ms. conway never responded to o.s.c. after concluding that investigation, but before issuing the report to the president, o.s.c. provided conway yet another opportunity to respond to the report, again she never engaged with o.s.c. and never provided a response to o.s.c.'s report. ms. conway ignores o.s.c., ignores the hatch act, and now is ignoring the committee. this is completely disrespectful to us as a co-equal branch of government, that she's not shown up here. the committee has no choice but to issue a subpoena. i support the leadership of this chair and this resolution. >> would my friend yield? over here. ms. pressley: i yield. >> thank you. [laughter] a me just say, this is not matter of quibbling. and unlike the statement of the ranking member, this is not some obsession about the president. this is the rule of law. we have in front of us a report from a trump appointed official who was a former staff member of this committee on the republican side. he's not a partisan, he's not some wild-eyed liberal. mr. conno

ms. conway was doing, correct? mr. kerner: yes. ms. kelly: now that ms. conway got caught violating o.s.c.'s guidance, the white house is arguing that o.s.c. does not have the authority to apply its guidance to federal employees. do you agree with this new argument from the white house? that o.s.c. should not provide or use guidance in interpreting the hatch act? mr. kerner:, no i don't. ms. kelly: this committee is the authorizing committee for o.s.c. and i believe o.s.c. does have the authority to issue guidance and the authority to apply that guidance to its determinations of whether the hatch act has been violated. the white house's novel argument which is a distraction, which they're very good at from the fact that the resident refuses to hold his assistant accountable. the president should fire ms. conway and i yield back. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. hairman. mr. kerner, in 2013 the o.s.c. initiated investigation of then-secretary of labor hilda solis for hatch act violations. you want to talk about political activity, you want to talk about soliciting

ms. conway? >> ms. conway never responded, no. >> never responded. >> in the past the ranking member was comparing this case to -- did those people respond to chastisements from her office verbal or -- well, there hasn't been a written report like that. >> right. i wasn't there and obviously that would go to the -- >> we have your testimony earlier in fact one of those people not only responded she issued a maya culpa and issued a response with the unfavorable act in sharp contrast to the case in point. >> correct. >> could this problem be solved if ms. conway simply moved the campaign? >> absolutely. >> and was she counseled or advised to do that? >> we have definitely suggested solutions, not just to move into the campaign but also how to come into compliance with her twitter feed and how to stay within the rules of her media appearance. >> and this is matter of law? >> correct. >> and she's in violation of the law? >> that's correct. >> and you've definitively determined that, and has the white house

ms. conway, correct? mr. kerner: yes. ms. ocasio-cortez: and with that i would like to show you all a video that highlights many of the violations that the office of special counsel detailed in its report. >> anything time zero equals zero. simple multiplication. 50 democrats can run, 19 are now running. if your message is zero, it's a big zero. there's no strategy i see. you've got o'rourke and booker promising they would nominate a woman to be the vice president. do they not think women running are good enough to be president? stop the nonsense everybody about -- we are all women, we are pro-women. we are for independent thinkers. elizabeth warren is running for president. she tried to appropriate somebody else's ethnicity she lied about that. they've got a bunch of, i'd like to say, i don't see any presidential timber yet, just presidential woodchips. the women are complaining too. i see women on tv complaining about the female candidates aren't covered the same. that's just hogwash. they just have terrible ideas. you can

ms. conway. mr. raskin: without objection. ms. norton: mr. kerner, i want to clear up matters essentially going to the constitutional rights of speech. now, we know that ms. conway was speaking about the kind of political and public matters that we talk about every day. so someone watching this hearing may wonder, well, what's wrong with her talking about -- what is happening as a public matter? my interest in it comes because it is another of my lives before us came to congress. i was a lawyer. so i'm accustomed for arguing for peoples' rights to say anything they want to say. i had to get used to the hatch act, too. i want to clarify whether you consulted when dealing with ms. conway and talking about public matters of the day, who you consulted with? did they include lawyers who had backgrounds in constitutional law? >> our hatch act unit has lawyers on staff. in fact, i believe they are all lawyers and spoke to the white house counsel's office and had regular communication and had other communications in terms of the applicability of the

ms. conway has to respect the hatch act just like the 2 million employees and with that, ms. norton, you have nine seconds left. ms. norton: i think you are making part of the point. mr. raskin: we go now for five minutes, mr. armstrong is recognized. mr. armstrong: i'm going to follow up on mr. hice's questions. earlier, you said kellyanne conway interview on may 29 was fairly early in the morning, right? >> yeah. mr. armstrong: earlier, you said the report lad previously been written but this was the straw that broke the camel's back. why did it take seven or eight hours to get to the white house? >> the report was essentially written. we added a couple of things from the interview. first paragraph. mr. armstrong: it was edited? emails and consulting with your staff. was the recommendation for her firing written before or after? >> the recommendation for firing was already in the report but wasn't in the same way. something to the effect of termination up to and including her removal. mr. armstrong: i want to -- we are talking about accountability. i want to talk about the

ms. conway's testimony here today. they sent a letter to the committee on monday arguing that ms. conway is, quote, absolutely immune, end of quote, from testifying. they claim that this principle has been, quote, consistently adhered by administrations of both political parties, end of quote. ladies and gentlemen, this is simply not true. congress has never accepted the claim that white house advisers are absolutely immune. in fact, our committee has obtained public testimony from numerous white house officials while they served in the white house. these include multiple white house counsels, the deputy counsel to the president and associate counsel to the president, a deputy assistant to the president and the director of the white house office of security. in the case of ms. conway, the white house's arguments have even less merit. we are not asking about any conversations she had with the president. and we are not asking about any advice she gave to the president. here, we have a clear-cut case of a federal employee -- >> we'll reair the entire hearing. the committee has gavel b

ms. conway is allowed to -- not allowed to state that. >> it's an opinion. i think the argument was made that she was just stating facts.

ms. conway's comment was taken out of context. here's what happened after a reporter asked kellyanne conway in the white house driveway about violating the hatch act. first she did what she does to most questions. she ignored it and did a full three-minute rant against joe biden ending this way. >> joe biden all an of that is part of his record. i don't care that he's running for president. i could care less. what i care about is people lying about their records and being hypocrites and people supposed to be informing the president about such hypocrisy not doing so. if you're trying to silence me through the hatch act, it's not going to work. >> the office of special counsel said you violated it. >> let me know when the jail sentence starts. >> should we expect the president -- sorry. >> how is that for context? and then as usual, another white house reporter took the pressure off by changing the subject. the special counsel's report says ms. conway's persistent notorious and deliberate hatch act violations rate add unprecedented

ms. conway refused to testify. the committee heard from henry kerner, the special office for the special counsel. >> the committee will come to order.

ms. conway, who refused to testify. questions were directed that henry kerner, who heads the office of special counsel.

ms. conway had violated the hatch act which is a very factual base question.will likely come of this. >> we should note the office of special counsel not robert mueller, different wing. at the end of the day the president is one that can decide what kind of actions should be taken and she's been reprimanded before due to the hatch act and really nothing came about. it is likely to say nothing will come of it now. >> exactly. it is a watchdog group that tries to make sure that they not engage in political activity but it is, when you talk about social media employees to have first amendment rights to free speech. >> it's interesting that you bring up social media because it is part of the argument the white house is making. this is kind of a different space. then you know going on television. >> right. and a lot of specifically address that. there a lot of facts that bleed into, this was personal capacity that they're making statements or at his official capacity? and really where is that line drawn. that's why the white house is respondent strong to say there'

ms. conway's employment immediately in light of these dozens of violations of federal law. allowing ms. inue her position of trust at the white house would demonstrate that the president is not interested in following the law or requiring his closest aides to do so. everyone is still here. i think i was talking about this during the break. if i talked about it on tv, i'm sorry to everybody. when i worked in the white house, you couldn't spend a nanosecond doing anything other than official government business. so if you had any occasion of contact -- i ended up going to the campaigns. i didn't have there situation for long, but you had a bl political phone and a political laptop. you did nothing. the lines were so stark. it's not just an obliteration of forms question. i think it's a real test of whether donald trump's teflon nature when it comes to breaking the law is transferrable. >> in this case at least, i don't know if it's politically transferrable, whether they'll pay a political price for it, but she's not going to lose her job. there's so much wrong with the president's argumen

ms. conway's employment immediately in light of these dozens of violations of federal law. allowing ms. nway to continue her position of trust at the white house couwould demonstrat that the president is not interested in following the law. democrats on capitol hill will no doubt want to keep the spotlight focused on this. the oic can only make recommendations. they do not have enforcement power. so this is just a suggestion to the white house. the white house saying they believe the special counsel recommendations are deeply flawed. >> we're also just learning that some members of the judiciary committee are sitting down and reviewing mueller probe documents. what are you hearing? >> that's right. a significant movement. and we're talking about all the back and forth that's happened in recent weeks and months between the house judiciary committee and the department of justice over access to information. this is now in response to the deal that was struck earlier in the week. the doj allowing members of the house judiciary committee to have access to some but not all of the underlying ev

ms. conway, who refused to testify.fter approving the subpoena, the hearing continued with questions directed at henry kerner, who heads the office of special counsel. at henry kerner, who heads the office of special counsel.

so it was just, like, this empty table that just says ms conway there, and she went on "fox & friendsl in sick to work and someone finds you at, like, the grocery store or something. it's like that. it's like, "you're getting a subpoena!" ( cheers and applause ). >> stephen: so what is the-- what is the actual-- >> hello! >> stephen: what is the actual mechanism you guys have to compel her? can you send the arms to drag her to capitol hill. >> well, we can fine her. we can-- i believe she can go to jail. she can be put in jail. ( cheers and applause ) >> stephen: please, don't chant "lock her up." we don't need that. >> too soon. too soon. but i think, overall, this is a rule of law in the united states. and the hatch act, you know, it applies to all federal workers. and one of the things i said is at the beginning of this year, we had 800,000 federal workers that went without a paycheck due to the government shutdown. and they were not allowed to organize politically, despite the fact that they couldn't pay their mortgages or pay for their babies' diapers and here she is going on "fo

ms. conway's violations, if left unpunished, would send a message to all federal employees that they needby the hatch act's restrictions, her actions erode the foundations of our democratic system, the rule of law. let's discuss. walter shaub is here and rick wilson. mr. shaub, let's talk about this. i think that, you know, we can all agree that kellyanne conway won't be fired and i imagine that this counsel, trump appointee, knows that too. but still he is taking a stand. >> you know, there was a story recently where the "new york times" called something an existential question. but this is an existential question for the agency that enforces the hatch act, the office of special counsel, which isn't related to mueller. she's saying publicly -- saying words that signal she's not going to comply with it. when does my jail sentence start? if they can't see her disciplined, how can they continue firing career federal employees, which they do, just last year they forced somebody out of i.c.e., and that person is now banned from working for the government for five years. there's a new standard

ms. conway violated the law dozens of times by using her official position to criticize democratic candidatesupport republican candidates. obviously, that is against the law. >> saudi arabian crown prince meeting in seoul their talks were expected to focus on economic cooperation and bilateral ties >>> and target is going head to head with amazon prime day this year by debuting an event called deal days. the online sale event will last 48 hours on july 15th and 16th the same time as amazon's shopping holiday target stressing that there is no membership involved to participate. at the cnbc update at this hour, not the last of the competing deals. >> i love it bring it on. this is my birthday week, i'm going to go all out for it >> we know what to buy you a long list of deals >> courtney, thanks. >>> here is what is coming up on "the exchange. >>> ahead, nbc takes its first jab at netflix ahead of its streaming service. >>> a $100,000 pickup truck. >>> apple makes a big bet on autonomous vehicles. >>> and why some say they regret their college degrees. it's all coming up on "rapid fire." is whe

ms. conway was any other regular career employee, they would implement displenary action and recommend hery can do is recommend to the president that he take disciplinary action and they obviously recommend he take the most extreme disciplinary action possible. >> i doubt that's going to happen. >> i doubt it also. >> a programing note this sunday at nine p.m., don't miss the redemption project with van jones. he travels to indiana to meet two brothers whose father was shot and killed when he tried to stop a robbery. >>> up next, nancy pelosi defends president trump's blistering attack on her on the sacred ground in normandy. i've got an idea! oooh, what is it? what if we give the people iphone xr, when they join t-mobile? for a limited time, join t-mobile and get the awesome iphone xr on us. welcome to our lounge. enjoy your stay. thanks very much. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ find calm in over 1,000 airport lounges worldwide. it's another way we've got your back. the business platinum card from american express. don't do business without it. -[ scoffs ] if you say so. ♪ -i'm sorry? -what teach here isn't tel

ms. conway and president trump, this is not a conspiracy to silencetr her or rt her first amendment rightshis is an effort to enforce federal law. >> she's not asking for contributions. ge's not asking for anyth other than-- she's not even campaigning! she has a microphone stuckn her face and she is responding. you've done the same thing, mr. chairman! >> woodruff: the white house has argued that conway is immune from having to give congressional testimony. the defense begapresenting its case today for navy seal edward gallagher, accused of murdering an islamic state prisoner in iraq. the special operations chief is being court-martialed in san diego. defense attorneys have insisted at former colleagues of gallagher who testified against him, were lying. in afghanistan, two u.s. service members were killed on a patrol. officials gave no details. it happened a day after secretary of state mike pompeo visited kabul, and voiced hope for a peace deal by september first. more than 2,400 u.s. troops have died in afghanistan since the u.s. invasion in 2001. western and central europe roasted toda

ms. conway was any other regular career employee, they would implement disciplinary action and recommend political appointee to the white house all they can do is recommend to the president that he take disciplinary action and they obviously recommend he take the most extreme disciplinary action possible. >> i doubt that's going to happen. >> i doubt it also. >> a programing note this sunday at nine p.m., don't miss the redemption project with van jones. he travels to indiana to meet two brothers whose father was shot and killed when he tried to stop a robbery. >>> up next, nancy pelosi responds to president trump's blistering attack against her on the sacred ground in normandy. ♪ this is my mom's house this place is home. a lot of firsts happened here... first kiss, first cigarette. never saw it as a problem... but when i was younger... 2 cigarettes, 3 cigarettes it wasn't; it wasn't a habit... my mom - she was always like "you need to do something, you need to get rid of them." that was her thing. as time went on, as smoking started falling out of fashion in society and rules started c

ms. hicks, here is a map of the west wing. can you at least point to where you worked? was it closer to stephen miller's terrarium or kellyanne conway'sything? blink! blink! blink, damn you!" trump's got to be relieved that hicks had his back today, because reports are, even though they worked closely together, they've drifted apart since she left the white house, and that recently, there were several times when she didn't return trump's call, leading the president to ask his inner circle, "what happened to hope?" ( laughter ) sir, we've been asking that question for three years. we'll be right back with ice cube. ( cheers and applause ) at panera, our salads with peak-season berries... creamy avocado... and a dressing fit for a goddess. come taste what a salad should be. and order online for delivery right to you. panera. food as it should be. this is jamie. you're going to be seeing a lot more of him now. -i'm not calling him "dad." -oh, n-no. -look, [sighs] i get it. some new guy comes in helping your mom bundle and save with progressive, but hey, we're all in this together. right, champ? -i'm getting more nuggets. -how about some