Page 64 - Reviewing News Today

Till tillis, two republican senators mutt out bills saying you cant fire the special counsel unless you go through us first. >> and hasnt been signed by the president. interesting you were at that news conference with attorney general jeff sessions announcing a stepped-up attack for the enormous amount of leaks and he said this. listen. >> one of the things we are doing is reviewing poses affecting media subpoenas. we respect the important role that the press plays, and well give them respect, w...

Current attorneys who already worked there on other projects whether they would be interested in working on a new project thats going to be run by the political appointees out of the front office. trump administration political appointees. that would involve affirmative action and reviewing policies and college admissions that may be deemed to discriminate on the basis of race. usually, an anti-discrimination effort in targeting a university or a school would be run out of a special section. the...

Really important for us to take away the keys to the american health care system from the administration and do that as soon as possible. >> lets move on to some other important issues. when asked why president trump still hasnt signed the russian sanctions bill which you and your colleagues in the senate approved 98-2, he pointed to the legal reviewing process reviewing all aspects of that legislation. do you buy that? >> ill take the president at his word on this. this is a complicated piece o...

For office. a special counsel is reviewing whether that was a violation which prohibits partisan political coordination by the fbi. inspector general is reviewing if that shouldve been recused based on the financial ties to the clinton physical network. he was also named in a lawsuit by female fbi agent. michael flynn wrote a letter in support of the female agent. so that makes him an adverse witness in the proceedings. and he supervised the investigation. three fbi employees personally

Indicates that under the new analysis, all of the techniques that were approved under the binding memo like waterboarding, would still be legal under the new memo. in other words, nothing changed. and it says it expressly had the approval of your division. do you recall reviewing and approving that memo? >> i do not recall approving, reviewing and approving that memo. what i do recall is that we provided -- we drew a line about what the criminal divisions appropriate role was. that the criminal ...

Were one of the justice department officials who would have received drafts of the memos and that those memos would not have been issued without the approval of the deputy attorney generals office. in fact, you said he believed that you provided comments on the 2003 olc memo, which concluded that interrogation tactics dont qualify as torture unless they are intended to cause the kind of severe pain associated with organ failure or death. what was your role in reviewing or approving that memo or ...

So-called torture memos in 2002 and 2003. one of the authors of these memos, john yu, testified that olc would not have issued such opinions without the approval of the office of the attorney general or the office of deputy attorney general. in fact, in his testimony, john yu specifically referenced mr. wray as one of the individuals who would have received drafts of olc memos. so this raises the question of what exactly was mr. wrays role in reviewing and approving these memos. and id like mr. ...

Prosecuted japanese soldiers for the war crime of waterboarding u.s. prisoners. to mean, that memo was a horrifying low point in the legal scholarship of the department of justice. your name came up in testimony in congress with respect to a 2003 memo, could you just let me know what role you had in signing off on any of the olc torture memos and what you knew about them? i know a lot of people were cut out. thats the problem with the process. what was your role with respect to the memos on wate...

Officials who would have received drafts of the memos. in those memos would not of been issued without approval of the deputy attorneys office. he believed that you provided comments on the memo which included that interrogation tactics dont qualify as tortur torture. what was your role in reviewing or proving that memo? regarding the treatment. some of us were trying to get a hold of those memos during that time. we couldnt even see the memos.

2002 and 2003. one of the authors of these memos testified that olc would not have issued such a opinions without the approval of the office of the attorney general or the office of deputy attorney general. in fact, in his testimony, john referenced mr. w aray as one of the individuals who would receive drafts. so, this raises the question of what exactly was mr. wrays role in reviewing and approving these memos. and id like mr. wray to clear this up this morning. i had an opportunity to talk wi...