. thanks very much for joining us. right now we're keeping an eye on several live events coming up over the next 90 minutes or so. first the white house press briefing only minutes away. looking at live pictures right now, sean spicer will brief reporters, take questions as well. likely to be pepped on a whole bunch of issues including health care. certainly on the expectations for a very important senate judiciary hearing coming up later today on the russia investigation. also later this hour we expect to hear from the fbi director

james comey. he will be speaking at the anti-defamation league summit here in washington. we left heard from director comey when he spoke and testified before the senate judiciary committee the other day. the committee's next hearing begins next hour. the former director of national intelligence james clapper will testify along with the former acting attorney general sally yates. yates is expected to layout exactly what kind of warning she gave the white house about their choice for national security adviser, the fired michael flynn. bring in jim acosta. sally yates wasn't the only one who warned the trump administration about hiring michael flynn as the president's top national security adviser. you have breaking news on this. what are your sources telling you? >> that's right, wolf. as a matter of fact, it was president obama who warned then president-elect trump on november 10th. you'll remember that 90 minute oval office meeting that they had here at the white house two days after president trump was

elected. they both were sitting in the oval office and according to our sources then president obama warned the president-elect not to hire michael flynn, to stay away from the retired general in part because he was being swept up in this russia investigate and also i'm toll by former obama administration official that in the view of president obama there were just better people for president-elect trump to select for the position of national security adviser. of course this news broke, wolf, just a few hours after president trump tweeted once again that it's the obama administration that is to blame for michael flynn tweeting early thier this morning tweeting he was given the highest clearance by the obama administration. we have talked about that time and again. it was in this briefing room a couple weeks ago where sean spicer was trying to make the case that listen, yes, there was some vetting that went on inside

the trump transition but they were relying on the obama administration which had done a security clearance on michael flynn in the early months of 2016. and they were essentially saying and president trump is essentially saying in his tweet this morning why would we have to worry about michael flynn when he was vetted by and cleared by the obama administration? so it's not too surprising i think that, you know, when you hear these statements coming from the trump white house time and again that obama had given the skruecurity clearance, it w going to happen that obama officials were going to say by the way president obama warned president trump about michael flynn two days after he was electric elected president of the united states. president obama has with the exception of last night's remarks on health care has sort of stayed out of this story and stayed out of donald trump's hair while he's been president of the united states.

but clearly this is an indication that the obama folks are getting frustrated and losing patience with president trump with these remarks about the obama administration being responsible for michael flynn. >> the obama administration fired michael flynn as the dia director back in 2014. and in early 2016 when he got his security credentials, security clearances renewed, it was the dia, his former employer at the pentagon as well as the u.s. army that gave him those security credentials. now correct me if i'm wrong, jim, he's being investigated for misleading, for not necessarily providing all the information about the money he was paid from russian television when he was applying for updated security credentials, right? >> that's right. that's a part of that. don't forget he was fired by president trump because he did not provide information to the administration about these conversations that he had about russian sanctions with the

russian ambassador during that transition in december. and so the timeline becomes very interesting. you have two days after president trump is elected president that he's warned by president obama to steer clear of michael flynn and then it was in late december when the former retired general, the soon to be national security adviser, was having a conversation with the russian ambassador sergey kislyak about these surussian sanctions. they were hoping the trump administration would provide some relief on. then of course there's the entire saga of how michael flynn did not tell the truth to vice president pence who went on to the sunday talk shows and said oh, no, michael flynn did not talk about russian sanctions, he didn't do anything wrong. that turned out to be bad information and that was essentially why mike el flynn was fired. this is just another example of the sort of drip, drip, drip problem with michael flynn for this white house and i expect it will dominate a big part of the discussion here in the briefing room today.

>> i suspect right. we're waiting to hear from sean spicer momentarily. we'll be heading over to that lectern. jim, thanks very much. let's talk about all of the breaking news. bring in our panel including cnn chris, cnn editor at large and cnn reporter, chief national security corresponde-- nia-malin and gloria borger. what president trump is trying to do is say i wasn't responsible for michael flynn, i was only adhering to the highest level security clearances he received during the obama administration. >> michael flynn has become an orphan. nobody wants to claim responsibility for him. and i've talked to former transition officials who said that they, you know, they kind of felt the same way, that president obama felt. that they all had questions

about donald trump. i mean about michael flynn. but then they were fired and then of course flynn was hired. and i was told by one former transition official that he'd actually raised some issues about flynn with the president-elect and the president-elect kept making the point that he is a really loyal guy. in the end i think that was probably what the decision to hire him as national security adviser was about. which was ultimate complete loyalty to donald trump. despite all the red flags. >> the other thing about this, it totally inaccurately reflects the vetting process for the most senior national security officials officials. if you're chosen as national security adviser that is not based on a two or three year-old security clearance. there's additional vetting done. that's the responsibility of the incoming administration. this whole thing about the clearance is a red herring. the administration does the vetting. >> amy, the senator from

minnesota is joining us. she's a democrat on the judiciary committee. did you know about this warning from president obama to then president-elect trump over michael flynn? >> no, i had never heard about it until today. but i'm not surprised given that president obama had basically fired flynn from his administration. so i don't think it's a surprise at all. i was more surprised by the fact that the president, president trump, is now trying to act like, you know, this wasn't their problem, he'd been hired originally by the obama administration whien in fact there were clearly several warnings, something we'll be asking sally yates about today. >> during this upcoming hearing that's supposed to begin in about an hour half. >> the first will be about the fact that she had warned the white house and while she may not be able to reveal classified information, she can tell us the

process. was it just some heads up at a cocktail party? i don't think so. i think it's very important because there's been intimation that it wasn't a real formal warning and i think it was. secondly, i want to ask about how we prevent this from happening. at some point the parties are going to have to put aside their differences here so this doesn't happen again. whether it is how the press handles these kinds of clear cyber attacks from another country, what happened in france this past week, how the parties, different political parties handle it when they know that they may be getting something, a campaign, maybe getting something as a result. the cyber attack, i think we have to have a major discussion as a nation over how we protect ourselves from the influence of foreign countries. >> you probably saw the president's tweet this is morning. he argues the hon it's on the o administration for giving michael flynn the highest security clearance. i want you to respond to that as well as president obama, his

warning about flynn, why he was given that kind of access. >> well, first of all, it is just absurd that the president, the current president, would be blaming obama for someone he then hired given that we now know as of today the news that's been coming out that president obama warned him not to hire him, that we now know that sally yates has talked to the white house and warned them that he'd been compromised. i mean, this is a guy, general flynn, that actually called up the russian ambassador the day that president obama decided to expand the sanctions against russia. and the reason this is relevant and why the administration was so concerned and why the fbi and intelligence officials were so concerned is that can compromise someone, right? they could be blackmailed over something like this. so they had every reason to warn the trump administration. they were doing the right thing as was president obama. >> we're waiting for sean spicer by the way to step up to the

lectern over there. as you know, maybe you don't know, but we've been told that members of the house and senate intelligence committees, some of those members say they're running into road blocks right now, senator, which could delay any findings until next year. is the senate judiciary committee, and you're a member of the sub committee which will be holding its hearing, having similar issues should it all end up in your opinion with an independent outside investigation? >> well, i'm one of the first people that called for this independent commission. senator cardin and elijah suminsu cummings stood together and said we think we need. this a lot of it is, yes, focus on finding out what happened, but to make sure we protect our security in the future. i have a lot of faith in senator

warner, but their purpose will be to dig in and fine out what happened. if they keep getting these road blocks, it's all the more reason that we also have an independent commission as well as we know the fbi investigation that's going on. >> senator, thanks so much for joining us. we'll be watching this hearing coming up. >> thank you. it should be a good one. >> thank you. as we wait for the hearing we're also waiting for sean spicer, the white house press secretary to show up. we'll have live coverage of that. lots going on this hour. crystal, why do you think that president trump did hire michael flynn as his national security adviser, his immediate predecessor said don't do it. sally yates was later giving some warnings. even as glor ra reporting even some transition officials were saying this is not a good idea. hold that thought. we'll listen to sean and then we'll get back you to. >> nmove this up a little bit.

i appreciate your flexibility today. so that the pool can cover the vice president as they welcome honor flight veterans to washington on the anniversary of "d" day. the vice president is hosting more than 120 veterans as part of national military appreciation month and public service recognition week he lighting the trump's administration commitment to our military and public service. also today the vice president secretary price, secretary shulkin all attended an event on the scientific opportunities in medicine. key leaders from government, the private sector discussed the united states comprehensive bio medical landscape and further educated white house staff on in important topic. the meeting was organized by the national institutes of health and was led by direct dr.

francis collins. leaders in the medical education and research joined executives from companies who invest in bio tech who provide analysis and real life examples of how america's sustained leadership in the biomedical industry has resulted in benefits to our country's economic and physical well-being. among the participants were bill ford, dr. craig thompson, the president of memorial sloan koettering. dr. bargman, dr. mark tesse, president of stanford university and dr. rick lifton, president of rockefeller university. responsible for 44% of global research and development. this invest ment is dependent on the nih. in order to maintain our international leadership in bio

medicine we must strengthen the partnerships in government agencies, eck dacademics and reh foundations. i'm pleased to announce today shortly after this briefing we will release a list of the president's third wave of federal court nominees. these ten individuals that the president has chosen were chosen for their deep knowledge of the law and the their commitment to upholding constitutional principles. two of the nominees came from the list of potential supreme court nominees that the president released during the campaign. if confirmed, justin joan lar son will be a circuit court judge for the sixth circuit. justice larson is currently serving on the michigan supreme court. justice david strass. the campaign list was put together from input from the heritage foundation as well as

the federalist society and as the president said last september when it was released these, quote, highly respected people are the kind of scholars that we need to preserve the very core of our country and make it greater than ever before. the president followed the principles to select the additional eight individuals. in terms of the president's schedule for today this morning he met with his national security adviser general mcmaster. he also spoke with the french president-elect to congratulate him on his victory. the prime minister of georgia was also at the white house meeting with the vice president. the prime minister then dropped by with the vice president into the oval office to greet the president. earlier this afternoon the president had lunch with the vice president. in about an hour he'll meet with secretary of state tillerson. secretary tillerson has also been meeting with several foreign leaders today at the state department including foreign minister of slovaki and

foreign minister of qatar. the secretary is in denmark to co host a meeting with danish minister of defense with senior leaders from 15 countries that are contributors to the deisis military campaign. secretary mattis will also meet with the minister of defense to discuss european security. with the dan niche prime minister to reaffirm the ties between denmark and the united states. in other cabinet news secretary zinke is in utah to continue his four day tour today putting into action president trump's approximately 27th executive order to review these monuments. secretary zinke will be acompanied by the gov mernor an member of utah's delegation for a tour of the million plus acre monument and an afternoon hiking

tour and round table meeting listening with friends. while in utah the secretary and other officials are holding daily press briefings on the grou ground. with that i'd i'll be glad to take questions. >> sean, thank you. president obama warned then president-elect trump against hiring mike flynn as his national security adviser. why did he ignore that warning? >> i -- the president doesn't disclose details of the meetings he had but it's true that president obama made it known he wasn't exactly a fan of general flynn which shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone given that general flynn had worked for president obama, was an outspoken critic of president obama's short comings specific league as it related to lack of confronting isis that were facing america. so the question that you have to ask yourself really is if president obama was truly concerned about general flynn, why didn't he suspend general

flynn's security clearance which they had just reapproved months early sn earlier? additionally why did they let him go to russia for a speaking engagement? there were steps they could have taken. if that was truly a concern more than just a person that didn't -- had bad blood. >> i want to follow-up on a couple points. if a sitting president raises the name of one individual, why wouldn't that give the president-elect pause? i understand what you're saying, the caveat about the fact that he campaigned, et cetera, but wouldn't that give the incoming president pause? >> well, i think -- i don't know that i agree with your characterization. he made it clear he wasn't a fan and i don't think that should have come as a surprise considering the role that general flynn played in the campaign. >> did it give him any pause at all? >> again, if you know what we knew at the time which is that the security clearance that he had had been reapproved in april of that year. not only did they reapprove it,

they took no steps to suspend it. the question has to be what did they do with real concerns beyond just not liking him for comments that he made. >> it's our understanding and if you could clarify, did not mike flynn not need upgraded security clearance in order to serve as the national security adviser? >> he had been head of the defense intelligence agency. >> but you vetted him as well. >> that's the same clearance -- the security clearance, we went over this, it's the same at any level. he had had his reinvestigation in april of 2016. and the obama administration took no steps, not only did they reaffirm that, they took no steps to suspend it or take any other action. >> but did you not vet him yourselves? >> you don't vet -- on a security clearance, that's why you get a security clearance. everyone in the government goes through the same process. so the answer is that those same -- that same process worked for general flynn as it did for me or anyone else who works here. there's no difference of a

security clearance woonce it's issued. >> what we know is what we knew at the time. does knowing what the white house knows now, does the white house, does the president believe that general flynn should not have had that clearance reissued last year, number one. and number two, does the white house believe that general flynn was truthful when he filled out his form for the investigation last year? >> i'm not going to get into those details. that is something that was adjudicated by the obama administration in april of 2016. they took no steps to suspend that. so that's not really a question for us. it's a question for them at that time. >> knowing what you know now -- >> i think the president took appropriate action when he did. once he felt as though general flynn misled the vice president, he took action and he stands by that today. >> the ties to russia, his work as a registered foreign agent, did it lead to his firing in february? >> i don't think we're going to relitigate this. the president made the right

decision back then and he stands by that. >> last week officials indicated the pentagon planned to send the president a proposal to send several thousand additional troops to afghanistan. can you confirm whether or not the president has made a decision about sending additional troops to afghanistan and if so, when are they going, how many are going, and what is their mission? >> i'll refer you to the department of defense on that. they near contact with them, but we have nothing to share at this time. sarah. >> the president tweet ted this moe that they should ask sally yates about classified leaks and general flynn. does the president have evidence that ties sally yates to the flynn leaks? why did he tweet that? >> you guys are well aware of the president's concern about spills of classified and other sensitive information out into the open. it's something that should concern every american and the president has made it very clear since he took office that that's a big concern of his.

and so the idea that classified information made its way into the press is something that i think while we're asking all of these questions is one of the ones that i think the senator should ask. how did that information get out into the open like that? i think that is an equally important question that frankly isn't getting asked. >> does the president believe that sally yates was the leaker in this? >> again, the tweet speaks for itself. what he's saying is the senate should ask those questions. >> sean aside from the announcement today that the president will nominate ten judges to fill vacancies many concern the white house is behind on overall appointments. the president told the examiner that he doesn't need to fill vacant posts in the administration and after these ten there will still be 110 vacancies. does the president believe the jobs do not need to be filled and are there any plans to increase the pace of political appointments? >> there's three questions in

there. i'll try to break them down. number one, we have a very robust schedule of releasing names. there is a method to this in terms of the nominees we're going to put out now and i think you should expect to see more and more go through. the process this time around is a little bit different. we're actually going through the office of government ethics and fbi clearances before announcing most of these individuals. so there's a little bit of a different in how we're doing this. we are well on pace with respect to many of these to get the government up and running. but the president's point that he was making in that interview was that part of the review of the government is to make sure that we're looking at these positions and figuring out whether or not the taxpayer is getting the best bang for their bucket. so we're looking through the entire government, director mulvaney briefed you about how we look at government to figure out whether or not we can do a better job of filling positions, staffing the government, but we're going to continue to ahav

announcements on key positions. >> the key to -- >> i you'll continue to see other key positions, we have a very healthy clip of announcements that continue to go out. >> ahead of her testimony today does president trump believe sally yates is a trustworthy source of information? >> that's not up for us to decide. that is up to the senate to decide whether or not what she does and we'll have to wait and see what that -- >> and following up on sarah's question, it seemed that the president was implying that sally yates may have had something to do with the leaked information to newspapers. is that what he was implying? >> i think the tweet speaks for itself. sometimes you don't have to read too much into it. richard? >> sean, two questions on nafta. first, the canadian prime minister on friday said that they're considering as a reaction to what the prime minister calls punitive duty on canadian soft wood lumber

considering banning [inaudible] from the u.s. is this the beginning of a trade war? >> no. that's why we have dispute settlement mechanisms to do this in a responsible way. wilbur ross has been in touch with his counter parts over there. there's a reason that the dispute mechanism is set up the way that it is under this particular trade agreement. but under most trade graagreeme. the two parties can resolve in a way that allows for both sides to air their concern. that's why you have an agreement. >> so you trust the mechanism on this? let's let it play out but i think secretary ross took appropriate action to protect the industry. >> ten days ago the president said that mexico and canada have agreed to fasten the process to renegotiate nafta. what has happened in the last ten days? >> we'll have further updates for you on that. right now there's nothing to share. >> did sally yates have to run

any of her planned testimony by the general counsel's office that she'll deliver later this afternoon? >> i'm not aware of it, no. >> also, do you have any reason to doubt that her testimony which willing under oath will be truthful before this senate? >> i have no -- i mean, i would assume that when you raise your right hand and agree to tell the truth and nothing but the truth that you'll do that. that's the whole reason that you pledge. >> thank you, sean. president trump was not receiving a daily intelligence briefing. he was receiving his information from general flynn. do you thaink that lack of information from the intelligence community contributed to the lapse in vetting with general flynn? >> so first he did get his -- we extensive went over the pvd briefing throughout the campaign. i believe back then it was three times a week. and then by his national

security team. they would go in and do that. i think the premise is not there. secondly as i mentioned, the processes that were followed by general flynn are followed by every government employee who receives clearance at that particular level. >> on another thing, wanting to talk about the signing statement that came out on friday with the spending bill. senior administration officials including education secretary betsy devos didn't seem to know about that. why didn't she or people working on that know about that and know it was coming? whose idea was that and what happened between when sarah was out here on friday saying that she didn't think there was going to be something like that and then close of business when there was a signing statement? and did you know it was coming? >> signing statements are a pro forma activity that occurs during a bill signing that's performed by the department of justice off the legislative council. it's been used by every president. i'm not really sure what everyone knew. that is something that goes along going back multiple

administrations. >> follow that on -- >> on the travel ban, i have a couple questions. back in february the president said that lifting the travel ban will mean that many bad and dangerous people would be pouring in. have you seen any evidence that that's been the case in the three months since this ban was lift snd. >> >> i think that's a question for homeland security. i'd be glad to follow-up with the department of homeland security. i don't have anything at this time. >> if this white house is no longer calling this a muslim ban as the president did initially, why does the president's website still explicitly call for, quote, preventing muslim immigration, and it says donald j. trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of muslims from entering the united states. >> i'm not aware on the websites. i know how he talked about this from the first day of the administration, the travel ban in this country's national security interest to make sure

people that are coming here are coming here with the right motive and reason and we're having a public safety aspect to make sure we're protecting our people. we've been very consistent since the first day of the administration on this. >> completely disavowing the use of that phrase muslim ban? it's still on the bwebsite, it worth you clarifying that? >> i'm trying to figure out why -- i've been very clear. i don't think i need to clarify what we have said or what the president said -- >> if it's coming up in court. >> i understand that and that's one of the reasons we have concerns about how that's being interpreted. i think the travel ban was very clear. it was something that the president made clear in the filings that we have filed, why he did it, the motives for doing it and he was clear when he spoke about it from the beginning. there shouldn't be any question as to why the president is doing this and the idea of making sure

we're putting the safety of our country and our people first and foremost. >> two topics, hopefully fast. the kushner family was in china making a pitch for the visa program. this came a day after the president signed which extended that program. two questions. one, is it a violation of the conflict of interest agreement that jared kushner came to? and also, does the president believe that visa program needs to be modified? >> i think i would refer you to the company on that. jared has done everything to comply with the ethics rules to make sure and that had nothing to do with him per se. he wasn't involved. secondly, i think we've talked about this before. the president and congress are looking entirely -- at how to look over the entire visa program. all the various visa programs and whether or not they are serving the purpose they were intended to. whether or not we're making sure we do what's in the best interest of the american worker. so we're going to continue to work with congress on that.

>> regarding the opioid commission, it's my understanding that no members of that commission have been named yet. we're more than 30 days into what was supposed to be a 90 day period for that commission to come back with a report to the president. what's up with that and does that send the wrong signal to people who believe that this is a very urgent crisis where more than 100 people are diagnose every day? >> let me get back to you on the exact names. i think when it comes to the opioid crisis, the president both during the campaign and the transition and now as president has made it very clear of his commitment to figuring out how we can address this cries that plagued so many neighborhoods and communities and he'll continue to work with -- he appointed governor christie and a bipartisan commission. as soon as we have additional information on that, we will do that. kevin. >> why is it important for the

president to get these ten individuals out there to serve the country and on a more broader perspective, there are a number of vacancies, 129 going into today, to say nothing of some of the openings over there in eeop that i'm sure can still be filled. the pea the pace seems slow. >> on the judicial jobs we're going through it. as i mentioned earlier, there's a lot of background that goes on in each of these, the fbi background check that goes o. they're all in the pipeline. i think you'll continue to see very robust of announcements on not just the judicial front but on several of the fronts. we've been tracking where we are. i think we're well on pace with where previous administrations have been. but we're doing a great job of filling those key positions and making sure we get the right

person for the right job. steve. >> i want to ask you a question about afghanistan. last week the special inspector general for afghanistan reconstruction taking a very grim picture. security incidents through march reached the highest level in decades. civilian casualties were the the high oe highest on record. what's going to be his ultimate goal? is it going to be stability or out right victory? >> i think number one he wants to make sure that that we defeat isis. that is in our national security interest. make sure that we protect our people. but does so in a responsible mart way. he's talked about not projecting, you know, where he's going and what he's going to do. to let the enemy know ahead of time. part of that guidance that his national security team is giving him are different pieces you're talking about. how do we achieve those key

outcome. how do we utilize our military and our treasury to the best of our ability. that is something we're continuing to work on and do. that's part of what he is getting briefed on and is implementing. i'm not entirely sure if that answer is where you're going. that is what he has been getting briefed on. that is the kind of decision making process. >> is the president displeased with the current state of affairs in afghanistan? >> he wants to make sure we win. that's why he charged the national security team to come up with a plan that can get us there. veronica. >> does the president believe that health care is a right or a product? >> well, i think the president's been very clear in his statements whether or not you call it a right or not, he wants every person to have access to health care that covers pre-existing conditions, that is affordable, and i think the steps that he's taken over the last week and the bill that he worked to pass through the house

clearly highlight those priorities. he wants to make sure that people have access to care. he is concerned when he hears about companies leaving the marketplace and not giving consumers a choice. he is concerned when he hears about deductibles going through the roof. costs going through the roof. and people not having the access that they can to health care. and he is very concerned that we are facing a choice right now where obamacare is failing and dying. and that if we don't act that people won't have access to health care. they won't be able to afford it. so the steps that he is taking are to achieve those principles that he's laid out. >> the question as it relates to president trump and former president obama, back to that november conversation, were there specific reasons given? and if so, as it relates to michael flynn, and if so was that based on private information? >> i don't know the answer to that. like i said, he passed along exactly what i mentioned to kristen at the outset.

michael. >> two clarifications. on the signing statement broadly, are you saying that the president was not aware of that very law, of the details of that very long signing statement and it was just something done -- >> no, no, no that's not -- no. the president is obviously aware of what happened. the question that was asked is it is a process. it happened for administrations going back generations i'm sure. i don't have the precise nature of when signing statements came into being. this goes along with a bill signing to make sure that the executive branch's intent is as understood. >> a lot of things that were in that signing statement was carry overs from things obama had also objected to. but the president and the senior staff here was aware of what those things were and approved those. >> of course, yes. >> second question, on the flynn and the security clearance, you guys have made from the podium

and the president made the big deal of the obama people gave him the clearance or reupped the clearance earlier. >> right. >> are you suggesting now, knowing what you guys know with hindsight and whatever, are you saying that they should have -- you believe that the obama administration should have denied him his clearance back in april based on the information that you're now aware of in connection with russia, et cetera? are you suggesting they should have deny today? >> what i'm suggesting is you can't have it both ways. the folks who are coming out and saying obama, you know, expressed some concern about flynn. well, number one, it was pretty expected. this is a guy who was very outspoken in his criticism of president obama's policies. so the idea that president obama, you know, didn't like the guy doesn't seem shocking. but the point that you have to ask yourself is if you -- if the obama administration or under the obama administration, if they reissued one of the highest security clearances that you can get, knowing what they knew then

and then didn't do anything to take a proactive step to suspend it in any way, shape, or form, the question you have to ask yourself, if they were concerned, why didn't they take any steps? they're the ones who had at that point all the access and all the knowledge to everything that on his security clearance. not us. so if president obama or anyone else frankly in the government was concerned, the question should be asked what did they do and if nothing, then why not if they really truly were concerned? i thang ink that is a fair ques. dave. dave. dave. >> sean, over the weekend north korea detained the fourth u.s. citizen. are you concerned that they're trying to escalate tensions even further? do you consider these americans hostages? what are you doing diplomatically to try to get them release sd? >> obviously this is concerning. we're well aware of it and we're

going to work through the embassy through our state department to seek the release of the individuals. i would refer you to the state department on that. >> to follow-up on your answer in afghanistan. you mentioned isis but you didn't mention the taliban. should we read that to -- >> no. to defeat isis and taliban. it's to make sure we put our national security interest first and defeat all of those folks that seek to do us harm. >> are you willing to negotiate with the taliban? >> i think right now the whole point of this is the president is receiving a plan and guidance from his national security team as he had asked for. that guidance is coming forward as we speak. he's continuing to meet with them. and there will be further updates from the department of defense as we move forward. as i mentioned at the outset the vice president has an event. i want to make sure the pool has time to set for it. we're around all afternoon. take care. good to see you.

thank you. >> so there it is. sean spicer of the white house press secretary wrapping up his daily briefing. lots of questions on the upcoming testimony that we're about to have before senate judiciary sub committee michael flynn right at the center of all this. he's not going to be testifying but the acting attorney general sally yates will be testifying as well as james clammer, former director of national intelligence. gloria, the point that sean spicer was trying to make is if the president of the united states had so much concern about michael flynn becoming the president's -- the president-elect's national security adviser, why did they renew his clearances in april of 2016? >> well, i was just talking about or communicating with a former senior obama administration official who said to me that he didn't work for us anymore. this is effectively a courtesy and you know about this, jim, this is a courtesy they extend to people. he wasn't -- they weren't aware

of all the situations surrounding flynn at that point. and so it was extended. and so -- but if you are going to become the national security adviser, the level of vetting goes way beyond that. and it -- as susan rice herself said to fareed zakaria, it was a separate and much more elaborate check than a security clearance. it gets into financial information, your relationships and it gets into your behavior. >> here's the thing. if just having a security clearance is all the vetting you need to be national security adviser, then today 1.5 million americans could be national security advisers. there are more than a million who has top secret security clearances. when you go into those senior administrations, they put you to a higher stand. keep in mine, flynn was not new to them. he'd been a very vocal spokes

person for trump. but let's put that aside. because if obama came do him on november 10th and said you really shouldn't trust flynn, you may understand does trump trust obama's recommendation? that's fine. and sean spicer said there we didn't know what the background was, why they felt that. on january 26th, sally yates, the acting attorney general and the trump administration goes to the white house counsel and tells them why, exactly why she's concerned about flynn. because he was lying she said when he denied raising sanctions, u.s. sanctions on russia in his communications with the russian ambassador. then they had the goods. it was only 18 days later that michael flynn was fired. keep in mind the night of a "washington post" story where it came out in public that he had lied to the vice president. so they had the goods. >> i want to go to jim acosta. he's still there in the briefing

room. what was your main impression? the point that sean spicer was making is that it was no secret that the president, the president at that time, president obama was not a fan of general flynn. >> that's right, wolf. i think the general take here is that this is a white house that is still very much on the defensive when it comes to the hiring of michael flynn for national security adviser. you heard sean spicer in the briefing in here talk about, quote, unquote, bad blood between president obama and general flynn. i think that, okay, president obama made sure that michael flynn was gone from his position at the defense intelligence agency during his administration, but at the same time, it doesn't sound like, unless we hear otherwise, there were a whole lot of other personnel recommendations coming from president obama to president-elect trump at that time. and for the president of the united states on november 10th, two days after the election, in a sit-down meeting with the president-elect in the oval office that went on for 90

minutes, for him to give that kind of warning to the president-elect, stay away from michael flynn, that is a pretty significant warning. but we do know, wolf, that president trump was very much a fan of michael flynn. you recall that news conference early on in his administration when he described media reports on general flynn as being part of a witch hunt. and just this morning he was blaming the obama administration for providing a security clearance to michael flynn. so i think it's fair to say at this point that this white house just really doesn't have a good answer at this point on michael flynn. they're blaming the obama administration for the security clearance of michael flynn, but at the same time, the president disregarded a personal warning from the outgoing president two days after the election to stay away from michael flynn. i think until we get an answer from the president himself, sean spicer's answers in this briefing room are just not going to suffice.

>> and nia, let me read to you these two tweets from the president this morning. the first one, general flynn was given the highest security clearance by the obama administration, but the fake news seldom likes talking about. that then he tweeted ask sally yates under oath if she knows how classified information got into the newspapers soon after she explained it to white house counsel, and sean spicer repeatedly was asked are you accusing sally yates of leaking that classified information and the simple thing that sean spicer said, the tweet speaks for itself. >> which i don't know what he means by that in terms of the tweet speaking for itself. he essentially wouldn't really answer. but the president is clearly trying to cast doubt on sally yates credibility. they see her as an obama hold over, an obama appointee, someone who basically has an axe to grind with this white house. we see again this president's tweets getting him in trouble,

right? the sort of constant talk about president obama and what president obama's administration didn't do in regards to flynn. again, that has essentially made obama or obama aides to come out and talk about this conversation. when spicer was leaving, was president obama right about flynn? was he right to warn you about flynn and it turns out he was. trump's inability to accept that he was wrong about flynn. >> it's all a diversion. you want to talk about leaks, you want to talk about sally yates leaking, toupt charyou wa charge the susan rice leak. the question is should flynn have been appointed national security adviser? it seems that there are serious questions there. they fired him 23 days later, whatever it was. and the question is why didn't he get that more extensive vet that he should have gotten? we know the president felt very loyal to this guy.

and that is probably the reason he got appointed. but should he have been given all these issues? >> right. gloria is exactly right. the question is why after a meeting like that eight days later does president trump say to michael flynn do you want to be my national security adviser. not do you want ab an adviser. do you want to be my chief national security adviser. i put that to a former trump campaign official and the answer came back i wish i knew. i think that that's a very common thing. gloria's reported on this. cnn broadly has reported on this which there are lots and lots and lots of doubts. from president obama to tramp campaign transition officials to sally yates. lots of doubts about this person, should this person about yo n your administration. i think the obviously answer is loyalty. he was the guy who was with trump from the beginning. led the lock her up chant. he was the most outspoken surrogate. donald trump likes. that he likes to reward loyalty.

>> and then he fired him. >> he fired him not because of that coinformation. because he lied to the vice president about it. what we're talking about wasn't even really the fireable offense though the timeline is exactly right. the fireable offense was he lied to the vice president. >> and maybe flynn didn't have a lot of other friends at that point. >> everybody stand by. jim, chris, gloria, we're going to have a lot more coming up, including special live coverage of today's senate hearing about russian interference on the election. monds. so, guess what? we call it cranberry almond. give kind a try.

[customer] have you ever walkedp into the paint store feeling like you should really know more than you know? satin versus semi-gloss, and...i don't know! [team member] yes...i know the feeling.

[customer] that's how i feel right now about all the financing options for this project i'm doing. i feel like i should know more than i know. [team member] don't sweat it. we have this new tool--my credit options guide-- that gives you a customized comparison like this, which helps you discover which credit options might be right for you. [customer] oh, this is better. they should make one for paint. [team member] want to get started? [customer] sure. you knmegared omega-3s... but did you know your eyes, your brain, and your joints really love them too? introducing megared advanced 4in1... just one softgel delivers mega support. at where instead of payinging a befor middlemen,em. we work directly with family farms to deliver higher quality ingredients

for less than you pay at the store. get $30 off at blueapron.com/cook tensioning, north korea contained a fourth u.s. citizen. a professor and possible bargaining tool with the u.s. our senior international correspondent ivan watson is joining us from seoul, south korea. >> imagine learning that your spouse has been detained in north korea on suspicion of plotting to hurt the north korean government. that's what happened to a woman over the weekend after her husband, an ethic korean and naturalize u.s. citizen was

detained. now he was angel call christian pastor who was teaching at pyongyang university of science and technology helping teach ing a cultural techniques. i asked his wife what message she has for north korea. here's what she said. >> she is is the second american working at that university to have been detained in just over two weeks. the other was a professor named tony kim suspected on similar charges.

and therein, a very serious now. not only because of the confrontation between pyongyang and washington over the nuclear program, but also because there are no diplomatic relations between the two countries and finally because north korea claims that it recently foiled a cia-backed alleged assassination plot targeting the supreme leader of north korea. so all of that ramping up real tension and pressure and part of why kim's wife is so worried right now and trying to send the message that her husband loves the north korean people and he's been falsely accused. >> moments from now, the former acting attorney general sally yates will testify about russian interference in the u.s. presidential election. our special coverage continues, right after this quick break. tz and b and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance

plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks, so you get to choose any doctor who accepts medicare patients. rates are competitive, and they're the only plans of their kind endorsed by aarp. remember - these plans let you apply all year round. so call today. because now's the perfect time to learn more. go long.

. i'm wolf blitzer in washington. this is cnn's special live coverage of what's expected to be explosive testimony from the former acting attorney general sally yates. it's the first time we're hearing directly from yates sibs she was fired tr defying his travel ban. minute trs now, she's expected to reveal to a senate subcommittee which e he told the trump administration about michael flynn and it's coming on the heels of a bomb shell from the former obama administration officials. they say the former president personally warned then president-elect trump against hiring