these justice department- ongoing matters with me justice department and double layer deliberation. these are justice department privileges that i will respect. the department has released a letter discussing will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest, for example, questions about the initial opening of the fbi russia investigation which occurred months before my appointment. or matters related to the dossier. these are subject of ongoing review by the department and any questions on these topics should be directed to the fbi for the justice department. as i explained when we closed the office in may, report contains our findings and analysis and reasons for the decisions we made. we conducted an extensive investigation and in writing report restated the results and we scrutinized every word. i do not intend to summarize or describe in a different way in the course of my testimony today. as i said the report is my testimony and i will stay within that. i will not comment on the actions of the attorney general or congress. i was appoin

department of justice civil division. civil division at the justice department is now run by jody hunt, jeff sessions' former chief of staff. as of last night, this is how the justice department had left it. they are telling the court, we're out. it's over. then today on twitter, the president expressed his displeasure with this eventuality and insisted this is not what his justice department is doing. this is not what his government is doing. you heard we are not putting on that census question. we certainly are. and jody hunt who has seen this movie before, jody hunt has been fried by this particular proverbial electric fence in his recent past, he rears up and basically panics today in public on a hastily called court hearing on the phone with a federal judge. we have the transcript of it. i have never seen or heard anything like this before. presumably in the mind of the head of the civil division at the justice department, presumably he was reliving president trump beating the ghost of jeff sessions all over again fo

the intelligence leaders at the justice department. they must be destroy disciplined denounced and call out the dogs on them. all of these people with all of these decades of leadership experience, the specific leaders who were trying to understand and assess the attack by russia and thwart it on behalf of the united states, the subject matter experts in a best place to recognize what's happening, trying to elect trump. these are the people who have paid the price for it in the 2.5 years since. that includes james baker who was the top legal official at the fbi. the president attacked him by name repeatedly for his role in this terrible witch hunt in the russia hoax. fox news and other conservative media repeatedly accused him of being a traitor for the crime of serving in fbi leadership when russia helped trump win and the fbi decided they needed to look into that. james baker stayed on at the fbi for the first year of the trump presidency. he left the fbi a year after james comey was fired as the director. all of that time of being a

and, wolf, this is a big procedural setback for the department of justice. their plan has been multi-fasciated. they're attacking this census case to put this citizenship question on the 2020 census on multiple levels. they are fighting this in courts across the country. federal courts in maryland, new york and california. they're also possibly working with the president on what could be a memorandum or an executive order. so this is a major defeat as it pertains to the court track. they are not allowed in this new york case to substitute these attorneys. the judge really coming down on the department of justice, denying this request and saying

a senior justice department official tells us tonight that mueller's letter to the justice department which this letter says it is in response to, apparently that letter to mueller to justice was simply a one paragraph letter sending the justice department the subpoenas he got from congress and asking for guidance for what he could say. now we know that the justice department took 12 days to respond to mueller on that and now tonight they have given him this order to basically not tell congress anything at all especially not about the president or anybody else who was in charge and it was signed by a justice department official who is supposed to have no role in this matter at all. we will get some expert help on that in just a second in terms of the implications of this letter and what mueller might do about it. you should also know that the president does appear to already be freaking out a bit about mueller's wednesday morning testimony. whether or not you see the justice department letter that was sent to mueller tonight as part of the freak out is up to you. the president is sayi

department of justice civil division. civil division at the justice department is now run by jody hunt, jeff sessions' former chief of staff. as of last night, this is how the justice department had left it. they are telling the court, we're out. it's over. then today on twitter, the president expressed his displeasure with this eventuality and insisted this is not what his justice department is doing. this is not what his government is doing. you heard we are not putting on that census question. we certainly are. and jody hunt who has seen this movie before, jody hunt has been fried by this particular proverbial electric fence in his recent past, he rears up and basically panics today in public on a hastily called court hearing on the phone with a federal judge. we have the transcript of it. i have never seen or heard anything like this before. presumably in the mind of the head of the civil division at the justice department, presumably he was reliving president trump beating the ghost of jeff sessions all over again fo

justice department, ordering them to do things to serve his own interests and the justice department was moderately resisting to the extent that they could, all of that stuff laid out in the mueller report as potential obstruction of justice by the president, that wasn't laid out to see if the president committed those crimes. all of that is to decide whether the president committed those crimes and to see the type of constitutional pressure the president was using to try to pull apart the threads that make us the country that we are. the president defies a lawful court order and informs the justice department to do so. that's no longer a normal dispute. that's constitutional crisis territory. that's where he's pointing. can you count on people at the justice department being the right people and the upstanding people to stop it from happening? i mean, you can't say you didn't see this coming, right? more ahead. stay with us. when crabe stronger...strong, with new nicorette coated ice mint. layered with flavor... it's the first and only coated nicotine lozenge. for an amazing taste..

the special counsel's office is part of the department of justice. and by regulation, it was bound by that department policy. charging the president with a crime was therefore not an option we could consider. the department's written opinion explaining the policy makes several important points that further informed our handling of the obstruction investigation. those points are summarized in our report. and i will describe two of them for you. first, the opinion explicitly permits the investigation of a sitting president because it is important to preserve evidence while memories are fresh and documents available. among other things, that evidence could be used if there were co-conspirators who could be charged now. and second, the opinions says that the constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse a sitting president of wrongdoing. and beyond department policy, it was guided by principles of fairness. it would be unfair to potentially accuse somebody of a crime when there can be no court resolution of the

this is not the justice department of donald trump. it is outrageous that barr announced this yesterday and the lawyers withdraw today with not a word of explanation to the american people about why all of these lawyers are withdrawing and why they are subbing in their hand picked people. the justice department made representation after representation and the supreme court said we are contrived and wrong. now they are doubling down on the strategy and what they are doing is torching the relationship of the justice department to the supreme court of the united states. i can't imagine something more corrosive or sad. this is a president who thinks he owns the justice department when all of us who have been lucky enough to serve, we are temporary stuarts for an institution who was set up in 1789. every solicitor general wants to avoid something like this. >> given what we know, is there any way of guessing, i suppose the word is, or calculating whether the attorney who is withdraw have all with drawn of their own volition or whether they

was the department of justice

a federal judge in new york refusing to allow the justice department to swap out its legal team in the case. that decision just announced. let's bring in cnn's senior legal analyst preet bharara. he's the former u.s. attorney for the southern district of new york. so, preet, what does this mean for the president's quest to include a citizenship question on the census? >> well, it doesn't help that effort. we all sat around the television and the newspapers last week under the impression that that fight was over because the supreme court made a ruling saying that you can't add a citizenship question on the basis of a pretext. and now you have a series of lawyers who decided for whatever reason that they don't want to be on the case anymore and that's what people have suspected about this. and judge fuhrman, who is a very good judge, i know him, he's a smart guy and he doesn't take any nonsense. he's not going to let the case proceed unless he understands under oath the reasons why these lawyers have decided to remove themselves from the case or if they were removed by other folks. so it

another justice department lawyer told the judge, we at the department of justice have been instructed to examine whether there is a path forward consistent with the supreme court decision that would allow us to include the citizenship question on the census. we are examining that, looking at near term options to see whether that's viable and possible. the judge ordered the government lawyers to tell him by 2:00 p.m. friday if the government is going to continue fighting the case. the government lawyers asked for a delay until monday because of the fourth of july holiday, to which the judge as i just said, simply said no. the judge then told the government lawyers, if you were facebook and an attorney for facebook told me one thing and then i read a press release from mark zuckerberg telling me something else, i would be demanding that mark zuckerberg appear in court with you the next time because i would be saying i don't think you speak for your client anymore. leading off our discussion tonight, neera tanden, president of the center for american progress and eugene robinson, associa

how many pages has the justice department produced to date? 17,000.an: the commerce department? mr. jordan: 14,000. mr. cole: has the justice department made officials responsible for transcribing the testimony? mr. jordan: yes, mr. gore and others. we have more witnesses scheduled. mr. cole: has the commerce department made any officials available? quite a lot of information has been forthcoming to your committee. mr. jordan: that is the way it is supports to work. mr. cole: this one puzzles me for a lot of reasons. are the negotiations going on right now between justice -- i should ask both of you this. you would know probably better than anyone else. whether there are ongoing negotiations now between commerce and committee? >> [indiscernible] i guess they are referring to amendment 4. 4 talks about the idea [indiscernible] this amendment, the department of commerce has produced thousands of documents, that are redacted, already public. but it has refused to produce any of the unredacted key documents identified in the committee subpoenas, including .mails about secretary ross [in

the justice department's internal reviews into the origins of the russia probe. once those are overcome in the senate judiciary committee led by lindsey graham will also investigate. laura, we've got quite a ways to go. >> laura: it never ends. thank you. they were labeled spies and traitors, their reputations and finances ruined. they were the collateral of the damage and robert mueller's investigation into donald trump and associates. one man who had his entire life turned upside down is here to deliver his own message to bob mueller. former >> laura: former trump campaign manager michael caputo is here now. do you want to just shake hands, move on, call it a day, or republicans demand real accountability? >> of course we need to demand real culpability accountability. i went from emotion to emotion like tars and on vines. i thought it was hilarious and then i got really sad. i realized "ingraham angle" nine, i'm just mad. i'm angry for they chose robert mueller because of his outstanding reputation, but still knowing he really didn't have it all together anymo

so clearly, the justice department's kind of out of the loop and the commerce department's out of the loop and the president's off on his own quixotic campaign. but i suspect what's going to happen at the end, ali, is that the justice department lawyers are going to reassert themselves and say, look, this is what we told the supreme court about june 30th, we said even last week on tuesday in a filing on june 25th. and yeah, two days later the supreme court ruled against us. but boy, it will destroy our credibility with the federal judiciary if we go back on our word now. i mean, when i sat in that chair, the government's top lawyer for litigation, the thing i was most concerned about was protecting the credibility that prior generations of government servants had built up with the federal courts. and right now president trump is threatening to torch whatever credibility the justice department has left because of what he's doing. and that will be a huge, huge error for the country and for him. >> so let me ask you something. the justice department lawyers either pull back on this or th

ongoing matters within the justice department and deliberations within our office is our justice department privileges that i will respect. the department has released a letter discussing the restrictions on my testimony and i therefore will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest for example i am unable to address questions about the opening of the f.

we know that he has not provided them to the justice department in advance. he's not providing them to the committees in advance and we're darn sure he's not going to release them to the public in advance. so they're due to gavel in at 8:30. you should probably be watching before that. right up towards the top, mueller will be giving an opening statement. the first one to the judiciary committee committee. we have no idea what he's going to say and nobody else does either. we're going to talk tonight over the course of this hour about how the committees are preparing. what they might ask. what they should ask. how they should ask their questions. we'll also talk about what else in history has ever been like this, if anything. but there's one piece of this that has been developing just this afternoon and into this evening which i want to try to address first, and it's about this issue of mueller's deputy. today we learned that in addition to special counsel robert mueller, there was also a deputy special counsel. there was? aaron zebley had previously been des

department and has not been cleared with the justice department. that's important and interesting because nobody know what is he's going to say. it also means that even though the justice department has been trying to pressure mueller about his testimony and the constraints they want on it, if mueller is planning an opening statement he is not planning on showing the department ahead of time, that at least means he is retaining independent control over his remarks regardless of what the justice department is telling him to do. just before we got on the air, jake gibson was first to report on this letter that the justice department sent to robert mueller today, trying basically to cirque um scribe his testimony on wednesday morning. doctor mr. mueller, i write in response to your july 10th, 2019 letter concerning the testimonial subpoenas you received from the judiciary and intelligence committees in the house. it quotes from what mueller said in his one public press conference at the end of may and pulls up the guillotine in terms of mueller's test

these are justice department privileges that i will respect. the department has released a letter, discussing the restrictions on my testimony. i, therefore, will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest. for example, i am unable to address questions about the initial opening of the fbi's russia investigation, which occurred months before my appointment, or matters related to the so-called steele dossier. they are matters of ongoing review by the department. any questions should be directed, therefore, to the fbi or the justice department. as i explained when we closed the special counsel's office in may, our report contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made. we conducted an extensive investigation over two years. in writing the report, we stated the results of our investigation with precision. we scrutinized every word. i do not intend to summarize or describe the results of our work in a different way in the course of my testimony today. as i said on may 29th, the

chuck rosenberg is a former senior justice department official and former fbi chief of staff. and neal katyal, former acting solicitor general. chuck and neal, we never put two people on together. i promise you're not here to do punching judy and fight each other. >> definitely not. >> let me ask you about this breaking news we got tonight. previously described in reporting about the special counsel's process about mueller's chief of staff and we know he was mueller's chief of staff when mueller was fbi director. now it seems that the intelligence committee has made the decision that they're going to swear mr. zebley in as a witness, to sit next to mueller and also answer questions from at least the intelligence committee members, even if judiciary committee seems like they may not be following that same path. chuck, i know you had the same job that aaron zebley did as chief of staff. what do you make of this? >> well, aaron is as smart and humble and diligent as you could hope for. he also will know the case backward and forward. he worked right next to bob for years, includi

we first asked for documents from the department of commerce and department of justice when we were in the minority in april and may of 2018. both departments ignored us. when i became chairman i renewed these requests on behalf of the committee and since then the administration has engaged in a purposeful effort to obstruct our investigation. and i do not use the word obstruct lightly. the departments have refused to provide key unredacted documents that we need to understand the truth about why they really made this ecision. instead, they produced thousands of pages that were largely unresponsive, heavily redacted or publicly already available. when they let us interview witnesses, they ordered the witnesses not to answer more than 500 of our questions. secretary ross even refused my request to meet with them to work it out. as a result, on april 2, more than three months ago, after a bipartisan vote, the committee subpoenaed the documents including a secret memo that the department of commerce wrote about the citizenship question and then gave to the department of justice. the depar

but so far no more word from the justice department. but we know they are objecting to zebley testifying alongside mueller which he's expected to do in the second part of the day. >> jess is a snyder, thank you so much. >>> president trump has been on edge ahead of the mueller hearing. using the phrase he often uses, witch hunt. let's go to boris sanchez. what's the latest over there? >> reporter: even though president trump says he's not anxious about the testimony today, it's clear that this investigation and the potential damaging information to come from mueller is consuming the president. we've heard that he's been phoning allies asking them specifically about what mueller may say in his testimony. the president also public i yesterday made comments to a group of young conservatives complaining that this investigation is continually overshadowing his presidency. the president letting his anger be known in a series of tweets this morning as well. take a look. the president writing so democrats and others can fabricate a crime, try p

a policy of the justice department that you can't indict a president is why he was not indicted. they lied to the american people. they said he was totally exonerated, he lied. he made that clear. today was a important day. [inaudible question] i think it definitely will. understand we have an unlawful lawless president who needs to be reined in. [inaudible question] >> mr. mueller made the clear point that any other person other than a person hiding behind the justice department, a policy of not indicting that individual because he he is above the law as long as he is president would have been indicted. he can't be indicted once he leaves office. i think that is important. we have a president is wanted before policy of the justice department, he would have been indicted by robert mueller. we have a lawless person in the white house. mueller did a excellent job. he's a great american. [inaudible question] >> i hope so. i think in time it may be there. he will commit more ask in the future. he has no respect for the constitution. he told school kids the other day that the constitu

these are justice department privileges that i will respect. the department has released a letter discussing the restrictions of my testimony. i, therefore, will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest. for example, i am unable to address questions about the initial opening of the fbi's russia investigation which occurred months before my appointment or matters related to the so-called steal doele do. these are subject by on going review of the department. any questions of these topics should be directed to the fbi orr the justice department. as i explained when we closed the special counsel's office in may, our report contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made. we conducted an extensive investigation over two years. in writing the report, we stated the results of our investigation with precision. we scrutinized every word. i do not intend to summarize or describe the results of our work in a different way in the course of my testimony today. as i said on may 29th,

the justice department opening an antitrust review of the world's largest technology companies. wall street right now on record watch. the dow, the s&p and nasdaq all less than a half percent away from record highs. can a major day for earnings push us over the top or will it be trade the white house confirming a u.s. trade delegation will head to china next week for the first high-level face-to-face meetings since president trump and president xi met at the g20 last month. >>> the uk ushers in its new prime minister, but can it get brexit back on track >>> and your stockof the day snapping back. shares of snapchat roaring in premarket trading. could it be a sign of better times ahead for evan spiegel and the company overall? it's wednesday, july 24th. "worldwide exchange" begins right now. >>> good morning welcome to "worldwide exchange." i'm dominic chu in for brian sullivan we have team coverage on all the manger sto major stories impacting markets. ylan mui has all things big credit technology. patrick palfrey is on set with me digging into the earnings story and eunice yoon

they had the justice department to bring people here, and also it had housed, since may of 1941, almost 1000 italians who had been taken off primarily merchant ships that were stranded in u.s. ports once war broke out in 1939. britain would not guarantee their safety passage home, because they did not want both the ships and the men to be enlisted in the war effort against them, so they languished really in those ports for quite a while until the government ordered the cruise to start sabotaging the ships because they were worried that the united states might take them over and give them to britain. once the sabotage began some of the united states ordered all of the men off of these ships, said that to ellis island, and then determine where they were going to put them. because the ccp camp was available here, they were sent on trains starting in may. when the italians first came here, they seemed to be happy to be here. the camp had a really enlightened camp director, a guy named nick collaer, who understood that while they were here against her will, there was no reason to make my dif

ongoing matters within the justice department and deliberations within our office these are justice department privileges that i will respect the department has released a letter discussing the restrictions on my testimony i therefore will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest. for example i am unable to address questions about the initial opening of the f.b.i.'s russia investigation which occurred months before my appointment or matters related to the so-called steel dossier these matters are subject of ongoing review by the department any questions on these topics should therefore be directed to the f.b.i. or the justice department as i explained when we closed the special counsel's office in may our report contains our findings and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made we conducted an extensive investigation over 2 years in writing the report we stated the results of our in investigation with precision we scrutinize every word and do not intend to summarize or describe the results of our work in a different way in the

in a letter to robert mueller signed by an associate deputy attorney general, the justice department is telling robert mueller he may not make "any comments on the facts developed and legal conclusions by the special counsel's office with respect to uncharged individuals." donald trump is an uncharged individual. the letter also said robert mueller should not testify about the "deliberative process," including any discussions he and his staff had about "investigative steps or decisions made during your investigation." that means according to the justice department anyway, robert mueller cannot answer the most important questions he will face on wednesday, including questions like why didn't you subpoena president trump to testify to the grand jury? it means robert mueller will not be able to answer the question, were you or anybody anyone on your team concerned that president trump would fire you? that's a question about robert mueller's deliberative process and the justice department is saying that he cannot answer questions like that. with robert mueller now scheduled to begin his

these are justice department religious i will respect. the department has released the on mys with restrictions testimony and i will not answer questions about certain areas i know or of -- are of public interest. for example, i am unable to address questions about the initial opening of the fbi russian investigation which occurred months before my appointment. for matters related to the , theseed steele dossier matters are subject of ongoing review by department, any questions on these topics should therefore be directed to the fbi or the justice department. explained when we closed the special counsel office in may, our report contains our , andngs, and analysis reasons for the decisions we made. we conducted an extensive investigation over two years, writing the report, we stated the results of our investigation with precision. we scrutinized every word. we do not intend to summarize or describe the work of the results in a different way in my testimony today. as i said on may 29, the report is my testimony and i will stay within that

department and the voting rights act. -- justice department enforce the voting rights act. but we now know that claim was nothing but a pretext, that in fact the supreme court said that. our committee's investigation uncovered evidence that secretary ross launched a secret campaign to add the citizenship question within days after he assumed his post. we learned that secretary ross ignored warnings from experts inside and outside the census bureau including the bureau's chief scientist. they said that they told him that adding a citizenship question would be costly and harm the accuracy of the census. our investigation also revealed that secretary ross spoke with attorney general sessions, steve bannon, and chris copart. contrary to his testimony before the congress, the commerce department conjured up the voting rights rationale to hide these interactions. we first asked for documents from the department of commerce and department of justice when we were in the minority in april and may of 2018. both departments ignored us. when i became chairman i renewed these requests o

the justice department is not going to dictate the terms, however, mueller has given every indication that those were the rules he was playing by anyway. i mean, this struck me as an unnecessary sort of shot at mueller. >> i think he asked for that. i think he asked them what the roo rules were and they responded with the letter. >> it could have been written many ways and it is written in a way that tries to narrowly circumscribe what is going to say but, you know, mueller has a lot of options even within the confines of his instructions. he can say when he's asked about the facts of the case, well, see my report. period. or he could, as the democrats certainly want him to do describe what's in the report. and to me, the most interesting thing about tomorrow is which way mueller is going to go. is he going to elaborate or at least explain what's in his report or is he simply going to blow the members of the congress off and say i'm just not going to repeat what's in my report. >> laura, pick it up from there, what's best case scenario for democrats with witness mueller. >> the goal f

now a federal judge just ruled moments ago that the justice department can't swap out the legal team. this was one of the big ways, the crucial way that is president trump was trying to get a question about whether you are a citizen or not in the census. the supreme court, of course, blocked it. so why is president trump so adamant that this question on citizenship be included? partisan i can partisan politics. >> you need it it for many reasons. you need it for dress. for directing. you need it for appropriations where are the funds going? how many people are they? are they citizens not citizens? >> fundamentally it's hard to imagine how anyone answers that question honestly if they're not a citizen. anyway, evan perez is outfront live in washington. what more are you learning about the ruling and why it's so important tonight. >> well, the big importance of this, erin, is the fact that the judge is simply frustrated and expressing frustration at the justice department. part of the problem for the department, the administration is that they cannot keep the story straight. the judge i

you are saying this in reaction to the justice department, the william barr justice department deciding this week not to prosecute the officer involved in the killing of eric garner. the next stage of this is up to the city of new york, should the officer be fired? do you believe that that police officer should be fired? you're going to be on the debate stage with the mayor of new york city, bill de blasio. is this nothing that you will bring up at that time? >> i absolutely believe that the officer will be fired. i hope we had the opportunity speak about the issue of police reform as you know, lawrence, i'm the only candidate that's put forward a police reform plan. this is one more powerful example of why we need it. i would just ask your listeners there, how many of these videos do we have to see, video after video after video of especially young black men that are treated differently by police, that excessive force is used on before we understand that it's -- even though we have great police officers out there and i worked with some as mayor of san antonio, this is not a case of jus

we both started off in the justice department. >> you were good friends. you can work together and not be friends. you and comey were friends. >> we were friends. >> that's my question. thank you for get iting to the answer. before you were pointed to special counsel. had you talked to james comey in the proceeding six months? >> no. >> when you were appointed as special counsel, was president trump's firing of comey something you anticipated investigating potentially obstruction of justice? >> i can't get into that. internal deliberations in the justice department. >> actually, it goes to your credibility and maybe you have been away from the courtroom awhile. credibility is always relevant and material and that goes for you too. you're a witness before us. let me ask you. when you talked to president trump the day before you were appointed as special counsel, you were talking to him about fbi director position again. did he mention the firing of james comey? >> not as a candidate. >> did he mention the firing of james comey in your discussion with him? >

let's dig deep we are the top fbi lawyer jim bake here spent two decades at the justice department. as he cnn legal analyst. thank you for coming in. so secretary acosta says it was valuable to get a guilty plea deal with epstein rather than roll the dice and go to trial. does that explain the unusual circumstances surrounding that plea deal? >> not fully. at least to me. this was a significant activity that he was engaged in. he pleaded guilty to in terms of criminal activity against very young victims. prosecutors have to make hard choices. they have to deal with reality and the victims and try to figure out what is the best thing to do. if you step back for a moment, what this is really about is seeking justice. justice for the victims. most importantly. also, bringing mr. epstein, who is accused at this point in time to justice, if he in fact committed the offenses alleged in the new charges. and then also about holding the department of justice accountable for the decisions that it made. so i'm glad to hear there's some level of internal review going on at the doj but i think t

the justice department says it is disappointed and will keep that option. in the wake of that ruling new tonight a former new york democratic assemblyman is suing democratic socialist congresswoman alexandria ocasio cortez. he says she blocks users on twitter based on their personal viewpoints. if you want something done right do-it-yourself, that is how tom stier is feeling tonight. will people the democratic field ever farther left? that is next. uh-oh, looks like someone's still nervous about buying a new house. is it that obvious? yes it is. you know, maybe you'd worry less if you got geico to help with your homeowners insurance. i didn't know geico could helps with homeowners insurance. yep, they've been doing it for years. what are you doing? big steve? thanks, man. there he is. get to know geico and see how much you could save on homeowners and renters insurance. >> shannon: hours from now >> hours from now the women's world cup championship soccer team will parade down the canyon of heroes. many cbt maps victory as a political opportunity. jonathan

of justice, and it is a member of the deputy of justice or the -- department of justice or fbi who right now should be prosecuted, they are not. i am sure mueller would like to speak to that. will he be given the opportunity to account for this nonsense, this is a ruse. >> you are right, i love what attorney general barr said, there was a crisis of leadership at upper echelon of the fbi, this is true, comey fired, mccabe fired, jim baker demoted, the left, lisa page ded and left, fbi head fee feet str, there was a problem there not with any type of collusion between the trump campaign and russia to impact the election. lou: and is the house -- are you house republicans going to be able to do anything about the addition of zebley to the table bev your committee. >> like the president we've been protesting this all day, the last minute thing they spring on you, never have i seen this in all my time in congress, even secretary chin chanc clinton whe testified her lawyers were not sitting with her, this is not how it is done. i have never seen anyone sit at witness table who has not been swo

ongoing matters within the justice department and deliberations within our office these are justice department privileges that i will respect the department has released a letter discussing the restrictions on my testimony i therefore will not be able to answer questions about certain areas that i know are of public interest for example i am unable to address questions about the initial opening of the f.b.i.'s russia investigation which occurred months before my appointment or matters related to the so-called steel dossier these matters are subject of ongoing review by the department any questions on these topics should therefore be directed to the f.b.i. or the justice department as i explained when we closed the special counsel's office in may our report contains our findings. and analysis and the reasons for the decisions we made we conducted an extensive investigation over 2 years in writing the report we stated the results of our in investigation with precision we scrutinized every word and do not intend to summarize or describe the results of our work in a different way in the

this is something that the department of justice objects to. it is against department practice to have attorneys in this type of setting sitting next to the special counsel testifying. but of course since aaron dudley is a private citizen, there's really nothing more the department of justice can do than sort of informally object her. he would not comment as to whether the department of justice had issued any former objection, but there's nothing that can be done. he was the demty special counsel and was really in charge of the day to day operations and we know in this last minute late night request from robert mueller he did request aaron dudley with him for this testimony to peejsy help him answer any questions. we know aaron dudley will be there with him next to him at this first set of this hearing before the judiciary committee and then also will be sworn in as a witness potentially asking question as we go into that noon hour with the house intelligence committee. we know robert mueller showing up very prepared today having prepped for da