i was at the department. i had no the department. it was a sunday afternoon. i was there in civilian clothes. i expected to have that meeting. have that meeting. i had no expectation of going to the white house. >> prior to the oval office meeting, did you set up a conference call with senior leadership at the department. if so, tell us about that call. >> yes. obviously, we scrambled that afternoon to prepare for the oval office meeting. we had discussed on several occasions the acting attorney general and i, whether we should expand the circle of people who knew what was going on. it was very important that steve knows and that's why we said to him on december 28, if mr. rosen were removed from the seat and the president did not immediately point someone else to serve as attorney general, despite function of the departments chain of succession, mr. engel would be in the seat. we wanted to make sure he knew what was going on sure that be. the three of us knew. we also brought mckinney in. so, the four of us knew. but, no one else other afternoon.e else other

the police department. the fire department. they naturally come to the civil service commission for assistant because they see we see the citywide bigger picture. what i wanted to add on the very last budget request is that the commission did request for an additional 1244 senior h.r. analyst because we saw we are receiving request to this day of the need to go out to departments and to the unions services from us. they want to hear about how we go about making decisions and policy changes and in doing so, we made that request at the same time. we ask from p.u.c. and m.t.a. to increase the work order will have they readily agreed because we saw how we were able to directly help their departments when it came to controversial subjects with the unions. >> don't the work orders then take care of it? >> unfortunately, the work orders were only able to increase to 70,000. >> and they could not make that equivalent to a 1244 and the increase of 70,000. and lowered the general plan support and the additional services we promised to p.

jeff clark with another department of justice department lawyer, ken kasky. and the letter was to be sent to the leadership of the georgia state legislature. other portions of the legislature that were intended for other states. neither mr. drug nor mr. klulowski had any evidence of widespread electorate and flawed, but they were quite aware of what mr. trump wanted the department to do. jeff clarke met privately with president trump and others in the white house and agreed to assist the president without telling the senior leadership of the department who oversaw him. as you will see, this letter claims that the u.s. department of investigations have, quote, intended fight significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the election in multiple states, including the state of georgia. in fact, donald trump knew this was a lie there. department of justice had already informed at the president of the united states repeatedly that is investigations had found no fraud serviceman to overturn the results of the 2020 election. the letter also said this, q

of building inspection, planning department, public health, fire department, all here to help people, whether you're building a new business or even new construction, to be able to, again, fit all of your appointments in one day and get things done quickly. so starting in may, our office of small business has actually started working out of 49 south van ness at the permit center, and we have a team of two staff who are dedicated to helping small businesses through their permitting journey. so we do encourage people, you can come to the permit center or you can e-mail us at sfosb@sfgov.org, and you can communicate with our staff dedicated to helping you with your permitting needs. we hope that people will consider consulting with us before you even sign a lease so that we can help you on the path to success and understanding the journey of setting up a small business in san francisco. >> well, thank you so much. i really appreciate you coming on the show, miss tang. thank you for the time you've given us today. >> director tang: thanks for having me. >> and that's it for this show. we

: we have the department of elections. >> the department disagree with the b.l.a.'s recommendations. >> supervisor: thank you so much. so to the controller, please note it's this committee's intention to accept the department of election's budget with b.l.a. recommendations. thank you. >> have a great day. >> supervisor: next we'll hear the human service agency recommendation. >> our recommendations for the human services agency contained on page 91 of our report. our recommended reductions total $4,194,618 in fiscal year 22-23. of that amount, $3,499,400 are ongoing saving and we have one time savings. in addition, we recommend closing out prior year unexpended encumbrances of $491,906. our policy recommendations total $250,000 in fiscal year 22-23. all of which are one-time and a can speak to those. i'm not entirely sure we have agreement on that recommendation and our recommendations for is fiscal year 23-24 total $1,913,673 and all of those are ongoing savings. our understanding is we have agreement with the department but i can't speak to whether they agree wit

, department of public health, the department of homeless and supportive housing. to be a policy matter for the board to consider. we're available for questions. >> supervisor ronen: great. before i turn it over to you miss carol, i just wanted to note that, you know, i continue to remain committed to c.a.r.t. and i just wanted to make it clear when we are, you know, sort of describing this line item in this program, that there are three aspects of this funding that attached to this funding. if that makes sense. so those three aspects. and director carol and i talked about this. that this needs to be a new team. that it is a team that is meant to respond to level c calls that come into 911. that are, then, diverted away from the police. and then, number three, it's run by a community-based organization. so i just want to note that in whatever sort of description ends up in the final budget that those are the three fundamental aspects of c.a.r.t. that we expect the department to adhere to. but i don't think this committee has changed our agreement with and support f

justice department all across the country— justice department all across the country and — justice department all across the country and you _ justice department all across the country and you realise _ justice department all across the country and you realise it - justice department all across the country and you realise it is i country and you realise it is imperative _ country and you realise it is imperative not _ country and you realise it is imperative not only- country and you realise it is imperative not only to i country and you realise it is imperative not only to our i country and you realise it is - imperative not only to our democracy but do _ imperative not only to our democracy but do your— imperative not only to our democracy but do yourj'ob — imperative not only to our democracy but do yourj'ob to _ imperative not only to our democracy but do yourjob to uphold _ imperative not only to our democracy but do yourjob to uphold the - but do yourjob to uphold the institutions— but do yourjob to uphold the institutions that _ but do yourjob to uphold the institutions that usur

in january, a federal judge invalidated lease sale, 2:57, based on your department, the department of the interior, doing insufficient environmental analysis. you chose not to appeal that decision. none of those leases will be awarded or drilled. look, as i look at this as a longtime appellate lawyer i suspect that, likely, one of two explanations for this. either you are happy with the result, you liked the result, or alternatively the environmental work that you did on this was sloppy. so, which wasn't? >> when i could say about that is our solicitors consult with the department of justice on these issues, they make that determination on whether an appeal should take place. >> we have a department that is determined to not allow oil and gas leaking. they have hiked royalties. they have taken things out of eligibility for leasing. this is coming at great expense to the american people who are paying dearly for it. the american people deserve better. >> senator. >> thank you. >> thank you senator. senator hickenlooper. >> thank you mister chair. secretary haaland, i can only imagined

18% and retirements were up 45% in major city police departments and you know some of them in fire departments. morale was last week by many other chiefs have an impact on this and i believe that to be the factor and we hit the san francisco police department. next slide. and, with that said, we have experienced some trends in terms of retentions or challenges with retentions and retirements since the gayle king beginning of 2022. we've found out quite a bit of research into the department and that is si combination of where some of this data is coming from. as a part of our collaborative reform initiative, and there's some things in terms of what's driving some of these issues and i'm going to briefly go over what those themes are. this is broken down into a couple of categories resources and supports. policies and impacts and political impacts. i'm going to leave off so i don't spend a whole lot of unnecessary time on this. but it's important that i go into what some of these factors are. in terms of the internal processes, one of the recurring themes within the department was to be better a

the department and d.p.a. contributed meaningfully to this draft that i'm happy to present to the public today. couple of things i want to cover is briefly explain what the problem is and why we're doing this and how this draft tends to resolve the problem. lastly, just lay out next steps in terms of the public process. as we all know, as we've discussed many times on this commission, there are fairly significant racial disparities in the departments stop and search data. just to give up a quick snapshot, for example, black people are 10.3 times more likely to be stopped for vehicle violation. all the things academic say are red flags form implicit bias. whereas, the potential race neutral reasons that can be driving disparities are not supported by the data. i do want to respond to a couple of things that you might hear from folks explaining a way disparities. sometimes you'll hear it's driven by neighborhood enforcement that we put more police in neighborhoods that are higher in critical. those neighborhoods

that people have in this department or any department for that matter. so, yeah, they're related in a major way. how do we get to a better place. at the end of the day, we have to hear each other. >> vice president elias: thank you. any other commissioners before i turn it over. commissioner yee. you're muted. >> commissioner yee: thank you, madam chair. i just have a question for the chief on the morale. coming from a large institution like myself morale can just be a fake wall to hit or, i guess, your command staff and i know that it changed over. i guess probably leading up to 2020 it's probably been building going back. is there -- i guess you're looking at policies or changes that we have to adopt to the changes to the c.r.i.. is that a factor into that? it probably is. don't need to answer that question. have that answer to that question. so looking going forward because there's more i guess changes coming with the police department. what is your plan to build that morale back up and when will you probably do the next i guess the morale, i guess ha

run department. and the buck needs to stop with someone. there needs to be someone that is first and foremost held accountability. the board of supervisors, all of my colleagues and i, field a tremendous number of calls. there is a tremendous amount of dissatisfaction in the city as this issue is dealt with and confronted with. and yes, we are, too, held accountability. i think supervisor and chair peskin said it best when we started this conversation. as the former myself as a former chair of the rules committee, when we have major committee positions, they are subject to board confirmation, i think about 99% of the time we get it right. if there is a proposed person to come into one of the seats of the mayor position, the board does its job and holds the mayor's office and that person accountability and there's been times when we have had to reject the mayor's proposals. with mayoral confirmation at the board and the board having a strong number of seats, this strikes the right balance. first and f

so these are department. these real all valuable tools that we valuable tools that we believe, believe. when we're talking about not only responding or preparing for these, but when we're building school, we need to be aware of but things should be taken into courtand we had ongol >> western years ago >> the stupid your submerged flow stupid person but making sure they're not increasing. that's a still enjoyed going to school and this is where the best practices i'm not coming into play. not one size fits all when it comes to the infrastructure. we are iffy and great nation but we can't get locked down. just talked about that sort of dichotomy. >> we had to thread the needle, right? because we want our schools to be happening, so that the kids are being kids. they're jumping, they're laughing, they're playing recess without fear of, you know, having to worry about having been -- blocking or having recess indoors. so we thought we had to thread that balance that we wanted to make sure that our school concerts

i'm proud of the department of justice they help lead. this may sound corny to some of your viewers. but that's what you are supposed to do. you are supposed to do the right thing, even when it is hard. they did that, good for them. but that is the job. but had they not intervened, had there been weaker people, had there been spineless people in their seats rather than them, chaos, stephanie. because it would have given the imprimatur of the department of justice to anybody in georgia who wanted to submit a false slate of electors or who wanted to claim that even the justice department believed that the election in georgia and elsewhere was fraudulent. so, a very important moment, when that we should not overlook. and i'm very glad that smart people -- courageous people -- did the right thing. again, that's the job. that is what you were supposed to do, even when it is hard. >> where they able to do the right thing, luke, by appealing to trump's narcissism? they stopped him, not because they convinced him that the letter was a bad idea or

by the first week of april the department had reissued that department bulletin. next slide for chief hawkins please. >> and for the third recommendation is that both d.p.a. and iad provide more in-depth complaint data so that we can analyze what types of bwc violations we are seeing and policy and training recommendations and actions might be most helpful in reducing those violations. >> thank you. next slide. that concludes our presentation. the first quarter 2022 d.r.b. meeting will take place in this month, june 22. >> thank you. one of the questions i had is it seems that the trend and failure to make arrest and inappropriate behavior and courtesy. what other steps can the department take to start addressing those? can you go to the district stations that line up and start reminding our officers of the trends and what -- i mean, what other substantive measures is the department taking? because given the presentation we had a couple of months ago about the arrest rate and several articles that we have had in the newspaper over the community's concerns for fail

very few departments like your department an increase of 50 million dollars. as a matter of fact the public defenders office who i promise you work just as hardas you and your officers to . their entire budget is less then your increase.and they still accepted the budget and legislative analyst cuts . so i'm nothappy . i find it really, really not disrespectful but irresponsible at this department thinks itself exceptional and above every other city departments in san francisco and isn't agreeing to a single cut. i want to start there. as thebudget chair that offends me . now, what is your total budget? >> i asked director leon to answer that question. >> one second. >> you need me to tell you what your total budget is? >> i have it. >> $708 million, 700,000,265 $272. that is a massive, massive budget. and the mayor gave you an increase of $50.8 million and you say in a $708 million you can find some savings? >> first let me say that we don't take this lightly and definitely i understand your frustration and passion. we do not take thislightly. and were not ab

you will lose the entire department leadership. every single aag will leave. the entire department will walk out within hours and i don't know what happens after that >> now, almost every assistant attorney general had committed to resigning, as well. rosen told the committee that clark was unqualified for the job, not just because he didn't have the experience, but because he was willing to go after all those false claims of election fraud. and the president knew it. >> the president turned to me and he said, well, one thing well know is you, rosen, you aren't going to do anything. you don't even agree with the -- the claims of election fraud and this other guy, at least, might do something >> now, at one point, white house attorney pat cipollone told president trump that if clark were appointed a.g., he'd be overseeing a graveyard. that seemed to break through to the president and trump never put clark in the top job he didn't give up either later that night he called rosen with more far-fetched claims about the rigged election. now, the committee also revea

jeff clark with another department of justice department lawyer, ken kasky. and the letter was to be sent to the leadership of the georgia state legislature. other portions of the legislature that were intended for other states. neither mr. drug nor mr. klulowski had any evidence of widespread electorate and flawed, but they were quite aware of what mr. trump wanted the department to do. jeff clarke met privately with president trump and others in the white house and agreed to assist the president without telling the senior leadership of the department who oversaw him. as you will see, this letter claims that the u.s. department of investigations have, quote, intended fight significant concerns that may have impacted the outcome of the election in multiple states, including the state of georgia. in fact, donald trump knew this was a lie there. department of justice had already informed at the president of the united states repeatedly that is investigations had found no fraud serviceman to overturn the results of the 2020 election. the letter also said this, q

, department of public health, the department of homeless and supportive housing. to be a policy matter for the board to consider. we're available for questions. >> supervisor ronen: great. before i turn it over to you miss carol, i just wanted to note that, you know, i continue to remain committed to c.a.r.t. and i just wanted to make it clear when we are, you know, sort of describing this line item in this program, that there are three aspects of this funding that attached to this funding. if that makes sense. so those three aspects. and director carol and i talked about this. that this needs to be a new team. that it is a team that is meant to respond to level c calls that come into 911. that are, then, diverted away from the police. and then, number three, it's run by a community-based organization. so i just want to note that in whatever sort of description ends up in the final budget that those are the three fundamental aspects of c.a.r.t. that we expect the department to adhere to. but i don't think this committee has changed our agreement with and support f

so i was at the department but i had no expectation of leaving the department. it was a sunday afternoon. i was there in civilian clothes, as we both were. and expected to have that meeting, do some other work. but i had no expectation of going to the white house that day. >> so prior the that oval office meeting, did you set up a conference call with senior leadership at the department and if so, tell us about that call. >> yeah. so obviously it was a bit of a scramble this afternoon to prepare for the oval office meeting. we had discussed on several occasions the acting attorney general and i, whether we should expand the circle of people who knew what was going on. it was very important that steve engle know. that's why i reached out to steve on december 28th, because if mr. rosen were removed from the seat and the president did not appoint someone to serve as attorney, just by the department's function, mr. engle would be in the seat. he wanted to make sure what was going on should that occur. so the three of us knew. no one else aside from jeff clark knew w

>> at this point, we left the white house, reconvened at the department, i left the department, as back in my apartment, myself phone rang, it is the president, and he had information about a truck, supposedly full of shredded ballots in georgia. that was in the custody of an ice agent, whose name he had. i said that i.c.e. was part of the department of homeland security, i had heard about this, if homeland security had our assistance, we had provided, but it was up to dhs to make a call if their agent was involved. he said fine, i understand, can you make sure that me and ken cuccinelli, knew about this. i would pass that on to him, i eventually contacted him later that evening, and i said this is what the president told me. if you guys have anything, bring it to our attention, let me know. he said thank, you that was it. >> mr. cipollone left the meeting, and convinced the president to not appoint mr. clark, but he did not think the president had accepted the truth about the election. sure enough, all of the same debunked theories appeared in a speech at the ellipse three days later.

had nothing to do with the department. the department did not request that. that was pursuant to litigation by other parties. there was a hand recount. they compared the hand recount to the machines. for the ballots that were counted by machine, more than 15,000, there was one error, one ballot. i did a quick calculation and came up with .003%. well within tolerance. the president was so fix kated on the asog report in the december 15 conversation that in fact, our investigation revealed that the error rate was .0063%. so that was the president's example of what people are telling you that is not true. that you cannot and should not be relying on. so that was one very explicit one. we went through a series of others. the truck driver that claimed to have moved an entire tractor trailer of ballots from new york to pennsylvania. that was also incorrect. we did an investigation with the fbi interviewing witnesses at the front end and the back end of that trailer's transit from new york to pennsylvania. we looked at loading manifests, interviewed witnesses includ

we have safer departments, they cost money, we need to help our smaller departments out. these are all measures that i think have strong bipartisan support. my bill has nearly 80 members on t including democrats and republicans, it was passed out of the senate judiciary committee unanimously. all we're saying is we should vote on this legislation to get the backs of our law enforcement officers so they can protect themselves and also protect our communities. right now it's critically important that we take those steps and all we're asking for is a vote on these bipartisan bills. >> as you know the supreme court yesterday issued a major ruling on gun safety and the second amendment and made it easier for people to carry weapons in states and cities really challenging new jersey, new york, other state laws. does that make the streets safer in your mind? >> well, obviously i think that's a step in the wrong direction, but what we're going to vote on today in the house is a step in the right direction. and the good news from yesterday was historic, right? you've got a biparti

dhs is fundamentally a department of partnerships. it is ina's mission to make these partnerships by ensuring relevant intelligence is always waiting for a wholehomeland security enterprise . i.n.a. performs a number of functions. matches the information and intelligence sharing with our state local, tribal territorial and private sector partners. it serves the intelligence of the dhs components and leadership. leverages the information a dhs components to identify and address threats to our national security and report information sharing within the department . if i'm confirmed i will work hard to enhance ina's ability to which each of those tasks. first i intend to focus on workforce. which as i have seen is a very strong and aggressive group of dedicated intelligence. as the manager i've always believed is my first duty to support my personnel. as a leader of intelligence agency i'll be particularly vigorous in defending their ability to deliver effective unvarnished analysis is completely free from any political agendas. also car

you and the department opposed filing it. we see on the screen here that the talking points that you drafted on that. you said there's no legal basis to bring in lawsuit. anyone that thinks otherwise doesn't know the law much less the supreme court. why was this the department's position? >> i think it was -- the memo sort of speaks to this. but essentially this was a draft lawsuit that apparently was prepared by people outside the department. it would be styled as brought by the united states and the acting solicitor general as an original jurisdiction matner the supreme court. it was a merit less document. somebody prepared it and handed it to president and forwarded it on for our review. the department of justice doesn't have any standing to bring a lawsuit. the lawsuit would have been untimely. the states had chosen their electors. they were certified, cast their votes and sent to washington d.c. neither georgia nor any of the other states december 28th whenever this was was in a position to change those votes. the electi

picture a scenario with the separation of the departments where a department would be less likely to contract with public works and potentially over time, not you or us, be more likely to contract out? >> that is raised by our building trade staff. we have internal process by which they are offered the first right of refusal for projects. that mens ensure that the fol-- that helps ensure that those maintaining are involved early on in the capital projects. there is a concern that over time and we have seen this time and time again with other departments that used to be part of the department. for example building inspection. they have other priorities. when we come to them we have to get in line like everyone else. while there is great intention to keep those policies in place and ensure right of refusal for work. i can see over time they might get dilutessed we have concern the building repair staff would miss out on opportunities for work. >> chair peskin: supervisor mandelman. >> supervisor mandelman: thank you for finding a way to get prop p work. supervisor peskin and district c

thanks to the hard work of our many staff in the department. the fourth annual climate action month outreach campaign ran from march 25th to april 30th and i want to give the highlights of what was done. we created a landing page which cataloged all 130 activity that were taken place that month. and that page received 32,000 visitors. it's 15,000 more visitors than received the previous year so there was an especially crease in the act of activity we saw on that web page. in addition, we did goggle search ads, facebook ads to really promote all activities taking place and we had over $34,000 clicks for the san francisco environment organize events. we also had five live and virtual events with over 300 registered participants and youth day of service and bike ride in golden gate park and focus event around ev and electrification. on the other hand, we have an amazing outreach team that does work with public schools and they were in hot demand during that period as well. schools are calling, like, hey, can we get someone out to talk to our kids,

leave the department all together or the industry all together. and so we're trying to address that by a 2% longevity premium at year five and 15. and in order to attract new officers to the department, we've also moved the entry level step up so that that way we're more competitive with other departments in terms of how do attract new officers to the force so that we can backfill our ranks of officers where we see some significant decline in the overall number. that is our general presentation on items one through 32. i am available for any questions. >> thank you. i think just one and you referenced some of the vacancies in particular departments but obviously a lot of discussion overall around vacancies in the labor staff up campaign. and i am wondering if you can just discuss ou these m.o.u.s directly address filling vacancies if at all or to the extent that is addressed by side agreements and other future negotiations. just give us the lay of the land of those discussions and the extent to which it is reflected in the m.o.u.s before us. >> su

what does this tell you about where is justice department is? it's been north of 100 people given subpoenas already -- >> no, i'm saying there are more than 100 people who could be involved in this totally. so i don't know if there's been that many subpoenas given already, i want to make that clear. what we have seen is that this has continued to grow. what we don't quite know is what the justice department is interested in. they have shown interest in this. we know that a grand jury in washington is examining some of the fund-raising behind, you know, the rally, and looking at the money, that kind of came into the rally. and then other place where is the committee has, you know, publicly and privately expressed -- they would like to see more enthusiasm from the justice department and we just don't know. he said they're going to follow the facts, and that has gotten a lot of criticism from the left, who said they wished he would be more aggressive. so far, a lot of public bread crumbs for us to see. >> do you know why -- obviously we're in the m

the justice department won't tolerate it. the jus kit department's top priority is holding accountable those who commit heinous act. we must all continue to combat hate and discrimination before they escalate to violence. every community deserves to feel safe and protected. through vital grant programs and technical assistance, the department is working diligently to support victims and jurisdictions that have experienced these incidents of mass violence. the office of victims of crime deploy officials to work with the community and state officials to ensure that everyone who needs and wants services has continued access to mental health and other resources. the justice department stands with you and will continue to work to make real this nation's promise of justice and equality under the law. i am now going to pass it to assistant attorney general clarke. ms. clarke: thank you, associate attorney general gupta. mr. attorney general and colleagues, today i join my colleagues in grieving the innocent victims of this senseless

attempted to weaponize the justice department for his political gain, pressuring them relentlessly with demands like this -- >> i'm just asking you to do is just say it was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the republican congressmen. >> that pressure, those calls, it was relentless, almost daily. pressure to say things that were not true. that these officials told the president were not true and pressure to do things that arguably were not legal. then there was the scheme to install this man, jeffrey clark, an environmental lawyer and election live promoter into the top job at justice. federal investigators raided clark's home wednesday. the day before he was to be the focus of the congressional hearing. clark described the raid overnight. >> at one point, you know, 12 agents and two fairfax county police officers went into my house, searched it for three and a half hours. they even brought along something, tucker, i have never seen before or heard of, an electronic sniffing dog and they took all of the electronics from my house. >> new fallout this morning from revelation that is s

a low-level justice department environmental official. who trump considered elevating to acting attorney general in the final weeks of his term. >> did the president tell you that he would remove you and mr. rosen because you weren't declaring that there was election fraud? >> toward the end of the meeting, the president again was getting very agitated and he said that people tell me i should just get rid of both of you. i should just remove you. >> mr. clark had told us that the president had asked him to consider whether he would be willing to replace me and supposedly on a time table by monday the 4th. and so i had told mr. clark, i thought he was making a colossal error in judgment. >> the committee show cased how clark was instrumental to trump's plot, clark and another trump loyalist were behind a draft letter to state officials in georgia which called joe biden's win there into question. >> this letter claims that the u.s. department of justice's investigations have, quote, identified significant concerns that may have impacted the

today we focus in on the department of justice. last hearing was about the different election officials and the state. and we are continuing to put those pieces together as we move forward in the hearing. so, you know, i think it'll paint a very clear picture by the end of our hearings about just what all of those levers were. >> also, so much from the people we heard from is that they were republicans who were very loyal to the president. many had been in the administration for the department of justice throughout the entire administration. while we heard the department of justice officials talking about how alarmed they were from the president's behavior, reporting they've also converted he never ordered them to break the law. do you agree with that, and how much does that impact merrick garland and the department of justice as they weigh charges? >> well, i can't comment, you know, from the department of justice and their perspective. that's not the purpose of this committee. it's a legislative committee. but what i would say is

justice department and how trump plans to use the justice department to overthrow the government and stay in power. in this part of the plot, the justice department would essentially tell the country that trump was right, there really was tons of fraud, swing states won by biden, probably really were not won by biden. the justice department would in fact tell those swing states that they really should consider sending in trump electors to the electoral college instead of biden electors. that was the plan the justice department play at that role. and how they carry out that plan? the vehicle for this part of the plan was, this official, jeffrey clark. the plan was to fire the attorney general, or place him with this guy, and then this guy would and after the trump plan, to have states that biden won decertify their votes, to instead proclaim trump had won those states and to have those states cast their electoral college votes for trump. clark promised to carry it out. we got new detailed revelations about every step of how they tried to do that today. and we will have more on that co

one of the things that i think is critical for the department like the department of on the environment to make sure -- with so much grant funding, nearly every single piece of revenue that comes in the department is earmarked towards something. we have to cover that through other means. we don't have general fund dollars. therefore legal dollars don't flow into our budget. as a commission it's important for us to support especially that third piece of that where we want to make sure that we are -- we want this department to be held as a pinnacle of being ethical in the same way that we have such an international reputation being a leader in the environmental movement. we need to be equally seen as put forward in terms of how we approach other ethical decisions. commissioner hunter? >> commissioner hunter: thank you for dealing with all the questions. the only two thoughts here on the department review of internal policy is, i think increasing the robustness of the policy is important. when we did records retention -- [ indiscernible ] on the second one for the staff briefing, the only

we work closely with the justice department but anything over 250,000 department we're going after so i will get you the money that he recovered and also get to the money that's on the hook that we are in court on. you have two numbers. >> that would be great. ms. clark spoke about the childcare workforce shortages. and i think, so this isn't a shop in working on with the a nr of folks on the panel for a while. childcare continues to be hot issue for folks in southwest washington. 25% of our regions childcare capacity completely disappeared during the pandemic and is already an issue before the pandemic. i just wanted just a commitment from you i think you will give it frequently the department is going to commit to helping us build this pipeline for childcare workers, quality childcare workers as a type an address these shortages to create opportunities for mom's and others in this country. >> you have a commitment on that. not only that i'd love to talk to anyone ideas because it's a very challenging career because what happens is a lot childcare facilities is somebody will start a

it is not like the commerce department, or whatever. it is special, it is relatively apolitical, lady justice is its symbol, blindfolded, and you take that oath, and i saw it twice at the justice department when i was there, and two different administrations, where the attorney generals themselves, the lawyers of the justice department, the korean folks, people like barbara, they take that oath incredibly seriously. so i wasn't democratic administrations, we went hard after democrats. attorney general went hard after democrats, they did not go after republicans. that is -- what trump's justice department did was -- from sessions to matthew whitaker to bill barr, it was a bunch of political people doing trump's bidding. but here is why it is so significant, what is going on tomorrow, even with those folks, they found a line that they could not cross. and they threatened to resign if trump installed jeffrey clark as the acting attorney general, because jeffrey rosen, the current acting attorney general, would not do the bidding of trump.

one sort of understands the department of justice. they are in favor of executive privilege, executive confidentality. i am afraid, what's really the problem that underlies this, is congress has csystematically undercut it is own authority, certainly not if thrp a trump department of justice so it's been a long time since its had its own mechanisms for enforcing its subpoenas and sad to say, probably time for them to try to find a way to revive that and maybe go back to the times when we send the sergeants in arms to arrest mark meadows or something like that, then we can have the haiti's case and see if he can get out of the prison in the basement of congress. >> well, despite the mental image of seeing all of that happen, let's see, if congress can't agree on anything, see if they can agree on something like that. great to see you, really appreciate it. >>> "outfront" for us next, president biden takes on the supreme court, saying he supports a carve out to filibuster rules in order to protect abortion rights but is that a dangerous

the first witness assistant secretary of energy for international affairs us department of energy, you are now recognized for five minutes. >> mr. chairman and ranking member and members of the committee, it is an honor to appear to discuss energype security in europe and the role of the us department of energy to support development of infrastructure assistance in eastern and central europe to support a secure sustainable diversified sector to make a more secure. i am appearing before you what the troubling and disturbing time in addition to the tremendous sanitary and consequences russia is instigatingru energy war affecting countries throughout europe as a result us department of energy are redoublinger efforts to bolster energy security to accelerate net zero transition it has home. vladimir putin's actions have sent oil markets reeling raising prices at the pumpp underscoring the need to work with european allies with diversified energy solutions to secure a clean energy future. stated but me the start period forces the national security importance of energy and testament and tran

the security departments . nextplease . the chart here details the city staff we have a 10 vacant positions in comparison to fy 2019 . four of those 10 positionsare funded . as in the mayor's office proposed budget six of those positions are unbudgeted or frozen solely due to city budgetreductions over the previous two years . this was achieved by temporarily increasing the attrition rate as described earlier these frozen positions at an active operation. impact particularly our service to our asian american community and the community broadly speaking lines together in fighting for human rights and social justice.although budgeted positions are for vacant positions that we are desperately trying to backfill. the museum as you may know has historically not add dedicated city hr personnel. to assist us in terms of hiring or backfilling so backfilling as always been challenging but even more so are limited hr resources available to us. filling the four budgeted vacancies and getting six frozen positions budgeted