a common enaddition ceremony. the car crashed into parliament and a man with a knife continued the attack and tried to enter parliament. sadly i can confirm that now four people have died. that includes the police officer who was protecting parliament and one man we believe to be the attacker, who was shot by a police officer. the officer's family has been made aware. at least 20 people have been injured. as part of long-established and well-rehearsed plans, parliament has been locked down and met with our plans for ending terrorist attack. that response included uniformed and special is firearms officers. we now have an ongoing operation. whilst we currently believe there was only one attacker, i'm sure the public will understand us taking of precaution in locking down and searching the area as thoroughly and exhausttively as possible. i know the officials working

within parliament and public in the area completely understand we need to do this. i thank them for their patience and their support. this investigation has the full weight and expertise of the counterterrorism command behind it. if there are people who saw the events unfold today but haven't yet spoken to us, i would urge them to get in touch. a crime scene will remain in place in the areas in westminster. understand until we carry out our painstaking investigation to recover all the possible evidence. looking forward, throughout the res of the day, including when people are commuting home and indeed over the days that follow, the people of london will see extra police officers armed and unarmed on our streets. this includes our officers working longer hours and extra shifts along with our colleagues from british transport police and city of london. as you are aware, we can call on the military if need be in the

future. we're in the process of opening casualty bureau for those worried about sdprendz family. we're reaching out to community leaders across london. our strength of our city depending our ability to stand together at such terrible times. if anyone sees anything suspicious or anything that causes concern, please contact us. don't hesitate. my thoughts are with all those affected by today's attack. as a service, we've lost one of our own as he acted to protect the public and his colleagues. this is a day we planned for, but we hoped would never happen. sadly, it's now a reality. we will continue to do all we can to protect the people of london. i'll take a couple of questions. [ inaudible ] >> we'll look for that later on. [ inaudible ] >> there's a massive operation

ongoing. i'm not going to discuss the operation sensitivities for reasons i'm sure you understand. >> was the officer that was attacked, one of the armed officers? >> one of the armed officers, yes. [ inaudible ] >> as you'll understand the situation, when you've had such an awful incident take place on westminster bridge, the reports will be confused with many varying accounts and we're working our way through that. we're satisfied at this stage it looks like there was only one attacker, but it would be foolish to be overconfident so early on. so for precautionary reasons we're locking down the area to make sure everyone can be safe. [ inaudible ] >> so, what we're saying to the public is, please be vigilant. no reason to be alarmed but

vigilant on your way home. you will see more police officers armed and unarmed out on the streets. >> the peace officer and suspected assailant who died, the others who died on westminster bridge or in parliament? >>hat's my understanding at the moment. casualty numbers and details can be a bit confused but i believe they died on the bridge. one more question. [ inaudible ] >> clearly our investigation is going forward and i'm not going to give you any details on that for obvious reasons. >> can you tell us more about the officer who died? >> weave got an awful situation. an officer has been killed. it would be wrong to give details now. thank you very much. >> keir simmons, our london-based correspondent, we see the numbers now at the bottom of the screen. four dead, 20 injured. what else did we learn from that briefing? >> i think the crucial question in terms of the investigation that mark rouly, acting deputy

commissioner set out was whether or not there is one attacker or more than one attacker. he said we are satisfied that there is one attacker but we are locking down the area to be completely confident. in terms of the pictures we've been looking at, you've seen the vehicle that slammed into the fence by houses of parliament. it looks as if one of the doors of that vehicle is open. it looks as if the working hypothesis for scotland yard is this was one person driving the vehicle, that exited the vehicle, ran around into the grounds of parliament and then attacked a police officer. we now know fatally, who was defending parliament. remember, that police officer was trying to prevent the assailant from getting into the house of parliament. we even know one of the most senior scotland yard officers was there at the time, was a witness by coincidence, we think. the risks were huge, beside what

we know from the fatalities and injuries. >> malcolm nance is here with us in studio as well. malcolm, coming out of the briefing what would you add vis-a-vis your observations? >> it was a very concise briefing and excellent. now that we know the police officer himself died defending the parliament. initially, this has the hallmarks of isis but also has traits taken from o groups, al qaeda in hamas. in israel there's a common tactic of using suicide as individual weapons attack where you pick up a knife, you go into the street, you find a policeman, attack him and wait to be killed. same with the use of vehicles. there were over 48 vehicle attacks, in israel against people. we also saw that at nice and as keir said earlier, al qaeda and isis have put out playbooks on how to use vehicles. it's the first anniversary of the brussels attacks. so, this combination of things

leads me to believe we have a self-inspired wannabe gjihadist who carried out this attack in london and carried out the chain of success in england defending against attacks like this. >> we are joined by a member of parliament, a member of the house of commons, jonathan ashworth was evacuated from his office when this attack began. mr. ashworth, what were you able to see and hear about and where were you taken? >> well, i am in fifth floor office overlooking the yard, and i could see from my window the car mounted on the pavement, and i could see into the yard and police and others trying to resuscitate a body on the ground. i could see armed policemen crossing the yard. we were evacuated from those

offices overlooking the yard and now we're in another part of the parliamentary estate. we're still in lockdown. we're all devastated to learn in the last few minutes that a police officer has lost his l e life. there are thousands of people who work here. thousands of people who work here will go home tonig but one less person who works here won't go home tonight. gen his life defending the thousands of other people who work here. we're absolutely devastated at that news. >> we add our condolences to that. how has your life changed? how has the process of coming into work changed and your view of the terrorist threat over these past few years? >> well, i was a member of parliament and i worked in the uk government, and i remember when we had our terrorist

attacks on our london tube system, our underground system, so london knows there's a threat but we are as a nation resilient. and we believe in the end the values of democracy, freedom, justice will win out in the end. these people can attack the building, they can attack other institutions in london, but they can't destroy our values. and i think that's something we should never forget. london will carry on. we will all carry on. we're a democracy. we're one of the oldest democracies in the world. we're a proud democracy. people will continue to go to parliament. wea we've had school parties here today, people visiting. that will continue. we won't let this get in the way of the democratic process. >> it's scary to think in one

instani instant driving across a bridge. looked like every other car driving across the bridge, but for a sudden left turn, that's what made it a weapon. >> yeah. that's correct. and it's frightening. we come into this building. i walk along that bridge four, five days. i walk over that bridge often. thousands of tourists and huns of thousands of tourist walk across that bridge constantly. 's a famous bridge. as i understand it, there have been some french school children or students who have been injured, perhaps even lost their lives. it is devastating. our thoughts and prayers are with all the families and the victims. but we must not let terrorism, if it's terrorism, defeat us. we won't let them defeat us.

democracy will win out in the end and our way of life will win out in the end. and i think this is something many of our viewers will agree, of course your nation has been the victim of atrocious acts in recent years as well, but we will never give up on democracy and freedom. >> again, given the long and close relationship between our two nations, our condolences go to you, jonathan ashworth, a member of the house of commons. we'll let you go back to your colleagues. thank you very much for letting us know the view from inside. matt bradley, nbc news correspondent based in london, is with us by telephone. matt, give me a situation or where are you vis-a-vis the pictures we are watching mostly of the scene on the bridge? >> reporter: thanks, brian. i'm actually on lambeth bridge, which is the bridge immediately to the west of westminster

bridge. you'll remember westminster bridge, the focus of the original attack. that's where one of -- at least one of the assailants drove into a crowd of people. this bridge i'm on you can have a commanding view of the houses of parliament, of the london eye and of the traffic that was stopped on the bridge. really, it's a startling scene because there are several police boats parked in the river with their lights flashing, so it's really -- it's all of the streets leading up to this bridge have been blocked as well. i just now saw dozens and dozens of school children in their little uniforms, mostly addition looked around age 10 or slightly younr,iling out of the house ofparliament, which of course this attack had occurred. it looked as though addition-- resisted the urge to thrust a microphone into their faces and ask them what they saw. of course, they actually looked -- they looked like they hadn't seen any of the action

and they were all a little surprised and shocked to see the enormous number of police cars and the media that had trained their cameras on them as they were leaving. we saw these dozens of children who had been on lockdown in a visitor's center, which is adjoining the parliament. one of the teachers did mention they had just been on a field trip to parliament. probably just to get kind of a stodgy lesson in british history and politics, and ended up getting much, much more -- a much devastating and exciting day for them. it looks like they didn't see the attack. they were sheltered in the visitor center. it's not part of the house of parliament. it joins the houses of commons. they look as though they hadn't seen anything. they actually seemed in good spirits and were quite startled by the amount of attention trained on the building.

>> matt bradley, thank you. we'll stay looking at these scenes. keir simmons, that's, sadly, the closest we've seen of this accident scene after the fact. keir, it's been something, i'm guessing londoners and brits have gotten used to in real time, along with us. here we are in our studios in midtown manhattan. on my way into the building i passed m-4 style, long barrel, semi-automatic weapons we did not see in this part of new york city years ago. i know that in london, it is not part of the tradition to be openly armed for law enforcement. but you've watched this change take place. we learned today the reason why we have it. >> that's right. and looking back over decades in that particular area, you've seen the changes take place. you've seen old movies, old

images of the way downing street, which is very close to there, used to be with people walking up and down the street now. that is blocked off so you can't get in there with a pass. >> like pennsylvania avenue in front of the white house. >> that's right. here in front of the parliament, that's a security defense you're looking at. the car has clearly pushed past that and has rammed that gate to the point at which it's got past the kind of defenses designed to prevent some kind of an explosive attack on the building. so, i guess what you end up with is a building that is about democracy. it is about members of parliament being able to have access to the people who they represent. and those people being able to get access to them. you can go in, people will have done it, and watch prime minister's questions, watch it taking place. anyone's allowed to do it. that's what democracy is. this was an attack on democracy. you know, sitting here, watching these pictures in my hometown,

it's pretty tough to see, honestly. at the same time, you listen to the way people are dealing with it. a calm way they're dealing with it. you listen to the head of addition the acting head of scotland yard there talking about one of his officers being killed, defending that building, defending democracy, actually. and i guess you feel a little bit of pride at the way people have dealt with this, despite the attempt to attack such an important building. just looking at these pictures, you just can't overemphasize, brian, the kinds of addition -- of tar gets available in that area. the queen is at buckingham palace a short distance away. scotland yard itself is a short distance away. downing street is there. the seats of british religion, the church of england is there. there are so many ways in which people can be attacked, but you're left thinking, how many defenses do we need to put up?

if this is one person who's been inspired from overseas, it's very, very difficult to defend against that. >> malcolm nance, this is where we enter your expertise. one of my point that four seconds before this happened, this was just a car. after this sudden left turn, it was a terrorist weapon. >> absolutely right. and, you know, keir brings a very important point to the table. as your question indicated, what level of security do we want? what level of security we need. if you leaf it to counterterrorism professionals like, my we'll be building 20-foot high texas barriers around your building and it will look like downtown baghdad, tanks on the street corners. this is not what we are. as we are as a nation, both nations allied -- >> as you talk, this is new york city police officers. >> emergency responses for new york city. you can elevate it a little bit so that the terrorist -- the

effect that you want is a deterrent effect but you don't want a deterrent effect on democracy up. want a deterrent effect on terroris cells as they realize the security situation can elevate or lower, depending on what intelligence we may have about them. you throw in the question of uncertainty around their operations. then when they carry out their operations, as you saw today, the very low, discreet security. granted, it cost one officer his life, but it stopped the massacre that it was designed to stop, which is, you know, armed assault on the parliament. >> you've been looking, i noted earlier, at the size of the knife up. saw the size of the knife in the pictures. >> 12 to 16 inches. >> just a knife. >> just a knife. and to malcolm's point, the temptation is for this to have an equal and opposite reaction, but we've got to keep these houses of democracy open. we have a brand-new

multi-billion dollar visitor center under our u.s. capitol. it has made the u.s. capitol safer. nothing can prevent against this kind of low-tech terrorist attack that, indeed, starts with the turning of a wheel and a moving vehicle. sam gad jones, defense editor for "the financial times" was near parliament when this attack took place. he is able to join us by phone. sam, what did you see in the moment and in the aftermath? >> well, actually, i wasn't outside parliament, but, obviously, in the area during the attack. the whole area was sealed off soon after it became clear what was going on. that was just after lunchtime in the afternoon here in the uk. the response was very fast. i would say that. parliament is obviously a very heavily defended site on any given day anyway.

and the whole area around westminster, for obvious reasons, is very sensitive and is highly surveilled and authorities are on the watch out for any kind of terrorist incident there. so, the response was very swift. but as you and your guests have said, ultimately, with thisind of low-tech terrorist attack, there's only so many countermeasures you can ever put in place to try and stop it from happening in the first place. and when we're talking about a car and a knife, objects that are impossible to ban or regulate the use of in these circumstances, then we're talking about a reality in which you're never ultimately going to be able to stop every single attack. >> sam, when you hear scotland yard tell you to be vigilant, as you go on about what has become the evening in london, what does that mean to you?

>> i think they're worried, obviously, as any security forces are, about copycat attacks, about attacks -- one attack triggering others. also, of course, about the chance that this wasn't a lone actor. that there may be others involved on the ground. in london you're kind of constantly reminded about the threat and of course in europe where we've seen these kind of attacks in recent months. sensitive sites like train stations, public spaces, you are reminded to be wary. if you go on the tube, on the underground in london, there are announcements about making sure you're kind of wary of suspicious behavior or to sort of look out for unattended items, unattended bags, luggage, that kind of thing. that has been the case for many years now. so i think in a certain regard londoners are used to all of

this. >> thank you very much for adding your voice to our conch. sam gad jones of "financial times" calling in from london. kelly cobiella, another one of our london-based correspondents, is standing by to talk to us. kelly, as we go to you, we note that on the left-hand side of our screen is a real-time picture. we just opened up the iris a little bit to add some light to the picture, but 6:22 local time, thedf dinr hour in london, we'll be losing daylight pretty soon. >> reporter: that's right. and people are going to be going home, talking about this very incident. it's something londoners have been sort of prepared for, braced for, i suppose, for years really. the city is no stranger to the threat of a terrorist attack. the threat level was already

extremely high. the exact verbiage, i think, severe. people have been told its not a case of if but when. the likelihood of something happening in this city was fairly high. brian, i was making my way down to the offices in central london, two, three miles from here. people were getting on the tube, they were heading home, they were walking on the streets. granted, it's not as busy as you would normally see london at this time of the day. certainly not in this part of london. but they are sort of getting about their business, including tourists. we spoke to a couple of americans who are here, just arrived this morning. they this only been in the city for a couple of hours and were on their way down to see big ben when they heard all of the commotion. and they said, look, we understand, we knew when we came here that it was a possibility that something like this could happen in europe. everyone knows that.

and they said, yes, it's terrifying. that's what its meant to be. that's what it's meant to do. but that doesn't mean we're going to run and hide in our hotel. that's the kind of attitude you have from londoners and from people who are in this city. a couple things just from the investigative side, brian. we now understand that among the dead, as you heard in that press conference, are the officer who was there to protect parliament, the man who was stabbed by the attacker, after he rammed all of those people on the bridge. two people on the bridge and the attacker himself. so four people dead in all, 20 people injured. some of those injuries are reported to be catastrophic. some not so serious. and among the injured, brian, tourists, at least three french students who were here on a school trip. we understand from the french officials that their injuries are serious. brian?

>> kelly cobiella, one more question. this calls for a prediction on your part, but what do you thing the break of day tomorrow will bring, another business day, in the portion, in the section of london where you are? >> reporter: well, if the streets are open, it will feel fairly normal, to be honest. this is a city that just gets on with it. and if, in fact, the investigation in this part of london, central london, is completed enough to open up these streets, and i imagine they would do that as quickly as possible so they can get back to business as normal, then you will see once again tomorrow morning, black kacabs coming up and down the streets, the signature red bes and people heading to work and trying to get on with it. >> kelly cobiella, thank you for adding to our coverage. you see the updated figures at the bottom of the screen. not including the assailant, we

should note. three dead, 20 injured in london attack. another break for us. our live coverage continues right after this. let's party! [kids cheering] [kids screaming] call the clown! parents aren't perfect but then they make us kraft mac & cheese and everything's good again. because it's here. cue the confetti.

say hi to xiidra, lifitegrast ophthalmic solution. xiidra is the first prescription eye drop solution approved to treat the signs and symptoms of dry eye. so give your eye doctor a ring, and your eyes just might thank you. one drop in each eye, twice a day. the most common side effects of xiidra include eye irritation, discomfort or blurred vision when the drops are applied to the eyes, and an unusual taste sensation. to help avoid eye injury or contamination of the solution, do not touch the container tip to your eye or any surface. if you wear contact lenses, remove them before using xiidra and wait for at least 15 minutes before placing them back in your eyes. are you ready to do something about your dry eyes? talk to your doctor about xiidra. 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. you didn't know we had over 26,000 local activities listed on our app. or that you could book them right from your phone. a few weeks ago, you still didn't know if you were gonna go. now the only thing you don't know, is why it took you so long to come here. expedia. everything in one place, so you can travel the world better. the search for relief often leads here.s, today there's drug-free aleve direct therapy. a high intensity tens device that uses technology once only in doctors' offices. for deep penetrating relief at the source. aleve direct therapy.

we are back. as is often the case, we're covering news on a number of fronts. obviously, our ongoing live conch of what is being called and treated as a terrorist attack this afternoon in london. the news out of washington and the pace of it does not stop. sean spicer has been briefing at the white house. we're going to listen in while keeping an eye on everything that's going on and we'll keep an update on the washington news that's taken on new currency in the last hour. let's listen into the white house briefing. >> we institute high standards here and we're held to them. given your words, is it sufficient to trust the information the people you hire give you and can you say with certainty right now there isn't anybody else that's working in the interest of other foreign government, working for this government right now? >> it's a good question, peter, because there's a big difference between working for a campaign or an entity where there's no forms to fill out. when you work for the united states government, especially here in the white house, you

fill out a security clearance form, an employment form that asks certain questions under the penalty of law. those questions -- >> holon. >> but to begin, h filled out forms under the penalty of law. i don't know what was on his forms or what was not on his forms. what the president let him go for was not being truthful to the vice president. not necessarily what was on a form. if somebody fills out a form, security clearance form or another document and lies on that form or misleads, they'll face the penalty of law on that. that's a big difference from saying when someone was hired on a campaign or another entity they should disclose everything in the past, who their clients were -- but if someone presented a resume and it was faulty, sure, if that was -- as you recall, there was another person during the transition named to a position that was discussed as not be iing truthful with some

their works. we let them go. people write things, they have jobs, they describe themselves in certain ways. every time that i'm aware of that we've had an incident where someone has not been forthright and truthful, we've let them go. but when you work for the united states government, you actually fill out security clearance forms, employment forms under the penalty of law. none of those cases occurred in the past. to dredge up someone's work from a decade ago -- not to say paul was untruthful. you're trying to make the accusation that somehow he was dishonest or -- yes, are you. >> i'm not asking about paul man aport. can you say with certainty right now there's nobody working for this white house that is presently working in the interest of a foreign government? >> i can tell you that every form has been filled out -- >> so you trust that -- >> absolutely. you got -- i mean, people are filling out forms. so to sit here and ask me that i can vouch for whatever it s a few hundred people, that have sfild out everything, that would

be ridiculous for me to stand here and suggest that i possibly could. what i can tell you is under the penalty of law, every single person has filled out a form that is being vetted by whatever level of classification they need to get by the appropriate law enforcement agencies or hr entities. but i can't prevent somebody from fully disclosing everything on their taxes or filling out a form. i can tell you if there's an instance brought to our attention where someone misled us, they would be sent to the appropriate law enforcement action or dismissed. but there's no tolerance for that. >> in regard to devin nunes, in the comments telling us, on march 4th the president tweeted, how low has president obama gone to tap my phones during the very sacred election process. this is nixon/watergate, bad or sick guy. does the president stand by his statement that president obama is a bad or sick guy? >> i think the president's tweets stand for themselves. we've talked about -- hold on. i'm going to answer the question

if i can -- >> reporter: the difference addition. >> i know. i think the president's tweets speak for themselves. as for the rest of the tweets, let's see how this process evolves and what further information we can gather. >> reporter: thanks, sean. on the executive order on energy independence, that's been delayed for several weeks now. >> hold on. why has it been delayed? >> reporter: your office said it was going to be released several weeks ago. it wasn't. then there were reports consequently that said it would be released and it hasn't been. can you -- >> with all due respect -- >> let's talk about what we're witnessing and just heard. on the left, the terror is attack in london, which we've been covering. on the right you have just heard the press secretary at the white house assure us all that people are filling out forms and you've also heard him try to draw a distinction between people working in government, who may have foreign entanglements and people who aren't.

but in this case, while our own reporter, peter alexander denied he was asking about paul manafort specifically, it would mean that the chairman of the campaign of the man who is about to become president of the united states. let me read you what i meanwhile you look at both of these scenes. associated press president donald trump's former campaign chairman paul manafort secretly worked for a russian billionaire to advance the interests of russian president vladimir putin, a decade ago and proposed an ambitious political strategy to undermine anti-russian opposition across former soviet republicans, the associated press has learned. the work appears to contradict assertions by the trump administration and manafort himself that he never worked for russian interests. so, again, you heard there the distinction between people working in government and people who were about to be connected

with government, in this case, the future president of the united states. the other thing we just witnessed, sean spicer was given an opportunity to retract or soften the language from the president's tweets that barack obama was somehow a bad or sick guy and, again, took a pass on that opportunity. kelly o'donnell is standing by outside the white house for us. kelly, did we get that about right? >> reporter: yes, brian. most recently the president in an interview referred to president obama as nice personally but suggested that some of the people who supported him had been undermining the new trump administration. very treacherous ground for sean spicer to say something ahead of his own boss. all things related to barack obama seem to cause a great deal of anxiety here. when it comes to larger issues, its helpful to remember that when paul manafort was brought on during the trump campaign, that was at a time when there was a strong feeling within the

republican party that they could mount a challenge to sort of topple his advantage at the convention. that was something that was alive and real at that early phase. paul man for the has a home inside trump tower. he's he's effectively a number of donald trump at the time. he was part of the nitty gritty of what happens at a convention so he had relevant experience. it waslso at a time when very few in the republican establishment wanted very few to donald trump. others had ties to jeb bush or other prominent republicans. so paul manafort came in as one of the few available people, relative experience and a neighbor of the president. one wonders how much vetting then-candidate donald trump did about paul manafort at the time. one question is have they had any contact since he left the organization? one thing we're learning today that seems to move the ball a bit but we don't have enough

information is this revelation from the house intelligence chairman, who was prominent in the hearing featuring james comey, saying today to reporters and apparently on his way here to the white house to brief the president about some incidental surveillance that captured u.s. individuals who were a part of the trump transition. chairman nunes says this was done lawfully under the fisa court and we don't know much else. here is sean spicer describing this new development at the briefing. >> i don't want to start talking or guessing what he may say or may not say or explain this. we'll have more information or i hope to have more information once the president is briefed and to find out, you know, what else has gone on in terms of additional information on this. but i do think it's a startling revelation. there's a lot of questions that need to get asked. i think it's interesting, all of the questions are in the presumptive negative to us,

instead of why was this taking place? why were people surveilled? >> reporter: one of the things nunes and other officials have said very clearly, there's no evidence of a formal wiretap related to trump. the fisa court incidental surveillance may be something of another category. he described this as new information that may have come forward. chairman nunes said at the hearing with comey he asked for persons with information to bring it forward. is this a new development? there are a lot of questions here. one can imagine the white house will grab onto this information to try to justify past tweets from the president that are at issu 's hard to understand if the president would have had this information. it sort of murkies up the water to a degree. because it's very clear that all officials say that president obama did not order any kind of wiretap on donald trump or trump tower. what else could there be that would be lawful, which devin

nunes says, but has the snare of the net and unmasking of u.s. individuals that apparently some people attach to the transition. now, is this michael flynn, the former national security adviser? we already knew he was a part of this. and nunes coming over here raises the question of how much does the house intelligence committee still investigating and are there any appropriate lines to be drawn between him briefing the president at time that committee is investigating. a lot of questions still to be answered. >> kelly o'donnell, thanks. as kelly noted, an attempt to change the verbiage and stake out a different argument that somehow wiretap, the specific word wiretap, now means some sort of incidental collection of intelligence. more on that after this. let's go over to capitol hill and kasie hunt, where the pace of news has not let up. it was enough to have us on the air from 9:00 a.m. to midnight.

today that includes the comments by nunes. kasie, perhaps you can take a second whack at explaining all of this and give us an update on this enormous looming vote on health care as well. >> reporter: of course, brian. on your first question about what chairman nunes had to say. i do have a little more information on that. nbc has confirmed nunes did not share this information with adam schiff, democratic ranking member on this committee, before he came to these microphones to tell us what he had to say. and of course he also said in that press conference that he briefed the speaker of the house and going to the white house to brief the president. so far it doesn't seem there's been a democratic member of congress who has seen this information and might be able to provide an assessment that looks through a little bit of a different lens. we know the intelligence committees have a history of working together in a bipartisan

way on their investigations. it's particularly true in the senate. this, of course, is the house which tends to be a bit more partisan. but it's still a position they take seriously. and i think at the hearing that they had with jim comey earlier addition i can't remember if it was earlier in the week. monday when they had that hearing. there were partisan overtones at same time they are kind of conducting this investigation together and still publicly saying they have faith in each other to get to the bottom of all this. this would suggest there is somewhat of a brief. what nunes said today, its possible it's not necessarily new information. we did know that there were some names that were unmasked swept up in incidental collections, it may have been standing fisa warrants. it's part of the story of how michael flynn came to resign as national security adviser. so, what nunes had set to find

out are what are the names of other americans who may have been swept up in these outside investigations? he seemed to suggest, and this is what i think we're going to try to follow up on initially as we get more information about this, he suggested this report that he has seen, while it is a product of the intelligence community and, therefore, an official u.s. government product, he didn't necessarily receive it or he wouldn't confirm he received it from an official mouthpiece of one of those agencies. he wouldn't say, you know, the nsa spokesperson or director came to me and gave me this. he just said sources provided it to him. if you're familiar with how these briefings work, when comey comes up here, he talks to members of both parties at same time or the gang of eight, which includes members of both parties. clearly this information was obtained in an unusual way. i think it's also important to note that nunes said ts h nothing to do with russia. it has to do with something else entirely. that means it's likely not in coection to that counterintelligence investigation the fbi is conducting. nunes also took the opportunity

to take a little shot at comey. he said the nsa is cooperating with him on this, but so far comey hasn't and he has a call into him. inc. that's where that stands from this perspective. we'll see if more comes out of the white house. of course the question on the hill, what is going to happen with that health care. you had the freedom caucus, many conservatives at the white house. the leadership saying, look, it's up to the president at this point. the speaker was on fox news this afternoon and he said that they're adding votes by the day. they're not losing them. they feel like they're headed in the right direction. it's not clear they have the votes to pass this. event the leadership will be in the position where they put this on the floor and play chicken. if you want to vote no, vote no, just do it in public. or if it's clear it's delayed, they may not put it on the floor at all. >> kasie, to your point about comey, one would assume he would be incredibly anxious and treated as an incredibly urgent

matter to learn everything devin nunes knows about this incidental collection of information. >> reporter: you would assume so. nunes seemed to suggest this is something the fbi should have made known to him. its not clear to me if he also feels that way about the nsa, as though he feels the nsa should have said this but now they're helping him out so things are in better shape there. again, those are still questions we're sorting through. in many ways, if that hearing on monday gave a little clarity to a muddled rumor-filled story where it's hard to separate facts from innuendo, rumor from truth, this added a lot more rumor to it. frankly, added a lot more questions about what's going on. and i don't think that we're at the point where weave heard enough information, heard from enough voices to fully grasp the

magnitude of what nunes is looking at. whether it's something extraordinarily significant or something that contributes more to the political side of this consideration. >> kasie hunt, thank you for the clarity of your reporting from capitol hill. malcolm nance, you were reacting off-camera to this. what kind of incidental intelligence collection could we be talking about? >> now you're stepping into my world. this is national security agency information or fbi counterintelligence surveillance information, which were going on, legal collection activities, against foreign entities, either russian intelligence officers, russian diplomats or other persons -- >> could be bacnking, drugs -- >> any facet of electronic intelligence. it could be collection coming from our allies, which american citizens have, as we say technically, shown up in the traffic. and you never want to show up in traffic if it's a russian

intelligence officer. these people may have had phone conversation, may have had electronic tfrz, may have had text messages. it doesn't matter. they initially were seen in foreign intelligence communications and that's when you go get a fisa warrant to access that information and turn it from intelligence into evidence. and the other day when we had that committee meeting, the hearing, it was pretty clear by admiral rogers and director comey that there was no targeted intelligence but there could have been incidental intelligence. and representative nunes seemed to make it seem that wasn't the issue. leaking was the most important part of this entire discussion. then he comes out and gives a press conference on special intelligence and u.s. citizens that may have been involved in it. this is very confusing. >> and still, jeremy bash in washington, when the president talks about being wiretapped,

not just a phrase but a term of art,omething very specific. more than that, an order that went out under the previous president, how could there be something he knows about that then the head of the fbi and nsa go before congress and say, if it's out there, we don't know about it. >> it's very strange, brian. i think it's very strange of the chairman of the house intelligence committee to go down to the white house and take this collection and brief the president about it for two reasons. number one is the president sits atop the u.s. intelligence community. he has a director of national intelligence. he has an fbi director, a national security agency director, cia director. he can task them and say, hey, i'm interested to know whether any of my people were collected in incidental collection during the transition, during the campaign or at any time thereafter. he can do that. he doesn't need a congressman to tell him that.

it's an odd bank shot. second, and i think more problematically, brian, is that the chairman of the intelligence committee is presiding over one of three federal investigations into the president and his inner circle. senate intelligence investigation, house intelligence investigation, and an fbi investigation. and it really compromises the investigation as malcolm and others will tell you, if you take the head investigator and they're talking directly to a potential witness or even a target. it really spoils the whole investigation and calls into question its integrity. i don't know why the chairman would want to do that. >> jeremy bash, thank you. malcolm nance, thank you. the picture you're looking at on the right would be beautiful but for the reason why we are looking at a live picture of london at about ten minutes to 7:00 there local time. beneath big ben you see the blue strobe lights of metropolitan police force up. see the london eye ferris wheel

in the background. that was halted because of what officials are investigating as a terrorist act earlier today. another break for us. our live coverage will continue. i like that. [ all sounds come to a crashing halt ] ah. when your pain reliever stops working, your whole day stops. awww. try this. for minor arthritis pain, only aleve is fda approved to work for up to 12 straight hours with just one pill. thank you. come on everybody. aleve. live whole. not part. it's about moving forward not back. it's looking up not down. it's feeling up thinking up living up. it's being in motion... in body in spirit in the now. boost. it's not just nutrition. it's intelligent nutrition. with 26 vitamins and minerals and 10 grams of protein.

all in 3 delicious flavors. it's choosing to go in one direction... up. boost. be up for it. s cheeparty! [kids screaming] call the clown! parents aren't perfect but then they make us kraft mac & cheese and everything's good again. the valiant taste times of death, but once!! uh, excuse me, waiter. i ordered the soup... of course, ma'am. my apologies. c'mon, caesar. let's go. caesar on a caesar salad? surprising. excuse me, pardon me. what's not surprising? how much money matt saved by switching to geico. could i get my parking validated? fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more.

we heard gunshots, what we thought were gunshots. turned around and saw the cplowd into a lady. body was literally -- must have been ten -- >> yeah, ten or 12 bodies lying across the bridge. >> it was horrendous. absolutely horrendous. >> two of the eyewitnesss to the trauma london has gone through today. you see night fall. we're a few minutes before 7:00 local time. the scene was bedlam just beneath big ben there on the left. on the right, the daytime pictures of the scene we recorded immediately afterwards. keir simmons, our london-based correspondent, happens to be here with us in new york. keir, run through what has apparently happened here, starting with the first incident, first impact. >> yeah, let's just talk first of all about the importance of the place where it happened.

officials in mi-5, british security service in downing street, parliamentarians inside parliament, will all be trying to figure out what happened in close proximity to the actual events themselves. looking at this map here, what it looks like occurred, according to accounts and images we've been seeing is the vehicle drove across westminster bridge from the right to left, that's from the south to the north. it plowed into people along that bridge, including a group of french tourists, students, three of whom are seriously injured, according to the french. it kept going, and then crashed into a barrier where that first red dot is. that is a barrier that is protecting the houses of parliament itself. it then appears, and you see pictures of the vehicle with one door open, that the assailant then got from that vehicle, according to what scotland yard say they believe, and ran around the corner into the open gates

of parliament itself. not into the building but into the precinct. ran into that area, attacked a police officer with a knife, killed that police officer, and then was himself killed by armed officers. there will have been armed officers there ready to protect such an important place, such an important building. after all, this was happening on the day the pri minister herself was there in parliament for prime minister questions. in fact, that assailant ran into the entry point that the prime minister herself would use in a vehicle on her way to conduct that important piece of democratic questioning of the united kingdom. >> three killed, 20 injured, as it says. the death toll not counting the assailant. we still think this was a single assailant who covered that much ground in that short a period of time. >> that's right.

scotland yard themselves saying they belief that this is an assailant, saying they are satisfied this was only one attacker. but at the same time, in the same sentence, saying they are locking down that area until they are entirely confident that there isn't anyone else involved because, as you can imagine, you don't want to open up that space if there is somebody else involved in this, for that person to then go on and carry out a further attack. so, as it stands, it looks as if it's one person. the importance of that, brian, is this. it tells us that it is less likely to have been a kind of coordinated attack, perhaps less likely to have been directed by an overseas organization. maybe more likely to be somebody who's been inspired by the kind of publicity we've seen from al qaeda, that we've seen from isis, who the publications of though those organizations have talked about using a vehicle as

a weapon. it's happened in france and it's happened in germany. >> on the left-hand side of the screen, there is the car against the fence. you've been saying, keir, you thought the assailant ran around one corner into the gate. our graphic, as often showing, as another block. >> yes, yes. >> we have some disagreement there. >> it looks to me, and witnesses have been talking about being able to see that car ram the gate and then witness the incident with the police officer. it looks to me as if the person inhe vehicle has run around the corner you're seeing on the left and now has run into the area that that -- that grassy area, the lower grassy area, behind big ben, which is within the precinct of the houses of parliament itself. within that place that is the symbol of british democracy. >> the equivalent of our grounds of capitol hill and then some. also you see, depending on the

shot, that the -- the lawn ajais ent to that has become a kind of impromptu helicopter landing zone. that's how they got some of the wounded, sadly now some of the dead, out of there to hospital treatment. jeremy bash remains with us, former chief of staff over at the pentagon and the cia, among other jobs he's had in and around washington. jeremy, again, so this -- word goes out this has happened in london. and i don't mean to use this term to diminish anything. it's as low-tech as a terrorist attack can get. what are the u.s. and other countries to do about this kind of thing? >> first, they want to determine whether this attacker was connected to any cells inside the uk or any foreign terrorist organization. the working hypothesis has got

to be this is an isis-inspired attack. i say that because isis has featured british citizens who have joined their ranks and cried out for, if you will, attacks inside the uk. in fact, isis's propaganda, the main magazine, online magazine, has said, don't come to syria, don't come to iraq. undertake attacks in your own home country. they put out, if you will, a terror tool kit that has talked about car rammings, that has talked about knifings, building on a november 2014 statement from their principal spokesperson in the syria/iraq area that id, you should strike the disbeliever wherever, whenever, however you can. they talked about using rocks to smash their heads and cars to run over them. that was the inspiration we now believe for last year's horrendous car ramming attack in nice, france, that took the lives of 73 individuals. i looked at the scene of

westminster bridge today and i thought to myself, my god, this could have been so much worse. an individual even with low-tech capabilities, like a car, a knife, a personal handgun, can wreak havoc downtown, close major thoroughfares and cause major carnage in these crowded metropolitan areas. >> are we just lucky that doesn't happen more often, considering the difference between this being a normal day and our coverage of a terrorist attack is grabbing the steering wheel of a car and pulling to the left? >> well, at some level, of course, brian, we are lucky. it is sarin dip to us. i also have to credit the british intelligence services. new scotland yard and coming in secretly behind them, the briltic secret service, the director of british intelligence, mi-5. they have gotten very good at identifying individuals either

traveling to the uk or actually born and bred in the uk who may have verged off and sympathized in some ways with radicals, somehow made contact with people who have traveled to syria and iraq, somehow become inspired through their online content or other ways by attending sermons or public lectures of people who are trying to inspire or radicalize people. mi-5 is really good at this. they have identified a lot of people who would fit that category and they have stopped many attacks. it's important to note, brian, that isis has not conducted a successful attack in the uk, if today's attack turns out to be isis-directed or isis-inspired, this would be the first. brian? >> and that investigation is proceeding. jeremy bash, thank you very much. the 3:00 hour has arrived here east coast time. you see nighttime has fallen in london, as we are covering this ongoing aftermath from