>> jon: we are back in an hour. >> jenna: "outnumbered" starts right now. >> meghan: attorney general jeff sessions, the white house and the justice department firing back after allegations that sessions talk to russian officials during the campaign, but did not tell the truth about it. democrats calling for sessions to step down and a growing number of republicans are urging him to clarify his testimony and recuse himself or many investigations. this is outnumbered, i meghan mccain coming here today, harris faulkner, sandra smith, rachel campos-duffy, and guy benson and your outnumbered and purple fie

fied. >> harris: congrats on your northwestern wildcats, my frien friend! >> meghan: unfortunately, we've got a get started. let's get started with attorney general jeff sessions. the white house and the doj pushing back hard on reports that he lied to congress during his confirmation hearing. sessions, saying he never met with any russian officials during the campaign on campaign related issues, the white house calling the story "the latest attack by partisan." democrats want sessions to redesign and a special prosecutor to be repointed. here's chuck schumer. >> there can be cannot be the a of doubt about the partiality about the top general of the

land. it's clear that general sessions does not meet that test. because the department of justice should be encroached for the good of the country, attorney general sessions should resign. >> meghan: john roberts joins us with more. john come anyhow. they've stone for us? >> what he said during his confirmation hearing, when senator al franken asked him about his contact he might have had with russian officials, what would he do about it if he learned this contact happen? senator sessions said i can commented on it, goes to make because i haven't had any contact with them. last night, we learned that he did meet with the russian ambassador twice last year, once on september 8th and the senator 's office and a chance meeting on the sidelines of the republican national convention back in july after a heritage

foundation event. the white house insisting that that was a chance meeting, and the other meeting in his office was under his position of the committee. this morning, he said this has nothing to do with the campaign. >> well, i have not met with any russians at any time to discuss any political campaign, and if those remarks are unbelievable to me and our faults and i don't have anything else to say about that. thank you. i have said that whenever it is appropriate, i will recuse myself, there's no doubt about that. >> that's one of the big issues here, because their growing calls for senator sessions, now attorney general sessions to recuse himself from the doj investigation into possible russian tampering with the election, and there is at least one republican who says he should recuse himself, that's jason chaffetz from utah.

this morning, and an exclusive interview with abby huntsman, sean spicer said there is no reason for him to recuse himsel himself. >> there's nothing to recuse himself, he's 100% straight with the committee and i think people are choosing to play partisan politics and they should be ashamed of themselves. >> those calls for him for him -- this statement to not recuse himself comes directly from president trump, he says there's no way that's going to happen. there are also growing calls from some democrats for him to resign as attorney general. chuck schumer stopped short of that sometime ago, but he says there needs to be a prospective prosecutor to look into all tha that. >> we must evaluate the scope of russians stomach russia's interference with our election. the only way that can happen is if an independent, impartial, special prosecutor with no attachment to this administration takes control of this investigation.

if the administrator and is unwilling or unable to manage that, congress should rinse to the law allowing us to bring in a special counsel to do it for them. >> reinstate the law for a special counsel, that would be the special counsel law, administration.rr during the paul ryan, a short time ago, accused democrats of setting their hair on fire over this russia issue to try to gain coverage. the president has a big speech this afternoon aboard the uss gerald ford, the first one that was supposed to serve as an exhibition point to his address, nobody is talking about that today. >> meghan: thank you so much, john. great work. i want to start with you, guy, there's a lot to unpack here. first of all, do you think jeff sessions should recuse himself? >> guy: you heard in the clip there, he said if it's appropriate, i will recuse

myself. given what we know and what we don't know, it is appropriate for him to do so. there's a growing course of republicans saying that, because if he was in some way connected to or a subject of this broader doj investigation, you can't have him overseeing an investigation of himself. that, at least, is an appearance of impropriety. there is an important distinction to make and he should separate himself from that. that being said, the calls from schumer and pelosi and other democrats were him to resign, that is premature, at the very least, ludicrous, based on the information we have right now, because if you look at the exchange is, one was a written exchange and a questionnaire, the other one, al franken from minnesota. at the context of the question were sessions role as a member of the trump campaign and discussion with russians during the campaign.

he said one was by chance, these were in connection to his chance stomach job in the senate. i don't think there is any clear evidence of perjury here, again, there might be more evidence, but so far, we see he didn't perjure himself, and to say he didn't should resign himself, that's crazy. >> meghan: for his work during the trump campaign. >> guy: is totally normal and expected that people in important senate committees will meet with foreign dignitaries, it happens all the time. that's not a scandal unto itself, if he was talking to the russians about his campaign and he lied about that, that would be grounds for termination or resignation, but we don't know that. there's absolutely no scintilla of evidence about that. >> rachel: one of the meetings

was a chance meeting, he went to an event for the heritage foundation, several ambassadors, including russian ambassadors want to talk to them after. that's a pretty normal thing that might happen, it's not like it was a planned meeting. >> guy: i still would like to see more clarification. he kind of comprehend so we said no, i didn't communicate. >> harris: that's kind of the point today, he was asked the question, if anyone on the campaign affiliated with the campaign were found out to be talking with the russians, what would you do was a question from senator frank n? and a senator sessions at the time, said he answer the question of first person. he said, i was a surrogate a couple of times on a couple of occasions, and i did not have communications with the russians. and then, i cannot comment on

that. >> meghan: sandra, this russian ambassador must be the least memorable person in the world. jeff sessions can't member meeting with him, optically, we have to believe that this doesn't look good. >> sandra: i think you're hearing the same thing from jeff sessions as well as his republican colleagues. he says is going to recuse himself if it's necessary, if it's warranted, and paul ryan is a saying the same thing, that's what he should do. what one might take issue with is what you're hearing from the bleeding democrats, nancy pelosi put out a statement stating facts that jeff sessions lied under oath. we don't have evidence of that, she's jumping to conclusions. she said sessions is not fit to serve as a top law-enforcement official official of our country. to go that far, politically,

it's inappropriate. >> guy: the democrats keep overstepping. i think this is an important story overall and this is a problem for sessions in the white house, because democrats get out so fast -- >> meghan: elizabeth warren is out on twitter. she said "this is not normal. at this is not fake news, this is a very real and serious threat to national security of the united states and we need attorney general jeff sessions, who should never have been confirmed in the first place, to resign. we need it now." why do you think the democrats are doing this? >> guy: i think their base wants them to be very angry and resist at every turn. i think they're still upset about the outcome of the election. i think there is some legitimate question here about trump world and to the russians, that is not

a fake news story altogether. there should be investigations, and there is one. again, if sessions believes, and i think now, it's probably really necessary and definitely politically necessary to recuse himself from the investigation, that's fine. but to rise to the level perjury, part of the statute that requires intent, that you deliberately lied to congress. i think there is no proof of that, and let's not forget, his predecessor, eric holder, on several occasions, misled congress and set of factually inaccurate things, but they couldn't prove intent and so there is no action after that. >> meghan: i think the timing is very interesting. every time trump seems to get momentum, democrats say out and say the russians, the russians. the republicans need to be careful here. we saw congressman jason chaffetz saying he should recuse himself, i don't think they should necessarily take the bait here from the democrats, who i

think are obviously having very bad intentions here. republicans tend to eat their own a lot, and i think they should hold the line until there is evidence. they shouldn't move this story any further. >> guy: isn't it fair to say no resignation, that's preposterous? i don't think -- >> rachel: he said i will if it's necessary. >> harris: if there are questions, by the way, you had mentioned jason chaffetz, rob portman of ohio, representative, for some, -- these are the list of people who would be in favor of sessions recusing himself. you've got labrador from indiana and then -- an additional note,

kevin mccarthy is a saying that it would be easier for an investigation into ties between the russian government and a campaign of president donald trump would continue. the list gets longer. >> meghan: i think this will be the type of story they had to take minute by minute. some blunt advice for a publican's and obamacare from trump, as we are now getting new reports that republic under settling on a new plan. what house speaker paul ryan just said minutes ago. plus, nancy pelosi raising eyebrows when she said she was "very proud of democrats." you call this dignified? we debate. after the show, he can join our live chat or go to facebook.com or you can tweet us. see you there. umbrellas!!

you need one of these. you wouldn't put up with an umbrella that covers you part way, so when it comes to pain relievers, why put up with just part of a day? aleve, live whole not part. tell you what, i'll give it to you for half off.

feel free to be yourself all day.... just switch from denture paste to sea-bond denture adhesive seals. holds stronger than the leading paste all day... without the ooze. feel secure. be yourself. with stronger, clean sea-bond.

♪ >> we are also making progress on our work to repeal and replace obamacare, working very close to the trump administration, will soon introduce legislation to have lower costs, increase choices, and give people control over their health care.

we are united and we are determined to rescue people from this collapsing health care law and to keep our promise to the american people. >> sandra: i was speaker of the house paul ryan saying the g.o.p. will soon introduce legislation to repeal and replace obamacare and that the party is united in their efforts to do so. this is amid reports that republican leaders have been keeping the plan under tight wraps after a version that leaked last week triggered serious blowback from party conservatives. meantime, whether republicans are united or not, charles krauthammer has at some blunt advice for them. >> i think they're missing the point. the point is they need one plan, so pick a dam plan so nobody knows for sure which one will be the best. then you've got a political case to make to the democrats. >> sandra: pick a plan he says. do you agree with that? >> guy: 100%.

charles krauthammer is usually correct, and in this particular instance, he is absolutely correct. you had some people on the right flank of the party saying the tax credits, that's too much and we should get rid of the medicaid expansion, not block, it's not good enough. then you have moderates of the party saying it's a little scary and we should just fix around the edges. if this is how the republicans are going to progress, the law will not get repealed, it will continue to hurt millions of people and the republicans will betray their base that voted for this in the last four elections. it is unacceptable, you have to pick a plan. it will be perfect. >> sandra: you are at the the other night. you had your ear to the ground, what are you hearing? >> rachel: they agree on all the principles.

there's some bickering going on about what exactly guy is sayin saying. perfect can be the enemy of the good, and what they need to do is not look entirely at principle, but look at what's possible. i think some of these people who are really driving some steaks here and it will be responsible electorally. this is a last chance. they've got a do it -- this is the last chance to do it. they have to unify. whether it's ted cruz or rand paul, i think they will be held held -- >> meghan: there is an ideological split within the party about obamacare. as you said, ted cruz and rand paul being the front runner in this, if you don't completely re-place that is, it is obamacare light. i agree with what rachel and guy

are saying, if they blow this opportunity, it's kind of done. we've seen so much frustration, so many really intense town halls that are erupting all over the country. >> sandra: now is the time. >> harris: who knew health care was less complicate complicated? is there anything wrong, guide, with saying we're going to deal with this? stick to things that you can fix so you can check off some boxes and move forward. are they waiting for that big we didn't moment? >> guy: i think it should be the goal, because if you start fixing the little pieces, then the will to do other stuff melts away. you have to say -- they made a very clear promise, they ransacked collector cycle and one by it. >> harris: what if they can get both done simultaneously?

>> rachel: this is a giant promise that a lot of us were skeptical. if they don't do this. >> rachel: >> sandra: attorney l jeff sessions is under fire, a new report that the obama administration raised to preserve intelligence on russia before leaving office. whether that was standard procedure or politically motivated. plus a report that defense secretary james mattis will get a much bigger role when it comes to fighting terror. what the white house has reported considering letting him do and whether it's the right move

what super poligrip does for me is it keeps the food out. before those little pieces would get in between my dentures and my gum and it was uncomfortable. just a few dabs is clinically proven to seal out more food particles. super poligrip is part of my life now.

♪ everything your family touches sticks with them. make sure the germs they bring home don't stick around. use clorox disinfecting products. because no one kills germs better than clorox.

youthat's why you drink ensure. sidelined. with 9 grams of protein and 26 vitamins and minerals. for the strength and energy to get back to doing... ...what you love. ensure. always be you. hey, searching for a great used yeah! you got it. just say show me millions of used cars for sale at the all new carfax.com. i don't want one that's had a big wreck

just say, show me cars with no accidents reported pretty cool i like it that's the power of carfax® find the cars you want, avoid the ones you don't plus you get a free carfax® report with every listing start your used car search at carfax.com home loan, that newly listed,ank mid-century ranch withed for a the garden patio will be gone. or you could push that button. [dong] [rocket launching] skip the bank, skip the waiting, and go completely online. get the confidence that comes from a secure, qualified mortgage approval in minutes. lift the burden of getting a home loan with rocket mortgage by quicken loans. [whisper: rocket] ♪ >> harris: on the one hand, what we've been reporting, attorney general jeff sessions

is under fire after his meetings with russian ambassador during trump's campaign and then there's this, the obama administration reportedly rushed to preserve intelligence of russian hacking and contacts between associates before leaving office. they quickly spread information across the government to leave a trail for investigators. a spokesperson for president obama said this to fox. "this situation is serious, and as is evident by the united states response. when the intel community does that type of conference of review, it is a standard practice at a significant amount of information will be compiled and documented." sean spicer claims "the only new pieces of information that have come to light is that political appointees in the obama administration has sought to create a false narrative to make an excuse for their own defeat in the election.

there continues to be no there there." >> guy: a few things. i think it's worth remembering that president trump, then president-elect trump before that, candidate trump, he was always skeptical, to put it lightly stomach . they were all unanimous saying there was an attempt to metal. maybe some folks in obama world were saying this is a president who has an agenda here on this issue, so we want to preserve some of the information that we've gathered over the process of the probe. the other thing, president obama did not make that big of a deal over the russian involvement during the election. because they assume tillery was going to win, they didn't want to go there.

it doesn't seem like a boy crying wolf or a situation where it's like, all of a sudden they're really upset about it, whereas, when they could have blown the whistle during the campaign, they sat on the whistle. >> harris: and you the whisper in the ear, when i get into office, things will be different. i'm paraphrasing that a bit. what was he talking about? i want to know the origin of the conversation. >> rachel: make no mistake, this probe has nothing to do with national security, this has everything to do with politics. if they want to investigate it, we have to have people in there who are going to investigate it for national security breaches or national security reasons. the way he disseminated this information -- we know that obama is headquarters as a couple of miles away from the white house. this is an attempt not to make an excuse for why they lost the election, but also to cause trouble and disruption so that donald trump cannot get his agenda in order.

>> meghan: listen, i am deeply offended and insulted at the idea that democrats just now care about russia. for those of us who have been following what put in has been doing for the last eight years, everything with crimea and ukraine with the hundreds of thousands of protesters that came out. they have never cared. you have never cared about the expansion and gaining of strength. this happened under your watch, put in is the powerhouse that he is globally because you sat back and did nothing and i haven't even talked about the syrian refugee crisis, so give me a break. the only time you care is when it's political a convenient, i don't trust any democrats when it comes to anything having to do with russia, quite frankly, there are few republican's i trust talking on this issue, but we should be focused on national security, we should be focused on the people of the ukraine, we should be focused on syrians. this is what the russian story should be about. i'm sick of talking about leaks. there are real national security

concerns here. >> harris: what you said as well, guy, is it time for somebody outside to take a look at this? >> sandra: those appointed by obama have the same answer and essay we had to collect and compile and preserve informatio information. that's fine. nobody can challenge that, right? so we have to go back and assume it was all politically motivated, but nothing was done wrong. >> guy: i think you can hold two thoughts in your head at the same time, which is it is a problem that the russians tried to interfere in our elections, right? that is not acceptable, there should be investigation, but also, there's a lot of politics being played, a lot of hypocrisy on both sides right now, and a lot of weakness, vis-a-vis russia, that the democrats were perfectly comfortable with and now all of a sudden, there russia hawks.

>> meghan: you could not get anyone to talk about this on national television. all of a sudden, you're caring about what putin is doing? i have cared about this for so long, talk about all the time, trying to get a detention, and only democrats care when it has to do with politics. >> harris: would it help to have someone outside both parties to take a look at this? >> guy: the department of justice is looking at it with the fbi. >> harris: the fbi got a little political over the summe summer. >> rachel: trump needs to get ahead of this. >> sandra: fox news alert. heading to virginia. he will be making remarks aboard an aircraft carrier promoting his plans for a major military buildup. this after secretary jim matus will take on a larger role in fighting terror. the white house is considering giving mattis, instead of

president trump, final say in approving sensitive raids and drone strikes. in anticipation of more numerous and more rapid approval. the plan would reportedly and the re-approval process under president obama that could delay submissions by hours or in some cases, even days, possibly diminishing their success. guy, you seem to be nodding your head. >> guy: i think this is a reasonable course of action. if there's going to be major operations, i think the president should have final say as commander-in-chief, but to put a lot of authority into the hands of james mattis, i think that's something most people are comfortable with. general mattis was confirmed, he is a consensus pick who is immensely respected.

>> sandra: megan, you have thrown your full support behind mattis, but so is the president. he has made it very clear that he trusts and respects the decisions that this man makes. >> meghan: i worship the altar of all things that is mattis. if you know anyone who has served underneath him, he is a cultlike figure. he led so may troops in different areas and iraq and afghanistan. i cannot overemphasize the loyalty the military has to this man, i don't think i'm speaking out of turn on this. i don't think this is a big deal at all. donald trump is going to put the knowledge of this into the hands of someone who clearly knows more, i would debate that there isn't anyone else -- >> sandra: maybe this makes them come around a little bit. >> rachel: looked, i think

intelligence requires quick action and at any time you can make that decision making process quicker, faster, and the hands of somebody is trustworthy absent mattis, i think this is good leadership. this shows good leadership on the part of donald trump. >> harris: as we fight to take the western part of muzzle, which is where you got three quarters of a million people trapped, they are a man had metastasizing battlefield fighter. you've already learned so much more about isis. who wouldn't vote in favor of that? it could take a year to take the other half. >> rachel: military complaints very often about how botched down decisions were. >> sandra: we want to alert you with this, this just end. all house judiciary democrats

are calling for a criminal investigation into jeff sessions, all judiciary committee democrats have sent a letter to the fbi and to director james call me and to the director garage and a d.c., calling for an immediate criminal investigation into u.s. attorney general jeff sessions. the letter was signed by every democrat member of the u.s. house judiciary committee. guy benson, what you make of this breaking news? >> guy: i'm not surprised. i seem to recall republicans doing something similar with eric holder with his alleged incidents of perjury on the doj wiretapping, but again, in this particular case, the democrats are jumping as far out as they possibly can get, saying criminally investigate him and resign when, there's some agreement on the couch that recusal is appropriate and my opinion. >> meghan: i disagree.

look how they're sticking together right now. republicans take the bait, they never stick together. there is no evidence right now, there's no reason for him to recuse. >> meghan: i'm not sure what you mean by republicans don't stick together. again, general flynn stepped down. there's not evidence here that doesn't suggest that there's something strange about the relationship of the trump administration and russia. he, himself made a moral equivalency with russia and being american. >> harris: i want to get on the record with exactly where this statement is coming from. you heard sandra talk about james call me and the attorney of the fbi. "the washington post" article is with a start within their statement that they reported last night that attorney general jeff sessions, who is heavily involved in donald trump's campaign, not only stuck with russia's ambassador, but when

asked about such contact, failed to disclose them, so on and so forth. separately, "the wall street journal" is reporting that federal investigators have also been probing attorney general sessions contacts during the campaign. this is coming from two different areas of journalism, and that kind of look at it -- >> guy: what has the fbi found that there probing it? again, he comes back to two answers. >> sandra: specifically this probe addresses statements he made with russian officials. these statements could indicate a number of criminal laws including lying to congress and perjury. >> guy: it sounds like there is an investigation. the core issue here is, sessions made to statements on the record under oath about his contacts with the russians. one of which, senator lahey he was completely truthful.

>> harris: i have been called a surrogate for the campaign a time or two, i did not have communications with the russians. he went on to say, i cannot comment. >> rachel: the incident we're talking about happened after an event and public around other people where other ambassadors were coming up to him after the event. >> guy: there was a separate meeting in his office as well. this is like a pile. the context is about the campaign. if that's how sessions was answering, it appears that he was being truthful, but it's cloudy enough and murky enough that i want clarification and i don't think recusal is uncalled for. >> sandra: they're calling for a full briefing on the trump and russia investigation. that news will continue to break and will keep watching it for you. former president obama ready to make a comeback, what he's planning to do and whether it's going to help democrats or hurt them. ♪

>> harris: fox news alert and as we told you moments ago, democrats pushing now for a criminal investigation into the new attorney general, jeff sessions, and whether he had any contact with russia prior to the election of president trump. now you have the house intelligence chair talking. >> we all meet with those senators and congressmen, meet with those ambassadors on a

regular basis, so i've only read the press report that said mr. sessions had a meeting and so i think at this point, it would be up to attorney general to clarify with the senate. i don't know if there is a disagreement, because i don't know what the senate is saying to them. >> has said his name come up at all? >> we are not going to talk about what's going on behind closed doors. >> it should sessions recuse himself? >> i have no idea, because we have no idea what he did or didn't do. that's up to the attorney general. i think he needs to meet with senators if there is a some disagreements. >> he said he wanted secretary kelly to tell him whether there was or were not an ongoing

investigation. is that something that's not appropriate? >> if there was an investigatio investigation, i think that would be pretty rare for them to tell us. [inaudible question] >> i think this is the appropriate place for this to be done. we have the legislative branch that has the house intelligence committee, it has jurisdiction over the intelligence agencies, it's bipartisan, we have a bipartisan agreement. as i've always said, this is a long, ongoing investigation and concern that we've had until russia activity not only in the cyber realm, but in this election and other elections across the globe.

>> what's the timeline? >> look, there's a lot of information to get through that relates to the document that was produced by the obama administration in the early part of january, all of that intelligence, we are still awaiting some of that. we'll also be looking at what the fbi can provide us, and also waiting to determine and figure out who may or may not be part of these leaks that have occurred. >> you said meet with ambassadors, the legal issue here is the failure disclose that during the confirmation hearing. how can the american people trust him to oversee this investigation and have campaign contact with russian officials when he did not disclose it

himself? >> i don't know what has been said or not said. i quickly read the press report, and i know that there saying the senator asked him and he responded. at this point, there's a disagreement beef between the attorney general and some senders. i think the best plan here is to discuss this plan and see if this can be solved and if there can be any agreement. i'm not in the senate. i won't be talking to the attorney general. [inaudible question] >> other than in newspapers, yes that, correct. [inaudible question] >> not that i'm aware of at this time. but, as i've said, i read about this in the newspaper and i see some of you talking about it.

if you have those names of those people, if you want to come forward, we would greatly appreciate it, because we would like to have those names and turn those people in, but we need some credible evidence to do that. >> "the new york times" reporting today that the british government had let americans know -- are you familiar with any of that information? >> yeah, i don't have any reason to believe that that's the case. >> do you have any concerns about the reporting that the obama administration was concerned that the intelligence committee destroyed -- >> that seems pretty far-fetched far-fetched. those were unnamed obama officials, so if they have those concerned stomach concerns, it would be pretty easy to stand up in front a press conference like i'm doing right now and talk about those concerns with all of you. i would suggest that you guys go

chase them down, sit outside their house, and ask if they have concerns. >> the white house is asked the staff to turn it in a document that might need. what happened to the information that was already out there? >> i am not at this point, i have no reason to believe any information is being withheld from us. i will say, there is a lot more information that the intelligence agencies need to provide so we can thoroughly get through all the information and process it. >> he said the other day that he wasn't fully convinced that the fbi would be cooperative. >> the director was very upfront with us. i think we were very direct with him, we will continue to get this information and he, has an

agreement with us that he will try to provide what he can with us. there are also -- is not always easy to get this, because you're talking about information that some of it was possibly picked up incidentally, especially as it relates to general flynn. >> one of the reasons that the fbi -- >> is not a matter of them being not forthcoming, it's a matter of providing us timely information when they can get it to us. i would assume that because it's quite complicated, as a relates to if, for example, you were on the phone with the russian ambassador and somehow your phone call got reported, would you want to hand over that transcript to the committee?

>> was he a private person? >> harris: representative nunes of california. two important things and he said. first of all, with regard to jeff sessions, our attorney general and whether he had pre-election contact, he said we know what we know based on reporting. pointing to the stories that came out last night, predominantly by "the washington post" and "the wall street journal." he then implored those reporters before him to basically go do their jobs. he said if you want to know more about this, we are waiting for names to come up, whistleblowers, if anybody can help us out. the other thing he said, we have no evidence of improper contact with russian officials, either by attorney general sessions or anybody else at this point within the term campaign, what i understood him to say. this story is coming together

and breaking fashion and recovering it as it does. right now, they need evidence and they need actual witnesses. that's not a case, that's a lot of people talking. we'll be right back oesn't care what you eat or how healthy you look. no matter who you are, a heart attack can happen without warning. a bayer aspirin regimen can help prevent another heart attack. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. bayer aspirin.

>> sandra: congressman adam schiff is now speaking. it will listen and to what he has to say is jeff sessions is under fire. >> if we're going to do our job, the fbi is going to have to cooperate with us and that means they can't say will tell you about this, but we won't tell you about that. we are, obviously going to persist. at the director will be coming back. we hope to get a different answer from a director next time we meet, because this counterintelligence investigation that we are undertaking is among the most serious that we've ever done.

we cannot represent the american people if the department of justice or the fbi is unwilling to tell us what indeed they've looked at, what leads they have followed, where they have found substance and where they have not. i'm disappointed we didn't have that briefing today, and it's going to be vital that we get the full cooperation of the fbi, not just rhetorically, but also the fact that they share with us what they may be doing. i don't want to go into too many specifics, but he made it very clear that there were certain questions that we were asking that he would answer and others he would not. when asked those questions, he referred to the earlier decision to decline to answer the question. again, i hope that when we next to me with a director, he will have a different point of view,

and hold the department will, because we will need information and we're better off getting that through the volunteered cooperation of the fbi. >> [inaudible question] >> i can say this, up until now, i wasn't sure whether there should be a special prosecutor, because that is a function of a couple things. it's a function of whether the attorney general and the independence and whether there's a conflict of interest or appearance of impropriety, and whether there is something concrete and specific enough to be investigated. i am now convinced that both of those criteria are met in independent prosecutor should be appointed. certainly, the attorney general is in no position to oversee any investigation or prosecution

involving any of the counterintelligence issues concerning russia. i am now convinced that an independent prosecutor is necessary. >> should the attorney general resign? >> i have not had a chance to go through the testimony that senator sessions gave. i want to reserve judgment until i have a chance to study exactly what he said. certainly, if you willfully misled the senate, then yes, he should step down, but i want to have a chance to look more into the facts before i reach a conclusion about whether that was willful misrepresentation. [inaudible question] >> the committee investigation goes on, regardless of a prosecutor. it those are very different functions.

that is not a core part of our responsibility, all responsibility is national security interests. that may lead to referrals for the justice department or not, but that doesn't mean that we don't need to do our jobs. i'm certainly very pleased that the chair and i have reached an agreement on the scope of our investigation. we are going to look at the documents, we are to look at the use of the paid media, the propaganda campaign, we are going to look at the fbi response, we are going to look at the official occlusion, including anyone affiliated with the campaign, and were going to look at the issue of leaks. we have a now detailed scope of investigation and i think it's a very positive step. >> why was it necessary to ask

administration? >> this is not uncommon in any investigation, we want to make sure that the administration and the department is on notice that these are the subjects of the congressional and any destruction will be violation of law. to clarify if there's any ambiguity, there should be a forthcoming of evidence. [inaudible question] >> i don't want to get into any facts of our investigation, but the request to preserve documents is made prophylactically, it's the very beginning of the investigation so we don't have any issue like that in the future. >> do you believe the term campaign had contact with the

russian officials? >> i'm not going to go into the specifics. [inaudible question] >> harris: the key question came up again with represent of adam schiff, a democrat standing next to the house and tallow chair, republican from california, the question about evidence again coming up. remember nunes said there is no evidence and no hear from schiff and he says not going to get in to specifics, that will go down the road of getting to specifics about the investigation. some very important things coming out of both of those men on capitol hill right now. we kind of drill down on what's happening today. real quick, to cut you up, in case you're just tuning in, our attorney general, jeff sessions, was asked during his senate hearings and separately from that whether he had ed any contact with russia. he said he did not, under the context, we understand, of

talking about the campaign. guy, as you have pointed out, that might have been problematic for him. maybe he wanted to expound just a little bit. >> guy: was at issue here is the exchange sessions had with senator franken. it's important to look at the context and the wind up to the question we keep playing. it was all about the campaign. doesn't seem like such an's denial was a little more blanket in nature, that could have been sloppy, it is not necessarily evidence of perjury, but i think it might be enough to create a sufficient cloud as to merit and warrant. >> sandra: he said in independent prosecutor is necessary, he said he was not convinced before, but other criteria, and his case has been met. >> guy: he also said the word willful when dealing with the perjury which is a very important word. >> harris: will stay on it. at the issue, again, was there n officials in our attorney general when he was a surrogate

for the campaign? a story breaking her live on fox news channel. a stay with us. we are outnumbered online. >> jon: a fox news alert, president trump on his way to virginia right now to deliver remarks from the uss gerald ford. >> jenna: the president speaking for the first time since allegations that attorney general jeff sessions met twice with a russian ambassador during the presidential campaign and failed to disclose it when questioned at a confirmation hearing. we will get into more of that and cover all of the newest "happening now." >> i have not met with many russians at any time to discuss any political campaign. >> jenna: new revelations about attorney general jeff sessions and his contact with the russian ambassador during his presidential campaign. this as reports surfaced about the obama admin initiations pushed to spread intelligence on russia's meddling in the presidential election. determined not to let the issue