department of justice. she became the trap door underneath robert mueller's special counsel investigation of the president and his campaign. and that's because robert mueller gets to run his own team, gets to run his own investigation but doesn't have total independence and free reign under the reallatiogulati mueller needs permission for important advances in his investigation. so if he wants to do something big and open a line of inquiry and if he wants to bring charges against a person, he can't just do that on his own and own say so. he has to advice the person overseeing his investigation at the justice department. he has to advice them in advance of his plans to do it and basically has to get their permission. the person in the oversight rule for the investigation is trump's appointed general rod rosenstein. funny, republicans who have been targeting him call him rosenstein. the same way they call the democratic party the democrat party. it's rosenstein to the extent they care. in theory, when there i

she had been an island of stability in this justice department. the president can't stand jeff sessions. you saw what he just said about rod rosenstein. rachel brand is a justice department veteran, she has impeccable credentials for her job, she had custody of certain issues in the justice department that were relatively uncontroversial. it certainly suggests there was something going on that there that she didn't like and didn't want a part of anymore so she left after just nine months and that's unusual when you look at the tenure of people in that -- at that level in the justice department. >> another very sensitive story, you heard jim sciutto's reporting, how unusual is it that dozens of trump administration officials at the white house, including jared kushner, the president's son-in-law, still don't have permanent security clearances. >> as jim sciutto reported, it was very unusual and potentially troubling, here's why. it's not an usual for an fbi background information to last up to a year, that's not unusual. it's thorough, they literal

they've been launching a campaign to discredit our institutions including the fbi and the department of justice. every time a senior official leaves, it sends a message that the department is not functioning as well as could it and i think that fits with this pattern. >> look at this graphic we have showing this shake-up going on at the justice department and the fbi fired, recused, resigned, resigned. there has been a significant shake-up. samantha makes good point. if this has undermined democratic institutions, that seems to be working. >> not only was it successful in 2016 but it is spilling over into 2018. and it doesn't seem to be slowing down. when you show that graphic, how scary is the fact several left because they felt that they had to give their personal allegiance to the president of the united states? not to the constitution as they swear to do so when they're sworn in but to the president of the united states. that's very, very scary. >> do you want to weigh in on this, david? >> not to mention that while all of this is going on, the russians are persisting, and it is not clear t

the justice department has limited resources. when you're trying to decide how to deploy the resources and what places you will place emphasis. the memorandums that essentially we will let the states experiment but we will really put up guardrails. it was very explicit. we said that when it came to dealing marijuana to minors. transportation marijuana across state lines. there were eight or nine factors in the memo. inthat if you go across those 8 factors then there will be federal and government intervention.i mean we are speaking to the governors of colorado and wisconsin peer sharing with them whatever concerns were. getting reassurances from them that what they would put in place a serious regulatory system. we hink the approach that took was appropriate. when it comes to you say prison reform. i would pcall it criminal justice reform. that was an issue i think we had a rare opportunity. at a significant bipartisan reform effort. i remember having a meeting in my conference room. we had representatives from coke brothers, the

usually the white house has a lot of confidence in the justice department. the rift between the white house and the justice department is significant and it is in my view one of the biggest stories of the trump administration. host: i want to come back to that point. a caller joins us from lawrenceville, georgia. me in onould you fill the timeline of the steele dossier. we know for a hired fuse and gps. they discontinued that relationship and the democrats got involved. there is conflicting information out there regarding that. guest: this is an important question. initially the washington free beacon, a conservative outlet, was paying for the work that fusion gps did for opposition research on the trump campaign. once the free beacon decided they no longer wanted to fund that work, democrats stepped in and picked up the fusion gps tab. my understanding is that when democrats stepped in, or after democrats stepped in to fund the project, then that money was passed on to christopher steele to put together the dossier. the dossier was not a project of the wash

the justice department has limited resources. and when you're trying to decide how you will deploy those resources, what places are you going to place emphasis, the memorandum that is called -- is as essentially we will let the states experiment but we will put up guardrails. and it was very explicit. he said that when it came to dealing marijuana, dealing to minors, transportation marijuana across state lines, there were eight or nine factors in the memo. if you cross those eight or nine factors then there will be federal and government intervention.i remember talking to the governors of colorado and wisconsin. sharing with them whatever concerns were. getting the assurances that they will put in place serious regulatory systems. and i think the approach that we took was appropriate. when it comes to use a prison reform. i would call criminal justice reform. that was an issue where i think we had a rare opportunity at a significant bipartisan reform effort. i remember having a meeting in my conference room. we had representative

john sullivan went up to the justice department and talked to a justice department official who saidt the leak was not only unauthorized, by the was inaccurate and did not reflect mr. campbell's credibility. john was talking to the fbi agents. he couldn't figure out why the justice department people were doing this. i think it's all over. 10 days later senior justice department officials go to the hill and brief congressional staff with the same false statements that they gave to isikoff. why did that happen? i am say together attorney general and i.g. i want to know who authorized those people to go up there and provide false information. david: you have here a letter dated february 20 to mr. sessions, the attorney general, complaining about all this and suggesting that it is not only improper, it's illegal to do what they have been doing. so what happens now? what does mr. sessions do with your ever in. >> i hope he starts opening an investigation. there is such a thing called an administrative a tina. he can go to the people he thinks know about this matter, people who say they ar

which is you know, not typically the way the department of justice does its business. but given the nature of robert miller's inquiry here, i would hope that whatever his conclusion. i draw no conclusions on my own at this point. whatever his conclusions i would hope that if a report is prepared that it would be shared with the american people. >> what will have to be prepared for them they will have to submit a report to doj. >> well, yeah -- i would have to look at the regulations. but i don't know if there indictments. i do not know if there is still a need. i do not know. but if there is a report that is prepared i think it should be made public. >> roslyn jordan -- >> hi, thank you. it is one thing to get districts redrawn and to get candidates elected. but is there a democratic party version to help these legislators at the state and local level come up with law and chain processes so that you do have a coin flip to settle the virginia beach seat. >> i think there are, there are some core things that the democratic party stands for engine run on. concerns about h

in the same way that president obama treated his justice department. president obama and i are friends, but he also understood, as i understood, that there has to be a wall between the justice department and the white house. and there were things that i did while i was attorney general, decisions that i had to make, that were not communicated to him. my guess is there were more than a couple that he probably did not agree with, and yet i never heard from him anything either privately and certainly not publicly, that was critical of any decision that i made. i would hope that the president would rethink the way in which he has attacked the career people in the fbi, the career people at the justice department, the career people in our intelligence community, and think about, you know, the ways in which he has spoken about his attorney general, who is actually our attorney general, and understand that there's long-term collateral, negative consequences to such attacks. you know, the mueller probe is going to be unaffected. bob mueller is a strong guy. the

to hear so many positive kind word about the justice department. thank you so much for sharing all your experiences. >> homeland security secretary also spoke at the doj summit about what her department was doing to combat human trafficking. she was introduced by the deputy attorney general, rod rosenstein. this is 15 minutes. [applause] >> i also want to give a special thanks to patrick who has been our master of ceremonies and has done such a superb job of keeping us on track even dealing with some slight delays. and helping to coordinate the program. we began our day with remarks from attorney general jeff sessions and we are deeply honored to have for our closing speaker, another member of the president's cabinet. sixth homelandhe security secretary. she is a superb leader with a wealth of relevant experience. last year, she served as the chief of staff to the department of homeland security and she then served as the chief of staff to president trump. in president bush's administration, she served as senior director on the homeland security cou

the justice department is considered separate from politics.he president may choose the attorney general, the attorney general is supposed to be loyal first to the constitution and to the law and secondarily affiliated with the white house. that is why these are eyebrow raising questions. you know, to a certain extent, some of this is the president not being familiar with the customs. absolutely to your question will come up when you ask these more probing questions of whether the white house is actively trying to undermine the character. they will not be flattering anecdotes to the people looking into these matters. >> tal, it is clear that nunes is trying to discredit the fbi and the mueller investigation. all of that being said, there are all of these investigations republican led investigations happening on capitol hill. does he risk muddying the waters and discrediting his own investigation in the process here because dragging politics into all of this? >> rene, i don't know how you could make the argument that the waters are not muddy at

today, president trump is expected to ignore the warnings of his fbi chief and justice department officials and green light the release of a classified and partisan memo alleging fbi surveillance abuses. the memo was written by the gop head of the house intelligence committee devin nunes who also served on the trump transition team. the president throwing some extra shade on law enforcement this morning, tweeting the top leadership and investigators of the fbi and the justice department have politicized the sacred investigative process and in favor of democrats and against republicans. something which would have been unthinkable a short time ago. rank and file are great people. now, he failed to mention the top leadership are his appointees and life-long republicans. i want to get right to cnn's jeff zeleny at the white house what is the latest there, jeff? >> reporter: well, brianna, good morning. president trump as you said is positioning himself to square off fight with the top ranks of the fbi and the justice department. in terms of the timing of the release of this memo, white house of

think about all the folks in the department of justice house have done this.oint of this was to throw up lots of dust and smoke and perhaps it has succeeded. i guess the real question, i get it that republicans go along with the conservative policies but why do they feel they have to become accomplices on the russia investigation particularly when we will know the russians are attacking our democracy and that's the part i can't get past. >> that is so wildly. >> one last word to you. why did trump bring on board a campaign a guy watched by the fbi who obviously has been suspected a long time for years of involvement with the russian oligarchs and those people who obviously they thought was being used by the russians. why would trump bring that as flaky as this guy carter page, look at the guy. he's flaky. why did he bring him into the campaign. >> every presidential campaign has hangers on, people that give them selves title that show up at a meeting and say they're a integral part. everybody knows he was a nothing then and a nothing now. >> he named him as on

on issue after issue, jeff sessions' justice department has failed in its mission to promote justice for all americans. instead, sessions has taken the department in exactly the opposite direction. so, let's make a list. start with voting. in 1986, mrs. king warned us that sessions had used the awesome power of his office as an alabama prosecutor to chill the free exercise of the vote by african americans. as attorney general, he's continued that crusade targeting not only african americans but latinos, the elderly, veterans, and other marginalized groups. only weeks after sessions took the reins, the justice department abandoned its legal challenge of a texas voter i.d. law that intentionally discriminated against voters of color. later, the department argued that it should be easier -- easier for states to strike eligible voters from their voting rolls, a proven way to prevent citizens from voting. sessions has eagerly embraced president trump's make believe, fact-free conspiracy theories about voter fraud condoning the president's voter suppression commission and engaging in state-

muhammad: the speech he gave to the employees of the justice department, um, about the importance of k history and its role in achieving justice in america. henderson: he believed that real change, lasting change began with confronting the hard truths that may have stood as barriers to advancing your goals. murguia: we saw this in last year's election with countless attempts to suppress the vote of communities of color. stevenson: minorities, those who will never have the political power to protect themselves fully through the political process, that, for me, is the most important thing the justice department can do. ifill: the day the shelby versus holder case was decided, the case in which the supreme court struck down a--a key provision of the voting rights act, eric holder convened a number of civil rights leaders in his office. henderson: using his lawyers aggressively in the civil rights division to defend voting rights, that made a powerful statement. you know, eric understood that voting is the language of democracy. you know, if you don't vote, you don't count. maya: my fathe

it's not justice department. >> who is going to fire him?> rosenstein has to make up his own mind. there's only seven people involved in this whole problem. and they're the ones, all of them have been. >> charlie, your words. what do you think is going to happen? >> look, the whole charade, the whole point of this memo was to discredit this investigation to, obstruct this investigation to, create a predicate for possibly neutering this investigation by getting rid of rosenstein. everyone knows all of that. all of the stuff about transparency is so much eye wash. there's all this misinformation because you don't get a fisa warrant with just a four-page memo. you have 50, 60 pages, fisa judges are mostly republican. they've gone through it. think about all the folks in the department of justice house have done this. the point of this was to throw up lots of dust and smoke and perhaps it has succeeded. i guess the real question, i get it that republicans go along with the conservative policies but why do they feel they have to become accomplice

not -- not the justice department or the fbi acting inappropriately.-- i think we have to make it clear. >> you're saying president trump is the one who brought politics and surveillance together. >> that's right. >> i hear you. jim, i want to ask you. you know rod rosenstein, the deputy attorney general, you worked with him at the justice department. the memo mentions him as having been one of the people to sign off on one of the fisa warrants against carter page. all indications are that president trump is itching for rosenstein to leave. if he fires him or not. what counsel would you give him tonight? >> rod? >> yes, not the president, rod rosenstein. >> because that would be a tougher job. >> rod rosenstein. >> rod is a principled and objective guy. i've known him for a long time. i think he know what is the job should be, and he excels at it. i also think he doesn't get distracted by the politics of the moment. there is more to dig into the the whole situation. nobody should stop at one memo and feel they've answered all the questions around fbi a

fisa gets to hear one side from the justice department. the justice department has an obligation to present it fairly, making sure that the fisa court sees all of the evidence and all of the evidence that undercuts the evidence. you know, one thing i'm thrilled about, i've been fighting this fight as a liberal democrat for 50 years and thank you republicans anconservatives fors coming on board and looking critically at the fbi and the fisa court. i think that's a good thing for america. david: the fisa court is not the only one on the spot here. the fbi has a duty to trace down sources. and christopher steele, who was supposedly the main source of the trump dossier, turns out now that he may have just been a pass through and he was passing through a lot of information that was coming directly from the clinton campaign and there was no attempt by the fbi to track down where this information was coming from. >> and there should be now. it's not too late. there should be a deep inquiry into everything that went into the fisa warrant. we're al

justice system. it is not an indictment of the fbi, of the department of justi justice. it does not impugn the mueller investigation or the deputy attorney general. this is about us holding the system accountable in reviewing whether or not fisa abuses occur. >> paul ryan, if it is about holding the system accountable, if it is about transparency, why not release all of the document? why not let the democrats share their memo? joining us now live, nbc news, we mentioned it, national intelligence and security reporter, ken, and former senior director of the cia -- legit job -- ned price. also served as national security counsel spokesperson under president obama. now he is an nbc news national security analyst. that's a mouthful. ned, you resigned a year ago, after more than ten years of service under republicans and democrats. you said you could no longer serve under president trump. give us your reaction to the president's tweet, slamming the leadership of the fbi and the justice department. >> well, that's right, stephanie. in some ways, it is only fitting we're discus

states of america. >> i think the fact that he says he wants roy cohn work for ip him at the justice departmentou all you need to know about whether he wants justice or not. we'll be right back. whether he wants justice or not. we'll be right back. all you nee whether he wants justice or not. we'll be right back. you all you whether he wants justice or not. we'll be right back. i asked my doctor. she told me about non-insulin victoza®. victoza® is not only proven to lower a1c and blood sugar, but for people with type 2 diabetes treating their cardiovascular disease, victoza® is also approved to lower the risk of major cv events such as heart attack, stroke, or death. while not for weight loss, victoza® may help you lose some weight. (announcer) victoza® is not for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. do not take victoza® if you have a personal or family history of medullary thyroid cancer, multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to victoza® or any of its ingredients. stop taking victoza® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling

it is xlamd the justice department and justice department omitted the province of it. there are serious questions raised by the memo. that they should make sure it doesn't violate any american civil liberties and not be used to make counter intelligence decisions. but speaker ross caution that had members of congress not use to it impugn the integrity of justice system and the fbi though that is precisely how president trump and his supporters are using this memo as mr. trump escalates his tikes u.s. law enforcement agencies. the justice department and fbi run by the president's own appointees say that the memo is misleading. >> i think it is a disgrace, what's happening in our country. when you look at that, and you see that and so many other things, what is going on, a lot of people should be ashamed of themselves. >> democrats and some republicans fear that president trump will try to use the nunes memo as a pretext on fire those investigating, whether anyone affiliated with the trump team collaborated in any way with the russians. issuing this blunt warning. saying

the justice department during the 2016 presidential campaign.and the targeting of trump campaign associates. among the key findings that the fbi and this is department relied heavily on what is called the anti-áuntran4á and verify dossier that was opposition research to secure a surveillance woman for a trump campaign and quarter page but also the fbi justice department never disclosed to the national security court called the fisa flight at is very much a political -- funded by the dnc and the clinton campaign. they also found that the researcher who was behind the project, the british spy, christopher steele, had a personal animus against then candidate trump and the cut off lines with him because he lied about the distribution of the memo with the media.despite being cut off officially by the fbi, christopher steele continued to pass the information to the bureau contacts, to a justice department official who had then been -- final key point is that the then deputy fbi director andrew mccabe testified under oath to the house intelligence comm

reaction to the president's statement moments ago saying investigators and leaders of the fbi and justice departmentinvestigative process. >> well, it strikes me as the pot calling the kettle black. i think this is almost amusing if it weren't such a serious subject is. i think the department of justice, and particularly the fbi, have done the right thing by trying to defend themselves. and i was particularly struck by the fbi statement which cited errors of omission of fact rather than jeopardize the sources. >> why? >> transparency is a great thing. but let's be fact al and objective about it. this is clearly a blatant political act. and i hope the fbi particularly takes the opportunity to rebut the memo and include those to the extent that they can. >> there is an implication in the president's statement this morning that it is the leadership politically biased not the rank and file. is there any narrative to that distinction, especially in dealing with the russia investigation from the beginning. wassist the leadership doing this investigation? was it the leadership driving for these fisa warran

and you when you are the president, you support your justice department. and you allow them to do their jobs. and that is with all the facts out there, chris, what really bothers me most as a former prosecutor. you don't undermine an investigation. you don't send out tweets about it. and mostly, you don't release classified information in the middle of investigations. i can't tell you what that does for trust for those agents on the frontline, for the prosecutors working hard pre day and that is why i'm shaking my head. >> your colleagues leaders in the house and senate, democrats, they sent a letter warning trump to use the announce memo as pretext for firing rosenstein would be viewed as an attempt to obstruct justice and the russia investigation. is that your view? is rosenstein a red line for you? >> of course rosenstein is a red line. i think you have to make clear as other senators including lindsey graham have done in the past that this would really trigger a constitutional crisis. and you can't have another saturday night massacre. but i really lik

when you read the transmittal letter saying this is the product of consultation with the department of justice, that, too, is misleading. if writ accurate it would say we're doing it notwithstanding the consultation and the department of justice. >> did the then deputy director andrew mccabe tell your committee he there would not be a fisa warrant without the dossier? >> well, the language that's used in the memo was not his language. i can't give both precisely what he said, i can't do it from memory but more than that he talked about, i can say in very general terms, that a fisa spliks viewed in its totality. each part of an application is important to the application. and so we'll have to wait, i guess, until his testimony is fully disclosed. we do make reference to it in our response of memorabilndu me. they are cherry-picking to it. >> if the goal here, and you suggested it is the goal, to discredit the entire russia probe, robert mueller, to discredit the fbi, the justice department, the top leadership, we saw the president's tweet on that this morning. some have suggested that gets pret

i think it would cause serious turmoil in the justice department. aybe it's my hope, maybe i'm naive, i think you see resignations that came out of that department if you were to move against him. that's clearly what he wants to do. i think over the coming days we'll see whether he actually thinks he has the political space to do it or not. >> red state noticed a significant inaccuracy in this memo. they're calling the whole credibility of the memo into question. it has to do with an inaccurate summerization of something on the public record. whether the allegations in the memo had been verified. i'm going to read from the memo and then read what comey actually said. this is the fourth item in the third page. according to the head of the fbi's counterintelligence division, assistant director bill presnap corroborated of the steele dossier was in its infancy at the time of the initial page fisa application. after steele was terminated a source validation report conducted by an independent unit within fbi assessed steele's reporting was corroborated. y

certainly this hangs over the white house and, indeed, the justice department and the fbi.fact, all of washington, what the president's plans are for the deputy attorney general. there is no white house briefing today. so at this point we are going into a weekend here with unusual confrontation between these separate agencies here and the white house. wolf? >> we'll see if rod rosenstein, deputy attorney general, stays or goes. you can clearly see on his face, the president, that deep irritation with the deputy attorney general when he was asked do you have confidence in him, he said you figure that one out. stand by. i want to go to capitol hill right now. democrats are reacting as well. democrat reese acting and saying this republican majority report is distorted. >> reporter: that's right. in fact, i just got off a conference call with adam schiff, ranking democrat on the house intelligence committee who laid out a number of concerns with some of the allegations in this memo. i'll tick through some of them. one of the big allegations in the republican memo is what the de

you can't trust the department of justice to investigate and prosecute itself. d: if trite's a flaw in fisa as well as the department of justice. rand paul has been criticizing the fisa courts saying 99% of applications are approved. and saying this is evidence of what little information is necessary to get permission to spy on americans. gregg: this is a prime example how secrecy begets corruption. with it's a star chamber and only a judge is looking eight, one person. he can be deceived and lied to. you can't have public court hearings for something like this. but there need to be safeguards put in place to make sure people like comey and mccabe and peter strzok and rod rosenstein was involved in this and night was fabricated. you have to be able to stop these people in their tracks. david: you see that statue of lady justice blindfolded. justice is suppose to be blind in this country, not intimidated or infiltrated with political desires. clearly that major rule was violated. >> we entrust the department of justice and the fbi to uphold and pen force the law.

. >> reporter: the memo also alleges that the fbi and justice department did not inform the fisa court that former british intelligence agent christopher steele who compiled the dossier was funded by the democratic party. adam schiff said that it is, quote, not accurate that the secret court waunss unaware of steele's political motivations, he says that the court knew of a likely political motivation behind steele. >> what it ends up delivering is criticism of a single fisa application and its renewals that cherry picks information that doesn't tell the reader the whole of the application and as the doj and fbi have said deeply misleading. >> reporter: while the memo attempts to portray the fbi as relying on outside information to launch the russia investigation, it notes that a counter intelligence investigation was actually opened months before the page application based on a stream of intelligence separate from the dossi dossier. this includes information from the australian government can which learned that another trump campaign adviser, george papadopoulous, had been offered dama

that would be the call of the justice department overseeing them. you have the possibility of whatever is found not being shared with the public. i think where the rubber meets the road here politically is with the house because the question has been from the start, would there be any restraint, any limits on the president's willingness to delegitimize these institutions that he views as a threat to him. early in the presidency i think there was more pushback from republicans in congress. you get noises from republican senators about firing bob mueller would be a catastrophic event. but on a day-to-day basis and with a decision like this to release the memo over the objections of so many at the fbi and the intelligence community, the house republican majority in particular is sending him a very different signal, that they will be there arm in arm no matter how far he goes. that puts him out on a limb for 2018. you've got to think this issue of whether they're willing to exert any restraight or oversight by each action most closer to center stage for

what i don't understand is if this is a real investigation of the fbi, and the department of justice uldn't one of the first steps be to bring the fbi, big christopher wray or whatever fbi department official in front of the committee and grill them? >> yes, in a closed environment. and i have been on the receiving end of that when one or more members or committees thought the intelligence committee was up to no good and that would traditionally be the way it was done or another way would be to refer their concern, in this case, the department of justice inspector general who is there as an independent voice. who has qualified competent and objective staff to look into this. obviously this has got all kinds of political overtones and where it seems to me chairman nunes is more concerned with trying to protect the president. >> how unusual the situation is it. we have seen nunes in a position that looks similar to this where he made the midnight run to the white house and it turns out they had gotten information from the white house itself. how unusual is it to have the fbi director ch