that's where mr. comey errored, he violated that policy and damage the campaign of one of the candidates and the rest is history. i just think that this extraordinary hearing, i've been a member of congress for 24 years, it's the first time we've had this kind of circus, really, of trying to really investigate the investigators when that's already done. i would urge that we make sure that the actions we take do not create further divisions in our country. president trump tweeted a few months ago "the top leadership and investigators at the fbi and justice department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of democrats and against republicans, something which would've been unthinkable just a short time ago." is that tweet supported by the inspector general's report? >> no. >> no, it is not. i would hope those on the committee who believe in the rule of law, who understand our country would be damaged if we allow political divisions to attack our law enforcement agencies, to undercut invest

mr. comey, who was appointed by mr. trump, he is not a democrat. i happen to know that robert mueller is not a democrat. so these are not political decisions made by political operatives. they should be following the evidence. and i would just like to note that if you had wanted to harm and interfere with the election of president trump, you could have leaked information that the investigation was ongoing. but none of that came out. as a matter of fact, we asked the leaders of the department of just and the fbi about whether there was an investigation of mr. trump prior to the election and we were told they could not comment on it, which was in fact the appropriate response. you should not comment on a going investigation. if you find something, you have an indictment. if you don't find something, you say nothing. that's where mr. comey erred. he violated that policy and he damaged the campaign of one of the candidates. and the rest is history. so i just think that this hearing, this extraordinary hearing, i've been here, a member of congress for 2

that's where mr. comey erred. he violated that policy and damaged the campaign of one of the candidates and the rest is history. so i just think that this hearing's extraordinary hearing, i've been here a member of congress for 24 years. this is the first time we've had this kind of event, a circus, really, of trying to really investigate the investigators when that's already done. i would urge that we -- we make sure that the actions we take do not create further divisions in our country. you know, president trump tweeted a few months ago, quote, the top leadership and investigators of the fbi and the justice department have politicized the sacred investigative process in favor of democrats and against republicans, something which would have been unthinkable just a short time ago. is that tweet supported by the inspector general's report, mr. strzok? >> no. >> no, it is not. i would hope that those of us on the committee who believe in the rule of law, who understand that our country will be damaged if we allow p

and then when mr. comey doesn't go along with him, he first tells fox business that comey's tenure is in jeopardy, and then he ends up firing him. again, that's very conclusive evidence of obstruction. >> and how do you know he said yo beforehand? >> again, you know, these are -- because i know hip hop. i don't know wise guy, mob lingo. >> is that poetic license or legal license? >> i would so love to do a closing statement in a trial in this case. because i would lay it all out, both what mr. trump tried to do, not only with regard to comey, but with regard to sessions. >> right. >> you know, the way that he kept trying to say, man, if i had known that you were going to recuse yourself, i would never have appointed you. dude, i really wish you would resign. and then there's the dangling of pardons before other witnesses. >> right. you put the yos and the dudes together and you get a public -- a set of tweets, and as you say, also, contra rudy's claims, a set of private attempts to say, hey, sessions needs t

comey. the times reporting that in public mr. rosenstein has shown no hint that he had second thoughts about that role, but privately, quote, he expressed remorse at the tumult it unleash the. he said the full story would vindicate him. according to one person with whom he spoke shortly after comey's firing, rosenstein was shaken, unsteady and overwhelmed. another person in touch with rosenstein around that time said he sounded frantic, nervous, upset and emotionally disregulated. in one of these conversations with the acting fbi director at the time, andrew mccabe, rosenstein became visibly upset. joining us now from "the new york times" mike schmidt who just broke this story, nbc news intelligence national security reporter ken dilanian and frank figliuzzi, fbi assistant director for counter intelligence. mike schmidt, take us through what your reporting about unknown and emotional reaction from the deputy attorney general. >> this was an incredibly important time. this is between the comey firing and when mueller is appointed.

. >> he is under investigation as well because mr. comeyuserred what is going on with the -- usurped the power and you have the flow of investigation affected and that is why mr. comey is actually under investigation right now? >> harris: what happens next in this whole process? you will have his testimony. will you get something now from lisa page and, you know, the american people were invoked in all of this. peter strzok strzok said that i said those words about stopping trump from reaching the white house on behalf of the american people and so they are already in the conversation now. and so what is the end game for the american people? accountability. they are ready to see something happen? >> i didn't, yeah. first of all let's talk about what a super patriot mr. strzok believes that he was. this is the narcissistic mentality. but let's leave this aside. what will happen next, we'll get all of the facts and next from both of these individuals and we're going to process those and quite frankly i would suspect that if we find criminal a

mr. comey, who was appointed by mr. trump. he's not a democrat. i happen to know that robert mueller is not a democrat. so these are not political decisions made by political operatives. they should be following the evidence. and i would just like to note that if you had wanted to harm and interfere with the election of president trump, you could have leaked information that the investigation was ongoing. but none of that came out. matter of fact, we asked the leaders of the department of justice and fbi about whether there was an investigation of mr. trump prior to the election, and we were told they could not comment on it which was the appropriate response. you should not comment on an ongoing investigation if you find something, you have an indictment. if you don't find something you say nothing. that's where mr. comey erred. he violated that policy and damaged the campaign of one of the candidates and the rest is history. so i just think that this hearing, this extraordinary hearing. i've been here a member of congress for 24 years. this is t

mr. comey, who was appointed by mr. trump. he's not a democrat. i happen to know that robert mueller is not a democrat. so these are not political decisions made by political operatives. they should be following the evidence. and i would just like to note that if you had wanted to harm and interfere with the election of president trump, you could have leaked information that the investigation was ongoing. but none of that came out. matter of fact, we asked the leaders of the department of justice and fbi about whether there was an investigation of mr. trump prior to the election, and we were told they could not comment on it which was the appropriate response. you should not comment on an ongoing investigation if you find something, you have an indictment. if you don't find something you say nothing. that's where mr. comey erred. he violated that policy and damaged the campaign of one of the candidates and the rest is history. so i just think that this hearing, this extraordinary hearing. i've been here a member of congress for 24 years. this is t

ninety seconds or so that to make a brief speech of thanks to the president for the nomination but mr comey has gone on for much longer than that and of course he's going into a great deal of background about his his family and his legal standing and his his his legal history in the decisions that he's making we can't forget of course this is not the end of the deal he still has to face these congressional these hearings to put him into place possibly by october. that's absolutely right and by picking cavanagh trump has taken on a massive battle one he knew he was going to be taken on and that is because cavanagh has a long record first as somebody who worked in the white house under president george w. bush and then you know as somebody who worked for kenneth starr who prosecuted president clinton led to his impeachment trial this is a guy with a long paper record the democrats are going to be able to poor through and ask multiple questions they want to drag this thing out until the november midterm elections when they hope they will have charge of the senate and then they could absolutely

. >> there are many reasons that mr. comey has to be brought before congress. he may think he's going to get some zingers in the, he's got to be examined about many things in the ig report and about leaks that are under investigation by the ig. the fundamental problem here is there is no integrity in the process. for mr. miller's team that he picked throughout the process, that is what is fundamentally most impressive. >> sean: and to the only one who said he would get me out, thank you. >> i could get you out but i don't want to get you out. >> we have a big interview with the president's attorney rudy giuliani coming up next. -we're in a small room. what?! -welcome. -[ gasps ] a bigger room?! -how many of you use car insurance? -oh. -well, what if i showed you this? -[ laughing ] ho-ho-ho! -wow. -it's a computer. -we compare rates to help you get the price and coverage that's right for you. -that's amazing! the only thing that would make this better is if my mom were here. what?! an unexpected ending! why people everywhere are upgrading their water filter to

mr. president, why did you fire comey? a is already expended over and over again.ither believe it or not, buton don't think we are sucker. you believe a liar like comey. or one of the other lawyers -- they are very good friends. >> sean: robert mueller waser denied the day before he got a special counsel job. >> comey is more discredited than anyone in this investigation. he cannot be believed. so if you are telling me you will believe comey's word against the president, than i know you are trying to trap him into perjury. >> sean: do you think -- what happens -- for example, what happens if mueller decides he wants to take this all the way and subpoenaed the president of the united states? >> we go to the supreme court and we find out if he can. never been decided. the only subpoena to the president that has happened is to bill clinton. it was withdrawn. it's never been decided. we'll have a case, we will find out. thenen we have cases of lesser officials that were subpoenaed. documents of a subpoena. you always have to show particularized need. if you have to sho

they might hold off on some things around the election because it will be perceived, as it was with mr. comeyny further indictments would have political motives? cynthia: i think they will definitely do that. you're not supposed to do it near an election. that was drummed into us when i was in the justice department. i absolutely agree there will not be big bombshells right before the election. shery: cynthia, thank you so much for your time. our thanks to cynthia alksne, former federal prosecutor. coming up, immigration gambles. president trump threatens a government shutdown if democrats failed to back his demands for a border wall. what he means and the geopolitical catalyst at the heart of the crisis. this is bloomberg. ♪ david: this is bloomberg markets: balance of power. i am david westin. shery: and i'm shery anh. targetingtrump immigration, tweeting i would be willing to shut down the government if the democrats do not give us a vote for border security, which includes the wall. must get rid of catch and release, etc., and go to a system of immigration based on merit. we are now joine

purpose of the september and october 2017 statements including tweets regarding an investigation, mr. comey? what was the purpose of your july 2017 criticism of mr. sessions, which came in a tweet. mueller has indicated before he intends to look at the president's intent when it comes to what he was typing with his thumbs. >> let me ask the two of to you stand by. i want to get to michael cohen. the newly revealed audio here may complicate in a deal cohen could receive. eric is with us. the reporter behind these new details. how are prosecutors feeling now that this has been out and they didn't know about it? >> generally speaking prosecutors don't find it helpful when aspects of their investigation are made public. >> they like the control. they want to avoid where potential witnesses or people under investigation are talking to each other about pieces of evidence and other things like that. they chose to make public a piece of potential evidence. that probably is not considered what the prosecutors wanted to have happen. >> okay. thank you so much. welcome to the cnn family, by the way. d

i don't know if mr. comey was being generous to mr. trump.ut i do think he sees this, and capone for him is probably a hero. if he'd just been smarter about the taxes, he wouldn't have had this problem, you know? and so i don't think it's that far from him. and consider the fact that his mob associates who inhabited his building and helped him in his casino operations and were the closest friends of his lawyer roy cohn put him in that mind-set. we have as close to a mobster in the white house that is an associate of mobsters very comfortable with that language. >> you make some fair points. i may have been naive thinking that any reference to al capone would be a negative reference. john flannery, we appreciate your insights. >>> up ahead, president obama is speaking out and going after an apparent reference to trump lying. >>> nancy pelosi says the russians must have something on trump. we're going to get into every possible form of this question when we're back in 30 seconds. , he'd be stopping for more pills right now. only aleve has the s

mr. comey's deviations from that protest pole must acknowledge. i hope you'll think back to statements you made about interference of the special counsel earlier in this congress and consider the consequences of our words and actions here today. the majority keeps telling us over and over again that there was bias in the clinton investigation, bias in the russia investigation, and that bias must never again affect an investigation at the department of justice. the rules that prevent mr. strzok from answering some of the questions today are designed to accomplish precisely that, to prevent congress and the public from injecting bias in counsel -- i'm sorry, to prevent congress and the public from injecting bias and politics into the special counsel's investigation or into any other investigation. when the special counsel's job is done, i invite all of us to join in examining his findings. until then, mr. chairman, i hope we can treat our guests with common courtesy and leave the special counsel alone to do his job. i yield back. >> the chair thanks

and so i really think we ought to stop talking about mr. comeycus on what americans think and they're growing more exhausted with this probe. >> there is another angle here to talk about with you. the growing speculation that michael cohen is showing he could flip. he was saying in an interview this week family and country have his first loyalty, and then he also removed his reference to president trump as being his personal attorney from his twitter biography and linked in, and he's also brought on lanny davis, best known for defending president clint in the 90s. >> he already flipped. he already flipped in the sense that he hired lanny davis. lanny took on this case, i'm sure, because it's a chance to seek revenge for what the to clint hillary clinton when hurt donald trump. when i read there was mention about cohen's new-found sincerity, i laughed. he doesn't know how to act sincere. consequently, i think a metamorphosis under the expert hands of lanny davis in fostering a sincere performance for cohen for the media and also for the prosecutor

so that's kind of the pot calling the kettle black by mr. comey and co. >> one thing that's interesting is that the documents make it clear that they were relying on information from christopher steele, but not only investigation from christopher steele, on fisa renewals assert that you're an agent of an foreign power, and then it was signed off, the fisa application and then three renewals, by four judges all of them appointed by republicans. this isn't just christopher steel or james comey, this is many, many people over four administrations, over and over believing that you were an agent of a foreign power. how do you respond to that? >> actually it would be a good question for them, jake, is whether they believe that what they did was appropriate now. you know, again, they were misled and if people are giving them typically when the department of justice is giving a court information, i think it's reasonable for a judge to believe that that's true. i'm hoping that the judge will -- the fisa is just the first part, let's see what they do in sou

purpose of your september and october statements, including tweets regarding an investigation of mr. comey? so what's happening here is the special counsel is looking at these tweets, which as you said, these are public statements by a u.s. president. and how they interact with private interactions with the individuals involved. for instance, james comey. he has a conversation with him, asks him questions about the investigation, et cetera, makes public comments as well. do those public comments and those private meetings, whatever pressure was perceived to have been placed by the president on comey or sessions in those private meetings, whether that adds up to an attempt to either obstruct the investigation or perhaps tamper with witnesses. if you are publicly attacking people involved in this investigation, that could under some circumstances provide evidence of that. i should say the president's lawyers have said that all these questions that are under scrutiny here, including the president's firing of james comey, were very much within the president's power. he is the president. he can

so that's kind of the pot calling the kettle black by mr. comey. >>> it says the fbi believes page has been the subject of targeted recruitment by the russian government and then redacted, undermine and influence the outcome of the 2016 u.s. presidential election in violation of u.s. criminal law. it says the russians were trying to recruit you. we know you went to russia in the summer of 2016 to deliver a commencement address, is it not a possibility that the russians were trying to recruit you, even if you did not take the bait? it seems that would be your job, you were working for trump, you were working with the kremlin in the past, that would be a reasonable thing for you to try to do? >> it's unreasonable, jake, and it speaks to another misleading testimony related to the indictments that eric holder and preet bharara submitted on january 2015 talking about that prior case. and, you know, a lot of that is incorrect spin. that individual, mr. padobne, a young diplomat in new york. i talked with him about my class. i sat -- we had coffee one t

comey. the times reporting that in public mr.that he had second thoughts about that role, but privately, quote, he expressed remorse at the tumult it unleash the. he said the full story would vindicate him. acco

but with regard to mr. comey my recollection is that he was aware of the concerns but i was not privy to discussions he had with the attorney general or other concerns he may have had outside of my presence. >> with regard to mr. giuliani, on october 25 then trump campaign adviser promised a quote/unquote pretty big surprise coming up in the campaign. on october 28 giuliani claimed to be in contact with former agents and a quote/unquote few active agents who obviously don't want to identify themselves. there was a concern that there is a deep and visceral hatred towards secretary clinton in the new york field office at the same time mr. giuliani says he is having contactwis with activ agents. can you give us your take? >> i recall the comment and recall it caused me a lot of concern. >> and why? >> because while it is possible that he is engaging in some sort of bu puffe puffery, the reality is giving the timing that the laptop was there and talking about it in the context of a big surprise it caused me great con

but with regard to mr. comey, my recollection is that he was aware of those concerns but i was not privy to discussions he had with the attorney general or other concerns he might have had outside of my presence or conversation. >> with regard to mr. guliani. on october 25, then trump campaign adviser rudy guliani promised a "big surprise" coming up in the campaign. october 28 guliani claimed to be in contact with former agents and a few active agents that don't want to identify themselves. there was a concern that there have a deep and visceral hatred to secretary clinton in the field office. at the same time, mr. guliani said he's having contacts with agents, active agents. can you give us your comments on this particular issue? >> i recall that comment. i recall it caused me a lot of concern. >> why? why did it cause you concern? >> because while it's possible that mr. guliani is exaggerating our engaging in some sort of puffery, the reality that given the things going on, given timing that the laptop was ther

in the case of mr. comey and mr.e and miss yates, for instance, who were fired for misconduct, i think it is easy call whether to remove their security clearances. on others, if i were the president i would let the ig process begin to work a little bit, see what they come up with. but the standard, there isn't much required to pull someone's kurt clearance. it has been abused to target trump people. melissa: what does it allow you to do. i understand the cachet when you're getting hired in the private sector but are you allowed to get briefed on stuff? do you have access to things others don't if you have a security clearance? >> you have access to government decision-makers currently in the intelligence community. so you can talk shop. melissa: yeah. >> you can't do that anymore, at least on classified material if you don't have security clearance. melissa: it is worth quite a bit. thank you for clearing that up for us. take you back to the fisa document. they finally released it. i was roaring with laughter, when i

you may not like what mr. comey says or mr. clapper or anyone else has to say.t because they served as a former dni or national security advisor or whatever doesn't preclude their free speech rights once they leave that position. has nothing to do with responsibilities under current law and regulation to be a part of that network of individuals who get continued classified briefings. this boils down to one simple thing, the president is pissed because these folks are talking smack about what he's doing at the white house. he doesn't like it. he can't strike at them because they don't work for him. he can do the one thing, go at the one nexus he has to his administration, forever you will, that is that they still get these classified briefings. >> i think that makes perfect sense, michael, what you're saying and goes back to this seems to be a very emotional president breaking the rules and doing things experts say undermine national security, because there's something, as you put it, makes him upset. he's also upset about a current national professional, upset o

political election and political system, it also described a so-called dossier, at least mr. comeyid. there is a person that was there that i could us a lot more about it, we are talking former homeland security advisor tom. he was there, listen to what he had to say about that today. >> i was in that brief income of the two weeks before the inauguration. that would focus primarily on the cyber component of what the russians did. not the information operations. those information operations are ongoing. i agree with the fbi director. >> just to give you a little clarity there, what he is suggesting, jon, is that this is a broad sweep briefing that you get so often especially in transition circumstances. it did not give grandeur to detail about some of the information that the russians both had and were attempting to exploit, and that is something that i'm sure the president got plenty up in the days after. back to you. >> jon: kevin at the white house. kevin, thank you. i mention that the senate is voting on that nonbinding resolution to keep the trump administration from letting mo

actions mueller is investigating as a possible obstruction case, including private interactions with mr. comeyns and other senior administration officials about the russia inquiry, misleading white house statements, public attacks and possible pardon offers to potential witnesses as well. the paper goes on to say trump's lawyers argue none of what mueller has honed in on constitutes obstruction, but privately some of the lawyers expressed concern that mr. mueller will stitch together several episodes, encounters and pieces of evidence like the tweets to build a case that the president embarked on a broad effort to interfere with the investigation. speaking with the times, trump's lawyer rudy guilliani dismissing mueller's interests in the tweets as part of a desperate quest to sink the president, saying, quote, if you're going to obstruct justice you do it quietly and secretly, not in public. >>> joining us one against onset, nbc legal analyst danny cevallos. good to have you back with us. if we assume it is trump's team that's the source of the cohen revelation, which is hard to pinpoint, is

by mr. comey and co. >> reaction now pouring in, most along partisan lines. republicans and democrats suggesting these newly released documents back up their personal views of robert mueller's russia investigation. let's get right to cnn's senior washington correspondent, ryan nobles, near the trump golf resort in jersey, where the president is spending his weekend. ryan, trump has been on a twitter tirade about this. >> that's a great wait to put it. we haven't seen the president. he's had no public appearances the entire weekend. our only glimpse into his thinking is his twitter feed. and he's been very active on twitter and on this particular topic, he's tweeted four different times about the release of this document. and in his mind, it is vindication for his long-held belief that robert mueller's investigation is a witch hunt and this particular fisa application was done almost criminally. he dribs escribes it as a consp in many ways. so the president has been looking for more and more evidence to try to discredit the mueller investigation. this falls ri

by mr. comey. >> it says "the fbi believes carter page has been the subject of targeted recruitment by the russian government," and then it's redacted and then it says "undermine and influence the outcome of the 2016 u.s. presidential election in violation of u.s. criminal law." it says that the russians were trying to recruit you. we know you've said that you went to russia in the summer of 2016 to deliver a commencement address. is it not a possibility that russians were trying to recruit you even if you didn't take the bait? is that not possible? it seems to me like that would be their job and you were working for trump, you'd worked with the kremlin in the past, that would be a reasonable thing for them to try to do. >> it's totally unreasonable, jake. and it actually speaks to another misleading testimony related to the indictments that eric holder and preet bharara submitted on january 2015 talking about that prior case. and a lot of that is incorrect spin. that individual, mr. podobny, a yo

with somebody who had personal relationships and previous interactions with director mueller and mr. comey. and that he has taken such a lead out front in making this case that you do need to win the case of public opinion. the bottom line is i think rudy giuliani is right. there is an evidence of anything wrong. of the this goes, the longer they go to their direction. >> harris: what happens if in the end there isn't any evidence? the public knows that a lot of it is tax dollars perhaps, we don't know the end date yet for tax dollars were spent to find out something that turned out to be without evidence and then we move on. isn't that what you want rather than stopping something short and giving the other political party some ground to feed on fighting it wasn't a true investigation? what's your opinion on that? >> trey gowdy said a couple of weeks ago when the hearing, it's tearing this nation apart, there needs to be a decision as to whether or not to prosecute, was there any information. the president's legal team has been told repeatedly the president is not a subject of this investi

you saw this with mr. comey when he wrote those memos to himself. they're trying to put something in record and leave a paper trail. we'll see in this case if anyone inadvertently left a paper trail. >> i think that's the big question, hans, is there any proof. hans nichols at the white house on a very busy day. thank you very much, appreciate it. >>> let's refresh our memory about this trump tower meeting because it's been a while. about two years ago in june 2016, e-mails show donald trump jr. wrote to british publicist rob goldstone. quote, how about 3 at our offices? thanks, rob. appreciate you helping set it up. the "it" prefers to the trump tower meeting. in that same e-mail exchange don junior was offered dirt on hillary clinton to which he replied, if it is what you say, i love it. just hours later candidate donald trump appeared at a campaign event to tease an upcoming speech that would reveal incriminating information about the clintons. take a listen. >> i am going to give a major speech on probably monday of next week, and we're going to

but with regard to mr. comey, my recollection is that he was aware of those concerns but i was not privy to discussions he had with the attorney general or other concerns he might have had outside of my presence or conversation. >> now, with regard to mr. giuliani, on october 25th, then trump campaign advisor rudy giuliani promised a, quote unquote, pretty big surprise coming up in the campaign. on october 28th, giuliani claimed to be in contact with former agents and a, quote unquote, few active agents who obviously don't want to identify themselves. let me make sure i have this right. there was a concern that there was a deep and visceral hatred toward secretary clinton in the new york field office. at the same time mr. giuliani says that he's having contacts with agents, active agents. what is -- can you give us your take on this and your comments on this particular issue? >> i recall that comment. i recall it caused me a lot of concern. >> and why? why did it cause you concern? >> because while it's certainly

mccabe, mr. comeyr echelon senior exclusives related to the hillary clinton case as well as the russia collusion case -- >> and the gop said that's bunk, jimmy, and they'll prove it. did they do it today. >> here's the other thing. everything that happened today was rehearsed. we did this behind closed doors. >> but they wouldn't release the transcript. no we know why. >> now we have it out in open form. you and i talked about this earlier. it's not that there's a criminal act. it's the fact that mr. strzok, in my mind, damaged the fbi, damaged the brand, and reduced the confidence of the american people in the fbi as an institution. why? because as you pointed out on the whiteboard, poor judgment decisions. people can say, if you exhibited poor judgment here, how can we trust you in these other instances? >> all right. is that good enough for you, laura coates? then i have a second point i want to make about whether strzok helped or hurt his situation today. but in terms of what we found out about him

that's kinds of the pot calling the kettle black by mr. comey. >>. documents make it clear they were relying on information from christopher steel and not only on information in christopher steel, a fisa warrant and three renewals, officials of both the obama administration and trump administration over several months assert you're an agent of a foreign power and it was signed off -- fisa application and three renewals by four judges all of them appointed by republicans. so this isn't just christopher steel or james comey, this is many people, over two administrations, four judges appointed by republican over and over, believing that you are an agent of a foreign power. how do you respond to that? >> actually, it would be a good question for them, jake. whether they believe that what they did was appropriate now. you know, again, they were misled. if people are giving them typically when the department of justice is giving a court information, i think it's reasonable for a judge to believe that that's true. unfortunately, you know, mr. berman, the u.

my recollection is that mr. comey was aware of those concerns. i was not privy to discussions he had with the attorney general. with regard to mr. giuliani, on october 25, rudy giuliani promised a pretty big surprise coming up in the campaign. 28, giuliani claimed to be in contact with former agents and a few active agents who don't want to identify themselves. let me make sure i have this right. therewas a concern that was a hatred toward secretary clinton in the new york field office. at the same time mr. giuliani says he is having contact with agents, active agents. can you give us your take on this and your comments? >> i recall that comment. i recall it caused me a lot of concern. >> why did it cause you concern? >> while it is certainly possible that mr. giuliani is exaggerating or engaging in some puffery, the reality is that given the things that were timing, agiven the cause me great concern that he had information about that. >> that he should not of had? -- have had? >> through unauthorized disclosure. advised thats are there are folks

mccabe and case of mr. comeyclearances are no longer in effect anyway, but what is startling about this the number of people who have them period, way, way beyond these. i want to explore this with former justice department attorney, john yu. good to have you back with us. >> thanks, neal. neil: i can't believe these numbers. apparently 4.1 people in this country have some form of security clearance. i can understand the high number given those that work in defense companies or establishments or contractors but 1.3 million have this top security clearance, that is raising eyebrows. that is a lot of people. how did it get so high? >> i used to have one of those top secret clearances when i was in the government. but when i left, i was read out of it, taken away. that is appropriate. what you're seeing are a lot of people, a lot of those people are people still working in the defense industry, working for businesses that support the national security functions of the government. but i think you're right what you're

john brennan, director of national intelligence, james comey, susan rice, andrew mccabe and former nsa and cia chief michael hayden. by the way, mr. president, comey and mccabe don't have the security clearances and can't be revoked. these officials have been critical of president trump, specifically on the subjects of president trump's relationship with vladimir putin and the subject of why president trump continues to deny what the intelligence community says, that there was election interference by the russian government in 2016 and a denial reiterated this weekend calling it all a big hoax. again, according to the experts it's not. experts say that until this afternoon, there's always had to be serious grounds for revoking security clearances and criticism was not the grounds. after all, remember, former director of the defense intelligence agency, retired general flynn leading the charge to lock uphill hill during the 2016 republican convention. >> lock her up. that's right. yeah, that's right. lock her up! >> you will note president obama did not revoke general flynn's security clearance. now, traditionally there has to be

mr. comey's deviation from that protocol must acknowledge. when we reach that impasse, mr. chairman.u made about interference with the special counsel earlier and consider the consequences of our words and actions here today. the majority keeps telling us over and over again there was bias in the clinton investigation, bias in the russian investigation, and bias must never again effect an investigation at the department of justice. the rules that prevent mr. strzok from answering some of the questions today are designed to accomplish precisely that. to prevent congress and the public from injecting bias and politics into the special counsel's investigation or into any other investigation. when the special counsel's job is done, i would invite all of us to join in examining his findings. until then, mr. chairman, i hope we can treat our guest with common courtesy and leave the special counsel alone to do his job. i yield back. >> their thanks the gentleman. i recognize the chairman from south carolina, mr. gowdy, for his opening statement. >> in our justice system we give law enforcem

mr. comey's deviations from the protocol must acknowledge. when we reach the impasse, i hope you'll think back to the statements you made about the interference and consider the consequences of our words and actions here today. the majority keeps telling us over and over again that there was bias in the clinton investigation, bias in the russia investigation, and that bias must never again affect an investigation at the department of justice. the rules that prevent mr. strzok from answering some of the questions today are designed to accomplish that. to prevent congress and the public from injecting bias in counsel -- i'm sorry to prevent congress and the public from injecting bias and politics into the special counsel's investigation or into any other investigation. when the special counsel's job is done, i'd invite all of us to join in examining his findings. until then, mr. chairman, i hope we can treat our guest with common courtesy and leave the special counsel alone to do his job. i yield back. >> chair thanks the gentleman and it's my

mr. chairman, i would not agree with that characterization of director comey. and in answer to your question, i have not seen it before. >> all right. was that appropriate what he did? hold a news conference and publicly announce the decision that was supposed to have been made by the department of justice? >> sir, that was his decision. >> was it appropriate in your opinion? >> sir, i don't think it's for me to say. >> it is for you to say. what's your opinion? >> i understand the variety of factors -- well, i understand some of the factors that went into director comey's decision to make the announcement. i can tell you that decision was not made lightly at all. i can tell you my experience in that decision. >> you're not aware of any precedent for that? >> i am not. >> mr. strzok, in a footnote, 197 of the inspector general's report, it is noted that, quote, supervision of the russia investigation was briefly transitioned from strzok to another counterintelligence division, d.a.d., in early 2017. why were you transitioned from the russia investigation in ear

mr. strzok, former director comey played judge, jury and exxon e exoarator in the hillary clinton investigation. >> mr. chairman, i would not agree with that characterization of director comey and in answer to your question i have not seen it before. >> was that a appropriate, what he did? to hold a news conference and publicly announce the decision that was supposed to have been made by the department of justice? >> sir, that was his decision. >> was it appropriate. >> i understand same of the factors that went into that decision. that decision was not made lightly at all. >> you're not aware of any precedent for that? >> i am not. >> mr. strzok, in a footnote, 197 of the inspector general's report it's noted quote supervision of the russian investigation was transitioned from strzok to another counter intelligence team. why were you transitioned from the russia investigation in early 2017? >> sir, let me see if i can answer that question without getting into operational detail. the investigation was brought -- what russia was doing against our country encompassed a variety of thing. there wer

mr. chairman, i would not agree with that characterization of director comey. and in answer of your question, i have not seen it before. >> all right. was that appropriate, what he did, hold a news conference and publicly announce the decision that was supposed to be made bit department of justice. >> sir, that was his decision. >> was it appropriate, in your opinion? >> sir, i don't think it's for me to say. >> it is for you to say, i asked you the question. >> sir, i understand some of the factors that went into director comey's decision to make the announcement. i can tell you the decision was not made lightly at all. >> but you're not aware of any precedent for that? >> i am not. >> mr. strzok, in a footnote, 197 of the inspector general's report, it is noted that, quote, supervision of the russia investigation was briefly transitioned from strzok to another counterintelligence division d.a.d. in early 2017. why were you transitioned from the russia investigation in early 2017? >> sir, let me see if i can answer that question without getting into operationa

with regard to mr. comey, my recollection is he was aware of those concerns, but i was not privy to discussions he had with the attorney general or other concerns he may have had outside of my presence or conversation. >> with regard to mr. giuliani, on october 25th, then trump campaign advisor rudy giuliani promised a quote unquote pretty big surprise coming up in the campaign. on october 28th, giuliani claimed to be in contact with former agents and a quote unquote few active agents who obviously don't want to identify themselves. let me make sure i have this right. there was a concern that there was a deep and visceral hatred toward secretary clinton in the new york field office. at the same time, mr. giuliani says that he's having contacts with agents, active agents. can you give us your take on this and your comments on this particular issue? >> i recall that comment. i recall it caused me a lot of concern. >> why? why did it cause you concern? >> because while it's certainly possible that mr. giuliani i

and there were concerns about number of folks, but with regard to mr. comey, my recollection is that he was aware of those concerns but i was not privy to discussions he had with the attorney general or other concerns he might have had outside of my presence or conversation. >> now, with regard to mr. giuliani, on october 25th, then trump campaign adviser rudy giuliani promised a quote/unquote pretty big surprise coming up in the campaign. on october 28th, giuliani claimed to be in contact with former agents and a quote/unquote active agents who obviously don't want to identify themselves. let me make sure i have this right. there was a concern that there was a deep and visceral hatred toward secretary clinton in the new york field office. at the same time, mr. giuliani said that he's having contacts with agents. active agents. what -- can you give us your take on this and your comments on this particular issue? >> i recall that comment. i recall it caused me a lot of concern. >> and why? why did it cause you concern? >> because, while it's certainly possible

mr. strzok, hillary clinton has said publicly that fbi director james comey cost her the election. do you share hillary clinton's opinion? >> sir, i don't know. i read a lot of pollsters and speculations but i don't know. >> it is an important question because you think about hillary clinton making a statement like that about the fbi and the fbi director as well as the statements that president trump has made about the fbi and those are the two leaders in each party. i think it does matter, out of curiosity, are there any recordings of the interviews of the clinton e-mails investigation? >> no, sir, i don't believe we recorded any of the interviews. >> to the best of my recollection, i would need to review the case file. >> is that normal for an investigation of that size? >> yes. >> mr. strzok, did you consult with james comey before he made the decision to go public days before the presidential election with the fact that the fbi was going to re-open the investigation into hillary clinton's e-mail once it was determined that anthony weiner had access to the e-mails did you consul

director james comey mr trump fired last year accuses them of influencing agencies that are supposed to remain a political call was deputy national intelligence officer for international threats of the national intelligence council he joins us from boston massachusetts going call two of these six people don't have any security clearance anyway so what's the point of the white house kind of marching its troops up to the top of the hill on this well i think it's consistent with trump's modus operandi which is threaten and make afraid and try to punish anyone who challenges him on any point of any sort be it substance or political or personal so it's a gratuitous act but it's much more serious than that it's never been even suggested before in american history that a president would so openly use the levers of power to punish someone simply for having criticized if he goes ahead and does this with the of the for two points point number one can he actually do it on his own can he unilaterally pull the plug on their clearances and point number two i mean would it silence them anyway. i be

. >> fact, on the 25th of october, days before the comey letter, mr.uliani went on television and said ha ha, this is fox, something's coming. on october 28th in the morning before the letter was written, he went on the huy hewlett show saying i heard from former and active agents something bad is coming. giuliani and many of the agents have been identified as leaking to pressure james comey to reopen an investigation that turned out to be a nothing burger. >> what do you know about the state of his relationship with the clintons right now. with hillary clinton. is it still close or the sort of thing he would discuss with them or cleared with them at all? any sense of that? >> not necessarily whether he would clear his potential representation of michael cohen with them, but the argument you heard him making. he wrote a book about the argument of comey the election for donald trump. that's he did talk with the clintons about and the clintons told their allies they believe in. to the extent that he is still seen as a clinton surrogate or at least an all