but i had a relationship with debbie wasserman schultz and that she's a nice person and a good person. in congress, it's a little tough to say that and that's one of the unfortunate parts of today. one other question debbie wasserman schultz, i love her, i love why she's in charge, she's so funny. >> i don't know how you mean that but okay. >> that being said, why do people come home from washington but never listen to us. they never go back and do what we asked them to do. they go back and do what they want. >> depends on where you stand on the issues and at the end of the day, thebiggest battle for a member of congress is to , what your confidence demands you do. balancing that with what the constituents want because it's not always the same. i think sometimes members of congress over complicate things. >> but there voted into congress to get rid of obamacare and you go in there and say we're not going to do that now. >> let's bring that to the here and now, this political situation is the craziest ever. i don't know how to make sense of it and i've been a political animal since i w

again and that's one of the reasons i can see these things but i had a relationship with debbie wasserman schultz and she's a nice person and a good person. a congress men, it's a little tough to say that and that's one of the unfortunate part of today. >> one other question. >> debbie wasserman schultz, i love her, she's so funny. >> i don't know how you mean that but okay. >> she's hilarious. >> that being said, why do people come home from washington and hear us but never listen to us. >> they never go back and hear what we have to do. >> they go back and do what they want instead. >> depends on where you stand on issues and ultimately at the end of the day, the biggest battle for a member of congress is what you your conscience demands you do, how you feel in your heart that balancing that with what the constituents want because it's not always the same. i think sometimesmembers of congress , they over complicate things. >> it's incumbent in congress to get rid of obamacare and you go in there and say we're not going to do that now. >> let's leave leave out the here and now, this political si

not you former democratic chairman debbie wasserman-schultz rode to obama's defense. what anyone earns in the private sector. it's none of your business. kennedy: now it's not, until a republican does it, hypocrite. the party panel is back. so carly, i agree with her. i think that his wife isn't secretary of state. they don't have a massive foundation. he's just trying to raise a little bit of money. if he can get $400,000 for a speak ebb gaijt, have at it. >> i think a little bit of criticism is the price he has to pay. i would have those would have made a couple free speeches before cashing in, especially at a bank in such a public way. kennedy: he did make that speech at the university of chicago. i had forgotten how long winded he is and low energy. >> we got it for free for 8 years. >> $400,000 is an obscene amount of money. you know what else is? the amount of money anyone famous gets to do anything. you are a politician, this is the time to cash in when it's all over. the problem is when you are a politician, secretary of state, and you are running around and y

debbie wasserman-schultz is defending barack obama's payday saying people should mind their own businesspeople wonder if debbie wasserman-schultz would be as nice to president trump if he did the same thing. this is the new new york. we are building new airports all across the state. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov at crowne plaza we know business travel isn't just business. there's this. 'a bit of this. why not? your hotel should make it easy to do all the things you do. which is what we do. crowne plaza. we're all business, mostly. it's none of anyone's business what someone who is a member of the private sector decides to accept in terms of and seshan. with all due respect on what barack obama or hillary clinton earns as a member of the private sector it's none of your business. she sent to americans you know in what my in business. but remember what he have to say during his presidency. take a listen. i did not run for office

at the center of the document is the former dnc chair debbie wasserman schultz. sites and e-mail that she reportedly wrote. said the justice would not look deeply enough on her private e-mail server. that would be the justice department admitting we're not looking there because we just don't want to see it. congresswoman shult shult is with us. let me cut straight to the chase. this memo said you wrote this aem. did you write any such aem? >> not only did i not write any e-mail more have i spoken to anyone at the fbi about this. i don't even know the people that are supposedly both the ones that the e-mail was sent to by me nor do i know any of the people that were referenced in the aem. i have no relationship with any of them nor do they have one with me. it's -- the entire -- this entire thing, revelation is disturbing. i also -- it wouldn't be responsible of me to speculate about whether or not the fbi or director comey made any decisions based on this false memo an nonexistent e-mail but all i know is they never spoke to me about it. >> let me be clear. if th

not only do they deny having the conversations, in one case, you know, we talked to debbie wasserman-schultz who's like, i literally never heard of that person, i have no idea what you're talking about. the other reason, frankly, some people we've talked to are skeptical of this document, if you look at the names pulled in there, it's a little bit of russian mad libs of americans we hate and it really is suspicious to some people -- >> right. >> -- that this collection of humans. >> -- right. >> -- who fit a russian conspiracy theory about how america works would in fact all be talking to each other. >> why didn't comey know that? >> exactly. >> it's a great question and there seems to be, frankly, a disconnect between folks who have looked at the document, looked at this issue and, frankly, are having these conversations in realtime when the investigation was going forward and now when the fbi and others have really tried to justify -- >> exactly. >> -- what the bureau did. >> that's the question that i've heard from inside the bureau because he obliquely has referred to this in testimony.

and there's congressman woman debbie wasserman schultz.l talk health care and the democrats' desire warnings to republicans. >>> french election coming down to the final stretch. the latest polling showing macron with a huge lead, but will it stick? ready or not, here i come.ek.) ♪ anyone can dream. making it a reality is the hard part. northrop grumman command and control systems always let you see the complete picture. and we're looking for a few dreamers to join us. ♪ 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. there's nothing more than my vacation.me so when i need to book a hotel room, i want someone that makes it easy to find what i want. booking.com gets it. they offer free cancellation if my plans change. visit booking.com. booking.yeah. before fibromyalgia, i was a doer. i was active. then the chronic, widespread pain drained my energy. my doctor said moving more helps ease fibromyalgia pain

clinton's neil: debbie says but out of it, the democratic national committee chairwoman debbie wasserman schultz saying it is no one's business how much barack obama is making on the speaking circuit. that $400,000 speech, headed to the fall, that had a lot of eyebrows, he railed against. the point was who cares? >> what made this a good story was not that he gave a speech or got paid for it, a wall street firm, the center of evil, if you were a big journey. this according to president obama for eight years to donate to charity. >> a cynical move. neil: shouldn't have taken money from wall street. >> if he is so horrible to them why they would want to pay him. >> they are using him, lobbying him to make money. >> railed against fatcats. >> for the sake of argument, the principal position, speaking his mind. >> here is the thing, people think this is his private life, he has the ability to pick up the phone and call politicians to discuss legislation. why the wall street bank -- they can see what he has to say. they want influence and a lot of x senators. >> terrible, to do this. neil: does it of

been compromised in the clinton investigation because of e-mails between the then dnc chair debbie wasserman schultz and a clinton campaign operative saying lynch would make the fbi clinton probe go away. according to one government official in classified briefings comey told lawmakers that he was afraid that this information would, quote, drop and undermine the investigation, but comey didn't tell lawmakers at the time that he doubted the accuracy of the information even in a classified setting. according to one government official the fbi director felt that the validity of the information didn't matter because if it came public he had no way to discredit it without burning sources and methods. >> in public comey gave the notion for breaking protocol and making this announcement last july because bill clinton had boarded then attorney general loretta lynch's plane which was inappropriate. that's why he decided to speak out. >> that's right. i am told he didn't even mention that in classified settings on capitol hill. he didn't talk about the plane incident. instead he told lawmakers that this russi

look what happened with debbie wasserman schultz.ost: if you don't like the messengers in the intelligence community looking into this, what is the best way to do it? ander: bring ralph nader on have him testify about the efforts to stop him. consciences -- conscientious effort to deny green ballot access. about the lackt of voice. there's more than two positions on any issue. until we understand that come our voices are not being heard. host: here's some of the voices from members of congress yesterday. mostly democrats tweeting out the response to that hearing -- their response to that hearing. senator dianne feinstein said -- , democrat from california -- and then there is ann kuster of new hampshire -- we want to hear your thoughts. patrick calling in from anchorage, alaska. line for republicans. caller: good morning. i watched the- whole thing yesterday. i was surprised to not hear was the word "whistleblower." i was frustrated through the whole thing because they never thee about exactly how collusion with the russians influenc

george called debbie wasserman schultz basically to make sure they would go easy on the clinton. check. >> when you start to read through this, the general headline, but it is pretty stunning. part of the questions has been who will be the new fbi director. mr. comey is gone. this was going to happen anyway. in washington we roll our eyes, but joe lieberman wrote a letter who withdraws himself from consideration. >> democrats are not going to go for that. senator mccain had already kind of gone public blaming the democrats for making it too hard for his amigo to get in. but if that -- it's another problem for comey. if that influenced his decision making, i mean, he's going to appear probably the week after memorial day up here. i've got to presume that's going to be a big part of the questioning. was he moved by this document that they failed to even check out at the basic level. >> another story first reported by cnn last night and now by other organizations as the attorney general of the needs when getting his security clearance did not list on the form where it asks if you've

suspicion for breaching security one of ng equipment and the men is still an adviser on debbie wasserman schultz's staff. what is your opinion about keeping this person under investigation and should have this role? ms. pelosi: people under investigation by the attorney general of the united states. ou have a very specific charge there. i haven't followed that so closely. we have been busy with a lot of other things. i'm not sufficiently understanding the situation to make any concern about it. but there are plenty of people who are under investigation who still have their jobs. the ter: on health care, department of health and human services came out with a report saying they believe premiums have doubled in the last four years. what is your response to that? ms. pelosi: who said that? reporter: health and human services. is there a point where democrats can put their own bill or potential repairs separate from the republican process? ms. pelosi: first of all, if you look at the calculation that they made, it's a very bizarre calculation. as i have said to the republicans and to the president ove

it says that there is this e-mail as you explained just a minute ago from debbie wasserman schultz to a member of the clinton campaign team describing how -- excuse me, from debbie wasserman schultz to an employee of the oakland society foundation describing how loretta lynch has been in touch with a member of the clinton campaign team and telling them she's not going to let the probe into clinton's e-mails go too far. that's basically what's set out here and that's what falls into the fbi's lap. then the question is the discussions that happened in trying to determine what the intelligence value of that document is. what we learned is that by august, they had determined that it was unreliable, that it is not something that should have been counted on in any way because unreliable is a fairly straight assessment of the lack of reliability of the information therein. we found out several months later this was part of the explanation for why he made the decision in early july to push lynch to one side basically and announcing the end and the closing of the probe into clinton's e-mails,

sources, they know the source, debbie wasserman schultz. why did it take so long to conclude it was a fake? >> in the post story they say they weren't even interviewed by the fbi, weren't even contacted by them. if the fbi was so worried about this document, why didn't the fbi go out and talk to them about it. the other thing that's interesting about this document that we learned when we were reporting on it is that lynch didn't know about it at the time. instead, comey had his deputy go to the senior most career person at the justice department and talk to them about this, but that lynch and the political folks that were running the justice department didn't know what was going on here. my sense is there's probably some other stuff here that went on that we don't know about, and there were some interactions between comey and the justice department that we don't know about on this, but, as it stands right now, this doesn't really help comey's argument for why he did what he did. >> also this morning, "the new york times" reports american sp

the story at daily caller, debbie wasserman schultz threatening capital police, they want to accuse everyone else of fomenting violence, instigating violence, violent rhetoric. would we be having this conversation about greg gianforte and the anger of so many people in america if the media had done their job the last 10, 20 years, if they hadn't looked the other way at the violent actions we have seen so many progressive leftists commit. heather: more arrests in the search for the terrorist cell connected to the manchester massacre intensifies. more about the cold-blooded killer's path to terror. in manchester, details on some new rain at this hour. >> reporter: a lot of activity here, the memorial to the victims of an incredibly brutal attack monday night in manchester, we are tracking closely and aggressive police hunts to get to the bottom of it, into this morning, one more arrest. eight people with possible ties to the attack. they assure us the support network behind this bomber as new images emerge of the attacker, salman abedi. at least a year before this attack he had been radicalize

true and suffrage cable wikileaks the emails which ultimately led to the firing, remember, debbie wasserman schultz, this blows the whole narrative out of the water. maybe seth rich was upset that the dnc was conspiring to hurt bernie sanders and helpful or clinton when the nomination. we learn from those released emails, remember this, that that was the case. and then finally tonight, powerful sources. we want to understand exactly what happening here because the intensity to get this president has been more fierce than ever. five forces aligning against trump. you've got the destroyed trump propaganda media, the destroyed trump democrats, the washington establishments, that never-trump people, and they all seem to be working together in an unprecedented attack against the sitting president. let start with the propaganda media. they have been working around-the-clock since november. that's right, they were colluding with hillary before the election but since then to smear and character assassinate the president by any means necessary and they have been against trump from the beginning. remember it

been compromised in the clinton's investigation because of e-mails between dnc chair of debbie wasserman schultzld lawmakers he was afraid that the information would "dropped" and under mind the investigation. he did not tell lawmakers that he doubted the accuracy of that information. record to sources posted by comey of the fbi felt that the validity of the information did not matter because if it became public, there is no way of discredit it. think of the chains of events. when comey held this press conference in july, 2016 and said no charges against clinton. he took the inappropriate step of calling her extremely careless. she never recovered and talking to many officials on capitol hill and elsewhere, desemination of fake information is still a major issue. russia is still trying to spread false information in order to cloud and confuse ongoing investigations. victor and christie. >> dana. thank you very much. we spoke with tom fuentes, fbi assistant director, listen to his reaction. >> if there were any truth at all to this story that the fbi decided to close the investigation based on in

where have they been when debbie wasserman schultz threatened the chief of capitol police?here were they when someone tried to run republican congressman off the road because of health care? a guy pushed a member of congress in north cota. betsy devotes was blocked from entering a public school building. on inauguration day, a car was set on fire. buildings were broken into. where was the left? >> eric: you are suggesting because gianforte is a republican. >> lisa: it is all politically motivated by the left. it's the night before a special election. they want to win back the race. >> kat: when a guy before an election beats up a reporter in front of other reporters. everyone is going to want to talk about it read are you serious? if he doesn't win because of this, reality tv show. reality tv show with the dude who punched out the reporter. crazy. >> eric: hold on. >> rob: i've been talking to people in montana since this happened. there are republicans changing sides because this happens. there are democrats changing sides because it happened. >> eric: can we point out 70%

political crisis, i have joined with my colleagues, darren soto, ileana ros-lehtinen, and debbie wasserman schultz, to interdues bipartisan legislation allowing venezuelan nationals who have made a new home in the united states to remain here, if they choose to do so, since it is too dangerous to return to their home country. instead of returning to the instability and uncertainty of venezuela, they would be granted legal permanent residency so long as they do not have a criminal record and never been involved in the persecution of others, eliminating any possibility of uman rights violators or thugs accessing our legal immigration system of the the people of venezuela deserve the american people's support and admiration for their continued fight against the brutal maduro anti-american regime. honest and hardworking venezuelans who will be persecuted or imprisoned unjustly should they return to their country should be allowed the opportunity to take refuge here in the united states. mr. speaker, i rise today to discuss the critical issue of reforming and re-authorizing the national flood insurance

had been compromised in the clinton investigation because of emails between then dnc chair debbie wasserman-schultzlitical operative lynch saying the fbi probe would make the probe go way. according to one government official in classified briefings, comey told lawmakers he was afraid the information would, quote drop and undermine the investigation but comey didn't doubt the accuracy of that information even in a classified setting a few months ago. according to sources close to comey the fbi director felt the validity of the information didn't matter because if it became public they had no way to discredit it without burning sources and methods. think about the chain of events all of this help set off. when comey held his press conference in 2016 announcing no charges against clinton he also took an extraordinary and what many people say inappropriate step of calling her extremely careless. clinton aides are convinced her reputation was damaged with voters and she never recovered. now it probably wouldn't have happened without russian interference. talking to many officials on capitol hill elsewh

to show that then attorney general lynch had been compromised because of e-mails between debbie wasserman schultz and a political operative saying that lynch would make the fbi clinton probe go away. according to one official in classified briefings, comey told lawmaker he was afraid that the information i described to you would drop and undermine the investigation but comey did not tell lawmakers that he doubted the accuracy of the information even, brooke, in that classified setting. now, i can also say that, according to sources close to comey, the fbi director felt that the validity of the information really didn't matter because if it became public, they had no way to discredit it without burning sources and methods. >> let's go back to when jim comey testified a couple of weeks ago on capitol hill. >> i struggled with the number of things that had gone on, some of which i cannot talk about yet, that made me worried the department leadership could not complete the investigation and decline prosecution without grievous damage to the confidence in the justice department. and the capper was --

i mean, maxine waters here sounded almost as rattled as debbie wasserman schultz. >> i actually thinkdodd-frank is a great example. i really do. she talks about consumer protection and consumer financial protection bureau. $12billion, billion with a b from credit card companies and other entities that were taking money. liz: division of the party? >> a strong middle class. and i think you're right. that trump did a great job with economic nationalism, which is otherwise been the message of the democratic people. liz: but dodd-frank hurt loan growth, which needs for the middle class. >> i agree with you. i don't think dodd-frank was perfect. but it has protected consumers, and it made sure people who are giving this financial advice has your best at heart. liz: democratic outgoing party chair john. he used vulgarities, giving the finger to president trump. let's watch. >> now all together. (bleep) donald trump. liz: all right. we've seen use of vulgarities by the democrats. is that the best they can do? what do you think? >> it's interesting danielle agrees with the protection thing an

loretta lynch had been kpl compromised because of e-mails, reportedly between then dnc chair debbie wasserman schultzpolitical operative saying that lynch would make the fbi clinton probe go away. according to one government official in classified briefings, comey told lawmakers he was afraid the information would drop and undermine the investigation, but comey did not tell lawmakers he doubted the accuracy of the information, even in a classified setting. according to sources close to comey, the fbi director felt validity of the information didn't matter. if it became public, they had no way to discredit it without burning sources and methods. think about the chain of events this helped set off. when comey held a press conference in july, 2016, announcing no charges against clinton, he also took the extraordinary and many say inappropriate step of calling her extremely careless. clinton aides convinced her reputation was damaged with voters and she never recovered. probably wouldn't have happened without russian interference. also targets on capitol hill and elsewhere, dissemination and fake informa

we discovered it was citing an e-mail between debbie wasserman schultz. she is talking to a member of the clinton campaign and don't worry. it won't get too close. nobody is all that e-mail. the fbi knew as early as august that the reliability of that document was unreliable. the questions are did the fbi make its decisions based on a document that they discovered was unreliable at best and potentially even fake. or are they explaining a decision based on a document that is unreliable or fake? in both cases, it is troubling in one case perhaps one was unreliable intelligence and might have been fabricated by russian sources could have sway the decision making in the fbi or it is being relied on now when they know it is not something that can be relied on. >> the spider web of russian influence continues and everyone should read karoun's reporting. thank you very much. >>> up next, we have a top house democrat calling for attorney general jeff sessions to be investigated after a new revelation. a live report from washington. what's with him? he's happy. yo

compromised in the clinton investigation because e-mails, reported e-mails between then dnc chair debbie wasserman schultze saying lynch would make the fbi clinton probe go away. according to one official in classified briefings, comey told lawmakers he was afraid the information would drop and undermine the investigation but comey did not tell lawmakers that he doubted the accuracy of that information, even in a classified setting. according to sources close to comey, the fbi director felt the validity of the information didn't matter because if it became public, they had no way to discredit it without burning sources and methods. >> in public, comey said the reason he was breaking proets coland having that news conference in july is because the former president, bill clinton, wound up going to the then attorney general loretta lynch's plane a week before and having that conversation which he considered to be inappropriate. >> that's right. and that is the public explanation. he did that as soon as and as late as may 3rd the last time he testified in public as fbi director. in his classified sessions, co

she's slapping debby wasserman schultz. >> it starts at the top. >> but you know, there is the chairmanit also slams her campaign. when it is also her campaign. >> she's not wrong snf. >> no. she's not wrong. the dnc was incredibly poorly managed. among the more destructive things that happened. i go to this mysogyny thing. how it is covered. every conversation i think styles, are we underestimating the gender lens on how people are seeing this now in the rear view mirror? >> i will answer your question. i think she has two options. the first is to stop talking about it. the second would be to say i didn't campaign enough in the midwest. i didn't talk enough about domestic policy issues, economy and trade. the things donald trump happened to talk about. the issue of mysogyny. she was the most highly paid female speaker in the country, period. so i think it is misleading and, to cast herself as victim is misleading. you know, nyu did a study that put a man playing hillary clinton, a female playing donald trump, reentacted debates. the audience reaction demonstrated that she was perceived

chair, debbie wasserman schultz said comey couldn't serve in a neutral and credible way.obama's advisor valerie the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time urged him to fire comby. just yesterday representative maxine waters said hillary clinton would have fired comey. if you want to talk about people in the dark? our story is consistent. the president is the only person that can can fire the director of the f.b.i. the president made the decision. it was the right decision. the people that are in the dark today are the democrats. they want to come out. they want to talk about all of these -- they love comey and how great he was. look at the facts. the facts don't lie. their statements are all right there. i think it's extremely clear that -- and frankly i think it's kind of sad. in washington we finally had something that i think we should have all been able to agree on and that was that director comey shouldn't have been at the f.b.i. but the democrats want to play partisan games and i think that's the most glaring thing that's been left out of all your process stori

been compromised in the clinton investigation because e-mails between then dnc chair and debbie wasserman schultz and political operative were saying allegedly that lynch would have made the fbi clinton probe go away. according to one government official, in classified briefings, comey told lawmakers he was afraid that information would drop. that's a word that one source used with me. and would undermine the investigation. but comey did not tell lawmakers that he doubted the accuracy of the information even in a classified setting. according to sources close to comey, fbi director felt that validity of the information didn't matter because if it became public they had no way to discredit it, wolf, without burning sources and methods. >> interesting, dana. in publicing with the reason comey made for breaking protocol, holding that news conference last july or hillary clinton e-mail was because bill clinton boarded then attorney general loretta lynch's plane a week earlier and he deemed that inappropriate. >> that's right. that was the public testimony that he gave as recently as may 3rd. in these

been compromised in the clinton investigation because of e-mails between then dnc chair debbie wasserman schultz and political on sieve saying lynch would make the fbi a probe of clinton go away. according to one government official in classified briefings comey told lawmakers that he was afraid the information would, quote, drop and undermine the investigation, but comey did not tell lawmakers that he doubted the accuracy of the information, even in that classified setting. now, according to sources close to comey, the fbi director felt that the validity of the information really didn't matter because if it became public they had no way to discredit it without compromising their sources. >> as you'll recall, dana, james comby in a recent testimony on capitol hill krooipted the plane incident where loretta lynch met with bill clinton on the tarmac as the capper. how does that play no all therefore? >> reporter: in these classified sessions on capitol hill comey didn't even mention that plane incident. instead he told lawmakers that this russian information was the primary reason he took the unus

of a right wing fever dream, somehow loretta lynch, hillary clinton and george soros and debbie wasserman schultzere conspireing together, just utter, complete nonsense. either the fbi fell for something or else they were using this for political purposes, but either way this is a huge problem and it is just further evidence of the need both for the special prosecutor and for a robust investigation on the hill. >> well, there is a special counsel right now. you're pleased about that? >> i am. what i'm saying, this is just evidence of why it is so important they be able to do their work. >> what was so surprising about the fake memo is it could have been checked out very quickly, but apparently they never interviewed any of the people even mentioned in that memo. >> i mean the memo, to even hear it described, you don't have to be a professional law enforcement person to know it is crazy and nonsense. so how this ever became part of the justification for why jim comey went out publicly against hillary clinton, i want to know the answer to that question because this is just a kind of nuts scenario w

chair, debbie wasserman schultz said comey couldn't serve in a neutral and credible way.obama's advisor valerie the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time urged him to fire comby. just yesterday representative maxine waters said hillary clinton would have fired comey. if you want to talk about people in the dark? our story is consistent. the president is the only person that can can fire the director of the -- that can fire the director of the f.b.i. the president made the decision. it was the right decision. the people that are in the dark today are the democrats. they want to come out. they want to talk about all of these -- they love comey and how great he was. look at the facts. the facts don't lie. their statements are all right there. i think it's extremely clear that -- and frankly i think it's kind of sad. in washington we finally had something that i think we should have all been able to agree on and that was that director comey shouldn't have been at the f.b.i. but the democrats want to play partisan games and i think that's the most glaring thing that's be

former dnc chair debbie wasserman schultz said she thought comey was flonker able to serve in a neutral and credible way. president obama's advise or valerie jarrett reportedly urged him to fire comey. just yesterday, representative maxine waters said hillary clinton would have fired comey. if you want to talk about people in the dark? our story is consistent. the president is the only person that can fire the director of the fbi. he serves at the pleasure of the president. the president made the decision, it was the right decision. the people that are in the dark today are the democrats. they want to come out, they want to talk about all of these they love comey and how great it was, their statements are all right there. facts don't lie. i think it's extremely clear and frankly i think it's kind of sad in washington we finally had something that i think we should have all been able to agree organization and that was that director comey shouldn't have been at the fbi. but the democrats want to play partisan games and i think that is the most glaring thing being rancisut of all of your p

and i've asked him about where those wikileaks dnc emails came from that resulted in debbie wasserman schultzing. this kid got shot in the back. they said it was a robbery. yet he had his watch, his wallet, and his phone. i don't believe it's a robbery. but i asked julian, was it the russians? and then listen to what julian said in a dutch interview. >> sean: did russia give you this information or anybody associated with russia? >> al is not a state's party, so the answer for our interactions is no. whistle blowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often very significant risk. the 27-year-old works for the dnc. he was shot in the back. murdered just two weeks ago for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in washington. >> that was just a robbery, i believe, wasn't it? >> no. there is no finding. so,. >> what are you suggesting? >> i'm suggesting that our sources take risks and they become concerned to see things occurring like that. >> was he one of your sources then? >> we don't comment on who our sources are. >> sean: by the way my thoughts and prayers go out to

show the dnc did any outrage when bernie sanders was prevented from pushing forward when debbie wasserman schultz and that group prevented it. flagrantlybama bypassed law. does everybody remember when he employer mandate did not have to kick in, even though the law had passed. the individual mandates went through, no outrage from the democrats. i find it interesting. host: do you think no investigations? caller: i think the investigations should go on. democrats crying foul here with kicked out, comey proved himself incompetent a while ago. everybody talks about the timing. donald trump could not breathe then without having some -- could not breathe in without having someone question how he breathes in. it is all put aside. by election was usurped americans. people are screaming about the russians. the russians have been trying to affect elections since the beginning of time. why aren't the democrats screaming that democrats stopped the free election? hillary clinton became the nominee because of democrats. host: who was your candidate? number one,cruz rand paul number two. host: who did you vote

which was not doing enough to build up the data and the technology in the dnc and faulting debbie wasserman schultzteresting at this conference, paris. she says she takes responsibility for all the decisions made during the campaign, but i'm paraphrasing her, but that's not why she lost. in other words, she didn't lose because of any of the decisions she made. she lost because of comey and putin and more. >> you know, we want her to be candid and authentic and times and talk about that, but her views are candid and authentic is that she did not lose because of her actions. she said today she made some mistakes but is very focused on comey and russia. she's been fairly consistent about that. the new thing i heard was the dnc part which is true. the dnc was viewed as pretty weak and they basically said they had no data, had to build it up from scratch. you'll hear democrats in the next couple of days saying it would be nice if she takes more of the blame for the loss because she clearly lost to a candidate who was probably weak who had terrible approval ratings so she needs to think about where does

in the clinton investigation because of e-mails purported e-mails between then dnc chair debbie wasserman-schultztical operative saying lynch would maybe the fbi clinton probe go away. according to one government official in classified briefings, comey told lawmakers that he was afraid the information would drop and undermine the investigation, but comey did not tell lawmakers he doubted the accuracy of the information, even in a classified setting. according to sources close to comey the fbi director felt that the validity of the information didn't matter because if it became public they had no way to discredit it without burning sources and methods. think about the chain of events this helped set off. when comey held his press conference in july of 2016 announcing no charges against clinton he took the extraordinary and many people say inappropriate step of calling her extremely careless. clinton aides are convinced that her reputation was damaged with voters and she never recovered. that probably wouldn't have happened without russian interference and talking to many officials on capitol hill

been compromised in the clinton investigation because of e-mails between then dnc chair debbie wasserman schultz and a political on sieve saying that lynch would make the fbi clinton probe go away. according to one government official in classified briefings comey told lawmakers that he was afraid the information would drop and undermine the investigation, but comey didn't tell lawmakers that he doubted the accuracy of the information, even in the classified setting. now according to sources close to comey, the fbi director felt that the validity of the information did not matter because if it became public, wolf, they had no way to discredit it because they were worried about sources and methods and compromising those sources. >> you remember at the time, the reason he gave for breaking protocol and having that news conference without even information the attorney or others necessarily in the justice department was because bill clinton had boarded loretta lynch, the attorney general at the time, her plane and he thought that that was inappropriate. >> that's right, and that is interesting becau

debbie wasserman schultz, a democrat, confronted jim comey, then fbi director, about the fbi's lack of action about the hacking into the dnc. i'm told it was very contentious, it was a very raw moment. those are the types of things that can happen in these kinds of briefings. and as i noted, 193 house democrats, many of whom have a lot of questions, a lot of concerns about what's happened not just over the last ten days, but over the last couple of months. expect those questions to come. the answers? not so sure about that, guys. >> all right, phil mattingly, keep an eye on it for us. thank you very much. >> we saw basically speaker of the house, paul ryan, almost photo-bombing phil mattingly during that live shot, walked right behind you. also house majority leader kevin mccarthy there as well. >> and you've got to think about kevin mccarthy when you think about them dropping off those phones. >> that's right. >> no recording devices in this one. it is just a few hours until the president departs on air force one for his overseas trip, the first of his administration. nine days, five

this narrative started at the democratic national convention when debbie wasserman schultz was pushedwanted to talk about something else other than her e-mails. we're still hearing the same thing. we have no evidence of collusion. >> i wish they'd hurry up. we really need to get to the bottom of this. this issue's been raised in the minds of the american people. everybody in america doesn't read aristotle, but most americans get this. they're smart folks. they figured it out. there's been allegations that the russians somehow influenced the result of the election. let's get to the bottom of it, let the chips fall where they may. just because the russians tried to doesn't mean they succeeded. i don't think the russian activity and i believe there was russian activity, i don't think it determined the outcome of the election. that's my opinion. let's see the facts and put it behind us. >> maria: you said something that the president tweeted about. you will ask sally yates how this information got into the public newspapers? >> you bet. i'm assuming somebody before it's my turn to questio