and if they actually got a special prosecutor, we'd start hearing from them. oh, he's going too slow, he's too partisan, he's not interviewing the right people. this is just resistance. >> jack kidnappingston, brian f thank you so much for both of you. at this hour, "inside politics with john king" starts now. his controversial firing of the fbi director, james comey. >> why did you fire director comey? why did you fire director comey? >> because he wasn't doing a good job, very simply. he was not doing a good job. >> did it affect your meeting with the russians today? >> will the new fbi director be

in charge of the russian investigation? >> just a few words there from the president. democrats assert that the time is no accident and that the president fired comey at a critical time in the investigation into russian election meddling. >> the question is, why did it happen last night? we know director comey was leading an investigation into whether the trump campaign colluded with the russians. a serious offense. what must happen now is that mr. rosenstein appoints a special prosecutor to oversee this investigatio investigation. >> now, the comey firing also shocked republicans, and a good number of them consider the timing improper, if not suspicious. but the senate's top republican tried to quash any calls for a special prosecutor or new special committee to replace the investigations already underway. >> today, we'll no doubt hear

calls for a new investigation, which could only serve to impede the current work being done. partisan calls should not delay the considerable work of chairman burr and vice chairman warner. too much is at stake. >> senator mcconnell there referring to the senate intelligence committee investigation. more on that in a bit. which us to share the reporting and their insights, karen tumulty of "the washington post," phil maddingly, margaretmargaret talif. a lot to digest, including some giant holes in the white house's splax of how and why this happened. i'm not a lawyer, but how is a attorney general who has promised to recuse himself in all matters related to the russian campaign investigation, then in this letter recommend the firing of the fbi director leading that same russia campaign investigation? let's begin with the immediate fallout. the president just spoke on this. also sent out vice president pence to make remarks on this up at capitol hill. cnn's jeff zeleny at the white house. the take us inside the white

house strategy. and they seem a tad defensive. >> reporter: defensive is one word for it, john. perhaps that's a charitable word for it, as well. i was here late last night and the white house was in fu full-court explanation mode. but trying to get on top of this story. quite simply, they were caught flat-footed by this, which is very difficult to imagine, really, unless you consider the fact that the communications shop here at the white house, and most people working in the west wing, i'm told, didn't know about it until right before it happened. i am told this was held by a very close group of people, the president, a few of his top advisers, people simply did not know it was going to happen last evening, around 5:30 or so. now, fast forward until this morning. the white house sent the vice president up to capitol hill to explain this, to essentially do a cleanup duty, if you will, which vice presidents also often are called upon to do. but the president is not expecting to address this. but you did hear him a short time ago in the oval office, saying that comey was not doing

a good job. well, john, if this white house is trying to tamp down comparisons to the nixon white house, having a photo op next to henry kissinger, the secretary of state for president nixon, also one of his national security advisers, is probably not the best way to do it. it looks like they're trying to double down on that. but separately happening, we're also getting some more information about specifically what went on in the days leading up to this firing. our sara murray is reporting that the director of the fbi, james comey, asked for more resources, more must be, to put toward the russia investigation. to ease concern from capitol hill, from senator richard burr and senator mark warner that this fbi investigation, this hill investigation, as well, was moving too slowly. this was earlier this week. they had the meeting on monday, of course, the firing happened yesterday. but, john, this is simply going to fuel the fire here, raise more questions that as immediately after the fbi director asks for more funding

for this investigation, he's fired. >> jeff zeleny, a busy day at the white house. i want to note that the department of justice is denying that, cnn's reporting. "the new york times" also reporting that director comey had asked rod rosenstein, saying he needed more money, more resources for his russian campaign meddling investigation. the justice department is denying that. but we are told by sources on capitol hill and "the new york times" is reporting this as well. we'll continue to track that. before we get to the panel, cnn's manu raju live on capitol hill. manu, leader mcconnell waved off any calls for new, more independent investigation. is that the final word or are there any cracks in the republican resolve? >> reporter: john, there are certainly cracks among republicans about exactly what happened here. a lot of concerns from republicans about the timing. what will you're not seeing, though, is unity from the republicans about what to do next. a lot of different ideas and some people supporting the president, like mitch mcconnell is and like chuck grassley, the senate judiciary chairman. but some raising concerns, like senator bob kcorker of tennesse, senator lisa murkowski of

alaska. but no republican yet is really embracing the idea of a special prosecutor. but there are some ideas for a special committee, something separate from the ongoing investigations that are happening on capitol hill. and one leading voice of that is senator john mccain, who is once again calling for a special committee and also, john, raising concerns about the white house's rationale for firing james comey. i had a chance to talk to mccain earlier today. >> why were you disappointed in this decision to fire mr. comey? >> because i believe that mr. ko ko comey is a good man and i don't think he deserved to be fired. >> you don't buy the clinton e-mail investigation that he mishandled the clinton e-mails, that's why he was fired? >> i don't believe that this is sufficient rationale for removing the director of the fbi. and i regret that it's happened. we have a lot of issues and challenges and this just diverts a lot of that attention. >> now, john, his arizona

colleague, jeff flaike, who sit on the senate judiciary committee, also raising concerns about the timing and the reasoning behind this firing. but like mccain, he's not ready to embrace the idea of a special prosecutor. and this comes as democrats meet privately behind the scenes to try to ratchet up their plans to move forward. and they disrupted the senate proceedings today, prevented committees for meeting for longer than two hours in order to voice their objections. so a lot of concerns from democrats, some concerns from republicans, but uncertain about what this means going forward and what this means for the investigations that are already taking place on capitol hill, john? >> manu raju live on the hill. thanks. we'll keep in touch as the day progresses. let's bring into the room, every adjective you can conceive is being used around town. the democrats saying nixonian, some people saying trumpian. whether you agree or disagree with the president, he meets with the russian ambassador and henry kissinger the day after doing this. a lot of that will add that to the tom clancy novel aspect of this. but where are we today? the white house is saying the

president decided to fire the fbi director because of how haenhe handled the hillary clinton e-mail investigation. that's their public line. they're saying essentially that he fired jim comey for the very conduct that candidate donald trump praised james comey for. so how do they intellectually connect those dots, or can they? >> first of all, this is not a white house or an administration that necessarily bothers to connect dots or bothers with consistency, even. but i do think that the events of the last 24 hours have really raised the political imperative here. however this investigation is conducted, it has to come to some kind of clear conclusion that is credible. now, whether that can be handled within the processes that are already set up, whether it's the sblebl intelligence committees on the hill or inside the justice department, is a real question going forward. and i think the pressure is going to continue to mount for

perhaps a select committee, perhaps some kind of separate prosecutor. maybe even a 9/11-style outside panel, to just take this out of the hands of politicians. >> but the white house doesn't want that. leader mcconnell so far holding firm against that. republicans believe, even the critics of trump believe, if something like that were to happen, forget this year. forget tax reform, forget health care, forget anything. you do a big commission like that, and year one of the trump presidency is frozen. >> it's a nightmare. and all you have to do is look back through industry. ask anyone in the clinton administration or bush administration. what happens when a trump administration starts up? you have to shut down. every day is dealing with document requests. it is a nightmare. i think bob woodward wrote a great book about special prosecutors and takeaway was, don't ever agree to this. nothing happens on capitol hill unless senator leader mitch mcconnell decides to change his

posture. i think the biggest thing, and manu hinted at this as well. last night up on capitol hill, first and foremost, i was the person who had to tell foreseparate republican senators what had happened. ne they weren't aware. the biggest question i got back from them, even those that have since put out statements supportive of the president's action is, why now? why are you doing this? you had a health care whin? a huge foreign trip in a couple of weeks. that can kind of reset your administration. why are you doing this right now? and one final thing, i just spoke to vice president mike pence, who gave an impromptu prmps on capitol hill. and he made clear, the administration has no desire despite their claims there is no collusion, noe evidence of collusion, to see a special prosecutor or a special panel. >> let's follow up on that point. a number of things said by senior administration officials. and one of the reasons they rolled mike pence out this morning is that the president was white hot last night. i'm told he's been hot about this for more than a week. the comey testimony last week,

then the clapper/yates testimony on capitol hill, he hears russia, russia, rust continuing, expanding, long-term investigations and he's mad about it. how does that get you to fire the guy leading the investigation? that's a different question. but he was very hot. the vice president in answer to questions from you and others on capitol hill, here's one of the things the vice president said. >> as you know, very clearly, as has been stated repeatedly and the president has been told, he's not under investigation. and as former director clapper of the director of national itelligence said, there is no evidence of collusion between our campaign and any russian officials. >> that's misleading. it's one of a number of statements from the white house that is misleading. director clapper said the other the day, when he said that, he was not aware of the fbi counterintelligence investigation into possible collusion. emphasis on possible collusion. we don't know the facts yet. but the vice president knows

that. the vice president knows that director clapper said publicly the other day, essentially, my prior statement is no longer operative. i did not know that the fbi had the investigation at the time. why zb why? >> the vice president also knows that words matter, as mike flynn's behavior towards vice few months ago, if in fact that was the totality of the reasons for mike flynn's departure. but i think this timeline and the question of why now really is the one that the critical members on both sides of the aisle are looking at. i talked to a number of administration officials who at least had some familiarity with some aspects of the decision making and heard kind of two stories that are not in conflict, but they present a -- they represent a range, right? and one was that testimony, most recently by jim comey, the mildly nauseous, but i would do everything again testimony, was like a turning point, a pivot point for president trump. and that combined with rod rosenstein's sort of support for this was enough for him. the other was that since last year, since the election and the

transition, president trump has had serious concerns about whether jim comey's the right fbi director for him to work with. somewhere in between last november, december, and a week ago, is the answer to this. >> i accept all that. we could sit here and bring in the brightest lawyers, former attorney generals in the world, in the country and have that good conversation, a good debate about whether jim comey's conduct in the last year and should he stay on as fbi director. i think there's any debate about that. but the man who fired him is under investigation by the man he fired. can he do that at this moment? >> trump can do things other people cannot do, as we have seen. i've been a little bit contrarian on the comey question. i think the americans put him in a difficult decision by nominating two people, one whose campaign was under investigation and the other whose staff was. and i don't think the good way to anhandle that was. even meatloaf got an in-person firing from trump and i think

comey deserves that. >> whatever you think -- >> this was handled in a classless way. comey found out by seeing it on television. >> and on its face, this explanation doesn't make sense, but i think what you're getting at, is there is this confluence of event wrus where you have rosenstein, who either was interested in taking comey out for these reasons, or was made the guy for taking comey out. his misfire on the huma abedin e-mails combined with trump's tendency to stew on things for a long time and make a very quick decision, it seems to all come together. i think an important fact is that the andy mccabe is no right-wing partisan. he's, the target of right-wing ire in the past for having been very close to the clintons in virginia during the whole clinton -- >> i didn't go to law school, but the attorney general who has recused himself from anything involving the russia investigation, but recommended firing the guy leading the

russia investigation is now interviewing candidates for interim fbi director, who will take over the russia investigation. somebody has to help me understand why that is not a direct conflict of interest? but from rod rosenstein, this is the memo here, essentially culled from op-ed pieces written by former attorney generals criticizing jim comey. this is not a new research project. and he makes the case -- he doesn't recommend firing him, but he says, you can make a case to fire him. and the attorney general says, lack at what my deputy says, i think you should fire him, mr. president. and then donald trump fires him, in this letter, firing him. it make is no mention of the hillary clinton e-mail investigation, but does note, just because, i guess, while i greatly appreciate you informing me on three separate occasions that i am not under investigation, i nevertheless concur with the department of justice that you're not able to effectively lead the bureau. the letter here tells you russia is very much on the president's mind. listen to kellyanne conway on television last night. >> this had nothing to do with

russia, as much as somebody must be getting $50 every time the word is said, i'm convinced, on tv, it has nothing to do with russia. it has everything to do with whether the current fbi director has the president's confidence and can faithfully and capably execute his duties. >> i just suggest she read the letter from the boss. it's hard to make the case it has nothing to do with russia, when you talk to friends of the president and others involved in this decision about how white hot he has been about russia, russia, russian in the news. if you're going to fire the attorney general and you're going to paycheck the case to the american people this was the right thing to do, you better make that good factual, credible case. here's the deputy white house press secretary, sarah huckabee sanders. >> it's been going on for nearly a year. frankly, it's kind of getting absurd. there's nothing there. we've heard that time and time again. we heard it in the testimonies earlier this week. we've heard it for the last 11 months. there is no "there" there. what we heard in the testimony

earlier this week was that the acting attorney general went to the white house and told them michael flynn was subject to blackmail by the russians and the president waited 18 days and only after that was publicly disclosed to fire him. we also heard jim clapper, the former director of national intelligence, said he couldn't answer a question about trump's russian business investigation because that was a part of investigation. so we actually learned a lot of new things. we don't know where they're going or the conclusions but there's a lot of stuff, credible things that are being investigated. and for her to go on national television and say, there's nothing there, go away, there's nothing to see. >> this is the sort of conundrum we keep seeing the white house communications shop, jeff was talking about them over and over again. they keep try to bring reality in line with donald trump's tweets, as opposed to dealing with the reality that has been laid out in testimony and elsewhere. don't forget, too, we found out this week that president obama had specifically warned incoming

president trump against hiring flynn. again, all of these things seem to. they're the context that all of this is happening in. >> sit tight. we'll continue the conversation. up next, why now? even some who say comey's firing was a good thing, acknowledge the timing, pretty bad. i've found a permanent escape from monotony. together, we are perfectly balanced, our senses awake, our hearts racing as one. i know this is sudden, but they say: if you love something... set it free. see you around, giulia ♪

stay with me, mr. parker. when a critical patient is far from the hospital, the hospital must come to the patient. stay with me, mr. parker. the at&t network is helping first responders connect with medical teams in near real time...

stay with me, mr. parker. ...saving time when it matters most. stay with me, mrs. parker. that's the power of and.

of your brain can make it hard to lose weight? contrave is an fda-approved weight-loss medicine that may help adults who are overweight or struggle with obesity lose weight and keep it off. contrave is believed to work on two areas of the brain: your hunger center... (woman) i'm so hungry. (avo) to reduce hunger. and your reward system... (woman) ice cream. french fries. (avo) to help control cravings. across three long-term studies, contrave patients lost approximately 2-4x more weight than with diet and exercise alone. contrave is not for everyone. one ingredient in contrave may increase suicidal thoughts or actions in some children, teens, and young adults within the first few months. other serious side effects include seizures, increase in blood pressure or heart rate, liver damage, manic episodes,

glaucoma and allergic reactions. do not take with opioids. reduce hunger, help control cravings. contrave. the #1 prescribed weight-loss brand. go to contrave.com. fmy doctor recommended ibgard. abdominal pain and bloating. now i'm in control of my ibs. nonprescription ibgard - calms the angry gut. this four-paragraph letter that last night the president fired james comey, the same james comey leading an investigation into election russia meddling in 2016, including the question of whether trump associates deliberately coordinated and colluded with the kremlin. as it was hacking into democratic e-mails and releasing them into the public. the president this morning on

twitter defending his decision. manage the tweets, the president says, quote, the democrats have said some of the worst things about james comey, including the fact that he should be fired and now they play so sad. james comey will be replaced by someone who will do a far better job, bring back the spirit and the prestige of the fbi. comey lost the confidence of almost everyone in washington, republican and democrat alike. when things calm down, they will be thanking me. that's the president on twitter this morning. and his aides say he came to the conclusion on the recommendation of the deputy attorney general that james comey had mishandled the hillary clinton e-mail investigation, so the president decided to fire him. well, here's candidate trump on james comey and his handling of the clinton e-mail investigation. >> and i have to give the fbi credit. it took guts for director comey to make the move that he made in light of the kind of opposition he had within trying to protect her from criminal prosecution. good job by the fbi. i have respect that the fbi has

given it a second chance. i really disagreed with him. he was not his fan, but i'll tell you what, what he did, he brought back his reputation. because there's a lot of -- a lot of people want him to do the right thing. what he did was the right thing. >> if what he did was the right thing, then months later, at a pivotal point in the investigation into trump associates and russian election meddling and apparently, according to our sara murray and "the new york times," days after james comey went to rod rosenstein and said, i need more money, i need more people, i have to expand my investigation, if he did such a great job, why do you fire him? what is new? what is new? you're right, the director misspoke about the e-mails in his testimony the other day. is there sympathetic substantially, transactionally new that makes you re-visit the clinton e-mail investigation now?

>> the memo, i guess, from the deputy attorney general -- >> which recycles a bunch of op-eds written in major newspapers back when james comey first came out and said he was clearing hillary clinton and after he came back out and said he was reopening the investigation, he was roundly criticized by republicans and democrats alike, they thought he overstepped his bounds. >> one thing that is new is rod rosenstein. they will argue that he was only confirmed two weeks ago. and that he was not -- their version is, this looking into comey was his idea, but whatever it is, that is at least their argument of what is new. >> well, rosenstein was confirmed with something like 96 votes. so he's not a terribly controversial figure. and then the other part of this is that, i think, you have to do it the reverse way, as well. which is, there would be nothing to recycle in this memo, had people had a consensus that he was doing a perfect job. and i'm pretty sympathetic to the job that he was put in the position of having to do, but i

think there is some revelation here that many people were being fairly, either, or not being truthful about the fact they didn't have confidence in him, or were being a little irresponsible with their rhetoric, including lawmakers on this subject. because if you don't have confidence in him, and then he's fired and you go, oh, that's the worst thing that's ever happened, i get all the arguments about timing and actually agree with some of them, but i think some of that rhetoric was a flip-flop, as well. >> and welcome to washington. rosenstein very much knows a straight shooter. he was confirmed 94-6 the vote in the united states senate. now he writes this memo, and again, based on good reporting, jim comey comes and says, i need more money. the question is, you tried to get the vice president to answer this question, and he diverted, is did rob rosenstein on his own decide, james comey, i've lost faith in him and i'm going to write this memo or did someone tell him, the president wants to fire james comey and he needs a justification to do so. >> it's a huge question in a list of unanswered questions we've got after 24 hours.

and preface with the fact that rod rosenstein was very well respected by democrats and republicans alike, george w. bush appointee in maryland. he was overwhelmingly confirmed in the senate. deputy attorney general, that is overseeing all of the components of the justice department. it is the coo of the justice department, understands, keeps an eye out, basically keeps the train running at the justice department. an enormous number of components that do all sorts of things. st it is a disaster of a job in general to try to control what the justice department controls. he comes into that role and decides that in his first 14 days, instead of trying to get a sense of what the atf is doing or different components are doing, even right to figure out how to get permanent attorney generals to oversee the justice department's divisions, he decides that he'll work on a memo to fire a very controversial or very well-known fbi director as his first job, his foremost job and the thick

thing he wants to do. i think the question that remains unanswered is, what was his motivation for doing this? al career official that the attorney general above him is recused from all of this. why did he decide, this is the first thing he need to do. >> and republicans control all of the committees on capitol hill, so the question is, which republican chairman and will the leadership, whether it's the speaker of the majority leader support that and say, it's tame to put rod rosenstein in the chair and ask these questions. federal grand juries have started issuing subpoenas for michael flynn's associates trying to get the records of the trips, the payments, the associations, the contacts with russians, whether it was above board, whether he deliberately left things off his forms for security clearance. that's one thing. and we saw from the president's tweets, he was paying very close attention last week when the former director of national intelligence was asked about trump and any russian business interests and said this. >> general clapper, during your investigation of all things

russia, did you ever find a situation where a trump business interest in russia gave you concern? >> um, not in the course of the preparation of the intelligence community assessment. >> since? >> i'm sorry? >> at all? anytime? >> um, senator graham, i can't comment on that, because that impacts the investigation. >> you have testimony like that. you have word, and certainly they're aware of this inside the justice department of the subpoenas that kcnn is reportin. you have reporting from sara murray and "the new york times" that jim comey wanted more money for this investigation. that is why if you are a trump critic or if you're just curious, and there's nothing new about the hillary clinton e-mail investigation, you can be pretty curious if not suspicious about the timing here. >> there are now at least three

ha high-profile people that congressional lawmakers on both sides all want to talk to. one is jim comey and doesn't everybody think that's probably going to eventually happen? maybe in closed sessions, may not be in public testimony, maybe a little bit of both. the other is rod rosenstein. and the third is michael flynn. because there is still the matter of -- that has not yet been publicly fleshed out, which is, was he just acting on his own in conversations with the rup russian ambassador, or was he acting with anyone's knowledge, nudging, suggestion, support, including the president? there are obviously more players, who would be interesting to hear from on a congressional panel, but i think when you look at those three, you have a good lay of the land. >> and the question now, we'll continue the conversation in a moment, they have an acting right now. then pick an interim and nominate somebody else. what will the administration say about the continuing of of that investigation and what happens to the investigations up on capitol hill? much more on the firing of the

fbi director, james comey, in just just a moment. enough said. reddi-wip. (flourish spray noise) share the joy.

it's my decision to make it's nbeauty last.ix. roc® retinol started visibly reducing my fine lines and wrinkles in one week. and the longer i use it, the better it works. retinol correxion® from roc methods, not miracles.™ won't replace the full value of your totaled new car.

the guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. no, i picked the wrong insurance company. with liberty mutual new car replacement™, you won't have to worry about replacing your car because you'll get the full value back including depreciation. switch and you could save $509 on auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance.

welcome back. the president of the united states today defending his decision last night to fire the fbi director, james comey, and on capitol hill, republicans brushing aside democratic calls for a special prosecutor, or for a special congressional committee to investigate and take over the investigation of russia election meddling, including the question of whether associates of then candidate donald trump were in some sort of coordination or collusion with the kremlin back in 2016, when all the election hacking was taking place. let's look now at some of the key players as this goes forward. leader mcconnell says, no, but ri richard burr, who has access to the most sense sieve information. he knows a lot of information that none of us at the table know. here's what he said. i'm troubled by the timing and the reasoning of director comey's termination. richard burr in part owes his re-election to president trump. but here, troubled by the timing and the reasoning. that's important.

>> it's a worthy statement. because the senate chairman of the intelligence committee has worked very, very hard to stay away from political statements of any kind or any statement that he could make that could be perceived as political as he has pursued the investigation of the intelligence committee is working on right now. i spoke to him this morning and my colleague, manu raju, spoke to him separately this morning. he made clear, the investigation is ongoing, it continues, they still believe it's bipartisan and that it can work. but the fact that he would raise any concerns at all, given his posture publicly given his position over the last 2 1/2 months is notable and something to pay attention to. >> and while i wouldn't question the sincerity of that sentiment, that is also, going forward with his concerns and his doubts, he's also, i think, building a case to keep this investigation in his own committee, as opposed to sort of taking it out of the purview of the committee and putting entitle either a select committee or some kind of commission. >> i think it's an important point, look, republicans can say whatever they want. they can have concerns, they can raise questions, they can go to the floor and say this was a bad idea. but until they actually take

action or try to put legitimate pressure on their leadership to change course or posture, it doesn't necessarily matter at all. >> i think it's important to point out, there aren't exactly zero republicans on the hill who have questions, senators in particular that have forceful questions about the russia question. i think there are plenty of them up there and the pressure they would put is in the discussion about who replaces comey. and that's where they can have, i think, some place to play, and where they can hold them accountable, before you get to pulling the trigger on yet another investigation. >> if there's a robust fbi investigation that continues throughout this process, what happens on the hill is perhaps less important. the scope of a political investigation is obviously deeper, and retcher, and in theory, less politicized than congressional hearings in the house or the senate. but the congressional investigations create a backstop, in case there are problems on that front. and for some of these lawmakers in both parties, their ability

to preserve their independence and their credibility is important, almost as a way to keep pressure on the continuing investigation inside the fbi. >> it was a great point. chairman burr said that he found director comey hob as forthcoming if even more forthcoming than any director when trying to get access. on the house side, a little bit more mixed on that view. the question will be, a week and a month from now when they ask for information, do that get that cooperation or sense there's a change in cooperation at the fbi? that will be a key thing. i think a lot of these republicans are buying themselves space. and a lot of them have worked -- richard burr not among them, but others have been critics of trump for a while or have raised questions about trump. is he too authoritarian, does he respect the rule of law, does he respect the separation of powers? among them, ben sasse of nebraska. regardless of how you think corrector comey handled the unprecedented 2016, this is troubling. the president said that jim

comey told him three times he was not under investigation. okay. i'm not saying we don't know that to be true, but we don't know how that happened, what the context was, you're not a target, you're not a subject, you're not involved at all. they seem to be creating space, that if a month from now, they don't sense cooperation or they think this is an effort to tamp down the fbi investigation, they've given themselves room to speak out. >> i think that's right. >> yeah, and i think that's right. and i think, look, senator sasse is one of those senators that has not held his tongue when he's had criticism when it comes to the russia issue, as well. but i will note, what he said publicly in that statement is repeated behind the scenes from just about every republican senator. >> and you hear dana bash was reporting this, they were taken aback at the white house. they thought that because democrats had been so critical of jim comey because of the clinton e-mail investigation, that the democrats, most of them, would be muted about this or supportive of this. >> it is stunning they thought democrats meant what they said. >> to your point, you say it

with a little snacker, but the democrats, if trump says good morning, they say bad morning. if he says up, they say down. some democrat statements early on, dianne feinstein's initial statement, very muted. the president called to give me a heads up, weh'll see who he nominated. today she comes out scathing. but much like the health care debate, what about the republicans? barbara come sea-tac usstack sa defend or explain tonight's actions. there must be an independent investigation. there are not enough republicans yet to demand it. but there are enough republicans who are keeping their cards, keeping their cards that if the president doesn't handle going forward well, this could change. >> the first bipartisan deal of the trump administration. >> that does go back to jeff zeleny's reporting, that this decision was handled by a very small group within the white house that did not include their communications professionals. it seems like -- and it goes to

president trump's management style, that this is the kind of thing that should have been vetted with your best people in the room. because it was obvious that essentially, every -- you know, everything was going to break loose. that the whole town was going to go nuts over this. >> maybe they don't care. maybe they don't care. you know, bad political intelligence or you meet with the russian ambassador the day after you fire the guy wloho's leading the russian investigation and meet with henry kissinger at a time of everyone's saying you're being nixonian. >> the man likes to triple down. >> when we come back, the fbi director has been fired. who's next? one republican senator on capitol hill says he doesn't like the man who's now the acting fbi director. this bar is made with cranberries and almonds. so, guess what? we call it cranberry almond. give kind a try.

a lower a1c is a lot witabout choices.tes but it can be hard sometimes, 'cause different sides of you struggle with which ones to make. well, what if you kept making good ones? then? you could love your numbers. discover once-daily invokana®, a pill used along with diet and exercise to significantly lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. it's proven to lower a1c better than januvia®. invokana® works around the clock by sending some sugar out of your body

through the process of urination. it's not for lowering systolic blood pressure or weight loss, but it may help with both. invokana® may cause dehydration, which could make you feel dizzy or weak when you stand up, so be sure to drink enough water. important side effects to know may include kidney problems, genital yeast infections, changes in urination, or potentially serious urinary tract infections. as is risk of fracture, or increases in cholesterol or potassium. ketoacidosis is a serious condition, which can be life threatening. stop taking invokana® and call your doctor right away if you experience symptoms. or if you have an allergic reaction, with signs like rash, swelling, or difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take if you have severe liver or kidney problems or are on dialysis. taking with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. the choice is yours. ♪

lower your blood sugar with invokana®. imagine loving your numbers. there's only one invokana®. ask your doctor about it by name. a. i asked for their candid and honest opinion about what i should do, about investigations, certain investigations.

and my staff recommended recusal. they said that since i had involvement with the campaign, i should not be involved in any campaign investigation. i have studied the rules and considered their comments and evaluations. i believe those recommendations are right and just. therefore, i have recused myself in the matters that deal with the trump campaign. >> that was the attorney general back in march. i don't want to dwell on this, but if you say in march, you're the nation's top law enforcement official, and you say in march, my staff has convinced me, i need to involve myself in everything involved in this, how can you two months later write a letter to the president saying, i recommend you fire the guy that i have vowed not to have

anything to do with. >> i think this is something larger, a calculation by the president that this is a big deal in washington and not a big deal in the country. that among his base and among many regular americans, this seems like jim comey, he's a weird, controversial guy. who cares? it's the president's prerogative. and that you know, average voters, average americans are not going to get hung up on whether jeff sessions recused himself on russia and clinton and whether that's hypocritical. that's the bet. i think, you know, 18 hours into the development of this, we don't really have any sense of how it's settling in with the american people. >> can i say to that point, when colbert went out and briefed his audience on this during i guess his monologue last night, when it was breaking live. they, at first, cheered about comey being fired, because they don't know which side they're on anymore, and they had to inform them that they're now on the other side and this was a bad idea. i think there is some sense that many in the country will be like, wait, weren't we talking about this guy being a bad actor for a year and how that's permeated the culture. >> we wanted him fired, just not by you. >> at the moment, the acting fbi director is andrew mccabe, who

was the deputy to jim comey. he, huimself, is under investigation by the department's inspector general. it's a controversy, his wife ran for office and took a lot of money from clinton allies, including terry mcauliffe. to complicate matters, you want to have trust in the fbi, here's senate chuck grassley, the senate of the judiciary committee, just moments ago to our colleague, manu raju. >> what do you think about mccabe as taking over as -- >> listen, if you're telling me mccabe is taking over, is that true? as has been said? okay, well, he's got political problems, because of helping his wife. and i don't think he's a person that should be taking over. >> you have that complication. now they're looking -- he's the acting. they're interviewing an interim. and back to the bee in my bonnet. jeff sessions is involved in interviewing the guy who will take over the investigation. now you have democrats -- >> you're not letting -- >> now you have democratic senators on capitol hill saying

they may tie up the weeds here. they may hold things up, use their procedural power to put the senate into fits until they get a special prosecutor. does that make sense? >> and this also goes back to the political calculation of the timing of this move. i mean, he's got a little bit of momentum coming out of health care, president trump has this big project ahead of him on tax reform and as -- this is just going to tie everything up, as long as it's hanging out there. >> can we also point out, that this has happened so quickly and so suddenly that the republican chairman of the senate judiciary committee was not aware who the person currently running the fbi is, which seems a little odd, particularly because the senator, as he noted, has had a real problem, now, acting director mccabe for a long time, based on what happened in the last year. so, i think, look, when it comes to the senate, as we all know very well and the majority of america doesn't, because they have better things to do, it only takes one senator to stop

everything from happening. and i know there's very real discussions going on behind the scenes right now, as if you just shut down the entire chamber. is that the only mechanism they have whether to force some action. not sure we'll get to that point. that's absolutely being considered right now. but i thought mary katherine made the best point, the fbi director, that vote for both party cenies is going to be the mechanism where they get answers. >> and there's a lot we don't know in the day after. you have the fallout the day after, the shock the day after, and everyone tries to figure out exactly what happened. up next, okay, fbi director jim comey just got fired, but one senator has a pretty interesting idea for his next gig what makes this simple salad the best simple salad ever?

heart healthy california walnuts. the best simple veggie dish ever? heart healthy california walnuts. the best simple dinner ever? heart healthy california walnuts. great tasting, heart healthy california walnuts. so simple. get the recipes at walnuts.org.

this is the schmidt's yard. and, oh schmidt, that's a lot of dirt. but there's plenty of time for scotts outdoor cleaner plus oxiclean to work it's magic. all while being safe to use

around plants and grass. guaranteed. this is a scotts yard.

i had a fun idea in the middle of the night. i think our committee, the intelligence committee, ought to hire james comey to director our

investigation. all right got clearances, knows the subject, man of integrity. >> oaks, there's nothing wrong with a little light heartedness and a little comedy in the middle of what many in washington think is a crisis over the fires of the fbi director. is there anyone at the table think jim comey will take it? jim comey, staff director, senate intelligence committee investigation? >> zero percent chance. >> i have no reporting on this. i would just say it's probably fairly unlikely. >> might be willing to just hang out, though. >> just chill for a bit. >> we've got less than a minute left. a final thought on where we go from here? >> i think that if president trump really was not trying to slow down the russia investigation and really was just frustrated with comey's tactics and past -- his choice for the next fbi director will be viewed as a litmus test for that. somebody like john pistole, an obama appointee, as well as a longtime fbi official, that would send a different signal. >> might change the narrative pretty quickly. >> i think margaret's right. this is the next step and we'll

know more about what this step was when we get to the next step, which is an unfortunate position to be in. but i think it's true. and i want to speak up for the idea of taking some space. and i think in the trump presidency, many people are like, unless you jump to the absolute worst conclusion immediately, you are complicit in some sort of wrongdoing. and that doesn't help us to get to the bottom of it. taking a little space and waiting for that next step is part of this process. >> let the dust settle. keep asking the legitimate questions. excellent point. standing by now live for what will be an interesting white house press briefing, wolf blitzer picks up our coverage after a quick break. started visibly reducing my fine lines and wrinkles in one week. and the longer i use it, the better it works. retinol correxion® from roc methods, not miracles.™ all umm...ed. you wouldn't want your painter to quit part way, i think you missed a spot. so when it comes to pain relievers, why put up with just part of a day? aleve, live whole not part. you want this color over the whole house?

then you're a couple. think of all you'll share... like snoring. does your bed do that? the dual adjustability of a sleep number bed allows you each to choose the firmness and comfort you want. so every couple can get the best sleep ever. does your bed do that? for a limited time save $900 - $1200 on select final clearance beds during our spring clearance event. only at a sleep number store or sleepnumber.com

following breaking news. president trump has just fired the embattled fbi director, james comey. >> it just doesn't make any sense! >> this is the kind of authoritarian behavior we've seen spread in other parts of the world. >> am i surprised by it? not necessarily. >> he's lost the confidence of people at the fbi. >> everybody's had a problem with comey. >> he's done his job well, and i don't think he deserves to be fired. >> the fbi has been way too involved in politics. >> this has not