ms. tlaib: does it include grounds of the white house? >> yes. ms. tlaib: why is it important that federal employees don't engage in this? mr. kerner: we cannot have people campaigning all day long on taxpayer dollars. ms. tlaib: kell mr. conaway: engaged in press introduce, is that correct? and i hate wanting to through this. there is a clip on april 24, i would like to show my colleagues. >> bernie sanders has problems with donald trump. and at this point in the primaries and connecting with the voters and the only difference between sand rs and trump, sanders is terrible and trump is a much better candidate. biden will be seen as the alternative. and look, old, white male career politicians is not having the democratic party -- ms. tlaib: based on that she was on white house grounds? mr. kerner: yes. ms. tlaib: is she campaigning? mr. kerner: this was one of the violations. ms. tlaib: a report that she was in front of the white house and she was a counselor to president trump, correct. when you see the text in the news chip with counselor of the u

ms. conway. the white house counsel's office, the white house counsel's office gave her training, we sent over power points and training materials. mr. connolly: your office issued a report on this? mr. kerner: we've issued two reports. mr. connolly: have you done that before with a white house official? . kerner: never issued two reports on an official. mr. connolly: and your office is how old? mr. kerner: since 1989. mr. connolly: so 30 years. have you received a response to those reports from ms. conway? mr. kerner: ms. conway never responded. mr. connolly: the ranking member compared this to axelrod and others, did those people respond to chastisements by your office, verbal or -- there hasn't been a written report like that. mr. kerner: i don't know if they responded, i wasn't there. i'll leave that to -- mr. connolly: we have your testimony earlier that one of those people not only responded but issued a mea culpa and reimbursed the government for expenses associated with the unfavorable act. mr. ker

did the white house raise any concern that ms. conway never actually said or tweeted the things in the report? >> no. >> so the white house does not dispute thehe facts. the president just does not want to hold kellyanne conway accountable. my observation is that the reason for that is she has been doing exactly what he wants her to do. this administration believes that it should not be held to the same laws that every other american should abide by. the executive branch is constitutionally established to carry out and enforce the laws of the hand. so my question is, what does it mean for us if they won't enforce the laws of the land on themselves? >> well, that's a good question for the congress. from osc's perspective we have to abide by the statute and conduct fair investigations that apply the facts to the law. that's what we did here. i think other steps are up to this committee and the congress. >> thahank you. i yield back. >> mr. meadows. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. kerner, she made you mad, didn't she? kellyanne conway

what's stopping this is the white house. ms. woodruff: can that be turned around? sen warner: it can only be turned around if americans of of both political parties say our democracy and the integrity of that democracy than themportant feelings and sensibilities of the current occupier of the white house. ms. woodruff: there is a lot more to ask you and your the vice-chairman chairman of the committee that oversaw a lot of the work running parallel with the mueller investigation. it is the turn of the members to ask questions when want to hand. you to raise your i'm reminding you again that everything is on the record. they will bring you a microphone we ask you to stand and state your name and affiliation and limit yourself to one question. lots of hands are up so right here in the front. i'm from california. i run a technology policy company there. there supporting rural operators and other from huawei supplier so we are in a major changing wireless environment which is software. interestingly, american have an advantage in the area of software so china has had a

a deputy assistant to the president and the director of the white house office of security. ms. conway, the white house's arguments have even less merit. we are not asking about any conversations she had with the president. anyre not asking about advice she gave to the president. here, we have a clear cut case of a federal employee violating federal law over and over and over again. we have video of that same federal employee mocking the law itself and claiming it does not apply to her. we have the white this is the opposite of accountability. our system of to laws in this country. above the law. not even ms. conway. for these reasons, we will hear from our ranking member. special counsel kerner's opening statement. we will pause so members can vote on a subpoena to compel her appearance later today. i will yield to the ranking member. >> the report is outrageous. it is outrageous and wrong. we should be honest. the reason we are here is mr. kerner got his feelings hurt, he told that to the white house counsel's office. said he took great offense to miss conway's response. that's

quote, even assuming that the hatch act applies to the most senior advisers to the white house, end of quote. similarly, ms. conway stated this week, quote, it is not even clear to us according to th white house counsel, that the hatch act applies to assistance of the president, end of quote. let me make this abundantly clear. the hatch act is absolutely applies to ms. conway, period. it is written in black and white. we are the committee on jurisdiction over this law. and neither congress nor the courts have ever suggested that a president's adviser is exempt. finally, i want to address the house the white house's baseless arguments for refusing our request for 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

ms. rebecca boggs roberts. [applause] >> i forgot to tell her to wear white. [laughter] ms. roberts: what a true honor it is for us to be here in this hallowed hall, as you heard from congresswoman lesko. in front of the room named for my mother and rebecca's grandmother, and with the speaker of the house and all of you fabulous, powerful women, and leader mccarthy. [laughter] it really is an occasion worth celebrating, and celebrating well into next year, until august. let me read you "the new york times" headline from may 22, 1919. suffrage wins easily in house, vote 304-89. 19 republicans, 70 democrats, largely from the south comprise opposition. the surprise vote was nicholas longworth, who voted the year before the amendment had come to the house and passed by one vote, and he voted against it then. but he said things had changed in his state since then. he didn't mention his wife alice, who probably wouldn't let him come home. [laughter] but after that heartbreaking vote in the house, or heart-stopping vote in the house, a heart-breaking one in the senate, lost by one

ms. johnson: only against white jurors. i would add her motivation is not the question here, but the question is -- jus. sotomayor: she didn't have any black jurors to exercise peremptories except the ms. first one. johnson: except the first one. jus. sotomayor: but so did the prosecutor accept the first one. after that, every black juror available on the panel was struck. ms. johnson: he seated one african-american juror. at the very end, struck one white juror. when all of the evidence in this case is considered, just as in foster versus chapman, the conclusion race was a essential part of evans' motivation is inescapable and mississippi supreme court's decision to the contrary is erroneous. jus. roberts: thank you, counsel. the case is submitted. announcer 1: after the oral -- sunday at 3:00 p.m. eastern, the prophetic presidential candidate senator bernie sanders posts eight town hall in rockville, south carolina. watch it on c-span, c-span.org or listen on the free c-span radio app. >> this week, on "newsmakers, congres

ms. johnson: only against white jurors. i would add her motivation is not the question here, but the question is -- jus. sotomayor: she didn't have any black jurors to exercise peremptories except the ms. first one. johnson: except the first one. jus. sotomayor: but so did the prosecutor accept the first one. after that, every black juror available on the panel was struck. ms. johnson: he seated one african-american juror. at the very end, struck one white juror. when all of the evidence in this case is considered, just as in foster versus chapman, the conclusion race was a essential part of evans' motivation is inescapable and mississippi supreme court's decision to the >> c-span's washington journal live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. coming up saturday morning, a look at recent tensions between the u.s. and iran with steph jones for the center of strategic and international studies. and then a news reporter talks about the epa's announcement repealing president obama's climate change policy, the cl

devastation, and false moral narrative of religious nationalism that has moved its way into the white ?ouse mswilliamson: not only will i, i already have. i've talked about why don't we have a poverty debate. i'm the only person who talks about the chronic trauma of millions of american children while their despair is merely normalized by the establishment. i'm the only one talking about the military-industrial complex except for tulsa gabbard. i'm the only one out there talking about the poverty rate and child poverty. i not only have, sir, but i have not had as much of a megaphone to do that because we have a political military-industrial that is an dominance by having only the conversations they are already having. i can push and push, but i need your help is much as you need my help because the voices of the people are ready and the megaphones are not prepared to receive that conversation as they should be. >> well, you have the megaphone right now. we are live streaming this to be seen all over the world, anywhere that has an internet connection. give us in a nutshell what is the purpose

white house press corps, and many of us were pushing and shoving back to make sure we held our positions. so the north koreans, they're tough customers, fred rikee fre they demonstrated that yesterday. ms. grisham deserves credit for all of this. we've not seen this white house, this administration exactly be champions for free press or for the white house press corps but what we saw stephanie grisham do and you have to give her credit where credit is due, she tried to muscle the north koreans out of the way so members of the white house press corps could get in place and cover this remarkable meeting. >> that's a great point. very notable she was in that scrum in that fight on behalf of the u.s. journalists. jim acosta, thank you so much, from seoul, south korea. >>> so how is that historic meeting being looked at around the world? we'll talk about that next. hey, who are you? oh, hey jeff, i'm a car thief... what?! i'm here to steal your car because, well, that's my job. what? what?? what?! (laughing) what?? what?! what?! [crash] what?! haha, it happens. and if you've got cut-rate car insurance, paying for this could feel like getting robbed twice. so get allstate... and be better pr

atthe man abroad perhaps burnish his reputation at home and make it harder to win the white house for the democrats? msi would if he had not incited a feud with the yor of london before he landed and began a very solemn an celebratory day with an unnecessary feud with an actor. i think we as amicans are very clear on the multi-fdoeted nature old trump and what he will be held to is whether he performed the service of president for all americans. udicated, he a will not prevail. christian:ince we are talking about the race in 2020, we should ask you, are you still contemplating nning? ms. abrams: i am indeed. again, i'm not in a hurry toma a decision, not because i don't believe it is not an simportant one, but my fo right now is making sure that no matter who the democratic nominee is, that we have a fair fight and we have an electoral system that meets the ideaam of ica. right now voter suppression rampant in our nation, and i want to make certain that g are doe work necessary to guarantee that whomever the nominee is, that they have a fair fight in the 2020 election. christian: some of thepinion piec

ms. newman, how important was the work of this intelligence -- this ani unit in preventing white supremacists terrorism? >> thank you for the question, ms. kelly. my office is distinct from the office of intelligence and analysis. we're customers of ina. the office you're referring to is in the process of working to -- towards a mission center model approach, which is an approach that's been recognized in the office of the director of national intelligence as the best practice. as part of that, they are forward deploying analysts to places where they can better collect intelligence. and including the fbi is the predominant place. since we don't collect intelligence the way we do foreign intelligence, it's their cases that tell us the most -- within the federal government about the environment within the domestic terrorist various movements. so that -- it's my understanding that's the intent there. they are still doing the work. they're still producing intelligence products. i read a few of them last week. so i don't know if that answers your question, but that's my level of knowledge about th

white house requested two weeks, we gave them two weeks. mr. jordan: in your letter to the president you said talking out ms. conway's twitter account, you said people follow her. why wasn't it important to put the number of people that follow her? >> she had taken off lunch -- her claim is that this is a personal account and used big growth in the account because she is using it as an official account. mr. jordan: how many twitter accounts does ms. conway have? >> one. mr. jojordan: did she have it prior to working for president trump? >> it is a hybrid. mr. jordan: if she had it workingri to mr. trump. and people are allowed to have a personal account even if they work in government? >> yes. in your report you felt 2. million people follow her account. >> correct. mr. jordan: why was that important? >> by virtue of her making the account an official account. when kellyanne conway makes a account and that would explain the increase. mr. jordan: if she had one follower and said the same things, would she be in violation. >> he that is one of the factors . mr. jordan: two followers and retweets and tweets the

ms. stephanie gresh am, the white house press secretary will choose who will ask the question. >> i'm goingo let our president choose. go ahead, mr. president. >> thank you. she's learned very well. thank you very much, stephanie, i appreciate it. just to add one thing to your question from cbs. it's just a step. might be an important step and it might not. but what we're doing today is a step. and probably it's a step in the right direction. there's a good feeling so it could be very good. as far as another meeting i think let's see what happens today before we start thinking about that but it could be very important. let's see, a question. >> thank you, mr. president, margaret tolive with bloomberg news. i hope you'll indulge me since we get one question i'm going to try to make it count. why do you want to step into north korea and what do you think that handshake could actually accomplish? nothing has substantively changed since hay now. why does kim jong-un deserve this moment and how do you respond to the critics who say it's nothing more than a photo op or that you're legitimizing a

ms. norton: mr. chairman, i think that's the only way this statute is constitutional. i can conceive of people working in the white house, only the president and the vice president where kellyanne conway could have avoided the issues before us today had she made it clear would it be enough to say, i'm not speaking in my public capacity, i'm not speaking as kellyanne conway, special assistant to the president, i'm speaking as kellyanne conway, private citizen. if she had said that and said some of the very things she said officially, that would have been constitutional, yes or no? >> i think that's right. ms. norton: thank you very much. i think it's very important to clarify that we don't want the public to believe the democrats on this committee are going after people for their free speech rights and i want to clarify. mr. raskin: would the gentlelady yield? thank you very much. i know it's important to your constituents in washington d.c. and important to my constituents in maryland. i attend thousands of federal employees, too. many of them were told they could not wear a resist button or talk about impeachment

in response, the white house and ms. conway have gone on the offensive. hatch act does not even apply. tell that to all the other federal employees that have to adhere to this law. the white house counsel claimed there were no violations, even assuming the hatch act applies. senior advisors. , itconway stated this week is not even clear to us at the white house according to the white house counsel that the house -- hatch act applies to the assistance of the president. let me make this clear. absolutely applies to ms. conway. period. we are the committee on jurisdiction over this law. neither congress nor the courts ave ever suggested president's advisers are exempt. baseless address the -- and they are truly are forless -- arguments refusing the testimony today. they sent a letter to the committee monday. immune, andis quote of quote from testifying. they claim this principle has byn consistently adhered to administrations of both parties. this is simply not true. congress has never accepted the arem white house advisors immune. our committee has obtained

because you guys did go into this knowing the white house was going to exert this executive privilege. >> well, not all the questions to ms her time in the white house. there were also questions directed to her for her time in the campaign which she did answer. in fact, my questions were about that. so we did get some information. it's clear from her answers, and she was under oath, so i assume she was telling the truth that she did not have a broad understanding of all of the elements of the campaign. however, she did provide information about other people whose testimony might prove fruitful to the committee in getting a fuller understanding of some of these issues. so that was very helpful. >> what was the most useful thing she told you? >> well, you'll see the transcripts, but identifying names of some of the individuals and some of the relationships. i had a question, really, about the russians which was the origin of this whole thing. and the jill stein campaign, which she did acknowledge was a subject of discussion, but she really was not able to provide any meat on those bones. >> understood. so we're waiting on t

white house? lawyer, for the purpose of this hearing, yes. chairman, okay. question to ms. hicks. when mr. lewandowski visited on june 19th, 2017, he was not an employee of the white house and the administration, correct? lawyer, objection. chairman nadler. that's a matter of public knowledge. it has nothing to do with whether or not she was white house staff. she would no that in any event, so it should not be covered by this. the lawyer, under the terms of absolute immunity, she may not speak about anything that occurred during the time of her employment in the white house as a close adviser to the president. the chairman, anything that occurred during that time? the lawyer, during her service as close adviser to the president. chairman nadler, so did a war break out between israel and egypt during that time period? lawyer, same objection. chairman nadler. same objection. well, i'll ask these questions for the record so you can object for the record. question to ms. hicks, do you recall if you knew why mr. lewandowski was at the white house that day? lawyer, objection. chairman nadler, we

at the moment whenever ms conversations, negotiations that have been taking place at the white housesed according to the mexican delegation. the focus has been on immigration. we have seen large groups of migrants coming from central america and trying to claim asylum. in simple terms, america wa nts asylum. in simple terms, america wants that to stop. they want to try to stem the flow of these migrants coming to the border. and tariffs are being used as the threat to try and address all of that. in a tweet from donald trump, he made it very clear that as far as he was concerned, clear that as far as he was concerned , progress clear that as far as he was concerned, progress is not being made to a sufficient degree and that these tariffs that would start at 5% from next week, then rise by 5% each month up to a maximum of 25% on all mexican imports from october. he said this tariffs would come into place unless there is an agreement. and although we heard from the minister, mexico's foreign minister that he was somewhat optimistic that he was going to remain optimistic. the two sides

ms. craft: yes. the majority of the negotiations occurred in washington at ustr. senator rubio: did the white house ever deploy you to events around the country to promote usmca? ms. craft: the state department would often suggest whether it be a northern governor's and northern premiere meeting or different meetings with governors in order to really stress the importance of our trade with each state because each state obviously canada, i think 33 of them is the number one trading partner. senator rubio: the point is the state department asked you and suggest you attend certain events within the united states to promote a top priority of the administration which is the usmca negotiations and agreement? ms. craft: that is correct. actually, i received a lot of invitations and my office would have to make, you know, difficult decisions because i couldn't be two or three places at once and they would have to make the decision. being in washington was my number one priority. if that did not interfere with the trip that will be promoting nafta, ustr -- usmca, then i would most certainly travel. se

false moral narrative of religious nationalism that has moved its way into the white house and is helping to set policy? mswilliamson: not only will i, i already have. as everybody has talked in the last couple weeks about why don't we have a climate debate, i've said why don't we have a poverty debate. i'm the only person who in every one of my campaign stops talks about the chronic trauma of millions of american children while their despair is merely normalized by the establishment. why i want a u.s. department of children and youth. i'm the only one talking about the military-industrial complex other than tulsi gabbard. i'm the only one out there talking about reparations for mass incarceration, the only one talking about the poverty rate and child poverty. i not only have, sir, but i have not had as much of a megaphone to do that because we have a political-media-industrial complex that seeks to perpetuate its dominance by having only the conversations they are already having. therefore, i can push and push, but i need your help is much as you need my help because the voices of the people are ready and

but with the white house already intervening, how much will lawmakers actually hear from ms. hicks? >>> a hearing over an issue that's been unsettled for a while now, reparations. as lawmakers look at a proposal to address reparations. >>> they're off, the 2020 race officially under way, we are seven days, of course, away from the first democratic presidential debate. president trump for his part kicking off his re-election campaign tuesday night in orlando. in his first big rally is any indication, 2020 is going to look a lot like 2016. in that 76 minute speech, the president hit on some familiar themes that helped deliver him the white house. bashing old rivals, democrats, the media and more pledges to drain the swamp. >> our radical democrat opponents are driven by hatred, prejudice and rage. they want to destroy you and they want to destroy our country as we know it. we went through the greatest witch hunt this political history. hillary clinton lost. remember the insurance policy. >> nbc's hans nichols is at the white house, and road warrior savannah sellers is live in pennsylv

and then as usual, another white house reporter took the pressure off by changing the subject. the special counsel's report says mssistent notorious and deliberate hatch act violations rate add unprecedented challenge to this office's ability to enforce the act. she defiant lit reyekted the hatch act's position to her activities and flippantly said let me know when the jail sentence starts and she made it clear she has no plans to cease abusing her official position to influence voters. now this would be the biggest scandal in most previous white houses but the special counsel's recommendation to fire kellyanne conway for violating the hatch act comes the day after the president said he himself would violate federal law to win re-election if a foreign country offered him information on his re-election campaign opponent. the president said i think i'd want to hear it. they have information, i think i'd take it. those are his exact words. the president said that the fbi director is wrong to say that that is a crime and. and so today in perfect symmetry to what the president said yesterday comes the case of kellyanne

ms. reid: when you are campaigning within white communities, because you have talked a lot about trying tong across people who may not naturally vote democratic, how do you make those issues you mentioned more powerful to them than their fears about immigration? rev. barber: can i follow up on that? because i want to push this. the poor people's campaign, we know all about committees having an impact. white.black and i am you can notice that. she is armenian by heritage. i am part test aurora and white and black, but i white comes to voter suppression, i am black. -- but when it comes to voter suppression, i am black. what would happen if candidates were willing to go into predominantly white communities, as this campaign does, and say, you are mad because people are taking more water rights and you are mad because of public education cuts and teachers leaving the community, and you are upset because wages are not high and unions have pulled out, but did you know that the people that get elected that do this to you only get elected because of racialized voter suppression? what if candidate

ms. reid: when you are campaigning within white communities, because you have talked a lot about trying tong across people who may not naturally vote democratic, how do you make those issues you mentioned more powerful to them than their fears about immigration? rev. barber: can i follow up on that? because i want to push this. the poor people's campaign, we know all about committees having an impact. white.black and i am you can notice that. she is armenian by heritage. i am part test aurora and white and black, but i white comes to voter suppression, i am black. -- but when it comes to voter suppression, i am black. what would happen if candidates were willing to go into predominantly white communities, as this campaign does, and say, you are mad because people are taking more water rights and you are mad because of public education cuts and teachers leaving the community, and you are upset because wages are not high and unions have pulled out, but did you know that the people that get elected that do this to you only get elected because of racialized voter suppression? what if candidate

reporter: the white house is offering to democrats. have you seen that? any comment -- ms. pelosi: what are you referencing? reporter: mnuchin was in last night? ms. pelosi: i can't tell you that. we do have to lift the budget caps and we have to avoid sequestration because that's not a good idea for our country and avoid shutdown of governments and some republicans don't believe in governing and we are going to combine and when we lift the caps, then we can talk about lifting the debt ceiling, but that would have to come second or simultaneously but not before. i don't know what their proposal is. i do know when we have been engaged in conversation with leader mcconnell and leader schumer and leader mccarthy with the secretary of the treasury, we were making some progress, but then they kind of backed away from it. i don't know what that one is. i'm not unusually, shall we say, when milk mulvaney -- he was one of the leaders of shutting down government when he was here and voted to keep it closed, voted to keep it closed and when we were operating on the republican numbers

administration, this white house continues to block the persons who are no longer at the white house, that includes i believe ms. donaldson, ms. hicks and mr. mcgahn from speaking legitimately and under the rules of the house, the legitimacy of this committee to seek witnesses and as well to suggest that mr. mueller should not testify, even though we believe we'll get all of these individuals, then i think the american people will see, is this the way we want to run a country? >> congresswoman sheila jackson lee, good to talk to you again. thank you for joining me tonight. >> glad to be with you. thank you. >> all right. for more on the legal and political implications of today's hearings, i'm joined by harry litman, contributing columnist for "the washington post" and msnbc political analyst david jolly, former republican congressman from florida. gents, good to see you. >> thanks, ali. >> let me start with you as a former member of congress. this is where the rubber hits the road when it comes to these hearings, right?ro you saw today what happened. democrats were going down a particular road. republicans wer

ms. hicks, are you going to answer question about your time at the white house? have you discussed today's testimony with the president at all? >> reporter: and inside the hearing room, she didn't have many answers either. a white house lawyer blocking her from answering any questions about her time in the administration, claiming she has what they describe as immunity. >> it could be as simple as, "where is your office located? objection." it is ridiculous. >> reporter: often seen but rarely heard. >> thank you, donald trump. >> reporter: hicks was by the president's side throughout the campaign and during his first year in office as his communications director. she was one of trump's most trusted advisers, and one of the most frequently named people in the mueller report. >> now hope hicks is a tremendously talented person. she started off with us right from day one. >> reporter: there for so many key moments. hicks was on air force one when the president crafted that misleading statement for his son don junior about that trump tower meeting with the russian la

we are expecting that the trump white house will presumably order hope hicks and ms. on ton turn over documents just as they've ordered other witnesses to not comply with other congressional subpoenas. so tonight we are awaiting word on whether the white house is going to block them from hanged over those documents or whether they will just defy them on their own, whether there will be additional contempt charges here. i mean, even without mueller investigation witnesses the judiciary committee does say they are moving ahead with hearings on the mueller report. judiciary chirm jerrold nadler announced a series of hearings in response to the report starting with someone who knows something about presidents obstructing justice, richard nix ons white house counsel john dean whose congressional testimony blew the watergate scandal wide open. ebel the judiciary committee's first witness a week from today because history doesn't repeat itself but it does rhyme. the judiciary committee, again, trying to get witnesses who are people who provided evidence to the mueller report

ms. clarke testified. i explained about the whites, four minutes green and red you don't have to go to the train, but you have to stop. they should be truthful and honest first ms. abrams is the founder and chair of an organization dedicated to advancing the electoral reform and in 2018 as the democratic nominee for governor of the state of georgia first african-american woman in u.s. history nominated by a major party for governor. running for governor she served in the general assembly from 2007 until 2017 in the house of representatives. she received her degree from yale law school and masters of public affairs from the school of public affairs at the university of texas at austin. you are recognized for five minutes and we appreciate your attendance. >> thank you mr. chairman, ranking member johnson, committee members thank you for allowing me to address this important hearing today. today. the decision created a channel for the troubling practice of the voter suppression during the time of dramatic demographic change however no assaults on democracy will ever b for whethe limited its targets of the franc

white house will also accept. i'm not in the room where that happens with our distinguished leaders minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from new york. ms. ocasio-cortez: thank you. madam chair, i rise today to offer this critical, bipartisan amendment that will allow united states researchers to study and examine the extraordinary promise shown by several schedule one drugs that have been shown in treating critical diseases such as m.d.a. success in veteran ptsd, treatment resistant depression or effectiveness in opioid and other drug addiction. additionally, this will allow research into marijuana's impact in cancer relief, seizure treatment, and more. this amendment strikes a war on drugs provision that prohibits any activity, quote, promoting the legalization of any drug included in schedule one of the controlled substance act. the problem with this provision is that it is so vague and broadly interrupted that it prevents -- interpreted that it prevents scientists from researching, examining and exploring avenues of treatment that could alleviate an enormous amount of suffering from medical conditions. with that, i would like to yie

ms. conway to continue her position of trust at the white house couwould demonstrat that the president isot 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 evidence that robert mueller used in his investigation. and now cnn is told that members are now going

ms. conway to continue her position of trust at the white house would demonstrate that the president is not 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 argument around free speech. the supreme court has looked at the hatch act specifically and made the point, ev

white house will also accept. i'm not in the room where that happens with our distinguished leaders minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from new york. ms. ocasio-cortez: thank you. madam chair, i rise today to offer this critical, bipartisan amendment that will allow united states researchers to study and examine the extraordinary promise shown by several schedule one drugs that have been shown in treating critical diseases such as m.d.a. success in veteran ptsd,

conway did not show up at the hearing after the white house said it would not allow her to appear >> msay violated the law dozens of times by using her official position to criticize democratic candidates and support 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 v

. >> last week, he took those white house m&ms a whole handful. >> trump is wary to embark on anothertop candidates turning down offers. remember that young guy that was like, yeah, no. i'm not coming. mulvaney is the third chief of staff in two and a half years. >> stop talking. >> that might have been the end right there. >> this is why the deal with the devil working in the trump white house is a terrible deal. it might seem at the moment it is a good deal. >> i'm going to work in the white house. >> it doesn't end well. >> the problem also is that whatever approach you make doesn't work. if you are like nick mulvaney who has sacrificed everything you ultimately believed in. runner of the freedom caucus. he said, my job it to do what trump wants to do. a couple of things that happen once you leave the trump white house. very few people have left with their reputation still in tact, general maddox is one. pompeo seems to have figured out trump so far. >> i don't know. >> i think his reputation is completely shot. he knows better. unlike donald trump, he knows better. he knows milita

white males and she doesn't know any of them —— guests. here is a clip. if they may, just want to say, it is such an honour to meet you, mss reynolds. my name is eugene. and when my parents got divorced opposition i don't know you are. i don't know who any of you are. well... iam tom. i write the monologue. i'm the youngest monologue right in the history of the show. i don't know any of this. do you know what, here's what we're going to do. you are number one, you are number two, you another three, number four. hi, catherine. thank god. how is your baby? she's 27. her baby's doing well. you are five, six, seven... that is what i'll call you. it's easier. can we call each other by our names? just learn the numbers, reynolds. can i switch? i'm the most senior writer. can we just get into it now and see if we can salvage anything with taping. i love it already. exactly. you are laughing all the way through. emma thompson does that thing, "i don't care". and moves on. all she says she has to have a woman in the writer ‘s room. the woman who applies has no comedy experience at all. has been working on a chemical plant. she imm

but with the white house already intervening, how much will lawmakers actually hear from ms. hicks? over an issue that's been unsettled for