nadler says no need.aning whitaker, before the committee tomorrow morning and are prepared to respond to questions from our members then i assure you there will be no need for the committee to issue a subpoena on or before february 8th. he goes on to say, we are prepared to handle your concerns on a case-by-case basis before, during and after tomorrow's hearing. we can expect if all goes according it plan, whitaker will show up tomorrow. the question is whether he will answer any communications between he and the president. past officials have declined to answer those questions. what happens if he doesn't answer those questions tomorrow? >> good point. manu raju, you're carefully going through this letter as well. i suspect that the key words are both during and after tomorrow's hearing. >> he's not saying he won't issue a sp. he is only saying if you don't appear we'll go forward with the subpoena but if you come and answer our questions there will be no need for a subpoena. basically putting the ball ba

nadler: mr. chairman, i am pleased that today we are considering h.r. 8. the bipartisan background checks act of 2019. we have promised the american people that congress would take steps to reduce gun violence and this bill is a critical first step toward doing so. during the past four weeks, as the judiciary committee and now the full house have discussed the issue of gun violence, i have cited grim statistics. nearly 40,000 americans lost their lives because of guns in 2017. in fact, every day in america on average 34 people are murdered with a firearm and more than 183 people are injured in an attack. gun violence of this magnitude is a distinctly american problem. a country to country comparison is shocking. for example, in 2011 the united kingdom had 146 deaths due to gun violence. denmark, 71. portugal, 142. and japan, just 30. the united states that year, about 35,000. a recent study the -- in the american journal of medicine found that compared to 22 other high-income countries, gun-relat

nadler: mr. chairman, i now yield two minutes to the gentlelady from california, the chairperson of the crime subcommittee, ms. bass. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. bass: thank you. mr. chair, i rise in strong support of h.r. 8, the bipartisan background checks act of 2019, which will extend the current federal background check requirement to unlicensed sellers of guns. it is about time that congress takes this issue seriously and i am pleased that this bipartisan bill has been brought to the house floor with the urgency this issue deserves. in recent years, our nation has experienced an increase in mass shootings and our nation is appropriately horrified. however, mass shootings are just one symptom of our gun violence epidemic. the daily toll of shootings occurs in communities across our country, on our streets, in our schools, and even in our houses of worship. as one testified before the judiciary committee earlier this month, one year after the terrible shooting

nadler: i certainly hope so. and mentallye have nstable or whatever. shouldn't have gun in some exceptions. but we don't want to go too far. now, the now, the only objection i heard other than the fact is that it takes some time to -- if you are not buying in -- indiscernible] you have to take the time to go to a licensed gun dealer and get checked out. wood wood and money. mr. nadler: i'm coming to that. i said there were two. and second, it will cost some money. ow much, i don't know. the licensed gun dealer will charge you a fee for doing this. if the gun dealer around the corner charges a lesser fee, you will probably go there. there will be market fees. and yes, there is a slight burden, but the judgment is, our judgment is it's worth that burden to keep guns out of the hands that shouldn't have them. and again, remember what we are dealing with. other countries have 150 a year. we have 39 thousand and no one can tell me that americans are 10 times as mentally ill as people in europe, japan or anyone else. the prevalence of gun. if i could, i woul

nadler: mr. chairman, i am pleased that today we are considering h.r. 8. the bipartisan background checks act of 2019. we have promised the american people that congress would take steps to reduce gun violence and this bill is a critical first step toward doing so. during the past four weeks, as the judiciary committee and now the full house have discussed the issue of gun violence, i have cited grim statistics. nearly 40,000 americans lost their lives because of guns in 2017. in fact, every day in america on average 34 people are murdered with a firearm and more than 183 people are injured in an attack. gun violence of this magnitude is a distinctly american problem. a country to country comparison is shocking. for example, in 2011 the united kingdom had 146 deaths due to gun violence. denmark, 71. portugal, 142. and japan, just 30. the united states that year, about 35,000. a recent study the -- in the american journal of medicine found that compared to 22 other high-income countries, gun-relat

nadler: correct. mr. woodall: i'm looking also at the section -- looking at the section on loans of guns. my dad's friend gary gave him a .243 bolt action for deer hunting when i was a kid my dad passed away last summer he still had that .243. gary has so many guns he didn't need it back. a t's been a 30-year year -- 30-year transfer. if my dad's best friend wanted to dad's best friend wanted to sell him that rifle instead of learning him the rifle for 30 transfer.t would be a now that we go to a gun dealer mydo, i can no longer -- in hunting club, i can no longer sell weapons back and forth, it .f.l. issue?, >> the purpose of the bill estimate sure that every time someone gets a hold of a gun, a background check is done with no section. >> and the committee concluded that not having that exception toadened, not allowing me sell guns within my hunting we would expect that to save lives, not just create a burden for gun owners, but it will make a difference in the committee's judgment? >> i am much were wh

no one will outlast jerry nadler. he will be persistent. we will go after whitaker, even if he is not in the news for some simple answers as to what happened. >> where do you think this is heading? you are now on the house oversight committee. you have a lot of investigations of the trump administration. where is it heading? >> it's not personal to the president. the president keeps making it as if someone is out to get him. this is about basic conflicts of interest. it goes back to the 1920s when there was the tea pot dome scandal and handing had the administration and an official was accused of bribery. the congress said, we need to know. do they have financial conflict of interest? we want to know, does the president and administration officials, do they have financial conflicts of interest overseas? >> this is what the president tweeted today. the dems and their committees are going nuts. the republicans never did this to president obama. there would be no time left to run government. how do you respond? >> the president has never been

nadler from new york. mr. nadler: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i support this amendment, which requires the f.b.i. to report on a number of petitions it was not able to resolve with a determination within 10 days. we know that providing more time for checks to be completed in the instances that more time is needed will help prevent guns from getting into the hands of those who ineligible under current law from purchasing and possessing the guns. that is the goal of this bill is to do just that and to allow individuals whose checks take longer than 10 days to complete the opportunity to petition for their case to be reviewed within another 10-day period. the report required by this amendment will help us oversee the implementation of this new process and the changes instituted by this law. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. mr. schneider: thank you. i reserve my time. the chair: the gentleman from illinois reserves. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. chins collins thank you -- mr. mcclint

i want to make sure we clearly understand what nadler said.he didn't say, we won't subpoena you. am i right? >> that's right. nadler certainly left wiggle room in the ultimate written commitment that he made to the justice department. now, doj officials say they are satisfied that nadler has made them confident that he won't serve a subpoena to whitaker while testifying later this morning, but it appears just from reading that statement that nadler may potentially leave the door open. this committee heari ining truls potential to go off the rails. the first blockbuster showdown between a top trump administration cabinet official and the newly empowered house congressional democrats. whitaker's ascent in the doj especially given his minimal recent experience in federal law enforcement is something that has enraged the democratic base. nad lehr a tler has a ton of qu for him related to the probe and officials i spoke with with direct knowledge of whitaker's preparation said they've been worried not just about the questions whitaker may get about

where jerry nadler was pushing him on a range of topics.say he did not give any assurances to the white house about the mueller investigation. he said he got briefe once, but when nadler asked him how many times have you been briefed, he said he would not discuss that. so he also. >>> as democrats will run here after the votes. >>> which committee plans to bring him back for a closed-door, ask him questions about the topics he refuses to answer to today. that's what nadler said. so so far, rather tense in that hearing room. pop,? >> to that point, i was wondering the same thing, manu. could he be a private citizen? will he stay in the department of justice? we'll see. if they depose him behind closed doors, is that for a specific investigation? simplgts i think they will want to know more. >> that's going to be a legal fight between the justice department and this committee, but he may not answer them today, but he will still be pressed. >>> let me bring in our experts. if you could remind our viewers about the whole recuse al there was adv

chairman nadler had sent the questions well in advance. he told him to please determine which questions the president wanted to exert executive privilege around. at the beginning of the hearing, he started by saying i will be using executive privilege here. the guy's going to be gone in a week, and we really wanted to get information from him. >> was it a waste of time, the hearing? >> i don't think it was a waste of time, because the guy is if acting attorney general. i think he showed over and over again that he should not be thing atting attorney general. he didn't know the answers to most of the questions. even if they weren't about mueller, he couldn't answer the questions. >> your democratic colleague of tennessee said he thinks whitaker is lying about several of these pointing including he never discussed the mueller probe with the president of the united states. that would be a crime if he's under oath lying before the committee. do you think he per jurisdiction himself under oath? >> i don't know. it would be difficult to believe

not only that, but whitaker has put the committee chairman there nadler on the clock saying he wants that assurance in writing tonight no later than 6:00 p.m. all of this is happening as the president's permanent pick william barr just cleared a big hurdle of his own. so we start with laura jared, our justice reporter who's all over this breaking news. take us inside this standoff and what is going on? >> we're really in a limbo mode at this point with a will he or won't he will show up tomorrow. that 6:00 p.m. deadline now ticking away that whitaker has imposed for the house judiciary committee, the chairman jerry nadler to let him know whether or not he's willing to withdraw that subpoena that was sort of preemptively issued earlier today for his testimony as we know nadler wanted to have that subpoena in his back pocket in case whitaker tried to avoid questions on executive privilege grounds. whitaker now saying that's not fair. this is a breach of the agreement. i was willing to come voluntarily, but i will not discuss my confidential communications with the president, which is s

nadler: i will -- excuse me. if the gentleman repeats that or any other comment, i will direct he be removed. i will direct he be removed if he repeats it. thank you. >> mr. chairman, i would observe that's three interruptions of my time by the same individual, and that the chair is not utilizing his discretion to remove the individual. i believe i have about a minute of time remaining and i wanted to take the time -- >> will the gentleman yield for -- my friend yield for a question. >> i typically do, my friend from florida, but since my time has been interrupted by members of the other side, perhaps you can have a colleague yield time to you. the time i have remaining, i believe was at a minute and 12 seconds. rep. nadler: the gentleman has 1 minute, 37 seconds. >> thank you. i appreciate that. rep. nadler: the gentleman will proceed. >> thank you, mr. chairman. we all are entitled to our own opinions and views on how to address gun violence, but i don't believe that we are entitled to our own facts, and while

>> why is jerry nadler wrong?e's saying is true and actually we have a president who has committed impeachable offenses and they do rise to the level of impeachment, and if you simply look at the last week, you look at his fake state of emergency, you see a president who's willing to go directly against the constitution, to continrave congress' right to allocate the money in our society because he didn't get his way and he threw a fit. so, in fact, what we've seen is a president who's going at the most important issues that a president can do. the separation of powers that mr. nadler has actually specifically referenced, if a president goes after the separation of powers, that's an impeachable offense. >> yet, chairman nadler is not starting impeachment proceedings and showing no signs of doing so. he's seeming to be much more cautious. what are you going to do about it? >> well, what we're trying -- we have 7.3 million people who've signed our petition. 26,000 of them are in congressman nadler's district. in fact

donald trump's declaration of a national emergency.in a letter to trump friday, nadler and other members of the judiciary panel express their "alarm" over the proclamation, an effort to get more money for a u.s.-mexico border wall. nadler says his committee will investigate the "serious constitutional and statutory issues" the declaration raises and is asking white house and justice department officials to appear at a hearing.he says the decision shows "reckless disregard for the separation of powers and your own responsibilities under our constitutional system."trump said friday he would declare the emergency in an effort to bypass congress, which would not give him full funding for his wall.the american civil liberties union says it will file a lawsuit challenging president donald trump's emergency declaration to fund a wall on the u.s.-mexican border.the friday announcement came hours after trump signed the declaration and said he expected legal challenges. the civil rights group will argue that trump's use of emergency powers is unprecedented and can't be used to build a border wall.

chairman of that body, jerry nadler is preparing a subpoena just in case whitaker doesn't show. nadler says he wants to ask him about his supervision of the mueller investigation and his decision not to take himself out of it despite his prejudgments, his criticisms of the inquiry. well, with that a lot to talk about. let's bring in our lead-off panel on a wednesday night. mica, former staffer for the house intelligence and armed southwests committees. harry lipman is here with us. a doj veteran who is both a former u.s. attorney and former deputy assistant attorney general under president clinton. and the aforementioned aaron blake, senior political reporter at the washington post. let's start with you. given your experience on the hill, by how much is donald trump's life going to change again effective today? >> it's going to change quite dramatically. you have many committees who e are -- their policies, but more particularly with the president and his personal financial entanglements. there are things that are fine if you are a private citizen or private businessperson to ha

jerry nadler said he may have misled you and others in his testimony. what are the areas of concern? >> the areas, how did you get the job ? he seems to suggest he didn't say anything to the white house about his prior existing views, that the mueller investigation was a witch hunt. we now have witnesses that he gave us who can either corroborate his account he never brought that up when he auditions for the job or would contradict it. also, when it comes to recusal, again, it's very fishy he was advised to recuse himself yet he chose not to. we understand how that played out. we can probe further. finally, i asked him, would bob mueller agree with your account that this investigation is nearly complete? he actually was pretty straightforward when he said no, mr. mueller, wouldn't agree. the concern now is, is he limiting the freedom of movement that the mueller team needs to have to follow the evidence? we can shine further light there. >> last time we spoke, congressman, you said you were getting, in your words, pretty close to making an announcement

and jerry nadler has been preparing for this for a long time. we'll see what happens. >>> also speaking, and we're just learning about this as we wake up this morning, the daughter of the president, senior white house adviser ivanka trump, she did an interview with abc news with abby huntsman from the view and abby pressed her on whether or not she is nervous about the mueller investigation. listen. >> are you concerned about anyone in your life that you love? >> no. >> being involved? >> i'm not. i'm really not. >> you mentioned the moscow example, that's a perfect example. there's nothing there. yet it's created weeks and weeks and months of headlines. so, no, i have zero concern. >> it's interesting. first of all, it's always interesting to hear from the senior adviser to the president on the subjects, white house advisers don't often talk this openly about that. but when she's saying no one she loves, one would assume that means her father, her brothers, her husband, she's connected to a lot of people here who there have been question marks

so that's where jerry nadler, the chairman, was going with this. i can see what mr. whitaker says he would rather talk about violence prevention or something like that. >> bill: at the department of justice, which is what he said the hearing was all about. i don't know how much further they go, shelby. if the questions are going to go on the democratic side the way they have gone and the answers have been quite apparent from whitaker. >> he made it clear he wouldn't talk about any conversations he had with the president but he has been willing to while answering some questions, give those answers that chairman nadler wanted. he didn't want to talk about his conversations but said he didn't have those conversations with the president. he has now said that under oath. another point jerry nadler wanted to hit on is whether or not he had briefed any third parties who may have told the president. that's when things got contentious and whitaker wanted to invoke the five-minute rule. it was an important question. i don't think we got much of an answer. he didn't give the fl

nadler says his committee will ve constitutional and house and justice department officials to appearat a hearing.he says the decision shows "reckless disregard for the separation of powers and your own responsibilities under our constitutional system."trump said friday he would declare the emergency in an effort to bypass congress, which would not give him full funding for his wall.the american civil liberties union says it will file a lawsuit challenging president donald trump's emergency declaration to fund a wall on the u.s.-mexican border.the friday announcement came hours after trump signed the declaration and said he expected legal challenges. the civil rights group will argue that trump's use of emergency powers is border wall.aclu executive director anthony romero says the declaration is 'patently illegal.' their legal action would be separate from anything congress may do.house speaker nancy pelosi (puh- loh'-see) and senate minority leader chuck schumer have also raised the possibility of legal action. they say trump's decision would "shred the constitution" by usurping con

is chairman nadler correct in charging whitaker's testimony? to matt whitaker has gone unanswered for almost a week now. though i was told tonight from capitol hill that they think matthew whitaker might still reply. then again we expected matt whitaker to leave the justice department when william barr took over as the new attorney general, but instead matt whitaker has stayed on. they've given him a different job at the justice department. if he is still a justice department official tonight, that means he is still under the oversight of the house judiciary committee in congress. that committee could bring him back in if he lied to them, pur purgered himself under oath pur purgered himself under oat >> tech: at safelite autoglass we know that when you're spending time with the grandkids... ♪ music >> tech: ...every minute counts. and you don't have time for a cracked windshield. that's why at safelite, we'll show you exactly when we'll be there. with a replacement you can trust. all done sir. >> grandpa: looks great! >> tech: thanks for choosi

jerry nadler who is jewish said it was deeply disappointing and disturbing that she appears to trope -- omar standing strong, writing quote my intention is never to offend my constituents or jewish as a whole. omar has been considered a rising star, part of the new group of young women elected to congress. >> together we can organize our world and politics of hope. >> reporter: but this isn't the first time she's been accused of

bill barr's confirmation potentially next week, i don't think he'll answer the questions jerry n nadler wants answered. so what information can they extract if any? he's in a position to shine a lot of light on his interactions with the president. status of the mueller probe. i don't think he'll do those things. maybe there is a little bit there. we focused on democrats. republicans have their own issue with the justice department, particularly those on the conservative right related to lisa page, peter strzok. you know about the clinton e-mail investigation, james comey. there is a lot there. again, the problem is i think whitaker has roughly zero incentive to be forthcoming and will likely claim executive privilege or conversations in that regard a lot. i think we'll get less than we hope for. in terms of washington drama, this is sort of top shelf stuff. >> we'll be watching. i want to get to some reporting you have. you sat down with kellyanne conway. she revealed something to you we hadn't heard before about an assault. walk us through what happened there. >> this is something that

you saw that from nadler today. once he got the gist of the cd that whitaker was not going to answer questions invoking the squishy executive privilege, not coming out and claiming privilege but saying it might be something they do later. a staffer handed him a prepared statement. he read it out locking the idea they would bring whitaker back for a deposition at a later date. there are contingency plans. going back to something chuck said. whitaker is going to play this differently because he knows he's not coming back in this role. he doesn't have to worry that his answers here are going to frustrate doj funding down the line. that he's going to poison the well for his future in this role. this is it for him. he needs to survive this and agree there's politics at play here, and there's politics in play in all of this. his political future is tied to donald trump far more than tied to the department of justice. bill bar will come in and the next of the oversight hearings with his hands clean from this two a certain

you see jerry nadler there, democrat of new york.week ago when whitaker said the mueller probe was close to getting wrapped up. they'll want to know about that. it's clear from the opening statement we just got that whitaker plans to assert that executive privilege may cover some of the answers in the future. it sounds like there is a lot he's not going to answer. >> that's right. we'll see how this whole thing goes. this is a very, very big committee. this could be a lengthy hearing, but not necessarily that informative. especially around the questions that democrats want to know most of all. >> let's listen in. they just gavelled in. >> he went on to be the longest serving member of congress in the history of the united states. by virtue of enduring accomplishment, one of the greatest. he was a presence in the hearing room, a determined investigator and a true believer in congressional oversight. he loved the house of representatives. we remember him for his humor, charm, integrity and his fantastic twitter account. our thoughts ar

this turn to nadler, speaking of no class. again, one of the chairman who is going after the president, at what point do you believe, or is there a point that the republican party will rise up and say, the hell with you, this stops and we may now. where is mitch mcconnell? where is your minority leader? is there anyone that has any kind of heart or soul? in the corporate owned republican party? >> i will tell you, i think we need more people with hearts and minds. i know today we fought jerry nadler, i went after him to look at what his resolution was doing. he wants to get power to basically subpoena would occur at any time. this is unprecedented. whitaker has agreed to come in and testify. >> the american people understand what a pigsty that committee is, and want an unfortunate character the chairman's. but, nonetheless, we understand their actions. what are you and what is your leaders in the republican party, what are they doing? >> i don't know what anybody else is doing but i know the freedom coccus is doing. what i am

what do you think chairman nadler is trying to get at? >> he's trying to get at a number of different things. but is whitaker being forthcoming? of course he's not because he's invoking executive privilege. but you can look at the algebra of his statements. he's already said i have not spoken to the president about mueller. we can cabin that off. he's locked in there. but it appears the negative of that is that he has talked to president trump. but he's not going to talk about what he said. executive privilege does make sense in certain situations. the idea is that while these people deliberate, they may say things in a moment of candor that they don't necessarily want to be part of the public record. on the other hand, in addition, as the head of the doj, there are many different ongoing investigations, and members of the doj, united states attorneys, ausas, they don't volunteer a lot of information about ongoing investigations. they almost never do. so he has at least two major powerful reasons for not disclosing information. so when he

i want to start with the fights going on between whitaker and chairman nadler. nadler not giving whitaker the guarantee he's asking for in order to agree to testify. do you have any indication that whitaker is going to accept the deal? >> the chairman just sent over a letter assuring acting attorney general whitaker that if he comes forward tomorrow and answers our questions he doesn't have to worry about a subpoena. that's the process that we want, but erin, in what country does an executive tell elected representatives that they're above answering questions? i'll tell you what country. it's china, russia, iran, but it's not the united states of america. the reason we are ready to go with the subpoena is because we have sent over to the administration a number of questions we want to ask the acting attorney general, so he's getting the questions in advance and ask them if they're going to assert any privileges that would prevent him from answering. they didn't send anything back, so we got nervous and we didn't want to waste our time, waste the american people'

congress jerry nadler of new york.ter advises whitaker that at his testimony last week in congress, quote, members on both sides of the aisle found many of your answers to be unsatisfactory, incomplete or contradictory by other evidence. contradicted by other evidence is a bad one. the judiciary committee chairman is inviting matt whitaker to clarify his testimony, but the implication of his letter, this contradicted by other evidence thing, the implication is that matt whitaker may have made false statements to the committee while he was testifying under oath. to be specific, nadler says that the committee, quote, has identified several individuals with direct knowledge of the phone calls you denied receiving from the white house about the justice department's prosecution of longtime trump attorney michael cohen. mr. whitaker said under oath in his testimony that he did not have communications with the white house about the cohen prosecution. jerry nadler has advised him tonight that they have identified several indiv

bob mueller will finish his investigation when he finishes the investigation. >> reporter: nadler has a list of questions he wants an answer to, including when matthew whit cher had conversations with the president after those briefings, because nadler sed says he doesn't find whitaker's insistence that he didn't have conversations with the president completely credible. of course the chairman, jerold senate ler is threatening a subpoena, if it's necessary to get those answers. jessi jessica schneider. cnn. >>> under what is called the maginski act, he had 120 days to determine whether the saudi prince was responsible and whether time pose sanctions. the white house says the president doesn't have to act on committee requests. lawmakers such as democrat bob th menendez says he does and is pushing for action. he says, the trump administration shows it has continued to ignore u.s. law to stonewall accountability for the murder of cash oak. mr. trump has not agreed with the cia conclusion that the saudi crown prince ordered khashoggi's killing. khashoggi, of course, worked for "the washi

especially a contentious questioning by the chairman of the committee, democratic congressman jerry nadler. big questions going in were essential the following -- what conversations has whitaker had with the president about the special counsel's investigation. did any conversation happen before he was named acting attorney general, and would he try to claim executive privilege? so far some answers, but also raising more questions. manu raji has been watching all this. late out the headlines we've heard so far. >> the big headlines is matt whitaker made clear he did not speak with president trump about the investigation. he said i have not talked to the president about this or service white house officials. he also said i do not believe that he's had conversations with a third party, an individual who may have later paced on notches about the special counsel probe to the president. he did rereel he had been briefed once about the investigation, but he was briefed multiple times and would not reveal any of those matters. and after the firing of jeff sessions, the acting attorney general, the

who made the first move, nadler or whitaker?you the same thing i tell my kids and who is going to make the responsible -- >> it's demeaning. >> no, if you and i can't, at this late date, have these conversations -- you're not my dad either and i'm going to tell you something. >> you know for a fact i didn't mean to demean you on this and i'm trying to make a point. >> fair point. >> you said this on this thing to other people has not been fair so let's not go there. >> moving on to matthew whitaker and whether or not -- >> my point is this. it doesn't matter who started this completely insane process we're in of complete dysfunction, where grown people are saying i will not come and talk to you unless you do it my way. if he wants to make the point is all i'm saying, let him come. he is a formidable presence. he is a tough guy. make that point to the american people. >> why a subpoena, though? >> chairman nadler is the chairman of the committee. there's real contention between members of congress on capitol hill that matthew wmt

nadler, congressman nadler who is heading up the committee and he is asking for mark, the acting attorneyy about why or why not, what his process was on not recusing himself from the russia investigation when he became acting attorney general then they said they are going to subpoena him also even though he said he was going to come and talk to them. >> three reasons that jerry nadler did that number one so that you and i would be talking about it and others talking about it the acting a.g. under subpoena. number two it does compel attendance but matt already said he is coming thirdly and importantly and what i don't think your viewers know is when matt says i can't answer that question because it's privileged, i can't answer that question because it's an ongoing investigation, if you are under subpoena, it makes it much easier for the committee to compel you to answer that's why they are doing it they are not worried about him not showing up. he already said he is coming. although, martha, i hope he doesn't. he will be the a.g. another week. he has another week. he is certainly not going

to say this is not over seems to be what congressman gerald nadler was just informing us. the acting attorney general matthew whitaker did state a couple of matters of note. he says he has not talked to president trump about the special counsel's russia investigation and he has not interfered with the investigation at all. acting attorney general whitaker testified before the house judiciary committee. remember, he had criticized the scope of robert mueller's investigation before joining the justice department. >> at no time has the white house asked for, nor have i provided any promises or commitments concerning the special counsel's investigation or any other investigation. during my time as the leader of the department of justice, the department has complied with the special counsel regulations and there's been no change in how the department has worked with the special counsel's office. >> of course, they spent a lot of time bringing up his tweets and utterances and attempts to get a job. jerry nadler drilled down on a briefing that he says the acting attorney general

thank you again. >> thank you. >> thanks jerry nadler, carolyn maloney, as well. >>> and moments agosident trump boarded air force one headed for vietnam, his second summit with north korea's dictator kim jong-un. coming up, the oscar goes to diversity and the big winner at last night's academy awards ceremony. stay with us on andrea mitchell reports on msnbc. andrea mitchel reports on msnbc making my dreams a reality takes more than just investment advice. from insurance to savings to retirement, it takes someone with experience and knowledge who can help me build a complete plan. brian, my certified financial planner™ professional, is committed to working in my best interest. i call it my "comfortable future plan," and it's all possible with a cfp® professional. find your certified financial planner™ professional at letsmakeaplan.org. >>> and the oscar goes to -- >> boom! charlie wactale and sandra, and -- >> the 2020 presidential election is around the corner! let's all mobilize and be on the right side of history. make the moral choice between love versus hate. let's do the right

nadler. >> thank you. professor turley, i unfortunately agree with you that courts are very reluctant to question the president's honesty or any president's honesty or motivations. but i think that on this one, at least as to the use of military funds, he wants to move military funds to -- to have the border guarded by building a wall with military funds, presumably the wall is a military asset for military use. but the act specifically says the military cannot be used to enforce domestic law. so how can you justify the use of military funds for military purpose for military purpose that is denied to be a military purpose by law? >> that's an excellent question. and that will be an issue the court will have to deal with. i have to say that i'm skeptical because the military has been used on the border in the past. presidents have called the military to a border. it's a classic use of the -- >> can they be challenged in court? >> not that i recall, but i doubt a court is going to seriously debate whether a

it is likely that chairman nadler will sue to lift those redactions.t i have been told is the things that be redacted in that report, includes what else but the executive privilege question. this core constitutional issue of just how much privacy does the president have and just how untransla untransla untransla untransla untransla untransparent the president can be >> we'll find out. this is not going away. >> pete williams, good to see. >> betsy woodruff, thank you. >> pete, thank you. >>> the virginia daily press is reporting republican state senator, tommy norment was an editor of a yearbook full with slurs and racist statements. governor northam and herring have admitted to wearing black face in the past and governor fairfax had been accused of sexually assault back in 2004. fairfax denied that allegation. there has been calls for top officials to resign. partisan politics are getting in the way. if northam and herring and fairfax all steps down, the state house would be in control of house speaker, court cox. joining me, political reporter, eugen

chairman nadler and members of the house judiciary committee for inviting me here to testify today. my name is sabrina tap harper and i'm the commander of the domestic violence unit in baltimore, maryland. i'm here today to talk about the dangers that gun laws impose on our communities, specifically for women and families who are victims of domestic violence. the data is clear, victims of domestic violence are at an increased risk of gun violence in this country. in the united states women are 11 times more likely to be killed with a gun than women in comparable countries. much of this fatal violence against women is committed by intimate partners. according to the fbi, almost half of the murders of women were committed by current or former husbands or a boyfriend. ten times as many as by a male stranger. according to the american journal of public health, the presence of a firearm in a domestic violence situation increases the risk of a homicide for a woman by 500%. these numbers miss many of the murders committed by ex-boyfriends who are seldom categorized and who may account for

committee going back and forth in a power struggle over whitaker's appearance before nadler's committee. whitaker writing, quote, consisting with longstanding practice, i remain willing to appear to testify tomorrow provided that the chairman assures me the committee will not issue a subpoena today or tomorrow and that the committee will engage in good faith negotiations before taking a step down the road. the tpheb move would appear to be up to chairman nadler. >> dana: there's a new effort to get the president's tax return. >> reporter: yes. the tax writing committee, they are interested in getting at president trump's tax returns so they're gonna talk about presidential and vice presidential tax history in the hearing. we got a bit of a preview earlier from the house speaker, nancy pelosi. >> they are prioritizing their work and in terms of the taxes, it's not a question of just sending a letter. you have to do it in a very careful way. the chairman of the committee will be doing that. i know this is impatience because people want to know. >> reporter: a freshman house republican exp

unless the chairman, jerry nadler, withdraws a subpoena. because he had already agreed to talk with him. catherine? >> that's right. this episode really highlights, harris, the central tension between the acting attorney general and the house committee with oversight. let me just tell you how we got here. about three weeks ago, there were negotiations between the justice department and the house committee over the acting attorney general's appearance during public testimony. that's what is scheduled for tomorrow. the justice department's position is that the acting attorney general, matt whitaker, agreed in good faith and volunteered to come to the committee and testify. is that they spent weeks preparing him to do so. with the justice department has told the committee is that if they take what they describe as the unusual step of issuing a subpoena, matt whitaker will not appear on l-uppercase-letter tomorrow as scheduled. the reason they say that's the case is because they believe this is an unprecedented step that is meant by the democra

. >> committee chairman, jerry nadler says he's not done hearing from whitaker and threatened to subpoena him to get the answers the democrats demand. our next guest is a member of the house judiciary committee, steve cohen of tennessee. congressman, first of all, i just have to get your reaction to that testimony you heard today, both to his demeanor and in many cases his refusal to answer yes and no questions. >> well, he came in to stonewall us, that was his purpose. he had an audience of one, which was donald trump, and when he was a football player and i can certainly see him as a football player, he was a tight end, and that's generally a blocker in the iowa program. he was a blocker today too. he's still in the same role he was when he played for the iowa hawk eyes. he didn't show me anything to say he should be the united states attorney general. i have met many and this man does not measure up to them in any way whatsoever. he was treading water and stone walling. >> in a lot of people's eyes, making a mistake of being disrespectful to the chair declaring his time up and repeated

we do know now that we've got adam schiff, jerry nadler and others in the house who are beginning to put the pieces together themselves. whatever mueller does not give them, is not able to give them, they're going to be working to assemble into i think what will be by the end of this year a very coherent story that i think will be quite -- quite conclusive as to what was going on in this campaign. >> nelson, thank you for joining us tonight. nelson cunningham. jennifer ruben, stay with us. >>> coming up, a veteran republican steps forward to challenge donald trump in the 2020 republican primary. that's next. in't easy. 12 hours? 20 dogs? where's your belly rubs? after a day of chasing dogs you shouldn't have to chase down payments. (vo) send invoices and accept payments to get paid twice as fast. (danny) it's time to get yours! (vo) quickbooks. backing you. uh uh - i deliverberty the news around here. ♪ sources say liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. over to you, logo. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ guys go through a lot to deal w