ms. anderson made reference to it. basically to let va off the hook and say you don't have to follow far any more for these contracts. one of the abuses that can happen when far is not followed is there's the potential for cronyism or higher prices. it's sort of like soul sourcing of contracts and the taxpayer isn't given the benefit of competing bids and that kind of thing. would you agree with me that the legislation va is proposing could allow for those problems to arise? >> i am and i'm concerned about that sort of thing. whether it's travel or conference spending or payroll got a major initiative to make sure we -- you know payroll is where it needs to be in terms of contracts. perhaps more is required be complexed. the control that i'm inkreegd with is that we use these individual to see if they pass the threshold of $1 million annually. we're doing a lot of this, for instance. >> the specific logic that concerns me in the proposed bill is that, quote, health care can be ae warded without any law that would ourse

ms. anderson, i'll ask you because mr.fry earlier summarized what he thought your response would be to the question. was this or was this not legal? >> and not to put too fine a point. this, these were not illegal actions or illegal activities. yes, they were not f.a.r.-kplients. an illegal contract, and i'm speaking as a lawyer. an illegal action or illegal activity it's not enforceable. these, these commitments are enforceable. in fact, the federal acquisition regulations acknowledge, understands that that, that there are times when officials not authorized to commit the government, they do chit the government, and there is a formal ratification process. the courts and the boards have recognized that when the government makes a commitment, pays, receives the services that the government can't hide behind the fact that you didn't follow the ffrmts a.r. the government received the benefit. and there's a legal theory for recovery on that. so i, i respectfully disagree with with mr. fry's position that these are illegal cont

ms. anderson, i will ask you because mr. frye earlier summarized what he thought your response we to the question. was this or was this not legal? >> not to put too fine a point these were not illegal actions of illegal activities. yes they were not far -- f.a.r. component to an illegal contract, i'm speaking as a lawyer, and illegal action or an illegal activity is not enforceable. these commitments are enforceable. in fact, the federal acquisition regulations acknowledge understand that there are times when officials not authorized to commit the government, they do commit the government and there is a radical process. the course and the board to recognize that when the government makes a commitment, pays the fee-for-service, that the government can behind the fact that you didn't follow the f.a.r. the government received the benefit. and there's a legal through the recovery on that. i respectfully disagree with mr. frye's position that these are illegal contracts. >> it sounds like, i may or may not be fun the distinction

ms. anderson i'll ask you because mr.e earlier summarized what he thought your response would be to the question. was this or was this not legal? >> not to put too fine a point, these were not illegal actions or illegal activities. yes, they were not f.a.r. compliant. an illegal contract, and i'm speaking as a lawyer an illegal action or illegal activity it's not enforceable. these commitments are enforceable. in fact, the federal acquisition regulations acknowledge, understand that there are times when officials not authorized to commit the government, they do commit the government and there is a formal ratification process. the courts and the boards have recognized that when the government makes a commitment, pays receives the services that the government can't hide behind the fact you that didn't follow the f.a.r. the government received a benefit. and there is a legal theory for recovery on that. so i respectfully disagree with mr. frye's position that these are illegal contracts. >> it sounds like i may or may not be

ms. mitchell was working. >> anderson we're learning that someone complained about a questionable relation shen between joyce mitchell who's also known as tilly and one of the inmates, which we believe may have been david sweat. though there have been some sinuations with the other man who was working with the tailor shop. unclear as to what the questionable relationship was about. the corrections officers did investigate. and when the two escaped, i believe investigators were very quickly able to turn their attention to this woman simply because of her connection. >> and that's why they were able to check her cell phone and know it was used to contact some associates? >> that's exactly right. multiple calls were made to an associate, richard max. they believe she made those calls on her behalf or alternatively, they took that phone and made that cole themselves. that's a bigger indication. who were they talking to outside of the prison walls and who did they expect to possibly help them when they did ultimately escape. >> so we don't know for sure i know the wall street journal and abc ha

anderson the thing that troubles me most is this is another, the second allegation against ms. she was also charged, undue fa familiarity earlier. it shouldn't have happened. >> the idea that gene palm were goud and show the catwalks to these guys allegedly with the idea of having them fix something because a breaker was going out, does that make any sense? aren't there maintenance people? >> absolutely. they have electricians they have plumbers, they have laborers and usually falls under what we call support services. those are people who have access they have the keys they have all the materials and tools necessary to affect repairs. we don't subthat work out to inmates if you will. >> you have no doubt there is a larger problem at this prison? >> no doubt. >> ed gaven, appreciate you being on. >> pleasure thank you. >> ahead in south carolina hours after the body of clementa pinckney arrived to lie in repose bible study resumed inside the charleston church where he and eight others were murdered one week ago. ♪ ♪ (vo) you can pass down a subaru forester. (dad) she's all your

anderson, mr. palmer receives the request from mrs. mitchell to take burger meat to mr. matt, i apologize, and it's not uncommon for inmates to cook inside of their cells. and ms. mitchell, before handing off the meat to mr. -- sorry -- >> that is okay. >> before he handed off the meat, he asked if there was anything wrong with it. and she said no. and we're learning now that there were tools hidden inside of that package. mr. palmer did not know what was inside the package. he had no knowledge beforehand that there were any type of tools inside. the only mistake he made was trusting joyce mitchell. >> so do you know why he trusted joyce mitchell on this? did he know her that well? did he think richard matt was a good guy? did he not have any suspicions? because he could have, i assumed, have run it through a metal detector? >> he could have run it through a metal detector. he feels extremely guilty about that. he is regretful. he apologizes for that. but ms. mitchell was just as manipulative as these two inmates were. he trusted her, he didn't have a close relationship with her, but she was able to do this with many other individuals who worked inside the pris