Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
-- go back to Washington now and more on the house judiciary is committee's investigation.
It's -- whether the US attorney general lied under oath while testifying.
On the surveillance of reporters now look at this very closely here's what Eric Holder said.
Before congress two weeks ago.
With regard to the potential prosecution of the press for the disclosure of material that is not something that.
I've ever been involved -- heard.
Or we think would be a wise policy in fact my views quite the opposite that.
-- back disputes the reports that the attorney general was involved in conversations that led.
To naming Fox News correspondent James Rosen -- criminal co conspirator.
In a leak case I'm joined now by south Carolina Republican -- -- she's on the House Judiciary Committee that will be leading that investigation joins me now Carson good morning good to have you here.
Good -- a lot of finger out of that well thank you they they look at that statement and by the attorney general and say you know it's one of two things you know -- either he never intended to prosecute James Rosen.
He just wanted to sort of stir up and not enthusiasm to get the war -- that he needed to go after those phone calls and emails and the like.
He -- he's lying and that -- those are the two possibilities laid out there do great.
-- there may be more possibilities but you just played what he said now let's contrast what he said what the facts still was an.
An affidavit in support -- -- search war which cited rose and as -- a leader in a better which by the way is a crime and a co conspirator which by the way is a crime.
So for him to say have never heard of it or been involved with those are two very -- expansive terms.
And when you look at the policy Department of Justice you cannot seek a search warrant or subpoena against a reporter.
Without the express approval of the attorney general himself.
You say did he lie you know was he mistaken wasn't an innocent -- -- collection to be misunderstand -- Johnson's question.
I can't answer -- I can tell you this what he said is not true what his motive was I'm -- chairman good -- chairman sensenbrenner.
We'll get to the bottom all but when you contrast police said what the facts.
They're not close yeah.
I mean when he was speaking before that panel he was talking about the AP.
And then a couple of days later all of this news started to spell out about the rose an investigation.
So we don't know you know whether he will say will of the I was purely just talking about.
The -- -- situation -- but he you know made very broad comments there about how he would never be involved in anything that smacked of the prosecution.
The journalists in fact in a report -- came out yesterday.
In that interview he told the reporter that that he felt remorse over what was going -- and with regard to reporters.
What do you make of of you know this sort of revelation that he feels bad about all of this.
Well I would want to ask you what are you feel bad about -- mean if you didn't follow your own procedures are followed the wall then what do you feel bad or not is secondary.
That -- need to be a violation of your own policies or violation of the code of federal regulation.
But -- I just think it's sad that we're having to Parse the words of the top law enforcement official in this country.
Is it not too much to ask -- the attorney general.
Give straight answers when he calls before congress it it in my asking too much that the top prosecutor in the contrary.
Not mislead congress if you take what he said.
And then contrast that with what he did -- what the department did he's either so.
Absent from the job that he has no idea what's going on or are there would be a more nefarious explanation which we will get to the bottom off.
Want to move onto the other topic that we wanted to -- about today and that is this subpoena.
State Department documents in a bad guy as he case.
What do you after there -- think this timing gonna get it.
Well your second question is wonderful because we've been after for almost nine months now and then what we know what we want -- pretty simple.
We want all the emails related to the drafting of these demonstrably -- talking points.
It's been almost non -- we're still trying to figure out why Susan Rice was put all the Sunday morning talk shows why it was a Secretary Clinton.
Why they went from telling the truthful September 12 that it was Mansour Al -- -- off.
To manufacturing this this myth about a video.
Chairman I -- has asked repeatedly for these documents.
I I know the State Department says they've given us reams and reams of paper but they could save the paper they just give us what we're asking for what we don't Walt.
Paper we want the truth when -- the facts on how these -- talking points war.
-- -- thank you very much congressman South Carolina we will see next time thank you -- -- yes ma'am thank you --
Filter by section