Okay, so Congress, they have a lot of reasons to be mad at Bill Barr right now.

That they do.

Noah Feldman is a constitutional scholar at Harvard.

He's been studying Congress like a chessboard, piling up the lists of grievances the Democrats have against Attorney

General William Barr.

There's the distortion in his report to Congress.

There's the potential stonewalling or even misstatements in his testimony.

There's a refusal to hand over the entirety of the Mueller report.

It's that last move. Barr's refusal to hand over the unredacted Mueller report.

Even after a subpoena, that's left the House Judiciary Committee looking to put William Barr in check.

It's why they've scheduled a vote to hold him in contempt of Congress this morning.

What do you think is going to happen when all these Congress people walk into the room?

Well, the first thing to remember is that we're talking about a committee vote on contempt.

This is a first step. This is a recommendation, or it would be if passed, a recommendation by the committee to tell Congress, we think all of you should hold him in contempt.

The last time I talked to Noah about the Attorney General, Bill Barr was still interviewing for his job.

And some Democrats were cautiously optimistic about him. Noah was, too.

So you're making the case that this is really just a first step, and it's unclear

where this all lands. So does this vote matter? Oh, it matters because Congress still is in its

mode of oversight of the executive. And when they ask to see documents, if the executive says no,

the first significant step that Congress has to take

in order to get those documents, the first move towards a constitutional confrontation between the

two branches of government is a contempt vote. And the first part of a contempt vote is for the

...