yes, ms. ricet in wiretaps without cause, that's true. let's wait for that to emerge without rushing to judgment. gina smith, oklahoma, susan rice can just plead the fifth like lois learner, how can anyone be held accountable for anything? that's what we have the fbi for, gina. investigations can overcome silence. bobby smith, wichita falls, texas. o'reilly, what you call trump hatred is more accurately a deep disgust by a significant number of americans including republicans, trump's style and behavior. so what, bob? so what? every politician is loathed in some quarters. oppose on principle, i have no problem with that. sabotage everything? i have a problem. hurt some folks. christopher, staten island, new york. i'm confused, aren't judges supposed to be impartial in i'm. there are judges who rule from ideology. democrats would be more comfortable with a left-leaning justice. he looks like an honest man to me. sandra, bill, you use the phrase fair-minded people. i believe they also think mayork ga

to be fair to ms. ricend we do want to do that, she denies all wrongdoing and should be given the presumption of innocence because that's the american way. >> there were occasions when i would receive a report in which a u.s. person was referred to, name not provided, just u.s. person. and sometimes in that context, in order to understand the importance of the report and assess its significance, it was necessary to find out or request the information as to who that u.s. official was. >> did you seek the names of people involved in -- to unmask the names of people involved in the trump transition? trump campaign. people surrounding the president-elect? >> let me be clear.. >> in order to spy on them? >> absolutely not for any political purposes to spy, expose, anything. >> did you leak the name of mike flynn? >> i leaked nothing toid nobody. >> bill: nothing to nobody should be nothing to anyone. now, here's my question. if susan rice did surveil the trump people, big if, for a year, what was her motive? why

as we know, fox news along with bloomberg is reporting that ms. riceively sought to classified information for about a year. some of that involve the trump campaign staff and transition people. caught on wiretaps involving foreign nationals. joining us from los angeles, fox news outcome investigator, malia zimmerman. what do you have a forest tonight that is new? >> hi, bill. one of the stories we have been working on is what you brought up with newt gingrich, which is stonewalling. we understand from the house and senate intelligence committees that there has been stonewalling by the u.s. intelligence agencies that are supposed to provide information. that would include, for example, the nsa. that would include the fbi. as you recall, they had an open hearing in the house with the intelligence committee. james comey and admiral rogers came to talk to the house intelligence committee members. that was a public hearing. during that hearing, they were 100 questions that weren't answered. they were supposed to come back into private sessions and that was

at that time, i expect ms. rice to take the fifth just as lois lerner did. t that means others in government will have to step forward to testify about what susan rice did or did not do in order for we the people to know. today, president trump said the surveilled situation is "going to be the biggest story, such an important story for our country and the world, one of the biggest stories of our time for it's clear the president has a vested interest in this having tweeted he was surveilled by president obama himself. obviously mr. trump would like to know what happened. but the anti-trump folks would try to prevented some light on susan rice, there's no doubt about that. if the former national security advisor was using her very high office to help the democraticc party before and after the election, that's a huge scandal. president obama will have to be questioned about it. that's a big if, premature conclusions as well as speculations are the enemies of true justice. the polls say most americans want answers to the russian intrusion into the presidential e

if there's concern for illegality or inappropriate conduct, we probably will call ms. rice in to testify. in her public statement so far there's been inconsistencies, that's why i think it is important to continue together in a bipartisan fashion as we have and get to the bottom of all of these things and let the facts lead us where they may, not only on this controversy but on some of the more wild eyed con spirlsy theories people are kplaming about collusion between donald trump associates and russian intelligence. it is important not to get ahead of ourselves in these matters, that we take a deliberate approach and let the facts lead where they may. >> which is excellent advice except the president is not heeding your advice. in that interview with the "new york times" he specifically says susan rice he believes committed a kriechcrime. he didn't provide evidence, didn't cite a particular crime, just says he believes she committed a crime. here is a question and you are a graduate of harvard law school, was it an appropriate use, an appropriate statement at the president

devoted only time to it -- a whopping 46 seconds -- and that 46 seconds was devoted to defending ms. riceh. >> according to a former national security official, trump associates were not the sole focus of rice's request, but they may have been revealed when she asked to understand why they were appearing in intelligence reports. however, rice did not spread the information, according to this former official who insisted that there was nothing improper or political involved. trish: okay. now, cnn went a step further when a host there said he would never report this story at all -- somehow he doesn't want to insult your intelligence by even reporting it. watch him. >> there is no evidence that backs up the president's original claim. and on this program tonight, we will not insult your intelligence by pretending otherwise, nor will we aid and abet the people who are trying to misinform you, the american people, by creating a diversion. trish: and yet when there is no evidence that trump was somehow involved with the russians way back when during the actual campaign, cnn went wild with that

reporter: do you think susan rice was legal --? ms. pelosi: susan rice has authority in this subject. what is weird is the president of the united states with no information saying she committed a crime. mr. president, reclassify the basis of your comment. first he says the president of the united states, barack obama committed a crime, now seas susan rice. it's time for him to be president, to be the manager, to be the executive, it's the executive branch. he boasted how a great executive he was. i don't know about that. but for him to resort to misrepresentations of that kind is -- how many times can i say it is beneath the dignity of the office of president. how low can you

in terms of ms. rice, she says she didn't do anything wrong. she didn't leak anything.e with that or do you think there was something else? >> you know, there's a lot we don't know right now. she may have been found in a proper for something proper. we need to know exactly what was in this intelligence. item up at some classified or how long it will take to find that out. what exactly are they monitoring between orin officials and trump officials like to hear what exactly was the content and why wouldn't the intelligence agencies have done this unmasking? it is legal to reveal the name of the u.s. person caught up in foreign to foreign communications. the question is why wouldn't the intelligence agencies have revealed information? i did it come from a white house staffer? that is one big question. andrew mccarthy, prosecutors said that the smoking gun the fact that susan rice herself is asking information. she's a consumer of the reported of the report and it should have been intelligence agencies with any real intelligence value they would've done that already. eric:

there are credibility issues at stake here, clearly with ms. rice, fox news contributor steve cortes joins us along with the former chair of the democratic party in d.c., steve bolden. good to have you here. you heard karl rove's thoughts on all of this. i just want to ask you, if the nsa and the cia aren't calling for the unmasking of this individual's name, why would susan rice? >> right, and i think the only logical answer to that question is she was doing it for political reasons. speaking of mr. rove, you can imagine if the bush administration had been surveilling and unmasking individuals in the obama transition? we would still be hearing about it today! >> no, i can't! we would never hear the end of that, steve! >> there would be people in prison, likely. strains all credibility. she has to testify under oath, and by the way, i would add i thought it was disgraceful over the last couple of days that mainstream media media tried to play the race card. what the left often does when it can't defend itself on facts or ideology, they throw out rac

with all due respect to ms. rice, she is famous for lying on national television about benghazi.er credibility is shot. >> i think she lied when she was asked about the unmasking. she didn't know anything about it. her credibility is shot and i think james comey will have critics on at least one side. >> james: stay right there, panel. up next, an occasional battle of the nastiness known the him.. . .. >> today is a good day for america. >> gorsuch is going to be confirmed. the way it occurs is in the hands of the democratic minority. >> there's never been a partisan filibuster of a supreme court nominee in american history. never. >> democrats are setting a very dangerous precedent when it comes to how they want to do this. >> do i find it difficult to hear them spout righteous indig nation about the senate rules? i do. >> that being the chief export of washington, d.c. back with our plan he will on the latest plot twist to seat neil gorsuch on the supreme court. we have 11-9 that advanced his nomination to the full senate floor but we got more indications from democrats saying

i can't believe how unprepared ms. rice was and the base of questions that she wouldn't answer like would she testify. a couple weeks ago she said she knew nothing about the unmasking of names and it wasn't in generalty. >> today was a generalty. and she doesn't -- listen -- she doesn't know the information that devin nunes has so how would she know specifically what she's talking about. >> to nothing to sometimes it waus necessary. as if she found this unmasking document that would get pinned to her lapel before she left her house like mittens on a wintry morning. and when we talked about the unmasking, she was quick to say she wasn't doing any of the unmasking or the administration wasn't doing any of the unmasking for political purposes but she was involved not once, not twice as we know dozens of times. >> that's her job. >> even devin nunes original statement said there was nothing illegal done. do you think they understand how this information is collected? and the process of actually having things unmasked? do you th

miss rice has been ms rice has been accused of "unmasking" members of donald trump's transition teamhe name of any us citizen incidentally caught up in surveillance of foreign officials is usually redacted — they're just us person one. in certain cases, intelligence agencies can request the person's real name be released or "unmasked". it is not illegal. but mr trump's team says the obama administration wanted to unmask people for purely political reasons. high when to put it in context. in december, susan rice is sitting there when obama gets rid of some diplomats. she is getting intelligence on how the russians are responding. up pops some american names that is incidentally collected. it seems to me that she surely has to ask, it is herjob, to ask these americans are good talking to the russians. if that is how it happened. we are to be incredibly careful there is no evidence that the trump administration was colluding with the russian government to affect the vote. we cannot speculate too much. was susan rice asking for these names to be unmasked for intelligence reasons, legitim

stuart: so if ms. rice revealed the names or got it know the names in a way that was inappropriate or illegal. >> espionage and should be investigated. stuart: she should be put on oath. >> she's probably not going to testify against herself, but the fbi should have a criminal investigation. the congress. i doubt that she's going to answer anything. stuart: so far we've steered clear of the investigations and back and forth about the russians and this, that and the other. today we've gone full bore with the susan rice story because i think it's a major scandal. am i right? >> i think you're right. it's a major scandal and a turning point in the scandal and demonstrates-- daily caller reported that susan rice ordered, they used the word ordered spread sheets of donald trump's conversation. stuart: spread sheets of his conversations? >> spread sheets of his conversation. this is a scandal of watergate magnitude if true. if it happened as these venues are now reporting it. stuart: that would mean, if that repo

with all due respect to ms. rice, she is famous for lying on national television about benghazi.er credibility is shot. >> i think she lied when she was asked about the unmasking. she didn't know anything about it. her credibility is shot and i think james comey will have critics on at least one side. >> james: stay right there, panel. up next, an occasional battle of the nastiness known the supreme court. you always pay your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. and if you do have an accident, our claims centers are available to assist you 24/7. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance >> today is a good day for america. >> gorsuch is going to be confirmed. the way it occurs is in the hands of the democratic minority. >> there's never been a partisan filibuster of a supreme court nominee in american history. never. >> de

and senate intelligence committees, three former members of the transition team say we demand that ms. ricee called before congress in order to discuss her motivations for these actions. if true, her behavior appears negligent at best, criminal at worst. mitch mcconnell backs an investigation. watch. >> i've asked the intelligence committee to conduct a bipartisan investigation of this whole episode. they will conduct it. hopefully at the end we'll find out what happened and they'll issue a report, i hope on a bipartisan basis, and anything related to susan rice, or any of these other suggestions, will be handled by the intelligence committee. >> harris: at the white house, press secretary sean spicer yesterday with strong reaction to rice's denials, telling the media rice seemed to contradict her previous comments on pbs when she said she knew nothing about reports president trump or his associates may have been swept up in routine surveillance, saying, quote, it's not for me to decide who -- or he said, i should say, or how they should do it, but there's a sharp contrast between a few wee

while we don't know if ms. rice requested these dozens of reportings, we are told they were only distributed to a number of recipients, including mrs. rice." again, that's the "wall street journal" relying on one of their sources. the spin they put on it is troubling, if it has nothing to do with the russian investigation, which susan rice suggested it did. >> right. if they were targeting members of the trump administration that would not be in line with what's been said so far. they say they were targeting foreign nationals, foreign diplomats, people of that nature, and other people were swept up in this. again, without having access to this information it's difficult to see, but i think that that wall street editorial is relying on a source, so that's important to keep in mind as well. >> jon: the long and short of it we should get ready for senate intel committee hearings? >> i think that's right. that's the narrative dominating the next couple months on capitol hill, anybody to all the other things that the adm

apparently, ms. riceooked at some of the dispatches and allegedly unmasked some of the americans involved which is not usually done. fox news correspondent adam housley and melia zimmerman and investigative reporter have been working the story. they join us now from los angeles. housley, what is the investigation as far as congress is concerned stand right now? >> we've been told that members of the intelligence committee say the investigation is expanding right now. they're looking into allegations for other americans or other politicians are unmatched and had their information collected. the file similar to what they did with the trump team, they're also not going on a record at this point due to the fact this was an ongoing investigation. they also have easter break. meantime, we've also been told the senate is looking at doing the same thing and together they both tell me members of both committees that what they continue to request from intelligence agencies has been very little given. this is the fb

"when asked if ms. riceho denied leaking the names of trump associates under surveillance by united states intelligence agencies committed a crime, the president said, do i think? yes, i think." he was asked about what he thinks about bill o'reilly. trump responded, "i think he's a person i know well, he is a good person. i think he shouldn't have settled. personally, i think he shouldn't have settled." joining me now to discuss, jeff weaver, former campaign manager for bernie sanders. president of the group, our revolution. and rick tyler, msnbc political analyst, former spokesman for ted cruz. thanks to both of you for being here. rick, let me start with you, rick, i'm curious, look, a lot of people looking a the timing on this and say president trump, this is a way of distracting, bring up -- make outlandish charge, certainly whatever you say about susan rice at this point, to say she committed a crime, he's not citing a statute and not citing any evidence there. that seems like a pretty intense statement

that's a very serious question and i think ms. riceho is unfortunately known to be a liar on several fronds ought to be dragged up and put under oath. >> shannon: senator cornyn think that may happen. great to see you both. >> bill: more horrifying moments from syria. dozens reported dead after a suspected chemical attack on civilians. then, reports of rocket attacks that followed on the clinics that treated the survivors. the story as we're learning it next. ways wins. especially in my business. with slow internet from the phone company, you can't keep up. you're stuck, watching spinning wheels and progress bars until someone else scoops your story. switch to comcast business. with high-speed internet up to 10 gigabits per second. you wouldn't pick a slow race car. then why settle for slow internet? comcast business. built for speed. built for business. >> bill: a fox news alert. a suspected chemical weapons attack in syria. the graphics are disturbing. reportedly 58 are dead including several children. kitty logan has the report. >>

ms. rice's comments, if these leaks were not done for political purposes, that didn't, mean that, that theyll weren't done. so, that's a broad area to cover to say i want doing this for any sort of political agenda here but they were still done, and that leaves a wide room to i guess avoid legal action against yourself but what do you make of that? >> so, neil, i'm going to give you three words and you're probably going to hear these three words over and over again as this investigation continues. foreign intelligence purpose. that is the legal standard for which you can unmask or reveal the identity of a u.s. person caught up by accident, not accident, incidentallyç when mn iting another target. if there is a legitimate foreign intelligence purpose it's legal. if there isn't, it's not. neil: what if you're making the argument, i'm no lawyer, you know the ins and outs of this far better than i, you thought at the time there was. is that enough cover for you but enough cover to say no, i never had any political ends or goals here? >> well, i think we need to be clear how this takes place. s

. >> reporter: rice told ms nbc as national security advisor she would sometimes ask for identities of u.s. civilians caught up in foreign surveillance but it had nothing to do with politics. >> there is no equivalence between, so-called unmass kick and leaking. the efforts to ask for the identity of an american citizen is necessary to understand the importance of an intelligence report in some instances. >> reporter: white house says there was no collusion, between trump campaign associates and russia during the election, and insists the real story is the obama administration's improper surveillance of u.s. civilians , and leaks to the press. >> we have been trying to say, that from the get go there has been an ongoing investigation that we have supported, looking into this matter. >> reporter: white house also says that it knows nothing about a meeting between black water securities firm founder eric prince and an associate of vladamire putin and calls the story flimsy. washington post reports that the united arab emirates arranged a meeting in the island where prince was looking to

. >> jeff, do you see a continuum of the white house attempting to divert with susan rice now, ms. last week. the morning of the house intelligence committee, he is tweeting with hillary clinton and uranium deals. a lot shiny objects thrown around. >> there's enough out there all the way across the board that we should really get into this. it strikes me as interesting that you have paul manafort and carter page and roger stone saying, i want to volunteer and come testify. you ask susan rice, well, you know, i'm not sure. let's get it all out. get all these people out there. what did they know? to borrow a phrase, what did the president know? when did he know it? what did susan rice know? what did president obama know? >> what's the issue here? what's the central issue? >> there's two issues. i know you want it to be the russians and collusion. >> collusion, not collusion. the russians. and what occurred. it's not about the press. it's not -- this is a story about the national security -- >> let me finish. >> it's about the national security of the united states being endangered an

. >> reporter: former national security advisor susan rice speaking to ms nbc pushing back against accusation that is she improperly handled classified intelligence about associates of the donald trump >> the allegation is that somehow, obama administration officials, utilized intelligence for political purposes. that is absolutely false. >> it comes amid reports on conservative outlets that rice requested identities of the americans, including trump associates with ties to russia who were swept up in surveillance of foreign entities. the process, known as unmask ing is legal and well within the purview of the national security advisor. >> in order to understand the importance of the report and sense of significance it was necessary to find out or request the information as to who that u.s. official was. >> reporter: trump allies sought to cast this as proof after the claim that obama spied on the president and wiretapped trump tower. richard burr indicate ago this rice may be called to testify in the committee's investigation in russian's meddling in the 2016 election. burr's fellow republic