mr. podesta himself was fully aware that his private e-mails would be exposed?

mr. podesta at the time mr. podesta said he was not even aware whether his e-mails had been stolen and would be published? >> it's not something i can comment on. >> at this point, mr. chairman, i'm going to yield to mr. himes. >> thank you. the ranking member and gentleman, thank you for being with us today. let me when i get my own time, i'll have some follow-up question, but let me start with a point that the chairman brought out i think very specifically, which is that there's no evidence that votes were technically changed in any of the jurisdictions that he named, admiral rodgers, thanks for confirming that. the intelligence community believes that the russians penetrated the networks of the dnc, of john podesta and other have, is that a fair characterization of the conclusions of the intelligence community? >> yes, sir. >> and did the intelligence community ever do an analysiss to whether the dissemination of that adverse information in a closely fought election had any effect on the american electorate? >

mr. podesta's e-mails were going to be released? >> it's not something i can comment on. >> do you know that mr. podesta has said that at the time he wasn't even aware whether his e-mails that had been stolen would be published? >> it's not something i can comment on. >> at this point, mr. chairman, i'm going to yield to mr. himes. >> thank you to the ranking member, and gentlemen, thank you for being with us today. let me -- when i get my own time, i'll have some follow-up questions, but let me start with a point that the chairman brought out i think very specifically, which is that there's no evidence that votes were technically changed in any of the jurisdictions that he named. admiral rogers, thanks for confirming that. but am i correct that when we say russian hacking, what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes that the russians penetrated the networks of the dnc, of john podesta, and other individuals, stole information, and then disseminated that information. is that a fair characterization

mr. podesta's e-mails were going to be released? >> that's not something i can comment on. >> do you know that mr. podesta has said at the time he was not even aware whether his e-mails had been stolen and would be published? >> it's not something i can comment on. >> at this point, mr. chairman, i'm going to heeled to mr. hymes. >> thank you. the ranked member and gentlemen, thank you for being with us today. let me, when i get my own time i'll have some followup questions, but let me start with a point that the chairman brought out i think very specifically, which is that there's no evidence that votes were directly changed in any of the jurisdictions that he named, admiral rogers, thanks for confirming that. but am i correct that when we say russian hacking, what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes that the russians penetrated the networks of the dnc, of john podesta and other individuals stole information, and then disseminated that information, is that a fair characterization of the conclusi

mr. podesta, himself, was fully aware his private e-mails would be exposed? is it possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence? yes. it is possible. but it is also possible, maybe more than possible, that they are not coincidental, not disconnected and not unrelated and that the russians used the same techniques to corrupt u.s. persons that they employed in europe and elsewhere. we simply don't know, not yet, and we owe it to the country to find out. >> congressman schiff is a federal prosecutor, formally, and looked and sounded the part today in the hearing. as for the fbi director, himself, we've compiled for you some of the more important moments from his testimony today. >> i have been authorized by the department of justice to confirm that the fbi, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. and that includes investigating the nature of any links between individuals associated wi

mr. podesta said he was not even aware that some of his emails would be published? director comey: it's not omething i can comment on. representative schiff: at this point, i will yield to mr. himes. epresentative himes: thank you for being with us today. when i get my own time, i will have questions, but let me start with a point that the chairman brought up, which is there is no evidence that votes were technically changed in any of the jurisdictions that he named. admiral rogers, thank you for confirming that. am i correct when we say russian hacking, what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes that the russians penetrated the networks of the dnc, of john podesta, and other individuals, stole information, and then disseminated that information? is that a fair characterization of the conclusions of the ntelligence community? admiral rogers: yes, sir. representative himes: and did the intelligence community do an analysis as to whether the dissemination of that information in a closely fought election have any effect on the american

mr. podesta time in the barrel was coming in august of 2016. would that have been prior to the public release of stolen emails of mr. podesta's? director comey: i believe that is the correct chronology. representative schiff: do you know how mr. stone would have known these emails would've been released? director comey: it not something i could comment on. representative schiff: do you know if the emails would have been published? director comey: not something i can comment on. at thistative schiff: point, i will yield to mr. himes. thank youtive himes: for being with us today. when i get my own time, i will let me starts, but with a point that the chairman brought up. there is no evidence that votes were technically changed in any of the jurisdictions that he named. admiral rogers, thank you for confirming that. and my correct is a russian hacking, what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes penetrated thens networks of the dnc, john podesta, and other individuals, stole information, and then disseminated that

mr. podesta's emails for going to be released? >> not something i can comment on. >> do know that mr. podesta said at the time he was not even team out bring stolen would be published? >> not something i can comment on. >> at this point, mr. chairman, i am going to yield to mr. himes. they did to the ranking member and gentlemen, thank you for being with us today. willi get my own time i have some follow-up questions but let me start with a point the chairman brought up very specifically, that there is no evidence that votes were technically changed in any of the jurisdictions he named. admiral rodgers, thank you for confirming that. am i correct that when we say "russian hacking" what we are referring to is the fact the intelligence community believes the russians penetrated the networks of the dnc of john individuals,her stole information, and then disseminated that information. is that a fair characterization of thecan -- conclusions intelligence community? >> yes, sir. >> did the intelligence community ever do an analysis as to whether the dissemination of that information in a clo

mr. podesta's? >> that is correct chronology. >> do you know how mr. stone would have known that mr. podesta's e-mails were going to be released? >> that is not something that i can comment on. >> and are you aware that mr. podesta has said that he is not aware that his stolen e-mails would be published? >> it is not something that i can comment on. >> at that point, mr. chairman, i want to yield to mr. himes. >> thank you, ranking member, and gentlemen for being with us here today. when i get my own timely have follow-up questions, but let me start with to a point that the chairman brought out specifically which is that there is no evidence that votes were technically changed in any of the jurisdiction that he named, admiral roger, thank you for confirming that, but am i correct that when i say russian hacking, what we are referring to is that the intelligence community believes that the russians penetrated the networks of the dnc, of john podesta and other individuals, stole information and then disseminated the information? is that a fair assessment of the conclusions of the intell

mr. podesta that's e-mails were going to be released?mment on. >> do you know that mr. podesta has said that at the time he was not even aware that his e-mails had been stolen and would be published? >> it's not something i can comment on. >> at this point, mr. chairman, i'm going to yield to mr. himes. >> thank you to the ranking member and, gentlemen, thank you for being with us today. let me, when i get my own time, i'll have some follow-up questions, but let me start with a point that the chairman brought out, i think, very specifically which is that there's no evidence that votes were technically changed in any of the jurisdictions that he named, admiral rogers, thanks for confirming that. but am i correct that when we say "russian hacking," what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes that the russians penetrated the networks of the dnc, of john podesta and other individuals, stole information and then disseminated that information? is that a fair characterization of the conclusions of the intellige

mr. podesta's e-mails were going to be released. >> not something i can comment on. >> do you know that mr. podesta said at the time he was not even aware of whether his e-mails had been stolen would be published? >> not something i can comment on. >> at this point, mr. chairman, i'm going to yield to mr. hims. >> thank you for being with us today. let me -- when i get my own time, i'll have some follow-up questions, but let me start with a point that the chairman brought out i think very specifically, which is that there's no evidence that votes were technically changed in any of the jurisdictions that he named, admiral rogers, thanks for confirming that. but am i correct that the -- when we say russian hacking, what we are referring to is the fact that the intelligence community believes that the russians penetrated the networks of the dnc, of john podesta, and other individuals stole information, and then disseminated that information? is that a fair characterization of the conclusions of the intelligence community? >> yes, sir. >> did the intelligence community do an analysis as to whe

mr. podesta himself even before mr. poe december de was aware his e-mails would be exposed? possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated. and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence. yes, it is possible. but it is also possible, maybe more than possible that they are not coincidental, not disconnected, and not unrelated. and that the russians used the same techniques to corrupt u.s. persons that they employed in europe and elsewhere. we simply don't know. not yet. and we owe it to the country to find out. >> today's hearing, just the . when we come back i'm going to ask my panel how many of those questions can we answer and will we get the truth? and the mid-sized metris. ...if these are your wingtips... ...if this is your gourmet latte... then these are your vans. vans for professionals. strictly professionals. best commercial van residual value according to alg and starting at just $25,995. mercedes-benz. vans. born to run. z282sz zwtz y282sy ywty but shouldn't it be about firsts?d in zeros. and seconds... how about adding a third? we th

mr. podesta and then published it through wikileaks in a way to influence our election.here's other evidence that you can just read. we don't have to -- we don't have to have cyber security specialists to help us. so when sputnik the russian government news agency tweets #crooked military, that's a clear statement about what the russians are thinking during our elections. >> so going after the election, you know, there was so much optimism. at least in the markets. the ruble was rallying. the russian stock market was on fire and there would be a thawing between the u.s. and russia and that president trump would be more open. you heard geoff, putin is reaching out to have that meeting. has that changed because of all the investigations and all of this noise, the fact that it continues to be front and center? >> yes. what i would say two big things. number one, because of the investigation, because we are so focused internally, president trump has not defined a foreign policy generally i would say and most certainly not towards russia. and if you compare where the trump ad

mr. podesta himself was fully aware that his private e-mail would be exposed? is it possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence? yes, it is possible. but it is also possible, maybe more than possible, that they are not coincidental, not disconnected and not unrelated and that the russians used the same techniques to corrupt u.s. persons that they employed in europe and elsewhere. we simply doesn't know, not yet. and we owe it to the country to find out. director comey, what you see dal we have to commit to this investigation. this is it. we are not supported by hundreds or thousands of agents and investigators were offices around the world. it is just us and our senate counterparts. in addition to this investigation we still have our day job, which involves overseeing some of the largest and most important agencies in the country, agency, which by the way are trained to keep secrets. i point this out for two reasons. first, because we cannot do this work alone and nor should we. we

mr. podesta was paid tens and millions of dollars from the russian government. we need to investigate him, then. >> this is an investigation about the president. >> just a moment. there are many lobbyists who have been paid all kinds of money and -- look, we have investigations about lobbyists all the time. this is not about trying to make it about republicans or democrats. it's about trying to find out what the hell happened to our election and we have a president and the people around him and, unfortunately, a republican party on the hill that seems not the least bit interested in the truth here. there are some members, yes, but increasingly in the house especially, they seem to be -- >> it all seems to come down to partisanship. i think that many people believe it's like the fairness doctrine, if you prosecute a republican, you must prosecute a democrat. >> no. >> that's not actually how it works. great talking poin.. james comey was at the intelligence security alliance defending the fbi as nonpartisan. listen to this. >> the last year -- it's been almost a

mr. podesta was aware that his private e-mails were exposed?it possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated? nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence? yes. it is possible. it is also possible, maybe more than possible, that they are not coincidental, not disconnected and not unrelated. the russians used the same techniques to corrupt u.s. persons that they i'm employed in europe and elsewhere. we simply don't flow. not yet. we owe it to the country to find out. >> shepard: the democrat, adam schiff at the beginning of the hearing. heading into that, congressman schiff said not only was there circumstantial evidence of collusion between the trump campaign and russia but as he saw it, direct evidence of deception. now the white house is responding. >> investigating it and having proof of it are two different things. look at the acting obama c.i.a. director who said there's smoke but no fire. senator tom cotton. not that i'm seeing, not that i'm aware of. look at collector clapper. i have no evidence of collusion

mr. podesta himself was fully aware that his private e-mails would be exposed? is it possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence? yes. it is possible. but it is also possible, maybe more than possible, that they are not coincidental, not disconnected, and not unrelated, and that the russians used the same techniques to corrupt u.s. persons that they employed in europe and elsewhere. we simply don't know. not yet. and we owe it to the country to find out. director comey, what you see on the dais in front of you in the form of this small number of members and staff, is all we have to commit to this investigation. this is it. we are not supported by hundreds or thousands of agents and investigators with offices around the world. it is just us and our senate counterparts. and in addition to this investigation we still have our day job, which involves overseeing some of the largest and most important agencies in the country, agencies which by the way are trained to keep secrets. i point

mr. podesta's e-mails were released? something that i can talk about. >> i'm not going to talk about any particular person, mr. schiff. roger stone is here on an interview that only only see on cbs. good morning. have you talked to the fbi? >> i assume that page one of "the new york times" january 20th said wiretap information on trump aides was being used in an soquiry. under surveillance now for some time. what probable cause there is or what evidence that would dictate that, i don't know. >> have they asked you one way or the other, not to destroy any documents? >> the u.s. senate intelligence committee has sent me a letter asking me to preserve documents, and i'm doing so. >> how do you explain the fact that you said this quote about john podesta? i assume it's going to be in a barrel. >> because i wrote an extensive investigative piece on john podesta. the organized crime in russia and money laundering for the clinton administration. >> were you surprised when john podesta's e-mails came out which you seemed to pred

mr. stone predicted that john podesta's timing would come. while mr. stone has said that he could not have predicted the dnc hack beforit happened,e di predict that john podesta would be in the barrel so i think it does beg a lot of questions that i would certainly like answered. >> do you want to enter for -- do you want to interview him, paul manafort? >> i don't want to go through a witness list but i do want to respond that those facts that he has already admitted are of great interest and concern to me. as i have said before, if these people want to come forward to our committee, they are welcome to and they are welcome to ride -- provide written testimony. anybody who wants to come forward and information but as i said we are not going to just call in witness is based on press reports alone. >> [inaudible] >> we have not had -- we have not spoken -- >> [inaudible] >> i think we ought to look into obviously the full range of active measures the russians employed. if one of the russian active measures was the same as what they have done in europe an

mr. stone predicted that john podesta's time in the barrel would come. so while mr. stone has said that he could not have predicted the dnc hack before it happened, he apparently did predict that john podesta would be in the barrel. i think it would beg a lot of questions that i would like answered. >> you want to interview him, paul manaforte, do you want to talk to these folks? >> i don't want to go through a witness list, but i do want to respond that those facts that he has already admitted are of great interest and concern to me. >> as i've said before, if these people want to come forward to our committee, they're welcome to. and they're welcome to provide either depositions, written testimony, so -- and that remains the case. but as i said, we're not going to just call in witnesses based on just press reports alone. >> did michael flynn cooperate with your investigation? >> we have not spoken to mr. flynn at this point. >> [ inaudible ] without seeing mr. trump's -- [ inaudible ]? >> yes, i am. >> i think we ought to look into obviously the full range of active

mr. podesta himself was fully aware that his private e-mails would be exposed? is it possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence? yes. it is possible. but it is also possible, maybe more than possible, that they are not coincidental, not disconnected, and not unrelated and that the russians used the same techniques to corrupt u.s. persons that they employed in europe and elsewhere. we simply don't know. not yet. and we owe it to the country to find out. director comey, what you see on the dais in front of you in the form of this small number of members and staff is all we have to commit to this investigation. this is it. we are not supported by hundreds or thousands of agents and investigators with offices around the world. it is just us. and our senate counterparts. in addition to this investigation, we still have our day job which involves overseeing some of the largest and most important agencies in the country, agencies which, by the way, are trained to keep secrets. i point thi

steal personal messages and other information from individuals ranging from john podesta, the clinton campaign manager, and mrngs like wikileaks russian intelligence used things like wikilea ks and russian intelligence used things like wikileaks and corey graft times that would cause maximum damage to one candidate. —— choreographed. before that meeting started in washington, vladimir putin dismissed us intelligence community's claims that his government interfered in the election. translation: did the russian government attempts to influence the result of the us election translation: at one time, the rake in government said read my lips, no. and what about the outcome of this first hearing on this investigation? two key things to come out of this key hearing today, the first was the level of sophistication it is being alleged when it comes to claims russia meddled in the election last year. cyber security experts are saying there was a disinformation campaign and they targeted key states in the united states and voters. they spread disinformation on various social media profiles and used to that to slander,

mr. flynn, manafort, stone of wikileaks release of the podesta e-mails.the answer to that question unless you do. which i would love to hear. i think there are many things which we need to know and let's slow down and find out the facts. >> carl hold on. sally raising your hand politely. thank you. not used to it. >> continue to be polite. what i would like to say is that there is ongoing investigation. >> we just learned about yesterday. that's new. >> that carl just pointed out and we all learned about yesterday. that is the truth. that cannot be denied by anybody. and the problem with this is, what i do not understand is that if there is nothing to hide, i would think that donald trump would say, you know what, let's get all the special prosecutors, every investigator, put everybody we have on this case and we will put it to rest because there is no truth to anything. and if there is -- that is what i don't understand. >> well put. >> if you look back at other investigations, what happens to the administration when you have ongoing investigation like t

is it a coincidence that roger stone predicted john podesta would be the victim of a hack. even before mr. poe december de was aware his e-mails would be exposed? is it possible that all of these events and reports are completely unrelated. and nothing more than an entirely unhappy coincidence. yes, it is possible. but it is also possible, maybe more than possible that they are not coincidental, not disconnected, and not unrelated. and that the russians used the same techniques to corrupt u.s. persons that they employed in europe and elsewhere. we simply don't know. not yet. and we owe it to the country to find out. >> today's hearing, just the first step in answering 9 questions posed by those contacts by those coincidences, when we come back, i'm going to ask my panel, how many of those questions we can answer and will we get the truth? now it's good for us all. like introverts. extroverts. (cheering) and even bert. man you gotta' try this sandwich. who's just overt. oscar mayer deli fresh. so good! you foundi'm a robot! cars.com rawr yeti and found a place to service it, too. ♪ jingle

mr. stone tweeted "i have confidence that my hero julian assange will educate the american people soon." are you aware of that? >> same answer. >> are you aware that wikileaks released the podesta emails? >> yes sir. >> i will yield now to mr. himes. >> i know that we are going through the 90 minute mark on this hearing so let me step back a second and just review the topics because there is a lot on the table. friends on the republican side will get no argument from this side on the importance of investigating prosecuting leaks. to ourre a threat national security whether they were perpetrated by edward snowden or people outside the white house or perhaps as we have seen in the last 60 days, maybe from people inside the white house. i can use yourif phrase, intense public interest, there is intense public interest in the fact that our new president will attack anyone and everyone. he will attack the cast of "hamilton." he will attack chuck schumer, our allies, mexico, australia and germany. intelligencek the community, associating you with mccarthyism and not see as him. whichere is one country is immune and inoculated from any form of presidential attack no matter what the be

podesta e-mails. >> not a formal campaign adviser but a long-time associate of mr. trump?long-time confidant who has publicly taken credit for paul manafort getting the job as campaign manager. there's a lot of connections here. follow the dots and the puzzle's coming together. we need to understand the full picture. but every single american deserves an answer to this question. >> robby, same question. obviously collusion is the big scary possibility here. nobody said that they have direct evidence of collusion. in your experience of it, did you see evidence for that? >> well, as glen said, i think we've got to answer this question. it can be pretty simply done. congress can get to the bottom of this and they seem to be beginning that process, that's good. you know, as glen mentioned, roger stone admitted that there were some communications there. i would also just say, you know, let's step back for a second. the whole reason we're having the discussion about michael flynn and this wiretapping is because the nsa was tapping russian agents. and in the course of tapping tho

mrs. clinton was upset. remember john podesta came up and said we are going to hold on.e says i fit i'm finished i'm through. she starts blaming right away. >> yeah, jim comey. that is an interesting thing. when you get into this story the clintons and fbi had a 27 year ongoing war. it's stunning. and again and again, throughout his life, jim comey would come to the conclusion she is guilty but we can't prove it. brian: did trump win it or did she lose it. >> both. trump was masterful and under estimated because trump was the master of branding and branding he would say make america great again, and then he would go off message they would say. even when he was off message he was on message because the second part of his message is i'm not a politician. brian: game of thorns is the name of the book. we just crashed the surface. we'll have you back. doug, thanks so much. great job. >> thank you. brian: meanwhile straight ahead, prosecutors say she knew what her terrorist husband was planning. murdering of 39 people at the pulse nightclub in orlando. she did nothing to stop

mr. stone tweeted that my hero julia sans will contact the american people soon? >> same answer. >> are you aware that it was only several days later that wikileaks released the podestaoing to yield now to mr. himes. >> thank you. i know that we are going to the 90 minute mark in the hearing, let me step back and chest to review the topics. there is a lot on the table. and i think that my friends on the republican side will get no argument from the side on the importance of investigating prosecuting leaks, they are a threat to our national security whether they are perpetrated by edward snowden, people outside the white house, or perhaps we have seen in the last 60 days, may be people inside the white house. but mr. comey, if i can use your phrase, intend to public interest, there is public interest in the fact that our new president will attack anyone and everyone coming he will attack the cast of "hamilton," chuck schumer, our allies, germany, he will attack the intelligence community that you lead. associating you with mccarthyism. there is one person in one country that is immune, which is inoculated from any form of presidential attack no matter what the behavio

john podesta has told the bbc fbi directorjames comey kept quiet about the investigation into possible collusion between russia and the trump campaign, but went public about its inquiry into mrsd him if he was suspicious during the campaign of course we thought that was going on for some time and argued to the press that they had to really look at that and try to dig into that and cover it. but it was a revelation that the fbi was looking at that as early as now evidently they were, it's kind of one more drip in something that i've been highly critical of the bureau about, which is the double standard they applied in this campaign. the intervention, the number of resources they spent, the scores of fbi agents they had poring over hillary clinton's e—mail server, which jim comey, the fbi director, ultimately concluded that it wasn't even a close call, there was nothing worth prosecuting there, compared to their engagement on the russian side, his interventionjust 11 days before the election to say i'm going to reopen this. the clinton investigation, he had this total silence on with respect to the russian intervention and now the potential collusion between the trump campaign

john podesta told the bbc that the fbi directorjames comey kept quiet about its investigation into possible collusion between russia and the trump campaign, but went public about its inquiry into mrsleague philippa thomas asked him if he's been suspicious during the campaign. of course we thought that was going on for some time and argued to the press that they needed to look at that and dive into that and an coverage. it was a revelation that the fbi was looking at that as early as they were. it is one more drip in something that i have been highly critical of, the double standards in that campaign. the intervention, the number of resources they spent, scores of fbi agents that they had poring over hillary clinton's e—mail server which james komi ultimately concluded it was not even worse. compared to their engagement on the russian side, this interventionjust 11 days before the election reopened this, the clinton investigation. yet total silence with respect to the russian intervention and now the potential collusion between the trumpet campaign and the russian actors. it was really a double standard that is still inexplicable to me. you are quite calm about this... no, i am ver

john podesta told the bbc that the fbi directorjames comey kept quiet about its investigation into possible collusion between russia and the trump campaign, but went public about its inquiry into mrsa thomas asked him if he had been suspicious during the campaign. of course we thought that was going on for some time and argued to the press that they had to really look at that and try to dig into that and cover it. but it was a revelation that the fbi was looking at that as early as now evidently they were, it's kind of one more trip in something that i've been highly critical of the bureau about, which is the double standard they applied in this campaign. the intervention, the number of resources they spend, the number of resources they spend, the scores of fbi agents they had poring over hillary clinton's e—mail server, whichjim poring over hillary clinton's e—mail server, which jim kony, poring over hillary clinton's e—mail server, whichjim kony, the fbi director, ultimately concluded that it wasn't even a close call, there even anything there compared to the engagement on the russian side, his intervention just 11 days before the election to decide to reopen this, the clinton i

mr. trump said he loves wikileaks for posting information about hillary clinton's campaign. sean spicer was asked about that. >> there is a big difference between disclosing john podesta's gmailabout a back and forth in his undermining of hillary clinton and his thoughts on her on a personal nature and the leaking of classified information. there is a massive, massive difference between those two things. and i think it is, again, the interest and the outrage that occurred last year by a lot of democrats when it came to leaks it's interesting we're not hearing just as much outrage now when it comes to issues of national security. >> we're joined by the "new york times" columnist thomas friedman. author of a book titled "thank you for being late." a major bestseller. tom, thank you for joining us. respond to sean spicer, what he just said. >> well, when you basically don't take seriously the fact that a foreign power is hacking our election on behalf of one candidate. this time it happened to be on behalf of mr. trump, next time it could be against mr. trump. this has to be taken very seriously. this was a very important year, 2016-2017. i have a chapter in the book, is god in

mr. stone tweeted himself he had been in contact with julian assange and wikileaks. he then put out a public tweet saying long before the john podesta e-mails leaked that he knew that podesta's, quote, time in the barrel was coming. and now in recent press reports he said he's been in contact with guccifer 2.0, who we now know is a russian agent. in my mind, that's a trifecta and anyone that wouldn't ask him to come forward -- i'm happy to hear his side of the story, but to do this in a way that explained these kind of contacts, i don't think we wouldn't be doing our job if we didn't ask him and a series of other individuals. >> before we go, the u.s. and the united kingdom banning most types of electronic devices from the mideast, due to intelligence that al qaeda was perfecting techniques for hiding explosives in batteries and compartments a anythings like laptops. have you been briefed on this? >> i have been and we ought to take this threat seriously. i think there already further briefings in the next few days. if our adversaries are able to shrink down some of these potential explosive devices and potentially fit them in -- at

podesta's emails. the incidences keep piling up. -- the coincidences keep piling up. let's talk about paul manna for as a follow-up to mr. himes questioning. mr. metaphor was a major part of the trump campaign including serving as its chief strategist before departing in disgrace in august 2016. it has also established the fact that paul manafort was a longtime official advisor to russian ukrainian political leadership. as paul metaphor it a subject in your investigation? >> i am not going to comment on that. >> can you describe to the american people the russian -- ept of -- a technique >> it is a technique to other information at people that may be embarrassing or humiliating and use it. >> are you aware of a situation where that has been successful leverage? >> yes. i believe our counterintelligence division has encountered in a number of times. christ is that include places like hotels that are wired for audio and video. placesoes that include like hotels that are wired for audio em video? read i do not remember specifics, but i believe that would be possible. -- s i recognize >> before i get into the body of my rema