from 2013-2016, intercepted metadata jumped by -- it tripled. it tripled.ither the terrorist in this country have gone up that significantly or in an election year, our nsa and intelligence communities were gathering information on political opponents to use against them and trampling on however, our fourth amendment rights. >> people are going to have to dig deeper but i will tell you something. you mentioned the number in 2015 of unmasking. at 654. that is what the obama administration actually reported. it was underreported by a factor of more than three. in 2015 they were 2200 unmasking that the obama administration misreported. the trump administration just corrected it. there are much higher in 2015 and 2016. >> sean: john, this is an important question. >> that's a pretty big -- a large gap. someone is not good at math at the dni. >> sean: sara, let's go through this very closely. this is so important and i think americans need to know. if the nsa -- by the way, i have great respect for our intelligence community. their job is beyond risky. their job

is very powerful, you could use metadata and start handling off how google uses metadata. you could launch algorithms, you could divine patterns, predict behavior. and on and on. and hal and i wait till he's done and go eric is right, we don't do any of that but he's right. in other words, we don't do to the data that american business does to similar data. it could, it actually could yield useful information but remember, we're back here in the game of how much is enough, how much are you comfortable with? how much of your privacy and liberty you want to give up for another pound of safety and although you all are free to let google do it unless it violates your privacy, i'm sorry, google can't put you in jail. american government can. and therefore we are quite comfortable that no, we've got this narrow need, that's a useful tool. we will use it for that. we never even to try to do that.>> it really starts in an interesting way. >> so it's a narrative it's the only part of the memoir that looks like a dialogue we're not talking about time or place or date or even who the

so eric comes out to say the metadata des is powerful then he starts to rattle off how global uses it. there are other rhythms, patterns, predict behavior, going on and on and on the with intel he is done and say we don't do that but he is right. we don't do to the data that american business does. it could yield useful information remember how much you comfortable with? some much. >> guest: to give up for a pound of safety? you are free to let google do it to violate your privacy but they cannot put even jail the american government can so therefore we were quite comfortable. . . it really starts in an interesting way. >> so it's a narrative it's the only part of the memoir that looks like a dialogue were not talking at about time or place or dates or even who the actors are. it goes our you sure they're there. the one he will make the decision as. we have good human intelligence and we been tracking the streaming video they are confirming it's them. they're there. how long had you have capture the target and who else is the run. a couple of hours. the family over here in the main bu

that's why people say why don't you get metadata? you can't convict somebody based on metadata. >> and my remaining time, i want to go back to the investigation. i want to give you another opportunity to maybe finish by expending the context -- i want to create a context going back to when the investigation first began it was all part of media attention. by june 27, the then attorney general met with the spouses of someone who is related to an active investigation. it was an unusual encounter that was spun by the media. then it was july 5th that he the statement. a few of the things you said -- based on the evidence you were gathering, there was one component. it was like removing a frame from a huge jigsaw puzzle and domain pieces on the floor. something else of the media ties into. you went on to say that under similar circumstances, the person who is engaged in these activities would likely be subject to security or administrative sanctions. that was the tough part of the statement that you made. you went on to say that you didn't

they come to you and say the metadata shows that we have potential here information that could cause up to open the information and it could be as sensible at that moment to say how quickly could you get a search warrant and how quickly can we get an answer to that question because i made a promise to people in congress that i would get back to them with this information and if there is anything real here, you need to get on that pronto so that i could answer that question. so that the search warrant precedes the letter rather than the letter preceding the search warrant. particularly in light of the widely adhered to policy the department not to disclose ongoing investigative materials and the truly exceptional nature of disclosures. >> yeah. >> why not the search warrant first. >> i press them very hard on that and found credible their responses that there was no way they could review the volume of information they saw on the laptop in the time remaining. >> except that they did. >> well they did. because our wizards at our operational technology division came up with a way to dedu

. >> went section 702 is used, what we are talking about here is not metadata, it is not that this call was made from this number to this number, this is content. so if we were talking about two u.s. persons, american citizens, if i were calling you, that is typically not something section 700 she would be used to collect, but if it is me calling someone else, and if that person is not a u.s. person, they end up being an agent of a foreign government, someone has determined that communications involving that person might be connected to a national security investigation, there is a chance that communication could be intercepted, not just the fact the call was made but also the content of the call. >> correct, that is what we call incidental collection. >> that incidental collection is aggregated, you have databases that store all of these things. there are lots of u.s. persons who have had communications, conversations that themselves have been recorded that are out there. in a database. can you search that database for communications involving specific u.s. persons without getting a wa

. >> now, when section 702 is used typically what we're talking about here is not metadata. it's not this call was made from this number to this number. this is content. and so if we were talking about two u.s. persons, two american citizens, if i were calling you, typically that's not something that section 702 would be used to collect. but if it's me calling someone else and if that person is not a u.s. person, if that person ends up being an agent of a foreign government and if somebody determined that communications involving that person might be connected to a national security investigation, there's a chance that that communication could be intercepted not just the fact the call was made but also the content that have call. >> correct. that's what we call incidental collection. >> that incidental collection is then aggregated. you have databases that store all of these things and so there are lots of u.s. person who haved communications, conversations that have been recorded that are out there. and in a database. can you search that database for communications involvin

folks say why don't you get metadata. you can't convict them based on metadata. >> you have to drill down. i want to go back to the investigation. and i just want to give you an another opportunity to maybe finish by explaining the context that you were operating in, but i want to create a context going back to the investigation first began. it was already a part of media attention and i think on june 27th, the then attorney general met with the spouse of someone who is subject to an active investigation which was at the very least an unusual encounter which also spun up the media. and then i think it was july 5 that you made the statement that i think a few of the things you've said, that i guess based on the evidence you were gathering, it was like removing a frame from a huge vin be damage jigsaw puzzle and dumping pieces on the floor, something else that the media ties into. and then you said there is evidence of potential violations of statutes regarding the handling of classified information. and you went on to say

andignificantly impair folks often say, why don't you get metadata. convict on metadata. >> you have to drilled down. >> i want to go to the investigation. i want to give you another opportunity to finish by explaining the context you are operating in i want to create the context going back to when the investigation first began. it was already a part of media attention. i think on june 27th, the then-attorney general met with the spouse of someone who's subject to an active investigation which is at the very least an unusual encounter which also spun up the media and i think it was july 5th that you made the statement that i think a few of the things you've said that i guess based on the evidence you were gathering, one component was like removing a frame from a huge vintage jigsaw puzzle and dumping the pieces on the floor. something the media ties into. then you said there's evidence of potential violations of statutes regarding the handling of classified information and you went on to say under similar circumstances a person engaged in these activi

what they could see from the metadata was that there were thousands of secretary clinton's emails onhat device including what they thought might be the missing emails from her first three months as secretary of state. we never found any emails from her first three months with respect to ms. huma abedin in particular, we didn't have any indication that she had any sense that what she was doing was in violation of the law. couldn't prove any sort of criminal intent. >> sean: why is james comey only revealing this information now and we are really supposed to believe that huma abedin has no idea that sending classified material to anthony weiner's laptop isn't a crime? aren't we supposed to protect that? how stupid do they think we are? he should, comey, ed at a minim done a full investigation of huma abedin. president trump tweeted this, fbi director "the five" and gave her a free pass for many bad deeds, the phony trump russia story was an excuse used by democrats as justification for losing the election, perhaps he just ran a great campaign. clinton got a free pass and it so did huma

we talked a lot last year about the metadata database. it does not compare in importance to 702. we can't lose 702. >> i agree. it is a little bit difficult to talk about things that do involve classified matters in public, but i think the public needs to know that there are multiple oversight layers, including the fisa court, congressional oversight, internal oversight within the fbi and intelligence community that protects americans from -- under their privacy rights, while targeting terrorists and people who are trying to kill us. i want to talk about the electronic transactional records, something you and i discussed before, as well. the fbi can use national security letters, i believe, to get financial information and telephone numbers now in the conduct of a terrorist investigation, but because of a typo in the law, the fbi has not been allowed access to internet metadata in national security cases, to the extent that is necessary. can you talk to us about the importance of that particular fix, the electronic communications transactional records fix? >> thank you so much, s

folks often say why can't you get metadata. you can't convict somebody. >> you've got to the drill down. >> i want to go back to the investigation. and i just want to give you another opportunity to maybe finish by explaining the context that you were operating in. i want to create the context going back to when the investigation first began. it was already a part of media attention. i think on june 27th, the then attorney general met with the spouse of someone who is subject to active investigation which was at the very least an unusual encounter which also spun up the media. and then i think it was july 5th that you made the statement that i think a few of the things you've said that i guess based on evidence you were gathering there was one component like removing a frame from a huge jigsaw puzzle and dumping pieces on the floor, something else that the media ties into. then you said there is evidence of potential violations of statutes regarding the handling of classified information. and you went on to say that under simil

they laid out for me what they could see from the metadata on anthony weiner's laptop. that was seized from another case. what they could see from the metadata is there were thousands of secretary clinton's e-mails on that device, including what might have been the missing e-mails from her first three months of secretary of state. he was using a verizon blackberry then and that was important. if tluz with evidence she was acting with bad intent -- >> but they weren't there. >> can i fin sh my answer? >> yes. >> they came in and said we can see thousands of e-mails including many many many from the verizon clinton domain. the department of justice agreed we had to get a search warrant. i agreed. i authorize ds them to seek a search warrant. and then i faced a choice. i've lived my entire career by the tradition that you can avoid it, you avoid any action in the run-up to the election that might have an impact. but i sat there that morning and i could not see a door labeled no action here. i could see two doors and they were both actions. one was labeled speak, the other

they briefed me on what they can whileom the metadata and was significant. they wanted my approval to do a search warrant. i authorized and and so did the department of justice and then they reviewed. during the following week, they emails. 40,000 i understated how many they reviewed. they found 3000 more work-related. and came from blackberry backups and a bunch of other things. 12 of them were classified. we had seen them all before. they finished that work. they briefed me. they said it did not change their view. then i sent the second letter. of those letters great national security damage? hard to answer. by definition, because of vocation is based on the potential for damage. thanks on the front page of the new york times. >> i am not aware that any of the males in the investigation got into the hands of people who were able to exploit them to damage national security. me offer you this hypothetical. they come to an safety metadata shows we have potential information that could be relevant or causes to reopen the information. it would seem to me it wou

. >> analyzing metadata. >> no one is listening to your telephone calls. john: both are true.st gathering, looking for patterns, and may be able find a will find a terrorist that way. >> but that reveals a lot about you. >> maybe they will find someone who wants to kill us >> but this program has been wholly ineffective at doing that. it does not keep us safe. john: congress has kind of taking your side at least saying that the phone companies have to hold the data. >> exactly true, and and i was on the right side of history here. john: why is it less problematic? >> the phone company has records of certain customers they don't have everyone's record in one database. they are not going to look up her records, but someone who may be on their radar, and the political party not favor by the government, they can learn a lot. it is who has the information that matters, and the government is powerful. john: this is expensive. good for you for fighting what you believe in. coming up, where you work? are there notices like these posted? they are not they're because workers areeager to

they come to you and they say that the metadata has shown that we have potential information here that could be relevant and could cause us to reopen the information. it would seem to me to be sensible at that motion -- at that moment to ask how quickly you can get a search warrant and an answer to that question, because i made a promise to people in congress that it would get back to them with this information. if there is anything real here, you need to so that the search warrant precedes the letter rather than the letter preceding the search warrant. particularly in light of the policy of the to department not to disclose ongoing investigative materials. andy truly exceptional nature of disclosures. find out the search warrant first? >> i found credible the responses there was no way, no way they could review the volume of information they saw on the laptop in the time remaining. >> except that they did. >> they did, and because our wizards came up with a way to see them electronically that involved writing a custom software programs that will help us in lots of other areas. we cann

i think the debate over whether or not to have the metadata is sort of over. we have this tremendous capacity to scoop up the data and analyze it. the problem is the power it gives people who scoop it up, and the oversight. i am worried it's going to get caught up with partisanship. looks as if it was abused by the obama administration. what i think we ought to be thinking about is how do you institute new mechanisms that will be, and oversight perhaps from congress but from also the courts. so that it's not abused in the future. i am worried were going to be obsessed with who did what to whom when, looking to find scapegoats and to retroactively put the obama administration on trial. there are probably abuses that ought to be exposed and people punished but that's not the major issue. the major issue, we are in the new age. we have new capacities. how do you harness it? >> bret: if there is evidence of a political element, it changes the dynamic of what we've been covering. >> it would but i think it's important to think of this, one of the things that came o

what they could see from the metadata was that there were thousands of secretary clinton's e-mails oncluding what they thought might be the missing e-mails from her first three months as secretary of state. we never found any e-mails from her first three months. she was using a verizon blackberry then and that's very important because if there was evidence that she was acting with bad intent that's where it would be. >> but they weren't there. >> can i finish my answer? so they said we can see thousands of e-mails from the clinton e-mail domain including from the verizon clinton blackberry domain. they said we think we have to get a search warrant to get these and the department of justice agreed. i authorized them to seek a search warrant. you avoid any action in the run-up to the election that has an election, whether it's a dog catcher election or the president of the united states. i could not see a door labeled no action here. i could see two doors. and they were both actions. one was labeled speak, the other was labelled conceal. because here's how i thought about this. i want y

pieced together a suicide bombing, this was in lebanon, but it's remarkable once they get into the metadata, get into the signature of the bomb, get into cctv coverage and the rest of it, i think within days they're going to bean to piece together who was behind it. and if in fact there was a master bombmaker, i think they'll be able to identify them. >> what kind of an effect do you think this will have in britain, politically and otherwise? >> reporter: politically, it has caused the suspension of the election campaign. don't forget there's a general election on june 8 here, it's been suspended and the parties are not cam paining. i must say, in terms of security and a little bit of a political shot across the bow, the home secretary here today expressed, quote, irritation at the leaks that were coming out from the americans. it will be interesting to know from bob how this happened, some of the, for instance, the name of the bomber, these pictures that you're reporting from the "new york times" and others, and various different details apparently have come out from leaks in the united st

fewer than 50, according to the nsa, terrorists in our sights, yet 150 million americans have their metadatallected. >> 150 records were picked up, not americans. >> tucker: 150 million. >> million. nsa is doing exactly what congress told him to do. it said we want to keep this program, but when they set up the program, they set it up more or less to address a problem that they had seen with the 9/11 attackers.es when they identified a terrorist haven in yemen and they saw phone calls coming in, they didn't realize they were coming from the united states. so nsa said we need to find anybody who's in touch with the terrorists outside of the united states, and we want to, as you'd expect, if you're investigating somebody who's in touch with a terrorist, you want to know who they are in touch with in the united states and who both people are in touch with. so when you do the math, that turns out to be close to 150 million. >> tucker: doubling a penny every day for a month. >> exactly.p it's like that one grain, two grains, four grains on a chessboard and you end up with all the grain in the wor

me so i met with them in the conference room and they obeyed out what they conceived from the of metadata analyses in the unrelated case. they said there were thousands of secretary clinton's females on the device including what they thought might be the missing e-mail's refers to three months of secretary of state. we never found any from the first three months but that is important because this is evidence in she was acting with bad intent. they said we can see thousands of females including the many from the of blackberry domain. the department of justice agreed we had to get a search warrant. and then we face the choice of that you could possibly avoid it with any election i sat there that morning i conceive to doors one labeled speak and i'm not try to document to this you need to know my thinking. repeatedly telling the congress we are done there is nothing there. to restart in a hugely significant way to find those t-bills and not speak about it.org conceal so speak would be bad but with the election in 11 days concealing would be catastrophic not just with the fbi but well beyond

what they could see from the me metadata, was there were thousands of secretary clinton's e-mails on that device including what they thought might be the missing e-mails from her first three months as secretary of state. we never found any e-mails from her first three months. she was using a verizon blackberry then. that's obviously very important because if there was evidence she was acting with bad intent, that's where it would be in the first three months. >> but they weren't there. >> can i just finish my answer, senator? so they came in and said we can see thousands of e-mails from the clinton e-mail domain including many, many, many from the verizon clinton domain. blackberry domain. they said we think we got to get a search warrant to go get these and the department of justice agreed, we had to go get a search warrant so i agreed. i authorized them to seek a search warrant then i faced a choice. i lived my entire career by the tradition if you can possibly avoid it, you avoid any action in the run-up to the election that might have an impact, whether a dogcatcher election or p

evidence is not in the steele report, the mi-6 report, it is in the intercepts, it is in the phone metadataa lot of these people will be called into the fbi and asked questions. on the one hand the fbi will have the intercepts. on the other people are going to have to -- you know, they're going to have to give up secrets. this is going to plague the trump administration. i think josh would agree for a very long time. it is very unfortunate for us, and the faster we get over with it the better, but i don't think it is going to be fast. >> bob, what would you be -- let me ask a quick follow up to bochb bob. as far as the hearing tomorrow, bob, what would be your question specifically for sally yates and the director of nation pal intelligence, former director, james clammer? >> i think sally yates did her job. she went to the white house, it has been reported, and said, look, you got problems with flynn. the real question -- she is going to be able to document this. the real question is why did the trump administration not listen and put a hold on flynn's appointment? that's the real problem.

things about metadata and whatnot. i have never seen the relationship in this state. you've written about it in recent pieces. what do you see sort of from your perspective of having been in those, you know, in the fight in the trenches and now having a little more perspective and sort of observing these times? >> i mean, the relationship now between the press and the white house, the press and this president, seems as dysfunctional as i've seen it. even at the height of tension, either between the "times" and the bush administration or the obama administration, both of those white houses pursued criminal leak investigations that touched on the "times." there was tension, but there was still, you know, a moticom of respect and some level of honest communication where each side gave considered respect to the position of the other. and right now, there's just such a high degree of cynicism on both sides. you know, the press can't believe any -- the tweets of the president or what his spokespeople tell them. you can't, you know, depend on them being informed of what's re

it in the hearing because when they initially got the large volume of emails, they looked at the metadata and that is not content. that's the two-from information. they look at that large volume and said this is the problem and with this many emails that involve hillary clinton that may go back to things we did and didn't have, i have to tell congress where we are. >> martha: i just wanted to ask about it. thank you very much. good to have you with us tonigh tonight. so tonight, a potentially dramatic byproduct of james, his removal from the top of the fbi is a former fbi agent suggests that both the case and the immunity deals struck during the clinton email investigation have not run out the statute of limitation. they could be revisited by a new boss. joining us to discuss that, debate of the breaking details tonight plus two stories, to front pages and one similarity. both wrong. as we examine the anonymous sources in the wake of comey's ouster that are wreaking havoc against washington. plus new details tonight in the fraternity hazing death of penn state student credit the attorney

and they laid out for me what they could see from the metadata on this fella, anthony weiner's laptop"this fella, anthony weiner?" [ light laughter ] you know who he is. also, that sounds like the beginning of a vaudeville routine. "you see, there was this fella, anthony weiner. and he liked to take pictures of his ding dong." [ laughter ] now comey violated a long standing policy by interfering in the election, and today he tried to defend that decision. although, i'm not sure his explanation was all that convincing. >> i faced a choice. and i've lived my entire career by the tradition that if you can possibly avoid it, you avoid any action in the run up to an election that might have an impact. whether it's a dog catcher election or president of the united states. but i sat there that morning and i could not see a door labeled "no action here." i could see two doors, and they were both actions. one was labeled "speak" and the other was labeled "conceal." >> seth: and donald trump said "don't open conceal. that's where i keep my tax returns." [ laughter ] "and where i try to keep eri

it's used typically what we're talking about here is not metadata. not this call was made from this number to this number. content. so if we were talking about two persons, two american citizens, if i were calling you, typically that's not something 702 would be used to collect but if it's me calling someone else and if that person u.s. person, if that person ends up being an agent of a foreign government and determined that communications involving that to a might be connected national security investigation, there's a chance that, that ommunication would be intercepted. not the fact that the call was made but also the content. call t's what we incidental collection. >> that collection is then aggregated. ou have databases that store all of these things and so there re lots of u.s. persons who have had communications, conversations that are recorded out there in a database. can you search that database for communications involving specific u.s. persons without getting a warrant? >> yes. >> and the fact that these communications were intercepted any

freedom act that ended both collection of telephone metadata under section 215 of the patriot act replacing it with a new regime more protective of americans' privacy. and later in 2015 it was included in it was inclouded in the omnibus spending bill. it could not have been timelier. neither bill would have been possible without michael's tireless efforts. he worked on a broad range of issues with a broad range of stake holders in and out of government and these measures were necessary, effective, and -- necessary and effective in securing our liberties. prior to that he served in the obama white house as deputy advisor to the national security staff. he's a naval reservist. after a well-deserved vacationing he'll embark on a new career as a lawyer here in washington, d.c. on behalf of the hpsci family, i want to wish michael, his wife, and his daughter the very best and thank them. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rise? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today to congratulate , d honor a great cincinnatian mike

with them late morning in my conference room and they laid out for me what they could see from the metadatan this fellow anthony wiener's laptop seized in an unrelated case. what they could see was that there are thousands of secretary clinton's emails on that device, including what they thought might be the missing emails from her first three months as secretary of state. we never found any emails from her first three months. she was using a verizon blackberry. if she acted with bad intent that's where it would be in the first three months. >> they weren't there. >> can i finish my answer? we can see thousands of emails from the clinton email domain including many, many from the verizon clinton blackberry domain. we need a search warrant. and the department of justice agreed. i agreed and authorized them to seek a search warrant and i faced a choice. i've lived my entire career by the tradition if you can possibly avoid it, you avoid any action in the run-up to an election that may have an iment pact. i sat there that morning and i couldn't see a door labeled no action here. i could see tw

one thing people found is in the metadata, in the company documents.ave russia where it is appearing. that is not conclusive in and of itself. it does raise the question, it is a reminder that russian hackers, are believed to have targeted the campaign back in march. possibly the same hackers who stole information from the democrats in the u.s. election. we are going to know more about this in the weeks and months to come. >> thank you very much indeed from our friends 24 observers desk. me turn to you to my right. hugh have been quite up until now. you are a specialist in branding. you must be astonished by the phenomenon of a manual mac on and this extraordinary outcome -- of emmanuel macron and the sixth ordinary outcome. -- and this extraordinary outcome. >> the fillon campaign fell apart. hollande didn't have the support, so he filled this vacuum in the middle. it is a triumph of personal branding to have his movement named after his initials. he's got a good thinking going on there. see how that form relates to a political party and movement. >>

they laid out for me what they could see from the metadata on this fellow anthony weiner's laptop thatn unrelated case. what they could see from the met at that data, there were thousands of secretary clinton's emails on that device, including what they thought might be the missing emails from her first three months as secretary of state. we never found any emails from her first three months. she was using a verizon blackberry then. that is obviously very important because if there was evidence that she was acting with bad intent that is where it would be in the first three month. >> but they weren't there? >> can i finish my answer, senator? they came in and said we could sigh thousands of emails from the clinton email domain including many, many, from the verizon clinton domain, blackberry domain. we think we have to get a search warn to go get thighs. the department of justice agreed we had to get a search warrant. i agreed. i authorized them to get a search warrant. i faced a choice. i lived my entire career, tradition you can avoid it any election whether dog catcher, election or

they laid out for me what they could see from the metadata on this fella anthony wiener's laptop. what they could see was there was thousands of secretary clinton's e-mails on that device, including what they thought might be the missing ele mays from her first three months as secretary of state. if there was evidence she was acting with bad intent -- >> but they weren't there -- >> look, can i just finish my answer? they said we can see thousands of e-mails from the clinton e-mail domain, including many, many, many, from the verizon clinton domain, blackberry domain. the department of justice agreed. we had to go get a search warrant. i agreed. i authorized them to seek a search warrant. i've lived my entire career by the tradition that if you can possibly avoid it, you avoid any reaction in the run-up to the election that might have an impact. but i sat there that morning and i could not see a door labeled no action here. i could see two doors. and they were both actions. one was labeled speak. the other was labeled conceal. here's how i thought about it. i want you to know my t

investigation, but because of a typo in the law, the fbi has not been allowed access to internet metadata in national security cases to the extent that is necessary. can you talk to us about the importance of that particular fix, the electronic communications transactional records fix or active fix? >> thank you so much, senator. this seems like a boring deal, this makes a big impact on our work and here's why. in our counter terrorism cases and our counter-intelligence cases, we can issue with all kinds of layers of approval in the fbi a national security letter to find out the subscriber to a particular telephone number and to find out what numbers that telephone number was in contact with, not the content of the communications, but just the connection. again, because of what i believe is a typo in the law, and if i am wrong, congress will tell me they intended this, the companies that provide the same services but on the internet, resist. and say we don't have the statutory authority to serve an nsl national security letter to find out the subscriber to a particular e-mail handle or wh