stephanie rosenstein has 27 years in the department, served on 12 years united states attorney and in the last tour of duty i believe you will find this team that we put together one that you will respect and appreciate as we go forward. i'm grateful for all of you that are here today and i appreciate the help that you will be providing in confronting the problems that we face. the chump administration at the department of justice are committed to reducing violent crime and hate crimes and making america safe. as you know, hate crimes are all often precursors to violent crimes or indeed are violent crimes. no person should have to fear being attacked because of who they are, what they believe or how they worship. so i pledge to you as long as i am the attorney general of the department of justice we will continue to protect the civil rights of all americans, and we will not tolerate the targeting of any community in our country. in february, as we wrestle with how to organize the effort against crime we established a department of justice task for force. they worked through five subco

rosenstein. >> two other people. >> two others? >> ali velshi and stephanie ruhle. we're going to go back to it as the questions continue. >> in the year 2016, there were 6,469 authorized targets out of 3 billion internet users. that's the ratio. the question of unmasking has been raised. it's my understanding that 1,939 u.s. person identities were unmasked in 2016 based on collection that occurred under section 702. so my question is going to be the following, and i'll ask it all together and, hopefully, you'll answer it. i would like a description of the certification process and the use of an amicus. the program sunsets after five years, about raising that sunset versus no sunset because of the privacy concerns. it is my belief there should be a sunset. and the use of an amicus, which is currently used as part of the certification process. and whether that should be continue and had formalized. admiral, it's programs under -- >> if i could, doj is going to be smarter on the amicus piece. please, will you take that piece? >> i'm not sure i am smarter on the amicus

stephanie? >> thanks, hans. i want to point out in -- just to put into context rod rosenstein talking about anonymous sources, if the intent -- people should understand anonymous sources are not only there to speak out against the president. you got to take a look inside. jared kushner who owns the new york observer a week ago i sat down with a former editor in chief who said jared kushner he certainly knows how to leak, president trump whose dear friend david owns the national enquier and us weekly, we know that president trump has been a leaker before and steve bannon, former executive director of breitbart news who has a waiver to still speak to breitbart, let's be clear when we talk about leaks, they're everywhere. i want to bring in my panel. mike lupica is an msnbc contributor and columnist for the "new york daily news" and megan murphy not just the editor for "bloomberg business week" this week, yesterday it hit stands "bloomberg business week" relaunched, is it a new direction, new brand, looks fantastic. so fantastic that megan rocked up with celebration hair today. this is a party. michael, i want to s

stephanie ramos reporting. >> reporter: oh, definitely. >> a contentious face-off erupted between senator kamala harris and a member of trump's administration. it happened as harris demanded specific answers from deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. she asked about the authority of special counsel robert mueller who is looking into ties between president trump and russia. >> are you willing or are you not willing to give him the authority to be fully independent of your ability statutorily and legally to fire him? yes or no, sir? >> he has the full independence as authorized by those regulations as -- >> are you willing to do -- >> would the senator suspend? the chair is going to exercise his rights -- >> the chair then admonished harris and asked her to suspend her questioning of rosenstein. >>> a new berkeley institute of governmental studies poll shows california's views of the russian investigation are strongly partisan. democrats are one sided in their negative reaction to comey's firing, disapproving 79% to 7%. on the other hand republicans approve of the president's firing of comey by a 3 to 1 margin, 65%, 22%. 1600 californians participated in this telephone poll conducted from the fourth to the 29th. >> abc7 news was in

rosenstein himself might become a fact witness in the obstruction of justice investigation. so, he may have to recuse himself also. but ultimately even if there are recommended charges, stephanieong-standing doj policy not to indict a sitting president. ultimately even if it's something that the department of justice says this should be pursued, it's going to be handed off to congress and it will essentially become a political question on whether they want to pursue the constitutional remedy of impeachment proceedings. >> can we just take a moment. we have to go, but is it not extraordinary that we're sitting here straightfaced saying it's long standing policy the department of justice does not indict a sitting president. this is an extraordinary time we're living in. thank you so much. i have a sinking feeling you will both be back here again. we will take a break, up next, we will go back to the congressional shooting that took place yesterday. just outside washington, d.c. where i am right now in front of the capitol. i want to find out more about who the shooter was and why exactly did this man drive to virginia to carry out this attack. we've got some new details and how