tonight on primetime with a look at the publishing industry to begin at 8:00 p.m. eastern with a tour of regnery publishing an interview employees that publishing house. former publisher and editorial for the bloomsbury press will talk about the duties of a book editor. a look at columbia university price on how university publishers work and weekend with editor-in-chief of the right, receiving the editorial excellence work in the biographer's international organization. the tv in prime time on this week on c-span2 beginning at 8:00 p.m. eastern. >> joining masses lanny davis, author of "the unmaking of the president 2016: how fbi director james comey cost hillary clinton the presidency." also served as the white house special counsel from 1996 to match 1998. if you look at it,ic this is at the feet of fbi director james

comey. >> guest: i looked at the statistics. i tried not to offerto opinions. i have opinions on mr. comey. i think rod rosenstein had it exactly right. what he did was to fire an event when he offered his opinion on the evidence in july 2016, something that is not allowed and is a firing offense when they offered his opinion on hillary clinton's e-mail practices not allowed. when he sent ant letter rock ovr 28, 11 days from the election, violating 50 years of justice department policies, defined the deputy attorney general's wishes. he did it anyways because he gets to decide what is right and what is wrong and that narcissistic attitude is what caused rod rosenstein to write a memo because the deputy attorney general by donald trump and he was exactly right and even in retrospect, james comey would not tell rod rosenstein he had any regrets. that's what a narcissist does. he defines what isy right.

this book has the word higher loyalty. his higher loyalty is not to the law, to the policies or to the rules. he gets to violate them. you get to define what the loyalty is and it caused hillary clinton statistically i proof, the presidency. >> you reference it just takes quite a bit lacuna polling. wide are you specifically looking at the polls to make this case? >> at that at three or four different ways. one is aea head-to-head contest and immediately after to the next 11 days. then i also looked at emotions and impressions that change between right before the over 28th letter in right after. every measurement, not just a head-to-head polls, which by the way were 1.2% of accuracy. hillary clinton won by 3 million votes. that was the prediction under the real clear politics average. but i did more than just polls and if i could show you some chart for your viewers, it would

visually prove my case. >> when we talk about the net drop hillary clinton's offer no time at the announcement to the time of the election. >> guest: well, i think this to be chart number two. as is the morning of the 28th about tober, the national average of all polls, national popular vote ahead by 5.9%. the morning of october 28. the e-mails come in the server, everything she was criticized for, which is taken ownership of. she's ahead by 5.9% in the average in real clear politics poll. but the larger margin than barack obama in 2012. look what happened in chart two. october 28th she's ahead by that margin in the three critical states which would've allowed her to win the presidency should carry. pennsylvania, michigan and wisconsin. to's ahead by five seven-point in those three states. large margins in states that are purple states that have

republican governors, republican legislatures that have gone on either way. look what happens like a stockmarket crashing within days of the october 28th letter. nothing elsese intervened, no great trump search, no change in news, and just saturating the american people. they decided to violate the rules and send a letter to congress with all speculation. we are going to look instead of looking first before sending the letter. >> you reference in the book if you go back to the same poll that shows the dramatic drop the top about, you'll see pennsylvania, michigan and wisconsin, state that if she would've i spent more time in, don't you think i was a contributing air, and not only the contribution to her? >> to make a very short answer. no. the total margin in those three states, pennsylvania 17%.

in michigan, .2% and in wisconsin, .7%. russ feingold ran for the senate in wisconsin that he campaigned every day in wisconsin. every day on the morning of october 28, he was to have the same margin as hillary clinton by six or seven points. he crashed after the comey letter just as hillary clinton did and he campaigned every day. it wasn't a matter of hillary clinton not campaigningit there. there is a causation event of a causation event of the sending of the letter caused her to drop in the polls precipitously for the next 10 days. saturated news coverage around the clock. saturated news coverage or news coverage at the headline on cable television, network television in all the major newspapers. hillary clinton under criminal investigation. two days before the election, mr. comey sent a letter early sunday morning. he saidd sorry, got it wrong. nothing there. a little too late.

>> we willin invite the callerso ask questions of her guests. lanny davis if you want to call. (202)748-8000. independent will take you back to the time or jim comey makes the initial assessment in july. we would' get your reaction to it. >> although the department of justice makes decisions on matters like this, we are discussing the charges appropriate in this case. i know there will be in the wake of this recommendation. what i can assure the american people is that this investigation was done honestly, competently and independently. no outside influence of any kind was brought to bear. i know there were many opinions expressed by people who are not part of the investigation including people in government, but none of that mattered to us. opinions are irrelevant and they were alley uninformed by insight

into investigation because we did our investigations the right way. only facts matter and the fbi found them here and entirely apolitical and professionally. >> you don't buy that argument? >> first of all, mr. comey, did everyone understand this? a criminal investigator weatherhead of the fbi or detective working for the local police forces and allowed to call a press conference and expressed opinion of evidence without, charging. a senior justice department official was quoted in "vanity fair" saying what we don't do in america, we don't change it not charge. what he went on to do was to express an opinion. first he said we are not charging mrs. clinton because there was no criminal intent in that correct outcome. but then he said she was extremely careless in the handling of her e-mails. her polls went down because the headline wasn't that she was

cleared after a one-year investigation. the headlines were gm's comey's opinion on the evidence in a criminal case. that was a firing offense that rod rosenstein, the republican appointed, trump appointed attorney general told mr. comey and asked him, do you have any regrets about violating the rules are not allowed to express opinion on the evidence muster publicly charged. mr. comey doesn't use those rules. he answers to a higher loyalty as he sat in his forthcoming book. the higher loyalty is james comey gets to decide. that is why you sent the october 20th letter violating 50 years of policy that you don't speak at the justice department within 60 days of a presidential election. republican and democratic attorneys generals, everybody followed the rules but one

person. james comey. why? he gets to decide what is the higher loyalty in that narcissism is what caused hillary clinton. >> host: aside from that, what about the fundamental issue of how hillary clinton handled her e-mails yourself. is that a concern people should know about and express? >> guest: no doubt. and then expressed this the way hillary clinton expressed. she made many mistakes. the e-mails come in the servers come in the way she handled the e-mails, other thing that happened in then campaign. what campaign doesn't makeke mistakes. the successful ones we forget about their barack obama ran two successful campaigns. who'd be the first to tell you many mistakes. two things can be true. hillary clinton made a lot of mistakes she takes responsibility for. before the october 20th letter on the morning of october 28th , she is winning by ae landslide. 5.9% larger and if i could book a size three if you have it up

on the camera, and this is the electoral map that would have occurred but for the comey letter according to real clear politics in every other analyst that is looked at the map that would have been the case said james comey not violated all the rules except the ones james comey gets to establish and that would've been the result of hillary clinton would've won, but she also made many mistakes geared >> for the basis of our guests book, "the unmaking of the president 2016: how fbi director james comey cost hillary clinton the presidency" lanny davis, are desperate first call comes from new hampshire, democrats line. you are on with lanny davis. >> caller: good morning, good morning. pedro, great cast as always. mr. davis, i have toi tell you that it's been proven that debbie wasserman schultz added in for bernie sanders come in the dnc kind of had it in for

bernie sanders with their rations in our elections are tainted in the comey memo, probably didn't help hillary clinton. that's not why i didn't vote for hillary clinton. i spoke with hillary clinton's face to face at one of our town hall meetings and i told her that my wife and i were going to be voting for bernie. but to tell you the truth, i think the whole election should bee nullified. hillary clinton and donald trump should be in jail and we should just start all overr again. >> host:t: rob, thanks very >> we have a due process system and you are entitled to your opinions. i love bernie sanders. debbie wasserman schultz did not cause bernie sanders to lose to hillary clinton in the primaries by 4 million votes. so your support for bernie sanders i completely respect.

i truly did respect admire bernie sanders. he lost to hillary clinton by 4 million votes and she won the nomination fair and square including the majority of the elected delegates, not counting .uperdelegates so she won fair and square and bernie sanders did his best because he saw the danger of donald trump with all due respect, sir, you're putting hillary clinton and donald trump in jail is not consistent with the due process clause of our constitution and certainly not consistent with what senator sanders would say that hillary clinton would've made a great president compared to the one we have now. >> from michigan, independent line.g. brian, you are next. >> good morning. thank you very much. i agree with what you say about the fbi in james comey, but i disagree withsh that's what lost the election. she lost the election because she played the race card against white america.

in 2000 may she played the race card against black america and now in 2016 she pleaded against white america and is taking off like a wild storm. she just played the race card. i remember when she told me, don't you pick on my blacks, mexicans, trans-genders and all of that. she directed that a white america. id had no choice but to go another direction. i was a lifelong democrat. thank you very much, mr. davis. >> of course i respectfully disagree with that. you have a right to your opinion. i look at america as one country. i'm sorry that you feel that way. i would say to you that 3 million people more than the total that donald trump one disagree with you. at the very least you are in a minority view and right now donald trump is 40% approval,

which they are high-fiving about at the white house. 40% is the lowest approval rating in the history of the president they for a person after his first year in office. you are in a minority diseases in racial terms rather than on the merits hillary clinton in my opinion we just respectfully disagree would've made a better president than donald trump. >> i pulled this from cnn's website from november 9th and according to the exit polling, she was already losing in a lot of key constituencies where latinos, african-americans. they don't know how much to the degree jim comey involvementsh , but would you admit that? >> she definitely was losing because she lost the electoral college. she won by 3 million votes so she must've been winning among a lot of people. what we know with certainty and i don't offer an opinion here. on a sober 28th, every public

opinion poll including those constituencies give her 5.9 national popular vote and electoral vote margin on the morning of october 28th. larger than barack obama had at that point in his campaign in 2012 over mitt romney in within 10 days she dropped like a rock and nothing happened other than saturated media coverage of the national headline that she was under criminal investigation. a lot of those voters by november 9th and afterward thinking as afterward thinking as much as i would like to see hillary clinton president or maybe i don't like her, but i don't want donald trump, stay home. the vote was down and also a lot of her voters that were weak switched over to trump and that was a direct result because statistics don't lie. >> these are last-minute decisions? >> are last-minute decision is a very important way to prove my case.

so in national exit polls, voters in the key battleground states. but take florida. she lost florida by 1.2%. the people who had voted up to october 28, she was ahead by 3% to 5%. then, exit polls, voters were asked when did you make up your mind? among those who said the last week before election day, meeting in the middle of the headline, 24/7 television coverage, hillary clinton under criminal investigation, while she lost the entire state by 1.2%, she lost the last week deciders by 30% to donald trump. there's absolute proof on the impact of the comey letter. >> host: from democrats find, atlanta, georgia. bradley, go ahead. >> caller: yes sir, mr. davis. i'm a democrat, supported ernie pitt and then i held my nose and voted for w mr. clayton.

forgetting a couple things come to hillary clinton's comeback has been that with loretta lynch and the tarmac which forced her to have to recuse herself. there were many errors in this election. you have the russians, hillary clinton calling people deplorable as. nevermind the fact she's got an assistant married to anthony weiner who's basicallyei a and basically, call me, i'm not happy about what he did, but bill clinton is such a scumbag and because of that fact he pardons some of the people he pardons, that will give trump the right to pardon who he wants to. the fact that scumbag bill clinton met with loretta lynch in the tarmac for its jim comey to do what he had to do. >> radley, thank you. >> first come you've got your facts wrong. you're entitled to your opinions but natural facts are at the

lynch recuse yourselves and she had the full authority to order james comey not to send his letter. she sent her opinions through staff people that it would be a violation of the 50 or more year policy. he nevervi picked up the phone d ordered him. so get your facts straight. it had nothing to do with a red orange. sally was the deputy. secondly, you are certainly an individual that uses ajit has come a pretty harsh adjectives. i won't even repeat the words used about mr. clayton. i don't know if you look yourself in the mirror whether that's a fair thing to do on national television, but let me describe to you what a minority you are in as an opinion. when bill clinton was done with everything he went through in the white house on the last day in office, he has a 65% approval rating, whichch is to say the highest approval rating in the history of polling for a second term president. so you sir, by using the adjective about the president find yourself in a

small minority and with all due respect of ledger in a minority because most people don't use terms like that about aninpl incumbent president with a 65% approval rating. that is a fact, not an opinion. >> lewis, sterling virginia, republican line. >> yeah, i just want to question the validity and basis of your research or your book, whatever you want to call it. leading up to an election where if you are wearing a trump sure out on the street, you would get beat up. honest. >> that says a lot. thank you for reminding everyone. >> caller: can i finish my? who are you going to vote for and i could a trump because i was afraid of a people with say or think. yourve narrative and the people that you guys paid to go beat up protesters made it so people

wouldn't come, so the entire basis of your book or whatever you're trying to capitalize on his false. hanks. >> first of all, you appreciate the fact that you remind people that trump supporters would beat up somebody wearing a t-shirt under the first amendment in the united states constitution. that's a terrible thing. you did state that hillary clinton supporters were paid for beating a trump supporters. that is not a fact. thank you to document that. in any case, let me invite you to look at the last chapter of my book. i'm sure you haven't read it. i know everybody says pullers can be trusted and they don't tell pollsters the truth. the actual polls predicted within 1.2% the national popular vote margin thatat hillary clinn won by 3 million votes. those within 1.2% accuracy, pretty darn good. but i didn't trust the polls. i looked at other data. for example, positive versus negative impressions.

studies haveho shown that questn is answered honestly by most people. they don't always want to say they voted for. if you think you have a positive impression or negative impression of hillary clinton and, you can answer this usually accurate. on the question going into october 28th for the first time in 15 months, here are the facts. hillary clinton got to 50/50 on positive versus negative. she'd been underwater negativesi for 15 months since the e-mail story broke. donald trump was three to one s. unfavorablerw versus favorable. october 28 she was about 50/50. within three days after those headlines, when the letterhead, hillary clinton under new criminal investigation, the positive versus negative question dropped within three days, 22 days, two to one negative and kept going down. only one thing cause started not with the comey letter. >> in the lead up you talk about the research done in the

epilogue. i'm interested in talking about that because that's part of it you write this. whatever reasons there may be regarding donald trump, one of them cannot be to do so with the popular will by overturning the electoral vote count to they would not have earned without james comey's last-minute improper intervention. can you expand on that? >> this is a very important point of my book. donald trump is now contradicting every intelligence agency director who he appointed. every senior member of congress, every observer, that the russians intervened in our democracy to help him get elected. heheto denies that as he denies almost everything else that's a fact. when i did this research, i was against impeaching donald trump and still am unless there is a bipartisan effort and a very high standard of removal. the main argument against

impeachment is the overturning of a popular election, unimpaired pain intervention that should not have occurred. i can't prove the russians elect a donald trump. my logic tells me that within pennsylvania, michigan and wisconsin, less than 1% that the russian campaign in favor of trump that is not proven and agreed to by all of trump's- appointees t, trump is the only desire left. i can't prove that caused hillary clinton the election. i can prove right after the letter she dropped like a rock and nothing else but comey'sro letter. that means trump cannot be opposed for t impeachment becaue we are overturning an unimpaired election. there may be other reasons to oppose that though we know he was a fluke, and i'm duration, resulted in alien improper intervention by james comey who had never taken responsibility for getting this country, donald trumpsi as president and i look

forward to reading the book where he gets to decide that the policies and standards are. not the rule of law, not the person he reports to. see james comey gets to decide what the higher loyalty is. >> wisconsin i believe she went to once. don't those players that are into the people that made the difference? >> guest: ofof course. in retrospect you can look at lots of mistakes. i remind you once again she's taken ownership for mistakes. the two things can be truee. contemporaneously. one is a presidential candidate makes mistakes that might have changed the outcome. another is on october 28th in the morning she wins. october 31 she has dropped like a rock. one thing happened. the decisive second true fact. first issue made mistakes in retrospect of the second true fact is that for james comey's

letter, she wins the presidency. that's a fact. >> the reaction for mrs. clinton on the boat. what did she say about it? >> this was clear before the inauguration we talked about my research. i was not intending to read this book. it was a painful book tot writ. i've written several books. this was the most painful. when i showed her the data, not the head-to-head data, the accurate data about people's impressions of her before the comey letter and after, she recognized that i assembled what no one else has compiled and if you don't want to read my book, chapter eight is for all the charts are the data is. she encouraged me. >> host: did you get any reaction for mr. comey? >> guest: i had two interviews with mr. comey. i wanted to get his viewpoint with people close to him and on the attorney general. what happened, what was the debate? why did you decide to send the

letter? mr. comey declined to interview me and they know that happen because someone very senior in the united states government and a close friend who asked him, mr. davis would like your point of view any other right to say no until his own story which is about to witness both. >> else more, maryland, independent line. lanny davis, author of "the unmaking of the president 2016". go ahead. >> caller: good morning. you mention that hillary clinton took ownership off her mistakes. the biggest mistake that i thought trying to be impartial and not be polarized by so many other people in this country p are. the biggest mistake that i saw was that when he wanted to see servers in e-mails, she had her lawyers deciding what was going to be accessible for the fbi and what was not in anybody else in the united states, the fbi

would've confiscated personal computers, working computers and looked at everything with a fine toothh comb and she was above te law with that. she picked it and choose what she was going to be giving to them and not taking ownership of it and if there is nothing to hide, she would've given everything, let them make an independent investigation. based on the limited information , he made a decision there was nothing they could press charges on. the conference that he had was called based on the evidence we have, that there is nothing we can press charges with. >> you make a valid point. people were suspicious that she did not laugh everybody to read through her personal e-mails,

e-mails that anybody including yourself would not want to be published on the front page of a newspaper. unlike you, hillary clinton's personal e-mail would have been published in the tabloids and elsewhere. none other than former secretary of state colin powell in an e-mail advised hillary clinton to use two devices, one not through the state department, her own personal one where she could use official and personal e-mails and at the end of her tenure turnover her official one. that came from secretary of state colin powell using his own private device outside of the state department and used aol's private server. in his server during the run-up to the iraq war was hacked. after one year of a forensic investigation of her private server said quote, we have no evidence that there was ever a

hack of hillary clinton's server. retrospect that in with hindsight, mrs. clinton said she would've never used a single device and she should be a separate devices distinguishing her personal e-mails, which most certainly should have been destroyed as you would want yours to be rather than on the front page of newspapers and used a separate device for official business. i think she's recognized with the wisdom of hindsight she would've done it differently. >> she never had a state.gov e-mail address. >> she did not have a state.gov e-mail address because their server was a hillary clinton e-mail address. this is a little fact in a big fact most people don't know. 80% or 90% of all of the e-mails that she received were from state department diplomat that she forwarded to others. those individuals, over 300 did not use a secure communication channel because none of the

33,000 e-mails she received,d, t one was labeled classified. let me repeat that. not one ofhe the 33,000 e-mails that she received, and this is finally coming james comey had to admit this. he said there were a few free, turned f out hero had the conspicuous classification label that 300 diplomat sent0 to her through nonsecure channels because they didn't consider the informationon classified. in retrospect there were judgments made in retrospect that the information was classified. that is why james comey could not charge her. >> ryan, democrats line. brain from jamaica, go ahead. >> thank you. the reason hillary clinton lost the election is because she hadl no vision and as an underhanded way of working. for example, the clinton