attorney general merrick garland is in the hot seat today in washington. lawmakers going after the multiple controversies the doj is facing. let's say they have plenty of sparks and they were flying. >> this memorandum is aimed at violence and threats of violence. >> i understand you're talking point. you're not answering my question. with all due respect, will you submit to an ethics review of this matter? yes or no. i wonder how the firm's doing without its fearless leader. you sure you want to leave that all behind? yeah. stay restless with the rx. crafted by lexus. experience amazing at your lexus dealer. i've spent centuries evolving with the world. crafted by lexus. that's the nature of being the economy. observing investors choose assets to balance risk and reward. with one element securing portfolios, time after time. gold. agile and liquid. a proven protector. an ever-evolving enabler of bold decisions. an asset more relevant than ever before. gold. your strategic advantage. thanks for coming. now when it comes to a financial plan this broker is y

attorney general merrick garland was noncommital when testifying before the house judiciary committee yesterday. >> the department recognizes the important oversight role that this committee, the house of representatives, and the senate play with respect to the executive branch. the house of representatives votes for referral of a contempt charge. the department of justice will do what it always does in such circumstances, will apply the facts and the law and make a decision consistent with the principals of prosecution. >>> joining us now, reporter. what sort of backlash will they face within the gop? >> i mean, absolutely these republicans knew when they took that vote, they're facing possibly becoming political pariah in their party. they voted against the majority whip, the majority party. they've seen this before. congresswoman liz cheney was on the select committee when she voted against -- i'm sorry. when she voted for the impeachment of the january 6 select committee and continued to speak out against donald trump, she was stripped of her leadership position with the blessing

garland testifies before the house judiciary committee or the routine hearing on the oversight department of justice. he'll very likely be asked how he's going to handle some of these cases. you know, he might actually get some greater insight into how this could all pay out. >> it's certainly a busy time right now over on capitol hill. you're also following, of course, all negotiations within the democratic party with the bipartisan sfrur deal and an attempt to get a deal on the larger reconciliation package. it seems like there's been a sense of optimism the last couple of days, but also there's a lot of stuff that needs to get sorted outst. tell us where we stand? >> on tuesday there were meetings. and in these meetings, according to sources in our room, he delivered these assessments of what could go and what could stay necessarily in their social spending package, and this is leading to a bit of heartburn among democrats about things they have to let go. you have the longer extension of the child tax credit or free community college, but emerging from all this and after meetings the

. >> on thursday attorney general merrick garland testifies on the justice department's mission and policies before the house judiciary committee. we're covering it live at 10:00 a.m. on c-span3, online at c-span.org or new video app, c-span now. >>> get c-span on the go. watch the day's biggest events on our new mobile video app, access top highlights, listen to c-span radio and discover new pad casts all for free. download c-span now today. >>> joining us now patrick penfield, of syracuse university. a supply chain practice professor here to talk about the delays in the supply chain. professor, thanks for giving us your time this morning. >> good morning. glad to be on the show. >> what's the best way to think about the supply chain particularly with the issues that are currently at play? >> yes, so supply chains are pretty simplistic. input transformation output. unfortunately, it's gotten very complicated over the years. and a lot due to cost reductions and trying to get the lowest cost, the best quality. now we have a global supply chain crisis. problems and issues throughout the variou

eastern on c-span3, the attorney general merrick garland will make his first appearance before the house judiciary committee on issues facing the justice department. 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span.org and on the new c-span now app, homeland security secretary appearing before the senate judiciary committee. watch next week on the c-span network. or you can watch full coverage on c-span now, our new video app. head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video, live or on-demand, anytime. c-an

garland and rick saying what will it take to get biden to replace merrick garland at the doj and trump this group are going to get through this unscathed. and few other comments and calling and and carolina pretty. >> good morning and thought i would like to make a suggestion for questions and comments because i was an election judge and no with the laws are needed about so i want to express. and give you suggestions on c-span but anyways about the laws that the republicans are making, you don't need these laws, the trying to secure it with id, we run so many laws just for id and if there was all this voter fraud, how come nobody has been charged of. if i saw you rob a store, board million 20 other people so you never gets arrested, nobody has been arrested so people said they seem fraud are doing it so if you know it did not happen so nobody is locked up and trump was the president at the time the doj to go after anybody and they never reported there never was an first of all, in order to i say make voting we should all have paper ballots but this is my suggestion, you should go to wh

host: what do you want merrick garland to do? caller: i want him to investigate trump's actions after november 3. he called election officials in the states and told them to commit perjury. where was merrick garland? what is this man doing? absolutely nothing. how useless is this guy? guest: i am coming to a similar opinion, if the opinion is, listen, we need him to step up. i agree these are serious, potentially criminal allegations or problems. keep in mind, we have seen hundreds of regular americans who showed up on january 6 and physically stormed the capital. they are being held accountable. they are being criminally investigated. some of them are being sentenced. they are having to hire lawyers or get public defenders that are overworked. they are having to pull into their own pockets and take from their family budgets to provide criminal defenses. that is on the backend, the people that showed up. what about the people inside government? that is what the judiciary committee is looking at. i agree merrick garland should be

attorney general merrick garland make his first appearance for the house judiciary committee on issues facing the justice department. at 10:00 a.m. eastern live on c-span.org and on the new c-span now app. homeland security secretary will appear before the senate judiciary committee. watch this week on c-span network. or you can watch a full coverage on c-span now our new video app. also head on over too c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video live or on-demand any time. c-span your under unfiltered view of government. ♪ ♪ download c-span new mobile app and stay up-to-date with live video coverage of the day's political events from live streams of the house and senate floor and key congressional hearings. the white house advancing supreme court oral arguments are live interactive morning program, "washington journal", will we hear your voices every day. c-span now has you covered download the app for free today. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. brought to you by these television companies including charter communications. >> broadbent is a force for

then, attorney general merrick garland makes his first appearance before the house judiciary committee. then, homeland secretary will appear before the senate judiciary committee. watch this week on the c-span network, or watch on c-span now, our new video app. also head over to c-span.org for scheduling information, or to stream video live, on demand, any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. funded by these television companies -- by these companies and more, including mediacom >> internet traffic soared, and we never slowed down. we powered a new reality. at mediacom, we are built to keep you ahead. >> giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> washington, unfiltered. c-span, in your pocket. download c-span now, today. >> the top two candidates in boston's nonpartisan mayoral election took part in a one hour debate. the candidates in their first debate discussed affordable housing, homelessness, public education and police reform. the winner of the election will replace marty walsh, who has been serving as u.s. labor sec

attorney general merrick garland will make his first appearance before the house judiciary committee on issues facing the justice department. at 10:00 a.m. eastern live on c-span.org and on the new c-span now app, homeland security secretary alejandro mayorkas will appear before the senate judiciary committee. watch this week on the c-span networks or watch our full coverage on c-span now, our new video app. also head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video, live on or demand, anytime. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> weekends on c-span2 are an intellectual feast. every saturday, you'll find events and people that explore our nation's past on american history tv. on sundays, book tv brings you the latest in nonfiction books and authors. it's television for serious readers. learn, discover, explore. weekends on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. >> brad smith is with us, the former chair of the federal election commission. he is also founder and chair of the institute for free speech. here with us to talk about his organization and their

on c-span3, merrick garland testifies. you can watch online at c-span.org, or with our new video app, c-span now. >> you can be a part of the national conversation by participating in the studentcam video competition. we are asking you to create a five to six minute documentary but answers the question, how does the federal government impact your life? the documentary must show supporting and opposing points of view. use c-span video clips, which are easy to find and access at c-span.org. the competition awards $100,000 in total cash prizes with a grand prize of $5,000. entries must be received before january 20, 2022. >> "washington journal" continues. host: congressman david price, represents the fourth district of north carolina for his 17 term. he joins us this morning from capitol hill. good morning and welcome back to "washington journal." guest: good to be back. host: the first item on the agenda, your announcement that you would not seek reelection in 2022. tell us why not. guest: i do not have any elaborate reason

merrick garland faces his first testimony before the house judiciary committee. that will be next thursday. i guess that is coming up this thursday, coming up this week, correct? guest: that is correct. host: what do you hope to hear or ask the attorney general? guest: i want to hear about the two-tiered justice system that we are seeing in america. that is what i hear from my constituents regularly. why do people get away with what they do, taking a server and wrecking it and that not being accountable. why the president's son has -- we find information that would be chargeable offenses by the average citizens in america. why aren't those things being investigated. why are parents, who attend a school board meeting them and there is vigorous debate commanding we have the attorney general saying, these people, we have to treat them as terrorists. they are not terrorists. they are just people who are seeking to be heard before unelected board. people want to know why there is a two-tiered justice system. why are some of us inferior in this democracy? host: we will

on thursday, two oversight hearings at 10:00 live on c-span3, attorney general merrick garland will make his first appearance before the house judiciary committee on issues facing the just -- issues facing the justice department. homeland security secretary alejandra mayorkas will appear before the senate judiciary committee. watch this week on the c-span networks, or watchful coverage on our new video app. also head over to c-span.org for scheduling information or to stream video live or on-demand any time. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. weekends on c-span two are an intellectual feast. every saturday, you will find events that explore our nation's past. on sunday, book tv brings you the latest in nonfiction authors. learn, discover, explore. weekends on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: brad smith is with us, former chair of the federal election commission. he is also founder and chair of the, here with us to talk about his organization and their look at threats to american free-speech rights. good morning. guest: good morning, thank you. host: tell us abou

thursday, merrick garland is going to be before the house judiciary committee for an oversight hearing of the justice department. there is a lot of issues that he is going to be grilled on -- january 6, but also on abortion, texas's abortion law, immigration is a huge one republicans are planning to ask about. a lot happening this week at the hearing level. we have not seen a lot of these hearings. this is going to be a huge week for these to have a centerstage, dominate cable news coverage. host: wanda, michigan, independent. caller: number one -- i do not like either one of these bills. i think they are full of things we do not need. my question is why art date talking about getting our deficit down instead of spending all this money? guest: a lot of people are talking about getting the deficit down, republican in particular. derek has have also been saying we cannot be spending as much as we have been -- democrats have also been saying we cannot be spending as much as we have been. the argument from the way house then they are trying to make this broader social spending package tota

merrick garland will make his first appearance before the house judiciary committee on issues facing the justice department. at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span.org and the new c-span that -- now at. an appearance before the senate judiciary committee. watch next week on the c-span network, or watch on c-span now, our new video app. head on over to c-span.org for scheduling information or stream video live or on-demand anytime. c-span, your unfiltered view of government. >> a new mobile video app -- c-span now. download today. >> "washington journal" continues. host: we are back and we want to know what your top new story of the week was. are there particular topics that were in the mainstream media that you want to talk about or is there something else going on that you think americans need to know about? call in and let us know what your top new story of the week wise. here are some stories that did come out this week that you may want to talk about. first of all, there is a supply chain disruption that happened and will happen in the future around the united states. the inflation concern

obama did not have the senate the year that merrick garland was goat supposed -- was supposed to have that hearing. host: on the history of adding justices to the bench, the last president to try to add justices -- franklin roosevelt. the high court has had nine justices 1869. before that, it fluctuated between five and 10 justices. jim, pittsburgh, independent. caller: i do not support changing a system that is not broken. we need to elect an ethical president and u.s. senate members. host: who is an ethical person narrative pennsylvania who should be in congress -- person out of pennsylvania who should be in congress right now? caller: i can't name anyone. host: who was the last president you thought did a good job of obeying his oath of office. caller: i don't think any of them do in my lifetime. host: who in history with you .2 / -- who in history would you poit to? caller: george washington. old hickory, president jackson. host: this is dena, princeville, hawaii. caller: it seems to me instead of calling it packing -- what he wants to do is bring balance. host: so it is all about

host: what do you want merrick garland to do? caller: i want him to investigate trump's actions after november 3. he called election officials in the states and told them to commit perjury. where was merrick garland? what is this man doing? absolutely nothing. how useless is this guy? guest: i am coming to a similar opinion, if the opinion is, listen, we need him to step up. i agree these are serious, potentially criminal allegations or problems. keep in mind, we have seen hundreds of regular americans who showed up on january 6 and physically stormed the capital. they are being held accountable. they are being criminally investigated. some of them are being sentenced. they are having to hire lawyers or get public defenders that are overworked. they are having to pull into their own pockets and take from their family budgets to provide criminal defenses. that is on the backend, the people that showed up. what about the people inside government? that is what the judiciary committee is looking at. i agree merrick garland should be

garland actually enforcing laws where they have the primary jurisdiction? that includes on human smuggling. shame on facebook, shame on facebook board of directors. shame on corporate america that is so interested in being woke yet they're basically destroying the fabric of this country and undermining the rule of law. stuart: mark brnovich, attorney general of the state of arizona, thank you very much for being with us, sir, we want an update what is going on in your state. >> you got it. stuart: now there is this, the "new york post," that the administration is secretly, secretly flying underaged migrants to new york. give me the story, lauren. stuart: the dead of night. this is biden's solution to the border crisis, they're kids, teenagers some men in their 20s. they arrived at westchester county in new york and "new york post" said 2,000 migrants have arrived in that airport since august 8th. they're being resettled in the new york area but flights also touching down from texas to florida where governor desantis says washington is setting immigration po

a memorandum by the attorney general merrick garland that senator mcconnell referred to earlier. he suggested that we are going after parents, that we want to somehow harass, intimidate and harass parents appearing before school boards. i went back to read the memorandum. it is explicit. those who engage in violent conduct at school board meetings are going to be stopped. they are violating the law and they are violating the spirit of those meetings where communities come together to decide the fate and future of public education. i think the attorney general is right, we should have safety in that environment just as we expect on the floor of the united states senate. nothing more and nothing less. mr. president, i yield the floor. mr. thune: are we in a quorum call? the presiding officer: we are not. mr. thune: okay. the presiding officer: the republican whip. mr. thune: as i begin this morning, let me start by reacting to a couple of things said on the floor already by my democratic colleagues. you know, the republican leader when he was down here earlier talked about the impa

and yet -- and i know that and merrick garland knows the constitution, at least he has at one time, and he knows there is no mention in the constitution of a federal role in education and yet he sends out a memo saying basically, it's pretty intimidating, that we are going to start digging into these school board meetings and weaponnizing or using the justice department to go after people who have differences of agreement that happen to degree with dr. king that people should be judged on the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. so who would have believed that 40, 50 years after it seemed we were so close to dr. king's dream being realized, that you would have an administration totally committed to undoing drk to judging people by the color of their skin instead of the content of their character. it's just shocking. but then -- and of course the saying in washington is and has been for many years, no matter how cynical your it's never enough to catch up. well, then we find out after attorney general garland sends out the letter that he is going to go after thes

garland's domestic terrorism in the form of parents actually putting up protests to the way their kids are being taught in schools, classic example of changing the subject, and mark my words, you are going to see more of it. >> tucker: you blame the records for the failure of the potato harvest. white supremacist, no one has ever seen one, but they are everywhere. i think that is a pretty hard case to make, though in the face of increasing poverty. can you actually convince people they are getting poorer because qanon is bad? >> you have this battle on the left, tucker, not a lot of people on the right appreciate this distinction. the occupy wall street left mostly left in the stands for ten years, then you have the new woke left that has actually held the reins over power. as you begin to see economic recession and economic consequences of this country and you begin to see inflation -- gas prices go up, i think you are going to see the rise of the occupy wall street left come back, and we are on the left need to go back to arguing about economic inequality as a fault to talking about

that was a letter they sent to merrick garland that caused him to refer to parents as domestic terrorists and then seek the fbi after these parents at school board meetings. the worst port of all of it is they covered up. they covered up because when they had a meeting to determine whether they would support this transgender policy, crt, vaccines, mask, the superintendent says there are no records of sexual assault that i know of in this school. meanwhile, there was one within a month before. and then he turns to a red herring and he says "time" magazine says this is all ridiculous anyway. the father at that point is like ballistic. his daughter has been forcibly raped and sodomized and he disagrees and the police come after him. you have got the right to assemble, the right to address grievances. first amendment. none of that is working in loudoun county or anywhere in the united states now. >> tucker: i have noticed. they are putting so much pressure on this country. something that is going to happen. really bad. judge jeanine, i appreciate your analysis. great to see you. john gruden w

merrick garland agreeing to have the fbi investigate. so that's the context that is coming in. you know what is hurting in this tight race, you know, terry mcauliffe has a lead in most of the polls i've seen. it's very small. it's within the margin of error. but less not behaving like a person in the lead. he's behaving like a person that knows he's taken a big hit that might prove fatal. >> martha: he was asked about the budget deal and the sort of larger, you know, net, social net that it represents. he said oh, we have to get this deal passed. and then he looked who is coming in. you have jill biden and former president obama coming in. it's going to be an interesting thing to see the suburban voters that voted for former president trump and joe biden how they vote in two weeks. >> you put your finger on the issue. what makes this schools issues so interesting is that democrats typically have an advantage own education among the public, especially among suburban voters. a lot of the suburbanites showing up are democrats or at least they're not the typical trump supporters. t

will merrick garland prosecute bannon? >>> and president joe biden about to face voters in cnn's town hall. anderson cooper is getting ready for that up to hall right now and will join me next. let's go outfront. >>> good evening, i'm erin burnett. we are less than o

and for his part, attorney general merrick garland is not showing his hand. in hearing today, he gave no indication of whether the justice department would bring charges against bannon, saying they will make a decision consistent with the principles of prosecution. joining me now is congressman bennie thompson of mississippi, the chairman of the select committee to investigate the january 6 attack on the u.s. capitol. mr. chairman, thank you for coming back. i really appreciate you being here again. and i want to get your reaction to the claim by the house minority leader kevin mccarthy that the subpoenas issued by your bipartisan committee are invalid. >> well, he is dead wrong. but that's not consistent with the law. clearly, we have, as you know, the authority as a duly constituted committee to issue subpoenas. we're doing that. we're doing our work. and he knows it, but, you know, he has to do the talking points. we are clear. we're on firm ground, and we look forward to the attorney general doing his job. >> there were two members of the republican side

and attorney general merrick garland, the leader of the justice department, he today was tight-lipped about what to expect about that process. he told a congressional committee where he was testifying today basically that the department will handle this, like he says they handle everything. they will handle this by the book, no fear, no favor. >> i will say what the spokesperson for the u.s. attorney's office in the district of columbia said yesterday or the day before. the house of representatives votes for referral of a contempt charge. the department of justice will do what it always does in such circumstances, will apply the facts and the law and make a decision consistent with the principles of prosecution. >> we will apply the facts and the law, make a decision consistent with the principles of prosecution. in other words, i'm not going to tell what you we're doing. we are just going to do it on our own times, we don't take advice from anybody, so you can leave me alone about it. which is, honestly, the right way to answer those kinds of questions. and, you know, stepping back f

attorney general merrick garland, the leader of the justice department today was tightlipped about what to expect about that process he said the department will handle this like he says they handle everything. they will handle this by the, book no fear in our favor. >> i will say what's spokesperson for the u.s. attorney's office in the district of columbia said, yesterday, the day before, house of representatives votes for a referral of a contempt charge the department of justice will do what it always does in such circumstances, we'll apply the facts and law and make a decision consistent with the principles of prosecution. >> we will apply the facts and law, make a decision consistent with the principles of prosecution. in other words, are not going to tell you what we are doing. we are going to do it on our own terms, we don't take advice from anybody. you could leave me alone about it. which is, honestly, the right way to answer those kinds of questions. you know, stepping back from this, in terms of the news worthiness of what is going on here and all this drama in washington. ste

attorney here in d.c., merrick garland, neither of them tipping their hand. they continue to say in statements. we saw merrick garland testifying yesterday that they will follow the facts and law to make an independent decision as to what they ultimately do. >> jessica schneider, thank you. >>> let's discuss this with congresswoman zoe lofgren. we just learned your committee is going to hear from jeffrey clark, the former trump justice department official. what do you want to hear from him? what is he going to testify about? >> well, our posture has been that we're not going to discuss publicly or with the press the witnesses, what we're going to ask and the like. but what we've said from the beginning that we want to find out what was planned, what was the intent, who paid for it, and i think mr. clark certainly has information about what was planned and what the intent was. so we will hopefully learn even more from his appearance and his discussion. we're very committed to getting to the bottom of everything about january 6th and leading up to it. not only

garland giving the decision as to whether he will try to prosecute banon. the house vote fell largely along party lines though nine house republicans voted with all 220 democrats to pass the resolution. tell us more about these nine republicans, not an easy vote, not easy to go against your party. >> not easy at all. as you noted the vote was largely along party lines but in addition committee members, representatives liz cheney and adam kinzinger, seven other republicans also voted to find bannon in contempt including representatives anthony gonzalez of ohio, peter meyer of michigan, fred upton also of michigan, john katko, nancy mace, brian fitzpatrick, jamie herrera butler of washington and the brother of former vice president mike pence did not vote. she said for her this is about being consistent, enforcing subpoena power and even signaled they might use it to investigate issues currently facing the biden administration. now, this bill gives speaker pelosi the authorization to ask the justice department to prosecute bannon. we are told she will sign it

but the decision on whether to proceed would lie with the loss, attorney general merrick garland and at this point it's not clear exactly what he will do. he is facing considerable political pressure, even though the white house and justice department are supposed to be completely separate, president biden weighed in late last week saying, yes, he believes bannon should be prosecuted. and, of course, we've seen democratic lawmakers also calling on the justice department to proceed with this arguing that if they don't, then trump associates won't have any incentive or need to cooperate. it's interesting, jake, in speaking with legal experts on both sides of this, including people who used to work for the former president they suggested that bannon could have made this a lot more difficult for the attorney general. he could have shown up and invoked privilege on some questions. could have taken the fifth. would have been harder to argue he wasn't complying. but instead he and his attorneys snts sent this attorney citing privilege, even though many of the items are not related to conver

attorney in d.c., not to merrick garland himself. take us inside the room per se. does the u.s. attorney pick up the phone and call garland, tell him i just got this referral? how does it work with a prominent and potentially thorny case? >> so technically the case goes to the relevant u.s. attorney, in this case, the u.s. d.c. attorney. i led a famously independent u.s. attorney's office, the southern district of new york, often called the sovereign district of new york. each u.s. attorney's office operates with some degree of independence from the rest of the justice department and from the attorney general. my office more maybe stridently than others. given the weight of the matter, the focus of the nation on it, i can't imagine the u.s. attorney in d.c. who i know who is an honorable prosecutor would be doing that without consulting with merrick garland. whether garland picks up the phone or the u.s. attorney picks up the phone, someone will and there will be a discussion about it. >> preet bharara, thank you. >>> president biden holding talks with both sides of the split. a

i was in that hearing room today with attorney general merrick garland, and if you flash back, sadly, to the last administration and how difficult it was to have then attorney general barr come before us, it was refreshing that we had merrick garland there and that he so thoughtfully said they will follow the evidence and the law and where it guides us. a very refreshing, it shouldn't need to be refreshing but a very refreshing moment today. i was proud of that moment. >> is there any response from the justice department that you could accept that was something other than the prosecution of steve bannon? >> oh, i'm -- number one, i'm so pleased with our committee and moving so swiftly, and making sure that we brought the vote to the floor of the house tonight and made sure that the referral was made to the department of justice. so yes, we saw in the last administration -- under the last administration a dragging of feet, a department of justice that was wetted to the trump administration in a very perverse way. we are still going to learn more about. so today was a really good day, i

., where was received at 5:30 pm today, at a house judiciary hearing, attorney general merrick garland said this. >> the house of representatives votes for referral of a contempt charge, the department of justice will do it always doesn't such circumstances, will apply the facts and a lot to make a decision consistent with the principles of prosecution. joining our discussion now is congresswoman madeleine dean of pennsylvania, she is a member of the judiciary committee, and the second impeachment of donald trump. thank you very much for joining us, tonight, i want to begin with where we just ended, and that is the attorney general's comments today. it's difficult to imagine him saying anything else, under these circumstances, and yet there is more suspense tonight in washington about what this attorney general will decide, and there has been a long time. >> and yet, lawrence, thank you number one for having me tonight, it's a pleasure to be with you, i was in that hearing room today with attorney general merrick garland, and if you flashback to the last administration and how difficul

lawrence, merrick garland is probably concerned about the independence of the department. he doesn't want to look like you're bringing political prosecutions against the former administration. but he also has to be concerned about the message it would send if he does not bring a case and lets steve bannon get away with giving congress the finger. nobody likes to be hauled in front of congress of the united states and forced to turn over documents and submit to a deposition. why would anyone else show up if there are no consequences? >> jennifer, when we see the committee moving to the stage of criminal contempt as quickly as they have, it is another public declaration by the committee in effect that we know how urgent this is. we know that if we don't move immediately we can lose all of the ground here that we have and the time can run out. we heard committee members today saying that they are in some negotiations with some other witnesses but if they get the feeling that those negotiations are just a delay game, they're going to hit them with the criminal contempt also. >

when i see -- in every single reply, he says merrick garland, he says the attorney general. it seems to me, that the public strategy of the committee today, publicly became, it's merrick garland time. we need the justice department to enforce, this subpoena. >> in the previous administration, this white house and this president, i have to stay out of this. this is the kind of decision the attorney general makes his own. lawrence, merrick garland is concerned about the independence of the department, he doesn't want to look like you're bringing political prosecutions, against the former administration. but he also has to be concerned about the message it would send if he does not bring a case, unless steve bannon get away with giving congress the finger. nobody likes to be pulled in front of the congress of the united states. and forced to turn over documents and it's submit to a deposition. why would anyone else show up if there are no consequences? >> and, jennifer, when we see the committee moving to this stage of criminal contempt, as quickly as they have. it's another pu

we don't know how quickly the merrick garland justice department will be able to move on this, and in, you know -- in the past these kinds of things have been able to be handled very, very quickly. what is your expectation of a timetable at the justice department for this? >> i would expect they could move pretty quickly. look, the justice department has a rule that they will not prosecute someone for contempt of congress if they are refusing to testify because there has been a legitimate claim of executive privilege by the president of the united states. it ought to be pretty easy for the attorney general to pick up the phone, call the white house counsel and say, dana, did president biden invoke executive privilege for jeff clark or steve bannon or any of these other within witnesses and when the answer is no, as we know the answer is, it's a pretty straightforward prosecution. i think the justice department could do more, by just making it clear that if you are not the subject of an executive privilege assertion by the sitting president of the united states, not donald trump but jo

we do not know how quickly the merrick garland justice department will be able to move on this. and you know, in the past, these kinds of things have been able to be handled very quickly. what is your expectation on a timetable at the justice department for this? >> i'm expecting they can move pretty quickly. the justice department has a rule that they will not prosecute someone for contempt of congress if they are refusing to testify, because there's been a legitimate claim of executive privilege by the president of the united states. that will be pretty easy for the attorney general to pick up the phone, call the white house counsel and say, did the president, did president biden invoke executive privilege for geoff clark or steve bannon or any of these witnesses? and when the answer is no, as we know the answer. is it's a pretty straight up and down prosecution. i actually think the justice department can do more to send a signal to these witnesses, and all of the other witnesses we know, this committee and other committee want to talk to you from the trump administration, by

attorney general merrick garland was in the hot seat today, congressman craig steube caught him in some rank hypocrisy. he is your next. days and nights out of sync, keeping me from the things i love to do. talk to your doctor, and call 844-214-2424. .. it's so good to see you. you too! so really, how are you? oh well, look! that's what we're both taking right now, fanapt. you know it's really been helping me manage my schizophrenia. i used to hear these terrible voices. loser! you're such a failure. you're so embarrassing. i used to feel like everyone was staring at me. but we're doing much better now, right? yeah. fanapt is approved for the treatment of schizophrenia in adults. in clinical trials, fanapt significantly improved symptoms of schizophrenia compared to placebo. fanapt may change your heart rhythm which could elevate risk of sudden death. your doctor will consider this when deciding among treatments and may prescribe another medication first or may instruct you to take a smaller dosage of fanapt. the good thing to know, is we're not alone. call 8557 fanapt and there you hav

it's pathetic. >> laura: merrick garland today denies that. he said we don't consider parents were angry at school board meetings to be domestic terrorists. they know this is hurting them but they dipped into the white supremacist rhetoric and kept beating that drum today. also decided to use the event today to go back to the well of questioning the integrity of our elections. >> this struggle is no longer just about who gets to vote but making it easier for eligible people to vote. it's about who gets to count the votes, if they get count at all. jim crow and the 21st century is now a sinister combination of voter suppression and election subversion. >> laura: what is he talking about here? i thought we weren't supposed to cast out our elections. >> i think we are listening to the kind of talk you might expect in a madhouse or maybe the faculty lounge. this makes absolutely no sense. counting the vote, is there any attempt to stop people from counting a vote? no. what you really have is we have a country flooded by illegals, we know from the

. >> merrick garland is focusing on january 6th, making sure they stay in confinement. they give explicit instructions on how churchgoers could vote. watch this. >> early voting has started, this is the first year you can vote on sunday so please vote after today's service and if you cannot vote today make a plan to go vote. goes whywillvote.com. will: this is called the soul for the polls, pushing folks with specific website. does that bring more problems to them if we had a justice department or an irs prosecutorial arm that was going to do something? >> an extraordinary video. the white house could argue we made the video, the violators are the churches who decided to play them but that doesn't work when the video is referencing churches and their services, directory from church to vote so the question is did the white house knowingly create a video to violate federal law? they are not the ones that will lose their tax-exempt status. it the the churches if this was a fully enforced but there's a serious problem if you are encouraging violation. what is interesting is

. >> laura: merrick garland is focusing on the january 6th grandma and grandpa's commode to make sure they stay in whatever type of confinement they are in. they gave you in the explicit instructions on how churchgoers could actually vote. watch this. >> early voting has only started. the first year that you can vote on sunday. please, vote after today's surface. if you cannot vote today, please make a plan to go vote. go to iwillvote.com. >> laura: professor, this is called pushing folks to a specific website? that brings more problems to them if we had a justice department or the irs arm that was going to do something. >> it's an extraordinary video because the white house can argue that we just made the video. the violators are the churchgoers who decided to play them. but that doesn't work when the video is referencing churches and their services. those directly from church to vote. the question here, did the white house knowingly create a video to violate federal law? clearly, they are not the ones who have a tax-exempt status. but there is a serious problem if you're encouraging

garland saying if you are a mom, angry about what they are teaching your kids at school or mandating them to be vaccinated. of your irate and upset and raise your voice you might be a domestic terrorist. former president george bush comparing moms at these rallies and school board meetings to domestic terrorists. it is awful but you need to be aware your government can listen to every phone call, discover everything about you, yank you off a plane, prevent you flying and that is not the america i to live in and we need to push back. laura: thank you for leading on this again and we want you that the left was going to come for the founding fathers, now the radicals controlling new york city are coming after thomas jefferson. city councilman joe marelli has an answer to that plus disdain for our history has been embraced by walmart, details on the latest investigation next. .. it's moving day. and while her friends are doing the heavy lifting, jess is busy moving her xfinity internet and tv services. it only takes about a minute. wait, a minute? but what have you been doing for the las

you have the department of justice with merrick garland saying if you're a mom and you're irate about what they're teaching your kids at school -- it is awful. but you need to be aware that your government can listen to every phone call, can discover everything about you, yank you off a plane, prevent you from flying. that's not the america i want to live in and we have to push back. >> laura: senator paul, thanks for leading in this. we warned you the left would come for the founding fathers. now the radicals controlling new york city, they're coming off city councilman joe barelli. he has an answer. and disdain for our history has been embraced by walmart. chris rufo has the latest next. one of my favorite supplements is qunol turmeric. turmeric helps with healthy joints and inflammation support. unlike regular turmeric supplements qunol's superior absorption helps me get the full benefits of turmeric. the brand i trust is qunol. >> laura: the most extreme abolish america elements on the left are embolden. you can see it and feel it. they have cultural power, they have momentum. sta

they are accusing attorney general merrick garland of using the f.b.i. to intimidate parents and demand the d.o.j. immediately stop targeting so-called threats to school officials. indiana attorney general is leading the effort. he says the federal government must back off. >> this is crazy. parents will win the day. they are trying to divide the family, brian, so the state can come in and run our lives and grow our kids. you can talk at a school board meeting. you cannot commit violence or trespass but there are laws for that, brian. you don't need the d.o.j. involved in this matter at all. we'll stand up for the parents of this country. >> harris: so why would the federal government want to step in so heavy handedly when we have law enforcement, at least for a while. the vaccine mandates are complicated. we'll get to that later in the show. >> it is intimidation pure and simple. the heavy hand of federal government. they don't want to hear from parents. you see this playing out in virginia. terry mccauliffe says it out loud. parents have no say. they b

but merrick garland is supposed be completely independent, nonpolitical he's proving to be another political hack in the spirits of james comey, jon brennan, they were all in government they are all supposed to be apolitical to go to cnn and nbc to offer partisan opinions that seem to target one side. that's what we appear to be dealing with clearly the justice department is serving at the pleasure of the administration and not the american people. >> there's a senate probe into hunter biden. they say hunter biden was using a bank account set up with the chinese conglomerate the energy conglomerate executive that finance 100,000 global spending spree for his uncle and his aunt. hunter biden was moving up millions of dollars from his law firm to his uncle's law firm buried there seems to be a bit of a biden family inc. feel to this, right? the senate probe found they were using a lot of off-balance-sheet shell companies to hide the cash flow from the dealings in china and russia. we do not know how much the president said he was basically 42000 a year. he was heavily in debt. now is a multimi

attorney general merrick garland testifying today at an explosive house hearing amid multiple doj controversies. joining us now. he was at the hearing, louisiana congressman mike johnson of house judiciary. congressman, thanks so much for joining us. you were there, tell us what happened and what is going on with the white house knowing ahead of time before ag garland sent out the memo threatening parents with federal firepower meant for terrorists to investigate them for threatening school boards? what is going on with this story? what do you think? >> well there is a lot here. as you said, liz, it was an important hearing. it was explosive. the attorney general sat before us for a number of hours. this is the first time we had an opportunity to question him since he took the helm of the doj seven months ago. the judiciary committee has oversight responsibility. we took it serious today. one of the big headlines came out of it, what you pointed out a lot of questions are being raised about the directive the attorney general, mr. garland sent out to the fbi and u.s. attorneys offices wanted to

where is the attorney general merrick garland on that. could this be a political embarassment of the trump-russia probe that was botched? they are demanding why is the justice department not released in anything so-called binder of "crossfire hurricane" documents forker dni ratcliff turned over more than 1000 pages of government documents to john durham for his special counsel probe. he is saying more charges could come out of what he has seen. what do you say to that? >> i'm really concerned that they're holding this binder hostage to try to outlast john durham's investigation. really the dirty little secret here is in the details. you know, when you have a declassification situation, the agency, in this case the fbi, gets to scrub through, what stuff can we not live with going public? that is next in doj hands. the fbi finished their scrub nine months ago. they are london approving what can come out with the binder. doj is exercising a pocket veto. they're slow walking this for political purposes. this is beyond slow bureaucracy. there