>> tucker: that's it for us unfortunately, tune in every night at eight to the show that's the sworn e e e e e e e , pomposity, smugness, and groupthink, "the five"'s next will see you tomorrow. >> this is a fox news alert, earlier this evening cia director mike pompeo slammed "the new york times" for outing an undercover cia officer. let's bring in fox news' ed henry for more on this story. >> good to see you, a dramatic development tonight. this is happening at the aspen security forum, this is an annual event out in colorado where these various security officials get together and talk about the top issues of the day. russian interference in the last presidential election was also a major topic, we'll get into that because rick pompeo got frustrated by a series of questions by reporters and panelists about that. what he was particularly angry

about is the fact that "the new york times" back in early june published an account of the new chief of iran operations at the central intelligence agency. they named this official even though he's a clandestine official. his identity is supposed to be secret. the cia director teed off on "the new york times" for publishing his name. >> we had a publication you worked for that published the name of an undercover officer at the central intelligence agency. i find that unconscionable. [applause] >> fox news is withholding the identity of the cia official because "the new york times" in their own account in june did say he was still working as a clandestine official, they noted that officials who commented on

the identity of this person who's running iran operations at the cia spoke on the condition of anonymity because he is still working on a clandestine basis and this could put his life in jeopardy if the iranians figured out, if other officials around the world figure it out. "the new york times" justified publishing the name by saying his identity had been previously named in other news accounts and they also fell back on the notion that since he is running iran operations for president trump who is pushing a more muscular approach toward tehran, it justified to "the new york times" publishing at least in their eyes the name of this clandestine official because they wanted to tell the public about the trump administration's approach to iran and how it was going to be more aggressive than the obama administration and potentially even include attempts to overthrow the iranian government. this is a dramatic development tonight, this cia director

saying this could put that official in jeopardy. >> dana: director pompeo showing restraints there, "the new york times" this is a justification as you described it, i would love to go back and read all of those articles and editorials about valerie plan who was at a desk job, the difference is to me very stark to what you just said. before we take it to run the table, do we know if "the new york times" asked the administration for a comment, if the cia or the white house asked "the new york times" not to release the names? >> "the new york times" did not directly say that in the june account whether or not the administration urged them to not publish it. the way that the times described the person's identity and the publishing of this account, it certainly sounded like i could tell you as a that the administration was frustrated and angry that

"the new york times" was going to go forward with its account. they explained in the story, "the new york times" had to lay out why they felt justified. they fell back on the notion that another unnamed news organization had named the cia official, so they felt it was okay. they justified it by saying president trump is leading a more muscular approach to iran so we need tell the public who is this person leading the policy. obviously as you just heard from the cia director, he is to say the least frustrated. >> dana: if it's more muscular you would need to take him covert so he could do his job. >> i think he's showing a considerable amount of restrain restraint, people who are put on the line to serve in this capacity, they already in positions that are fraught with the danger. to do this, it gives no

confidence to men and women who serve, what do you think is going to be the next step as it relates to pompeo to try to assure his individuals, the people working for him that this type of thing is not going to be repeated? >> it's a good question, part of the frustration from the cia director, there is nothing can do at this point, the times already published this official's name back in june. we are not naming the official because even the times acknowledged, he is still working at this moment as a clandestine officer. since it was published in "the new york times," the iranians and others know who this person is but you would assume steps are being taken to try to keep him safe and his family. this is worrisome for the administration, especially at a time when they are trying to step it up and to deal with iran in a more muscular way as you say. they just were embarrassed because they recertified the iran nuclear deal, they are

under great pressure from conservatives to say president trump during the campaign said he was going to rip up the deal. the administration thinks they need a little bit more time to rip up the nuclear deal, what comes next. it's a reminder, similar to the obamacare debate, you're going to repeal it what are you going to replace it with? >> jesse: there seems to be a pattern here of "the new york times" actively subverting the ability of the united states defense to protect american lives. if you look back to the bush administration, the times exposed to the cia black sites. they exposed the financing networking. they exposed the nsa surveillance program after being begged and pleaded with to stop, it's going to jeopardize national security. now they expose a covert intelligence officer. are there any consequences for

"the new york times"? i know it's a freedom of speech issue, freedom of the press. is there anything that can be done if it can be proven that they are actively putting lives at risk. >> you can see this is happening in a broader context, not just the administration written large but particularly the commander in chief. president trump has taken a very aggressive stance towards the media, the attacks on twitter and elsewhere particularly against "the new york times," in attacking some of the reports as fake news. it's happening in that context of a very divisive time and there's nothing to answer your question directly specifically the administration can do to stop the publication of this kind of a story. but you're right, there's a push and a pole, there's a traditional fight. there is that broader context where we as journalists want to publish as much information as we think the public has a right to know about and certainly the times tried to make that case in

their june report. i suspect now they're going to respond to the cia director's very critical comments to justify why they published it and they're going to try to lay out their case. it's happening at a time, very dangerous times all around the world in this administration. part of the frustration you can see from the cia director is there's not a whole lot he can do about the fact that this clandestine official's name is out there for all the world to see. >> dana: greg gutfeld. >> they out an officer that puts this person in danger, over the weekend of "the new york times" printed a piece about how words can be harmful. they were talking about -- it creates stress hormones. this is how words equal death, not to charles murray speech. they went to great length to talk about how words actually matter. it doesn't matter when they're using them and actually put

people in danger. my question is to "the new york times" the scoop is a scope no matter what, they will do anything to get it yet they find it critical of donald, jr., takes a meeting. could they have gotten this information from russia? >> we don't know that. >> greg: it could be from a foreign source, what if it was from a iranians we don't know. why did they turn this information over first? why did they take this meeting, it seems fishy to me. >> you said there was only one question i think there were six or seven. let's stick with the fact that you're not giving me facts right now because you're saying one question, two questions, -- >> greg: don't avoid the question. >> if this is tied to russia, it has to be investigated. >> dana: we're going to go to juan williams. if >> part of it is the

politicized website is a sheet of community, president trump doesn't agree that russia interfered, maybe it was china, baby was a fat guy on his couch in the basement, he doesn't agre with their conclusion that in fact russians were giving him preference, he has been challenging our intelligence officials in a very aggressive manner. now pompeo comes back and he is striking at the times for something that happened some time ago. the question becomes is this just about politics? >> you're certainly right that the context should be added the diet did not mention that president trump has not been taking on the media, he's been taking on the intelligence community. the administration is now going to blame "the new york times" in this particular case but there are certainly other cases where it's been the white house, the administration that has been taking action that has frustrated the intelligence community, but that's out there as well.

but i want to make an important point that you alluded to. rick pompeo got very frustrated at this aspen security forum when he was asked repeatedly on a panel discussion about did the russians interfere in the election or not? he said yes i believe that they did, but to take a look at our actions moving forward. more important than that is what is the administration doing from a policy standpoint? are we being tough with russia on issues like syria or not? he was asked again and he was finally flashed anger was for the 19th or 20th time, i will tell you yes i believe russia interfered -- they did interfere in the election. they tried to anyway according to the cia director. however, look at what we're doing moving forward from the policy standpoint, you can bet that's going to be one of the big questions moving forward. how tough or not is

president trump with vladimir putin in the russians? >> dana: kimberly has mentioned they've given their time and talents to the country, as taxpayers these are also the people we pay for -- we are responsible for them. it's not just of the cia director is met "the new york times" ," i think taxpayers have a right to be angry when one of their assets is in a properly unmasked in iran. ed, is it your birthday? >> it is my birthday. >> dana: happy birthday. thanks so much for joining us for that breaking news we appreciate it. heads, o.j. simpson is going to be a free man soon, he was granted parole after nearly nine years behind bars. highlights from the hearing and reaction next. these days families want to be connected 24/7.

that's why at comcast, we're always working to make our services more reliable. with technology that can update itself. and advanced fiber network infrastructure. new, more reliable equipment for your home. and a new culture built around customer service. it all adds up to our most reliable network ever. one that keeps you connected to what matters most. >> we have that you are currently recently turned 90 years old. 90, i'm sorry about that. [laughter]

i've missed a lot of time, 36 birthdays with my children. i ended up missing their graduation because of it, trust me, i wish it would have never happened. i haven't made any excuses in nine years but i should have never allowed these security guys to help me because it turns out they were only trying to help themselves. i'm not the guy who lived a criminal life, i've done my time, i would just like to get back to my family and friends and leave it or not i do have some real friends. >> i don't deal he's a threat to anyone out there. he's a good man, 9.5 to 33 years was way too long. it's time to give them a second chance. >> we've heard from you and your victims. my vote is to grant her parole effective when eligible. >> i concur, and granted parole. >> i concur and grant parole.

>> that will conclude this hearing. >> thank you. >> greg: and he's single. oj granted parole after almost nine years in jail, it's easy to see why, take a look at the visuals. he is jovial, joking around, people laughing along, i will cut up. he's older now, age makes you look less scary. is not that you're a better person and it's just that we can now outrun you. his hair went great and so did justice as well is our grasp on morality. now he's free, unlike his victims to live out the rest of his life with fans, groupies, and selfie seekers. i get it, he's famous and it sympathetically a widower. but since we're dealing with visuals, let's really deal with visuals. beyond a charming smile of a 70-year-old man, the great thing

about the internet is the awful thing about the internet. if you've never done a google image search of nicole brown simpson murder scene it will quickly erase that kindly old man you just saw. maybe you should, i'll wait. evil isn't just an idea, it's a real thing and that real thing is free, free to enjoy a margarita on a beach, free to enjoy tv offers from drooling producers, free to take pictures with ignorant millennials unencumbered by his past. maybe he'll get one or two of them back to his place and wake up the neighbors yet again. as for the rest of the world, our ability to forgive is more about forgetting. forgetting is easier than remembering that he butchered two people. but hey, he was a model inmate because his options were limite limited. he met the criteria of release. will our treatment of him now fulfill the criteria of shane?

the irony of all of this is the only way for him to pay the family of the victims is for us to pay oj for work were going to have to feed his fame in order for them to get their money. he's going to be around were going to see him all over the place. >> dana: he's been widely about how to make a living, he's been smart about hiding some of that money, the home that he owns in florida, it's protected from the civil asset forfeiture. it's interesting how parole works differently in different states. had this crime happened somewhere else, he might not have been eligible for parole today. it is very hard for those of us who watched this story develop over the past 20 years it is difficult to separate what happened in los angeles with what happened in nevada, i understand this parole board they only were responsible for looking at this particular crime in the rules are what they are. that was what they had a

unanimous decision. >> greg: when i was watching it, it was too much fun. too much laughter, there was something about a charming famous person exempts him from the rules. >> juan: always will be and it seems to be getting more and more that we are a nation that is guided by popularity, celebrity, whether or not you are rich. in this case i think what dana said is on point. this is not about the celebrated murder case, this is about the robbery. if you look at it in those terms, the upside here would have been if he had not been granted parole, because of all the criteria on the book, he qualifies. then it comes down to something else what you're talking about, now he goes out and he begins this next chapter of his life at age 70. he can't just claim the money even if there are scurrilous

producers that want to hire him or whatever. that money will go to the goldman family as it should. the question is then what does he do? his doctor said today he's been humbled by his time in jail. the o.j. simpson we know is not a humble guy. he's an aggressive publicity seeking egomaniac. where does he go? i don't know. i don't think it's the case that this was any perversion of justice, i think this was justice. >> greg: one thing that kills me as he was a model inmate. there's not a lot of options in prison when you are oj to be anything but a model inmate. he gets extra food but what else is he going to do? as you get older, he's not getting in fights. he is a young kid. >> kimberly: he was very jovial in nature, but the people

that you really think are the victims are nicole brown simpson and ron goldman. they found the criteria, they would've been treating them different from anyone else if they did not release him and they made this based on specifics and criteria, when you have the christian group on your behalf, this is a person that helps bring in the baptists, he counseled the minister, keep checking the list. he had all the checkpoints to make sure to accomplish his goal. when you talk about the monetary compensation and what he might get -- this feeds him if he's going to get that kind of notoriety even if he's going to have to turn the money over, it satiate him in a whole other way in terms of his narcissistic tendencies. that's paying himself and feeding the beast.

>> greg: that's another form of discrimination. if your are a criminal and you lead a model life in prison, but you aren't religious, you discriminating against people who aren't religious. it helps you to be a buddhist, christian, or a muslim in jail. that's discrimination against people who aren't religious, different part of the story. how should the public treat him? >> jesse: the oj selfie is going to be the new selfie of the day, that's unfortunate. i think he's a drunk and america needs its fix. the crime of the century is still so intoxicating. you have every ingredient to the perfect trauma you have jealousy, you have rage, you have athletics, you have someone like o.j. simpson who comes out, the man is so charismatic, he's

so engaging, he's funny he draws you in. but in a way he's very manipulating. he's also incredibly delusional, you see the eyes darting around you see the flash of anger. when he flashed his temper. he says i lived a conflict free life, no you didn't print i was never accused of wielding a weapon against anybody. what about the knife at rockingham. he almost felt justified in getting his memorabilia back which is insane. i think he was over sentenced for this first burglary because the judge wanted him to pay the price for skating on a double homicide but now i feel bad for nicole brown simpson's family, i feel bad for the goldman family, this opens up an incredible amount of new wounds, he's going to do whatever he can. i think there is going to be a new chapter in the life of oj, i don't see him riding off into the sunset in florida, i don't

think you can help himself. i don't think he has any impulse control, they're going to be looking to push his buttons. >> juan: i think he is reviled in this country including the hollywood elite, the fancy crowds. that's what i think. >> kimberly: he doesn't need the fancy hollywood elites, wait and see what happens. >> greg: i bet he could pay off the family in three years either with pay-per-view appearances, about 35 or 40 million? it's up to 50 million? >> jesse: he could do a live confession. >> greg: reality show ideas, living with oj. he could move into people's homes, offer advice. he could do find the real kille killer, where he searches for killers, how about that? the president sets a redline for robert mueller, and he is

♪ >> kimberly: resident trump delivered this morning to special prosecutor robert mueller. >> reporter: he was looking at your finances unrelated to russia, is that a redline? >> i would say yeah. >> kimberly: he would cross his redline if he were to investigate the president's finances, bloomberg reports he's expanded the investigation to include the business transactions. "the wall street journal" says the special counsel is also investigating possible money laundering by a former campaign chair paul mena ford. these are developments breaking this evening as we see. >> dana: this show is breaking so much news i can barely keep up. we just found out that president trump also -- his

lawyers are exploring ways to limit or undercut his russia investigation. also the other thing that happened is -- mark corrado who was a spokesperson and longtime washington aid probably one of the best legal p.r. people you can have on your site he's resigned today. he did not respond to a request for comments. there is a new team led by ty cobb. i don't understand how this is his redline to make. the justice department's may 17th order instructs him to investigate any links or coordination with the russian government as well as any matters that arose from the investigation. that is a relatively broad mandate, but it is estimated was given. remember when mueller was first putting together his team, there was consternation by the trump team saying these are all

financial investigators. this is not appropriate but that was about three months ago. there must be something happening, something afoot to the lawyers are being contacted, that make them think this is the direction they are headed to. mena ford piece is interesting. if it was one of my satellites, that's fine, go after him. it wasn't me. i don't really know, that's kind of a clue. >> jesse: the investigation is going off the rails. everything people fear it is going to happen about having a special prosecutor taking on the life of its own is now happenin happening. what are they really looking into, that he sold a mansion in florida? lot at 440 million? sold it for 90 million? he made a ton of money, is making money criminal? he sold an apartment to a russian? he's not kgb, who cares.

he made money at a beauty pageant in moscow? was the pageant rigged? i don't see the scandal here. it's not a crime to make money, locked trump up next to hilary. it looks like the investigators are not investigating the crime, they're trying to look for a crime, the fact that the trump organization >> kimberly: how do you explain this? >> juan: i think it's pretty obvious you get someone like paul mena fort in the last few days have indicated that he had a $70 million debt from two people tied to the russian government of the time he was the campaign manager for trump. they had leverage over him potentially. when it comes to these real estate dealings, the issue here is money laundering. he's in the business of

real estate, what's the big deal? is he selling at market value, or is he helping russians launder money through the united states. >> jesse: i don't think he's getting a deal for $90 million. >> juan: what if the guy is putting money in because he's trying to wash a lot of the money. sarah huckabee sanders said today at the white house at this moment the president had no intent to fire robert mueller. that set off alarms because what do you mean at this moment no intent? he really doesn't have the capacity. she should say we care about the integrity of this investigation, donald trump the president has done nothing wrong and left mr. mueller to conduct investigation. instead this is two days in a row. at first he puts sessions on the record and say i didn't like

that you recused. bob rosenstein is from baltimore, the only democrats. it's like he has no regard for law and order in the process and he thinks he can talk his way out of this. >> jesse: kind of like hillary hillary. >> kimberly: okay, greg. >> greg: not every places like the united states if you're looking for corruption in russia it's like looking for lint in a laundromat. it's the way it is right now. it's going to take a couple of decades and perhaps longer before it's not a lawless place. it's deadwood meets west world, anything could happen, you could die there in a business transaction. when you go to russia you have to deal to certain things. at the same way that hillary clinton when she took money, she took money from places their prime turf is human rights abuses. she took money from places that abuse people. in russia, they are dealing like the old westford the thing that also gets me mad is how the media reports the stuff about

trump. trump rages, heat fumes, trump slams sessions. they all share the same word a day calendar but whenever a liberal goes off whether it's schumer or maxine waters or tim perez, they never say they are raging. they always say they are destroying. they're crushing it. i'm just pointing out the hypocrisy so you can decide who the liars really are, will be right back. >> kimberly: clearly waiting the communications overhaul it looked for it. some new positive developments on the trump administration

>> jesse: very positive progress reports from our homeland security secretary on the number of crossings now at the mexican border.

>> what we're doing now is doing the best we can to stop the illegal movement of things and people into the united states. if the movement of illegal aliens across the border in the last six months or so but certainly post 20 january is down by 70%. >> jesse: one of you been saying for quite some time? >> dana: trump is the wall. >> greg: you were the first person to say that i believe. the point is -- he has caused to changes. the issue used to be about amnesty, now it's about the borders. everybody's move in the discussion it's about saving lives when you reduce human trafficking to save lives. the question is if he is indeed the wall as dana had said, how permanent can this effect be? when he leaves office, then the wall leaves.

the he has to create permanent ideas, he has to create a structure, create a new policy, new procedures that reflect the new reality so that when he leaves these things are in plac place. >> jesse: interior enforcement enforcement. they are just wrapping up these ms-13 gang members on a record pace right now because there are wreaking havoc all over the country. >> kimberly: just to understand the impact, in terms of the other gangs in territory and access and moved into that space, understand what the repercussions are going to be. he said he was going to do this, he acted very quickly and decisively, it really takes a big chunk out of crime, violent crime in this country and on children who are taking into these gangs and co-opted and taught a life of violence by replacing the father figures. this is so important and that's why we talk about it so much on the show. in addition to the fact that president trump has to build his

structure but he is also literally himself operating as a deterrent for people to try to come in because they don't want to mess around with him, why is this a bad thing? we don't want people coming in and putting their families in jeopardy and rewarding the coyotes had making a big mess for us. it's a mess over there too. >> dana: >> jesse: they're senda surge of i.c.e. agents to round up these illegal aliens, it's probably a good idea wouldn't you agree? >> juan: no. 40% jump already in the united states, most of these arrests are not for people who have committed any crime, certainly people who have not committed violent crime. >> juan: that's not true. >> juan: it certainly is true. what were talking about is president trump going after immigrants in a very aggressively is a political matter. but it's hurting people, hurting families. >> greg: ms-13, are they in

aarp? >> juan: if you're talking about violent criminals, i don't think you get any argument across the political -- >> jesse: you want to keep violent criminals safe and sanctuary cities. >> juan: i was responding to something greg said that i thought was a serious, if you are saying i'm so much a supporter of immigrants i'm going to tolerate crime and criminals and violence, nobody says that spirit of >> kimberly: they are actually arresting criminals inside the courthouse. as a prosecutor, i sat there and watched people in san francisco and other places which is disgusting because they get back out to reoffend. that's saving families. >> juan: the politics he sent in motion not going after the dreamers kids. he's saying i think dreamers should be able to say it. >> jesse: seems like juan wants to lock up president trum

president trump. >> i do think the president should ask for the supreme cour supreme court, currently federal court in california. if they got into the supreme court, get some clarity on this, we could probably save a lot of lives and just get clarity for people in law enforcement in these families to try and figure it out. >> jesse: up next, o.j. simpson and donald trump.

>> juan: there's a lot of wild things said on cnn daily about to president trump them at this one to the list. >> this is not your typical presidents. he is, o.j. simpson is a different kind of football player, doesn't make him a better person it doesn't make mr. trump a better president. >> juan: america generally doesn't have a high opinion of mr. simpson and here's an analogy to mr. trump, is that fair? is that fair? earlier you were saying someone who has impulse control. >> kimberly: you're not doing that to me, you're not going to say that i am suggesting the two are similar because that is completely wrong. >> you didn't say that, --

>> kimberly: you're trying to make -- >> juan: impulse, narcissism. >> kimberly: is that fair? i think it's grossly unfair, it's more appetite and lust from the media and these morons who try to make to disparage the president, disparage everything about the american presidency because they don't like president trump. >> juan: that's what i thought you'd say. is there any validity to the celebrity angle? >> jesse: i think if trump is the oj is the politics, then hillary is the marsha clark because she blew it when she had a sure thing going. if this goes back to what we're talking about earlier in the week, you compare your opponents to murderers or or 9/11, you've lost the argument. >> juan: so, dana, . >> dana: especially on cable

news, you try to say the most provocative thing so that you can fire up your base, this is a comparison that this really be the pale. >> juan: what to say. >> greg: paul begala is not your usual pundit but near there was jerrod your usual spokesperson for subway. i'm not saying he's just like a jared from subway but maybe i am. this is a step up for donald trump, it was only six months ago he was being compared to hitler. now he's just a double killer, i have a list of people they compared and donald trump two, hitler, richard the second, the joker, lex luther, putin, al capone, mussolini, still in, charlemagne, my favorite, biff tannen. >> juan: we are having too

much fun, one more thing up next

you won't see these folks at the post office. they have businesses to run. they have passions to pursue. how do they avoid trips to the post office? stamps.com mail letters, ship packages, all the services of the post office right on your computer. get a 4 week trial, plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv

and never go to the post office again. ♪ >> kimberly: it's time now for one more thing, greg. >> greg: let's go to this, shall we? greg's robot news. i'm going to be off all next week i'm going on a nice little vacation. because i talk about robots so much, this robot heard the news and he threw himself into a

nearby indoor fountain. this is in d.c., a security robots. so unhappy about b being off the five, flung himself into the fountain, he could not swim. i think he's faking it, all the robots are pretending to be incompetent so they can take over one day by surprise. >> it gives a lot to think about on your trip. >> jesse: joy behar announced that she named her dude don't make a new dog sanders. >> i want you to name my new dog can i name to bernie after you. [cheers and applause] [cheers and applause] are you happy with the name court to mark what think? >> looks like a very smart dog to me. >> jesse: a socialist dog.

>> greg: he'll spread the filter around. >> dana: you chicken. >> greg: i was going to poop say but i said filth. >> juan: the question was put to me who is the most popular politician in america, it's none other than bernie sanders. now a brand-new 2020 election poll shows that trump would lose in a matchup against a bunch of democrats, he would lose to both joe biden and elizabeth warren. who else would he lose to? bernie sanders would be trump 52-39. i find this unbelievable. >> kimberly: i have a sweet one more thing. a young boy suffering from a rare disease got to live out his dream of being a police officer, this was after the wildwood police department in new jersey swore him in as an honorary on monday. there he is, 9-year-old ethan

brannigan, he has a rare disorder caused by a genetic mutation, it leaves him visually impaired. god bless this police department, a very special moment for this boy an incredible act of kindness for him and his family. he loves the police so much he has a growing collection of little police patches that he collects during his life so far. anybody that wants to send him a pass, if you can please do so at lunch with lynch.com. >> dana: this caught my eye, it was on npr. say goodbye to x and y. it should community colleges abolish algebra. it is the most a failed course community colleges nationwide. 60% of students enrolled are required to take one math course, 80% never finish their requirements. i asked on twitter what you think about this? i thought this was really smart because i believe you use algebra every day, here's adam jay. i'm a janitor in a community college, you want roundtables

for 115 table to hold six chairs, how many chairs? some people think that algebra is terrible but it's actually worked. >> this is a fox news alert. i am chris wallace info bret baier. we have two breaking stories tonight, o.j. simpson gets parole after serving nine years for nine armed robbery. president trump with buyer's remorse about his own attorney general. jeff sessions response he will stay in his job as long as it is appropriate. the president told "the new york times" he would not have a point to the attorney general if he had known the sessions would recuse himself from the russia investigation. chief white house correspondent john roberts starts us off. good evening good evening. >> good evening. the white house says the president has no intention of firing his attorney general