Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
We've got some Eric Holder as attorney general he's an outstanding attorney general -- Does his job with the integrity -- and I expect to continue to do -- I was President Obama moments ago responding to questions about the attorney general Eric Holder.
And the Department of Justice.
And its decision to order a controversial grab the phone records from the Associated Press behind closed doors without advance notice the AP.
No objection was allowed -- No opportunity was given to make one after the fact -- -- -- get it.
The DOJ says it made that decision is part of a probe into who leaked classified information to the Associated Press year or so ago.
Yesterday a frustrated group of lawmakers tried to get.
Suggested he couldn't say much about this watch.
Did you seek the AP's assistance in the first place and if not -- and a again mister chairman I don't know what happened there about with the interaction between.
The EP and the Justice Department -- -- them.
Case I don't have a factual basis to answer the questions that you -- because I was refused I just.
I don't know what has happened I don't know I don't know.
I -- he was but I don't know.
-- -- Andrew McCarthy is senior fellow at the national review institute and a contributing editor at the national review.
Former prosecutor with the department justice he put terrorists in jail including the blind -- Thank you again for being here so he has no idea because he says he recused himself from the whole thing got started because they question him about some but as somebody who might -- had the information to leak.
At that when he sedar -- about.
Delegated all but he would not -- say.
I'm sure who who actually would have signed off on it and 95% sure it was probably the deputy attorney general -- but I have no idea how can -- not know and what do you make of that answer.
Well I think.
Part of it is if he's -- he's refused and he should not.
Now I he should know who he's delegated things -- when he's refused but I think holders had.
So many problems giving conflicting.
Answers to congress over the years.
That he's developed this habit which I guess if you were in his position you would you would probably cultivate.
And not to give.
Clear answer that doesn't have any wiggle room because if he admits something and then gets caught on it like.
You know maybe he did know something about it and and you know there's some document that shows he has knowledge and -- has another kind of problem so I think he just gives.
These kinds that we easily answer is because.
There's no way pinning him to not -- mean isn't there a way of saying it.
What give us the facts exactly what DT -- what were you asked that led you.
You to -- recuse yourself -- -- back you up and and more importantly.
Cleanup up before us who can't tell us why the -- was targeted why didn't consult them advances the law requires except in very limited circumstances.
You can walk us through because.
Forgive us but what I have an a hole -- Trust in government these days well you shouldn't have a whole lot of trust in the Justice Department in particular but I you know even on not a holder fan.
There is a culture in the Justice Department that when you're talking about an investigation.
You almost sound dishonest when you're asked about it because you're not supposed to.
Comment on it.
And I think if you've had the kind of problems that holder has had.
It's it's almost understandable what you would give an answer that you could wiggle out of because he's he's constantly getting himself into these.
-- -- but does -- peeping because you're -- -- it tough on terror -- on in a lot of the Republicans.
These in leak probes although there are far far fewer under President Bush than we've seen -- a President Obama.
By Sam -- can't be -- national security information that's an -- allies the American public and that's sort of what we just heard President Obama -- I.
I was one of the biggest complaint -- during the bush years but they did nothing about this.
On and I applaud the Obama administration for being concerned about national security -- I fault them for causing national security links which they do -- the days that they're not you know.
Cracking down on it but when they find -- favorable to them -- like the UBL ratings are exactly but.
It here's the thing.
In the US attorney's offices in the Justice Department.
-- And when you do it what you're supposed to do.
It's to a careful investigation so you narrow down the possibilities of where the leak is coming from so for example.
-- I've known of cases where they asked everybody in the government who might have known something that got leaked.
To file an affidavit.
And then they go through the affidavits they figure out which reporter Scott talked to -- -- you can't.
Stop people from lying but assuming that you get truthful information and affidavits.
Then you at least have a narrow collection of people -- you might want to follow up on.
What they did here.
Was scorched the earth.
For all of these different reporters.
Evidently without having narrow down who the possible candidates for -- -- And what's wrong here is that.
The adult supervision is supposed to be in the Justice Department to prevent that kind of thing from happening in other words you always get these guys what the line prosecutors who have the case really want the information and they want -- scorched the earth.
And the people at the Justice Department is supposed to be -- -- -- not no no no that's not how we there's -- first of yes right we're talking about the freedom of the press exactly and the and the real danger here is listening to president Obama's press conference -- I think this media shield law is a bad idea.
What's a good idea is having.
Adult leadership and political accountability in the Justice Department so this sort of thing doesn't happen.
I'm afraid we're gonna get saddled with a bad law.
As an overreaction to what happened at an interest in part.
-- let me shift gears with you now to Ben Ghazi because I was talking about the president's comments.
With with -- actually not that -- the IRS is when.
I'm I'm so confused well -- can't come up.
-- -- -- talking about the associated press and the DOJ investigating him now what -- -- to the IRS investigating conservative groups -- and the question is how far does this gal and whether the with a White House now president Obama's now very outraged about it and so on so forth.
But there's a question about whether the outrage is a little is a day late and a dollar short because we've had.
Hundreds of conservative organizations.
-- -- in their attempts to organize and collect donations and support the causes that they believe in.
While the IRS was perpetrating this -- So the Bloomberg reporter asked President Obama.
Who in the White House knew about -- -- -- anybody in the White House who battled on -- now.
Get general pull up that never bait again.
Of exactly what she asked.
Can you assure the American people that nobody in the White House knew.
About the IRS's actions.
Before your counsel's office found out about the IG probe.
And once again lets -- with the presidents have.
I can assure you.
I certainly did not know anything.
The IG report before the -- Report had been leaked through press.
And then the Associated Press comes up with this headline.
Obama assures he did not know about IRS political targeting before reports became public I think that's not that is not.
He assured -- you did not responsive answer before I I heard I'm gonna do implied admission -- there's a principle of the law that says.
If it if you were -- if if the answer screams out to be no.
And you don't give -- no answer it's like saying yes.
On he didn't answer the question it's very clear that he was asked what did you folks in the White House now -- wasn't he wasn't asked about the IG report.
He answered I didn't know anything about the IG report.
That the question is what did you know in the White House about the -- -- about it I really.
So that's the -- that's number one I I'd be very suspicious now the people in the White House knew exactly what was going on.
And the second thing I'd I'd point out is this.
As important as the law is.
It -- and regulations and an agency is the ethos.
Of an agency we saw this like in the ninety's when you have the wall where you know they had these regulations and people wouldn't cooperate is -- they felt like they shouldn't cooperate.
This went on at the IRS because they felt like it was OK to do this kind of thing.
Where to talk to Ted Olson who represents the Coke Brothers who says.
His clients are targets number one and what he believes is an enemy's list and he thinks the two things are related Andy thank you so much -- McCarthy everybody.
Filter by section