the department to do those kinds of fazed for trump, as trump was trying to fudge the election results and stay. empower what is you at the senior level of the justice department, use powers of the justice department for that purpose. you can't be that you just get to leave and move on in the next person holds that job gets to, what try to get it? what is the justice department going to do here? how is the justice department clean up after this mess? i don't know what's going to happen ultimately to trump ear or to jeff clark here. but what is the justice department going to do about the way it was used? joining us now is rhode island senator, member of the committee, sheldon whitehouse, he said it in some of the testimony used to builders report. i should tell you that senator whitehouse is also a former prosecutor, and served as u.s. attorney rhode island. he was also the states attorney general, uniquely qualified to comment on this matter. senator it's a pleasure to see you tonight. thanks for being. her >> thanks for having me on. so this is a lot of material. it's about a 50-page staff, reported several hundred pages worth of transcripts in, several hundred p

powers of the justice department in an irregular, out of chain of command kind of way, to get the justice department to bolster trump's made-up claims about fraud. these made-up claims he was using to try to stay in office. all the attention is on the fact that at the end of the day, senior justice department officials said, we're not going that far. you have to fire us or we will resign if you go that far. along the way, all of this stuff fed from rudy giuliani and from the qanon groups or whatever else they are, wherever else they got this stuff, it flowed into the trump white house, it flowed from the trump white house to the justice department and then senior justice department officials told federal prosecutors around the country, use the resources of your office to chase this down. it's not the way the u.s. justice department is supposed to work. now that we know the justice department did work that way under trump, what's the justice department going to do about it? what is the justice department doing with this new knowledge that its senior officials, up to the highest levels of the department, attorney general, deputy attorney general, they tried to use the department.

flowed from the trump white house to the justice department and then senior justice department officials told federal prosecutors around the country, use the resources of your office to go chase this down. it's not the way the u.s. justice department is supposed to work. so now, now that we know the justice department did work that way under trump, what's the justice department going to do about it? what does the justice department do with this new knowledge that its senior officials up to the very highest levels of the department, attorney general, deputy attorney general, they tried to use the department to kind of do those favors for trump to try to avert it at a senior level, use the powers of that department for that purpose. it can't be that you just get to leave and move on and the next person who holds that job gets to then try it again. what is the justice department going to do here? how does the justice department clean up after this mess? i don't know what will happen to trump. i don't know what will happen to jeff clark here. what's the justice department going to do about the way it was used? joining us is rhode island senator sheldon whi

department of justice has no indicted. a former between test pilot for fraud ortiz john hood. he is following the story and he has the latest the us department of justice says boeing's, former chief technical pilot for the 737 match jet withheld. crucial federal safety information in a scheme to quote, defraud boeing, us based airline customers, to obtain tens of millions of dollars for boeing. a federal grand jury in texas indicted 49 year old mark forkner on thursday, alleging he deceived the federal aviation administration. a g, or aircraft evaluation division during the 737, max jed evaluation and certification process by providing safety regulators with material false inaccurate and incomplete information about a new part of the flight controls for the boeing 737 max, called the maneuvering characteristics augmentation system and cast in turn, the d o j says airplane manuals and pilot training materials like any references 20 am cast and that boeing's us based airline customers, are deprived of important information when making and finalizing their decisions to pay. boeing tens of millions of dollars for $737.00, max airplane

us is the constitutionality of the legislation. that's the only question before us. as i said with respect to another statute, the justice department defends the constitutionality of statutes construed as constitutional. we believe that statute can be, yes. >> i would like to move on. recently you directed the f.b.i. to coordinate with 14,000 school districts after the national school board association asked you to protect school boards from the imminent threat of parents. along with friends, neighbors and constituents i have attended multiple school board meetings over the last year and have a child in public school yet. very concerned about some of the things going on. yes, some of those school board meetings get heated. are we, my friends, constituents and neighbors, are we domestic terrorists? are we criminals? >> no. again, i don't know the facts that we are talking about but the only way that you are criminals of the few commit acts in violation of the statutes which would mean threa o

the civil division without that kind of expertise that was really behind this notion of using the justice department it is used. is not used to would be a violation actually to use the power of the federal government to win elections that is plainly hate crime under federal law. and secondly, as chuck grassley himself the irony here is 88 years old decided to run again for the senate and ohio he sees me, and iowa. and after this insurrection in january, he did declined vote to remove donald trump from office and if you recall, rational back then was not that this was not a problem, rational was does make sense in terms of timing. this is no longer in office so we can technically remove somebody is no longer in office. imino in argue that his actions were not impeachable. but chuck grassley came out and said, he lost. and that is clear that donald trump lost and i'm paraphrasing but that's troubling that he bullied people in elections across the country in the process in this important thing to keep in mind for viewers elections are run by regular people. the run by our friends and neighbors and teac

by someone in the civil division without that expertise which was behind this notion of using the justice department in a way not traditional. it would be a violation of the hatch act to use the power of the federal government to win elections. that is plainly a crime under federal law. secondly, as chuck grassley himself, the irony himself, is 88 years old, has decided to run again for the senate in iowa -- after the january 6 insurrection, he declined to vote to remove donald trump from office. if you recall, the rationale then was not that this was not a problem, it was that it does not make sense in terms of timing because he is no longer in office so we cannot technically remove someone not in office. even republicans did not argue then that his actions were not impeachable. chuck grassley said he lost. it is clear donald trump lost. i'm paraphrasing but that he bullied election officials across the country in that process. that is an important thing to keep in mind for viewers. elections are run by regular people, our friends, neighbors, teachers, colleagues,, older people who are retired. the

just to address the department's use of the privilege more broadly, the memo requires the department of justice to provide periodic reports to congress identifying cases where the privilege is enfolked and explaining the basis for invoking it, i sent a letter earlier this month about reporting requirement because this committee received only two reports 2011 and 2015 and in the six years since the department of justice failed to provide such reports. just to come to the point, i am respectfully asking for commitment that you will provide these periodic reports to congress and review the department's policies with respect to its invoking the state secret privilege so to comply with 2009 memo that may have gone too quickly over the various actions of the department, i'm referring to the 2009 memo, requires periodic reportss. in eight seconds i have left. >> answer to both, yes, we are reviewing that memo and if anything, we will strengthen it and intend to make periodic reports and it is not periodic report to not have made a response since 2015, i ensure you, yes. >> senator cotton. >> judge, re

of the memo the whole time. the shutdown political dissent and silence parents. it seems we have another attorney general using the justice department for political gain. and this guy was almost a supreme court justice. joining me now dan bongino, host of "unfiltered" on saturdays. he is fired up. dan, first they told us that this was not happening. and then they have to confess and say well this is happening on colleges but really not in the classroom. then we found out in loudoun county when the parents discovered it was happening and stormed the school board meetings to protest, they made them sign nda agreements when they wanted to see the curriculum. and then find out the fbi was targeting the parents. they keep spinning on this issue. and we have an attorney general that's backing this mob. >> you know what this reminds me of, lawrence? it reminds me of one of those 1960s like red scare movies about like this is what the soviet union does. don't let this come here. except that it actually came here. think about what you just said like that story you just told actually happened, right? that the child was raped in the bathroom,

jeffrey clark was one of the department of justice officials who was pushing the former president's big lie within the agency. attempting to use the department of justice to look into claims of fraud in the 2020 election, despite there being no evidence of such fraud. this, an example of how the january 6th select committee using every tool they have available to try to get as much information as they can from associates close to the former president. tonight, the january 6th select committee is making serious moves. >> we're not messing around. >> meeting with a key member of the trump era justice department, and taking steps to force another one to comply with their investigation. sources say former acting attorney general jeffrey rosen met wednesday with the committee behind closed doors. rosen served as ag leading up to january 6th and resisted the former president's efforts to use the power of the justice department to investigate false claims of election fraud. >> the case has already been made if you look at the polls. it was a rigged election. you look at the different states, the election was totally rigged. >> meanwh

do you think that the public sees that as a proper use of department of justice resources, when it'sen shown that we're short on personnel in the civil rights division and that we need that personnel, and yet we're defending president trump's defamation lawsuit by a woman whom he has defamed? >> congressman, we are not defending the defamation made by the former president. as i've said publicly several times, sometimes being the attorney general and sometimes being the judge means taking positions with respect to the law that are required by the law but which you would not take as a private citizen. in this circumstance the justice department's briefing is not about whether this was defamation or wasn't defamation. it was solely on the question on the application of the tort claims act. and there is consistent precedent in the dc circuit which holds that even defamatory statements made during press conferences by public officials are within the scopehat very narrow purpose and very narrow defamation. >> if i may, sir, and i appreciate that and read that but this was an act he took wh

department of justice. and he hasn't had a chance to figure it out, but there are a lot of appointees now by the biden administration that a person political activist -- and they are using the letters of the department of justice against the enemies or political foes of the president. and merrick garland if he means what he says about being a nonpartisan attorney general, then he needs to get on top of that straight away his department of justice is being used the target moms and dads who are opposed to the sort of left wing propaganda being sent to their children. it's being used against political opponents of joe biden, i can trump supporters. it meant he had nothing to say about the abuse being injured out by guards and a d.c. jail against both rioters are both defendants from the january 6th riots who are being held for months without trial and who are complaining, their lawyers are complaining, that they are being abused by it really sadistic guards in d.c. merrick garland is not going to do an inspection. he was asked if he would and he said, it was noncommittal but it looked like a note to me. >> john: because it was a local issue. if you think on the subject of

of the truth. whatever vehicle is used, whatever tools that we can use or that the department of justice seeks to use don't bring any -- there's no joy in bringing this contempt citation. we just want to get to the facts. and the american public deserve that, and clearly a bipartisan group of members in the house believe the same thing. >> time matters and message matters. what happens if bannon doesn't wind up getting prosecuted and nothing happens to him? what do you think that does to your ability to get anybody to speak to you? >> we'll cross those bridges, you know, when we get there. we hope that's not the case, but i can tell you from an investigative standpoint we continue to have productive interviews and conversations with people who are fact witnesses and who know things about the planning of the january 5th and january 6th rallies, the planning, the funding, the execution of those events. we're having those good conversations and we're making significant progress. and so that obviously is helped by the more people who come forward and many have and the more voices that we hear. and that's

the idea of use the department of justice to get people to comply is something that could in fact happen on the civil side. >> laura, trump is still pulling the strings, telling the former aides to ignore the subpoenas. is this obstruction of justice? >> it is. it is obstruction of congress. it actually means being able to obstruct what congress is supposed to be doing. they have a legislative initiative, what happened on january 6th. it's a valid purpose. they select a committee, and the idea of telling someone don't show up at all, because i might assert executive privilege here, again, it's a question by question privilege. privilege only relates to the questions that might be responsive. there is a former president we're talking about. that privilege belongs to the current incumbent of the white house. and that is it joe biden, and that is debated, apparently, the big lie. that is joe biden, and he is not the one asserting it. >> max, adam schiff said the committee will move as fast as possible. >> the former president of the united states is still out pushing the big lie. the same b

so the idea of using the department of justice now to be able to, through a criminal referral, get people to comply is actually something that could in fact happen, unlike a very protracted litigation on the civil side as we've seen before. >> laura, trump is still pulling the strings, i mean telling his former aides to ignore their subpoenas. is this obstruction of justice? >> it is. it's obstruction of congress, which is why you have the idea of how you can be held in contempt of congress. that actually means being able to obstruct what congress is supposed to be doing. they have a legislative initiative in terms of trying to understand what happened leading up to january 6th. it's a valid legislative purpose. they have expressed it through a select committee, and the idea of telling someone to just say don't show up at all because i might assert executive privilege here, again, it's a question-by-question privilege. you don't get to say, i'm not going to answer any question. privilege only relates to those questions that might be responsive and could have a valid exercise of the privil

of law. he was in the justice department. it will be very important and i really think that it's refreshing. we shouldn't have been in the place we were for years with trump using the department of justice and putting people in place to simply protect him. we have in merrick garland someone who is measured and thoughtful and steady and really adheres to the rule of law. he will act swiftly. i have confidence the department will act swiftly. >> representative dean, you were an impeachment manager in the second impeachment. madeleine dean, my member of congress, when i'm in the philadelphia suburbs. good to see you. >> thank you. >>> we'll have a full table set this morning. we continue the conversation about joe biden's agenda at the top of the hour with the new york congress member ritchie torres who is with the group this week. >>> plus we have a special look at "civil war" which airs tomorrow night on msnbc. the filmmaker will talk about how the project came to be and lessons she learned from the experience. >>> for the latest "velshi" across america. i travel to mississippi to dive into the ways of the disconceptions of the ways the civil war continues to mi

the department of justice use of private prisons, rescinding the previous administration's guidance torequire the harshest penalties athe justice department has opened a pattern of investigation of systematically police department conduct in minneapolis just because we can't get it done in the states we are not standing back. but we have much more to do. and this needs important steps my nutrition also wants to advance the meaningful police reportthat includes additional executive action to live up to america's promise of equal justice . the work continues to create a safer stronger community in critical ways. with my american rescue plan and thank you for supporting it, everybody forgets that was $1.9 billion. $1 trillion. we got a lot done in that. it did so wellpeople don't even know where it came from . i'm serious. think about it. like what did you do for me lately? we added $1.9 billion. we made as a historic investments to community policing and violence intervention . we're showing to reduce some of these programs to reduce 60 percent. we're expanding summer programs and job op

and now the department of justice uses as an enemy. this is part of a larger colonial purge of ideological county. and the outrage over the attorney general's decision doesn't stop with the parents. many are already seeing this move as basically confirmation that the biden administration is ready to go to extreme lengths to silence descent. even if it means putting people on a black list, i have a feeling and a fear that the left has become more authoritarian than we can really even imagine, be afraid of your government. and that's a sad thing from someone in the government to say, is it domestic extremism for a parent advocate for their child's best interests every day brings new reports about this administration, weaponized the federal bureaucracy to go after political opponents. frankly, i don't think we've ever seen anything like it in american history may for those of us who miss the mccarthy era, i guess this president is intent on bringing it to us, but with new force and new power and new urgency, unlike anything we've ever seen

of new york. then there's a third character. his name is jeffrey clark. a lesser known official in the department and he went full insurrectionist and plotted with trump to use the department of justice to full meant trump's coup even if that meant getting rid of his boss, jeffrey rosen. senate report provides new context and new revelations. it details a meeting on january 3rd in the oval office, in this meeting you've got rosen, right, the guy trying to get justice, deputy and clark was there and pat sipilone and his deputy. trump opened the meeting and i want to read this to you by saying, one thing we know is you, rosen, aren't going to do anything to overturn the election. over the course of the next three hours the group had a wide ranging discussion on whether he should replace leadership, send clark's proposed letter that he wanted to send to georgia officials, as well as other states, faultsly claiming the doj was aware of election fraud and inviting the states to reject the electors for biden. this came after clark revealed to the acting attorney general and his deputy we have spoken to a witness who testified and claimed he had seen trucks moving ballots to a location wher

would like to ask you to detail somebody from the department of justice to talk to senator kennedy and me about this executive privilege problem and work with us on trying to figure out a solution, making the role of the department of justice more clear and transport and perhaps embodying it in rule or regulation or law and trying to figure out how to accelerate at the courts a way to get quicker decisions. because otherwise, as i said, delay is just dispositive and we lose not because we're wrong but because we're delayed. would you have somebody be our point of contact on that, please? when i say detailed, i don't know on our payroll, just a point of contact. >> yes, of course. >> great, thank you. next, i've been pursuing the question of the department's investigation into january 6th since pretty early days starting with a letter in january 8 that asked about the resources that were dealing deployed into this investigation and whether a task force, a prosecution task force was being set up and so forth. then another letter, february 24, with regard to domestic extremist violence groups' potential role. we've learned a little bit more now,

trying to kill you.ai the biden administration is trying to convince school board members using the department of justiceey are in physical danger from parents and those parents are national security threats. p once again, nothing like this has ever happened in this country. this is an utter perversion of the mission and the power of the united states department of justice. it is almost impossible to overstate how sinister and crazy this is. we almost never play the equivalence game because it is tiresome but in this case, it is ndhard to resist. imagine if donald trump doj designated, say, cnn anchors as domestic terrorists. put it in writing and then told men with guns to enforce the law. how would that go over? we, for one, would be outraged by that. all decent americans would. a lot of cnn anchors made excuses for violence during the riots of last year, but the media aren't upset about this. when powerless suburban parents resist having nihilistic rulingt class ideologies imposed by force on their children, our media seem to believe it is perfectlye fine to designate tm terrorists and threaten them w

justice department, so it will be very important, and i really think that it's refreshing. we shouldn't have been in the place we were four years with donald trump using the department of justice and putting people in place who would simply protect him. >>> and the are supreme court is leaving the texas abortion law in place for now, but they want to hear arguments in the case. those arguments set to begin on november 1st. they'll help the justices determine whether the law, which imposes a near total ban on abortions should be blocked while legal challenges continue. to help us get started this hour, nbc's josh lederman joins us from wilmington, delaware, where he's covering the president. and gary gum bach is in richmond, virginia. josh, what are you hearing about the time line for a vote on president biden's economic agenda, and who's going to be unhappy potentially at the end of this? >> reporter: well, a new time line is sometime this week they're hoping to have a vote, alex. but let's face it, they have blown through time line after time line and deadline after deadline already. most recently on friday, which is the last deadline to have a vote on this legislation, and a