campaign and trump prizes loyalty. for reasons only trump knows he is staying away from this controversy on this one issue. could it be the president is a closet eagles fan? don't forget the kick off in minnesota with our great team. anderson starts next. >> so that happened. john berman here for anderson. why, what is the motivation from releasing a four page document accusing misconduct by people running the investigation. many of them republicans. what if anything does it omit, blur or distort? how much of it is even news? does it make the case that its

author, and most importantly the president is claiming it does. >> i think it is terrible. i think it is a disgrace. what's going on in the country is a disgrace. the memo is sent to congress and was declassified. and congress will do whatever it does. and it is a disgrace. when you look at that and so many other things that are going on. a lot of people should be ashamed of that. >> he wants release before he had a chance to read it. he has been telling friends would discredit the russia investigation. you should know the key items in the memo itself. the major complaint centers on the fisa surveillance court warrant obtained in 2016 for carter page. the memo alleges that mccabe

told the house intelligence committee that no warn the would have been sought without the steel dossier information. christopher steel was hired by the company and later hired by dnc campaign. was the clinton connection disclosed? even though according to the memo this was known to senior fbi and democratic officials. officials identified in the memo assigning one or more of those fisa applications include sally yates, dana boente.

james comey, departed andrew mccabe and the current deputy attorney general rod rosenstein. targeting carter page by not revealing who was paying. keeping them honest, as cnn has been reporting, carter page was by 2016 no stranger to u.s. counterintelligence. something that was under scored in the situation room. >> a lot known by carter page. carter page had come to the attention of the fbi years before he joined the trump campaign in connection with the russia intelligence net work in

york. >> on top of that, fisa warrants had to be renewed and a case made for renewing them every 90 days. the court renewed this 13 times. even if you believe everything alleged by the memo all of it, he was not even the spark for the russia investigation. how do we know that? it is in the memo. the memo itself says the fbi launched a counterintelligence investigation on george poppa doplis. months before asking for a warrant on carter page. if the memo was designed to discredit the russia investigation, that in itself

discredited the memo. the fbi run by the president's hand picked director, a republican says the document is marred by omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the document's accuracy. the statement from john mccain is scathing. the latest attack serve no american interest, no parties, no president's only putins. the american people deserve to know all of the facts surrounding russian's -- including the president must stop looking through the investigation stthrough the len of politics. yet for all the sound and fury, for all the build up surrounding

this memo, for all the distrusted souls who were formerly held in high esteem, others argue just how little substance there is. james comey, tweeted that is it? dishonest and misleading memo wrecked the house intel committee, destroyed trust with intelligence community damaged relationship with fisa court and inexcusably exposed classified investigation of an american citizen for what? doj and fbi must keep doing their jobs. those two words for what goes straight to the heart of it. and perhaps the best answer we have comes from the one person who can act on the memo that he so badly wanted out there. >> confidence in him? >> you figure that one out.

>> in a moment democratic house intelligence committee member he himmes. >> first, as part of the justification to win approval to secretly monitor a trump associate. the interesting thing that what i read from you that is from an article from april april of last year. what is the big revelation in the memo? >> salacious unverified. and when they go to the court they don't tell me them that it was democrat finance opposition research paid for by the clinton campaign. they don't tell them about the

ohrs. they don't do it once or three times. four separate times. critical information about getting a warrant about fellow citizen. and that is what this memo discloses today. >> he was referring to part of the dossier. he never said all of the dossier was verified. >> he said it under oath in front of congressional committee. >> referred to part of the dossier. and we all know what part they were referring to. he told people behind closed doors unless he told you. >> why he didn't disclose it because they knew they took it to the court. >> in your own memo says minimally corroborated.

but if i can move on. >> it was about russia and the person that they were looking at was carter page. they fgot the name right and be the country right. so some things that were accurate. >> they got the fact that russia meddled. mccabe testified before the committee that no surveillance warrant would have been sought without information there. did andy mccabe say there would have been no warrant without the dossier? >> everyone knows the dossier was the basis for getting the warrant. mccabe said but for the dossier we would not have got the dossier. >> sought. and information. so when you say dossier

information, the plimplication points out to other research. >> they use the same information presented as a separate piece of information that corroborates the dossier. >> do you know that was all that was used? >> i know what the memo says and i have called for releasing the underlying documents. >> by your agreement -- >> but i trust when trey gowdy went to look at the underlying documents i trust that. i called for -- >> trey gowdy never said -- to release this information to the judiciary. >> trey gowdy never said it was the only corroborating information. >> i didn't say. that i said he reviewed the underlying documents. >> i want to bring in jim himes. you guys both agree to come on with each other.

so no one is being ambushed. to you, you heard talking about there. the suggestion is that the steel dossier was the only reason there was a fisa warrant. did andy mccabe say that to your committee? >> i was in the room when mccabe testified, jim jordan was not and that part of the nunes memo is flat out wrong. that is not what mccabe said. anybody who knows anything about fisa warrants they are r rigorously vetted and presented to a federal judge. a federal judge who is hardly in the business to allow shoddy work to permit a warrant to spy on citizen. that part is outright false. >> what did he say? >> it is true that elements of the steel dossier, and let's

take a big step back. >> now it changes. >> nothing changes. difference of elements of and essential to. and still, we don't know what is true and what is false. nobody is saying that everything in it is false. if the fbi was going to present elements of a dossier to a federal judge this would have put it into context. >> is it clear, that the article from april 18 -- >> let me say something. is it essential to tell the court who paid for the document. and my understanding is it might have been four separate judges. and not tell them it is a democrat/clinton. not the mention that the ohrs didn't disclose that either.

>> should the fisa judge have been told that the steel dossier was funded by the dnc and clinton campaign? >> interestingly enough, let me get to that. but the work of fusion gps and the work of christopher steele started out by a republican entity. >> i have to stop you. i think we believe fusion gps was hired by the washington free beacon first and yes they were funded. but steel did not come on -- >> hang on. the question at hand here is whether the fisa judge should have been told about the source of the funding. >> another misleading almost. the notion that the judge was not told. the context in which this information was developed is incredibility. whether individual americans were named specifically is a different question.

when you are applying for a fisa barnett you wou warrant you would mask the names. so the notion that they hoodwinked the judge which of course is the core here, is just not supportable by the evidence. >> was the judge informed it was a democratic source or just a political source. >> that i do not know. like devin nunes i have not actually reviewed the fisa application themselves adam schiff and trey gowdy have. that work was originated by a republican opposition research effort. >> and congressman jordan you haven't seen either. >> no we are not permitted to. i called wray show us the application.

show us the information. >> he was suspected for an agent. and that was why they were asking for a warrant to surveil. >> if you had other information on carter page, why didn't you use it. why did you rely on the dossier. >> congressman himes was clear. they didn't tell the court that the democratic national committee paid for it. >> like the nunes memo that is a mi misrepresentation of the facts. remember this, congressman jordan said four times they went to the fisa court and that is exactly right. four times they went and under the rules each of those times when they apply for a renewal of that fisa warrant, they would have to convince the judge not just that the original

information was solid, but that the surveillance was producing a new evidence. that is indicative of the fact that these wiretaps or whatever they were were developing new and different evidence quite apart from whatever was used in the dossier. >> they didn't tell them who paid for the dossier. they didn't tell them about bruce and nellie ohr. >> every time -- >> every time they -- >> every time they go to the judge, they have to make the case a new time. in your own memo, suggests here that it was an essential part of the application. you keep saying it is the exclusive part of the application. >> i am saying what andrew mccabe said. but for the dossier, we wouldn't

have sought the warrant. >> i was in the room. >> i am saying what the memo discloses which is andrew mccabe communicated this was an important reason for seeking the warrant. >> that is not what andrew mccabe said. >> and what did he say one more time? >> what the nunes memo alleges mccabe said is not accurate. it is true that information from the steel dossier was part of the application. these applications contain all sorts of information. but the notion that they never would have gone after carter page is just inaccurate and as we know, carter page had been an interest to the fbi years prior. >> why didn't they do it before? why didn't they do it before? why was it that the dossier prompted it. >> the dossier -- to answer your question is the dossier did not

exist when the fbi first started investigating carter page. >> hang on for one second. this is a great discussion but i would like to take a quick break and continue this discussion in just a minute. # money managers are pretty much the same. all but while some push high commission investment products, fisher investments avoids them. some advisers have hidden and layered fees. fisher investments never does. and while some advisers are happy to earn commissions from you whether you do well or not, fisher investments fees are structured so we do better when you do better. maybe that's why most of our clients come from other money managers. fisher investments. clearly better money management.

need a change of scenery? the kayak price forecast tool tells you whether to wait or book your flight now. so you can be confident you're getting the best price. giddyup! kayak. search one and done. i look like most people. but on the inside, i feel chronic, widespread pain. fibromyalgia may be invisible to others, but my pain is real. fibromyalgia is thought to be caused by overactive nerves. lyrica is believed to calm these nerves. i'm glad my doctor prescribed lyrica. for some, lyrica delivers effective relief

for moderate to even severe fibromyalgia pain. and improves function. lyrica may cause serious allergic reactions, suicidal thoughts or actions. tell your doctor right away if you have these, new or worse depression, unusual changes in mood or behavior, swelling, trouble breathing, rash, hives, blisters, muscle pain with fever, tired feeling, or blurry vision. common side effects: dizziness, sleepiness, weight gain, swelling of hands, legs and feet. don't drink alcohol while taking lyrica. don't drive or use machinery until you know how lyrica affects you. those who've had a drug or alcohol problem may be more likely to misuse lyrica. with less pain, i can do more with my family. talk to your doctor today. see if lyrica can help. it was always our singular focus, a distinct determination. to do whatever it takes, use every possible resource. to fight cancer. and never lose sight of the patients we're fighting for. our cancer treatment specialists share the same vision. experts from all over the world, working closely together to deliver

truly personalized cancer care. specialists focused on treating cancer. using advanced technologies. and more precise treatments than before. working as hard as we can- doing all that we can- for everyone who walks through our doors. this is cancer treatment centers of america. and these are the specialists we're proud to call our own. treating cancer isn't one thing we do. it's the only thing we do. expert medicine works here. learn more at cancercenter.com cancer treatment centers of america. appointments available now. . back talking about the nunes memo with two congressman who have graciously appeared both at the same time. jim jordan and democrat jim

himmes. a fascinating part of this memo put out today which says the russia investigation, the fbi launched a counterintelligence investigation back in july of 2016 which is months before they sought the fisa warrant on carter page. so the russia investigation wasn't based on the dossier, correct? >> well, john, it is one thing to start investigation entirely different matter to go to court to get a warn trant. peter strzok -- i mean holy cow th , this guy has no credibility left. >> he was assigned the investigation. >> he is the agent. he is the agent who was said we are going to launch this investigation in july. peter strzok gets this

credibility. >> i don't think the agent gets to decide who launches the investigation. >> he is only deputy head of counterintelligence. and in july of 2016, they launched the investigation and peter strzok was the one who cited in the memo. they got the warrant using dossier. and here is another thing they didn't tell the court. christopher steele's relationship -- working for the fbi. he broke a fundamental trust and yet they still used the dossier to get the warrant. that is a big concern. >> congressman himes if you can comment on the revelation. we heard a long time, you feel the investigation was launched by the dossier.

it makes clear there was an investigation predating the dossier. >> no question what is true and what is sad in this instance is a small group of republicans, a meaningful group of republicans are seizing on strzok's texts back and forth. despite the fact that strzok had nothing to do with the initiation of the investigation. at a time where obligated to point out. lindsey graham who said this is a profoundly exercise. you know, the good news is that while too many of my colleagues seize on irrelevant misstatement, rumor to try to do the work of damaging the fbi and order ultimately to put pressure on rosenstein and on the investigation.

calling this the efficient what it is. and deeply partisan. >> let me ask you specifically on that point. if it says things if this memo says things about the fbi or the investigation that is untrue, i can understand why they object that. having read this now multiple times did the sky fall in here? was anything revealed here that hurts the way the fbi does business? whether or not some of the charges in here are true. >> well, by and large, i would say perhaps in this instance not because it has not been a particularly well kept secret carter page is not of interest. the precedent established by this memo is that in a deeply partisan move, and by the way, those are mccain and graham's

words not mine. declassified without any review about the agency's concern. none. declassified something that in another instance might actually be very dangerous. so now we have a precedent that in a deeply partisan move, a committee of congress saying we are going to declassify this. >> the fbi director did get to see it. he may have objected to it. >> of course he objected it. the fbi put out a blistering memo and you know the fbi doesn't usually do this basically saying this is a terrible thing to do. >> congressman jordan, i want to get to the people named in the memo and i think that is a big part of it. i assume was to name names here. >> stop abuse of the fisa process.

>> by the people named in this many of whom are still in power. if rod rosenstein who is named here. >> comey is gone, mccabe is leaving. g jim baker has been reassigned. lisa page has been reassigned. and bruce ohr is demoted. i am talking about the top people at the top. we have seen them leave and demoted because they have done things wrong. >> i asked about rosenstein. we called for it six months ago, a second special counsel. >> do you want him to go? >> no i want a second special counsel to look into this. >> dana boente was named.

you have a four page memo -- >> second special counsel will get to the bottom. >> why wait to tell me if you think it is a good idea to have him working at the fbi. >> i have waited. we called for a special counsel six months ago. mueller can't expand this probe he is inherently compromised. i don't know of any other remedy where you can get to the bottom to this. >> is mueller compromised by this memo because i was told by gowdy it is not about mueller. >> i am talking about a second special counsel to look at the fbi. he has got that investigation going on. what i am talking about is for

this entire manner. >> really, gentlemen, thank you very much. i appreciate you agreeing to appear on the though together. turn up your swagger game with one a day men's. ♪ get ready for the wild life a complete multivitamin with key nutrients, plus b vitamins for heart health. your one a day is showing. but he hasoke up wwork to do.in. so he took aleve. if he'd taken tylenol, he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the strength to stop tough pain for up to 12 hours with just one pill. aleve. all day strong.

directv has been rated number one in customer satisfaction over cable for 17 years running. but some people still like cable. just like some people like pre-shaken sodas. having their seat kicked on an airplane. being rammed by a shopping cart. sitting in gum. and walking into a glass door. but for everyone else, there's directv. for #1 rated customer satisfaction over cable, switch to directv and get a $200 reward card. call 1.800.directv

the president is in mara laga perhaps weigh a personnel decision. he has been telling friends would discredit the russia investigation. deputy attorney general rod rosenste rosenstein sees the memo. >> you figure that one out. >> deputy white house press secretary hogan. >> there are no conversations or considerations about firing rod rosenstein. >> were there considerations

about firing rod rosenstein. >> not to my knowledge. >> never been these conversations? >> not to my knowledge. the memo dropped and everyone went into a frenzy. we huddled up and it has been clear. there are no conversations and no considerations about firing rod rosenstein. >> does the president have confidence in rod rosenstein. >> we have said many types if the president doesn't have confidence in you -- >> is that yes? >> he has confidence in rod rosenstein. >> if he didn't, he wouldn't be there. >> the reason i am asking is because, again, he said this today. let's play it again. >> do you have confidence in him? >> you figure that one out. >> so you figure that one out. you just told me yes.

the president said you figure that one out. >> i guess the media couldn't figure it out. i guess that is why i am out here tonight to tell what you he has been talking about. we haven't considered this move. rod rosenstein is in place and he is not going anywhere. >> if rod rosenstein called the president tomorrow and said hey, i am out. i am submitting may resignation, do you think he would tell him f not to? >> i don't know. >> if nikki haley quit tomorrow, do you think the president would be happy about that? >> i can't get into his head. i would be sad to see her go. but that is not my decision. >> would you be sad to see rod rosenstein go? >> i wouldn't be sad --

>> you wouldn't be sad? >> i don't know him. you brought up nikki haley. i know her personally. the president has no desire to fire rod rosenstein. >> all right. so the president put out that statement. we played it earlier talking about the memo. he says it shows a lot of bad things are going on in america. this morning he put out a statement saying the top leaderships and investigators of the fbi and justice department have politicized the sacred investigation. >> the president has extreme confidence and respect. subsequent reports and reviews have come out and we have seen there has been an apparent clear political bias. >> by whom?

>> peter strzok for one. >> beyond peter strzok. the people who are named in the memo include rod rosenstein. and dana boente. are they the leadership of the fbi and justice department who politicize the process. >> this memo raises concerns. >> are they at the highest level? >> when they can use the most intrusive surveillance tools against american citizens, i think americans should be concerned. >> should they be concerned that boent signed the memo?

>> lastly, the memo does not impugn the mueller investigation. does the president agree with that assessment? >> that what? >> that this memo doesn't impugn the mueller investigation. we are not talking about the mueller investigation. the fact of the matter in the height of a presidential campaign, the fbi and the doj signed fisa warrant applications bought and paid for using information bought and paid for by the democrats and did not tell the judge about it. again, should be concerning to most americans. >> it was three weeks before election day when the fisa warrant was signed and the american people didn't know. this is the fbi that repeatedly told the american people what

was going on. >> falling all over themselves to release this bit of information about the dossier with no sourcing whatsoever. you guys ran it wall to wall. the biggest news story in the world. >> january. >> and you didn't want to talk about this and release this information at all. democrats have to pick a lane here. >> you said january. it was not the height of the campaign. >> yesterday we were hearing if this memo comes out, the whole world is going to fall apart. american defense system falls apart. and now they are on the show saying there is nothing to see here. >> now we are where we are. >> i agree democrats may have raised alarm and there are conservatives who appeared on other networks saying this is bigger than watergate. >> the president obviously has

concerns about some of the reports that have come out and show clear bias against him. more than that, this process, the president wants sunlight here. he wants people to see what is going on with the fisa warrants so much that sarah sanders put out a statement that pointed out should adam schiff put out a memo, it is going to have the same process. >> i appreciate you coming on. look forward to it again. >> thank you. >> david gergen -- my panel. the memo is the memo and the bigger issue might be what happens because of it. and the question stands is rod rosenstein's job in jeopardy and we heard it is no.

>> this is how far something that the president was talking about with people last year. >> he just denied that. >> and that is fine. it was something the president was talking about last year. and how the number three of justice if she stepped up into rod rosenstein's job. i think he recognizes there is a danger in doing that and not looking to do that now. and i think he likes the we will see what happens or you figure it out as part of his tag line stay tuned to the next episode. i think it is something that is going to dominate the conversation for several days. a lot going on in this memo. this was not just a dossier that was paid for by the dnc. it began with the washington

beacon. the memo does not mention the fact that carter page had been under fisa warrant prior to that. so what we have seen repeatedly from the president which is a lot of facts that get presented a certain way devoid of certain context. the white house was not in lock step about how to approach this. some of his advisers believe both memos should be released. and what is going to happen is this is going to be what everyone is talking about as opposed to his state of the union address which feels like a century go, but three days ago. rather be talking about, rather than having a war on the fisa system. >> david gergen you were in the nixon white house, and that is the history that the democrats are preemptively citing here that could happen if the president forced out rod rosenstein. do you get the sense based on

what you are hearing from maggie, and the white house, and your sense of things that the deputy attorney general's job is safe? >> i don't think we can assume that. the white house told us almost a dozen times that no one in the white house ever talked about firing mueller and now we have verified reports that the president has been talking about and that was a pack of lies no conversations. repeated claims that nobody ever talked about rosenstein going, why should we believe that? and there are some differences now that are emerging from the nixon time which are troubling. nixon tried to use the powers of the existing law enforcement agencies to protect himself. trump by contrast is trying to destroy the credibility of our law enforcement agencies in order to protect himself. frankly, i think the effort to

destroy to discredit is doing a lot more damage in some ways to the institutions than what nixon did even though nixon's crimes were far more bigger. >> is this part of the lawn game, this memo which the president was telling his friends would discredit the mueller investigation. is this part of an excuse not to testify to the special counsel and when the mueller report comes out to say this investigation has been tainted from the start. >> i think that question is too deep in the weeds. the larger picture is that donald trump is doing, has been doing for a year everything in his power to cover up and make this investigation go away. what we are seeing today, this great day for the russians, as great a day as russia and putin can have as witnessed by the food fight we just saw by the

two congressman on this television show, the destabilization of our institution has been accomplished while the president of the united states continues to try to undermine, impede this investigation. now he has the party to go along with this with the red herrings we have been seeing in front of our faces with the so-called memo that is about some deep state going on. really, let's look at the big picture which is about a president who is trying to overwhelm, demean, undermine and make an investigation into him, his family, his conduct go away. and if there is nothing there there, there is every opportunity for the president to cooperate in a meaningful way with this investigation and let's see it. >> president obviously using the deep state to scramble your

picture right now. carrie cordero if i can bring you into the conversation, maggie among others say look, there are questions about the fisa process that are raised here. suggesting that the fisa judge, not one, or four different judges were told that the clinton campaign and the democrats were funding the steel dossier. should the judge have been told that? >> here is the issue. look what has happened. as a result of this selective declassification, you just had on your program two congressman who can't agree upon what was in this information, what was presented to the court and we don't know. the memo that was written and released by the house intelligence committee has so many glaring omissions that i can't tell you whether or not there was a specific fact that was told to the court and what i know is that the normal process

is that once the fbi changed its assessment of steel as a source, that what they should have done and what the normal practice should be is that they go back to the court and inform the court. the amount of information that they originally in the first application to be provided by the court depends on all of the other information in there. how critical his information was to the application and we don't know that. and the members that you have had on haven't been briefed on them and picked and showed what information they wanted to put out to support their narrative. the american public is less clear about what transpired. >> you bring up himes and jordan couldn't agree. based on this memo, it is not clear what happened.

it doesn't lay out the facts per se. it doesn't put in quotes the idea that mccabe said the only reason they got the warrant was because of the warrant. i know you were waiting to see this document. what they came out. is it as damning as the republicans were suggesting it would be. >> john, call me a healthy skeptic on this. and the dangerous hyperbole on both ends is it is uncon shonable. i cautiously awaited this today and i had it printed out because i am old school and i read through the 3.5 pages. and i have to describe it as are there unsettling things here,

absolutely. did the fbi make mistakes and missteps? absolutely. are there connection that need to be sorted out, absolutely. i read this and what i came away with is they are trying to shoot a cannon out of a canoe. i thought it would be truly by and i hate to use this metaphor, the smoking gun. and i have been harshly critical of an organization that i spent 25 years in it. confident right now. i think we have special prosecutor fatigue. let them do their job. it wasn't what i thought it was going to be. >> maggie, do you think the democratic rebuttal is going to be release? the white house says yes. but could it be caught up in the political process. >> i think it is likelier than

not that it does get released and then you will have these two competing pieces of paper that say different things and i want to point out to your point, we heard all kinds of things that were going to be in here. much of that did not live up to what was in there. i would like to wait and see what the democrats provide. but absent producing the actual testimony, absent producing what mccabe said to the committee, a host of people talking about testimony that they weren't even in the room for. to your point, there are legitimate concerns, real issues, the fbi has made a number of mistakes in a number of ways. >> i don't think that is clear at all. i don't think you can say based on this memo that they clearly have made mistakes -- >> no i am saying in general based on previous reporting which has been more extensive in

the three and a half years. >> why don't you think it measures up? >> the memo doesn't say in terms what the fbi did in terms what they actually did. it doesn't have an affirmative statement what they did with those sources. what other bases for the probable cause was in the application. could have been a host of other types of intelligence information that form the basis for that application. the memo doesn't say whether or not the fbi and the department of justice went back to the court and said court, we have changed our assessment of steel as a source and will you reauthorize the . so i think it's premature. there may be an inquiry that reveals there was something done wrong, but i think it's premature. >> carl bernstein.

>> we have plernnty of organizations, inspectors general, and oversights committee to look the at the fbi and what they have done in this investigation. what we really need to be looking at is the president of the united states, the russians, what occurred, and whether the president is part in presiding over a cover-up and obstructing justice. that's what's been lost all day in this just as the president of the united states intended. >> thank you so much, everyone. coming up, it's not just carter page mentioned in the memo, but a journalist. michael isikoff wrote about page's trip to mexico and an article that is cited in the memo. i'll speak with him next.

the republican memo features a cast of characters that include two journalists. the memo cites an article by michael isikoff. first here's the reference in the memo. the carter page fisa application also cited extensively a september 23rd, 2016, yahoo news article by michael isikoff which focuses on page's july 2016 trip to moscow. this article does not corroborate the steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by steele himself to yahoo news. david corn's work is also cited in the memo. he and isikoff are the authors of russian roulette that comes out on march 20th. michael isikoff joins me tonight. >> so, michael, first of all, did you have any idea that your name was going to appear in this memo? >> absolutely not. i was as stunned as anybody.

look, clearly i did -- the story i wrote for yahoo news in september of 2016 was the first story to disclose that there was a u.s. intelligence investigation into anybody associated with the trump campaign. but what kind of stunned me when i read the memo is it asserts that this story was then used as -- extensively cited as corroboration for the fisa warrant against carter page, which baffled me because the story was based -- reported that there was already an investigation, and it was based on information that the fbi already had. so it's not quite clear to me why they would have needed to cite my story to corroborate their allegations. they had -- it was about the information they already had.

>> let's break that into parts if we can. >> sure. >> what the memo says is that on the fisa warrant, it used your article as corroborating information to the steele dossier. let me read this to you. the article does not corroborate the steele dossier because it is derived from information leaked by steele himself to yahoo news. >> a couple things. first of all, what the memo doesn't say is what they were citing in my story because my story was -- had far more information than that which came from christopher steele. it cited other sources, a u.s. senator, congressional sources, u.s. intelligence sources, background on carter page and his earlier trips to moscow. so they may have been citing other aspects of the story. we don't know because we haven't seen the fisa application. >> you're not denying that steele was a source for the story? >> christopher steele said in a

court filing that he talked to a number of journalists when he came to washington in september of 2016, and he named the news organizations that he spoke to, and yahoo news -- that's me -- was one of them. so, yes, i'm not giving anything away here. yes, christopher steele was somebody i spoke to when i wrote that story. >> and the implicatiomplication from this memo is that he was the only source for your story. >> well, that's not the case. >> you corroborated -- >> all you have to do is read the story and you'll see there are moment source who's are cited. >> and you corroborated the things steele said with other sources? >> well, what i corroborated was that the fbi -- the information had been provided to the fbi, that they were taking a serious look at it, that they were investigating. now, the underlying allegations about the specific meetings that christopher steele asserts in

the dossier that alleges that carter page had, that remains an open question. >> did you reach out to steele, or did steele reach out to you? >> on our podcast, which we did today, skullduggery, i laid it out that glen simpson, an old friend of mine, longtime journalist turned private investigator, invited me to a meeting at a washington restaurant to meet christopher steele. >> and that was the first time you had met him in. >> that's the first time i met him. >> his credentials seemed legitimate to new. >> i checked him out. he clearly was who he said he was. i talked to people who had dealt with him. he was mi 6. mi 6 is the british intelligence agency. he had been their chief russia specialist. he had been a source for the fbi on one of their main investigations into corruption in the world soccer league, fifa. so he was a known quantity to the fbi and to the u.s. state department.

>> michael isikoff, great to have you. >> thank you. coming up, much more on all this. the latest from the white house and what democratic congressman eric swalwell, a member of the house intelligence committee, has to say about the memo and the repercussions when 360 continues. ♪ when you have something you love, you want to protect it. at legalzoom, our network of attorneys can help you every step of the way. with an estate plan including wills or a living trust that grows along with you and your family. legalzoom. where life meets legal. with advil's fast relief, you'll ask, "what pulled muscle?" "what headache?" nothing works faster to make pain a distant memory. advil liqui-gels and advil liqui-gels minis. what pain?

advil liqui-gels and advil liqui-gels minis.

to keep our community safe. before you do any project big or small, pg&e will come out and mark your gas and electric lines so you don't hit them when you dig. call 811 before you dig, and make sure that you and your neighbors are safe. topping this hour of 360, take a memo, please. the long awaited, hotly disputed nunes memo is out. president trump wanted the public to see it even before he himself saw it. now that he has seen it, well, listen. >> i think it's terrible. you want to know the truth, i think it's a disgrace what's going on in this country. i think it's a disgrace. >> as you know, the president okayed the release of it despite, quote, grave concerns from the fbi and objections from a senior member of his own justice department and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. as you also know, we've reported