that in the congress of the united states, this congress, we had over 100 women members of congress serving at the same time. 100. over 100 members. we had 91 on our side, 15 on the other side but we made a decision, hopefully they will too, that's just talking about the house. now at the -- in the same congress, next year, but in the same congress, we will be observing the 100th anniversary of women having the right to ote. [applause] it's a big steppingstone. again, with all due respect to everyone who has served, our caucus is over 60% women. people of color, lgbtq. 60% of our caucus. that's remarkable, right? different than when ump there. our diversity sour strength. i say to the members as we, shall i say, channel our exuberances. [laughter] our diversity is our strength. but our unity is our power. [applause] david: so in other words, when off freshman member of congress who has a lot of twitter followers and so forth and they get a lot of attention, that doesn't bther you? ms. pelosi: no, actually, i think it's important, especially for women and newcomers to the congress to know, t

>> congress has to hear from those lawyers. it has to review the documents because they provide essential cooberation. there have others that have been produced, the statement about the timing while donald trump was actually in the oval office as president of the united states. could this be used in an impeachme impeachment hearing? >> it could be used in impeachment proceeding, in any proceeding where it can be offered with a chain of custody and other legal conditions and requirements that have to be imposed it is usable in any lead proceeding. >> how do you think they are handling this evidence? >> mueller knows everything that michael cohen is telling to congress because he has very very comprehensively had michael cohen answer questions and so he is handling this evidence giving it the reliability it deserves with great care, clos attention and using it. >> it is a serious potential crime. from the legal per specific ifr does it matter that these edits were allegedly made by the president's lawyers and not the president hi

and congress? >> there is executive privilege. the president has the right to ask that they withhold anything that goes to basic decision making of the president, basic advice he gets. but it's not absolute. the supreme court has already said there is really a public interest standard there also. if it involves a crime and it involves public interest, then executive privilege can be overwritten. so he can declare it. also i think there is a tendency of the president or anybody in the executive branch to call executive privilege. first you narrow that down to the real executive privilege issues, and then you decide whether the public interest is so demanding that it has to be released. it's not the end of the question where he says, i'm declaring executive privilege. >> sara, everyone on pins and needles, wanting to find out what's in the report, et cetera, et cetera. but this isn't the end. this is the beginning of other investigations that have come from this probe. >> first of all, it's what you were talking about in terms of le

>> it shifts to the congress. southern district for new york and other federal jurisdictions primarily now it's on congress. this will be like watergate. they wouldn't let the grand jury indict president nixon. the grand jury wanted to do that. he settled for naming as an unindicted co-conspirator but laid out a path saying these are things if you want to look into it, these are things you want too look into and people forget it wasn't until congress had been at it quite awhile that public opinion began to swing against richard nixon. it took longer than most people talking imagined. >> i just think we have to keep site of how many indictments there have been. this has been raining on donald trump and so this is the most scandaled plague administration in american history or at least it's comparable to nixon and hardy. >> up on the screen. >> this is an on going story but a calm in the waters for donald trump that he's not taken out of the game this week. >> thank you, gentlemen. >> thank you, don, always good to

well, congress did that. bipartisan group delivered compromise legislation rejected the proposed 3w0rder wall -- border wall as ineffective. alternatively it made effective robust investments in border security. congress overwhelmingly passed the legislation. the president agreed to sign it. then he issued a national emergency declaration to raid funds from other departments to secure funding for a border wall. congress has repeatedly voted against. as already said he's made it about drugs. the wall will be ineffective. he's made it about the humanitarian crycy, the wall will be ineffective. how is he going to pay for it? well, he's going to take money that the department of defense was, was going to spend on high priority military construction projects, which will ultimately undermine the training, readiness, and quality of life for our men and women in the armed forces. in 235c9, general robert neller, commandant of the marines, has detailed that the unplanned, unbudgeted shift of funds to deploy troops to

congress, stop the greed. cut drug prices now. ♪ the house, kids, they're living the dream ♪ ♪ and here comes the wacky new maid ♪ -maid? uh, i'm not the... -♪ is she an alien, is she a spy? ♪ ♪ she's always here, someone tell us why ♪ -♪ why, oh, why -♪ she's not the maid we wanted ♪ -because i'm not the maid! -♪ but she's the maid we got -again, i'm not the maid. i protect your home and auto. -hey, campbells. who's your new maid? >>> for as long as he has been president special counsel robert mueller has been investigating him. people here in washington know what he knows and attorney general barr today said congress could get the c

congress is not required to honor those. on the other hand, a witness can assert the fifth amendment if he's subjected to possible criminal liability for his statements and that's why the immunity, the degree of immunity given allen weisselberg here becomes key. since we don't know exactly the contours of that immunity we can't be sure yet what allen weisselberg will say before congress. >> you just mentioned the option of pleading the fifth. the president has said previously only the mob takes the fifth. and if you're innocent why are you taking the fifth. will this move by the president's allies end up hurting the president? >> if taking the fifth involves not testifying about a crime that involves the president, then, yes. the president's statement is partially true because the amendment is about potential be against yourself. the reality of the fifth amendment is it protects us from being forced to testify about possible crimes. so the president is partially correct when he says that's what criminals take the fifth amend

congress very clearly a strong indication of the depth of concern that does lie within congress about saudi arabia's human rights record and yes we've heard from senator patrick leahy as well as the representative jim mcgovern calling for the immediate release of these two specific detainees but making very clear as well is that they are using these two cases to remind the world to remind the u.s. as a whole that there are many others in saudi arabia who are being held without trial because of their political dissent and we hear as well from the senator and congressman that basically the issue here lies with the ultimate respond. ability the man responsible for this so the senator and the representative insist is the crown prince of saudi arabia muhammad. now one must remember as well what has led up to this soon recent months there has been increasing pressure in congress to take action against saudi arabia this erupted further with the killing of jamal khashoggi and also the incredible anger that there has been among many sectors of congress at the fact that the trumpet ministration

congress and only congress has the power to declare war. even though the president may call for a declaration of war. and, when the united states is involved in international agreement the senate is all important. for example, the signature of our secretary of state to the united nation's charter had to be approved by a two thirds majority of the senate. a clause in the constitution states that treaties are made by the president but only with the advise and consent of the senate. >> from the capitol, down pennsylvania avenue to look at the white house. that is where the president lives. the white house represents the executive branch of the government. before he got through, i could see why uncle jim said the president has the biggest and toughest job in the world. >> yes. bill, the white house is both the home and office of the president. the president is chosen by the people through the electoral college. some of the president's duties are set by the constitution, other established by laws, treaties and public opinion. the president's mai

. >> why did you want to come to congress? >> well, sam rayburn and my mother were schoolmates at mayo college, a little college before east texas teachers state college at commerce, texas. now it's texas a&m at commerce. they elected a good friend. she wrote a letter to sam rayburn when world war ii broke out and asked me to help me get an officer, get officers training school. he didn't call her back or write her back. he came to her breakfast table. he said i can't hire him because of his grades. i graduated in a class of 38 but i graduated number 38. i always have been able to make it some way. somebody's been good to me. >> was it sam rayburn that made you want to come to congress? >> yeah. because my mother spoke to highly of me. a bunch of republicans came to me one time when i was a county judge in rockwall and was going to put up money for me to run against sam rayburn. my mother asked me, if you do that, where are you going to get breakfast, you know? i wasn't going to run against sam rayburn. he was a great man. i t

look at funding the federal government and congress after congress, while they were being charged. the first eight weeks of the new democratic majority, we have delivered on each of those big issues from day one and will continue to do that. that is the difference that i see. is that our colleagues are committed toward those goals. ideas to the same lower the cost of health care and prescription drug prices with a strong infrastructure package in america. and deliver on a sweeping government reform piece of legislation which we were able to get done today. >> no democrat shutdown's? >> remember, the debt ceiling problems we had for the past eight years were under republican leadership where they did not have the votes to get that done. it was democrats that had to come to the table. i am confident with where the speaker is today, there is no greater leader than her. no one works smarter around the clock. our democratic colleagues, we are working together and are united. we hope our republican colleagues will join us. the title was speaker across your cortez, does that concern you?

barr may provide congress with the conclusions as soon as this weekend. charges were filed against 37 defendants. seven have pleaded guilty and one was convicted. congressional leaders have also reacted. majority leader mitch mcconnell of the senate released a statement saying, and part, "i welcome the announcement that the special counsel has completed his investigation into russia'sforts -- into interference 2016 election. i hope it will inform and improve our efforts to protect our democracy." democratic leaders nancy pelosi and chuck schumer released a joint statement that reads, "now that special counsel mueller has submitted his report to the attorney general, it is imperative for mr. barr to make the full report public and provide documentation to congress." say theement goes on to attorney general should not give president trump or his staff a sneak preview of the mueller findings or the evidence. a justices, quoting department official, no further indictments from the special counsel are expected. follow c-span and c-span.org for updates on the r

only in congress do you see congress actually delegate a power to the executive as they did. the president the executive uses the power congress gave him and then they rebuke him for doing what is constitutionally and lawfully within his prerogative but what this shows is these individuals have zero understanding of the lawlessness on southern border, with drug pours across illegal entry and national security crisis we face by having open borders, to our south and it shows a fundamental misunderstanding. >> misunderstanding. i'm starting to wonder charlie what radical dems understand at all. [laughter] >> no kidding and you know what part of -- you know we're talking at least 11 million is most conservative estimates are there are 11 million illegal aliens in country today. what part of -- 11 million is not considered an invasion and not to mention, of course, all of the drugs things like that pouring over border if this is not a national emergency, i don't know what is and we can have a great debate about whether or not congress as caylee pointed out whether congress ought t

i don't think it's a coincidence that the first congress in early congress delegated power along these lines to the president. i don't think it's coincidence the first congress is the one most familiar with the failure of articles the federation and the needs of the initial government. they created the first departments, the first taxes and other laws and they also recognized they needed to delegate a certain amount of discretion to the president. i don't think that's a coincidence. i think our constitutional system has a gravitational pull in that direction. it's hard to define in advance with an emergency. i have been working on an article in financial contexts about risk dealing with systemic financial harm. and very skeptical you can write these things in advance that you can define in advance what emergencies are. if we could define in advance so many emergencies, then they wouldn't be emergencies. we would've seen them coming. that's why think it's important to leave as we inevitably will, it in the hands of the president. i am wary of congress interposing itself after the emerge

the first congress in early congress delegated power along these lines to the president. i don't think it's coincidence the first congress is the one most familiar with the failure of articles the federation and the needs of the initial government. they created the first departments, the first taxes and other laws and they also recognized they needed to delegate a certain amount of discretion to the president. i don't think that's a coincidence. i think our constitutional system has a gravitational pull in that direction. it's hard to define in advance with an emergency. working on an article in financial contexts about risk dealing with systemic financial harm. and very skeptical you can write these things in advance that you can define in advance what emergencies are. you can define in advance so many emergencies, then they wouldn't be emergencies. we would've seen them coming. that's why think it's important to leave as we inevitably will, it in the hands of the president. i am wary of congress interposing itself after the emergency has started. i agree, we need to wor

approved by congress for such activities as military barracks and hospitals. using funds already approved by congress avoids months or years of litigation which would make it unlikely that the full 234 miles are ever built. mister president, may be a couple weeks before the senate votes on a resolution regarding the national emergency declaration. so we don't know yet exactly what we will be voting on. there is time for the president's lawyers to take another look and determine whether we can both build 234 miles of border wall the president has requested. and avoid this dangerous precedent. then the senate could support the president's border request and be faithful to our own to support the constitution the create separation of powers as a crucial check on executive power that goes to the heart of our freedom. .. thank you. >> how about one for him? [applause] >> thank you. did that video make you feel good? we know what we are up against. we know. they are being very clear these days and yesterday was a busy day for all of us. checking for the hotel. a lot

this passed the house by voice vote last congress. i'm happy to see my colleague, congressman rigelund of virginia has joined congressman we canton has introduced on the floor. is is the first piece of legislation he's had on the floor and it shows his background in fighting terrorism. h.r. 1414 outlines how the terror landscape in our post-9/11 world has expanded. now we are tasked with protecting the american people not only from traditional threats posed by groups like al qaeda abroad but also domestic terrorism where crimes are committed on u.s. soil by both foreign and u.s. persons. fincen mandates that focuses on all forms of terror, not just foreign terror campaigns. that is a commonsense update to the statute that will bring clarity to our anti-terrorism laws. h.r. 1414 also strengthens fincen by ensuring cooperation with tribal law enforcement agencies and the prioritization of virtual currencies. some virtual currencies have een shown to frustrate law enforcements' efforts to link transactions to people or i.p. addresses. it

>> congress has three options. they can raise revenues, they can continue to borrow from the general fund or cut the program. i don't think we've seen an appetite for cutting the program over the years. that's certainly been discussed. they have to make those hard choices. >> other countries have, transportation competes for funding, like anything else does, the must be goes into the general fund and they have to decide. that's not how we do it in the united states. >> right. >> are we moving that way? is that even a tenable proposition for us, do you think? >> let's hope we stop moving that way. that would be our preference, because this is such an important part of our economy. we really need to make sure that we are making those invechstmen for the future. >> i've been surprised -- not surprised, but how strong this user fee principle has come up this week with the hearings, by the last panel. it does seem to be kind of flashpoint that's starting to emerge. do you agree? >> absolutely. i think like alison said w

speaker, that this is a sense of congress. this is not the first time we have brought a resolution like this to the floor. in fact, just last week, we brought a resolution to the floor to send a message to the american people that congress is united in condemning anti-semitism and bigotry in all its forms. there were people who criticized us for bringing that. thought it was unnecessary. but when we brought that to the floor, a majority of republicans joined democrats, an overwhelming majority, in voting for it. leader mccarthy called it a resolution to make a statement. whip scalise said, regarding the resolution, we must take a strong stand against hatred and bigotry wherever we see it, and i'm glad this resolution makes sense. so we agree with our bletion on the other side of the aisle -- colleagues on the other side of the aisle, that passing these resolutions can make a strong statement. although they may seem to some as unnecessary, these statements and these kind of important issues, i believe, are very necessary for th

the fight with congress, what is trump going to tweet? that's what we should be thinking about the next couple of weeks. we resolved one or one was closed today. let's just say the fat lady has not sung yet. >> and obviously there are so many questions but on this issue of indictments themselves, barr the informed congress tonight, the judiciary committees that mueller never tried to indict the president. now, of course that would be against justice department policy. but even though it was against policy mueller could have felt the president committed an indictable crime and felt like in any other situation he would have moved forward with an indictment. but in his letter today barr says mueller had never promised an action, and he was clear there were no such instances during the special counsel's investigation. it was very black and white. how big of a deal is that, james? >> yeah, that last part is a bit of interesting process here. there's a secondary requirement that the department of justice report to congress under the special cou

he could give congress the complete report, summary, or simply tell congress that the mueller investigation has concluded. the clinton administration regulations do not require a full report to congress. however, during his confirmation, attorney general barr said he wants to be transparent with congress and the public consistent with the rules and the law. we have no reason to think attorney general barr would back away from those statements he's made before the senate judiciary committee and, mr. speaker, i believe he's truthful and will be truthful to his word to make it as much possible as he possibly can. the american should not expect another starr report. the clinton justice department made sure another president would not have salacious stories aired before the american people. janet reno herself testified before congress in 1999 that it was a bad idea for independent counsels to publish final reports. many members of the democratic majority in congress today voted against the public release of materials related to the starr report and, mr. speaker, i would ask unanimous consent to

congress will weigh en. we will prioritize, work with the senate and come up with a funding bill that reflects those prioritizations that i think we can agree upon. >> talking about priorities, one thing i have been harping on for quite sometime is like is there a deficit hawk left in washington. you have spoken out often and loudly against run away spending in washington. you have taken tough votes to stand on this principle. when you see there is really no attempt at balancing the budget in this budget proposal, it would balance the budget in 15 years well after even a second term of president trump, how do you support it? >> you know, that's where when we broke with our party on the budget deal. i agree that the deficits are becoming a problem that is unsustainable. our national debt, at some time you run out of run way. we should be taking proactive steps now. i appreciate the president's proposals in reducing some of the spending, identifying some areas that we can have a debate. you have to look at thi

are moved through one chamber of congress. it really has fallen back on to the states and localities to deal with also took immigration issues. the plea and the goal is to get comprehensive immigration reform at the federal level that will help support states and localities and issues leading to immigration, we have found that to be a challenging process. over the time you have worked with the task force, has immigration become an increasingly salient issue for state legislatures? absolutely --susan: absolutely. >> what are some of the trends you have seen? many states are still in the session and we do not know what the outcome of a lot of what the bills will be. ourtwo trends we see drivers license and immigrants verify and employment issues. we also hear that there is a workplace shortage especially in the agricultural area. we have members on the task force and committee who work in those sectors and there not full-time body legislations. they have jobs other than being a state legislature. those were in the agricultural a

it is just sort of the reality of congress and washington. it is hard to get things done whether you are president trump, or president obama. he had plenty of fights with house republicans and he lost a lot of them. now we are in a different era of divided government and so it is going to be interesting to see. we have had sort of a failure to launch as far as having some kind of bipartisan budget deal to kick off the new era. andad 35 days of shutdown no successful resolution. lawmakers,a lot of particularly republican lawmakers who wanted to cut a bigger deal that would deal with spending caps so we would not have this six-month fight over how much we are going to spend on defense and domestic. that we could just deal with that early on and then once you reach the overall structure, the next six months are all about priorities and deals and instead we are facing six months of acrimony with a very difficult backdrop for the president. he has a lot of investigations, the house is sending a lot of subpoenas. you have them all the report coming

the vetoed bill and message are sent back to congress and this ends the matter unless congress can pass the bill over the veto by a 2 thirds vote of both houses. and then it becomes a law without the president's signature. the president can also appear in person before a joint session of congress to explain a veto or to propose new legislation, congress is then free to accept or reject the president's suggestions. and then it starts all over again. the great lawmaking assembly line goes on, creating laws and diversified as the nation size. labor, nationally defense, government departments, regulation of transportation, foreign trade, taxes, bills, bills, bills. and every act informed to the written constitution of the united states which fixes the rules, rules made by the people themselves. acting to represent of the people, rules for the people, rules which govern the great enterprise of democracy that is america. new ár muse new. >>> on sunday, a campaign rally in front of trump hotel. announcing the bid for precedency the week before. live coverage begins on cspan at 12:00 eastern >

congress in fact has superior authority in the area of impeachment. it's specifically given the power of impeachment. and what you're seeing from the justice department is really an effort to ignore history. what you saw in watergate was a prosecutor who did not reach conclusions, recommendations, but was preparing that material extensively in watergate for congress' determination because it certainly is congress' determination whether to impeach president trump for high crimes and misdemeanors, whatever they may be. i don't know about you, katy, but i was certainly shocked to hear that there were 400 pages in this report. now, as a lawyer, that's like 200,000 words and that's not counting the append sees and the graphs and charts. the idea that william barr would hold to himself with rod rosenstein the right to basically summarize that and dismiss that evidence going from a friday night to a sunday, that's not time for any normal person to actually assess that evidence. after 40 lawyers, 50 investigators, you know 2,500 subpoenas, 500 witnesses, the

over the years, sometimes it seemed that congress is behind technology by a couple of years. is that still the case? >> i think so. i mean, it's hard to keep up. you have people out there that are smart and you know, even if you're trying to defeat the bad guys, you know, we have one issue that our committee dealt with that i'm interested in, too, and i actually have a bill this year with ed markey from massachusetts, it has to do with robo calls and all the robo calls that we get. it seems like every time you come up with, you know, a strategy or a solution that can defeat the current way the bad actors come up with another way around it because technology is constantly changing and people are looking for new ways to defeat us in trying to stop it. i just think government has to do what it can to anticipate what's going to happen next. we are not always going to be right but we need to be thinking, you know, like they do and that's why i think the government has hired more and more of some of these young people who understand and are very adept at cracking and breaking down

well, congress did that. bipartisan group delivered compromise legislation rejected the proposed 3w0rder wall -- border wall as ineffective. alternatively it made effective robust investments in border security. congress overwhelmingly passed the legislation. the president agreed to sign it. then he issued a national emergency declaration to raid funds from other departments to secure funding for a border wall. congress has repeatedly voted against. as already said he's made it about drugs. the wall will be ineffective. he's made it about the humanitarian crycy, the wall will be ineffective. how is he going to pay for it? well, he's going to take money that the department of defense was, was going to spend on high priority military construction projects, which will ultimately undermine the training, readiness, and quality of life for our men and women in the armed forces. in 235c9, general robert neller, commandant of the marines, has detailed that the unplanned, unbudgeted shift of funds to deploy troops to

decide that he can override congress simply because congress doesn't do what he wants. i know that there are a lot of people in the country who agree with the president and that's why we have congress so we can debate these issues and if there were an emergency in the sense that the president is describing, there would be a lot more consensus. when a house is on fire, nobody is debating whether they should go into save people or whether they should put out the fire. everyone understands that's an emergency. the fac tht that there's a deba going on here, indicates it's not an emergency in the sense the president is describing and he can't go around congress. >> you tweeted, if you think my job is to support the president 100%, be the you don't understand what it means to be a representative in congress. my job is to support the constitution 100%. do you think republicans supporting this national emergency are abdicating their responsibilities to the constitution? >> i think so, yes. i don't think that they are all intending to do that. i think many of them are making arg

decide that he can override congress simply because congress doesn't do what he wants. i know that there are a lot of people in the country who agree with the president and that's why we have congress so we can debate these issues and if there were an emergency in the sense that the president is describing, there would be a lot more consensus. when a house is on fire, nobody is debating whether they should go into save people or whether they should put out the fire. everyone understands that's an emergency. the fact that there's a debate going on here, indicates it's not an emergency in the sense the president is describing and he can't go around congress. >> you tweeted, if you think my job is to support the president 100%, be the you don't understand what it means to be a representative in congress. my job is to support the constitution 100%. do you think republicans supporting this national emergency are abdicating their responsibilities to the constitution? >> i think so, yes. i don't think that they are all intending to do that. i think many of them are making argu

as i've said, congress deserves to have the information. but even more than that, the public deserves to have it. >> all right. i'm going to leave it there. thank you very much, congresswoman demings. a programming note, msnbc is extending its live coverage of the mueller report to be the. my colleagues joy reid returns at 6:00 p.m., followed by ari melber at 7:00 p.m. eastern. we'll be right back. k. the way they subscribe to movies. we don't follow the naysayers. ♪ ♪ not this john smith. or this john smith. or any of the other hundreds of john smiths that are humana medicare advantage members. no, it's this john smith. who we paired with a humana team member to help address his own specific health needs. at humana, we take a personal approach to your health, to provide care that's just as unique as you are. no matter what your name is. ♪ no matter what your name is. conventional wisdom says you can't make a 400 horsepower sedan, that's also environmentally conscious. we don't follow conventional wisdom. ♪ ♪ . >>> we're back with

congress demands the mueller report by tuesday. the attorney general says not so fast and delivers another new letter. decoding that next. >>> we're closing the border. we'll keep it closed for a long time. i'm not playing games. >> shutdown threat. the potential fallout if the president closes everything between the u.s. and mexico. is it even possible? >>> inside the numbers. what would happen if

when william barr submits his summary report to congress, will congress take a look at it and say, okay, we're satisfied with this, or if it goes the distance to exonerating the president, but only a distance, will they start asking for the entire report? will they then start asking for the source materials? the democrats are being hypocritical. quote, when it doesn't work in their favor, they try to change it. and then when this report, when it comes out, completely exonerates the president, will the democrat haves to go back to the drawing board, recalibrate and figure out what they're going to attack the president on from now until 2020. remember, laura, rod rosenstein in a letter to grassley in june of last year said, when you're writing these reports, it's incumbent upon prosecutors not to talk about misconduct among people who are not being charged. even if the president was found to have committed some sort of misconduct, the fact that he's not being charged may mean that there won't be much about the president in this report. we'll see. laura. >> laura: thanks so much. joining u

there have congress, sdny and state attorneys general. joining me is deputy assistant attorney general at the justice department under president obama, elliott williams. erin, what are you watching out for? >> we just got news that there was this caucus call on the hill. basically the readout we got was pretty much a strategy call. there was no real time line about when barr might be sending this summary to congress. we've also learned the white house is also is not expecting to learn anything. they're sitting back and waiting as well. everyone is sort of just waiting and wondering when this thing might come from barr. we got some indication that that sort of summary might make its way to congress tomorrow morning. so at this point nothing else today, but tomorrow might be a big day. >> so i am getting a bit more information on that as well, kasie hunt has just sent a reporting note about what exactly happened on that call. and basically it was nancy pelosi heading it, and then the chairs of the various committees saying that they want fu

they are not even letting congress see it. after releasing a less than four-page document from trump's newly appointed attorney general, which provides a largely but vaguely summery he says on robert mueller's findings, now nearly a week after mueller's actual report was completed, the report remains totally unseen and given the historical precedent for how things have been handled in the past and the intensity of the matter and the strangely vague non-specific but definitely supposed to be exculpatory summery we've been asked to swallow, this effort by them to keep the actual mueller report completely under wraps indefinitely, well as of today it's showing its first cracks. today for example we got the first credible reports about the rough size the mueller report might be. if you squint from a distance or get up close, could you tell the general size of it? "the new york times" was first on the spot the size of the mueller report story today but over the course of the day, we got a bunch of different sources and leaks saying

people here in washington know what he knows and attorney general barr today said congress could get the conclusions this weekend. we already learned a big one and she joins us now with that. explain what you are learning now and what you learned. >> it was early as our stake out team that's been posted up in front of mueller's office for months now noticed that the special counsel's team of prosecutors arrived to work early this morning and they also left early. an unusual move that got our spidey sense up and we now learned that the attorney general received the report from special counsel robert mueller early this afternoon. he got it within minutes of a court security officer delivering it here to the justice department. it was also received by the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. he called to thank bob mueller for his work, i'm told and that the justice department also called the white house. he was informed they have a report and the white house has not seen the physical report. as for how long the report is, that's one of the big questions on his mind tonight. we do not

what do you make of it. >> a lot is their hands tied in ways by congress and democrats in congress who try to throw up every roadblock, saying no more bed or you can't work with a private contractor to detain the people, the convoys are not a huge difference in number of getting through. than in convoy but they are specifically designed to overwhelm border security. then you can left wing groups suing left and right, you can't do this and that and judges putting an injunction so border patrol they are doing more paperwork than guards, they want to guard had. but they are tied up by lawsuit. lou: i'm going to -- i have to tell you, we'll have to throw a benefit. because the leadership of the dhs is set u upon. this u.s. government, world's only super power, you are laying out a sit of excuses for failure to do their job, i am sick of a government that does, that i don't think that this president is about excuses, i don't think she about accepting the nonsense that is emanating from leadership of dhs, border patrol, are you kidding me? who are these precious darlings who don't have the w

i think it is appropriate for the congress and for a member of congress to talk about foreign policy in the u.s. relationship with other countries. i think that's wholly appropriate. the problem, however, is i think we've got to do a better job of not allowing the name calling to distract from what are, i think, important public policy debates. she's got to make atone meant a atonement and make sure there are supporters of her who are angered through this process and people who have been hurt by it. and if her intention was not to do so, you have to govern your language more appropriate. >> i so the second comment, has she apologized adequately. >> i think one of the things i think she ought do is make clear what was being said there. what i heard was that u.s. members of congress are first and foremost loyal to the united states of america and u.s. interests. i think you can say that and at the same time be supportive of zblal let's play exactly what she said here. >> sure. >> i want to talk about -- i want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is okay f

features tender don and congress and bob. the key republicans on the medications and technology subcommittees. remarks by labor secretary alex, white house counsel in conway and others have been national association county legislative conference. an american legion, the american humanist association. ... c-span was graded as a public service by america's table television company and today we bring you unfiltered coverage of congress, the white house, the supreme court in public policy events in washington dc and around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. >> communicators is on capitol hill this week to talk with members of congress about issues such as 5g. autonomous cars, net neutrality and privacy. >> host: johnson, the recently said south dakota could be a leader in 5g also connect. >> guest: i think that we get a lot of progressive over thinking people in our state and realize the different technology can make in a rural state and little university in madison south dakota old dakota

an interesti in bringing the trump children before congress. specifically with the batch of 81 document requests that the judiciary committee sent out. you saw eric trump on there and donald trump jr. jared kushner was among that list of names. there is an interest in ivanka in terms of the broader question of white house security clearance. those areas are certainly something where we're going to see congressional committees interested in learning more information. specifically as to whether and why the president may have overridden career professionals with the recommendations providing security clearance to ivanka and jared. >> and john kelly. what is the likelihood he gets called to testify? >> one of the things i was speaking with a number of congress folks about this. they do expect that. trying to bring john kelly before the committee will result in a subpoena fight. this idea they believe he might claim executive privilege or they really have to resort to a subpoena to bring him forward. obviously john kelly, talking about the security

unfiltered coverage of congress. the white house, the supreme court, and public policy events and washington, d.c. end around the country. c-span is brought to you by your cable or satellite provider. and now you're watching american history tv. every weekend, beginning saturday at 8:00 a.m. eastern, we bring you 48 hours of unique programming, exploring our nations past. american history tv is only on c-span3. from 1955 until his retirement in 1977, roy wilkins was at the forefront of the civil rights movement as the head of the national association for the advancement of colored people. next on real america, roy welcomes -- wilkins, the right to dignity. narrated by sidney poirier. udes interviews. and strategies to advance civil rights. >> if there is one thing i resolve from the courthouse burning, it was that never would i be like those in the mob. never would i hate another human being so much that i would kill .im even if it takes years longer, even if the highways are not always wide and smooth, i pray that i

as requested by congress. what's the latest on that front? >> reporter: that's right, this is new information from gloria borger and manu raju, the headline being that jared kushner, the son-in-law and top senior adviser said he will hand over and provide documents that the house judiciary committee have requested of him. keep in mind, you remember when the original request was made, that was from jerry nadler, he requested information from over 80 people in trump's orbit. certainly significant that now jared kushner has agreed to comply, related to time on the campaign, time in the white house during the transition. potentially a huge amount of information from jared kushner. again, it all underscores while we talk about the mueller report and what it could say or could not say, capitol hill has their own investigations going on and they'll continue doing that. >> that's a significant development. the senior adviser, jared kushner, getting ready to cooperate with congress on this front. thanks very much. join

by which he means he wants the report to be made available to congress in its entirety and also to be made public now the house of representatives a short while ago passed a unanimous resolution insisting that the report be made public however all of that is up to the attorney general william barr within strictly establish justice department guidelines it's up to him in consultation with us as as to what aspects of this report will be made public whether it will be in its entirety whether it will be in a redacted form that is essentially up to him now those who he'll be consulting about the issue is deputy rosenstein as well as robert mueller himself so they'll be going through the report together and deciding whether the entire report is going to be handed over to congress and made public and that what we heard from chuck schumer is an absolute insistence that it is and on that no this of being made public mike giuliani who is rudy is lawyer is reportedly just said that his lawyers want an early look at mahler's findings before they're made public . well that in itself is problematic

congress? and i want to add, how do you think this steel and aluminum issue will play domestically and factor domestically into the canadian strategy here? >> well, first of all, i think the proposed amendments, i think it will be -- i don't know if they will accept letters this time around in the congress, but if the agreement is amended in the congress and moved back to the senate, and then of course, to the president, the amendments that i would anticipate will not be a difficulty for canada. stronger enforcement of labor and the environment will not be in my view a deal breaker for canada. what is very problematic for, again, the prime minister and the government, is having tariffs still there, and then ratify the agreement before the tariffs are lifted. and i think my advice to the u.s. administration, is lift the tariffs today, but my advice for the trade agreement is the same. lift them because i think it's really unacceptable for workers across canada, and for provinces, and other stake