are you dealing with congressman conaway or congressman nunes? >> my interactions are with mr.onaway and we have a good, working relationship and it has been in many respects a model of bipartisanship but the ultimate decisions are made by chairman nunes. for that reason, subpoenas that should go out aren't and those not necessary carrying us in a completely different direction are going out. end of the day, the leadership of the committee in the investigation is in mr. nunes' hands. the problem from the very beginning, you know, chuck, with that midnight run to the white house from our chairman, canvassing where he got that information poisoned our committee thereafter, giving me no sense of enjoyment to see the senate run into the same problem. if one party views this responsibility as circling the wagons around the white house and protecting at white house at all costs it's very lard to do a bipartisan investigation. >> let me ask you this. at this point, we have a special counsel. at the end of the day, obviously, you guys have a fact-finding mission. you're a separate bran

the preview, hosted by "the washington post," will include white house counselor kelly anne conaway. house minority leader nancy pelosi. and senators angus king of maine and shelly moore cap tofe west virginia. we'll have that live in about 20 minutes. 2:30 p.m. eastern. in the meanle time, we'll lookality the week ahead from today's "washington journal." continues. host: joining us for a discussion on many things, particularly in light of the white house and congress this week, are two guests. we are joined by darlene supervalu from the -- superville by adam weaver.

but pope conaway house intelligence committee member says this is one of the reasons why the memo needs to be released. >> in order for us to do the work of the judiciary committee to propose legislation and you need to know the underlying reason and this is a problem that can be solved. cheryl: house democratic leader nancy pelosi issued a statement saying in part chairman nuÑez memo contained significant inaccuracies and omissions to misrepresent the underlying intelligence and jeopardize our intelligence on enforcement communities. last week the justice department urged nuÑez not to release a thing of would harm ongoing investigations. it is potentially another knock on the fbi's credibility. the committee member called a sad day in the history of the committee because to the fbi use investigation for the russian dossier against president trump to get the clearance to go in for the surveillance and that would mean they were going after the president. transfer the trunk campaign. all this with the surprise resignation. fbi deputy director andrew mccabe has been removed from his positi

conaway. >> thank you. please pass onto your team thank you for where you've gotten us to today, the thousands of people hours whatever got you to it. however flawed we are at this point, we're far better off than when i first took up this task. i have seen that progress. got a long way to go. don't want to overpromise and underdeliver. the '18 audit is unlikely to be a clean opinion given the scope of what has to be done. but we are so much further along based on the leadership that you and your team are providing and the hard work of the folks who get up and go to work to face this daunting problem that so please tell them thank you. it's like trying to push that rock up everyday. we'll try to keep that process moving forward and not do anything that hampers from a legislative standpoint because we're frustrated it hasn't gotten done sooner. we have to recognize it is getting done. you talked about findings. that's got a certain definition to you. could you explain to the committee what a finding really i

conaway: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague from utah. while i'm not unappreciative of my colleague from california's comments, do i think we're at a place where we do need to move forward f we succumb to the emotions of what's going on around us and don't stick to the facts, stick to the -- what we're trying to get done, we do that to our detriment. i have great respect for my colleagues and his opinions. i believe that plays into the emotions what's going on rather than the facts of what's going on f we can just continue to push forward. going on if t -- we can just continue to push forward. let me say it preserves the operational flexibility of section 702 while instituting key reforms to further protect u.s. personal privacy. one of the major issues discussed over the past year has een the n.s.a.'s communication collection. a tortured title, but nevertheless we'll stick with the phrase abouts communication. abouts communications collection takes place at n.s.a.'s up stream collection and due to how the internet communications work all

the preview, hosted by "the washington post," will include white house counselor kelly anne conaway. house minority leader nancy pelosi. and senators angus king of maine and shelly moore cap tofe west virginia. we'll have that live in about 20 minutes. 2:30 p.m. eastern. in the meanle time, we'll lookality the week ahead from today's "washington journal." continues. host: joining us for a discussion on many things, particularly in light of the white house and congress this week, are two guests. we are joined by darlene supervalu from the -- superville by adam weaver. if you look at the papers this morning, this is from "the wall street journal," that the president is expected to soften the tone on the speech as far as tomorrow's presentation. darlene, what do we get a sense as far as tone eating into the speech tomorrow? guest 1: the white house has said he is going to speak in more optimistic tones tomorrow. contrast that with the inauguration speech he gave a year ago when he talked about american carnage and painted this very dark picture of the united states of america. he is loo

conaway: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague from utah. while i'm not unappreciative of my colleague from california's comments, do i think we're at a place where we do need to move forward f we succumb to the emotions of what's going on around us and don't stick to the facts, stick to the -- what we're trying to get done, we do that to our detriment. i have great respect for my colleagues and his opinions. i believe that plays into the emotions what's going on rather than the facts of what's going on f we can just continue to push forward. going on if t -- we can just continue to push forward. let me say it preserves the operational flexibility of section 702 while instituting key reforms to further protect u.s. personal privacy. one of the major issues discussed over the past year has een the n.s.a.'s communication collection. a tortured title, but nevertheless we'll stick with the phrase abouts communication. abouts communications collection takes place at n.s.a.'s up stream collection and due to how the internet communications work all

carol conaway cautioned, "research studies are typically designed to study people with a particular type of cancer and no comorbidities. when real life patients present with multiple health challenges, as they do in real life, they are usually culled from the process." and from brad restivo, "anyone considering experimental treatment should go into it knowing that they themselves are unlikely to benefit and quite likely to suffer, but that they may contribute to knowledge that could assist others in the future." and peggy slemp said simply, "i have been trying to get into a couple of trials, but have not been accepted into them. some doctors don't seem to be reaching out, even if we let them know we want to participate." as always we welcome your comments. visit us at pbs.org/newshour, on our facebook page, or tweet us @newshour. >> stewart: finally, a deadly shooting in colorado. the douglas county sheriff's department is calling the attack that killed one deputy and wounded four others an ambush. authorities say deputies were responding to a disturbance call and came under fire immedia

forwardanna wiernicki (stand up)washington correspondent take cg @ 0:37-0:47texas congressman mike conawayht against terrorism to wait any longer.other lawmakers argued the bill needed more protections for americansted poe: i despise terrorists. we oughtta go after them and get them.anna wiernicki: texas republican ted poe said the law is unconstitutional-ted poeu.s. congressman, r-texastake cg @ 0:56-1:01702 was written to go after terrorists, but is it it is being used to go after americansanna wiernicki: and republican justin amash unsuccessfully pressed an amendment to prohibit using the law against american citizensjustin amash: these are two very different options. anna wiernicki: but texas democrat henry cuellar said while the bill wasn't perfect, it was good enough... henry cuellaru.s. congressman, d-texastake cg @ 1:14-1:23 there are enough protections there to go after the bad apples and not go after people that have nothing to do with terrorism or some sort of crime.anna wiernicki: the bill now heads to the senate for a vote. in washington, i'm anna wiernicki. it's happened agai

conaway. >> two things real quick. the department is constantly facing funding challenges, et cetera. do you think you've got the right position or strength of position to be able to maintain and protect the funding to get all of this done? do you think you have the right support from the secretary and others to be able to make a cogent argument? >> i have the support of the secretary and the deputy secretary at secretary. at the committee level, i'm very comfortable. if you start talking about a cr that runs through the year, that changes. we have readiness issues in others that i'd have to be paying attention to as well. >> on the database of findings, there will be some findings that are more important than others. >> mm-hm. >> so when it first comes out, just the scope of the number of findings will probably be startling. will the cpa firms grade those findings as to ones that are, for lack of a better phrase, really critical or systemic versus easily fixed? is there some sort of a gray there that will help bifurca

mike conaway said the reason they did not allow the democratic memo to be released is they are following the same procedure as the nunes memo. they will get a chance to review the schiff memo and decide later about the public release. the one thing they did agree on is the chief strategist expected to come back to the house intelligence committee wednesday after bannon did not answer a range of questions earlier this month when asked about any matters a of the campaign season but after that really breaking down along party lines. both are warning about the other's actions and democrats contending it's a dangerous action and reckless and could be a cause, concern for national security and republicans pushing back tonight. >> thank you very much. >> you were there with congressman schiff during that press conference. what happened inside that meeting today. >> we reached a new low. we crossed a line that cannot be taken back. we political sized the law enforcement institutions that keep us safe and the release of classified information. this is terrible precedent going forward. >> are you

there would be an attempt to end the investigation by the end of the year, and let me compliment mike conawayaid, no, let's do it right. i don't want people to think it's ruined. the reality is there are good republicans and democrats that want to see it done comprehensively, and hopefully we can agree on a way forward so we have one report on one of the most serious things that has happened. >> are you comfortable with nunez when he went to the white house and shared the information, and i know the ethics committee cleared him, but are you comfortable with his involvement today? >> so far he has not been involved. in other words, i think i have been in just about all of our witness interviews and what not, and the chairman has not been involved. what has happened he is operating parallel investigations off to the side into the dossier, in which he doesn't inform us. what needs to happen, he needs to stop that and rejoin the investigation now that he has been cleared and see beyond the defense of the president in favor of all of us coming together to produce a report that is rooted in the fac

conaway. >> thank you. two other things real quick. the department is constantly facing funding challenges, et cetera. do you think you've got the right position or strength of position to be able to maintain and protect the funding to get all of this done? because it's going to be setting priorities and trading these dl dollars that are going to be needed over time versus spending them somewhere else. do you think you have the right support from the secretary and others to be able to make a argument that you need these funds to continue the audits and continue the fixes? >> i have the support of the secretary and the deputy secretary. i will tell you at the president's budget level or at the committee level, i'm very comfortable. if you start talking about a cr that runs through the year, we're in a very different place. i'll fight to protect this, but we have readiness issues in others that i'd have to be paying attention to as well. >> the bca levels would be a disaster? >> that would be a disaster. >> on the database of findings, t

the house intel headed by mike conaway, a republican. and chuck grassley, a republican. and the doj are who the president appointed. mueller, chris wray. >> bob mueller sat with the president that was a job interview for working in his government, so not set up to be an enemy. >> david, he is not satisfied with what the republicans are doing. >> look, i think the president has laid out such a clear strategy, right? if there are charges brought ultimately against anyone, he will argue that the fix was in from the start. there was a rush to judgment. and this is the deep state within the government reaching out. and if the investigation falls short, he will be vindicated in arguing this was a witch-hunt from the very beginning. ultimately this is a political street fighting strategy that he is pursuing here. republicans are in control of congress. they are in control of these investigations. and i think to john's point, the danger here for critics of the president is overreach and in a political process which is anything that congress does as a political process is going t

conaway, who is acting as the chairman on this investigation, was trying his hardest to be fair. i don't know exactly what's happening behind the scenes, but the only other assumption is that mr. nunes is making it much more difficult. the only person on the house side that can intervene is the speaker of the house. he has to be called upon to require these subpoenas to be issued. beyond that, these separate, rogue, unilateral investigations, which are taking place without any democratic input at all, for the most part, we're not even being made aware of what their investigation and asking us to participate at all. only the speaker of the house can stop this nonsense and bring us back into a fair, bipartisan approach. what exactly took place. in our lifetime, there will be no more important investigation. republicans should care as much about this as we do. they haven't tried to hack into the dnc and other measures, they hacked into our board of elections. as mr. comey said, they'll be back. >> but we want to point out that there's also no evidence that they were able to influenc

apparently mike conaway and trey gowdy were very frustrated with steve bannon, the fact he kept sayingver and over again i can't answer these questions. it's telling steve bannon actually told congress i would like to answer these but the white house essentially put a gag order on me. that really seems to undermine the white house's argument that steve bannon was a marginal player here, he didn't know anything about the goings-on at the white house. if that were try why is the white house so corresponded about what he could possibly tell them? >> my big take away from what i just heard of, and this is all breaking in the last amount of time. we saw him moments ago walking to his car. adam schiff comes out. once again, it seems they have drawn a huge red arrow pointing to the importance of the thing they're keeping inside the black box they won't let anyone see. >> exactly. that's exactly what the white house did with the "fire and fury" book. they said don't look at this, don't look at this. and of course everyone had to look. what is the white house so concerned about bannon telling l

mike conaway and the people like myself we continue to do interviews and see the importance of gettingbottom of the russia hack without prejudice. the whole point that the republicans made today was the transparen transparency. let's do full transparency, not republican transparency but they said no. some indicated a llness what they had a chance to review the memo to make it public. we'll do something the republicans did not do which is we'll share our memo with the department of justice and say we're going to make this public. >> thanks so much for joining us. >> thank you. >> let's get back to the panel. this is a moment in history to see which direction these members go. >> right. it's a moment for the fbi. what is chris going to do? he now runs a department that is demoralized by this. he has also asked these people, can i brief you before you decide to do this. if he doesn't brief them and convince them that perhaps this should not be released, what does the fbi director do because and maybe phil mud can answer this. this is a stunning development. he's being undermined here. >>

you know, ultimately if the chairman of the committee, of the investigative committee, mike conaway at this point, makes a determination that this expansive, this incredibly expansive claim of executive privilege doesn't apply, steve bannon, if he continues to refuse to answer questions, he puts himself at risk of being charged with contempt of congress. >> was there a bipartisan breakdown in terms of how republicans on the committee or democrats on the committee viewed his answers, or do you think it was bipartisan? >> yeah. i will tell you it's bipartisan. i don't want to get into the specifics of exactly who said what, but no, there was a great deal of consternation, very much on both sides of the aisle. look, every member there is a member of congress. we are very serious about asserting our prerogatives and our rights and of course, i'm glad to say that members of both parties really pushed back hard against this unprecedented claim, what looks an awful lot like a gag order. >> just finally, if steve bannon who has given lots of interviews on camera and certainly to michael wolff

conaway: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank my colleague from utah. while i'm not unappreciative of my colleague from california's comments, do i think we're at a place where we do need to move forward f we succumb to the emotions of what's going on around us and don't stick to the facts, stick to the -- what we're trying to get done, we do that to our detriment. i have great respect for my colleagues and his opinions. i believe that plays into the emotions what's going on rather than the facts of what's going on f we can just continue to push forward. going on if t -- we can just continue to push forward. let me say it preserves the operational flexibility of section 702 while instituting key reforms to further protect u.s. personal privacy. one of the major issues discussed over the past year has een the n.s.a.'s communication collection. a tortured title, but nevertheless we'll stick with the phrase abouts communication. abouts communications collection takes place at n.s.a.'s up stream collection and due to how the internet communications work all

i want to commend chairman conaway for his expertise and persistence on this issue as well as mr. courtney who was also a member of the audit panel several years ago. they will both be glad to know that we have had additional members join the committee in recent years who can contribute their background and experience to this issue as it we move ahead to -- as we move ahead. we hear evidence every week that we are not providing our military with the funding they need to carry out the missions they have been assigned. spend more. at the same time we have a responsibility to americans to see that each of their tax dollars being spent to protect them is being spent in a transparent way with appropriate accountability. we should never assume that an audit will solve all the problems of inefficiency but it seems to me that the requirement of spending money smarter is knowing the certainty -- knowing with certainty how it is being spent. it is likely the result of the first audit will not be pretty. those results will help direct us all, commerce on the department, and where we need to

i want to commend chairman conaway for his expertise and persistence on this issue as well as mr. courtney who was also a member of the audit panel several years ago. they will both be glad to know that we have had additional members join the committee in recent years who can contribute their background and experience to this issue as it we move ahead to -- as we move ahead. we hear evidence every week that we are not providing our military with the funding they need to carry out the missions they have been assigned. spend more. at the same time we have a responsibility to americans to see that each of their tax dollars being spent to protect them is being spent in a transparent way with appropriate accountability. we should never assume that an audit will solve all the problems of inefficiency but it seems to me that the requirement of spending money smarter is knowing the certainty -- knowing with certainty how it is being spent. it is likely the result of the first audit will not be pretty. those results will help direct us all, commerce on the department, and where we need to

conaway: mr. speaker, some folks in washington are upset because we just passed the largest tax increase in american history. they think this money is washington's money. and that politicians and bureaucrats to decide how to spend it. coy not disagree more. you and i know this money belongs to the american people. came right out of their wallets. under our new law we put hardworking families first by helping them cope with the cost of raising children by doubling the child tax credit. also help small businesses by cutting their taxes so that they can compete with foreign companies and create jobs right here in america. for those folks who don't think they need an extra also help sm by cutting their taxes so that they can compete $,500 or so or who think politicians and bureaucrats can spend their money better, i have a solution. mr. babin: go ahead and drop your new refund check in the mail. send it to the i.r.s. they will be glad to take your money. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempor

last night, the republican running the house russia investigation, mike conaway and ranking democratmemo? >> well, they've asked to see it, obviously. and in order for us to do the work of the judiciary committee, to propose legislation, if any is necessary, then you would need to know the underlying reason why that legislation would be moving forward and this is a problem that we felt neededed to be disclosed. >> the white house has made it abundantly clear that they want the memo published even though they haven't read it. that should tell you all you need to know about the president's priorities. even without reading it, even without hearing from the intelligence agencies or the fbi what damage it might do in terms of public release, it's clear they already want it released. that is apparently the standard now for the release of classified information. if it's good for the president, then fine, regardless of its impacts on the bureau, on the department or on the interest of justice. >> it was disclosed to the minority today for the first time that the majority has evidently opened