mr. horowitz, does your show any reason to discredit? mr. horowitz: i'm not going to make a decision on mueller's investigation. i'm going -- senator durbin: i want to stay within the four corners of your report. do you discredit the credibility of the investigation? mr. horowitz: we did not address it. we laid out what occurred and we laid out what individuals did in october where it touches the russia investigation. senator durbin: last thursday, senator majority leader mitch mcconnell said in an knew, he wanted the investigation to include. he said if the i.g. is through, why can't it ramp up? was there any relationship between what you were tasked in doing and what robert mueller is tasked in doing? mr. horowitz: other than the issues we talked about where we talked about text messages and brought them to his attention, we do not have any connections in that regard. senator durbin: my colleagues have raised the question about the new york field office and leaks in that field office and there are quotes in the report relative to mr. comey'

mr. horowitz: i do not believe we went to mr. podesta's communication devices as a third party. >> would you do that? mr. horowitz: let me talk to the team and get back to you on that. not to put too it, he already was giving inside information to the chairman of the hillary clinton campaign. he did it once. his son's job request was pending. seems to be a reasonable possibility he did it other times. i am not alleging it. i just want to know. thank you. >> thank you to our witnesses for your hard work and for what has been a long hearing. i want to begin by thanking you, inspector general horowitz, and your staff, director of the fbi, mr. wray, and the thousands of agents and doj professionals for doing the difficult, sometimes dangerous jobs, to investigate and prosecute crimes. the ig and fbi have demonstrated something very important through this process, which is that our most senior law enforcement leaders are subject to scrutiny. it bears repeating that for this review, senior ig staff conducted over 100 interviews and rev

mr. horowitz: no. >> do you believe in the easter bunny? mr. horowitz: no. >> do you believe that jimmy hoffa died of natural causes? mr. horowitz: not based on what i have read. >> do you honestly believe that the american people are going to look at this report and look at those emails and not believe that there was bias and people acting on bias and that a fix the fbi?t mr. horowitz: i completely understand the concern, senator, and that is why we have laid all this out here and why we found it in text the credibility of the handling of the what we sayn and here is not, as senator crapo mentioned, which is that there rather, we were asked to look at whether the specific decisions we reviewed were affected by bias. and those particular decisions abouthat we are talking were decisions made mostly by the prosecutors, not by any of the individuals you indicated there. and where there was that concern, which was in october, where agent strzok was a decision-maker, it is precisely why we found -- >> let me

mr. horowitz: indie mccabe, the deputy director. you have the lead investigator in the clinton taking outtigation, an insurance policy, making donald trump does not become president? horowitz: i cannot speak to whether he was there or not. -- wray: did you ask him sen. graham: did you ask and go -- did you ask him? mr. horowitz: he said he did not recall. the deputy: you said director of the fbi is not the andy. says he does he not recall whether he was there or not and neither are those individuals are putting him in the middle of the conversation. sen. graham: he wasn't there. someone is lying. we will figure that out, later. let's look at the actual interview itself. were involved in the clinton interview on july the second? six or eight people present. two agents conducting the interview. senator graham: this was the mail sent in 2016. -- an email send in 2016. a conversation between our two prosecutors, she might be our next president. how did you feel? mr. horowitz: we were concerned. sen. graham: one of the fbi agents said in

mr. horowitz i yield back the balance. >> from california. >> thank you mr. chair. mr. horowitz thank you for this tloort lays out clear and une quickiveal terms -- the e-mails and decision to decline prosecution were both done properly without bias. you concluded we did not find documentary or testimonial evidence that improper considerations can will yinclud political bias directly affected the decisions or that the justification offered for these decisions were pretextual, is that right? >> that's correct. >> -- questioned many aspects of the investigation from use of immunity agreements to the timing of the james comey drafting process. did you investigate these allegations. >> can you say that again. >> republican members repeatedly declared the investigation was il legitimate and questioned many aspects of the investigation from the justice department's use of the immunity agreements to the timing of the james comey drafting process did you investigate. >> yes. >> in response to your report chair gaudy wrote this report confirms investigations decisions were unprec

mr. horowitz, the president told us why he fired mr. comey and it wasn't for any of the things mentioned in the report. it was because of the russia investigation. he told that to us on nbc news interview with lester holt. i believe the president. unless there's evidence he was lying but i haven't heard any suggestions of that. now mr. horowitz, the special counsel's investigation has resulted in five guilty pleas and 23 indictments so far. do any of your reports findings call into question any of these serious criminal indictments? >> our report focused on the clinton e-mail investigation. >> it has nothing to do with it. >> so the answer is no. >> the only place we touch on russia is that october time period. >> thank you. on may 2nd, 2017, president trump tweeted, fbi director comey was the best thing that ever happened to hillary and that he gave her a free pass for many bad deeds, unquote. over the course of your investigation, did you find that the fbi gave hillary clinton, quote, a free pass from any bad deeds unquote? >> i'm sor

mr. horowitz. >> mr. chairman, for what purposes does the chairman from new york seek recognition. >> to make a point of moment. >> my colleague asked that his comments a moment ago were described as ranting and raving and i ask that the words be taken down. >> mr. chairman, i think it would do us all good to make sure that we have personalities that are not involved in this, and i think it really degrades the overall importance of this issue as we bring personalities in, and whether it be with other members or others in the administration, so i think that's important, maybe a gentle reminder would be appropriate. >> mr. chairman? >> mr. chairman, i would insist -- i would insift either that his words be taken down taylor be an apology. >> well, i'm not going to instruct the gentleman from arizona to apologize anymore than i am other members who today have also said things that came precipitously close to the line. i will ask the gentleman from arizona if i may continue -- if i may continue. >> all right.

mr. horowitz. should there be further investigations to what happened regarding the clinton investigation? >> as inspector general, that's most clearly not my decision to make. the last thing i'm going to do is step outside the authorities you've given me, the congress and the igf. >> so you can't respond to that? >> no. >> is there anything in this report that indicates that there should be another special counsel or further investigation of the clinton matter? >> well, senator, the decision about whether or not and when to appoint special counsel is reserved to the attorney general or the deputy attorney general if the attorney general is recused. one of the key take-aways is the fbi director shouldn't get out of his lane. >> so as deputy director rosenstein said to you that you should begin an invest combination into the clinton matter? >> i can't comment on my conversations with the deputy attorney general about investigations. >> thank you. >> here's where we are. i've been told that one repub

mr. horowitz, the report says that mr. comey's machinations resulted in lynch saying it would be counter productive to speak directly with the fbi director. can you unpack that for me? what does that mean? is the idea here that lynch and yates were simply afraid of exercising their thortd. >> their over sight experience. >> political interference, what's that about? >> couple of things. they were responding to the fact that director comey, rather than speaking to them directly, went to his chief of staff to one of their aides to them to relay his view on what they were going to do. what they told us their assessment at that point was based on their prior dealings with director comey was first of all if they went to him directly and said don't do it it would first of all look like strong arming and they weren't sure he would comply with the instructi instruction. they concluded it would be more effective or they would have a better chance of changing the decision if they went back the same way to him with their message whic

mr. horowitz. unfortunately, sir, your key finding that the decision not to charge secretary clinton was based on an assessment of the facts, the law, and past department practice, and not unbias or improper consideration, is now subject to the treatment that president trump and some of my republican colleagues will give it. i mean there was total bias, the president argued on the white house lawn just last week. what are we to make of this disconnect between what the report says and what the president and his allies say it says? why is it that no matter how many times we litigate this question, house republicans can think of nothing better to do than to endlessly investigate hillary clinton for the same conduct. why is it that after half a dozen investigations found no wrongdoing at benghazi, the majorities spent millions of dollars on their own benghazi select committee, and when that body found no wrongdoing either, why is it that the majority moved on to legitimize conspiracy theories about the

mr. horowitz, when -- >> mr. chairman. >> when you push the investigation, will you look at the question of why when the application was taken to the fisa court they didn't reveal the fact that the author of the document, the author -- >> mr. chairman, i have a problem with your inquiry. >> gentleman from ohio controls the time. >> well, is it not appropriate to raise the question as to what is the gentleman's line of question and whether or not we're dealing with a report of mr. horowitz or we're dealing with the republicans attempt to undermine the muller investigation and, as well, to fire deputy secretary -- excuse me, attorney general rosenstein c which you're planning on doing on friday. >> the gentleman of ohio controls the time and i would ask that the time be put back on the clock. >> i would just respond, mr. chairman. it's been widely understood that when the dos yeah was taken to the court to get a secret warrant to spy phenomenon a fellow american citizen, they didn't tell the court two important fac

mr. horowitz, the report says mr. comey's macinations said it would be -- is it the idea that lynch and yates were overstepping their authority? that it would look like political interference? what is that about? >> couple things. they were responding to the fact that director comey rather than speaking to them directly went through his chief of staff to one of their aides to them to relay his view on what he was going to do. when they told us their assessment at that point was based on their prior dealings with director comey was first of all the they went to him directly and said don't do it, it would look like strong arming and they weren't sure if he would supply or not with the instruction. they concluded that it would be more effective or they would have a better chance of changing the decision if they went back the same way to him with their message, which was to their principal associate ag to him. they reported back that they objected or recommended or -- clarify. they told him that they did not believe he sh

mr. horowitz at this time. thank you, though. [ applause ] >> thank you so much for all your work and for being here. before i introduce our moderator, our first panel, i want to first just share a few thank yous with you. the person who really is organized, been the driving force of this symposium is linda gustitus who is either my staff director or my own committee staff director, chief of staff in my office for more than two decades. and i just want to give special thanks to linda in the back of the room. [ applause ] her codi code director rectof the levin center washington office. thank you for all the great work you do. [ applause ] you do. >> now let me introduce the moderator of our first panel. and she will introduce the members of panelists of that panel. eleanor hill. she served as the u.g. for the department of defense with great distinction. she conducted that office with fairness and integrity and honesty. they served as the d.o.d. inspector general for five years, i believe. before that, she was

mr. horowitz, it's been a long day.there are many important and many would argue including me urgent issues facing our country today. some of them have been alluded to today. but there is nothing more important and nothing is ever more urgent than us having confidence in our justice system. so i will apologize to no one for having a hearing on your report which takes a really hard look at some institutions we desperately need. and i'll say this as a compliment to you and your team. i was thinking over the weekend how much better off our country would be had you and your team conducted the investigation that is the subject of your report. make no mistake, you and i probably would have reached some different conclusions as all washed up prosecutors do from time to time. you can look at a fact pattern and draw different conclusions. i don't mind if people are wrong. i really mind if they're unfair. we can survive being wrong. we can survive calling jump balls differently. we're not going to make it if you're system is perc

mr. horowitz. >> for purposes? >> a moment ago referring to ranting and raving i asked of those words be taken down. >> mr. chairman it would do was all good to make sure we have personalities that are not involved for the importance of this issue to bring personalities and whether with other members or others in the administration it is important a general reminder would be appropriate. >> i would assist that those words be taken down or there is an apologies back i will not instruct him to apologize or other members who have said things that came precipitously close to the line but if i may you may continue. >> i will ask him if he wishes to rephrase or restate his comments in any way. >> but the other side has been ranting and raving to issues that have nothing to do with the hearing. >> it was general as opposed to specifically directed at the individual quality -- colleen long -- colleague mac as long as it is clear he is talking in general. >> and think that's pretty clear. now we will recognize the gentleman

mr. horowitz, welcome. surrounding former deputy director mccabe's termination that the department of justice at high levels sought to determine nate the clinton foundation investigation. we also know that you found communication between secretary clinton and president obama. during your investigation did you seek access to communications from the department of justice? >> yes, we did. >> what about former obama white house officials? >> we sought department records and department information. we have in the past when we've sought white house records, this is true of administrations going way back, it's been made clear to us that the executive office of the president does not provide records to inspectors generals of agencies. we would look for them if they were incoming to the department and those would be records that we would seek and obtain, but we don't have authority over any other agency outside government -- outside the justice department. >> did you seek to interview any officials at the white hous

report, he'll join in the chorus that horowitz is undoubtedly the fairest person that could have done this and you can be sure if some of his conclusions are against mrs theory about what went down, horowitz will be denounced. so it is very, very political, comey will come up in it, mccabe will come up in it, just -- it is really going to be a comprehensive look at what happened during the election. so i think a very important document. >> interesting to note that horowitz did briefly overlap with comey while they were both working in the federal prosecutor's office in manhattan. how does that weigh in here? >> i don't think it weighs in. the reason i say that, poppy, an inspector general, by the very nature of the job, is sort of, although working for the agency, is independent of the agency. they're put in place to investigate the agency that they're assigned to. so he works for a lot of different bosses, but he's independent of them. i really don't think that's an issue. >> the new york times profile on him this morning is fascinating. one of the anecdotes at the beginning, talks about the portrait that hangs on the wall of horowitz's office, righ

mr. horowitz.he i.t. worker that managed the clinton server lied to the fbi repeatedly. he denied deleting clinton e-mails, he denied that clinton's staff had ever asked him to delete the e-mails, he denied knowing the e-mails were under a preservation order. on march 2015, he had a call with clinton's lawyers. after that he deleted the clinton e-mails, invoked the fifth amendment to avoid questions about that call, even sent an e-mail saying that he was part of "hillary cover up operation" and he later claimed that that was only a joke. there was no search warrant or subpoena for the laptops used by the clinton lawyers to see what they knew about what he did. he did not get the mueller treatment. no charges for lying to the fbi repeatedly. no pressure to flip and testify against clinton lawyers. he got immunity, this is a good example of that double standard in these two investigations and why more and more people are starting to believe the mueller investigation lacks fairness. the report noted t

mr. horowitz, are you investigating comey's handling of his memos?classification issues? and should mr. comey expect a report when it is complete? >> we received a referral on that from the fbi. we are handling that referral and we will issue a report when the matter is complete consistent with the law and we will -- and a report that's consistent and takes those into account. >> okay. in the fbi's response to the inspector general's report the fbi said, quote, there is no indication that any classified material ever transited former director comey, ms. page's or mr. struck's personal devices or accounts, but i thought neither the inspector general nor the fbi actually looked at their personal devices. i sent a letter to you, director wray, this morning on this topic, but i wanted to ask you, how can the fbi conclude no classified material was on the personal devices if you didn't even look at their devices? >> mr. chairman, first as to your letter, i haven't obviously seen your letter of today but i'm happy to take a look at it and make sure we're b

mr. horowitz. did the official specifically tell you that obstructing congress was not a matter of substantial federal interest? >> they didn't specifically say that to us. we asked them for their reasons and they explained various other reasons that we lay out in the report. >> former director comey said on television that the inspector general interviewed him about the handling of his memos of conversations with president trump. some of those memos contained classified information. comey said he did not expect a report on his handling of classified information because, quote, unquote, that's frivolous. i don't happen to think it is frivolous. question number one to mr. horowitz, are you investigating comey's handling of his memos, and does that include the classification issues? and should mr. comey expect a report when it is complete? >> we received a referral on that from the fbi. we are handling that referral and we will issue a report when the matter's complete, consistent with the law and ru

mr. horowitz. interesting testimony. but having reviewed the record, it was interesting because he had quoted prosecutor one, prosecutor two, agent one, agent two, agent three. these different people. different prosecutors, different agents that he was relying on their comments, their opinions, their ggestions, the s.s.a., supervisory special agent recommendation, and comments on things that should have been and should have not been. and things that were proper, improper. but we had no information who these people were. the whole reason for the inspector general investigation was because of the massive amount of clear bias that had been unearthed within the department of justice, including the f.b.i., that's of course under and part of the department of justice. so we're being asked to accept all of this information from the inspector general, when so much of it depends on the opinions and the comments and assessments of people whose identity we didn't even know. so not only did we not know their identity, we don't know

mr. horowitz's words on the trump investigation of the fbi and then put on mueller's team. i want to know who this lawyer is. i want to know who fbi lawyer number two is. we need that person to come in and be deposed as well. clinton investigation, trump information, on mueller's team, subsequently removed from mueller's team because of the bias they had. lou: three top attorneys in the fbi on the same train with the three same stops and ultimately ending up on mueller's team. it is so clearly and anti-trump bias, it is so clearly a hillary clinton bias in support of her candidacy. we're not talking about abstractions here. we are not talking about philosophy. if we've got this, i would love to have these comments on bias. if we got that number seven ready to go, folks in the control room? i'm speaking to you please. i could not hear your answer. okay. we don't have it. i'll read it. >> lou, one of -- lou: and this is lisa page speaking. on march 3rd, 2016, god, trump is a loathesome human, march 3rd, 2016 in that conversation, strzok, oh my god, trump's an idiot. march 3rd

mr. horowitz james comey, andy mccabe deputy director, jim baker, fbi counsel lisa page and peter strzok are six important people at the fbi, right? >> correct. >> they were the key players on the clinton investigation and on the russian investigation, correct? >> they were certainly important on both. >> has mr. comey been fired? >> yes. >> has mr. mccabe been fired. >> yes. >> did mr. mccabe lie under oath. >> in our view, yes. >> is there a criminal referral. >> i won't comment on that. >> has general counsel jim baker left the fbi. >> yes. >> was he removed from his position prior to leaving the fbi. >> i'm not sure. >> has lisa page left the fbi. >> yes. >> was shened prior to leaving. >> yes. >> and peter strzok removed from his position as deputy counter intelligence. >> yes. >> you havo fwhn the d.o.j. for six years, cheech of the inspector generals, have you ever, ever seen anything like this at any other federal agency in your time in the federal government? six of the top people fired, demoted, reassigned or left? >> um, i obviously can't speak broadly to other areas that i ha

mr. horowitz? don't see that as political bias? what do you call everything you just routerred? it's all political and look at this in the ig report also found that fbi employees received oh, free tickets to sporting events from who? the destroy trump media. so-called journalists they went on gulf outings with media refs. they were treated to drinks and food by reporters. because of everything we just showed you, that report concluded the comey, page, strzok and others severely damaged the reputation of the fbi. here is what current fbi director christopher wray said about all of these damning findings, take a look. >> i take this report very seriously and we accept its findings and recommendations. it's also important though to note what the inspector general did not find. this report did not find any evidence of political bias or improper considerations actually impacting the investigation under review the report does identify errors of judgment, violations of or even disregard for policy and dec

mr. horowitz. 9. for horowitz, half for chris wray, the fbi director, half for horowitz, the inspector general. stuart: is that how they're going to do it? >> yes. by the way, mr. inspector general, that guy sittingext to you, did he keep any documents from you? i don't know if you'll hear anything that pointed, but i would ask it. stuart: you are hoping that some of the senators on the committee are watching you now and will pick up on that question and will ask it at 2:00 this afternoon. >> i i am hoping against hope that some of these politicians can miraculously become cross-examiners. stuart: don't be pejorative, say those good politicians -- [laughter] that's how youe got it. >> all right. by the way, i was not on set when the president of the the united states said some wonderful things about you. stuart: he did. >> i understand you repeated it a few times. stuart: many times, yes. [laughter] and we're not done with it yet. >> it is well deserved. stuart: i don't know abou that, but it was fun.

mr. horowitz at this time, thank you. plus mike -- [ applause ] >> thank you so much for all of your work and for being here. before i introduce our moderator for the first panel, i just want to share a few thank you's with you, the person who really organized and is the driving force of this symposium is linda goodstein's who is either my staff director for my own committee staff director or chief of staff in my office for more than two decades. i just want to give a special thanks to linda the status in the back of the room. [ applause ] her codirector alisa being of the 11 center of washington operation, she is also with us today. thank you for all of the great work you do. now, let me introduce a moderator for our first panel, she will introduce the members of the panel. eleanor hill served as the ig for the department of defense, with great distinction. she conducted that office with fairness and integrity and honesty. she served as the dod ig for five years before that, she was the staff director for senator sam nun

mr. horowitz, does your report show any reason to devalue or discredit any opinions he has made? >> i'm not going to make a judgment on special counsel mueller's investigation. i'm going to stick to what i here -- >> i want to stick to the four corners of your investigation. did you address the credibility of the special counsel robert mueller? >> we laid out what occurred and we laid out what individuals did in october where it touches the russia investigation. >> last thursday senate majority leader mitch mcconnell said in an interview with the washington examiner he wanted the mueller investigation to conclude. he said, quote, if the ig is through, why can't the mueller investigation finally wrap up? was there any connection in substance or duration between what you were tasked in doing and what robert mueller is tasked in doing? >> again, other than the issues we talked about where we identify text messages and brought them to his attention, we do not have any connections, interactions in that regard. >> director wray, my colleague, senator leahy and others, have raised the q

mr. horowitz and director wray, the president tweeted several times today and yesterday that the mueller investigation continues to be a "witch hunt." he said on friday after reviewing the report, there is no evidence of collusion. his own fbi director today said that mueller is not on a witch hunt and that the report doesn't speak to the special counsel investigation. how is there the disconnect between what the president believes and other branches of the administration. >> the president has been clear. he was very involved in his campaign and he's laid out a number of times that there was no collusion. he strongly feels this is a witch hunt. the president has also said the ig report called into question the credibility of james comey and many other senior fbi investigators who've been involved in the russia investigation and that report validates the claims he's made repeatedly. >> reporter: the governor of massachusetts, a republican, reversed course and ordered the national guard not to send assets or personnel to the southwest border. he said the actions of the federal government a

mr. horowitz, number one. everything mr. comey did was self-serving.pretended to be concerned ab the department of justice and the fbi but i think he was concerned about them in the context of how his tenure as director would be looked u number two, the fbi has about 35,000 agents and employees, but clearly there were and probably still are some bad apples over there and it's going to be up to chris wray to demonstrate the will and ability to get rid of them. i think he has both. number three, the bias issue, you know, i read all the emails and the instant messages and the text messages. these were by people at the highest level of the clinton email investigation, the mueller investigation and the russia investigation. neil: you want to hear a lot from these guys and you will. senator, i have to interrupt the president of the united states is addressing the national space council private, public initiative to get back in space in a big way. hopefully not in a expensive way though. >> i would say our economy, many of you know that very well is doing bet

mr. horowitz: thank you mr. chairman, members of the committee, thank you for inviting me to testify today. page00 plus report provides a thorough and comprehensive and objective facts of the fbi handling of the clinton email in the station. it was the

mr. horowitz, does peter strzok like the president? >> reporter: today on capitol hill, republicans hammered justice department inspector general michael horowitz about those messages between strzok and former f.b.i. lawyer lisa page. >> february, march of 2016, peter strzok said, "trump's abysmal. trump's an idiot. hillary should win 100,000 to 0." it sounds like he hates the president. >> his text messages would implicate that. >> that is textbook bias. it is quite literally the definition of bias, allowing thmething other than the facts to determine your decision. >> reporter: the inspector general did not try to dissuade republican lawmakers over their concerns. >> i think, frankly, anybody should be concerned about any law enforcement officer expressing these kinds of views. i don't care whether it's a presidential race or a local election, it just shouldn't happen. >> reporter: strzok and page worked on both the clinton email stobe and the investigation into russian interference in the 2016 campaign. they were then assigned to th

mr. horowitz for more information. congress if they aren'ted in learning more.hey can continue to pursue this and perhaps they should in the interest of the transparency and accountability. jeanine, don't did yourselves, folks, we would know none of this if hillary clinton had been elected, and not donald trump. you wouldn't know what was going on at the tippy top echelon of the fbi. who was giving jim comey a hero's welcome for this leadership book. i don't need a lecture from jim comey about leadership and morality. it's embarrassing that's people killed the fatted calf and rolled out the red carpet for his book tour. a grandstanding, showboating, and subverting the process. he was insubordinate and he went outside loretta lynch's responsibilities and acted on his own. people should be very concerned about all of that. judge jeanine: i have read a lot of these 568 pages. the bottom line is they didn't make a criminal referral. they have said five fbi acts should be referred for disciplinary actions. there is no criminal referral as they did with maccabe. how d

mr. horowitz writes?nd was there a lot of the condemnation against hillary clinton and the use of her private server. >> the i.g. highlighted the potential bias in the handling of the wiener laptop issue. it took judicial watch to uncover the specifics of. arthel: what is the bias there? >> they waited a month perhaps because they were more eager to go after candidate trump in september and october of 2016 than to reopen and rehash the clinton email issue. arthel: does there seem to be much condemnation of that issue? is there a there there? >> the i.g. reports in my experience are cover-ups and expose's at the same time. there is a lot that's exposed. get accountability and that means putting a pause on the mueller investigation. arthel: the fbi director christopher wray said he'll be making changes in terms of sensitivity training and procedural changes at the fbi. i want to stick with the i.g. report. you just mentioned about the other five unnamed individuals who have been identified. including two ag

mr. horowitz. i am not buying that the clinton e-mail investigation was on the up and up. >> sean: i don't either. in the center of all of this is trump hating agent peter strzok. he will be subpened to determine why the f.b.i. and doj with held many of the anti- trump tex. he is the lead agent and vowed to stop a trump presidency in a text with lisa page, his girlfriend. and page was a high ranking f.b.i. attorney that was used by an true mccabe. yeah, that andrew mccabe. to bypass the f.b.i. chain of command. we have long reported about mccabe's democratic bias. peter strzok and jenny wray and those names sound familiar? and they all tapped the same people to finish the exxoneration of hillary and tap in for robert mueller for the trump russia witch hunt. they were then immediately appointed to investigate trump. the very agents, spews hatred about trump, vowing to stop his presidency and mocking trump supporters and the same people tapped to investigate trump. and the entire russia investigation

mr. horowitz telling me a long time ago. he said at the end of the process when the report is written, i have to give it to the tono romo. -- attorney general and the deputy attorney general. when that happens you will see leaks. only he has seen the final report. i don't think it will say they did a really good job. >> i don't think it's going to happen either. the democrats are going to be watching this as well. lawyers as well. what comey did with the fbi and lynch before that handcuffed the fbi and the doj. the question is -- that's one in one bucket. comey's truthfulness in regard to his book and interactions with donald trump are in a different bucket. comey puts republicans and democrats in difficult situations. >> laura: why do you think comey did not tell loretta lynch about this july press conference? >> it's incredible. there is not one criminal prosecutor at the federal level that works at the fbi. they work at the dolenc. -- doj. he can to consult with the doj. why didn't lynch recuse herself. -- doj. he can to

mr. horowitz. he says i can't understand this. >> laura: on page 294 of the, report, it's titled hillaryu. clinton and foundation, crime against children. it's referencing the e-mails. there was an effort to sequester certain e-mails away from the probe. you can see coleman's notes, anthony weiner, thousands of15 e-mails, et cetera. they had a conversation about which e-mails would be allowed to be looked at in this case and which would be, you know, set aside. and that also raises a lot of questions. they exchanged thousands of e-mails, apparently, i don't think they were looked at in this investigation at all. bobby, your reaction to where we are here. >> i think that specific question has to do with the search warrant. the office of the fbi who got the search warrant, it was fore that sexual crimes case against anthony weiner. you could only look for certain things. when it was transferred down to washington for the clinton e-mail, they were looking for different things. that's why the call went

mr. horowitz says he noted that it was the same as the presence birthday. is this a suggestion he will be pleased with findings or is it simply coincidental? >> you know, i noticed that. i thought it was sickly coincidental. the fact that he noted that, i don't know what, if anything it means. certainly an interesting way of looking at it. >> and he will testify before the senate judiciary committee, that is on june 18. in terms of the testimony, what is it the community want to learn from him and what is it he wants to be sure to tell the committee? >> well, also good questions. i think again, congressional democrats will try to get everything that they ken out of mr. horowitz. really there is no indication of pro-clinton, anti-trump bias. their belief is that there were parallel investigations going on during the time. one into the trump campaign ties into russia and also into hillary clinton email. they were very tightlipped about the trump investigation so they will probably try to develop that line of attack. and republicans i think will be doing the c

mr. horowitz to make that conclusion? >> yeah, i want him to explain to me why he did not make the conclusion and why it seems to isolate some pieces of evidence. leland: okay. all right. so, that is the part of the ig's report that deals with the clinton e-mail investigation. the president seems to be reading something else entirely into it. the president's thought first, and then yours? >> a report yesterday, maybe more importantly than anything, it totally exonerates me, there was no collusion, there was no obstruction. leland: perhaps the president got a different report than the rest of us did. did you see anything about the collusion investigation or the obstruction investigation in the ig's report to support the president's statement? >> i think there are things you can draw from the report that i saw. leland: like what? >> that i read. i think the bias that was there that comey was manipulating, that comey was leaking, and he was trying to manipulate an investigation to take place, and i think that it gets to the

mr. horowitz said is not there was no political bias influencesing this investigation.d not find any documentary evidence to prove that. in other words, peter strzok didn't write an email to all friends and co-workers saying help hillary and hurt trump and here's how we will do it. he doesn't have to say it. if you are in a club or a room and everybody agrees on something, like the u.s. military, it's not like the u.s. military has to have a strategy meeting every day and say today we will defend the nation. it's the given. it's what everyone understands they are supposed to do. that's what was at play here. >> tucker: i think the press would like you to stop asking so many uncomfortable questions and mindlessly absorb what they tell you. >> i won't do that. sorry. >> tucker: [laughing]. have a great night. the conversation around immigration is getting increasingly hysterical. not only some immigrants here be safe from deportation but not be arrested. what does that mean? plus a colorado congressional candidate maces himself in a campaign ad. you must meet him. he will