Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
You -- well GOP leaders have threatened to subpoena of the witnesses.
And said that they may even hold up the nomination of the new ambassador to Libya if the administration does not cooperate.
California congressman Darrell -- is chairman of the committee on oversight and government reform which is not the committee that would issue -- subpoena as.
But let me just ask you while I have you mr.
chairman how difficult that would be and could you at least get the names of the individuals.
Who they're who they're looking to identify anything.
Making -- exactly right with our ongoing investigation -- Ben Ghazi.
What we're finding is that statement -- just a few moments ago just isn't true they have not been open and transparent.
In fact even the names of these survivors.
So they could be asked if they would appear.
I had not been provided.
I think the important thing is nobody's trying to.
-- the victims.
But the fact is that every time we interview people who were there we find that the stories told to us publicly.
And what these individuals are saying privately are always different.
-- -- and I want to move on with you to another topic because I know that you were very concerned today.
About the nomination of Thomas Perez to head up the Labor Department this is that want a top official at DOJ under Eric Holder right now he heads of the civil rights division.
And President Obama apparently pleased with him in wanting to move him over to head the Labor Department.
And the Wall Street Journal had at a piece today.
That talked about how quote political muscle undermined the rule of law under mr.
-- -- civil rights division.
In simple terms it.
What is the allegation was that mr.
Well one of the allegations is that he interfered.
And cost the American taxpayers a 180 million dollars.
By getting a case dismissed where he didn't want to face the Supreme Court decision.
And gave up two very valid cases again a 180 million dollars of taxpayer money in Saint Paul.
This was unprecedented it's been said for additionally this nominee has been expressed as not having been candid in his testimony.
Candidates kind of almost funny words in politics that means he didn't tell the whole truth.
This is also somebody who refused to do his fundamental job which is to fully prosecute.
Voter intimidation that fell under his watch he's just some of the areas of concern that I think senators have.
And they need to ask questions and get answers and I don't think they're gonna like the answers particularly as to his lack of candor.
There was a case that was gonna go up to the US Supreme Court that mr.
-- that challenge the theory of discrimination and mr.
Peres apparently believes in.
That talks about how -- it's basically what you can prove racial discrimination by looking at statistics.
Rather than intended specific cases and that was about to head to the Supreme Court apparently mr.
-- didn't like the chances of it of his of that theory being upheld by the Supreme Court.
So we stepped did in -- case and tried to convince the city of Saint Paul, Minnesota -- it get out of it even though Supreme Court said they would take it he said don't do it.
I don't watch it it could -- continue with your appeal in exchange for you doing what I want you to do.
I as the DOJ.
Will not intervene to help the citizens in these other two big lawsuits.
That that we're also pending and so it appears this deal was -- why is not a problem is that sort of the horse trading done all the time.
Well it's been called unprecedented in their own internal investigation.
You remember he flew that he flew to Saint Paul to make this deal he basically paid a 180 million dollar bribe.
By causing these cases to collapse he failed to protect -- individuals who had valid claims and make it back to the important part.
If -- -- the city of Saint Paul in other cities around America.
Are not guilty of discrimination they're trying to do their job they've created an open environment and an environment in vision and our constitution.
But they are finding themselves falling.
If you will back on this whole question of you've got to hit certain numbers you've got to force the numbers that was a very legitimate question for the Supreme Court.
And again this is a president who picks people to promote because they support his ideology.
Rather than the rule of law.
This is a man heading up the -- rights division and at which that the inspector general of the DOJ just concluded that there is a racial hostility within that department.
That remains deeply divided over whether cases.
Enforcing rights under the voting rights laws.
Should ever be brought or should be -- with any consistency where the victims in those voting cases are white and the defendants are black.
That's under mr.
Peres and even some on the left have been saying this enough is enough Eric Holder personally needs to answer.
For that IG's report.
Although it's gotten very scant coverage so do you believe that that is a potential issue for mr.
Peres on his confirmation to head to head -- believer to.
I think it's one of the most serious accusations because it's it's his failure to do a job he was in his failure to be candid when testifying.
And then this interference.
Based on ideology these seem to be the reasons the president's promoting him.
Which is exactly what you don't want to have in a cabinet officer whose primary job is jobs.
We can't have that kind of ideology in a top cabinet position quite some individual who has proven themselves to put ideology.
Ahead of law.
Ideology ahead of the best interest of the country.
I was -- -- thanks so much for being here.
Thank you -- him.
Filter by section