senator langford? senator langford: thank you. appreciate the long day and the long conversation on these issues. it is interesting to me that in the beginning of the obama administration, they came to this committee and requested funds for race to the top funds for additional dollars for .c. to be able to say there are additional dollars if you do our curriculum we pick, if you'll do it our way, if you go through our plans, if you have a system we approve, we'll give you additional dollars. if i'm tracking this correctly, you're coming to this committee saying we would like additional dollars to get to schools if they pick a plan and they run a plan, and if they provide choice to their students in a public school setting. am i tracking that correctly? sec. devos: you are tracking that correctly. sen. langford: i grew up in an innovative district that did school choice from school-to-school. i did not go to the high school closest to me. i literally drove all the way across town. they had a band program and i liked at all those di

there are a lot of important issues. >> senator james langford, thank you so much. appreciate it. >>> what does the president's tweet about the lack of tapes mean for the other investigations on capitol hill? senator al franken is on the senate judiciary committee conducting. he's in the green room. and he'll join us live, next. ph) listen up, heart disease. you too, unnecessary er visits. and hey, unmanaged depression, don't get too comfortable. we're talking to you, cost inefficiencies and data without insights. and fragmented care- stop getting in the way of patient recovery and pay attention. every single one of you is on our list. for those who won't rest until the world is healthier, neither will we. optum. how well gets done. when it comes to reducing the evsugar in your family's dietom. coke, dr. pepper, and pepsi hear you and we're working together to do just that. bringing you more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all. smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels, and reminders to think balance. because we know mom wants what's best. m

britt, james langford will ask questions today. martha had lindsey graham on last night as well. this is how graham characterizes what he knows about the case for obstruction of justice. >> in the minds of special counsel mueller there is no obstruction of justice case to be made because if he felt like he had a case he wouldn't let comey his chief and only witness go out in public and get beat up. >> bill: on that point it's important to remember bob mueller is doing his own thing right now. what have you learned so far today based on langford's conversation last night and what we can expect? >> i think there are a couple of points here. one is that the most important figure here believe it or not is bob mueller. he is, we're told by sources, that has gone over this testimony with comey and kind of approved it. so in essence you're getting a sense of that investigation even though you aren't seeing it firsthand, two, langford, other senators depending on which side of the aisle they are on, they are talking about this obstruction of justice question saying what is inappropriate

we have heard from senator james langford who has suggested that perhaps these tapes don't even existmocrat senator chuck schumer saying, look, it is time for the president to stop playing games. so, there is definitely a sense of pressure to get that in those committee hands. another committee working on this, the senate judiciary committee, is pushing to get the comey memos, those comey memos from the columbia professor, his good friend, daniel richmond, who comey was working with, to get those in the hands of the media, to leak it to the media. they gave him a friday deadline. a source is telling cnn that he is cooperating with the committee and that there is likely some sort of movement to happen with those memos later today. so, that is something that they are working on as well, trying to create a sense of urgency and accountability on the white house part as well as comey and his associates. poppy? >> suzanne malveaux on the hill. thank you very much. and while some republicans are urging the president to clear the air, others are struggling with how to keep defending him. wher

richard langford's first i.c.u.y was a decade ago, and he has not lived on his own since. >> mom is the one who takes care of me. now my mother is 88 years old. >> the challenge is... >> reporter: psychologist jim jackson leads this support group, and is part of a team at vanderbilt university medical center that helped identify a constellation of symptoms mimicking p.t.s.d., post- traumatic stress disorder. they call it post-intensive care syndrome, p.i.c.s. >> they don't have a traumatic experience, in the way that a combat veteran or a rape survivor would, so they're not referred to a mental health professional. they really fall through the cracks. with all of these gaps, there just is a lack of awareness. >> how do you feel? >> reporter: dr. wes ely has studied this phenomenon for almost 20 years. he says the risk factors are clear; powerful sedatives and prolonged use of ventilators which can trigger delirium. some i.c.u. patients need those interventions, but not all of them do. >> we had to tie people down so

senator langford? >> thanks for your service and for stepping up to be able to take on this. i would have to tell you, there is not a person on this dyess that doesn't support education. we have 50 million students that are involved in elementary and secondary education and 20 million in higher education. that's an awful lot of families and people that are directly affected. we are all exceptionally passionate about this. also, in my short time of being in the appropriations budget, it is a fairly rare moment to sit in any hearing and have a conversation about how we reduce federal spending? it seems to be every request is, we need additional fund. there is always more to do. there noise question. for someone to come and say, we have to be able to find a way to serve students and the tax payers as well is a fairly rare conversation around these parts. let me ask for clarification. you brought up about the $1 billion increase in title one funds dedicated to furthering options for children to unlock success. the question came out and you alluded to it earlier, how is this diffe

>> kasie hunt joining us from inside langford to talk about everything that's unfolded here today.u for being with us and i have to get your overall reaction to what you've seen over the last eight hours or so. >> painful. it's what everybody else has experienced as well. first the shock of it, and also the unfolding of it. is it political motivation, where is this coming from, and we are so divided as a nation with people taking up their anger in a way that no one would want them to take their anger out. >> reporter: do you believe this is politically motivated? police are saying it's too early to say at this point. >> it is too early to say. the unpacking of it seems to lead that direction, but it's too far to say motivation. >> particularly among your colleagues in congress, they're talking about safety and security. given that this happened at a location, a public baseball field in the middle of suburb suburbanmesuburban alexandria in virginia, if steve scalise hadn't been there, there would not have been capitol police, there wouldn't have been detail there. >> we travel like

. >> before i turn to senator langford, let me say that the vice chairman and i have had conversations with acting attorney general rosenstein when special counsel was named. and as i had shared with the members of this committee prior to that, that as we carried out an investigation, there would come a point in time, either with the investigation that was currently ongoing at the fbi, or if there was a special counsel with the special counsel, where there would be avenues that this committee could not explore. it was my hope that already the vice chair and i would have had that conversation with the special counsel. we have not. we've made the request. we intend to have it. i think that both of us anticipated that we would reach this point at some point in the investigation. we are there. there are some things that will fall into the special counsel and/or an active investigation. >> let me say though at this point, we have not had that conversation with mr. mueller. we've not been waved off on any subject. the way i'm hearing all of you gentlemen, is that mr. mueller has not waved yo

. >> senator langford? >> thank you, mr. chairman. thanks for being here.fied in front of every senator in closed sessions. you've testified in front of the intelligence committee in open sessions. you've had lots of conversations on this, so i appreciate you being here again today. we go through some budget areas. i want to help clarify one thing. i read with some interest in the paper that there was some secret plan to be able to privately remove the special counsel who you just put in place. all i could think about was jim comey's statements publicly, saying how many times he read newspaper stories with unnamed sources, that as he read them, he thought, these are completely false. is there anything to some secret plan that's out there from you or anyone in the administration to try to go and remove the special counsel? >> there is no secret plan to involves me. no, senator. >> i would just say, no one in america is above the law, and no one in america is not faced with accountability and checks and balances. every one of us has checks and balances. the p

line ofd another questioning from senator langford of the senate intelligence committee. >> is there any sign that the president is not fond of this investigation? i can think of a hundred 140 word expressions to describe that he is not fond of this testimony. you are trained to keep these away for many, the president might have made. quite frankly, the president has informed about 6 billion people he is not fond of this investigation. you think there is a difference there? >> yes. >> what is the big difference in kicking superior officers out of the oval office, looking at the fbi director and saying i hope you let this go. i think if agents are as good as they are heard of the president of the united states did that, there is a real whisk dutch risk of a chilling effect on their work. that is why we kept it tight. ask about the 17 senators who asked questions. were they the right questions? good: the questions were ones. that helped get out a lot of the information that came out. but i really would have liked to and mr. comey explain why, a better fashion, why he thought there was

senator langford of oklahoma. senator cornyn of texas. part of a leadership team as well. that willthe senators ask questions this morning of mr. comey. has thisngton times headline. one democrat is set to draft articles of impeachment. representative al green, a democrat that says he is drafting articles of impeachment alleging the republican president broke the law and may and must be held accountable. he accused mr. trump of distracting justice when he fired the director and then suggested he did so because of the russian thing. and whether the trump campaign manager anything to do with it. the remedy for obstructing justice is impeachment. coupled with a statement indicated that the president -- the president intended to do what he did. there is also a pro president trump group out there fighting back with this ad ahead of today's is hearing by mr. comey. of the fbi, james comey put politics ahead of america. terms like radical islam for political correctness, comey allowed the dangerous practice to continue when terror attacks were on the rise last year, comey was con

and why don't we have people be able to walk along it and then a guy name jim langford at the time was in charge of the trust for public land, someone approached him and said they wanted help turning the sort of derelict land south of this big old derelict sears building into a park. in this invasion you can make this into a park and alleviate all of the flooding by building a retention pond there. and he thought it was a great idea. but that line was all in the news at that point the idea of it. and he said you know, look at the map. it goes right up to piedmont park. it goes through piedmont park. if we built the park down here and look! there is this other little park down here in this neighborhood. and he realized that it connected a bunch of parts. why not make it a greenway? right not make it a linear park that connected parts? so he hired a world-famous city planner i also got to not do this. to come down here and try to figure out what kind of parks you can have. and atlanta is severely under parked. we have a lot of trees in the city. beautiful trees. but most of them are in p

senators lee, langford, sass and contin. dinner with the vp or intimidation adds in your state?s a different strategy for a different co-hort. mike pence who is very popular among the thoughtful jack kemp conservatives is having dinner with that brand of conservative. catch more flies with honey. that's the strategy. do this for the team. one won for the kipper. heller is getting the opposite treatment, the stick not the carrot. i think this helps heller. he's a very shrewd politician. he survived in nevada along with the governor. they do it differently. they're not affiliated with the republican party of washington, d.c. it shows he's independent and willing to stand up. the problem is it makes it impossible for him to change his mind and get to yes. >> senator bill cassidy, a republican from my home state of louisiana who is also a doctor says he wants legislation that pass it is jimmy kimmel test. kimmel tweeted this. no family should be denied medical care emergency or otherwise because they can't afford it. given what we know and the cbo score today do you think the bill t

senator langford is not here but we certainly commit to helping you in the future. just so that you know, we expect that we'll see you a lot in our subcommittee. were very excited about the expertise that you bring to thid job and excited for getting to work with you going forward. thank you for agreeing to accept this position. i a lot of questions for fema and i'll reserve those for a second round. >> thank you, mr. chair and thank you to all the nominees for being here.s and also a special thank you to those mice were here. it is a family affair and we are grateful. a just at the outset, mr. vought, i will add my concern about your answer on their guidance. we were elected to represent republicans and democrats. it's my view that the administration serves members of both parties and their oversight rule and i am hoping that you will rethink your response. i wanted to spend some time on issues concerning fema and mr. i long, it was nice to meet with you yesterday. i just want to talk about predisaster mitigation. something we talked on yesterd yesterday. we can al

senator lee, who opposes the bill, senators langford, sasse and cotton who are still undecided. with a vp or intimidation ads in your state? >> obviously, it's a different strategy for a different cohort. these -- mike pence, who is very popular among what might be sort of the thoughtful jack kemp conservatives is having dinner with that sort of brand of conservative. and catch more flies with honey in that case. that's the strategy mike pence, you got to do this for the team, win one for the gipper. help us out. and heller is getting the opposite treatment. he is getting the stick, not the carrot. but let me talk about heller real quick. i think this helps heller. heller is a very shrewd politician. he managed to win in 2012, a tough year. he is survived in nevada along with brian sandoval, the governor. they do it differently out there. they're not affiliated with the republican party of washington, d.c. i think running ads talking about how he's not playing along with the president helps him. it shows that he is independent. it shows that he is willing to stand up to his own

today you heard from james langford of oklahoma who is a conservative, generally supporting the president. these are all folks having to push back against this. it just takes the wind out of the room. >> there's a lot of space between what sarah huckabee sanders was saying that the president was going to punch back when attacked and it's worth noting for our audience, the thing he seems to be responding to was comments about these fake time magazines up at trump properties. there's a lot of space between that argument that sarah huckabee sanders is making and what republicans on the hill were saying today. they were almost you nunanimous their express of dissatisfaction, disgust. >> reporter: you didn't hear anyone on the hill defending the content of those tweets. some pushed back on the idea of the president as a fighter. they want a fighter to fight for america. they want someone who punches up. the appearance of the president punching down was not popular even among some of the president's more regular supporters. some of who just didn't answer the questions about it today. >> you mak

mike bepence is inviting a handl of senators over tomorrow night, senators lee and cotton and langford and mike lee so far has said he cannot support it. >> thank you very much, sara. let's go to senator ron wyden, a member of budget and intelligence committee. thank you for being with me, senator. let's start with a couple of points. first of all, the deficit issue. i know you heard phil mattingly say senator mcconnell has money to play around with here to try to win people over. but the cbo says that the bill will cut the deficit by more than $320 billion. obviously, who knows, that's like throwing something against a wall, whether it's actually true or not. but if it is, is it a good thing? >> of course you can cut the deficit if you cut coverage. if you destroy the safety net that is medicaid, of course you can save money. and i think it's also pretty striking because the republicans are eyeing a multitrillion dollar tax cut bill when health care is wrapped up. look, i can tell you that this legislation is pretty much just the same as the house. you have 22 million uninshired, $770

trump say the opposite, james langford said this a senator he said the president wasn't saying to him you've got to do this or else. the or sells an important legal standard but remember the or else could have been when he fired comey a few week later. here's the most interesting take that i've heard so far. jonathan turley a law professor at gw university here in d.c. he said this must have been grossly inappropriate but maybe not illegal. >> all right. caroline shively, live in washington, d.c. thank you so much. >>> capitol hill could see fireworks you can watch it right here on fox 29 life. coverage former fbi director james comey's begins at 10:00 a.m. have some schedule changes. wendy williams will air after our special report and you can catch "the q" at 11:30 p.m. right after fox 29 news at 11:0. >> police say the four teens arrested for a beating a mentally disable man face charges for another assault. the teenaged boy went before a judge was his involvement in an assault on a principal at fitler middle school last week. the principal was trying to break up a fight when stude

hearing a tone changing with the steve scalise shooting, and i want to read you what senator james langford, a republican from oklahoma wrote yesterday. "i just chaired a hearing with the u.s. capitol police about safety and the june 14 shooting attack of steve scalise, mike mika and officers crystal griener and david bailly. national and local leaders, including our president, should model civility, honor, and respect in our political rhetoric. the president's tweets today don't help our political or national discourse and do not provide a positive role model for our national dialogue." my question to you is has capitol hill been making an effort to be more civil since the scalise shooting? have you noticed a change in the tone if discourse? >> i noticed a change for maybe two days. then, you know, there's one thing that changed the tone and discourse. it's another thing to be more open-minded to compromising, to going across the -- going across the aisle and working with the other party. i think that a lot of what we hear in twitter or at least this is the way that members kind of gauge i

. >> before i turned to senator langford, let me say that the vice chairman and i have had conversations with acting attorney general rosenstein one special counsel was named. as i shared with members of this committee, prior to that, as we carried out an investigation, there would come a point in time there was an investigation going on at the fbi or if there was a special counsel with the special counsel. it was my hope that already, the vice chair and i would have had that conversation with the special counsel. we have not, but we've made the request, we intend to have it. i think both of us anticipate that we would reach this point at some point in the investigation. there are some things that will fall into special counsel and or an active investigation. >> at this point, we have not had that conversation with mr. mueller, we've not been waived off. on any subject. the way i'm hearing all of you gentlemen is that mr. miller has not waived you off from answering any of these question questions. is that correct? >> i've had no conversations with mr. mueller. i've been out of the count

and in fact, senator langford has held hearings on this in which i participated. i think as a general matter, it would not be practical for an office like oira to review all guidance documents. when they are done right are interptive, they are nonbinding, they do not create new regulatory obligations. i think to review every one of them in advance to determine whether they violate those boundaries would be an enormous amount of work and probably not an efficient use of resources. on the other hand agencies do on occasion owver step. they are challenged and told that they can't do that. i think what there has to be is some kind of rule that basically says that a guidance document cannot have effect if it does not -- if it has not gone through a certain process internally at the agency, and been posted in a way that is transparent with explanation of how it relates to the underlying rule. what that would mean an agency could not come out and say our sidens document here means you can't store those chemicals in this way anymore. to take one controversial example. we

. >> senator langford, one of your colleagues from the other side of the aisle was on the program a littlerlier, and he talked about appropriations. he was on the house side of people receiving death threats. people thinking moving offices into courthouses for security pitch i understand your point for wanting to remain accessible. at what point do you fear this might change that calculus? >> this is a democracy, and we will have tough debates about that. i certainly know in the capitol, complex as members of congress travel in groups to various locatio locations, there are fairly extraordinary security protections usually in place, but not so much in other instances and we will have to do a thorough review especially as we review the facts that emerge after this tragedy, and i haven't had a chance to say this yet, but my thoughts are prayers are so much with representative scalise and with the u.s. capitol police who acted so quickly and courageously, and all of the victims of this morning's shooting. >> capitol police being hailed as heroes here in this situation. you interact with these

>> thanks, that is a great question and in fact senator langford has held hearings on this in which i have participated. i think it is a general matter. it would not be practical for an office like oira to review guidance documents. and i think to review every single one of them in advance to determine whether they violate those boundaries would be an enormous enormous amount of work and not an efficient use of resources. on the other hand, agencies do overstep. and the good news is that most of the time they are called out on that and challenged and told that they cannot do that. i think what there has to be is some kind of rule that basically says that a guidance document cannot have effect if it has not gone through a certain process internally at the agency and been posted in a way that is transparent with an explanation of how it relates to the under lying rule. what that means is an agency cannot come out and says our guidance document over here says you cannot store these chemicals anymore like that. don't you have to do that by rule? so by having a public posting requirement a

. >> before i turn to senator langford, let me say that the vice chairman and i have had conversations with acting attorney general rosenstein when special counsel was named, and as i had shared with the members of this committee prior to that that as we carried out an investigation there would come a point in time either with an investigation that was currently ongoing at the fbi or if there was a special counsel, with the special counsel where there would be avenues that this committee could not explore, and it was my hope that already the vice chair and i would have had that conversation with the special counsel. we have not. we've made the request. we intend to have it, and i think that both of us anticipated that we would reach this point at some point in the investigation. we are there where there are some things that will fall into the special counsel and/or an active investigation, vice chairman. >> let me just say, though, that at this point we've not had that conversation with mr. mueller. we've not been waived off on any subject, and the way i'm hearing all of you gentlemen,

senator langford. >> thank you. can you give me some information on the path forward in the on going conversation with the department of labor? >> senator, i can certainly do so. the department of labor has withdrawn the guidance previously issued on the joint employer. nah guidance had been issued in january 2016 and discussed the agency's rejection of the common law conflicts. that guidance is no longer in effect in the department of labor now. the national labor relations board doesn't come within the department of labor's jurisdiction. chairman alexander earlier referenced the national labor relations board and pending nominations. and as the national labor relations board fills, i would suspected that that's an issue they will have to take up and decide how to proceed. >> great. so everything is on hold at this point pending that? >> well, the department of labor, the guidance has been withdra withdrawn. so that is the portion of the issue within the jurisdiction of the department of labor. >> this is where you

. >> senator langford? >> thank you. chairman pai, i appreciate all of you being here as well today. tell me a little bit about lifeline and the process you're going through right now. i know there's been a review on lifeline. to determine how to be able to use that. there's been expansion of that over the past several years. still a concern about fraud. and want to be able to make sure that obviously taxpayer dollars are used correctly and wisely. where are you on that right now? >> thank you for the question, senator. i've been very consistent in saying that our top priority at the fcc is closing the digital divide. i think that the lifeline program is an important part of the equation. in terms of closing that divide. one of the things that we have looked at is the way to make sure that every single dollar which is after all a taxpayer dollar that is spent in the lifeline program goes to somebody that needs the help. we want to make sure that the lifeline program is directed towards needy consumers to make sure that f

what you see, president trump, mike president trump, inviting senators james langford, ben sasse, to a dinner to talk about this. the white house is pulling out all the stops. they see this as a key part of their legislative agenda. they would like to get this done to move to tax cuts and they consider this very important and the president who was kind of in the background. >> president kind of little bit in the background on this issue last couple days is now carrying the torch. i think what the conservatives will have to ask themselves is this. do they want to let the president of the united states, on a key legislative agenda, as he is getting ready to go for tax cuts. are they willing to upend that? i mean are they willing to pull the rug from under him when he is getting ready to roll out another, possibly even bigger legislative item, tax cuts, particularly for the economy, and screw up his momentum. i think that is part of the pitch here. you have trump, president trump directly involved. vice president pence directly involved. you have a heavy sell going. dollars to doughnuts

he actually said under questioning from senator langford he gave the government document itself to his buddy. that maybe his buddy still had it. this is just not appropriate handling of information. comey's reputation is such he is supposed to be this choir boy who doesn't do anything wrong. he came off as someone who manipulated the classification process, engaged in leaking. it was a big hit to his credibility. >> shannon: juan, one description i saw kind of seemed to sum it up. he landed some punches on president trump, no doubt about that. he put some information out there into the record that was not flattering at all but he didn't when it comes to some of these things jay was saying about proving a legal case of obstruction. a quote from jonathan turley who talked about the case wasn't there and added this. having a duplicitous or dishonest nature is not an impreachable offense. if it was applied in washington generally it would be a ghost town. >> i would have to get out of town, shannon. [laughter] i think, you know, to me when i hear that, though, i think gee whiz, i don't thi

. >> senator langford. >> my northern border is kansas, and we've had our moments, but we're getting along just fine. let me talk to you about a couple other things as well. one is, you and i have spoken in the past two weeks about real i.d., and some of the extensions in the process, and the decision making on that. i said, the deadline's coming up june 6th for that, we were going to try to get back to it quickly, there's been a delay on this, there's several issues that are pending out in for states like mine and others that are working through the real i.d. process. we are legislatures past issues with real i.d., working with implementation and such. it's been fairly automatic, if you're making progress, those extensions are coming. it seems to have delayed this time, to literally the last second and we're still waiting to be able to determine what's the decision making factor on that. help me understand a little bit better so we can take that back. >> first thing i'd say, i had a lengthy meeting earlier this week on this, actually today was the day that normally i would have made

. >> senator langford. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for being here. have testified in front of every senator in closing sessions. you testified in front of the intelligence committee in open sessions. you have had lots of conversations on this. so i appreciate you being here again today and going through budget areas. i want to help clarify one thing. i read with some interest in the paper that there was some secret plan to be able to privately remove the special counsel who you just put in place to be able to see that. all i could think is about jim comey's statements publicly saying how many he read newspaper stories with unnamed source that is as he read these and thought they were completely false. is there anything to some secret plan that's out there from you or anyone in the administration to try to go and remove the special counsel? >> there is no secret plan that involves me, no, senator. >> i would just say, no one in america is above the law and no one in america is not faced with accountability and checks and balances. every one of us has

. >> senator langford? >> mr. mccabe, can i ask you do you feel confident at this point the fbi's fully cooperating with special counsel with any requests and communication and setting up between the coordination between the auflss for documents, work products, insight, anything that special counsel as they are trying to get organized and get prepared for the investigation as they are taking on, is everyone in the fbi fully cooperating? >> absolutely. we are supporting them with personnel and resources any way they request. >> thank you. admiral rogers, this spring nsa decided to stop doing about queries. that was a long conversation that's happened there, it's now come out in the public about that conversation, that it was identified as a problem. the court agreed with that and that has been stopped. what i need to ask you is, who first identified that as a problem? >> the national security agency did. >> so how did you report that, reported that to who, how did that conversation go? >> so, in 2016 i had directed

. >> senator langford. >> we have had multiple opportunities to visit and i appreciate you and your service and what you've done for the nation and continue to do.io we had an opportunity to visit. you carry a tremendous amount of stress and that is true still today. let me walk through a couple things. your notes are obviously important because they have a very rapid account of what you wrote down and perceived to have been in the meetings. have you had an opportunity to reference the notes for the statements you put forth today? >> yes. i think nearly all of my errata and recordings of the conversations i had a chance to review them before filing my statement. >> do you have a copy of the notes personally? >> i turned them over to the investigators. >> the individual that you told about them in those posted them to "the new york times." did they have a copy? >> had a coffee at the time. >> do they still have a copy? >> i think so. t i can't say for sure but i think so. >> could you ask them to hand the copy back to you so you could hand them over to the ovet committee? >> potentially. >>

. >> senator langford. >> thank you, mr. chairman. attorney general sessions, good to see you again. >> thank you. >> you speak as a man eager to set the record straight. you've spoken very plainly from the opening statement all the way through this time. i am amazed at the conversations as if an attorney general has never said there were private conversations with the president. and we don't need to discuss those. it seems to be a short memory about some of the statements eric holder would and would not make to any committee in the house or the senate and would or would not turn over documents even requested that had to go all the way through the court system to finally the court saying no, the president can't hold back documents and the attorney general can't do that. so somehow some accusation that you're not saying every conversation about everything, there's a long history of attorney generals standing beside the president saying there are some conversations that are confidential. it does seem as well that every unnamed source st

steve: what's going to be interesting when we had james langford on -- they're all putting their owncided -- then he was protect trump, he decided he was going to memorialize things. although he met with president trump twice. why did he take notes with trump and not anybody else? and also regarding the cloud thing where mr. trump says i can't get anything done because i'm under a cloud and then he says what can you do about lifting the cloud? and then mr. comey says you need to talk to the department of justice through your white house counsel and then apparently mr. comey then sent some letters to the attorney general and acting attorney general and never heard back from him. so that's curious. ainsley: everyone has been talking about russia, russia, russia, and there's no evidence. brian: yeah, and he said about flynn loyalty about him, i can't do anything with everyone thinking that i'm hobbled. but i will say this. the one problem that i have that i think you can drive a truck through his statement was when james comey said he knows he should have went to the attorney general if

. >> senator langford. >> thank you, senator. i've learned several things today, including senator king kicks dogs every morning and i was completely unaware of that. let me ask this panel a quick question. it goes back to one of the heart of the questions senator king was bringing up before. what price should russia pay for this type of interference? it's one thing to see we're informing our people. we're trying to do it rapidly. i've heard that from several of you to say the speed of the information and the response is exceptionally important. finding cooperation between legitimate media sites, that they will actually help identify, here's false, here's true, try to get that out. but what price should they pay? let me bring up why. when the russians were cheating and doping their athletes, in a very short period of time, russia paid a very big price for that by their athletes not going to the 2016 olympics. and saying, i know you trained but you doped your athletes and you were caught for that. it's just within the last 24 hour

two members of the senate intelligence repuican senator j langford of oklahoma and joe manchin of wests morning. you have both read the comey statement. if you take every fact as true, do you think what he alleges is inappropriate conduct by the president? for example, asking for loyalty oath? is that true or inappropriate? >> it is inappropriate. that's the first week of the presidency and it describes that trump is saying this to everybody, we know that from other cabinet officials. he made the same statement he's treating comey the same way. >> do you believe comey's statement then? >> it sounds like the president would say that to other cabinet officials. comey said it felt awkward but didn't get close to saying it was criminal. >> do you think it is inappropriate? >> i don't think anybody thinks it was inappropriate. it's something i wouldn't do. as a former executive, you know the dos and don'ts. you don't mess with your intelligence. you don't mess with the law enforcement or your security details. >> that is step one then. the next part is, according to comey, the president say

i think marco rubio seems more comfortable and james langford of oklahoma seem more comfortable being tougher. whether the white house likes it or not. >> here is mr. comey now entering the room. >> by the way, i think that viewers should expect, this is about the process of how the president has handled this investigation. we may not get a lot about the investigation itself. >> in fact, i think we are expecting him not to get too much into it because, of course, there is a separate investigation going on right now by the special counsel bob mueller. >> let's go to peter alexander, the view from the white house. what are the president's plans in terms of monitoring or watching this hearing? >> lester, good morning to you. at 6'8", james comey has been looming over this trump presidency since the beginning. today i am told by a senior white house aide that the president will be monitoring comey's testimony today as time permits him in a white house dining room alongside some of his senior advisers, closest aides and members of his legal team including his outside counsel ma counsel. he

. >> senator langford. >> director comey, good to see you again. we have had multiple opportunities to speak as well as everybody on this dais has, and i appreciate your service and what you continue to do. i told you before in the heat of last year when we had an opportunity to visit i pray for you and your family because you carry a tremendous amount of stress, and that's still today. your notes are obviously exceptionally important because they give a very rapid account of what you wrote down and what you perceived happen in those different meetings. have you been able to reference those notes when you were preparing the written statement you put forth today? >> yes. yes. i think nearly all of my written recordings of the conversations, i had a chance to review them before filing my statement. >> do you have a copy of those notes personally? >> i don't. i turned them over to bob mueller's investigation. >> the individual that you told about your memos that was sent on "the new york times," did they have a copy or were they told oral? >> they had