Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Check out our top story as we watch a growing number of news organizations refusing.
To attend a meeting with the attorney general about the DOJ's spying on reporters.
But is that the right call.
-- now Judy Miller Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter author and Fox News contributor.
Jen Rubin is a blogger for the Washington Post also.
A former attorney.
And Nina Easton is a senior editor in Washington columnist for fortune magazine and the Fox News contributor.
And now the list of those who have said no is growing it includes Fox News although ABC news just said that they would attend.
But I'll start with -- is Judy is -- the right call for these news organizations say no not unless it's on the record.
I think it's definitely the right call at this point -- mean to have.
-- attorney general who has.
It -- very least if we were gonna be charitable here.
Need some contradictory statements.
About what he would and would not tolerate and what he would authorized to now go on background and say oh.
Where I'm gonna tell you what I really tried to do and why I tried to do it.
And to have the news organizations that were targeted because the first two hours organizations.
That announced they weren't calling you know 8 PM and then Fox News.
Hey kids -- not even to be able to report that because they've agreed to ground rules that would prevent them from doing that that's just unacceptable.
At this point Eric Holder has to speak the truth to the American people and first and foremost to the news media.
-- I know you say it in your column today that they are trying to lure us the media into -- -- session here.
Yeah I think so in fact sort of the stated purpose of this meeting.
Was to discuss ground rules how well he wants to discuss new ground rules of the old ground -- little.
That he violated even caught the counseled in house counsel the lawyers for these various news organizations and they can hash this out.
This I think is nothing but an attempted to hit number one keep his job as you noted Megan.
A number of people are calling for his head.
And number two did try to put a thumb on they.
Kind of coverage he's getting what he says something very -- -- they do is right when he confesses.
That he said something in the affidavit for James Rosen that wasn't true what he says.
Well yeah I should've said that the congress those people are gonna report on that gaffe from but this is competitive advantage it's silly they're now giving 8 PM in New York Times and fox is -- because they report on.
-- and yet it and then our bureau chief wouldn't be able to come out and share that with those of us who are actually reporting.
About this matter that was it that was one of the things in the near times raised about this.
When they objected and said that they are not showing up he'll let me ask you because if there's -- Whether it's on a record -- off the record.
There is an inherent weirdness.
To Eric Holder coming to the media and saying.
I spied on you please help me figure out a way to protect you from me.
Yeah and it has -- ham handed apology tour is the way I would put it IE he this idea that you.
Have integrity you believe in the integrity of the media and he asked editors' top editors to come to this off the record -- fashion.
It's not unlike how he describes learning about.
What he calls the magnitude.
The whole situation you're sitting in his breakfast table two weeks ago.
Reading about this and the Washington Post in the Washington Post broke the -- story.
And then he suddenly feels a sense of remorse and and seems to understand the magnitude of this as this search warrant -- signed off on now let's step back this is search warrant that not only.
Describe James Rosen as a co conspirator which is a rare -- stretch of the Espionage Act.
In an of itself.
But it cites his recording techniques suggesting they are criminal acts.
And then I did and now we now we also know there's near reporting that shows that the Justice Department went judge searching.
To make sure that -- didn't know about the break -- to his private email to keep it secret because the first few judges turned it down.
It given all that how could you not know what you were doing or the magnitude of what you're doing.
-- -- -- -- call that the corn flakes of regret yesterday they don't experience I've just been reading the Washington Post in reading your paper Jennifer.
He even if the finally dawned on him that maybe this wasn't the right -- and yet you see Brad what house of the Democratic National Committee.
Tweeting out a message saying -- these these news organizations have decided not to meet with holder -- for fits your right to gripe.
Your thoughts about that.
Yeah I -- things could have gone worse they did with that basically he was trying to bully the media isn't that a common pattern in this administration to showing up.
And saying somehow that the New York Times couldn't complain because they didn't hit a -- of these crazy ground rules.
-- that of all people brought the ACLU into the fight.
Castigating the Obama administration.
So we now have a very strange situation with Jennifer Rubin the ACL hill.
And the New York Times are all on the same page so I don't think the administration is doing something right -- all of those folks.
With very different views -- to -- -- objectionable.
That's I said earlier it's it's not everyday that we at Fox News Channel -- -- shoulder to shoulder with the Huffington Post.
But that's where we are today on this matter and Judy we talked earlier in the program about half when people are asked what's the biggest scandal facing the government right now.
They put this 13 they put IRS first been -- second and this 13.
But for the politicians.
In Washington who are battling this losing the press you know for President Obama for Eric Holder.
That is a big deal they might -- those scandals a little differently.
And when you've lost the press especially -- press that has been so -- time.
And so supportive of this -- administration that has bent over backwards to give them every break then your really really in trouble which is why we're having.
Attempt to kind of set the record straight on and off the record the hits it.
And that I mean there's no question that this is that this is the charm offensive but -- at some point OK so let's say Eric Holder -- back later today and says.
All right we'll do it on the record because I can't imagine he's gonna meet with these three organizations that have said yes right.
It's like Politico ABC news and one other.
So is he really gonna go forward just that meeting or will -- be forced to say okay we'll do something on the record and then does that change things.
Well yet changes things I mean if he does -- on the record then reporters will calm and they'll ask tough questions.
Mean going back -- -- question about the polls and why people.
See the IRS scandal and appreciate it -- and they they understand what it can be like the powerlessness of being attacked by the IRS.
The -- Ghazi scandal they understand the national cancer security concerns.
-- they don't necessarily targeted jump to the side of reporters but this is a case where reporters and the press who aren't always held in the highest standards.
Actually are in a position to ask tough questions of an official.
Who's seems to be changing his story on a very important -- situation here.
This is a case where the press should be led and should be asking those tough questions right alongside members of congress as let me ask you three as as experienced members of the press just quickly -- line what you think Eric Holder.
This scandal -- scandals that are now upon him Judy I think it's too early to tell -- I think by the end of the summer he may decide to spend more time with his family.
-- -- -- I think they let the winds blow for awhile and when they're like subsided a little bit and then he resigns and we have to question whether it's worth it is it worth it you know to have this distraction.
And these investigations and so on ongoing as we head into -- will soon be in an election year again.
We thank you -- so much thank you -- you.
Filter by section