillip hyman. i sevened in several other positions around the justice department and then in 2005 when i became u.s. attorney, i expected to serve for four years under president bush. and i am so grateful to president obama for demonstrating his confidence in me and allowing me to serve for eight years in his administration with the support of our home state senior senators cardin, mikulski, and sarbanes. political affiliation is irrelevant to my work. our goals of preventing crime and protecting national security require us to work cooperatively with all part

the department of justice has in the past made eloquent and forcement arguments in support of an intente before the judge revisiting this issue on tuesday when the day before we got notice from the department of justice that it sought to withdraw its claim. now this is an enormous about-face. it is a 180-degree turn in the prosecution of an incredibly important and well-supported claim of intentional racial discrimination in our election process. that can't possibly bode well for this justice department's commitment to equality in the election processes, and in protecting the rights of minority voters for the next several years. so we are extremely concerned and the meeting yesterday was not meant to negotiate. it was meant to give notice that civil rights groups will be vigilant. we will stay on the scene. we will continue to prosecute the claims with or without the department of justice, but we will not let the department of justice go quietly into the night and simply abandon its charge to ensure the fair and impartial administration of justice for all americans. >> and marc morial,

this is what the justice department regulations require. they say that a special counsel should be appointed when a standard investigation, quote, these are the justice department's words, when a standard investigation would, quote, present a conflict of interest for the department or other extraordinary circumstances and it would be in the public interest to appoint an outside special counsel. the regulations also require that a special counsel be a lawyer with a reputation for integrity and impartial decision making. there cannot even be the shred of a connection between the attorney general, mr. sessions, and this department of justice investigation into the events of 2016. second, if the justice department drags its feet and refuses to appoint a special prosecutor or select someone with insufficient independence, there is another route. we will then urge senator mcconnell and speaker ryan to work with democrats to create a new and improved version of the independent counsel law which would give a three-judge panel the authority to appoi

it exists is completely inappropriate and i would hope that people at the department of justice -- let me put it this way. the career people i worked with when i was at the department of justice would strongly push back on that type of behavior. i think the political people i worked with at the department of justice felt very strongly about the independence of doj and the separation between doj and the white house and would have pushed back and i hope the people running the justice department now, jeff sessions and the other people that came in with president trump, will feel the same way. of course, sessions would be recused in this instance and, presumably, would have nothing to do with deciding whether to turn that information over to the white house or not. >> jeremy and/or howard? >> a federal judge would have to order a wiretap of anybody suspected of being a foreign agent inside the united states. let's get one thing straight which is one of the aspects of president trump's tweet over the weekend was demonstrably false. it would have to be done with the say-so and approval of a

immigration and customs enforcement is heavily dependent on private prisons, more so than the justice department. for the two thirds of people are held in facilities run by private prison companies. this is something that under the obama administration, the department of homeland security's advisory council looked at, and actually there was a pretty contentious vote. in the end, the advisory council in december advised the department to begin a measured but deliberate phaseout of its reliance on private prisons, much in the same way as the justice department. of course that no longer applies to this administration. host: is someone undocumented is picked up by ice and put in one of these private prison corporations, what kind of setting to they encounter? guest: it is essentially indistinguishable from a prison or jail. all of the immigration system for thea model where company, it does not really matter for them who is occupying their prison beds. a could be somebody serving sentence or somebody there waiting for their immigration case to be adjudicated, but either way, they are staffed by the

now the fbi itself asking the justice department, the fbi asking the justice department to refute the two sources. the claim implying the bureau may have broken the law by obeying the president obama order. no comment so far from the justice department. >>> president trump asking congress to investigate the baseless wire tapping claim. and house chairman devin nunes will look into the party inmatt part of the russian campaign accusatio accusations. and we have james clapper telling nbc it is not happened. >> no such wire tap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time or candidate or against his campaign. >> if the fbi, had advice of court order, would that be information you would know? >> yes. >> you would be told? >> i would know that. yes. something like this, absolutely. >> more now from athena jones covering the president in florida. >> reporter: good morning, christine and dave. the president spent the weekend in florida. the fourth trip to the mar-a-lago. >> that's what we call a hiccup in television production. >> john oliver did it. >> i want to go to greg valli

concerning this investigations and sort of what was asked of them by the department of justicearding these wiretappings. so that's happening tomorrow. this letter comes on the heels of our reporting tonight, the story first reported by "the new york times" that the fbi had asked the department of just toys refute the allegations made by donald trump in this tweet storm yesterday morning that the obama administration that the president trump was wiretapping his phones, listening to his conversations, and today we learn that the fbi yesterday in a stunning move asked the department of just toys refute those claims and for political reasons it seems the fbi felt it was better for the department of justice to handle this. they would be able to talk to the white house about this, and i think certainly the fbi director has wanted to keep himself removed from this and limiting his communications with the white house about any sort of investigation. it's just a policy that he has held to, and he firmly believes in, and also part of t the fbi just does not comment on investigations. the

little did i know that just nine months later i'd be following him to the justice department when mark was kind enough to let me leave the law firm after only a few months there to go work on the confirmations of then judge and now chief justice john roberts, then judge and now justice sam alito. and white house counsel harriet iers. so it was a really unique opportunity to see judge gorsuch at the time in his role in the associate times. i didn't work directly for him. the component i worked for didn't report to him. it was the office of legal policy run by rachel brand who is now a professor and has been nominated to be the associate attorney general, the number three at the justice department. but i got to know judge gorsuch in a different capacity. as practicing lawyer in the federal government. that was really interesting. i saw him manage an entire set of divisions, the entire civil litigating arm of the justice department from the associate's office. he had a very practical view of this. entire civil litigating arm of the justice department from the associate's office. he had a

they have been held for two important positions in the department of justice. deputy attorney general and associate attorney general. deputy attorney general, second in command at the department overseas the day-to-day operations. the associate attorney general overseas the department's civil litigation departments. it's critical that we fill these two important positions so that the department can operate at full capacity. and we couldn't have two better nominees for these positions. mr. rosen stein and ms. brand share a lot of common. they both are dedicated civil servants. they both have been confirmed by senate before. and ms. brand's case, twice. and they both served in confirmed positions during president obama's administration. >> they are both talented and fair-minded lawyers. dedicated to the full and even-handed enforcement of our laws and they will serve the department with diszinks. mr. rosen stein served the department for more than three decades. president bush appointed him as attorney general for maryland. he served that position throughout presi

he is saying that department of justice is lying. as an independent entity. and if he comes out and says this is to happen. and the department of justice says it doesn't happen then i think that says volumes about what his position is on this thing with regard to mrs. clinton. as a close case. we are not going to prosecute her. all of this is open. you're sane and saying that they can't directly come out. what i'm saying is the denial is rightly come. in the ability. in washington right now. it's kind of silly. it's so easy to find out. and there is no gray area. they classed with the white house. >> i think what he is saying is it's a misunderstanding. i think some information has gotten to the white house staff and they're all a twitter about it concerned that they were being monitored in the previous president when it comes on to. you'll find in on the way they think it occurred. i've have meetings with him since i left the fbi. he is a man of integrity and he's gonna stand can stand up and do what's right. we will will see how this plays out monday morning

experts from the department of homeland security, the department of justice, and the state departmentd an hour-long call with the media on this topic this morning. our collective teams will continue throughout the day to follow up with the congress, the media, and stakeholders to answer your questions. i will now turn it to the attorney general for his comments. >> thank you, mr. secretary, and good morning to all of you. one of the justice department's top priorities is to protect the united states from threats to our national security. therefore i want to discuss two points. first, the national security basis of this order, and second, the department of justice's role in defending the lawful orders of the president of the united states. first, as president trump noted in his address to congress, the majority of people convicted in our courts for terrorism related offenses since 9/11 came here from iran. we also know many people seeking to support or commit terroristic acts willenter through our refugee program. today people who came here as refugees according to the fbi are under an

doing our best to stay warm, pete williams conferrivering th justice department. on set, puffy jacket day, "washington post" reporter who a closely firing that wiretap investigation and new york city politics reporter and msnbc contributor jeremy peters. kellyanne conway was on the "today" show this morning. here's what she said when savannah asked her about this wiretapping claim. >> this is information he had, he tweeted about it, he brought it up so he has the power to cl clarify on it. why not? >> i can't comment on his private conversations he's having with the justice department. >> so what are we hearing from the justice department. >> first of all, i want to commend you on your talent for understatement saying that today is chilly. >> yeah, i have a body warmers underneath this coat, pete. it just a whole thing. >> okay. secondly all the justice department will say is that they are studying this letter, a request from the chairman and ranking members of. house intelligence committee. the letter asks for information about what the government knows about the

what if the justice department dun' respond?in the obama white house there was a cardinal rule the white house did not interfere with the matters of department of justice. this administration to date seems to have taken a different approach with senior white house officials including the white house counsel seeming to get involved in doj matters. i certainly hope that this administration respects that independence that is so important on the part of the department of justice to follow the truth wherever it leads. >> what do you see happening today? >> i wouldn't want to wager on this. we've seen this take lots of twists and turns and i never expected we'd be in this situation to begin with but i certainly hope that this matter is behind us soon, the president retracts his comments and i would certainly hope issues an auto poll gee to president obama. >> we were talking about this with the panel a short time ago. say there is no evidence. does it have an impact, a, with the american people, or did they just sort of brush itff as

justice department hands over documents to congressional investigations. the president increasingly alone when top republicans say there is no evidence and one calling him to apologize to president obama. how long will the president stand by his claim? >>> utterliy ridiculous. in a rare statement the british government says that allegations that were reputed by white house officials. were white house forced to apologize? >>> 16 minutes, a fence jumper hiding from the secret service on the grounds of the executive mansion for more than a quarter of an hour before being caught. i'll talk to the lawmakers who launched an investigation. congressman jason chaffetz. >>> with less than a week before the house votes on the measure, more than 2 dozen republican representatives still aren't backing the bill. will last minute changes to it get them on board. >>> we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in the "the situation room." >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. >>> the breaking news tonight. new turm

. >> the justice department slamming the order. and strongly disagrees with the federal district court ruling which is flawed and reasoning and scope. senior white house correspondent jeff zeleny has the latest. >> reporter: christine and dave, the white house is crafting the legal strategy in the wake of another federal judge putting a restraining order on the travel ban. president trump minced no words wednesday night. he went after that judge. he expressed regret about making changes of the first ban to the second ban. he called it a watering down. >> a judge has just blocked our executive order on travel and refugees coming into our country from certain countries. the order he blocked was a watered down version of the first order. that was also blocked by another judge. and should have never been blocked to start with. >> reporter: at the rally which was paid for and organized by his re-election campaign, not the white house, especially went after the travel ban ruling and after the health care. almost trying to create the magi

the director of the fbi would know. >> the director of the fbi, laura jarrett to you as our justice departmentcomey could come out as he did during the campaign, he could talk about this and shoot it down himself. instead he's not. he's asking the department of justice to do that. attorney general jeff sessions has recused himself from any investigation to do with russia which this would likely fall under. then what does the justice department do? who would come out and comment on this if they're going to? >> the timing here is pretty interesting. tomorrow the judiciary committee will hold a hearing for rod rodstein to be the deputy attorney general. this will be far more entering because fireworks will be asking questions about how mr. rodstein plans to handle this as the deputy attorney general. he will be the um in ber two and the go-to when sessions recuses. >> of course, in the meantime is dana ben they and obama appointee. kevin maddon, it's interesting. one of the reports you read over the weekend is president trump wasn't thrilled with the defense he was getting from republican officia

the department of justice will require the jurisdictions applying for department of justice grants to certify compliance with 1373 as a condition of receiving those awards. this policy is entirely consistent with the department of justice is office of justice that was issued just last summer under the previous administration. this guidance requires state and local jurisdictions to comply and certify compliance with section 1373 in order to be eligible for grants. it also made clear that violations could result in withholding grants, termination of grants, and disbarment for eligibility of future grants. the department of justice will also take all lawful steps to clawback any funds awarded to jurisdictions that willfully violate 1373. in the current fiscal year, the department of justice is office of justice programs and community oriented policing services anticipates awarding more than $4.1 billion in grants. i strongly urge our nation , states and cities to consider carefully the harm they are doing to their citizens by refusing to enforce our immigration laws and to rethink these

that over the weekend some time, we don't know exactly when, but the fbi reached out to the department of justice two senior officials and asked the department of justice refute these stories and the allegations made by donald trump that there was any u sort of wiretapping of his phone during the campaign by the obama administration. the fbi is and its director comey is very mindful of how his organization and fbi is being perceived through all of this. the idea that somehow the fbi working with the obama administration would illegally wiretap his phone concerned him. so over the weekend he went ahead and we don't know if it was him specifically or someone else at the fbi called the department of justice and told them we need to do something about this. we need to refute this. we don't know who in the department of justice, the fbi spoke to. remember sessions, the tendatto general, had to recuse himself from this investigation because of his meeting with the russian ambassador. so we don't know who he spoke to. we don't really know a lot details about the conversation. but keep in mind, this is a

brand: i have a great deal of respect for the lawyers in the department of justice. i think discrimination on the is of religion in hiring illegal anywhere. with respect to the impact of partisanship on hiring, we have the civil sr. viss protection laws, which govern the department of -- civil service protection laws, which govern the department of justice. everyone who is in a hiring capacity understand what the rules are. i think train something a big part of that. i believe every employee of d.o.j. is supposed to be trained in a whole variety of laws that govern their conduct, including the civil service protection laws. senator whitehouse: will this be a priority for you to assure the department does not fall back into the predicament it fell into under attorney general gonzalez? ms. brand: yes, senator. senator whitehouse: science denial, specifically cly gnat denirblingse has been propagated by the fossil fuel industry for years through an array of front groups. the chamber of commerce, which you worked for, has been a relentless enemy of climate action and has

and the justice department itself. the gop has been complaining about that.e fire when it comes to questions about that? >> it certainly will fuel the fire. you know, just a day ago, sean hanity on fox news, who is obviously close to the administration said, boy, it's time to get rid of all the clinton appointees to the justice department. and the next day, that's exactly what attorney general sessions and president trump did. now, perhaps that's just a coincidence. but there certainly has been coming out of the trump administration a great deal of bitterness and anger towards anyone they feel is connected to barack obama, or they feel may have been leaking. they certainly know evidence that barack obama, that preet bharara was leaking this information. but, you know, the political controversy about leaks, and about trump's anger at obama certainly will be fanned by this. but i do think it's important to repeat that this is not a question whether donald trump had the right to do this. he certainly had the right to request the resignation, and to fire preet b

hear why the fbi director now wants the justice department to step in. >>> plus, the new travel ban rolls out today we're live in washington with the details. >>> breaking news, as north korea launches more missiles while the u.s. and south korea hold their meetings >>> newel allegations that isis has used chemical weapons in the iraqi city of mosul. >>> and caught on camera. close call on highway in texas. the quick reactions that kept everybody safe. >>> and a good morning to you all. president trump has a full day of meetings ahead with cabinet members as the fbi refutes his allegation that former president obama wiretapped him. >> in fact sources say fbi director james comey is now calling on the justice department to publicly reject the claims as the president calls on congress to investigate them. abc's lana zak has the latest from washington. >> reporter: today the senate is expecting to hear more from the attorney general jeff sessions from his meetings with russian ambassador. overshadowing that is the fallout from the president's twitter fallout. the president provided no eviden

sources telling abc news comey has asked the justice department to speak out, to reject president trump's claim. abc's senior justice correspondent, pierre thomas on the fbi director now at odds with the president he serves. >> reporter: tonight, that stunning request. fbi director james comey asking that the justice department publicly refute president trump's wiretapping claim. >> does president trump accept the fbi director's denial? >> i don't think he does, george. >> reporter: so far, no answer from the justice department. matters complicated because attorney general jeff sessions just recused himself from any investigations tied to the 2016 campaign. already leaving a leadership vacuum at the top. >> i should not be involved in any campaign investigation. >> reporter: sources say the fbi director is deeply concerned that trump's allegation is not only false, but suggested the fbi acted improperly, and pursued a politically motivated investigation. as a result, this moment -- >> he has become more famous than he me. >> reporter: took all that embracing the fbi director feels light y

or does it begin with the justice department?doesn't begin at 1600 pennsylvania -- that is alien to my life experience. now, mike, i will admit, i had some interest in some fisa against legislate foreign intelligence targets that were politically sensitive. all right? so that if exposed, we would pay a high political cost. i would have a conversation or two about condy rice. not about my legal authority but whether or not i would have her political okay to go against this foreign target that happened to be inside the united states of america that is why we needed the warrant. but we do everything possible to keep this as far away from the political branches as possible. the permanent government, either an intelligence or law enforcement build the case, give it to an article iii judge and that judge gives the okay. you go ahead and go up on a warrant. it is as deep a poe littliticiz process as we can make it. >> we are listening to the most incredible voice on the process here. what do you make, joe, of what has happened? step bac

and he's widely respected within the justice department.ow, we are expecting a new deputy, rod rosenstein, to be the next deputy attorney general. his confirmation hearing is up for next week. he too is a holdover from the obama administration. and not only that, he was -- he is the longest-serving u.s. attorney, having been appointed first by george w. bush. i think the justice department is going to argue that they can handle the investigation without the need of a special prosecutor or appointing someone outside the department. >> what's the likelihood, though, of a special prosecutor? what could make it happen inside of the justice department? >> well, in fact, it is up to the justice department and the attorney general and then i guess, in this case, the deputy tomorrow, to decide -- the deputy attorney general, to decide whether to appoint a special prosecutor. it's not up to congress. there is just a lot of institutional pressure here or prerogative to keep the investigation within the department, where they feel that they have the c

the justice department has yet to release any such statement.heident trump leveled allegations on twitter this saturday and the white house has shown no indication it would back down from the unsound claims. james clapper said there was no wiretapping directed against trump. >> for the part of the national security apparatus that i oversaw there was no such wiretap activity mounted against the timedent elect at as a candidate or against his campaign. >> critics are up using president trump of trying to distract the old from an investigation into his relationship with moscow. in the republican party lawmakers are divided. said the white house will have to show proof supporting their claims. >> i don't have any basis. i have never heard that allegation made before by anybody. i have never seen anything about that anywhere before. the president put that out there and now the white house will have to answer as to what he was referring to. >> the republican chair of the house gave credit to the claims saying the committee would take a serious look in

justice." and next you will meet a woman who may change your speak on this whole story. fisa applications and wiretapping she is a department of just national security lawyer and she did these fisa warrants for a living. you needd to hear her. "justice" rolls on in just a moment. >> welcome back to justice. that's "dig deep" are in the allegations made by president trump. that president obama had trump tower wiretap during the presidential campaign. with me is the former department of justice counterterrorism and counterintelligence attorney. good evening carrie, your first time a justice, thank you for being with us. you are one of the few people that has actually done these fisa warrants and has gotten to a fisa judge on behalf of the department of justice. this is your cup of tea. let's get down to some of the basics. number one, this, this is an area law that's very specific. it's almost clandestine and the sense that most people do not even know where the fisa court is located. they don't know who these judges are. they're appointed by the chief justice in there for seven years. i think actually that chuck schumer miss

that brought about this exchange with sean spicer today. >> did the justice department give you that assurance, because they're telling "the new york times" they did not. >> i'm not aware of it, but that's my point. we're not aware of anything. >> you haven't been told by the justice department that there is no investigation. >> no. >> so there might be one, so you just don't know. >> i said, we're not aware and that's why we want the house and senate to do what the president has asked of them, to look into this, but no, we're not aware. >> to discover if there is an investigation? >> no, to look into the situation. >> the justice department is saying they never gave you the assurances you gave us. >> what i gave you is that i'm not aware. and that is 100% accurate. >> so, when you said no reason to believe, it was, i'm not aware -- >> that's right. >> i don't know that they're not interchangeable. i'm not aware. i don't believe, look up in a thee saur us are, find some other ways, but i don't know that there's a distinction there that's noteworthy. we're not aware, i don't believe t

he was an advocate when he was in the justice department, and immediately switched to being a neutral decisionmaker. i think people look at justice jackson's jurisprudence and will say that was a man who took that craft seriously. judge gorsuch is similar in that way in the sense that, you know, he's having been a justice department senior official, that doesn't bring any baggage. he looks at the law for what it is and decides the case on the law, not on the view of how this should come out, whether for the government or for the defendant at the end of the day. he's spoken a bit about overcriminalization also and talked about the challenges that overcriminalization presents for the judicial system and for parties who are trying to govern their own conduct. >> if i can add something, i don't know if you agree with this, i think if he took something from his senior service at the department, to his job, that relates to criminal cases, it is that he has enormous respect for the department of justice, but also very high expectations for their behavior and the quality of their advocacy and

now asking the justice department to refute the president's claim.hat is according to two sources with knowledge of the situation. the fbi seeking the denial because mr. trump's claim implies the bureau may have broken the law by obeying president obama's orders. >> president trump now asking congress to investigate the baseless wire tapping claim. he is getting a mixed response. house intelligence chairman dennis nunes saying his k committee will look into the matter. other republicans are pushing back against the wire tapping claim. a former national intelligence chief james clapper telling nbc it simply did not happen. >> there was no such wire tap activity mounted against the president-elect at the time or candidate as campaign. >> if the fbi, for instance, had advice of court order for surveillance, would you know? sgr >> i would know that. something like this. absolutely. >> more now from athena jones. she is covering the president in west palm peabeach. >> reporter: good morning. the president spent the weekend here in mar-a-lago. it was a ser

little did i know nine months later, i'd follow to the justice department when mark was kind enough to let me lead to go work on the confirmations of then chief judge and now chief justice john roberts and then judge and now justice samuel alito and white house counsel harriet myers. it was unique opportunity to see judge in his time at the tops. i didn't work for him but didn't report to him. it was legal policy at the time run by rachel brand who's now a professor at the scalia law school and nominated to be the attorney general and justice department, but i got to know judge gorsuch in a different capacity as a practicing lawyer in the federal government. and that was really interesting but i saw him manage an entire set of divisions, the entire civil litigating office of the justice department and he had a practical view of this. again, very approachable. a young man at the time as mark mentions, he was in his late 30s. i was in my 20s and 30s. the bush administration was considering nominating him to be a judge on the tenth circuit. i knew this guy when he was a young lawyer or a

>> if you leave it within the justice department, you will still have critics. democrats say they won't stop short of getting someone who is independent. >> we have to run, "happening now" starts now. ♪ >> jon: continuing our coverage of epic story of the day, trump administration bases mounting criticism this hour after reports that the attorney general, jeff sessions, met twice with the russian ambassador to the united nations, i'm sorry, to the united states, after the presidential campaign. >> jenna: the story is developing, and moving very quickly. we'll get you caught up with where we are right now. attorney general sessions did not disclose as conversations during a congressional hearing and now some republicans are calling for the attorney general to clarify his testimony. several democrats are also calling on sessions to resign, but here we are. john roberts is live on the north lawn with more for us. >> one of the immediate problems for this white house is that the president has a big speech this afternoon aboard the uss gerald ford. nobody is talking

it is the department of justice being asked to provide the documents. it was a week ago the fbi director james comey asked the department of justice to publicly refute the president's baseless claims saying they were not true. the department of justice declined to do that. it is note worthy this is the agency tasked with providing this evidence. evidence that several officials say simply doesn't exist. christine. dave. >> athena jones at the white house. thank you. >>> long time trump associate roger stone not only admits with contacting guccifer 2.0, but defending. the online persona claiming to hack the dnc. stone says he did have a few brief exchanges and insists they occurred last august after the dnc had been hacked. stone says this proves he did not collude with the russians. >>> the abrupt firing of 46 u.s. attorneys finding out they were dismissed through media reports. sources telling cnn the firings could not have been handled worse with dozens of court cases hanging in the balance. the case of preet bharara in new york, which includes manhatta

what effect is this haveing on your investigation and the justice department investigation? mr. schiff: the concern that many of us have on the impact that the white house may have on the justice department analysis of these issues and one of the reasons why many of us don't feel that the recusal as partial as it was is enough. because as you got a sense from the members' questions, the russia issue suffuses the campaign and the administration. whoever is adjudicating at the department of justice the decision of whether charges should be ultimately brought has the independence to make that judgment. i think that's why an independent prosecutor needs to make that judgment. so we do have concerns about that. in terms of the administration's ability to influence our committee or our committee's investigation, we need to make sure that it doesn't, that we do a thorough job and not walled off from any line of inquiry and compile the witnesses and documents that need to be produced to do our jobs. given that the director has acknowledged that there is an ongoing investigation, we have

what are you hearing from the fbi that the justice department came forward -- asked the justice department to come forward and knock down the president's claims. >> probably has never happened before, pamela, as you know from covering this. it's a pretty extraordinary development. so sometime over the weekend, the fbi went to the department of justice and requested and asked them in conversations to refute basically president trump to say, hey, this did not happen. these allegations that he's made that president obama was involved in some sort of wiretapping of his phone. by extension, i think the director was concerned that the fbi would somehow be blamed for this. and quite frankly, by this request, the fbi is saying this did not happen. we did not wiretap his phones. yesterday we spoke with a former senior law enforcement official who had direct knowledge of the investigation from the department of justice. they, too, confirmed this never happened. so today we're learning it's a pretty significant thing for the chief law enforcement officer to basically now ask for the department of jus

we already commented on this multiple times. >> how does the department of justice not have any idea? >> i don't want to get into starting to parse what we knew an what we didn't. that request did not come to us. it went to the department of justic justice. >> saying we cart restart civilization with somebody else's action. >> i will touch base with the president on that. halle? >> i just want to go back to you just said a minute ago, what the president meant when he tweeted about the wire tapping. you all stood there and said the tweet speaks for itself. when do you decide when a president's tweet, when his words are open to interpretation and when though words stand on their own? >> i'm sorry. can you further explain? his tweets do speak for themselves. >> you interpret et it for peter. you said when he said wire tapping he meant -- >> he had it in quotes. >> did you ask him? >> i did. >> what did he say? >> he said they were in quotes. it was referring to surveillance. >> he cited other reports in his conversation? >> he did. >> that's what the tweet was based on? >> good try. i ha

host: you spent 26 years with the justice department. as a historian. when did you become being used as an expert witness? prof. mccrary: i first got involved as an expert witness in 1980 when the supreme court handed down a decision in a case known as city of mobile versus bolton where the court established that minority plaintiffs challenging a law as racially discriminatory had to demonstrate that it was either adopted or maintained for a racially discriminatory purpose, not merely that it had a racially discriminatory effect. since the law in question in the mobile case was adopted in 1911, there were not any participants around to be used as witnesses. the only way to figure out intent was to hire a historian to do research. i was teaching at the university of south alabama. so i guided the research and we used graduate students as as research assistants. other historians and social scientists got involved in the case as expert as well. but i was the person who did the focused research on the intent question. host: in that case and in others, have