one, the "new york times" story. anybody who followed trump on the campaign would be shocked to know that he said something endiscreet to the russian ambassador and the russian foreign minister in the oval office. so doing it in the oval office takes it to a new level. if bob mueller's investigation shows there was collusion between trump associates and russia, and that one of those associates is in the white house, that really could spell the end of the trump presidency. that story resides in a different category and is extremely significant. i don't think we can emphasize that enough. >> i think she's right. nonof russ surprise that had donald trump called someone a nut job. but the idea that he inferred to the russians that the firing of james comey releases pressure on him as it relates to the russia investigation, that takes to it a different level. >> it takes to it a different level. yes. he shared highly classified information about the russians and noted right to do in terms of intelligence etiquette and bec

importantly, though, in this "new york times" reporting, michael schmidt reports that director comey ed the memo with senior fbi officials. we just heard description from michael schmidt there that these memos were circulated by comey, contemporaneously at the time to other top staffers at the fbi and he initialled them when he did it. and he did that, according to "the times" because comey and his top staffers perceived that conversation with the president as an effort by the president to impede the fbi's investigation. but, and this is important, at least in "the times'" telling, comey circulated the stuff among other senior fbi officials but he and those other senior fbi officials deliberately did not share the memo with the fbi agents who were actually working day-to-day on the trump/russia investigation. and that makes sense. if the president is trying to pressure the fbi on that inquiry, it makes sense that the fbi director might try to shield the agents doing that work from that pressure. by not letting them know that that pressure was being exerted by the president directly in

you seem convinced that this memo, as described in "the new york times," is accurate, number one. and number two, displays exactly what is written here. do you have any concerns that fbi director comey at the time did not tell acting director mccabe, it doesn't seem, or the deputy attorney general rosenstein who both testified on capitol hill that there was no effort of interference or rolling back the investigation in any way, shape, or form. >> i am in favor of getting at the truth. i believe that requires the appointment of a special prosecutor. if the facts lead us in the direction you suggest, i will accept that. in fact, i would prefer that. i don't want to see a cloud of legal, if not constitutional cloud, over any president. we need to be operating with cohesion. this has jeopardized all of that in a brief period of time. >> bret: what do you think are the next steps? it seems every day we have another story on this front. from a capitol hill perspective, what happens next? >> so much damage has been done. we either have to come out we have to i think appoint a special pros

you can also say that the new york times doesn't like donald trump survey york times doesn't like donaldare york times doesn't like donald trump survey are trying to give him some further discomfort but i think it's just good old—fashioned journalism, they've got a pictured and they wanted to be first. let us look at the financial times. staying with president trumper, he is on his first foreign trip, he has been everywhere, but that is not the case. many significant countries today. the pope had a realtwinkle in his eye yesterday when he handed across his thoughts to donald trump oi'i across his thoughts to donald trump on what to do about climate change. 186 pages. i'm not sure donald trump will get past the executive summary. we will read that. what are you going to say to him?|j we will read that. what are you going to say to him? i am dying to see the pictures of donald trump regional 186 pages. the key influences on trumper, ivanka, his daughter and her partner jared kushner. they are saying, do not pull out of the paris accord. this will be further trump triangulate oi'i. will be

on may 17th there was a new york times story.y to halt the inquiry of flynn". it is a big part of... we don't need to discuss... great story! i love that story! well, good, because you were the boss that put it in the paper. now, in your paper, the documentation of mr trump's request is the clearest evidence, it was said, that the president has tried to directly influence thejustice department and the fbi investigation into links between mr trump's associates in russia. now that is a heck of a claim. this is the clearest evidence, you say. butjust be straight with me. had your reporter on that story seen the memo that was the foundation of the story? as the story describes, he had it read to him by a very reliable source. all of it? all that he quoted from. yes. but did he know 100% that what he was quoted over the phone was the entire memo? certainly enough of the memo for us to be confident that it was in context. but also, he hadn't seen the memo? so he didn't know that what he was receiving on the phone was actually 100% the

is doing 110w better the new york times is doing now than this time last year.n this time last year. in fact, if you look at the numbers, if you look atjust how much income new york times made in this last quarter, they made $13 million. compare the exact same time the last year. they actually reported a loss of $8 million. a big part of the story of cause has to do with just the sheer number of new digital subscribers that they've got and a big part of it has to do with the political climate here in the us. big part of it has to do with the political climate here in the usw seems the new york times is succeeding where many newspaper and magazine publishers have struggled amidsta magazine publishers have struggled amidst a host of websites and mobile apps delivering quick news for free? well, the new york times is a subscription base and you do pay for the service. the new york times specifically isn't free. while we can talk about the successes of digital and it is important to still look at their print editions, that's where they are losing money. their ad rev

, attack the new york times. i mean, he's attacked everybody. he's attacked the media. but he seems to have a special problem with you. - i have two psychoanalytic thoughts about it. - [evan] bring it. - the first is, you have to remember the president is a guy whose family made its fortune in queens. i think that what he did, his biggest accomplishment in the family business, was coming and taking manhattan. i think he really wanted, and he made a lot of money building apartment buildings for people who probably could not have gotten them. who were rich, but couldn't get into fancy, upper east side buildings. i think he wants to be loved by the new york city establishment, the manhattan establishment, rather, and i think the new york times, in his mind, is part of that establishment. - this is queens versus new york, manhattan. bridge, bus and tunnel problem? - but i'll add one more thing. i think it's also because he doesn't quite understand the role of the media. - i think that's true. that's obvious. - i thin

the "new york times" got ahold of these memorandums obviously from someone who had the fbi director'soint of view but it paints a contemp raise picture at the time when the conversations were going on, that he was asking him to go easy on mike flynn. again this, report was just posted just a few moments ago, wolf, but, again, something that shows that this is why the president had been, you know, perhaps thinking about this for a while and was angry at the director for ma while because clearly the director did not let this go. the investigation was widening, the scope of this investigation into michael flynn was widening right before he was fired, wolf. >> in a statement the white house is denying this version of events. let me read to you the statement that's in the "new york times." while the president has repeatedly expressed his view that michael flynn is a decent man he's never asked mr. comey or anyone else to end any investigation, including any investigation involving general flynn. the president has the utmost respect for our law enforcement agencies and all investigations. t

question that apparently the "new york times" is selling you asked

sunlen, you have been talking to lawmakers tonight on 2ru6r7's comments as reported by the new york times what are they saying? >> it's been silence so far from republicans but democrats are wasting no time to seize on this. some have called it unpatriotic, the comments by trump. they say it could show a clear attempt at obstruction of justice. here's what dan killedy said earlier tonight. >> it's dumb founding. just when we think this president has gone as far as he can possibly go, we hear this sort of a report. if it's true, i mean, this is -- it's bad for the united states of america. you got to wonder what is going on inside the head of donald trump. >> so strong words there, of course, and we also heard from patrick leahy. he was a former chairman of a committee. he said on twitter "this is what obstruction looks like" and he quoted that quote in the article that says that donald trump said i face great pressure because of russia, that's taken off. >> in a couple of moejts we'll get some answers. now ri678d blumenthal who sits on the judiciary committee, senator, second time we've s

i think the burden is on "the new york times." if they are reporting it and they've got somebody that's got the document, they need to get the document and get it released." the senator shared more than he's ever shared, something as materialist that probably would have been something he would have shared. burr said he met with director comey the day before was fired. let's bring the panel. stephen hayes, a.b. stoddard, charles hurt, opinion editor for "the washington times," and steve hilton, former advisor to british prime minister david cameron. charlie, your thoughts. >> well, i am particularly struck by the stark differences between what "the new york times" is reporting and what the white house has said. it's a flat denial. i do think, as you pointed out, it's very important to remember we are talking about parts of a letter that were read over the phone to a reporter. we don't know the full, with the full letter is. it is not in that context but we don't know what jim comey walked away from that conversation thinking, and i

first, brian, to you, this is the biggest leak yet. >> this has been a week story of "new york times"ington post" stories, all until now confirmed by other outlets. i'm sure our reporters are g digging into this. "the times" reached out to the white house for comment. sean spicer did not dispute the story. minutes after the plane takes off, this story comes out. this is going to take up the air time all the 12 hours that the president is in the air. >> i think the obstruction of justice charges are about collusion with the russians. the first opportunity he has a chance to meet with the russians, he says the pressure is off on the russia investigation. he's saying good news, the guy doing the investigation is a nut and i just fired him. so there's one interpretation of that, that he's establishing an element of collusion or corroborating it by that statement to the russians. >> and just to know the severity of the leak, this is a transcript of the meeting, according to a "times" reporter here, the document was read to "the new york times" by an american official. so someone sharing th

balanced. ♪ >> hello everyone, this is "the five.">> we begin tonight with breaking news, "the new york timesis evening reporting that trump suggested that then-fbi director james comey that he drop thehe bureau's investigation into former national security officer michael flynn. according to the times, and february, he told comey "i hope you can let this go," citing a memo written by mr. comey. the white house said the report is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and mr. comey. opponents of the president are saying this newg information is stunning evidence of obstruction of justice. it's the second straight night we've had breaking news about the president, and joining us with more is chief local anchor

if there was collusion between trump administration and russians, the washington post and "new york timesady. david: judy is it note -- isn't it time to release this information, i understand a lot is sensitive. both democrats and republicans, seems there a growing consensus to cut through the selective leaking and bring the information out so that american people can decide for themselves? >> i think to extend that we could do that without damaging national security or without endangering sources, it should be done. david: do you think it can be done? >> every leak damaged national security, every leak does, the leaks are more damages than what is being alleged. david: i agree, fred? is there a way to come out with this information without hurting the sources? >> my solution is we need a major house cleans of this government. i mean cia, fbi, the defense department, and there is no just obama hold overs are there are people promoted i in sensitive policy jobs who are working against the president, we need new blood to do the business of american people not spending the day undermining th

the new york times reportsing if. telling russian officials, one accused of spying. to the times, trump said in full, i quote him, i just fired the head of the fbi, he was crazy, a real nut job. i faced real pressure because of russia. that's taken

so i look at the "new york times" one. that's immediately more difficult for the white house. >> we're getting more and more every day. does this indicate only further that donald trump was trying to impede the russia investigation? >> well, i think we need to let the process play out. clearly, you got a lot to work with. a lot of empregss that have been made. i think we've got processes in place and we need to let them work. my real concern if i were in the white house, it is hard enough on move your agenda forward without all of these distractions, controversies and just stresses on the white house. it is going to be even more difficult now. >> michael, if your president had said something like this. had been the oval office with the russians and denigrated a former fbi director, what would your reaction have been? >> first of all, i would have been shocked. that's not the man i worked for. he would 97 have done such a thing. i think what we're seeing is an extraordinary high stakes contest between leaks that are coming

and we are supposed to have the inside track to what's going on at the "new york times." ies a day that we're going to really layout in rich detail, we invest all this time and energy to it. and then at 6:00 the president fires his national security adviser. fires the director of the fbi. bans travel from seven countries. we just have to blow it up. >> seth: you do have, of course, this incredible resource which is you have to apologize to this person. then the expert on the thing that just happened is what just right down the hall basically? >> yeah, one phone call away. so part of what we do on the show is we call my colleagues, wherever they are on earth. >> seth: and you record. you play the conversation? >> we play the conversation so that when they pick up the phone, and they're still screaming at somebody -- >> yeah. >> we play it. we do that and it's become such a recurring theme, and it's really popular that we have occasionally skirted the line between what a reporter would want to us play and what we would want to play. so now what we occasionally do is, we capt

this story first reported by "new york times". the president told comey that flynn did nothing wrong, we're told despite the fact that he was fired for lying to the vice president about his conversations with russian ambassador. sources say this encounter happened after a briefing involving vice president mike pence and attorney general jeff sessions who the president asked to leave the room, according to sources, so that he could speak privately with comey. comey was reportedly so concerned by the president's comments that he documented the exchange in just one of a number of memos he wrote out of concern. the president was trying to stop the investigation. the white house for its part has flatly denied these allegations saying the president never asked mr. comey or anyone else to end the investigation. this is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and mr. comey. now, we do know a lot of background. in a tweet last week the president threatened comey or at least warned him about potential

let's talk about this report that is raking in the new york times, these images, photographs that the newspaper is publishing on its website, here is the shredded backpack carried by the attacker. it's the blue back back, on the floor of the arena. it is very torn up. a couple of other pictures, some of shrapnel, and one that we can show you of the detonator. .. of shrapnel, and one that we can show you of the detonator... no, we don't have that picture. i'm filling you in as we are getting these pictures, but we have a picture of shrapnel and a detonator with a measuring tape next them. i think there's going to be a lot of questions as to how the new york times got access to these pictures, whether they were allowed explicit permission to publish them but these are the first bit of evidence we've actually seen. there will be probably a lot of anger about this in government circles because theresa may says she has been on the phone to her colleagues to discuss what was being leaked from the investigation, but regarding the parts of the bomb, it's difficult to say. the frenzy police ar

what happened back there in mid-february, the biggest screw-up of all of this was that the "new york times" story wasn't bs at all. "the times" published this report on february 14th. later that night, cnn reported their own version of the story. trump aides were in constant touch with senior russian officials during the campaign. then the "washington post" got the story, citing multiple contacts between members of trump's team and russians with links to the kremlin during the campaign and afterward according to officials who have seen those reports. by march it is multiply sourced, american allies including brits and dutch have provided information between european cities between russian officials and vladamir putin and associates of donald trump. further confirmation there after, british intelligence passed trump associates' communications with russians on to u.s. counter parts. further confirmation. until summer 2016 a number of western agencies shared information on contacts between trump's inner circle and resistance. all of that backing up that initial bombshell "new york times" repo

charlie savage from "the new york times," is excellent. i also rely havely on the new york review of books, people like david cole, was at george town, now at aclu. as for wikileaks, i'm torn because i think julian assange is such a strange character and was obsessed, like put defeat of hillary clinton and a definite link between the russian hacking and then the laundering of the material to get it to julian assange in a way he can say i didn't get this from the russians. that's my own personal opinion. so i. a sympathetic when wikileaks was started, it was to challenge the government and i think assange has become an anarchist and his target is the united states he has no other target. so, are we -- we have exhausted the subject? thank you. [applause] [inaudible conversations] >> you just heard from melvin goodman on the cia. in about ten minutes live from the gaithersburg book city of, e meredith wadman provides a history of vaccinations. >> here's a look at authors recently features on book tv's "after words," the weekly author interview

" book review anddyort overseas books at "the news york times" and choose a host "newo york times" and host of valaika podcast inside "the news york times" book review pages the author of the book parenting incorporated, to start a namemae marriage and the future of matrimony which was named one of the best books of the year by the "washington post." she has appeared on uber and npr.publis she has also testified about her work and presented her research to issue currently lives in new york printer new book 'my lifer with bob" is a singer account of the readers life. it's a journal that reports every book she has ever read from anna karenina to catch-22. her fantasy is mistakes and missteps of dreams and ideas both half-baked and wholeheartei her life in turn influences the book she chooses whether for solace escape information or sheer entertainment. anders solomon writes in this hilarious wise account of a life led half in the world and have them books pamela paul writes with exuberance about the bumpy road of maturity. her voice tender moral madcap nostalgic generous for captivate al

the white house was rocked by yet another major scandal tuesday after the "new york times" reported that president trump personally asked fbi director james comey to end the agency's investigation into trump's former national security advisor michael flynn. "the times" reports trump made the extraordinary request to comey during an oval office meeting february 14, one day after trump fired flynn for lying both publicly and privately about his contacts with russian officials. trump reportedly asked vice president mike pence and attorney general jeff sessions to leave the room before making the request to comey, saying -- "i hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting flynn go. he is a good guy. i hope you can let this go." "the times" based its report on two sources who cited a memo written by then fbi director comey after the meeting. on tuesday night, jason chaffetz, the republican chair of the house oversight committee, called on the fbi to to turn over all memoranda, notes, summaries and recordings of discussions between trump and comey. week after comey was fired a

host: "the new york times" talking about the history here of presidents collecting fees and checks after their time in the white house, saying president obama is hardly the first president to do so. bill clinton became rich after averaging more than $200,000 per speech over more than a decade. president george w. bush was blunt when asked shortly after he left office what he intended to do. 'a give some speeches just to replenish the old coffers' ronald reagan earn $2 million for a week of speechmaking in japan after leaving office. visit, for which he was subsequently the subject of derision, was sponsored by one of the communications groups there, the country's largest media conglomerate." democrats --(202) 748-8000. republicans -- (202) 748-8001. (202) 748-8002. hear what you think of president obama's speaking fee. caller: i do agree with him being able to accept the fee because it's legal. chief and id fire speak all the way from kentucky to north carolina to georgia, florida. i do not accept a fee. , it mayugh it's legal be unethical for someone to take a fee. i do my for free. hos

the "new york times" reports president trump told russian diplomats inside the oval office that newly fired fbi chief james comey was crazy and a real nut job and that the removal of comey would relieve great pressure from the russia investigation. comey alarmed. at friend of the fired fbi director says comey told him of his concerns about trump's behavior and his attempts to avoid the president, including a failed effort to escape a public hug. >>> answering to the house. deputy attorney general rod rosenstein who this week appointed a special counsel to lead the russia trump probe tells house members he knew in advance that comey would be fired but insists his now famous memo was not meant to justify the firing. >>> overseas mission. is a the late controversy erupts, president trump is headed towards saudi arabia, the first stop on his first overseas trip. the stakes and the risks. they are high, including an address to leaders of 50 muslim nations written by a leading figure by the president's travel ban. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >> breaking news. president

in our next hour we want to get your thoughts on reporting by the new york times on a memo written byames comey when he was still fbi director, in which president trump suggested to him to seize the investigation into michael flynn over his ties with russia. it has sparked considerable reaction on capitol hill, on the heels of classified information shared with russian officials from the oval office. your thoughts on this memo, we will reduce some of the contents therein. if you want to make your thoughts known, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. .n independents, (202) 748-8002 and onter you can post our facebook page. this is the front page story that you will find in the new york times online, michael schmidt writing "trump appealed to comey to halt inquiry into asked" going on to say he the fbi director to shut down the investigation into michael flynn. according to the memo, mr. comey wrote shortly after the meeting, goes on to document information that the president has tried to direct the influence the justice department and fbi investigation between

you listen to all of this, you read "the new york times," what you make of this? >> let me read you an excerpt. "neither nbc news nor the times has seen the actual memo." come on. this is news? martha, think about what is going on. i heard john roberts report. there's a lot of questions that have to be answered clearly. but think about what the mainstream media's projected here. i won't almost say this is modernized information. we have to understand that facts are facts and everything should be laid out, regarding actual memos. think about it, why didn't that comey associate just give a copy of that memo to the reporter? i think we would all be a lot more comfortable about knowing what should come next. this is something to me that the standards of reporting keep getting lowered and lowered with these anonymous sources. part two of this, as you mentioned in the introduction, the leaks. we have an issue right now, yesterday, the information which was provided to the russians was probably sensitive, but now, all of a sudden, you guys are talking about the fact that

susan, new york times first reported this. they have a quote from the memo that comey wrote a memo that president asking comey, quote, i hope you can let this go. do you believe that if this is all rak all ra accurate and that it is obstruction of justice and impeachable? >> first there has to be an investigation and the individual needs to know about it. those two features trump clearly knows there is an investigation and clearly it existed. the third part becomes difficult. that's that you have to prove there is an improper purpose, corrupt state of mind. now notably it doesn't matter if he had proper purpose as well. if any part of trump's intention here was in order to interfere with this investigation, that's going to qualify as obstruction. >> from your experience as a lawyer in the government, can an fbi director's contemporaneous notes, assuming all this memoranda by comey, can they hold up in court as credible evidence if there's a he said/he said argument that the president denying what comey is saying? >> this is ov

the attorney general, jeff sessions as well as you heard from michael schmidt from the "the new york timesthe story a short time ago. he said as this meeting was taking place in the oval office there had been a gathering of individuals before sessions and others were taken out of the office so the president could have the opportunity to speak one on one with james comey, asked if the attorney general jeff sessions, his team had any comment on it. they are declining to comment on it right now. of course, he and the deputy attorney general rod rosenstein right now are in charge of finding the next fbi director, the person ultimately that will oversee this fbi investigation into potential ties between donald trump's campaign aides and russian operatives, which is notable that jeff sessions is playing a role in that given the fact we know he pledged to recuse himself from anything involving the russia investigation. the white house appoints an acting fbi director's comments just a matter of days ago saying there were in his words no effort to impede the russia investigation. chris? >> ann, let

also breaking, "the new york times" reporting that president trump told russian officials in that oval office meeting that firing jim comey had relieved great pressure on him. he also called comey crazy and a real nut job. we're going to start with reporters covering all of this today. joining us, nbc's hans nick comes at the white house and "the new york times'" michael schmidt breaking news every single day on the comey front also joins us. hi, guys. hans, first, i'm flabbergasted, amazing i can be flabbergasted by sean spicer's response to the stories. tell us about them. >> reporter: the first response to "the new york times" story that broke shortly before 3:00, they essentially, they didn't dispute this story and here's what they said. they almost try to make this seem as part of the syria policy. it's quite a long quote, but i'm going to read to you, "the president has always emphasized the importance of making deals with russia as it relates to syria, ukraine, defeating isis and other key issues for the benefit and safety of the american people. by grandstanding and politicizin

furiously devastatingly negative news stories are being broken by "the washington post" and "the new york times" on the trump administration. there is a massive news day that has now been schedule probably for next month, some time after memorial day. that is when the senate intelligence committee will hear public testimony from the donald trump fired fbi director james comey. james comey was invited to testify to the senate judiciary committee also, but he declined. the judiciary committee issued a bipartisan statement from republican chairman chuck grassley and the democratic senator dianne feinstein, senior democrat on the committee saying we're extremely disappointed in james comey's decision not to testify voluntarily before the judiciary committee. there is no reason he can't testify before both the intelligence and judiciary committees. and that's true. james comey could testify to both committees. so why isn't he? why is he picking the senate intelligence committee over the senate judiciary committee? which actually has jurisdiction over the fbi and the justice department. the reason is

i know "the new york times" is reporting on it, but the comey memo, was he sending it to and how did es" get it? stick i couldn't tell you how "the times" got it. we are trying to search for it ourselves. it would seem according to "the new york times" that james comey kind of had an idea. again, according to people who were close to comey, the contents of the memo. they do not have the document itself, that comey was concerned about what the president was up to and wrote detailed notes every time they met. don't forget. the president last week sent a warning shot across comey's bow saying before you start leaking anything, you better concern yourself with whether or not there are any "tapes" of our meetings. we are talking about an oval office meeting. we remember that one president famously taped all of his private conversations. the white house has refused to say whether there is any kind of recording system in the oval office. everyone thought the president was referring to his dinner with comey and his discussions with comey about not being a target of the investigation on the te

meanwhile, " "the new york time" is also reporting that president trump asked james comey during the february 14 oval office meeting to consider imprisoning journalists who report on leaks of classified information. in a statement, bruce brown of the reporters committee for freedom of the press wrote -- "no president gets to jail journalists. reporters are protected by judges and juries, by a congress that relies on them to stay informed, and by a justice department that for decades has honored the role of a free press by spurning prosecutions of journalists for publishing leaks of classified information." "the new york times" has reported that israel was the source of highly classified intelligence that president trump reportedly disclosed to russian foreign minister sergey lavrov and russian ambassador sergey kislyak at the white house last week. at a tuesday news conference, national security adviser h.r. mcmaster sought to minimize damage f from trump's s disclos. >> a yes or no question. did the president share classified information with the russians in that meeting? weas i men

why do you feel so comfortable leaking out your journal to a "new york times" reporter? e: here's the thing. you have got to figure james comey, who has been in washington for a very long time, it sounds like he has been keeping notes on all of his important conversations. i heard somebody on the radio or something say it was his get out of jail free insurance policy where he had notes on everybody. if he has got notes on this president, we're probably going to see them. i would also like to seat notes he has got on barack obama. remember, it was suggested by some on the right that barack obama obstructed justice when he said of the irs, you know, there is no there there. not even a smidgen of corruption with the irs. during an irs investigation. or the hillary ming thing, she didn't break any rules while they were investigating the fbi was investigating her as well. so, it is interesting that we would see this particular fbi agent's notes through the lens of the "new york times." we haven't actually seen them but jason chaffetz wants to seat actual paper. ainsley: maybe

the new york times is reporting that president trump asked mr comey to drop the bureau's investigationalleged ties between russia and michael flynn, the national security advisor at the time. that's been denied by the white house, but there's no doubt just how serious this allegation is. one senior democrat said other senators were shaken and called for a special prosecutor to be appointed. well, this stunning and breathtaking revelation that the president is accused of reaching out directly to the head of the fbi did stop an investigation of general flynn under the circumstances raises serious questions about obstruction of justice. it is a fundamental question here. is anybody, including the president of the united states, above the law? can everybody be held accountable under the rule of law? and this revelation that has been alleged has raised that question. and the white house has issued this statement in response to the reports. while the president has repeatedly expressed his view that general flynn is a decent man who served and protected our country the president has never ask

that in the "new york times" this morning. back to our calls and our healthcare discussion.nna from texas. good morning. go ahead. caller: good morning. i don't think people understand what single payer is going entail. in canada, my daughter lived there for seven years. yes, they had good medical insurance, could come over here, my son-in-law had to have surgery, they could come here, bills paid. but then also, americans should get ready that your taxes will increase, because it's part of it. 50%. people don't understand that. that when you have single payer a friend who just lost her job because of -- she's out a lot, breast cancer, the affordable care, $21 a month. so she can get her chemo. that helps. children, the elderly, of which i am one of them, we're going to be saddled with premiums, higher premiums. under the affordable care, my husband has battled two cancers, one of them that is so rare that only 25 people at the time when he had the cancer ever had it in the united states. because we have high insurance, that's ok. but under the affordable care, it came down h

was that in "the new york times," "washington post" -- oh, it was in. ran one of those news organizations at the time. nope, that's not true. "the new york times" did not run 600 days -- >> gallup had an analysis that said the only thing that the voters heard was they hurt hillary clinton's name was emai email. the word email was larger than every single other word in the word cloud through the email story dominated coverage from the very beginning. she made a mistake. >> tucker: on the right it did, but not in "the new york times," not in "the washington post." "the new york times" wrote pieces like this. three days before the election, "hillary clinton at a campaign rally. "there is an unfamiliar sense of abandonment and joy. the rain grows heavier, her wet clothes turn as shade darker, she takes in the seed around her and last before she finishes her sentence." i'm feeling creepy about it. meanwhile, same day, i won't go on, but the headline in the "times" was in line -- trump is a villain, hillary is a hero. that's the story line in every media organ

the president, according to reports in "the washington post" and "new york times," may have divulged classified information to a known adversary, and actually tried to quash an investigation of a close political ally. from the president's own words, we already know that the russia investigation was on his mind when he fired mr. comey. we now know that it may not have been the first time that the president has taken an action to impede an active investigation of his campaign or associates, if the reports in "the new york times" are true. concerns about our national security, the rule of law, the independence of our nation's highest law enforcement agencies are mounting in this land. the stated explanation for these explanations from the white house have been porous, shifting and all too often contradictory. the country is being tested in unprecedented ways. what are now required are facts and impartial investigations into these very serious matters. first, the white house should make available to the intelligence committees the transcripts and any related summaries of the oval office

not tonight it's "the new york times" ." and the flynn probe, by a bitter, angry comey who didn't care a whit about the rule of law. >> i think we have to go to the next stage. it's no longer fake news it's now dishonest news. it is not about the political agenda, it's politics above national security. we've gone through the numbers just since february. let's look at what has been leaked to the press. i'm just going to give you a handful. the conversation was leaked to tempt the president of mexico, "washington post" leaks the conversation to australia. a political leader to paris. one is it going to stop? when is the conspiracy theory insanity of the resist movement of the nexus going to say look. were not going to endanger national security anymore, were going to do actual journalism. when is the leaking going to stop. it has to be coming. by the way, "the washington post" was so wrong so often. they were recording everything they said last night. the disastrous accuracy rating. it's pretty amazing. here's my question, if

in the new york times about u.s.-saudi arrays -- relations and the president son-in-law -- president trump son-in-law jared kushner welcome the high-level delegation of saturday's to a gilded reception room next door to the white house and delivered a pep talk, let's get this done today. he was referring to a $100 billion plus deal via mis-direction hope to seal it saudi arabia in time to announce it-- deal in a hopes to seal with saudi arabia in time to announce it. host: new york times goes on to say they are expected to frame the deal as a symbol of american minute commitment to security in the persian gulf. thatr officials point out president obama, whose arms billion, had $115 already approved several weapons in the package. check, -- chuck, independent. caller: this call is concerning trump's alleged interference in the investigation of russia. host: ok. caller: i think the democrats are trying to get comey in jail. host: say that again. caller: i heard him testified there was no, under oath, that buddy trying

liz: the "washington post," the "new york times" and the "l.a. s" agreeing what president trump did was perfectly legal. should the media focus on the leaks or what the president did, what do you think? . >> i think focus on the leaks would be nice from the media. instead what we're seeing is the left, and i would include most of the media outlets like the "washington post" as part of the left, they try act like the leaks are really just a distraction for all of us that we use who support president trump or republicans or conservatives use that as a distraction from the real issues. that is not the issue at stake here. there are saboteurs inside the cia and nsa and these are master manipulators, you give them readouts of a meeting, if they want to undermine you, they can. the white house has to be prepared, one to what will come out of the erdogan meetings, what readout could happen there? russia is a hot-button issue more than turkey right now. that's first. second, we've got to see prosecutions of the leakers. i imagine, liz, that the government

these are leaks that went to "the new york times" and other agencies. leaks have been going on for long time in my administration will get to the bottom of this. the leaks of sensitive information pose a grave threat. asking the department of justice to lodge a review of the matter and if appropriate, the culprit should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. in one sense, this is lining up with what he's concerned about at home. >> that's right. these leaks were a little different than the others. they don't seem to be leaks that were meant to undermine donald trump or embarrass him or show what kinds of outrageous things might've said in a private meeting to the world leaders. these were leaks with an ongoing current law enforcement investigation in manchester to try to find the bomber's accomplices. the name of the bomber was released before british intelligence want of it to be an police in manchester decided to stop sharing intelligence. that is quite a breach. >> i don't think this is intelligence. it's evidence, and "the new york times" an