mr. schiff on this subject. we are not that far apart. i think that the motion to recommit addresses most of the current concerns we have been getting from the outside groups and communities who are dedicated -- whose organize purpose is to protect the civil liberties of the american people. but, again, with great respect for everyone's opinions and whatever they have put forth, again, saluting our men and women in the intelligence community for the work that they do, we want to be sure we strengthen their hand in terms of protecting the national security of our country which is our first responsibility. keep the american people safe. and as we do so to honor our oath of office to the constitution, to honor the principles of the constitution. our founders knew full well the challenge between security and civil liberties. they he lived in a world when they were under attack. the war of 1812 came very soon after the establishment of our country. so this is not a foreign idea to them and it question griefs to us the responsibility -- begrief

mr. schiff: mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from utah. mr. stewart: mr. speaker, i'd like to make mr. schiff aware we have no further speakers. i'm prepared to close. programs in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. schiff: mr. speaker, once again i would reluctantly urge that we withdraw consideration bill on o the floor today. i certainly -- bill on the floor today. i certainly have been working as hard as anyone to try to agree to a compromise that would move forward this very important surveillance authority, but would strike the right balance between our security interests and our privacy interests. but i do think we need more time to work on this bill. i think that was only underscored this morning with the contradictory statements coming out of the administration . an issue of this magnitude and seriousness deserves serious consideration. i think we need more time

mr. schiff: mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from utah. mr. stewart: mr. speaker, i'd like to make mr. schiff aware we have no further speakers. i'm prepared to close. programs in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. schiff: mr. speaker, once again i would reluctantly urge that we withdraw consideration bill on o the floor today. i certainly -- bill on the floor today. i certainly have been working as hard as anyone to try to agree to a compromise that would move forward this very important surveillance authority, but would strike the right balance between our security interests and our privacy interests. but i do think we need more time to work on this bill. i think that was only underscored this morning with the contradictory statements coming out of the administration . an issue of this magnitude and seriousness deserves serious consideration. i think we need more time

mr. schiff: mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from utah. mr. stewart: mr. speaker, i'd like to make mr. schiff aware we have no further speakers. i'm prepared to close. programs in which the concurrence of the house is requested. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. schiff: mr. speaker, once again i would reluctantly urge that we withdraw consideration bill on o the floor today. i certainly -- bill on the floor today. i certainly have been working as hard as anyone to try to agree to a compromise that would move forward this very important surveillance authority, but would strike the right balance between our security interests and our privacy interests. but i do think we need more time to work on this bill. i think that was only underscored this morning with the contradictory statements coming out of the administration . an issue of this magnitude and seriousness deserves serious consideration. i think we need more time

mr. schiff. we also heard from judiciary committee ranking member nadler, congressman farenthold, congressman amash, congresswoman lofgren and also congressman poe. in addition to the vigorous debate before the rules committee, both the judiciary committee and intelligence committee held markups on legislation to re-authorize section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. today, we have the opportunity to pass an important piece of legislation that will enhance our national security and strengthen protections of americans' privacy. mr. chairman, i'd like to publicly thank chairman goodlatte and chairman nunes for the important work on this legislation. as a result of their efforts, the legislation we will consider today will protect the privacy rights of individual americans without hindering the intelligence community ability and identities of our enemies. the value that we place on these duties is reflected by the fact that they are enshrined in the preamble to the constitution, to p

mr. schiff: good evening. i want to give a quick briefing on the events of the committee evening. i think we have crossed a deeply regrettable line in this committee where the first time in the 10 years i've been on the committee there was a vote to politicize the declassification and intentionally compromised sources and methods. i made a couple of motions this evening. first, we scheduled a hearing today, a business meeting so that the minority memoranda can be made available to the members of the house that had been misled by the majority's memoranda. we expected that vote to be noncontroversial and it was. the house members will now have access to the minority memoranda. i made a secondary motion that prior to the public release of either memoranda that the fbi and department of justice have the opportunity to come and brief the entire house in a classified session on both memoranda on the underlying facts and underlying materials so that the committee could make a responsible judgment as to whether the memoranda should be made public. that motion was voted down by the majorit

mr. schiff. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. schiff: i thank. rise in opposition to the amendment. i respect and share the sponsors' commitment to privacy and civil liberties, but this amendment would go vastly beyond the legislation advanced by either the intelligence or judiciary committees. it will prevent the intelligence community from accruing lawfully collected 702 information even in situations directly related to counterterrorism and national security. it would make section 702 a far less effective tool at a significant cost to the national security of the united states. the amendment would require a probable cause warrant or its equivalent before the government can query lawfully collected 702 data in an effort to find communications concerning someone who may be a u.s. person or foreign person located in the united states, even when such person is communicating with foreign terrorists or intelligence targets. probable cause will be lacking in many if not most intelligence and counterterrorism contexts. u.s.a. ituations, the rights act

mr. schiff. we also heard from judiciary committee ranking member nadler, congressman farenthold, congressman amash, congresswoman lofgren and also congressman poe. in addition to the vigorous debate before the rules committee, both the judiciary committee and intelligence committee held markups on legislation to re-authorize section 702 of the foreign intelligence surveillance act. today, we have the opportunity to pass an important piece of legislation that will enhance our national security and strengthen protections of americans' privacy. mr. chairman, i'd like to publicly thank chairman goodlatte and chairman nunes for the important work on this legislation. as a result of their efforts, the legislation we will consider today will protect the privacy rights of individual americans without hindering the intelligence community ability and identities of our enemies. the value that we place on these duties is reflected by the fact that they are enshrined in the preamble to the constitution, to p

mr. schiff the ranking democrat on that committee. the president has up to five days to block its publication. but that seems unlikely. jennifer jacobs of blimebering news who joins us in just a moment reports quote, the mr. president erupted into anger traveling to davos when steven boyd warned it would be extraordinarily reckless to release a classified memo. one of the key targets at the fbi, deputy director andrew mccabe stepped down. mccabe was expected to retire soon, but as we learned from "the new york times" and writer matt michael puzo, he told friends that he felt the new fbi director chris ray was pressuring him to leave. then fbi director james comey who learned of his dismissal while he was in los angeles. comey's flight back to washington that we all followed on live television on a gulf stream private jet used by the government became an issue for the president, who according to nbc's carol lee, called mccabe to ask why comey was being allowed to travel on a government plane after being fired. trump also went onto ask

mr. schiff tries to distract from the serious bipartisan review that's been underway for nearly a year, westay focused on following the facts and working to safeguard the upcoming election. committee republicans say the investigation has run its course and they point to the fact that the key fbi witness interviews should conclude this month, trace. >> trace: catherine herridge live in d.c. thank you. let's bring in nicholas johnson. we should point out first and foremost, we talk about timing is everything here. bannon was invited to the house intel committee to speak for them a long time ago, long before michael wolff's book there and his comments. so this is an attempt by congress to pay off or play off the bad blood between trump and bannon, correct? >> no, absolutely. this is something that had been scheduled a long time before. there was no way any of these committees would not include steve bannon on a list of important people that they need to talk to. >> trace: yeah. so bannon has to be concerned. lewandowski you just heard him say, he says he's got nothing to hide. bannon, you kno

mr. schiff had asked him questions about what occur affidavit he left the white house in conversations with. and he asserted that the white house was prohibiting him from even talking than. so outside the white house, even most recently that he's had conversations, he believes the white house is preventing him from testifying. >> and obviously there is no conceivable legal grounds for any kind of privilege during the transition. he is a private citizen at the time. he is a private citizen after he leaves the white house. and any conversations anyone has in that situation, there is no privilege whatsoever. did his lawyer actually try to frame this in any kind of legal terms that you recognized? >> i wouldn't say it was with a straight face, lawrence. and, again, this is disappointing because there are a lot of questions for steve bannon. and arguably, you could say that he and the white house have waived his privilege. after all, he was cited a number of times mote most recently in the "fire and fury" book about conversations with the white house. and this flies in the face of a president wh

mr. schiff and my head just wants to explode. my father was an air force pilot.o accuse us of saying we would endanger national security is just silliness. this memo doesn't do that. what it does do is ask these questions, was the fbi fair? for the accurate? we've been making accusations, serious accusations, they've been called traders, treasonous. for more than a year now. did the fbi make those kinds of accusations against innocent people with laughable evidence? that's the kind of think this memo will address. >> laura: congressman gates from florida has been a frequent guest on the show. to listen to congressman gates, this is just got barn burner of a memo. i think people have gotten your hopes up that this guy's going to go and end this person will lose his job and maybe this one will go to jail. i always find that republicans tend to, sorry, be bad storytellers. i'm worried about that, as our other congressmen to whom i've spoken in the last 48 hours. >> we kind of get, try to get people to temper their language. i can't speak for what everyone has said,

mr. schiff there. >> dana: i guess on your point, there's a way to deal with the story, which is to ignore it. that is harder to do if the president comments on it. >> reporter: that's a problem, right? >> dana: that's all i have got. kevin, thank you. >> reporter: all right. >> dana: president trump is set to outline his immigration proposal next week as democrats are already reacting to it. senate minority leader chuck shumer slamming the plan, calling it a tool to tear apart our legal immigration system. chief congressional correspondent mike e manuel is live on capitol hill. mike, what is the response from president trump on this? >> reporter: well, dana, president trump took a swipe at the senate democratic leader on twitter saying daca has been increasingly difficult, made increasingly difficult by the fact that crying chuck shumer took such a beating over the shutdown that he is unable to act on immigration. the president spoke more seriously about the immigration issue during his address to the world economic forum. >> we will defend our citizens and our borders. we are also securi

mr. schiff has read the underlying classified materials.hat's the difference. >> congressman, thank you. we appreciate it. >> thanks for having me. >>> switching gears in a major way. awkward turn. porn star stormy daniels denying she denied the alleged affair with the president. are you confused? so are we. next. do it. we can do this. at fidelity, our online planning tools are clear and straightforward so you can plan for retirement while saving for the things you want to do today. -whoo! while saving for the things when this bell rings... ...it starts a chain reaction... ...that's heard throughout the connected business world. at&t network security helps protect business, from the largest financial markets to the smallest transactions, by sensing cyber-attacks in near real time and automatically deploying countermeasures. keeping the world of business connected and protected. that's the power of and. the commute is worth it.me, the more you know you and that john deere tractor... you can keep dreaming up projects all the way home. it's a

mr. schiff a few days ago. be clear about one thing when we talk about doj or fbi, we aren't talking about the body, they're dedicated public servants. we're talking about a few of the very senior officials within the fbi and doj. the fact you work for the fbi doesn't mean no one in that organization is above question. that one of them are beyond reproach. we have a responsibility to provide oversight. when they do something unethical and potentially illegal, violates the trust of the american people, for heaven sakes we have a responsibility to pursue that. you can't say, well you can't attack the fbi, you can't attack doj, that's silliness. when he refers to us protecting mr. trump, that's the thing that i react to most emotionally. it's just simply not true. it's just a diversion that we see things here, that trouble us. >> laura: congressman duffy before we let you go, i'll ask a simple question. rod rosenstein is the deputy attorney general, he was named deputy attorney general by jeff sessions, jeff sessi

mr. schiff. and the fact of the matter is that the f.b.i.ector wray has seen the memo before we had the vote. we also had two people from the f.b.i. go through it, one an analyst and one very familiar with the fisa court. the memo is about the fisa court process. it's a process you can look up. it is free information to see how the process should carry out. we put forth a memo because we thought it was time for the american people and at least our colleagues to start with to see what has been going on in the government. we are the representative of the people. >> bill: do you think, congressman, that this program has been abused? >> well, i think that we certainly have some eye-raising things we've seen take place. i think the process hasn't been carried out to the intent it was supposed to. and i think that it's made for some bad decisions along the way. sometimes there may be the possibility of information that has been withheld as the process goes forward. and so this is what we want to clarify. we want the american people to have eyes on

mr. schiff: good evening. i want to give a quick briefing on the events of the committee evening. i think we have crossed a deeply regrettable line in this committee where the first time in the 10 years i've been on the committee there was a vote to politicize the declassification and intentionally compromised sources and methods. i made a couple of motions this evening. first, we scheduled a hearing today, a business meeting so that the minority memoranda can be made available to the members of the house that had been misled by the majority's memoranda. we expected that vote to be noncontroversial and it was. the house members will now have access to the minority memoranda. i made a secondary motion that prior to the public release of either memoranda that the fbi and department of justice have the opportunity to come and brief the entire house in a classified session on both memoranda on the underlying facts and underlying materials so that the committee could make a responsible judgment as to whether the memoranda should be made public. that motion was voted down by the majorit

schiff says this is unacceptable. >> mr. lewandowski said he was not prepared to answer questions today. but he would return to the committee at a later date to answer questions. this in my view is unacceptable. >> reporter: this all comes as part of the effort by the white house to limit congressional testimony and limit what these people tied to the administration can say behind closed doors because they believe it is in keeping with past precedent. democrats see this as an effort to obstruct the investigation. >> manu, thank you. >>> apple made a big promise. it is bringing its cash stashed overseas home. finally. because of corporate tax cuts, it gets a cheap rate. it pays $38 billion in tax on that cash. apple will create 20,000 jobs and invest on $30 billion in facilities. for years, it would not bring back the foreign cash. that is a lot of money. that is until the change in the corporate tax code. apple can no longer avoid paying tax on the foreign profits. the president tweeting i promise my policies would allow app

when certain questions were posed, as adam schiff was saying. mrot on the phone to people in the white house who said, we are invoking executive privilege on this one and we don't want steve bannon to answer any of the questions. what the democrats would say is, this is a very broad interpretation of this thing called executive privilege, which allows the president not to have two answer certain questions. steve bannon is kind of evoking it here under the idea he was working for the president, therefore he speaks on behalf of the president or the administration. as the democrats we re administration. as the democrats were saying, they hadn't seen this broad stretch when it came to invoking executive privilege. if he goes before a grand jury he won't have that option, you'll have to a nswer have that option, you'll have to answer the questions. one last 9g"; you called . . ,, is but he means} > a pawns} l a isn't pawns} l h mm- known 55 known ? maverick g lgll our g '* g iti5: 95555595 5555555 h5=5 5—5 955 $5955 about 95555595 5555555 h5=5 5—5 955 $

mr. bannon. >> congressman adam schiff today, the top democrat on the intelligence committee in the house where they have tried to get answers this week from three figures in the orbit of the president, current white house deputy chief of staff rick dearborn who we're told did answer questions today. corey lewandowski who showed up and said apparently, maybe he'll answer questions sometime later and former trump senior adviser and campaign ceo, steve bannon, who would not answer questions yesterday but did get a nifty subpoena from the special counsel, robert mueller, in addition to the on-site subpoena he got yesterday. he was expected to come back tomorrow, his lawyer tonight is casting doubt on that. a source close to the situation says mr. bannon will cooperate fully and answer all questions from the special counsel, from robert mueller's investigation. the initial subpoena has now given way to mr. bannon agreeing to meet voluntarily with mueller's investigators, a meeting that is expected to happen soon, and, again, one where sources familiar with the matter say bannon intends to answer al

when pressed by schiff that might indicate money laundering mr. simpson says various criminals were buying the properties so there was a gangster, a russian gangster living in trump tower. here is how congressman schiff responded to questions on this network. >> this is is a concern i've had all along that this one area of the invest gages can be the most compromising. when we began this investigation, there were allegations of secret meetings with trump campaign people we now know took place. there were allegations of what general flynn was doing which we now know prove to be true and persistent allegations of money laundering, which we have really not been allowed to investigate and i think it would be irresponsible not to look into this and find out it's not true, it was highly suggestive or no, there is allegations and the president could be potentially compromised. >> in a few minutes, we'll talk to another member of the house intel committee on this broadcast and there is another update tonight also on the work being done by house intel. the

mr. nunes or his designee, adam schiff or his designee and two staff members each. that's it. the department takes any allegation of abuse of our justice system seriously. further we assume that intelligence committee members want to provide evidence of any allegation of misconduct to officials so we may take appropriate action. in addition we've heard that your committee is considering making the classified memorandum available to the public and media, an unprecedented action. we believe it would be extraordinarily reckless for the committee to disclose such information publicly without giving the fbi an opportunity to review the memo and advise the risk of harm to national security and ongoing investigations that could come from public release. indeed, we do not understand why the committee would try to disclose classified information without first consulting with relevant members of the intelligence community. so the letter goes on. we have obtained a complete copy of the letter. we've posted it at nano blog.com if you want to read it. if you're uncomfortable giving the mem

schiff said it was unacceptable. >> mr.ki said he was not prepared to answer those questions today. he would return at some later date to answer. this is unacceptable. >> reporter: this all comes as effort by the white house to limit congressional testimony and limit what the people tied to the administration to say behind closed doors. they believe it is in keeping with past precedent. democrats see this as an obstruction of the investigation. >>> thank you. the president heads to the pentagon today with the new nuclear strategy on the way. now he is accusing russia of helping north korea. we're live in moscow. mother nature nothing smells greater than the great outdoors. especially when you're in accounts receivable. only one detergent can give you a sniff like this. the irresistable scent of new gain botanicals laundry detergent. bring the smell of nature wherever you are. you've probably seen me running all over the country in search of our big idaho potato truck. but not any more. i am done with that. ooh, ooh hot - ju

mr. bannon back in soon with a different position because his position is completely unsustainable. >> adam schiffmocrat, former trump campaign chief and chief strategists spent nine and a half hours behind closed doors having a fight whether or not he could answer questions about his time in the white house or transition. chuck rosenburg joins us now. he's a former u.s. attorney and chief of staff to james comey and the former acting head of the dea. mr. rosenburg, thank you for being here. appreciate it. >> my pleasure. >> there is a few legal matters here that i'm hoping you can help us understand, me as a non-lawyer and the audience trying to figure out the importance. it's petit jury, not petite. right? >> i think petit. i took spanish in high school, i think petit. >> the grand jury works with prosecutors to decide whether or not to bring an indictment. >> you got that right. >> the petit, petite jury. they're more familiar to people who watch "law & order." >> they determine whether you're guilty or not guilty at trial. >> if there is this remarkable news first reported today by michael sch

schiff of california asks this question. did you find evidence of that with respect to mr. trump? simpson answers, i think a lot of what we found is subsequently there have been similar articles published. evidence is a strong word. we saw patterns of buying and selling that we thought were suggestive of money laundering. when pressed for a detail that might indicate money laundering, mr. simpson answers again, various criminals were buying the properties so there was a gangster, a russian gangster living in trump tower. here's how congressman schiff responded to questions about that earlier tonight on this network. >> this is a concern i've had all along. this one area of the investigation could be potentially the most compromising of the president. when we began this investigation there were allegations of secret meetings with trump campaign people which we now know in fact took place. there were allegations of what general flynn was doing which we now know and prove to be true and there have been persistent allegations of money laundering which we have not been allowed to inves

mr. bannon before our committee and asking those questions. >> harris: congressman adam schiff also reportedlyo hear from dozens of additional witnesses including ivanka trump and jared kushner. i do think it's interesting, he said he is going to answer all the questions. >> that's a kind of transparency you know you can take to the bank. this has been over a year, it was being investigated before president obama got out of office and there's been lots of leaks and lots of investigations and millions of dollars spent and i have yet to see anything, there were two coindictments and they had nothing to do with russian collusion. i'm all about -- obviously adam schiff wants to keep going with this, he's built his entire career out of this russia probe and he doesn't end but if they want to go and look, fine, but let's look on the other side, too. i think there is more of a case with the clinton foundation and pay per play and uranium one and all kinds of stuff to look at there. >> on the clinton foundation piece, yes, that was that was unseemly and inappropriate and of the voters made their decis

mr. mccabe. >> what is in this inspector general memo about mccabe or is congressman schiff right?ctor general has been looking into the events of 2016 and how the fbi handled the hillary clinton investigation. they are looking at andy mccabe's and his wife election and whether he should have recused himself at certain points. what the i.g. will find and many people have said is they're going to be critical of the bureau's decisions to hold that news conference where comey criticized hillary clinton and potentially critical of sending that letter just days before the election. >> obviously, that's all going to be important. i always feel it's important to mention. obviously, mccabe's wife was getting that money from democratic donors and running as a democrat. he voted in the republican primary in virginia. that's just something important to note. republicans are going to try to use that to call the entire russia investigation into question. is that fair? >> that would be a stretch. it goes through a very lengthy vetting process. it's approved by a federal judge. an independent jud

mr. simpson, do you have of this? to which he answered he doesn't have the proof but adam schiff's answer to that is why won't my republican colleagues let us, let me, let the committee of the house intelligence committee look into these as part of its russia investigation? and just the way that committee is set up it's got a big advantage to the republicans in terms of resources, the chairmanship, et cetera. that's a pathway that the house investigation at least will not go down. now, robert mueller's investigation of course a different story. >> what more do you -- what do we know about robert mueller? what is he looking into these allegations about? >> there are indications he's at least looking into financial entanglements involving the trump organization. for instance, we know the documents, some of the documents that trump and others have given to mueller under request have included financial documents. not going back 100 years of trump. a few years, but really just in a year or two, particularly during the time of the campaign. we don't know that that's going to lead into anything criminal but at least it's a path o

mr. lou wi -- lewindowsky would comeback. we press on. thank you. charles: representative adam schiff expresses his dis may of what is history now that majority house intel committee voted to release the momento. it will -- memo, await president trump who has up to 5 days to decide whether that is the next move, to texas tern attorney general expectation to know pax. do you think it was the right move? >> yeah. i have a lot of confidence in the process. i could in the end -- i think in the end you will see whatever comes out, we'll know what is going on. i am confidence that the process is working, our representatives are doing the right thing. charles: representative schiff, also suggesting that this a whole thing has been politicized. suggesting that it is going to jeopardize investigations, perhaps and certainly not help with credibility of it all, which is interesting considering the whole episode lost a lot of credibility to begin with. >> i don't agree with him, i think as process goes forward, you will see he not correct. and that we're going to learn what we need to learn, tha

here is california congressman adam schiff, the ranking democrat after that hearing. >> we had a long day with mr. bannon today. it began by being informed by his counsel that as he was attending on a voluntary basis he was going to decline to answer any questions concerning any discussions, meetings, conversations, that took place either during the transition or during his time in the administration. after we explored several attempts to try to elicit information that took place during those periods we convened on a bipartisan basis and agreed to the issuance of a subpoena to make his attendance at the hearing compulsory. >> jon: today corey lewandowski and aide rick deer born are both testifying before the house intelligence committee. here to break it down is judge andrew napolitano. first of all in talking about steve bannon and what he told the committee yesterday, we're sort of dealing with hearsay and leaks, right? >> we are. i'm very frustrated as are most of us that watch this for a living because democracy dies in darkness and when we don't know what happened, we have leaks from democra

the ranking democrat, adam schiff of california, told me yesterday he had a frank conversation with mr. wray about his concern, but yet the committee decided to move forward. >> this is paul ryan being asked about that, exactly that, this morning. >> this is a completely separate matter from bob mueller's investigation. and his investigation should be allowed to take its course. >> some reporting of the president would fire rod rosenstein. >> i think rod rosenstein is doing a fine job. i see no reason why he should do that. >> that's an important endorsement of rod rosenstein as a lot of people see this gathering storm on all sides. are republicans on the hill backing the president and going against their own fbi? >> yeah, and that's the real question, what will the consequences be for rosenstein? will he have to step aside? will the president put even more pressure on him? rosenstein is the one who oversees mueller and that's because the attorney general recused himself several months ago -- actually, last year. this is an issue the president has repeatedly obsessed about, obsessed wi

and then schiff asks, is it russian tradecraft that he would have been familiar with? mr. simpson, correct, so when the information comes back that there is kompromat, each sees their piece of the elephant. when he sees we have to go to the fbi or wants to go to the fbi, he is specifically concerned about the kompromat issue. that's pretty strong. >> right, exactly. and that's probably the thing that was the biggest news coming out of the dossier, when it was initially published many months ago oas. what's really interesting, too, about the way simpson framed this in the testimony, he's making the argument that the kompromat and the financial conspiracy go hand in hand. there's not necessarily a binary here, but rather, issues of folks potentially being leveraged by bad actors in the kremlin are of a piece with them being engaged in some of these very troubling and questionable financial transactions. now, that said, one thing that's really important to bear in mind with this will -- with glenn sumpson's testimony, as you pointed out a little bit with what rooney said, is

mr. lewandowski, to another. we press on. >> bret: ranking member of the house intelligence committee adam schiff. the decision has been made by the committee to vote out the memo produced by the republicans on the committee looking at classified material about surveillance during the campaig campaign. here is a compilation earlier of some lawmakers, whether this memo should be released or not. >> it certainly should be but somebody should explain how utterly insignificant it is. >> this memo answers what i think are really legitimate questions and i do think the fbi should look at it before it is released. >> i don't wanted released yet. i want somebody who is without a political bias to come in and look at the allegations. the way the fbi conducted itself and the department of justice bothers me. >> no one at the white house has seen the memo. it would be hard for us to make a decision. >> bret: other lawmakers say they are tremendously disturbed by what they see in the memo and want to get it out. that's the position the committee has taken tonight, voting along party lines to do just that. i w