gave that testimony he was aware of the fact that he had signed off on an fbi affidavit that specifically accused our own james rosen of being a criminal coconspirator are in a leak case and the question is now are the doj s denials going to stand up? joining me attorney with multiple cases before the u.s. supreme court and focuses on constitutional civil rights and civil litigation with the federal government. great to see you again. how are you? megyn: should mention a great lawyer at a fantastic firm called jones day where i used to practice. there you go. megyn: now, the doj weighed in on whether he lied when gave the testimony before congress and this is what they say. the attorney general testimony concerning the potential prosecution of a member of the press was accurate and consistent with the facts of that leak case because at no time have prosecutors sought approval to actually bring criminal charges against james rosen.
organization part of the service. and then you had a failure of management at the intermediary level i would say where lois was supervising the operation but took a year for her to get involved and take a look at the criteria and then took a full two years at least for the criteria that were investigated to be corrected. that is way too long. and then frankly i would tell you the third failure which was very disturbing is was in the front office. this issue was no secret. people were very open about it. congress was asking about the c 4s and you in the media were sort of raising questions about it, too. and the real sort of bewildering point is why wasn t the front office more concerned? why didn t it take a look at it? and when commissioner shumman testified before congress on what basis did he give the blanket denial there was
people in the regan administration for not being forthcoming with congress. a separate statute that says you can t mislead congress. elliott abrams for example got hung up even though he never told any mistruths to congress. the attorney general created an incredible conflict of interest for himself. megyn: good to be in that position. that is why we had an in dehe pendent council statute for a long time and has now gone away. put him in an awkward position which in other circumstances would lead the attorney general to get entirely out of the controversy where as the attorney general has been designated as the administration point man on relationships with the press and national security. megyn: he has taken heat for allegely misleading congress several times. if the fast and furious case testified he only found out about it a few weeks ago. and then submitted a letter to congress so inaccurate had to
got give any partisan advantage or mislead congress or members of the other political party. if you can t trust giving these people that much responsibility and not having any assurance they will carry it out in good faith is damaging to democracy. megyn: we had a couple of months here where the white house press secretary jay carney was caught red handed. i don t want to use the word lied but blatantly misleading the american people about what role the white house and state department had in the benghazi talking points. and then eric holder giving that testimony. and the irs after they testified they he never targeted conservative groups having to admit they did that for over 18 months. a sad state of affairs now mike. i got to go. give you the quick last word. not the way to handle a scandal. don t keep denying and covering up. bad politics on top of everything else. megyn: new developments in the growing irs scandal over the targeting of conservative
megyn: this is the testimony before congress they are trying to figure out whether it was false or not. let s list. with regard to the potential prosecution of the press tore disclosure of material that is not something i have ever been involved in, h heard of or would think would be a wise policy. megyn: again the word potential. the potential prosecution. let me ask you this, mike. he says with regard to the potential prosecution of a member of the press for the disclosure of material. could he about be splitting hairs between well, in that leak case i was saying rosen was a criminal because he solicited information not because he went ahead and published it and disclosed it? solicited information that is like saying i would like you you to tell me anything that is going on to whales blowers but the crime is the to whistle blowers. the crime is the disclosure. has to be connected to the disclosure. we can parse is 16 different ways. two points. one is during iran contra the