Truman ass the nat 1 on thef korean war. Quote what we are doing in korea is this. We are trying to prevent a third world war and this may be a turning point for a search in a practical way of achieving peace and security. And that mission goes on. Eve ael tucker carlsonight. It tns out the doj failed to dictate the final result of the 2,018 president ial election, but a year and a half into the Trump Administration the Justice Department still seems to at times be operating as a shadow government, a place that considers itself beyond the reach of normal oversight. Back in the real world, congress has the explicit constitutional power to oversee the fbi and a othercutincies, less weight supposed to work. Apparently that fact infuriates the Deputy Attorney general Rob Rosenstein. Earlier this year in january, rosensteinhreatened to appeal the email sent on staffers because of her being too aggressive. The message from rosenstein, back off. You dont investigate us, we will investigate you. Foxs chief correspondent Catherine Herridge broke that story and she has more on it tonight. Speak of the emails written on government accounts formerly documented the january meeting for the house office of general counsel. The tough lawyer for protecting congress. Fbi director christopher wray, their senior advisors as well as House Intelligecommittee chairman devin nunes and his senior staff. It came at the height of alleged government surveillance usage viewed at the trump campaign. Today they responded to allegations and Rob Rosenstein threatened to subpoena records and turn the tables on republicanled House Intelligence Committee and staff over the russia case. It is deeply concerning them
are under subpoena in the opening and is an obstruction of justice. Tucker . Tucker thank you for breaking that story in the first place. Is nothe o example of theavior doj apparently viewing itself as beyond beyond normal oversight. Months ago, we discovered that fbi agents peter strzok and other page were using their personal views intruding on their Law Enforcement duties. How far will that Go Into Wells May be involved . The public has a right to know that but we dont because the doj keeps trying to censor the Text Messages before relisting them. Heres one example. In a September 2015 text, he maintains about the handling of a case but the exact Route Complaint was her exact stomach rejected. Thanks to work by senator ron johnsons office, know that he wanted to quote bargain away everything and that it had a quote stockholm syndrome. And how they did everything they could to avoid bringing crges against any of clintons team. What is clear, is that nothing he said was a Security Threat that would require a reduction in order to protect the country. The doj was just trying to cover itself from keeping the public from learning the truth about what was going on, is not a defense . Professor, its a very simple question. Is the Department Of Justice allowed to redact information solely for the purpose of protecting its on reputation . It is not, even though it has a long history of doing so, not just in congress but in the courts. Whats really funny is, they will charge somee who gives the misleading information, but they will Tell Congress that they rejected classified information that proves entirely unclassified. There is this sense of acting
without her impunity, when you redact these types of documents. And that material is classified under any defition. They can disagree with chairman nunez, they can disagree with the white house, but they should all agree on the fact that this is an improper use of reduction. R and its been going on you set for quite some time, so this is basically the status quo, not a new way of ing business . Unfortunately it is. Ive been counseling Security Cases against the government, and i have redacted to the courts that its clearly not classified. And, n disputeshaRob Rosenstein went over to the congress and threatened to subpoena the personal communications of members there. Have you ever seen anything like the relationship Betwe Sugge The Doj and the Oversight Committee these committees have not had a robust oversight record. They often roll over. This is something new, and frankly, those of us who wanted more oversight have welcomed the last year. Finally you have a committee ying, wait. And threatening weather its criminal or civil, staffers mbers, its clearly
inappropriate. I can understand that rosenstein may have felt he was being mistreated, but that doesnt matter. You have to get over it. Congress created the Department Of Justice, this isnt personal. It isversight buss. So no matter how aggrieved you may be, you cant speak to an Oversight Committee and threaten those staffers with taking Something Like subpoenas to their doorstep. Tucker congress does have oversight over the executive agencies, including the Department Of Justice, correct . I mean, you watch the other channels and would think that was something that the rightwingers made up last week. But thats a constitutional principle, am i right . Thats absolutely right and you Shouldnt Pick fights with people with ersight power. Tucker yeah, i guess you shouldnt. Professor, thank you very much. Dana goldman Isme Federal Precutor and he joins us. Thanks for coming on. My pleasure, thanks for being here. Tucker so this is a good
point, and one ive heard others make before. This is been going on for a long time, not just this administration by previous mions, where the Department Of JusticeWithholds Informatn from congress claiming its classified, and when unredacted, it turns out to be not classified. They were lying. Why would anyone defend that practice . These things can often be subject to interpretation, and the prosecutor may have se belief that an initial stage that they are, or the Department Of Justice may have a belief that things are classified out there in relation to that case or other cases, or they may be some theory that it is classified and the Defense Attorney disagreed and said its not classified. Ultimately, a judge decides it. This is no different than tucker let me give you an example. This is a little bit different. For example, the Trump Department of justiceithheld this information from the congress that andrew mccabe
spent 70,000 on a Conference Table. Now you could argue that he had a right to do that or it was appropriate or whatever, but you cant argue that that information itself is classified are critical to National Security. Why would anyone def that . You are trying to hone in on one particular reason why things are redacted,orshould not be. The one what would be the justification for him rejecting spending 70,000 on a Conference Table . I dont know, and i dont know the detailed circumstances. But the point that i would want to make to you and listening to Jonathan Turley as well, we are looking at these as reductions and loot these of the overght role into the Department Of Justice. You have to draw a clear line between investigations that are over such as the clinton email investigations, and investigations that are ongoing such as the trump russian investigation. There is a longstanding practice that the Department Of Justice does not give over information relevant to ongoing to congress, and that is sometuse intelligence committee, through the use of their Purported Overght role has sort of done away with and tryo get it. Tucker it when you say purported Oversight Role, do they not have Oversight Role . If they have an Oversight Role. Tucker what do you mean purported Oversight Role . They are using the guise of their Oversight Role app to ask for information that either they should not get, or that they tentially and by accounts coordinated wit the white house and others who arent subject of the investigation. Thats entirely improper. Tucker i understand you are a partisan involved in the parts and debate, but take three steps back. There is a Public Interest here so we know that the last administration had a paid
informant spying on at least ree members of the trump campaign. Maybe there was a good reason and maybe there wasnt but the fact is, it was true. And the fact is that shakes they of tepartment of justice. So why wntesponsible people do their very best to explain why that happened as soon as they possibly could and calm public fears if the system is corrupt . Because the public believes it including me. Why wouldnt we want to know why that happened . I am not partisan. I think that people who use the term spy in the context of a confidential informant are doing only for partisan reasons. When you are going down that road ofsing a spy, tucker what i doing is speaking english and what youre doing is carrying water for a political party. Im saying they gathered information without the knowledge of the people they re speaking to. What happens in thousands of investigations across country. Tucker it may, but it doesnt again so the question, which i think i have a right to know, which is, why did that happen . Is not normal. You dont have the right to know, e investigations are Confidentifb Investigare confidential f very Important Reasons includi the protection of people who arent charged and the sources of information, such as confidential infmants. Tucker i understand. I would actually disagree with you completely, and i know you are a form of so comg this from a different point of view, obviously. But no one is disputing it happen to come up we know the names of the people involved. All that information is public and its been in the new york times. You acknowledge there is a Public Interest in explaining this to the public so they can trust the government aga. Why was the Obama Administration spying on the campaign . I dontispute that there is a Public Interest. I outweigdn current moment by an ongoing and
confidential investigation. The public does have a right to know at some point after the Ongoing Investigation is not jeopardized by telio r shy are people like me w are asking honest, tisan questions. Ely like, ho did this happen . Wham i being attacked as someone who is challenging the rule of law or seeking to dermine the system . My position is, im trying to preserve public faith in the system with sunlight. I thought that was a traditional on, is it not . I agree with you. Im just saying there is a Public Interest and i think that you and others have a right to know what happened during the course of an investigation. Just not while the investigation thats a critical difference. By preserving the rule of law, you have to preserve the confidentiality of investigation, and ultimately it will all come out. You do have a right to know and
thats why i draw the distinction between the clinton email investigation, which is over, and a Ongoing Investigation where the confidential informant is very relevant. Tucker anl, thank you for that, i appreciate it. House republicans are making another push at immigration. Will their bills fulfill the president s promises during the campaign or are theyet another slap to the donor class . Nextillet to that question, hey we didnt have a homeowners claim last year so allstate is giving us money back on our bill. Well, that seems fair. We didnt use it. Wish we got moy ck on gym membships. Get money back hilarious. With claimfree rewards. Switching to allstate is worth it. Now that im on my way do you still think im crazy standing here today i couldnt make you love me applebees 2 for 20, now with steak. Now thats eatin good in the neighborhood. indistthat was awfulttering why are you so good at this . Ach in high school. Really helped me up my ge. I d ac ooh. So, why donerve cches . Who says they dont . Coach mcadoo you know, at td ameritrade, we off free access to coaches and a full educaon curriculum just to heou improve y. Boom mad skills. Education to take your trading to the next level. Only with td ameritre. Do not mistake serenity for weakness. Do not misjudge quiet tranquility for the power of 335 turbocharged horses. The lincoln mkx, and a quiet interior from which to admire them. For a limited time, plus get 1,000 bonus cash. For a limited time, napoleon is duping us all around louisiana. Youre a nincompoop phone ping lei haveust received word the louisiana purchase, is complete Instant Purchase Tifications from Capital Oness so you won a purchase large, small, or very large. Technology this helpful. Could make history. Whats in your wallet . The fall election. They feel thats very important for some reason. A current draft for proposal being considered by Republican Leaders is probably better than prior proposals but it falls short of whathe current president campaigned on. It would to give amnesty to some da ca recipients, and also it would create more meritbased Legal Immigration system. But it would not in Chain Migration Cut over migration levels or critically implement everify to keep employers from employing illegal aliens. What to make of this plan exactly . Lou dobbs is of course the host of lou dobbs tonight on fox business and it may be the only other person in life that has followed this so carefully over a decade. What do you make of this . Its complex that i know you can cut toeart of it. Lets cut through the complexity because first of all, we dont know whats in it. There has been no writing of tax amendments. Its a preposterous closed room deal, entirely drawn u the speaker, who is owned lock, stock, and barrel by k street, the chamber of commerce, the business roundtable, the Koch Brothers and wall street. So it wont be favor of american middleclass and american working families, and indeed, that is his hallmark for 20 years in the house. He works for k street. Tucker so why the push to get this through without a debate . It seems like the republicans could win this debate if you look at all the polling on it, and the republicans are basically on the side. Lou as you have reported,
you can slice and dice the demographics anyway want to come and more people are disgusted and appald by that dilatory us and a negative impact of ilLegal Immigration into this country, and that is simply the straightforward fact. But they cant even raise a voice that is even remotely comparable to the ownership of the establishment and global elites who are demanding cheap labor. And that is straightforward. It is your purpose to bring more immigration into this country and to preserve lower wages. Just as President Trump has wages rising, the middle class is now growing. It was stagnant and it declining for 20 years until President Trump moved into the oval office. Tucker is a you are saying the current rlican leadership is willing to ignore the basic lefts on the last election and the expressed will of the American Population in order to serve the interest of a very small group of people to
pay the bills. B6 absolutely. And ryan is a lame duck speaker, he will only be in office until january of next year, he resigned. But thats all the republican conference can do in the house of representatives. He is now in franchise with the Leadership Conference and also what would be assuredly a loss of 50 seats in the midterm elections as a result of moving into the amnesty of this. The pace will not stand for this minute, no matter how popular the president is. And he is wildly popular. No matter the fictions that are spun up by ryan and his socalled leadership council. Tucker do they have pollsters who are telling them that politically, this is smart . Lou no. They have weltrategists telling them they suld run on the tax cuts, rather than the trump agenda, which is the tax
cuts, deregulation, balancing international trade, creating jobs, bring it back manufacturing, dealing with all the important issues in foreign policy,er it is the immense and an end success of e singapore summit, which is just one of a litany of achievements that this president unprecedented achievements. It is absolute disaster. Tucker tucker rhinos rue lemmings, mindlessly. Blue jobs, gre to see you. Lou th