0 reporters? >> april and may of 2012. >> that vague? >> yep. >> kathleen, you say over 100 reporters' phones were -- phone records were seized by the government? >> it's 20 different phone lines, joe, and they include main numbers. if you count all the journalists who would be making calls in and out of those phone numbers, it would be more than 100. >> what's so surprising here, mike, is of course other administrations have done this, have made mistakes in 2004, the fbi mistakenly did this and apologized for an indonesian office. this goes right to the core of the "associated press'" mission. what is the impact of having the phone records of 100 reporters of the "associated press" seized by the government? >> well, it's clearly distressing to think that without our knowledge someone is looking at phone calls that we talk to me and now the federal government, the justice department has their phone numbers inside their agencies, that's chilling not only to the "associated press," but to your sources. >> obviously we find this very distressing, and i think the ceo put it best in the very strongly worded letter that he sent yesterday to eric holder, the attorney general. i mean, i've been in this business more than 30 years and our first amendment lawyers and our lawyers inside the "a.p." and our ceos also well known first amendment lawyer, none of us have seen anything like this. >> and the quote from that statement, these records potentially reveal communications with confidential sources across all news gathering activities taken by the "a.p." during a two-month period provide a road map to the news gathering operations and disclose information about "a.p.'s" activities and operations. the government has no conceivable right to know. >> i want to get to lisa myers in a second. kathleen, hold on, i don't know if you want to ask a question. >> it is outrageous, tote i all inexcusable. the object of it is to intimidate people who talk to reporters. this was an accident waiting to become a nuclear event. and now it's happened. there's no excuse for it whatsoever. there's no reason for this investigation, especially on this scale. is there statutory for it? probably. is there justification for it in terms of recognizing what the right to a free press is and what a free press means in this country? this is intimidation, it's wrong, the president of the united states should've long ago put a stop to this in his presidency. >> and as the times reported today, carl, this administration has done this twice as often as all other previous administrations combined. >> the numerical thing doesn't matter, this is a matter of policy, it is known to the president of the united states that this is the policy. to say there was no knowledge in, quote, specifically about this in the white house is nonsense. this is a policy matter and this does go to the president, to the people around him, to the national security. >> the word intimidation. it's not just about intimidating reporters, but more importantly as you know better than anybody, it's about intimidating sources inside -- >> yes, the idea is to try to make an example of those people who talk to reporters, especially on national security matters, national security is always the false claim of administrations trying to hide things that people ought to know. 2: the news organizations have become very good at working with administrations in terms of real national security matters. this is inexcusable. it is intimidating. there is no reason that a presidency that is interested in a truly free press and its functioning should permit this to happen. >> kathleen carol from the "associated press," thank you very much. >> we appreciate it. >> joining us now from washington, nbc news senior investigative correspondent lisa myers. we're going to move on at one point to the irs scandal. but lisa, i'd love for you to jump in and with your take on this story. >> well, i totally agree with what carl just said. this is extraordinary. you know, it's never good if you're an administration and your name appears in the same story as richard nixon twice in the same week. and this is what has happened now with the obama administration. i think the obama administration's critics would also say their prosecution of leaks is selective, that they didn't have that much problem when details leaked about the successful raid on the compound of osama bin laden, yet they have vigorously pursued leaks in other cases. the chairman of the judiciary committee, patrick leahy raised the issue yesterday. he questioned whether the administration really could've met the threshold required to obtain this kind of sweeping subpoena of information. he said he was very troubled and wants specifics from the government on what they had that merited such an overly broad action. >> mike, and that's the problem here. overly broad is the term that the "associated press" has used. it's the term that constitutional scholars have used. by casting such a wide net as this statement from the "a.p." says, they now have communications with confidential sources, the government does, the obama administration. for all news gathering activities undertaken by the "a.p." that provides a road map for the federal government to the "a.p.'s" news operations, and discloses information about the activities and operations as carl says, they said, oh, well, it's about this operation in yemen possibly. they hide behind national security, they have just basically torn down the wall between the federal government and the news organization that half the world gets its news from. and they now know their operations, their sources, everything, it's shocking. >> the scope of the subpoena is stunning, actually. multiple cities, hundreds of reporters, several different phones, including a phone in the house of representatives' press gallery. >> can you believe that. >> everybody uses that phone. >> can you believe that? >> once you start on this path, it expands. that's what happens, that's why you shouldn't be doing it in the first place. >> gets to government incompetence. >> well, the incompetence is not foreseeing this is going to blow up in your face. >> yeah. >> there's no excuse for this because it is targeted at intimidation. there's no reason for that. >> and, you know, yesterday, mika, we were talking about carl said this administration is not criminal like the nixon administration. i said, well, at least they're incompetent, we all agreed on that, in these matters. but you know what, this goes beyond incompetence. this is sinister. this is -- the decision by the federal government to seize these phone records goes far beyond incompetence. and that's what's so disturbing this morning. >> just one other aspect that deserves mentioning. and that is that every day, people in high levels of every administration are talking to reporters and disclosing national security information. indeed of the type that they're looking for here. very high officials every day are doing this for their own reasons. so this is selective, it's -- there's no reason for it beyond that which is nefarious. it's simple as that. and it's dangerous and it shouldn't be excused. >> and from that at 15 after, we go to this story about the irs. despite growing calls for condemnation, president obama had stayed out of the irs scandal that is until yesterday. the president addressed the agency's role in targeting organizations with the word tea party in the name and others that had conservative ideologies yesterday. the president came out in full force saying that kind of behavior is not acceptable in his administration. >> if, in fact, irs personnel engaged in the kind of practices that have been reported on and were intentionally targeting conservative groups, then that's outrageous. and there's no place for it. and they have to be held fully accountable. we'll wait and see what exactly all the details and the facts are. but i've got no patience with it. i will not tolerate it and we'll make sure that we find out exactly what happened on this. >> the agency said the scandal was limited to low-level workers at a cincinnati field office. but now the "washington post" reports at least two irs officials based in d.c. were also involved with the investigation. >> and really quickly, a very important point, they're talking about a low-level field office in cincinnati. i got this wrong yesterday morning. it's not like, oh, you know, it's not like the office in scranton, right? >> right. >> no, they have set this up as the national center for this type of work. so this is the national office. it's not a low-level field office in ohio. and that is the spin from the supporters of the president. oh, you know, this was just a field, a couple of guys come in from applebee's and had rib lets and got this crazy idea -- no. this was the national office for what they were doing. >> oh, boy. lisa myers is shaking her head. what are you thinking, lisa? >> well, in a matter of four days, much of what the irs told us on friday has turned out to be at best incomplete and in some cases, simply untrue. you have the fact that it was not just a couple of rogue employees in cincinnati that the paper trail shows there were clearly documents, letters that went out from washington with these incredible requests for documentation, including asking for groups list of donors, over $2,000. you've had -- we've learned that the targeting was more extensive than they admitted. it began earlier than they admitted, and that the -- the two irs commissioners, the previous and the acting commissioner both were told about all this a year ago. yet they failed to correct the record with congress and they continued to maintain in correspondence that there was no targeting. >> right. so given the fact that the house, ways and means committee has set hearings for this on friday, carl, and there's a senate side, as well, is what the president said enough? >> no, because first of all, there's a treasury secretary in the united states. and the irs reports to the department of the treasury -- part of the department of the treasury. look, is this being politicized in trying to pin things on the president these events in some way together? yes, but does that mean that there's any excuse whatsoever up to near the top and maybe the top of the irs for what happened here? this is an organization that has to be sacrificed -- >> and, by the way -- >> there's no possible excuse. >> as you know, i mean, you said the top of the irs, who do they report to? they report to jack lew. there's a reason harry truman put on his desk, the buck stops here. i'm not saying the president knew, i'm also not saying the president didn't know. we don't know that now because of their behavior in what happened after the attacks on benghazi, mike barnicle, and therein lies the problem for this administration with benghazi. are voters going to go in 2014 other than conservative voters who can always vote against the president anyway? are they going to be thinking about benghazi? no, they're not. but when other crises like this come up. they're going to say, wait a second. they didn't really tell us the truth about how the benghazi thing went down. are they telling us the truth about the irs? can we believe what they're going to say about the "associated press." this is going from mere incompetence to what is beginning to look like a pattern if you're inside the white house, you have to blow that narrative up fast and i don't know if they're aggressive enough to do that. 2:00 to say i screwed up, it is our responsibility for what happened, and by the way, if i'm the president of the united states, i'm calling eric -- i would, i'd be calling eric holder into my office and have one question for him, you've got to explain to me, eric, why i keep you on. >> absolutely. >> why do you keep your job? >> no, absolutely. you've got to call the attorney general in on -- and say, eric, it's time to go. it's time to go. and it is time to go off of these -- but the -- maybe the larger issue here is what happens to immigration? what happens to gun control? what happens to every item on the agenda for president obama's second term? difficult enough already. with this stuff, what do people think about this out there? they think that the government is totally out of control. totally -- >> they are out of -- they seem to be out of control. and, again, the fact that this has hit one after another after another after another, lisa, is shocking. i want to end this segment with something that carl said that i thought -- as i always agree with everything carl says. this is for me as i'm reading the "a.p." story, i'm trying to put it together with everything i've known and you've known and carl's known and mike and all of us. and michael and mika that have grown up in and around this business in washington because i'm going, wait, isn't this what reporters have been doing since vietnam? isn't this what reporters are supposed to be doing? aren't they supposed to be calling to see if the government is lying to us? if they're telling us the truth, if the governors are spinning the war. isn't what the "associated press" has been subpoenaed for and attacked for, isn't that the most basic of reporters' responsibility when they wake up in the morning and go to work and start picking up the phone and making calls? >> it is. and the "associated press" in particular as an institution has been more aggressive, i would say, in the last couple of years in trying to do more investigative work and dig out more stories. and this administration has a history of really coming down on people who talk to reporters in any capacity. i mean, if someone has the audacity to say something critical of obama care, they take -- usually take it back fairly quickly or don't speak to reporters at all again because there is such a focus on keeping the story line and the narrative the way the administration wants it. and sometimes these efforts can become excessive. and may be what we're seeing from the justice department is really the embodiment of that mentality. >> we were so critical of the bush administration in dealing with the press at times. it's just a little perspective here. >> a lot of perspective. >> they didn't like it either. >> no, they did not. >> off of what lisa and carl have been saying, people don't like the media, we understand that. we understand that. but think if the press had been more bullish, more bulldogish on the start-up to the war in iraq on the weapons of mass destruction. think about if the press had been more bulldog on the gulf of tonkin in 1964, think of the lives that would have been saved if the doors were open and light shined on two wars that perhaps did not have to happen. >> we've got to go back to the pentagon papers. these investigations are always meant for a political purpose more than anything not for genuine national security leaks. >> all right. lisa myers, thank you very much. good to have you back on. coming up on "morning joe," olympia snowe will be here. also congressman keith ellison and singer amy grant joins us. and later, from the hit show "nurse jackie," bobby canavale. have i got that? up next, the top stories in the politico playbook, but first, bill karins with a check on the forecast. another beautiful march morning inner the northeast. windchills this morning down into the 30s and some cases the 20s. this is bitterly cold air we're dealing with despite the sun coming up. 25 is the windchill in binghamton, new york. one of the coldest i've been able to find. you need the hat and gloves for the kids this morning in the middle of may. good news this time of year, of course, the sun is up there for a long time. it will warm us up. it'll be a nice afternoon, but just, this cold this early in the morning is ridiculous. yesterday, the middle of the country, 93 in fargo, record temperatures through a lot of the portions of the inner mountain west. and chicago, you're 18 degrees warmer right now at this hour than at this time yesterday. in chicago, you're going to get the benefit of that. you're going to feel like a summer afternoon. 87. we also are going to approach the record high in minneapolis and 95 today. so the east coast, we have record lows this morning. and the midwest, we're going to have record highs. just an upsidedown spring. you're watching "morning joe" brewed by starbucks. 2:00 have a gooood nig. here youou go. you, , too. i'm goining to dream about t that steaka. i'i'm going toto dream about thatat tiramisu.u. whwhat a nightht, huh? but, u um, can thehe test drivie be over nonow? head b back to the d dealership?p? [ mamale announcncer ] it's praractically y yours. but we stitill need yourur signaturere. volklkswagen sigign then dririe is back. anand it's nevever been eaeasir to get a a passat. that's's the powerer of german n engineerining. get $0$0 down, $0 0 due at sig, $0 depososit, anand $0 firstst month's p pt on any n new volkswawagen. vivisit vwdealaler.com tododay. bjorn earns unlimited rewards for his small business. take these bags to room 12 please. [ garth ] bjorn's small business earns double miles on every purchase every day. produce delivery. [ bjorn ] just put it on my spark card. [ garth ] why settle for less? ahh, oh! [ garth ] great businesses deserve unlimited rewards. here's your wake up call. [ male announcer ] get the spark business card from capital one and earn unlimited rewards. choose double miles or 2% cash back on every purchase every day. what's in your wallet? [ crows ]