digging th digging up this version of the document and providing it to the committee. soviet strategy to derail u.s. inf deployment undermining nato solidarity. i would ask unanimous consent that it be included as part of the hearing transcript and since the inmates are running the asylum, hearing no objection, we'll include it in the transcript. director pompeo, earlier this year dr. god son testified that he believes that russia was using efforts to undermine our missile defense employment and the inf treaty in keeping with these past practices. to the best of your ability would you agree that russia is using some efforts? >> yes. >> thank you. as i mentioned earlier, the fy 17 intelligence authorization act included two unclassified

provisions that i authored. one would be restarting that old active measures working group. a second would require additional scrutiny of russian ambassador officials who travel more than the prescribed distance from their duty station. in late 2016 when that bill was on the verge of passing, i personally received calls from high ranking obama administration officials asking me to withdraw them from the bill. i declined. the bill did not pass . approximate tased last week as fat of the fy 17 spending bill. i did not receive any objection from trump administration officials to include from our intelligence community. director coats are you aware of any objection that the trump administration had to my two provisions? >> no, i'm not aware of any objection. >> director pompeo? >> none. >> do you know why the obama administration objected to those two provisions in late 2016? i would add after the 2016

presidential election. >> well, it would be pure speculation. i couldn't -- i wasn't able to read the president's mind then and i don't think i can read it now. >> thank you. i'd like to turn my attention to a very important pro vegz visio law i know you discussed earlier, section 702. director rogers it's my knowing that your agency is releasing some classified estimate of the number of u.s. persons who might have been incidentally collected using 702 techniques. >> we're looking to see if we can quantify something that's of value to people outside the organize. >> would that require you going in and conducts searches of incidental collection that have been previously unexamined? >> that's part of the challenge. how do i generate insight that doesn't -- in the process of generating insight violate the actual tenants. >> you're trying to produce an estimate that is designed to

protect privacy rights but to produce that you will have to violate privacy rights. seems hard to do. >> yes, sir. that's why it has taken us a period of time and we're in the midst f a dialogue. >> is it going to be possible to produce that kind of estimate without some degree of inaccuracy or misleading information or infringing upon the privacy rights of americans? >> probably not. >> if anyone in your agency or for that matter director mccabe in yours, believes that there is misconduct or privacy rights are not being conducted they could come to your inspector general, come to your general counsel. i assume you have open door policies? >> whistle blower protections in addition, yes, sir. >> they can come to that th commu -- this committee. at least four different avenues. i'm probably missing someone. >> and anyone in their chain of command. >> i would ask that we proceed

with caution before producing a report that might infringe on american's privacy rights needlessly and might make it that much harder to reauthorize a critical program, something that director mccabe, your predecessor last week characterized as a must have program. not a nice to have program. thank you. >> thank you, senator cotton. senator harris. >> acting director mccabe, welcome. i know you've been in this position for only about 48 hours and i appreciate your candor with this committee during the course of this open hearing. >> yes, ma'am. >> until this point, what was your role in the fbi's investigation into the russian hacking of the 2016 election? >> i've been the deputy director since february of 2016, so i've had an oversight role overall of our fbi operational activity including that investigation. >> now that you're acting director, what will your role be in the investigation? >> very similar. senior oversight role to understand what our folks are

doing and make sure they have the resources they need and they're getting the direction and the guidance they need to go forward. >> do you support the idea of a special prosecutor taking over the investigation in terms of oversight of the investigation in addition to your role? >> ma'am, that is a question for the department of justice and it wouldn't be proper for me to comment on that. >> from your understanding, who at the department of justice is in charge of the investigation? >> the deputy attorney general who serves as acting attorney general for that investigation. he's in charge. >> and have you had conversations with him about the investigation since you're been in this role? >> i have, yes, ma'am. >> when director comey was fired my understanding is he was not present in his office. he was actually in california. my question is who was in charge of securing his files and devices when that information came down that he had been fired? >> that's our responsibility, ma'am. >> and are you confident that his files and his devices have been secured in a way that we

can maintain whatever information or evidence he has in connection with the investigation? >> yes, ma'am, i am. >> it's been widely reported that director comey asked for additional resources and you're saying you don't believe you need any additional resources? >> for the russia investigation i think we are adequately resourced. >> will you commit to this committee that if you do need resource r resources you would come to us? >> i absolutely will. >> have you not talked with the white house about the russia investigation. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> you have talked with jeff sessions about the investigation? >> no, ma'am. >> you have talked with anyone other than rod rosenstein at the department of justice about the investigation? >> i don't believe i have. not recently. obviously not in the -- >> not in the last 48 hours? >> no, ma'am. >> what protections have been put in place to assure that the good men and women of the fbi understand that they will not be

fired if they aggressively pursue this investigation? >> yes, ma'am. so we have a very active lines of communication with the team that's working on this issue. they are -- they have some exemplary and incredible leaders they work for and i am confident that those -- they understand and are confident in their position moving forward on this investigation as my investigators and analysts and professional staff are in everything we do every day. >> and i agree with you. i have no question about the commitment that the men and women of the fbi have to pursue their mission. but will you commit to me that you will directly communicate in some way now that these occurrences have happened and corre director comey have been fired? that you will find a way to directly communicate with those men and women to assure them they will not be fired simply

for aggressively pursuing this investigation? >> yes, ma'am. >> thank you. and how do you believe we need to handle to the extent that it exists any crisis of confidence in the leadership of the fbi given the firing of director comey? >> i don't believe there is a crisis of confidence in the leadership of the fbi. i suppose that's what some self-serving and i apologize for that. it was completely within the president's authority to take the steps that he did. we all understand that. we expect that he and the justice department will work to find a suitable replacement and a permanent director and we look forward to supporting whoever that person is, whether they begin as an enter ainterim dire permanently selected director. this organization in its entirety will be completely committed to helping that person get off to a great start and do what they need to do. >> and do you believe that there will be any pause in the

investigation during this interim period where we have a number of people who are in acting positions of authority? >> no, ma'am. that is my job right now to ensure that the men and women who work for the fbi stayed focused on the threats, stay focused on the issues that are of so much importance to this country. continue to protect the american people and uphold the constitution and i will ensure that that happens. >> i appreciate that. thank you. >> thank you, senator king. second round, five minutes each. >> mr. chairman, i want to go back to the question i asked you, director pompeo, i went out and reviewed the response that you gave to me and of course what i'm concerned about is the sally yates warning to the white house that michael flynn could be blackmailed by the russians. you said you didn't have any firsthand indication of it. did you have any indication, secondhand, any sense at all that the national security adviser might be vulnerable to

blackmail by the russians? that is a yes or no question. >> it's actually want a yes or no question, saerenator. this is a counter intelligence investigation that was being conducted by the fbi and not by the cia. we're foreign intelligence organization and i was not intending to be clever by using the term firsthand. i had no secondhand or thirdhand knowledge of that conversation either. >> so with respect to this cia, were there any discussions with general flynn at all? >> with respect to what, sir? he was for a period of time the national security adviser. >> the topics that could have put at risk the security and the well-being of the american people? i'm just finding it very hard to swallow that you all had no discussions with the national security adviser. >> i spoke with the national security adviser. he was the national security adviser. he was present for the daily brief on many occasions and we

talked about all the topics we spoke to the president about. >> but nothing relating to matters that could have compromised the security of the united states? >> sir, i can't recall every conversation that i had with general flynn during that time period. >> we're going to ask some more about it in closed session this afternoon. admiral rogers, let me ask you about a technical question they think is particularly troubling and that is the s.s. 7 question and the technology threat. last week the department of homeland security published a lengthy study about the impact on the u.s. government of mobile phone security flaws. the report confirmed what i have been warning about for quite some time which is the significance of cyber security vulnerabilities associated with the signaling system seven. the report says that the department believes and i quote, that all u.s. carriers are vulnerable to these exploits resulting in risk to the national security, the economy

and the federal government's ability to execute national security functions. these vulnerabilities can be exploited by criminals, terrorists, and nation state actors and foreign intelligence organizations. do you all share the concerns of the department of human -- the homeland security department about the severity of these vulnerabilities and what ought to be done right now to get the government and the private sector to be working together more clearly and in a coherent plan to deal with these monumental risks? these are risks that we are going to face with terrorists and hackers and threats and i think the federal communications commission has been tradieading water and i'd like to see what you want to do to really take charge of this and deal what what is an enormous vulnerability of this country. >> i share the concern.

it's a widely deployed technology in the mobile segment. i share the concern. the department of homeland security in their role kind of is the lead federal agency associated with cyber and support from the federal government to the private sector is overall responsibility. we are trying to provide our expertise to help generate insights about the nature of the vulnerability, the nature of the problem. partnering with dhs, talking to the private sector. there's a couple specific things from a technology standpoint that we're looking at in multiple forms that the government has created. i'm not smart. i apologize about all of the specifics of the dhs effort. i can take that for the record if you'd like. >> all right. i just want to respond before we break to senator cotton's comments with respect to section 702. glad to see my tax reform partner back in this role. you know mr. director that i think it's critical that the american people know how many innocent law abiding americans are being swept up in the

program. the argument that producing an estimate of the number is in itself a violation of privacy is i think a far-fetched argument that has been made for years. i and others who believe that we can have security and liberty that they're not mutually exclusive have always believed that this argument that you're going to be invading people's privacy doesn't add up. we have to have that number. are we going to get it? are we going to get it in time so we can have a debate that shows that those of us who understand there are threats coming from overseas and we support the effort to deal with those threats as part of 702 that we are not going to have american's privacy rights swept up? we need that number. when will we get it? >> senator, as you recall, during my confirmation hearing, we had this discussion. i promised to you that i would, if confirmed, and i was, go out

to nsa and meet with admiral rogers and try to better understand why it was so difficult to come to a specific number. i did go out to nsa. it was hosted by admiral ronlge. we spent significant time talking about that and i learned the complexity of reaching that number. i think the statements that had been made by senator cotton are very relevant statements as to that. clearly what i have learned is that a breach of privacy has to be made against american people have to be made to determine whether or not they've breached privacy. there is an anomaly there. there's issues of duplication. i know that there were under way in terms of setting up a time with this committee i believe in

june, as early as june, to address -- get into that issue. and to address that and talk through the complexity of why it's so difficult to say this is specifically when we can get you the number and what the number is. so i believe -- we are committed to a special meeting with the committee to try to go through this particular issue. but i cannot give you a date because -- and number because i understand the complexity of it now and why it's so difficult for admiral rogers to say this specific number is the number. >> i'm well over my time. the point really is privacy advocates and technologyists say that it's possible to get the number. if they say it and the government is not saying it, something is really out of sync. you've got people who want to work with you. we must get on with it and to

have a real debate about 702 that ensures that security and liberty are not mutually exclusive. we have to have that number. >> senator king, i understand you have some? >> thank you, senator. if this hearing had been held two weeks ago, we'd be spending the last two hours talking about north korea. i think we ought to pay some attention to. that director pom pay koe-- pom could you give us an update on the nature of the threat, some of the pressure we were feeling is relieved? is there anything going on that should make us feel better about that situation? >> senator, i don't see anything that should make us feel any better about this threat. we have a threat from flash points that something could spark and have a conventional war wholly apart from the issues we talk about with icbms.

it's a well-armed adversary. >> you're watching the senate intelligence hearing in the wake of firing the fbi director. we're back in just a moment. physically. from the moment i wake up on my tempur-pedic mattress i feel like i'm ready to take on the day. i don't have aches and pains from the previous day's training. and i feel like myself. i wake up feeling stronger, a better surfer a better me. ♪ find your exclusive retailer at tempur-pedic.com

what makesheart healthysalad the becalifornia walnuts.r? 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. and my brother ray and i started searching for answers. (vo) when it's time to navigate in-home care, follow that bright star. because brightstar care earns the same accreditation as the best hospitals. and brightstar care means an rn will customize a plan

that evolves with mom's changing needs. (woman) because dad made us promise we'd keep mom at home. (vo) call 844-4-brightstar for your free home care planning guide. fmy doctor recommended ibgard. abdominal pain and bloating. now i'm in control of my ibs. nonprescription ibgard - calms the angry gut. . a discussion now about russian hacking during the 2016 election. let's listen. >> but throughout democratic nations that are facing this threat, the more we inform our people of what the russians are trying to do and how they're trying to impact our thinking and our decisions relative to how we want to be governed and what kind of democratic institutions that we want to preserve, the better.

so my hope is the russians have overstepped to the point where people will say we absolutely have to do something about it and we absolutely have to prevent the current efforts in place as well as potentially offensive efforts. >> i think your point about open hearings and education is important. you and i were in the ukraine and poll laand just about a yeao is they said the best defense is if the public knows what's happening and they say it's just the russians again. and we have to reach that level of knowledge in this country. so i completely agree and hope that as much of our work as possible can be done in open hearing. >> thank you all for your service. thank you to all the men and women of all 17 agencies for the incredible service they provide to the people of the united states keeping them safe, doing

things that most people in america will never know nor be able to fully appreciate. mr. mccabe, a special thank you to you for stepping up to the battle field promotion and representing your agency quite well here. this part of the hearing will be adjourned and gentlemen, you have about an hour and six minutes and we'll see you in the other room. thank you. meeting is adjourned. >> we have been watching the senate intelligence committee hearing on worldwide threats. it was previously scheduled. however, in the wake of president trump's firing of fbi director jim comey, that took center stage in the issues dealt with by these various agencies. i want to bripg ng in our panel talk about this. as this was going on there was an interesting moment when you saw the chairman and ranking member leave. it now seems we know where he was going. to meet with rod rosenstein. that he the deputy attorney general was up there on capitol hill to meet with these folks.

this is significant. >> it's significant because there's been a lot of questions about whether he was the impetus to try to have mr. comey removed as the fbi director, a story that seems to be falling apart by the minute, if not by the second. >> to remind folks, it was hung on the white house by a letter that rosenstein provided criticism of comey and how he handled the investigation and his possibly role in the investigation of hillary clinton private e-mail and private server while secretary of state. >> right. and timing is everything. we're talking about the chairman and vice chairman of the intelligence committee getting out of a hearing where these questions are being asked of other administration officials about why mr. comey was now dismissed to now go up to a secure area to have a conversation with the acting attorney general. >> are they trying to say hey, were you asked by the white house to provide some sort of rational or even just asked to provide a recommendation maybe without knowing that this is

what was going to be used as the justification for firing comey? >> i'm sure they want to get to the bottom of what happened with the comey firing. we saw today some testimony that contradicted some of the reasons that the white house has given in terms of why they fired comey. the white house has said it because morale was flagging at the fbi and we saw mccabe say no, the morale was fine. a lot of the 40,000 core of the fbi had deep respects and deep attachment to comey. so i imagine that they're going to try to figure out what role rob rosenstein had in this. we were told that two weeks into that job that rod basically came to this white house and it was his idea to fire comey even though in this letter he never specifically makes that recommendation that he should be fired. it's sessions in a follow-up

letter who recommends that he should be fired. >> i think we understand why the story is changing, because evan perez and pam brown have reported that rod rosenstein is unhappy. he's very unhappy with the way the white house handled the firing of comey . if you're being pinned with the justification of the firing and you're unhappy it, clearly you don't believe your letter that you were asked to put into writing after meeting with the president is the real reason of the firing. otherwise you'd be plenty happy with it. >> you think he's being manipulated. >> yes. so it is really clear here that the white house had to change their story which they did. the problem is even as they're changing their story, it's falling apart because in the change story we learn that they're saying well, commey didn't have a lot of support in the fbi. well, today we learned that mccabe thinks he had broad support. nothing is holding together for the trump white house on this firing of comey, why it happened, how it happened.

nothing they've offered is holding together. >> fascinating moments here on capitol hill as we're getting a lot of questions answered. we're going to continue. of course the busy day is going to continue with these hearings on the hill. we'll be back with cnn special coverage in just a moment. wire? only t-mobile one gives you unlimited data with taxes and fees included. that'll save you hundreds. get two lines of unlimited data for a hundred dollars. that's right. two lines. a hundred bucks. all in. and now, the brand new samsung galaxy s8 is here. so what are you waiting for? get the new galaxy s8. plus get 2 lines of unlimted data for a hundred bucks. taxes and fees included. only at t-mobile. 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. ltry align probiotic.n your digestive system? for a non-stop, sweet treat goodness, hold on to your tiara kind of day. get 24/7 digestive support, with align. the #1 doctor recommended probiotic brand. also in kids chewables.

i count on my dell small for tech advice. with one phone call, i get products that suit my needs and i get back to business. ♪ ♪

the shlike a bald penguin. how do i look? [ laughing ] show me the billboard music awards. show me top artist. show me the top hot 100 artist. they give awards for being hot and 100 years old? we'll take 2! [ laughing ] xfinity x1 gives you exclusive access to the best of the billboard music awards just by using your voice. the billboard music awards. sunday, may 21st eight seven central only on abc.

. it is a huge day on capitol hill. we've been monitoring the senate intelligence committee hearings in the wake of president trump firing the fbi director jim comey. we got certainly a lot of answers and i want to bring in my panel to talk about this. certainly a lot of contradictions between what some of the witnesses were saying and what we have heard from the trump administration and from president trump himself. let's start with this one. we had heard, david, from sarah huckabee sanders that there was a loss in confidence among the rank and file in the fbi of director comey. was there really? that was the question. let's listen to this exchange between a senator and the acting fbi director asked about this very thing. >> is it accurate that the rank and file no longer supported director comey?

>> no, sir. that is not accurate. i can tell you that i hold director comey in the absolute highest regard. i have the highest respect for his considerable abilities and his integrity and it has been the greatest privilege and honor of my professional life to work with him. >> now, to quote the white house spokes woman sarah kuk ca sar - opposite of what we heard from the acting fbi director. >> now you have to ask who do you believe has a better finger on the pulse of what fbi think? mccabe or sur ra huckabee sanders. it just, again, each hour, brianna, we keep learning of another hole blown into the

narrative being shaped by the white house about how and when and why trump fired the man overseeing the investigation into his campaign's russia ties. >> i think there's something to be said about the tone that we've seen in this hearing as well. specifically mike pompeo when he was initially asked by senator wyden were you informed about this threat from michael flynn as the national security adviser and he said he was very defensive about it at first in answering that. moving on, he wouldn't answer the question. and i do think that, and david has said this previously, is that we are seeing president trump put his people in very bad positions. we've seen that from the lectern. we are now seeing that from his top security people, his top security advisers as well who are unable to really answer questions that he has created. >> manu raju is on the hill for

us. very busy day, manu. what are you learning? >> actually in the room right now next to me there's a classified briefing occurring between senators richard burr, the chairman of the intelligence committee, senator mark warner, the vice chairman of the intelligence committee and two senior justice department officials. the deputy department at this meeting right now. we're expecting to hear from burr and warner afterwards to brief us exactly what they learn. expect there would be some discussion about the circumstances surrounding the comey firing and whether or not mr. rosenstein suggesting he was the one behind the faring. we know there's concern from mr. rosenstein pointing to him about

the firing. we know there were subpoenas that were sent out to michael flynn associates by a federal grand jury. this is something that almost certainly, probably will be discussed in this classified briefing given dana role on this as well. this comes also as rod rosen stein may come before the senate judiciary commit. he's considering bringing him before the committee. >> do you want rod rosenstein come testify before your committee? >> i haven't said anything along that line. i can say i'm considering that but i'm going to talk to a lot of members before i would make a final decision on that. >> so a bit of news there,

considering bringing rod rosenstein before the senate judiciary committee. members of congress want to hear more about what led to james comey's firing. >> certainly they want want to know. manu, thank you. nia, if that were to go forward and there were to be questions asked, we assume these would be questions asked publicly that could be asked behind closed doors right now from the top republican on the intel committee of rosenstein. >> might be contradictory, might be damaging. this has been a very, very bad week. i said last week i thought it was one of the better weeks with the passage of health care. here you have a week where this president caused all of this. this was his decision to fire comey and i guess him and his aides deciding to pin it on the deputy attorney general there.

pin it on this reason around him having a feeling over hillary clinton, that investigation and in comey's handling of it. and it just goes to the competence of this white house. and how is it do -- how do they get past this? how do they make their way forward? >> and how did this decision come to be made? clearly it appears to be a close hold from top officials. a lot of people left out of the loop. but how did this not occur to someone that look, the deputy a.g. might not just go along with what you're saying if this is not really what's happening? >> i think there's two things. one is can anyone tell the president no? through the campaign we thought it would be his daughter ivanka trump. god forbid. but that's very troubling that no one can say to him, stop, you can't be doing this. >> or that he doesn't listen. >> you're right. that might even be more troubling. the fact of the matter is what he has done is reckless and as we talked about this hearing

right now, all these world threats. if you were to listen to what these gentlemen were saying outside of the fbi, it is very scary out there right now. >> you could even hear them trying to redeirect to say let' keep our eye on the ball. we're talking about potential nuclear nations. we're going to recontinue this conversation. we have a huge day we're following. this intelligence committee hearing really in the wake of president trump firing his fbi director. we'll have more in just a moment. think again. this is the new new york. we are building new airports all across the state. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov

if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, isn't it time to let the real you shine through? introducing otezla, apremilast. otezla is not an injection or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. some people who took otezla saw 75% clearer skin after 4 months. and otezla's prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you.

i just saved a bunch of money on my car insurhuh. with geico. i should take a closer look at geico... geico can help with way more than car insurance. boats, homes, motorcycles... even umbrella coverage. this guy's gonna wish he brought his umbrella. fire at will! how'd you know the guy's name is will? yeah? it's an expression, ya know? fire at will? you never heard of that? oh, there goes will! bye, will! that's not his name! take a closer look at geico. great savings. and a whole lot more. hauge day here in washingto. hearing from -- following president trump's firing of fbi director comey. david drucker, cnn political analyst and senior congressional correspondent for the washington

examiner. kirsten, some of the most fascinating parts of this hearing that we have been monitoring there on capitol hill are the contra dedictions that we're hearing from the white house and what we're hearing from president trump. one of the things had to do in response to yesterday, sarah huckabee sanders look into russian interference and she said, quote, that it was probably one of the smallest things they've got going on their plate talking about the fbi and this investigation. but here's what the acting fbi director said about that today. >> how many agents are assigned to this project? how many -- or personnel generally within the fbi roughly? >> i can't really answer those sorts of questions in this forum. >> well, yesterday white house press spokesman said that this is one of the smallest things on the plate of the fbi. is that an accurate statement?

is this a small investigation in relation to all the other work that you're doing? >> sir, we consider it to be highly significant investigation. >> you would not characterize it as one of the smallest things you're engaged in? >> i will not. >> kirsten, a purposeful mischaracterization it appears or an uninformed one by the white house about what's really going on here. >> yeah. i mean, when it seems like what happened here was that president trump made a somewhat impulsive emotional decision based on the reporting that we have that this was sort of brewing with him for a while, that he was upset with comey and it finally sort of boiled over. and then his underlings are left to make up explanations for why he did and that they're not holding up including that fbi director comey lost the confidence of the people at the fbi. that was flatly denied by the acting fbi director today in the

testimony. also in the letter that was sent to fire fbi director comey, donald trump made this sort of strange assertion that he had 33 times been to time -- three times been told he was not under investigation. today they asked the acting fbi director about that, is that standard operating procedure to let someone know they are not the target of an investigation and he said no, absolutely it is not. and so each of these explanations are falling apart. >> david, we do not know for sure that comey did not say that to president trump, but as we understood today, that was the acting fbi director saying that he didn't believe that that was standard operating procedure. but important to point out we don't actually know what these conversations were and we couldn't get to the bottom of that today. >> correct. i thought the significant part of the hearing was at the very beginning when senator richard burr asked mr. mccabe did these conversations ever take place. you know, for people that don't understand quite how this works,

the chairman of a senate or house committee really control sos mus so much of how that committee is going to operate. if the chairman wants to take it easy on the administration, there's not much the minority party with do. we saw richard burr was very unhappy with comey's firing and right out of the gate i think what he was doing was sending a message that he's very concerned about this and wanted to know more about that. i thought that set the tone for the entire hearing. for the president, this gets to a larger issue in why we've seen so many holes poked in the various stories that the administration has put out, including today during the hearing which is he continues to run the government, run his white house like his closely held family business where he can always count on the loyalty of his subordinates because he controls them, because he's their boss. and because basically he is the company. and it's just so much different in the presidency when you're operating with so many agencies where people feel fidelity to

the constitution and the country even though they serve at the pleasure of the president. obviously you cannot control congress, which is a competing branch of government, and so much of this gets him into trouble and had he simply prepared a foundation for wanting to zmdismiss comey, the could have done this in a way it would have made it easier for his allies on the hill to support thhim and much easier f the public to digest. >> let's listen to what you just referred to a moment ago which was mccabe being asked about these alleged conversations, these conversations that president trump says happened where comey, the former fbi director, told him he says on three different occasions that he personally was not underinvestigatio under investigation. >> you ever hear director comey tell the pet he was nresident h

the subject of an investigation? >> i can't comment on any conversations the director may have had with the president. >> all right, kirsten powers, so he can't necessarily commit to knowing that, but what does this tell you? >> well, i just think the fact that he was asked by senator collins what the standard operating procedure was. he made clear it's not standard operating pore to tell somebody they're not the target of an investigation. the fbi doesn't normally talk about the fact that they're doing an investigation. >> what do you say to people who also say it's not standard operating procedure, the things that were alleged by the deputy ag in this letter, that comey did thing that were not standard operating procedure at times. >> absolutely. that's fair enough. maybe he did on three times do this. i guess we need to have him, you know, testify to that one way or the other. it's just a strange thing to put in the letter i think. i do think that there are plenty

of reasons, i think that fbi director comey actually did behave quite badly in terms of how he sort of inserted himself in the election, whether that was his intention or not, but the problem is a person who, you know, at least has people who are close to him who are under investigation, whether he's under investigation or not, you know, to fire the person, that's where we get into problems. it's not -- it's just not -- it's not the same thing as if -- he was just firing him for what he did and there was no ongoing investigation, i think we would be having a different conversation. >> stay with me. huge day here in washington as we get some of the answers to these questions about president trump's firing of the fbi director jim comey. we are back in just a moment. y. what? who's replacing me? splenda naturals? look, she's sweet, she's got natural stevia, no bitter aftertaste and she's calorie-free. so that's it? we made you a cake. with sugar? oh, no. (laughing)

taking you live to capitol hill. let's listen in there on capitol hill. >> i'll give you about five more seconds and that's going to be about it. vice chairman and i wanted to come out. we just had a meeting with the

deputy a.g. it's a request that we made prior to director comey's departure and it so happened that the timing of it meant that today was the earliest possible time that we could put it together. we didn't want to miss the opportunity. since the committee has an investigation going on that is very similar to what the department of justice has going on, we felt that there was a great need to set up a process for deconfliction so when we had witnesses we needed to talk to we weren't stepping on anything that might be an active investigation. today we were able to share that with the deputy attorney general and we feel like our investigation can go forward with a fairly good understanding

of the rules of the road. >> i simply want to add that i think it was a productive session, but i still have concerns about mr. rosenstein in terms of his role in the comey departure, in terms of the memo. i expressed and this is where again the chairman and i just disagree in terms of the needs for this narrowly tailored independent counsel, i expressed that concern to mr. rosenstein. he took it under advisement. i think as well to pivot back to the worldwide threat hearing, i think it was important, again, to get all of the leadership of the intelligence community, again, on the record saying they were 100% certain that russians interfered in our elections. they were agents of the russian spy services. it's remarkable to me that it seems like this administration

still denies that happened. and i thought it was very appropriate to get mr. mccabe on the record that if he has any -- sees any attempt of any political influence from the white house to try to squash his investigation he will hospital it to the committee. >> i think it's primportant to point out that the place we have 100% agreed and that's that regardless of what happens by the justice department or by the fbi that the investigation that's done by the senate intelligence committee will continue on its current course as aggressively as we're able to based upon what we glean. we continue to hold interviews. as was noticed last night, we issued our first subpoena. i hope it's our last because everything else might be voluntary, but in the absence of voluntary participation, we're willing to go to whatever basket of tools we feel is necessary.

>> mr. chairman and vice chairman, did the deputy attorney general describe mr. comey's firing and if the white house portrayed it accurately? >> that wasn't the purpose of his visit with us and i would ask you to maybe put that question to him or to the white house versus to us. >> did he express any concerns about the circumstances of mr. comey's firing? >> we didn't get into details about his involvement. you've got a copy of what he wrote. this is an individual that comes with unbelievable background. certainly he fills the role. our purpose of meeting was to make sure that we had a way forward that both the vice chair and i understood and felt comfortable with. >> let me just add to that that, again, i voted for this individual. he comes with a solid record.

i was very disappointed. i still find the timing of mr. comey's dismissal, with sally yates testimony on tuesday and jim comey was supposed to be in that hearing today. very troubling to me. it's one i expressed to mr. rosenstein. >> what do you mean that he took it under advisement, special counsel? i think he listened. i felt this is an individual that listened carefully and i think he's -- he -- >> on the worldwide threat report, mr. coats described a rising threat from russia, their cyber power seems to be able to mess up elections worldwide. what's your reaction to that? >> i think that's consistent with everything as a committee we've looked at. an increasing desire on russia's part gee graphically to have a presence. what looks to be aggressive in

french elections, potentially german elections. we might have a hearing in the not too distant future that gets into those elections outside of the united states. so the american people understand just what russia as an adversary today is attempting to do. >> one of the things i find so troubling and this goes across all cyber threats, but i've heard one expert indicate that if you add up all of the costs of what russia has spent trying to disrupt our elections, the french elections, what they'll spend to disrupt the german elections, the fact that the dutch had to hand count their ballots because of fear of russian interference, you add that all together, that is less than 5% of the cost of an aircraft carrier. as we start thinking about threats that are posed in cyber is one of the reasons why i think cyber could be our greatest vulnerability. >> that's why today's hearing is

probably more important than anything else mark and i will do today. it's so share with the american people just how that threat has changed. >> have you invited director comey to appear? and if so, what do you hope to achieve by doing so? >> we have sent former director comey a request to brief the committee next tuesday. at this point i have not gotten a response back on that. >> senator burr, did mr. rosenstein confirm that he threatened to quit over the handling of the comey firing and did you ask him about that? >> we didn't ask him about it. he didn't share it with us. >> to what extent until now has the investigation required cooperation from the fbi? to what extent in the future will the investigation itself require cooperation? >> i think mark and i have shared continually that we've had unprecedented access to

information. unprecedented access to interviews. that to date we have not been denied. sometimes we've had some very crucial negotiations to get to folks that we felt we needed to talk to. but we're confident that everything we've done up to this point has been items that were needed in an investigation and that the level of cooperation existed. and that's why meeting with the deputy a.g. today was important. because that puts -- that keeps our pathway open. >> i would simply echo that we both have sometimes been concerned around the pace of the investigation, but a lot of that is we are in uncharted territory with a lot of these intelligence communities. so it is at times it's not been because the chairman and i have had a disagreement. it's been because they're an area -- there's no playbook for how they share this kind of information with not only a

congressional committee, but with the staff that we've got dedicated. >> is your pathway open between your priorities and fbi priorities and is there any concern from both of you -- i know that you disagree on this, that a special counsel could interfere with your work? >> i don't think -- i make no judgment on whether a special counsel would interfere. this investigation will go forward and will be completed. it's a commitment that the vice chairman and i have with each other. he may have a different opinion as it relates to an independent counsel than i do, but we share one similarity. we're both committed to finish this investigation by the senate intelligence committee because that's our job. and we're going to do it right because that's what's expected of us. and anything short of that is to say to 85 other members of the united states senate and the american people we're the wrong ones to do oversight on a daily basis. we believe we're right and we're