mr. kislyak, the contents of president trump's phone calls with australian and mexican leaders, the content of mr. trump's meetings with the russian foreign minister and ambassador, the leak of the manchester bombing suspect's identity and crime scene photos and last week, within 20 minutes of meeting with mr. comey, the basis of what mr. comey's innuendo was. are these leaks serious threats to our national security and is the department of justice taking them with the appropriate degree of seriousness in investigating and ultimately going to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law? >> thank you, senator cotton. we have had one successful case very recently in georgia. that person has been denied bail, i believe, and is being held in custody. but some of these leaks, as you well know, are extraordinarily damaging to the united states security, and we have got to restore a regular order principle. we cannot have persons in our intelligence agencies, our investigative agencies or in congress leaking sensitive matters on staff. so this is a -- i'm afraid will result in -- is already re

mr. kislyak, the contents of president trump's phone calls with australian and mexican leaders, the content of mr. trump's meetings with the russian foreign minister and ambassador, the leak of the manchester bombing suspect's identity and crime scene photos and last week, within 20 of m mineeting with mr. comey, basis of what mr. comey's innuendo was. lea serious threa to our national security and is the department of justice taking them with the appropriate degree of seriossneusn i ultimately go prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law? ce.onfuwelou, senator cott e c hase very recently in georgia. that person has been denied bail, i believe, and is being heldn custody. but some of these leaks, as you well know, are extraordinarily dagimang the united states security, and we have got to restore a regular order principle. we cannot have persons in our intelligence agencies, our investigative agencies o ir lea matters on staff. so this is a -- i'm afraid will result in -- is already resulting in,nd i fear that some people may find that they wish they hadn't leaked. >> thank u. has exp

mr. kislyak. the contents of president trump's phone calls with australian and mexican leaders. the content of mr. trump's meetings with the russian foreign minister and ambassador. the leak of the manchester bombing suspect's identity and crime scene photos. and last week within 20 minutes of the session with comey, the basis of what his innuendo was. are these leaks serious threats to our national security and is the department of justice taking them with the appropriate degree of seriousness in investigating and ultimately going to prosecute them to the fullest extent of the law? >> thank you, senator cotton. we have had one successful case very recently in georgia. that person has been denied bail, i believe, and is being held in custody. but some of these leaks as you well know are extraordinarily damaging to the united states security. and we have got to restore a regular order principal. we cannot have persons in our intelligence agencies, our investigative agencies, or in congress leaking sensitive matters on staff. so this is -- i'm afraid will result in -- is already re

mr. kislyak. the content of trump's phone calls of australian leaders, the russian foreign minister and ambassador, the leak of the manchester bombing identity and crime scene photos, and last week within20 minutes of a meeting in classified setting with comey leaking what innuendo was. are leaks serious to the security, and are they going to prosecute him to the full extent of the law >> thank you, senator cotton we had one successful case recently in georgia. that person has been denied bail, i believe, and is being held in custody, but some of the leaks, as you well know, are extraordinarily dangerous and damaging to the united states' security we have got to restore a regular order presencinciple. we cannot have persons in our intelligence agencies, our investigative agencies or staff leaking information. i'm afraid this will result and already resulted in investigations, and i'm fearing that some people may find that they wish they hadn't leaked >> thank you, time expired as the record stated

mr. kislyak. the contents of president trump's phone calls with australian and mexican leaders. ontent of mr. trump's meetings with the russian foreign minister and the ambassador. the leak of manchester bombing suspect's identity and crime scene he photos. last week within 20 minutes of this committee meeting in a classified setting with jim comey the leak of basis of mr. comey's innuendo was. are these leaks serious, threats to our national security and as the department of justice taking them with the appropriate degree of seriousness in investigating and ultimately going to prosecute them to the fullest extent of thelaw? >> thank you, senator cotton. we had one successful case very recently in georgia. that person has been he denied bail i believe. is being held in custody but some of these leaks, as you well know, are extraordinarily dangerous, damaging to the united states's security. we have got to restore a regular order principle. we can not have persons in our intelligence agencies, our investigative agencies oar in congress leaking sensitive matters on staff. this is,

mr. kislyak are going to be really important on how he handles that. >> on the issue of executive privilege, doesn't the president have that responsibility? he has to tell sessions in effect this is executive privilege, don't talk about it. >> that's right. so the question is is the white house asserting that privilege at this point? i'm not clear that anyone knows the answer actually to how this is going to unfold. it hasn't been previewed partly because we didn't see a prepared statement and partly because of what we saw last week with coats and rogers and the questions about whether it will follow in that pattern. >> we'll see what happens today. mark, what are you looking at? >> i'm looking at tone and body language from attorney general sessions when it comes to was he aware of any discussions that robert mueller has been discussion that he perhaps could be fired or dismissed by president trump. whether that's from president trump or anyone else either within the white house or within the department of justice. also did he offer to resign. did he offer his resignation to president trum

mr. kislyak, and it's possible, i would say, that pompeo said, look, there's a lot of politics involved there, people are pointing fingers and trying to throw this administration under the bus vis-a-vis russia. i'm not sure those are true and i haven't seen a whole lot in that regard so i'm going to go ahead and have the briefings with him there. my guess is it's probably the second option that pompeo exercised. >> steve hall, thank you so much. >> sure. >>> why won't the white house flatout say president trump believes russia is behind the election meddling? why not? let's talk about it. >>> also, serious new concerns that north korea may be gearing up to make a big move. what u.s. spy images are now showing as tensions have risen over the death a american otto warmbier. >>> and just days after a jury acquitted the police officer involved in the death of philando castile, disturbing dash cam footage shows what happened. i'm brooke baldwin and this is cnn. ege football. now you drive 300 miles to watch this. yes, nice pop toss! flag dancing? we've been there. and with free hot breakfast and a

meeting with mr kislyak, did you mean you possibly met him?nty i did not. that is what i thought you were saying. sometimes when i hear meeting, that may mean more than that. you may have met him at the reception. could you have met other ambassadors?” rememberone in you have met other ambassadors?” remember one in particular, we have a conversation with, whose country had an investment in alabama. we talked at length about that. otherwise i have no recollection of discussion with the russian ambassador. you may have seen him, but you have no room where you are having meetings with individuals to have discussions at the mayflower hotel that day? that is correct. when you talked to mr comey, after you had your meeting with the president. you think that is probably the next day, you did not stay afterwards after he had left the oval office? i understand his testimony may have suggested it happened right afterwards, but it was either the next morning, which i think it was, or the morning after that. we had three times a week a national security b

mr. kislyak. contents of president trump's phone calls australian and mexican leaders, the contents of mr. trump's meetings with the russian foreign minister and ambassador, the league of manchester bombing suspect's and crime scene photos, and last week within 20 minutes of this committee meeting in a classified setting with jim comey, the leaks of what mr. comey's innuendo was. are these serious to our national security and are you taking them with seriousness and going to prosecute them to the full segment of the law? >> att gen sessions: thank you senator cotton. we have had one successful case very recently in georgia. the person has been denied bail, i believe and has been held in custody. some of these leaks as you well know are extraordinarily damaging to the united states security. we have got to restore a regular order of principle. we cannot have people in our investigative agencies leaking sensitive matters. this is going to result in investigations and i fear that some people may find

mr. flynn and in kislyak. the contents of president trump's phone calls with australian and mexican leaders, the content plaintiff trump's meetings with the russian foreign minister and ambassador. the leak of manchester bombing suspects identity and crime scene photos and last week within 20 minutes of this committee meeting in classified setting with jim comey, the leak of what -- the basis plaintiff comey's innuendo was. are these leaks serious threats to our national security and is the department of justice taking them with the appropriate degree of seriousness and investigatesing and ultimately going to prosecute them to the fullest xeent of t fullest extent of the law. >> thank you, senator cotton. we had one successful case in georgia. that person has been denied bail. we have to restore a regular or the principle. we cannot have people in our intelligence agencies, investigative agency norz congress leaking sensitive matters. on staff. so this is -- i'm afraid will result in -- is already resulting in

mr. kislyak, did you mean you possibly met him? >> i didn't have any formal meeting with him.hat's the only thing i cannot say with certainty i did not. that's all i can say. >> that's what i thought you were saying but sometimes i hear i didn't have a meeting that would mean more to me than i met somebody. >> right. >> you might have met him at the reception. could you have met other ambassadors at that reception as well? >> i could. >> i remember one in particular that we had a conversation with, that his country had an investment be in alabama and we talked at length about that, i remember that. but otherwise have no recollection of a discussion with the russian ambassador. >> all right. so you were there, you've read since he was there you may have seen him, but you had no room where you were having meetings with individuals to have discussions at the mayflower hotel that day. >> no, that is correct. >> whenever you talked to mr. comey after he had had his meeting with the president, you think that was probably the next day, you didn't stay afterwards and see him after he

mr. flynn talked to ambassador kislyak that are very, very critical to an evaluation of motive and the timeere. >> this investigation will go way beyond. richard, or that dinner, according to director comey, the president called him that day around mid-day and invited him to that dinner. so to your point that perhaps this was in reaction to what sally yates had informed the white house about, it wasn't like this was a long-standing dinner that was planned for days or weeks. >> this is an interesting coincidence and something that certainly mr. mueller will take note of and comey will say according to his prepared remarks that he was surprised that he was the only guest invited for this dinner. so not only would he alone with the president when this happened. of course, this was the occasion when there was, according to comey, a request that comey pledge that his loyalty to the president. this is something that is very, very unusual. >> coercing about that dinner, to your point the white house, sally yates had gone informing the white house that he had been interviewed be i the fbi and the i

mr. sessions at a third meeting with the russian kislyak at the mayflower hotel that he's never told us aboute did mr. sessions take in the firing of fbi director jim comey? and does sessions recollection of that meeting with the president square to what jim comey told us? the other development as we wait for jeff sessions to testify is the idea the president might fire the special counsel appointed to investigate. on an interview with pbs news hour last night, one of the president's families who had just met with the president suggested that idea. >> is president trump prepared to let the special counsel pursue his investigations? >> well, i think he's considering perhaps terminating the special counsel. i think he's weighing that option. >> the white house denies that rudy and the president ever spoke about the special counsel. a number of republicans are floating trial balloons. newt gingrich just tweeted, republicans are delusional if they think the special counsel is going to be fair. look who he's hiring. check federal election commission reports. just a few weeks earlier said robert mu

kislyak. he had met with the ambassador twice even though mr. sessions during his confirmation said he did not have meetings with the russian. what happened with comey, the former fbi chief. last week they told senators that he was fired over the russia investigation. now given that sessions had recused himself from the investigation but still recommended that comey be fired, expect it to come up when sessions would participate in comey's dismissal and why would he. and finally, is there bad blood between sessions and the president. mr. trump has criticized sessions for recusing himself from the russia investigation, which he believes led to the appointment of robert mueller as special counsel to oversee the probe. make sure you stay tuned to wusa9 today for a cbs special report live at 2:30. that is when attorney general sessions will testify that senate intelligence committee. >>> well, as we've heard all day today, a friend of donald trump's says that the president is considering terminating robert mueller. mueller is the special counsel lead

kislyak? that russian ambassador. and the head of the eb bank, and what did they want from kushner? david: -- rkovlie: but why was mrgo there? mark: we reported the meeting and we knew it came after a meeting with the ambassador. when we approached the white house at the time we asked why , was one related to the other? that he hadd recommended that jared kushner speak with him, but they didn't say why. when i believe that at least in part the meeting with gorkov was designed so kushner could have a direct channel to moscow, to possibly seek someone who more directly has the ear to vladimir putin. so this was a further effort to set up some kind of communications. now, that is at least part of it. there is more we would want to know about the meeting. why has this meeting with a russian banker, whose bank is under u.s. economic sanctions, and what would be the reason for not disclosing that on your security clearance form, which jared kushner didn't do? charlie: did jared kushner acknowledge that michael flynn was in the meetings? mark: none of these people had said anything publicly about this. there are a lot of d

kislyak. then he travels. then separately he lewinsky briefs mr.rump on a dossier containing salacious and unverified allegations about trump. here, comey says to the president-elect for the very first time and assures mr. trump, there's no open intelligence case on him. he then begins documenting every interaction he has. january 10, buzz feed coverage. the fbi interviews michael flynn at the white house. two days later, january 26 and 27, attorney general sally yates meets with white house counsel about the calls with kislyak. the next night, january 27th at a white house dinner, the president says i need loyalty, i expect loyalty. three days later, trump fires yates who refused to defend the president's travel ban. then michael flynn resigns after it is report he misled the vice president about his conversations with kislyak. the next day, comey says the president told him, i hope you can see your way clear of letting this go. meaning the flynn investigation. march 2, sessions recuses himself from parts of the russia investigation. march 20, com

mr. kushner had any conversations with ambassador kislyak. >> i do not. >> you had no conversation with ambassador kislyak at that meeting. >> i don't recall it, senator warner. certainly i can assure you nothing improper, if i had had a conversation with him. and it's conceivable that occurred. i just don't remember it. >> but there was nothing in your notes or memory so that when you had a chance and you did and i appreciate corrected the record about the other two sessions in response to that, this one didn't pop into your memory that there was over abundance of caution that you ought to report this session as well. >> well, i guess i could say that i possibly had a meeting but i still do not recall it. and i did not in any way fail to record something in my testimony or in my subsequent letter intentionally false. >> i understand that, sir. i'm just trying to understand when you corrected the record, clearly by the time you had a chance to correct the record i would have thought you had own ambassador kislyak was at that april 27th session. it received quite a bit of press notoriety. and again

kislyak. do you understand why that's the case? why did that happen? >> mr.essions has corrected the record. >> that was a mistake. >> mr. flynn has been fired, right? >> but you don't understand why he did that? why did he tell that deception? >> we have an investigation going on, chris. but all i know so far what's come out has proven that the president has been right along in that he wasn't under investigation. what he said has been proven true all along based on mr. comey's testimony last week. >> i'm not saying the president is under investigation. for those of us watching this -- >> mr. comey allowed the perception to exist that he was under investigation. >> congressman -- >> when he wasn't. >> for those of us watching this -- >> told the country it was a matter when -- >> for those of us trying to figure this out, it doesn't strike you as weird as three people close to the president of the united states under penalty of perjury gave misleading or false answers about meeting with russian officials? does that sound strange to you? >> we'll get the answe

mr. kushner has -- he has a security clearance. he reviews intelligence every day as we're learning from reporting. he has -- he is under scrutiny and investigation not just for meeting with kislyak, but now with the meeting with the russian banker gore kov. do you believe he should still have his security clearance? >> not at all. last month i joined representative don buyer. we sent a letter asking fothe security clearance to be spended because we got information from media reports that he falsified his first security clearance form. now we know that those falsifications were deliberate. these were meetings that were significant. one was with a back channel with russia that was being discussed. another was with a head of a russian bank under u.s. sanctions. you don't forget about these meetings a few weeks before you fill out your security clearance form. and when he omitted those meetings, that's a felony. i filled out these sf-86 security forms before. right on the form, it says if you deliberately omit this information, you're liable to face imprisonment. >> i just want to be clear here. you believe that the president's son-in-law and one his senior advisers currently with s

kislyak that nutjob, that crazy guy comey is gone and i'm glad relieves preshl on o pressure on our relationship. certainly russians weren't celebrating american democracy today. >> that's right. very good point. maybe mr. putin wasn't, but maybe some russian citizens were nap is the point , that is the point wanted to make. you're right, they celebrated that, but that was naive on their part to think that removing mr. comey was going to stop the investigation, that was naive on the president's part if he thought that and most certainly that was naive on the part of the russians if they thought that. because we are bigger than one man. we have a rule of law. we have a system of government. and that is a secondary lesson. the bigger lesson of course is that we are focused on ourselves, divided among ourselves, and that also was on display today. >> either way one of the lasting quotes of this day fromhe former fbi director, they are coming after america. that's what comey said about the russians. mike, thank you very much for being with us. >>> katy tur has been tracking something we brought up earlier and didn't have the ability to bring to you. and that is donald trump jr. was live tweeting the hearin

kislyak? >> all i can say sitting here is there were a variety of briefings given to the defense administration about the counterintelligence risk. >> pack to mr flynn, would have closing out the flynn investigation impeded the over all investigation? >> no. unlikely except to the extent -- there's always a possibility if you have a criminal case against someone and you squeeze them and you flip them, and they give you information about something else. but i saw the two as touching each other but separate. >> with regard to your memos, isn't it true in a court case when you're weighing evidence, contemporaneous memos or contemporaneous statements to third parties are considered appropriate in the validity of testimony? >> yes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i appreciate you and your service and what you have done for the nation for a long time, which you continue to do. i told you before in the heat of last year, we had an opportunity to pray for you and pray for your family because you do carry a tremendous amount of stress. and that is still true today. let me walk through a couple of things with you. your notes are important because they gi

kislyak? >> sitting here, there was a variety of defensive briefings given to the incoming administration about the counterintelligence risk. >> back to mr. flynn, would closing out the flynn investigation have impeded the overall russian investigation? >> no. unlikely, except to the extent -- there is always a possibility if you have a criminal case against someone, and you bring them in and squeeze them and flip them, they give you information about something else, but i saw the two as touching each other, but separate. >> with regard to your memos, isn't it true that in a court case when you are weighing evidence, contemporaneous memos and statements are considered proptive in terms of validity? >> yes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator langford. >> director comey, good to see you again. we have had multiple opportunities to speak as well as everybody on this dais has, and i appreciate your service and what you continue to do. i told you before in the heat of last year when we had an opportunity to visit i pray for you and your family because you carry a tremendous amount of stress, and that's still today. your notes are obviousl

kislyak? >> all i can say sitting here is there were a variety of defensive briefings about counter-intelligence risk. >> back to mr. flynn. would closing out the flynn investigation have impeded the overall russian investigation? >> no. unlikely except to the extent -- there's a possibility if you have a criminal case against someone and you bring it and squeeze them, you flip them and give you information about something else, but i saw the two as touching each other but separate. >> with regard to your memos, isn't it true in a court case when you're weighing evidence, contemporaneous memos and contemporaneous statements to third parties are considered probative in terms of the validity of testimony. >> yes. >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. >> senator cotton. excuse me, senator. >> director comey, good to see you again. we've had multiple opportunities to visit as everyone on this dais has. i appreciate your service and what you've done for the nation and continue to do. i told you before in the heat of last year when we had an opportunity to visit personally i pray for you and your family because you do c