whitaker said not so fast. discuss my confidential communications with the president. jerry nadler had this subpoena in his back pocket ready to use it in case. whitaker is saying if you don't tell me by 6:00 p.m. tonight that you will not try to enforce and serve that subpoena on me i am not coming. we'll have to wait and see if they force the subpoena tonight, in which case w hichlttaker is not coming. >> if they try to enforce their newfound subpoena power, now that they're the majority in the house, the fear among democrats is that that could backfire. >> this is a larger issue, tension we've seen between the branches and whitaker has exposed it. you see how few options democrats have when it comes to the enforcement of the subpoena. it can be quite messy. inherent power through congress, that only goes so far. it's not as if the congress police will arrest whitaker. we haven't seen that since 1935. they could go to court and get a civil contempt through a judge and they could try to get doj to enforce a su

. >> whitaker didn't deny if anything regarding the white house investigation which whitaker oversees before of after he took over the top spot at the doj. >> at no time has the white house talked to nor have i promised concerning the special counsel's investigation or any other investigation. >> it's a yes or no question? have you communicated anything you've learned about the investigation to president trump, yes or no? >> mr. chairman, as i said earlier stored in my opening remarks, i do not intend today to talk about my private conversations with the president of the united states. but to answer your question, i have not talked to the president of the united states about the special counsel's investigation. >> whitaker has come under fire before he joined the justice department which they quickly pointed out was not part of the hearing. >> it's nothing be characterization, harassment. >> he declined to specifically condemn the label witch hunt used by the president to describe the russia probe. >> i have not interfered with the special counsel's investigation. >> are you overseein

>> whitaker: corrupt. >> thompson: yeah. >> whitaker: immoral?mpson: yes. >> whitaker: depraved? >> thompson: yes. they're appropriate, for the behavior that's taken place. >> whitaker: you are a drug executive. you manufacture drugs. >> thompson: many drugs. >> whitaker: are you at fault in this epidemic in any way? >> thompson: i wish i was smart enough to have seen this epidemic before-- before i got three or four years into it. absolutely. but once you find out that it's not correct, you have to do the right thing. is there anything more important? >> emily walden: my son wanted to fight for his country. his country failed him. >> whitaker: if there is one victim who confirmed for ed thompson that turning on his industry was the right thing to do, it was emily walden, who would become an unlikely ally. thompson manufactured an opioid, oxymorphone-- the same drug that took the life of walden's son, tj, a private in the kentucky national guard. >> walden: he was getting ready to be deployed to africa, and a few weeks prior to that, he went on a

yes, matthew whitaker's answer leaves that open as a possibility if matthew whitaker has a very narrow definition of the russia probe, specifically any collusion with russia and any effect by russia affecting the campaign f in 2016. >> the left side of your screen, that is the house committee room, journalists, staffers, the gallery there. everyone waiting for members to return from votes and tributes to congressman john dingell. on the other side of this break i'll be joined by congressman eric swalwell of california. congressman swalwell, a member of the aforementioned judiciary committee. he'll join me right after this. i don't keep track of regrets. i never count the wrinkles. and i don't add up the years. but what i do count on, is staying happy and healthy. so, i add protein, vitamins and minerals to my diet with boost®. boost® high protein nutritional drink has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals your body needs. all with guaranteed great taste. the upside- i'm just getting started. boost® high protein be up for life. itso chantix can help you quit

not clear that whitaker did a whole lot. but again, even the fact of asking fits a pattern that we have seen with the president over and over. his lawyers would say, look, he's allowed to ask questions. that's what he's entitled to do. he's entitled to, you know, to raise questions sort of in defense of himself, as long as it doesn't cross a different line. other people may have a different interpretation of it. >> so, it's -- listen, cnn previously reported that the president expressed anger to whitaker about the cohen investigation. why did the president ultimately sour on whitaker? >> so, the president ultimately -- everybody starts out at a certain [ inaudible ] when the president first appoints them to something and you can only go downhill from there, particularly if he doesn't see you on television. he became frustrated. i don't think that he has turned on whitaker. whitaker is allowed to remain at doj right now, i'm not sure how long he'll be there, but he is still working there despite not being the acting attorney

whitaker. whitaker repeatedly refused to answer questions from democrats related to the special counsel's investigation and to communications with president trump. the hearing continuing any moment now, but first a taste of what we just saw. >> have you communicated anything you learned in that briefing about the investigation to president trump, yes or no? >> mr. chairman, as i said earlier today in my opening remarks, i do not intend today to talk about my private conversations with the president of the united states. but to answer your question, i have not talked to the president of the united states about the special counsel's investigation. >> and these interactions got testy at some points. take a listen. >> have you ever been asked to approve any request or action to be taken by the special counsel? >> mr. chairman, i see that your five minutes is up, and so -- i am here voluntarily. we have agreed to five-minute rounds. >> i will point out that we didn't enforce the five-minute rule on

whitaker? >> thank you, mr.lins for the opportunity to testify before the committee today. i am looking forward to discussing with you some of the accomplish miles an hour and priorities of the department of justice. >> i also would like to acknowledge the passing of mr. dingell. he was a statesman. the department is blessed with extremely talented, highly principled public servants dedicated to upholding our great constitution and the laws of the united states. i saw that up close during my 5 1/2 years as united states attorney for the southern district of iowa. our office put criminals behind bars and we kept the people of iowa safe. i personally prosecuted several important cases and worked with the men and women of the atf, dea and u.s. marshal's service, the fbi, and it was a privilege. in 2017 i returned to the department and served for 13 months as chief of staff to former attorney general jeff sessions, a man for whom i have great respect. he led the department with integrity, with dedication to the rule

"the times" adds trump sour eedn whitaker. whitaker could face bigger problems. he recently told a congressional committee under oath that the president had never pressured him regarding any investigation. >> at no time has white house asked for nor have i provided any promises or commitments concerning the special counsel's investigation or any other investigation. >> reporter: whitaker is now under scrutiny by house democrats for potential perjury. today, a doj spokesperson said he stands by his testimony. trump is standing by him. >> a very, very straight shooter. i watched him during the hearing, some of it. i thought he was exceptional. >> reporter: since trump told advisors rod rosenstein assured him the cohen investigation had nothing to do with him, "the new york times" reports he has since wondered if rosenstein was deliberately misleading him to keep him calm. the extensive report is also claiming trump told advisers in february 2017 they should say he asked for michael flynn's resignation because, quote, that sounds better. pressed by spicer if it was

so that was the request he put in to matt whitaker. >> and whitaker ultimately said what? whit kwer was unable to do anything about it. it appears he didn't take too many steps to follow through on the president's request, knowing full well that actually trying to get someone put back in charge unrecuse was something he did not have the power to do in the justice department. as we reported, trump eventually sours on whitaker. he is angry whitaker is not able to carry out some of the tasks that the president had hoped he might be able to do. so it was one kind of window into the president's attitude toward law enforcement, towards these investigations, which as we report are kind of encircling him. >> mm-hmm. all right. so you have president trump and his conversations with the acting attorney general. who are some of the other players involved in this whole thing within the white house? who else would know about this? >> well, in terms of his conversations with whitaker, it's unclear. we don't know who else the president might have spoken to or who might have been in on th

already answered it. >> whitaker has said little. we've learned a lot. i have never seen a witness tell a committee chairman that his or her time is up. that's extraordinary. matt whitaker is a former college football player. it looks like he's trying to run out the clock. his answers eve tn to basic questions are long winded. even just to get to yes or no questions. that's not going to help. they will keep him here as long as they have to to get the answers they need. and we learned the committee intends to bring him back to get answers to the questions that he is invoking this kind of squishy executive privilege on saying he won't talk about them, but the white house isn't invoking executive privilege. the other thing we're seeing here is the play book that republicans will use over the next two years to frustrate democrats in their oversight efforts here. you saw it from doug collins, the ranking member here calling this a dog and pony show and a side show in his opening statement. and then turning into into a self-fulfilling prop

what you saw today to from whitaker is some of the water gets in. it gets in through whitaker. it gets in through his office. he refused to say he did not try to intervene or reassign the southern districts or other offices. i imagine he didn't have the capacity to lie. i imagine that if he had, he would have given press about robert mueller and said no, that didn't happen. what are you left with? what impression are you left with watching whitaker then? >> this is a man whose long silences, his pauses were suspicious. he would not answer the question about whether he talked to the president about michael cohen or about the southern district investigation. why not answer, of course i did not talk to the president about an investigation that implicates him that would be unethical. that would probably be a crime. but he could not say that. he did establish himself as the attorney general of president trump's fantasies. every time he had a choice between expressing fidelity to the rule of law and to the appearance of justice or on the other hand fidelity to donald trump, he chose

put in matt whitaker and he's apparently disappointed with matt whitaker because whitaker didn't follow through to put guardrails around this probe. is that ethical behavior in your view as a lawyer? >> so let's talk about the whitaker issue. geoff berman did the right thing. just the appearance of the conflict of interest, he did the right thing. for whatever reason he decided to do it. >> the president didn't think it was the right thing. >> even if matt whitaker asked geoff berman to get involved in that problem, he wasn't getting involved in the probe, he recused himself. he had obligations as a lawyer and obligations to the justice department as a presidentially appointed senate confirmed united states attorney. we don't know whether the president made that inquiry or not. he's denied it. whitaker hasn't confirmed it. i don't believe that even if the president asked whitaker to do it, whitaker was not going to ask berman because if the president made that inquiry, he probably told the president he was recused and couldn't move forward so even the president made that request, berman

whitaker? >> his name is greg scott. >> so that's -- did you communicate any information you learned in those briefing to other members of your staff? >> i don't believe so, no. >> do you know whether any information that you learned in those briefings were communicated to anyone at the white house? >> as i mentioned previously, congressman, we have kept a very close -- >> mr. whitaker, it's a yes or a no. do you know if it was communicate today anybody at the white house? >> as i sit here today, i don't -- i don't know whether it was communicated, i do not believe -- >> did you put into place any restrictions or limitations or instructions to your staff not to share this information with anyone at the white house or the president's legal team? >> yes, together with the general standard that investigative information and materials are need to know and law enforcement -- >> thank you, mr. whitaker. did the president lash out at you after michael cohen's guilty plea for lying to congress about a

tonight that whitaker won't be subpoenaed tomorrow. we will bring any response to you as soon as we get it and we'll have a democratic member of that committee with us in a moment for more on what's coming next. the daily beast is out today with some of the most detailed reporting on what preparing whitaker for his testimony tomorrow has been like. whitaker has gone through multiple practice committee hearings, known as muts, where justice department officials pepper him with questions that committee democrats mlob. that's according to multiple doj officials involved in the prep. they tried to prepare him for lengthy statements, harsh tones and leading questions. dozens of department officials have helped him prepare. those officials told the daily beast, working through the government shutdown to brief him and get him ready. among the questions they're preparing for him to field, did you have any communication with any white house official, including trump, about the possibility of your appointment as acting ag? did you consult with t

so that was the request he put in to matt whitaker. >> and whitaker ultimately said what? >> whitaker was unable to do anything about it. it appears that he didn't take too many steps to try to follow through on the president another request, knowing full well that actually trying to get someone put back in charge unrecuse is someone he did not -- did not have the power to do in the justice delaware we reported trump sours on whitaker. he is angry whitaker is not able to carry out some of the tasks the president had hoped he might be able to do. so it was one kind of window into the president's attitude towards law enforcement toward these investigations, which as we report, are kind of encircling him. >> all right. moments ago, president trump was asked about this "time's" report as he was at the white house. >> reporter: mr. president did you ask attorney general math coup whitaker for investigation into your former personal attorney michael cohen? >> no, not at all. >> laura jarrett, let's just context is important. right? so explain the context of what was going on bet

whitaker? >> i do, sir. >> let me frame it this way. did rod rosenstein give the special counsel the authority to investigate specific americans? >> is mr. mueller honest? >> congressman, i have been on the record about my respect for bob mueller and his ability to conduct this investigation. >> do you believe he's honest, yes or no? >> i have no reason to believe he's not honest, so yes. >> did the president lash out at you? i'm not asking what he tweeted. i don't have a lot of confidence in the veracity of his tweets. i'm asking you under oath. >> congressman, that is based on an unsubstantiated -- >> sir, answer the question yes or no. did the president lash out to you about mr. cohen's guilty plea? >> no, he did not. >> that was rhode island democrat david cicilline. he joins us momentarily. there was another moment of note at the hearing today. two republicans, including ranking member doug collins of georgia raised the issue of roger stone's arrest in florida, which cnn was there exclusively to cover, suggesting along with the act

whitaker. >> thank you, mr. chairman and ranking member collins for the opportunity to testify before the committee today. i'm looking forward to discussing with you some of the accomplishments and priorities of the department of justice. before i start i would also like to acknowledge the passing of former chairman dingell. he was a statesman and leader and it is a sad day on this committee, i'm sure. first of all let me say it's an honor to represent the 115,000 men and women of the department of justice. the department is blessed with extremely talented, highly principled public servants dedicated to upholding our great constitution and the laws of the united states. i saw that up close during my 5 1/2 years as united states attorney for the southern district of iowa. we kept the people of iowa safe. i personally prosecuted several important criminal cases and worked with the men and women of the atf, dea, fbi and u.s. marshall service and state, local and federal partners. it was a privilege. in 2017 i retur

whitaker. given the performance today, do you think there's any point in calling him again? >> well, he would be under oath. it would be a deposition, and we could ask questions. i think he's going to start to realize the fact that he could be in jeopardy. he didn't answer the questions forthrightly, it's hard for me to believe that donald trump didn't ask him as he did jim comey and others about the investigation and to have loyalty and to be easy on flynn and those type of things. he was upset with sessions. he did he didn't have his own attorney general. he wanted his own guy and this whitaker comes out of nowhere. he wasn't in the line of succession, which ted deutsch made clear. it was an aboerration there, an most of his jobs had not been in the legal sector and in the political world had been abject failure and he had some encounters where he headed up some charity group where he got $1.2 million when he came to washington to do some work and there was suggestion, sheldon a adelson, a ma

and therefore, whitaker would not attend. democrats say "we drafted a subpoena or regard approvals for it because you want to be sure the acting attorney general, matt whitaker, answers all of our questions -- which includes why he did not recuse himself from oversight of the mueller probe, as well as his criticism of that investigation, harris." >> harris: i'm wondering if it has any bearing on all this with matthew whitaker. >> you broke up right there if you could repeat that. >> harris: when he appears to be out of that job, if the full senate votes like the senate judiciary committee. and i'm reading that there are democrats coming on board to support him as well. like doug jones, in alabama. a democrat there saying that he will vote to confirm william barr. so matthew whitaker is about to be out of that temporary acting ag job. i don't know if that then puts this in a different light. just her a quick thought and will move on. >> i'm glad you raised this issue, because one of the questions is whether the nominee for the

whitaker? >> congressman, you have mentioned a lot in your -- >> very simple question, what was the name of the charity? >> you have challenged my character, i have ability to -- >> i control this time, mr. whitaker. if you want time of your own, this is my time. mr. whitaker, you don't run this committee. you don't run the congress of the united states and the judiciary -- >> gentlemen will suspend. the gentleman is correct, the witness will answer the questions and it is up to the gentleman to decide what questions. will continue and resume. >> what was the title of the not for profit that you ran? >> whoo time period, sir? >> what was the last title? it changed name three different times, right? what was the final name? >> while i was employed as the executive director, it was called foundation for accountability and civic trust. >> did you name it? >> i did. >> highly noble goals. trust, accountability -- [cross talk] -- >> i control the floor, mr. whitaker, you don't understand. >> the gen

whitaker did after this was unclear. there is no evidence he took any direct steps to intervene in the manhattan investigation. he did tell associates that the justice department that prosecutors in new york required quote adult supervision. so as i mentioned, we'll have more tonight but this is potentially trouble for matt whitaker who is no longer acting attorney general but staying at the justice department now that the new attorney general william bar has been sworn in. this is potentially trouble for whitaker if his adult supervision comment means he did try influence that prosecution in new york at the behest of the white house. it's also trouble for whitaker obviously if he did lie about those interactions under oath to congress. it's also potentially trouble for the president if he was going after a federal criminal case, right? if he was trying to hand pick to try to protect himself. that's the kind of thing that theoretically could be prosecuted as a felony obstruction charge against a defendant even potentiall

that's exactly what she did to whitaker. >> again and again whitaker dodged questions about the mueller investigation, saying he couldn't talk about an ongoing investigation. >> yes or no? since your appointment as acting attorney general, have you been briefed on criminal or counterintelligence matters within the special counsel's purview? >> chairman, thank you for that question. as you know, i cannot talk about ongoing investigations. >> he can't talk about ongoing investigations. but he changed his tune when it came to a question from ranking member douglas collins. >> the office of inspector general is currently looking at the carter page fisa applicat n application. >> which is very much of a concern. >> and it is also being reviewed at the same time, simultaneously by mr. john huber, who is the u.s. attorney from utah who was asked by attorney general sessions to conduct a review of certain matters at the department of justice. >> huh? that was pretty detailed. it sounded like he was talking about an ongoing investigation, didn't it? which has to make you wonder, is it just a mat

whitaker, you don't run this committee.he congress of the united states, and you don't run the judiciary committee. >> gentlemen -- >> you know, that is a tactic. people don't want to answer the question, they feign outrage. it's happened a lot over the last couple years on this network and people i've interviewed. did today show why many have said the acting a.g. is not qualified for the job? there's a lot we don't know about him now. >> well he's superbly qualified for the job is the job is essentially to be a flunky for the president of the united states and to do whatever the president wants him to do. what i was asking him about actually was a really shocking and stunning reversal in office of legal counsel opinion, which has stood since 2011, which has said that there's a ban in federal law on internet sports gambling, but it doesn't apply to the states that are having their lottery online. so a lot of states have done that. the person who hates that the most is sheldon adelson because he views it as competition. and

>> my answer is no if i was in whitaker's position. anything that relates to an ongoing doj investigation gives you pretty good reason to decline to answer the question. and anyone on the criminal defense side who has defended a case in federal court against the doj and assistant u.s. attorneys knows that they are generally very silent about what's going on with an ongoing investigation. you'll rarely if ever hear anything about an ongoing investigation. the doj is uniform on one thing. they don't talk about ongoing investigations. and in that sense whitaker arguably had good grounds for not answering. >> all right. thank you so much for your input early on this saturday morning. >>> coming up a rising tension and a standoff over aid in venezuela. why are people who desperately need help not getting it? need help not getting it when i walked through a snowstorm for a cigarette, that's when i knew i had to quit. for real this time. that's why i'm using nicorette. only nicorette gum has patented dual-coated technology for great taste. pl

do we expect matt wlhit whitake questions about his conversations with the president?aid that whitaker does plan to testify that he did not provide and the white house did not seek any commitment about the russia investigation, that he wasn't asked to recuse. but he has said that he is not going to go into the details of the discussions that he's had with president trump. and that was the point of contention between him and the chairman of the house you judiciary committee. and on both sides this fight was really precedent, settings tone for what democratic oversight was going to look like for the next two years or more. from the administration's perspective, they didn't want to set the precedence of every cabinet heb goica cabinet member going before committees with a subpoena hanging over their head. from the democrats' perspective, they wanted to show that they are willing to use august the tools at their dispossess al to exercise the kind of oversight they thought has been being laing in the republican controlled house, to show they won't get stone walled by this a

does whitaker get up and walk out of the room?ouse democrats really want to test that at this phase with somebody that's only in this job for another week. we expect a vote on a soon to be new attorney general bill barr to happen next week. whitaker's time is limited here but his information is considered very valuable to democrats. they'll try any way they can to get at it today whether we have the first real come to blows moment between the administration and house democrats today over this issue of executive privilege and how officials can invoke it. we will find out shortly, but this is the tip of the iceberg. democrats will be going after information about how the president and his appointees have impacted the mueller investigation in a lot of different ways over the course of the next few months and we'll learn a lot about how they plan to do that once the questions start for matthew whitaker. >> joining me now former assistant u.s. attorney and law professor kim wayly, former deputy assistant attorney general and "the washi

called matthew whitaker with a question.e asked whether berman, and trump ally could be put in charge of the widing vention. whitaker could not fulfill the president's request because he was recused. according to the report, he soured on mr. whitaker and complained about his inability to pull levers that could make the president's many legal problems go away. and the president is contesting that story, flatly denying that he ever asked his acting attorney general to change his prosecutor in the cohen case. >> change the leadership to your former investigation -- >> no, not at all. that's more fake news. there's a lot of fake news out there. no, i didn't. >> however, trump's reported outreej to whitaker may contradict the sworn testimony last month. among other things whitaker told the house judiciary committee that no one from the white house reached out to express dissatisfaction about the cohen investigation. >> did they reach out in some way to express dissatisfaction? >> no. >> joseph marine eois a former federal prosecu

whitaker. about doj oversight. following the new york government up until the moment of birth and the governor northam virginia's comments indicating support of an action which in my opinion relates to infanticide. are you concerned about some of these actions of late that implicate the federal partial abortion act that criminalizes procedures? i am getting really concerned that this is violating the law and has the doj looked into this? >> asked, as an american citizen i am very concerned. >> can you also tell me, i read recently a "wall street journal" opinion piece from 2018 and in that, it said new york city, thousands of black babies are aborted than born alive each year and my grandkids are african-american. so if there was a crime occurring in this country that exceeded the number of deaths from cancer, heart disease, aids, and accidents combined which abortions do, is that something that the doj would get involved in and be concerned about and try to stop? >> congresswoman, every life is valuable. while i c

part of the reason that he called whitaker that we reported back in december, he called whitaker venting his frustration because he thought that the investigation was making him look back. remember it outed him as individual one in that hush money scheme trying to silence women before the election. so he was troubled by it, he felt like it was unfair. he felt like the southern district needed to be reined in in some ways. we don't know what whitaker did to execute on those wishes. but the fact he was putting that kind of pressure, leaning on whitaker on something where he was directly implicate i did think is the issue. >> but wait, there's more. david gregory, there's more. so in this "new york times" report it sort of traces the whole chronology over two years of all of the things that could rise to obstruction. so was that he wanted matthew whitaker to install his friend, his ally jeffrey berman over the hush money payments. then before that he wasn'ted corey lewandowski to get rid of jeff sessions. and then he wanted don mcgahn, the white house lawyer, to get rid of robert mueller. b

at this moment, it looks like whitaker is coming.that he will show up. >> we are anxious to get a response from the justice department. everybody stand by. i want to bring in shimon prokupecz. there's a story involving jeff bezos and the ""national enquire enquirer". >> jeff bezos, of course, the amazon founder and who has been involved recently in the "national enquirer" posting text messages and revealing or claiming he was having an affair. just recently, the "national enquirer" reached out to him. ami reached out to him claiming they had compromising photos of him and what he is claiming in a remarkable posting that he just posted online, he said that they were trying to blackmail him, nation"national enquirer" was t to blackmail him because they were hoping to stop "the washington post" from publishing a report on the "national enquirer." jeff bezos released e-mails and other information which describes what the "national enquirer" claimed they have, what kind of photos they have, the description of the photos, really remarkable

gerald nadler confirms whitaker will be there 9:30 eastern time.ns why your bodega has already run out of jiffy pop tonight. this should be fairly incredible. there has been a lot of wrangling over this appearance, a lot of consternation in the justice department about how whitaker might do in this hearing. the questions back and forth about whether or not he would be able to appear, and i mean able in a number of different ways. whitaker's already been advised about a lot of the things he's going to be asked about. questions about the firing of former attorney general jeff sessions and whether white house officials or the president himself contacted whitaker about replacing sessions. whether those discussions included the possibility of whether whitaker would recuse from overseeing the mueller investigation. questions about whether whitaker consulted with the white house on his decision he wouldn't recuse despite the fact that ethics advisers told him he needed to. also questions about these advisers who whitaker consulted who told him it was okay

whitaker? >> congressman, you've mentioned a lot in your -- >> i'm asking a very specific question. >> you have challenged my character -- >> no, no. i'm asking you a question. i control this time, mr. whitaker. if you want to ask the chairman for time of your own, this is my time. you don't run this committee. you don't run the congress of the united states and you don't run the judiciary. >> the gentleman will suspend. the witness will answer the questions and it's up to the gentleman to decide what questions. the gentleman will continue. we'll resume. >> what was the title of the not for profit that you ran? >> at what time period, sir? >> what was the last title? i know it changed its name three different times. what was the final name? >> while i was employed as the executive director it was called the foundation for accountability and civic trust. >> did you name it? >> i did. actually -- >> those are highly noble, accountability and civil trust. let's talk bktability and civic trust. mr.

whitaker?any different types of complaints. >> did you file à [multiple speakers] you worked as the executive director of this 501(c)(3) committee to file fcc complaints? >> yes we filed fcc complaints in addition à >> who made the decision to file the complaint? >> i was the executive director, i believe i signed all if not all à >> did you make the sole decision to buy the complex? or were you directed? >> no i was not directed. >> you did that on your own? >> yes we were an independent non-à >> is nonpartisan. did you file any fcc complaints against any republicans? >> as i sit here today i don't recall but all of our complaints Ã>> thank you mr. whitaker. i would like to ask for unanimous consent to make part of the restriction of political campaign intervention by section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations and it reads "under the internal revenue code all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in or intervening in any political c

whita r whitaker. this is my time. >> mr. whitaker, you don't run this committee. you don't run the congress of the united states and the jush dishl county. >> gentlemen, we'll continue, we'll resiume. >> what was the title of the not-profit you ran? >> what time period, sir? >> with the last type. it changed its anyway three different times already. when i was employed, it was called the found occasion and accountabilitity. and specific trust. let's talk about it. >> mr. whitaker, i got a fe f question for you. the gentleman controls the time and if he herbs as many members have done equationally. he wishes to see another question. >> i do not feel the answer is completely on the record. >> the question he asked. >> tell us where the fun came from that you were paid of the $102 million. >> mr. trump -- we'll go down many more times, if he want wants -- thwants -- wants -- this is not a confirmati confirmation. >> the gentlemen from maryland has a discretion to ask questions. the gentleman will proceed. the ruling of the chair. the gentle lady has moved the table o

whitaker. before we turn to the business at hand, i want to take a moment to comment on the passing of our friend and former colleague chairman john dingell of michigan. representative dingell was elected to congress in 1955 and went on to become the longest serving member of congress in the history of the united states and 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 congressman oversight. he loved the house of representatives. we remember him for his humor, his charm, his unshakeable integrity, and of course, his fantastic twitter account. our thoughts are with our colleagues debbie dingell and the entire dingell family. chairman dingell will be missed. >> mr. chairman could i say as well in for the, you know, mr. dingell's service and our colleague debbie and the service he rendered, i'll agree with you on that. >> thank you. >> and recognize myself for an opening statement. mr. whitaker, i

whitaker? >> they've made the political calculation that in any way going against trump is more costly than actually speaking out and being and showing a degree integrity, even with the losses they took in 2018, they think that if they go against trump, the electoral results will be even worse. >> all these people you're talking about are there despite the fact they were suporb r portative of trump or because they were. the ones who were going to lose have lost. these people are there because they're supporters support donald trump. and so that is the problem ultimately that republicans have long term is they cannot separate themselves fromden donald trump because ultimately they're voting the vast majority of the republican party still supportive of donald trump. what happened today may look like a freak show to 50/60% of the country. but there's 30 to 40% who think this is our guy. >> yep, looks great to them. >>> up next one of the most impassioned moments came when congresswoman made them a

and i think whitaker was, you know, really evasive in other ways.ive about the group that paid him hundreds of thousands of dollars, a dark money group that he was at the helm of to try to attack climate change investigations by state attorneys general. he was not forthcoming about other matters. and so i think he came into this house in some ways the way he came into the public's life at doj, which is as someone who has proven himself again and again to be unworthy of the position of public trust that trump tried to install him into at the justice department and put him in his position of power that he, you know, doesn't have the -- i think the real wearwithall to hold such an important position in our country. >> lisa, basically he wasn't that good at doing the evading and the ducking. >> that's right. he wasn't very good. he was rude. he was contemptuous. he seemed in some ways to misunderstand the role of the chairman in setting the clock for questions. and so i think he -- he decide not -- >> did he think it was like -- did he think it was like

whitaker to do that. he made comments about things or maybe even you're reporting mused about things that he didn't like about the investigation. is that -- is that improper? i would say no. is it wise? no. but i don't think it's improper behavior on the part of a president. >> so the pattern that the "new york times" lays out that we've reported for a long time of the president asking to put loyalists in charge of various aspects of this investigation -- >> when you say loyalists, the idea -- look, you have all sorts of people who were in previous justice departments that were, quote, loyalists to the president who had been in charge of investigations. >> it doesn't appear -- it doesn't appear, though, that they were put in place specifically because they were a loyalist. and, again, "the new york times" reporting is that the president wanted geoffrey berman, no relation to me, to be in charge of the investigation and michael cohen and at that point sdny already said the president was involved in crimina

and whitaker said no. but the question was framed in a way like did he harass you, did he harangue you. there wasn't a lot of follow-up. after that happened, what we know is that whitaker's been called back up to the hill. now because of this "new york times" story, we know why. there apparently is evidence that the president did call him and did try to get the united states attorney to manage the case, somebody he thought might control the southern district of new york better and in his favor instead of the unfolding investigation. so what jumps out here to me is whi whitaker has a problem on the hill with perjury, number one. number two, if true, this is part of a pattern that may be obstruction for the president. >> and natasha, to bring you into this, as the times report, this is as much a public relations strategy as it is a legal strategy for the president. this seems like it's baked in. this has been his effort from the very start, hasn't it? >> yeah, and i think that's why we've seen rudy giuliani

>> they want to control the action, and that's what whitaker wants to do, too.says i'm here voluntarily, he sets parameters, he can remind them i'm here to be cooperative. i'm here as a volunteer, not under compulsion. they want him under compulsion so they can have more rules about what he has to answer. technically, legally speaking, under subpoena if he doesn't comply with it or he doesn't answer something, they have the threat of contempt. practically that's a lot of s p steps to get to the contemt point. i would call this a beating one's chest contest between the doj and the hill. >> the committee wants to know about maybe what assurances whitaker has given the president, right? >> right, they want to know about these conversations matt whitaker has had with the president or people at the white house about the investigation. was he ever asked to do anything in particular? was he ever asked to restrict the scope? was he ever asked to, in some way, prejudge or communicate to the special counsel about the length of the inquiry? and i do think that part of the

whitaker? >> very good. i have a lot of respect for mr. whitaker. i think he's done a great job. he's a very straight shooter. i watched him during the hearing, some of it. i think he's exceptional. he's a very fine man and he should be given a lot of thanks from our nation. >> for now matt whitaker remains at the justice department on the federal payroll as a senior counselor just as trump's new attorney general, william barr, has now taken over the department for the second time in his career. our panel will be here to break all this down in just a moment, but first to get to the very latest on this reporting, we are joined on the phone by one of its authors. michael schmidt, pulitzer prize-winning washington correspondent with the "new york times." michael, we are reminded that a lot of this took place just this winter. yes, your extended piece of reporting has a two-year timeline on it, but remember, of course, as you well know, whitaker just came in in november. so this is almost a realtime narrative. these efforts, as you report them, happened just very recently. talk about

that whitaker oversaw as acting attorney general. and if you read that justice department statement carefully, there isn't a denial that president trump and whitaker discussed the sdny probe. and during recent congressional testimony, whitaker would only say he wouldn't discuss conversations with the president when he was asked whether he did speak to him about the sdny investigation. in contrast, he told the committee he never spoke about the mueller probe to president trump. so you look at the comparison, how he answered those two questions about the mueller probe, saying he never talked about it with trump, compared to sdny saying he's not going to talk about those conversations. this latest reporting, erin, about trump, fits into the pattern where he believes officials in the justice department roles should show loyalty to him and do his bidding. as you'll recall, the president was furious when jeff sessions recused himself from the russia probe and never got over it. erin? >> he certainly never did. of course, still taking the o

you will recall that, and that he did spoke with whitaker about it over the phone.uld do a better job of krog the investigators in the probe that he oversaw as acting attorney general. during recent congressional testimony whitaker would only say he won't discuss conversations with the president when asked if he spoke to him about the sdny investigation. >> i want to know whether you talked to president trump at all about the southern district of new york's case involving michael cohen. >> congresswoman, as i've mentioned several times today, i am not going to discuss my private conversations with the president of the united states. >> in contrast he told the committee he never spoke about the mueller probe to president trump. >> 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. >> but this latest reporting about trump fits into a pattern where he believes officials in doj roles should show loyalty to him and do his bidding. as you will recall the pres

whitaker. i would like to ask for unanimous consent to make part of the record the restriction of political campaign intervention by section 501(c)(3) tax exempt organizations and it reads under the internal revenue code all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in or intervening in any political campaign on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate elected for public office. >> without objection. >> thank you. i have some other questions here. all this time i'm waiting and i can't find the questions. nope. nope. thank you. this pertains to also an issue that's very close and dear to my heart. the department of justice withdrew a 2014 memo which stated that the best reading of the title 7's prohibition on sex discrimination in the workplace encompasses antitransgender discrimination. the new memo instructs the department of justice's attorney to now argue that federal law does not protect transgender workers from discrimination. ar

matt whitaker to have jeffrey berman oversee the cohen probe. this is innocence is in respons reporting that he did make that ask because he viewed berman as an am lilly. he was upset about the cohen probe and how it inchmplicated and that he did talk to whitaker with about it over the phone. he thought that he should control the investigators in the probe. during recent congressional testimony, whilt ketaker would and i that he won't discuss conversations with the president. >> i want to know whether you talked to president trump at all about the southern strict of new york's case involving michael cohen. >> congresswoman, as i've mentioned several times today, i'm not going to discuss my private conversations with the president of the united states. >> reporter: in contrast he told the committee he never spoke about the mueller probe to president trump. >> at no tirm has the white house asked for nor have i provided any promises or commitments concerning the special counsel's investigation or any other investigation. >> reporter: but this late

whitaker. >> thank you, mr. chairman and ranking member collins for the opportunity to testify before the committee today. i am looking forward to discussing with you some of the accomplishments and priorities of the department of justice. before i start i would also like to acknowledge the passing of former chairman dingell. he was a statesman and a leader, and it's a sad day in this committee, i'm sure. first of all, let me say that it's an honor to represent the 115,000 men and women of the department of justice. the department is blessed with extremely talented, highly principled public servant dedicated to upholding our great constitution and the laws of the united states. i saw that up close during nigh five and a half years as united states attorney for the southern district of iowa. our office put criminals behind bars and kept the people of iowa staff i personally prosecuted several important criminal cases and worked with men and women of the a.t.f., dea, fbi, and state and local and

whitaker to interfere in the investigation. trump himself was asked about "the times" report directly just this afternoon. >> did you ask acting attorney general matthew whitaker to change the leadership of the investigation of your former personal attorney, michael cohen? >> no, not at all. that's more fake news. there is a lot of fake news out there. no, i didn't. >> what is your relationship like with mr. whitaker? >> very good. he's a great guy. he's a straight shooter. i watched some of his hearing. i think he's exceptional. he's a very fine man and he should be given a lot of thanks from our nation. >> for now matt whitaker remains at the justice department on the federal payroll as a senior counselor just as trump's new attorney general, william barr, has now taken over the department for the second time in his career. our panel will be here to break all this down in just a moment, but first to get to the very latest on this reporting, we are joined on the phone by one of its authors. michael schmidt, pulitzer prize winn