ms. yates can shed some light on in her testimony today. the president and his administration have yet to take responsibility for or explain these and other troubling russia inks. dismissing facts as fake news and downplaying the individuals involved. and nearly two years since he declared his candidacy for president, only one person has been held accountable, michael ynn sm the trump administration has said it was not improper. we need a more thorough accounting of the facts. an 18-minute gap transfixed the country and got everybody's attention. in this case we have an 18-day gap between the noisk of the white house that a senior official that a senior official has been compromised and action taken against that senior official's role. e trump administration has a terrible. my sincere hope is this hearing and those to come will help us find out. hank you chairman. we tor graham: mr. clapper, appreciate you. and the former attorney germ has een both come. please rise. raise your right happened.

ms. yates, are you familiar with the dossier? >> i am. if i could try to clarify one answer before as well because i think senator graham you may have misunderstood me. you asked if i was aware of any evidence of collusion and i declined to answer because answering would reveal classified information. i believe that's the same answer that director comey gave to his committee when he was asked this question as well and he made clear that just because i say that i can't answer it, you should not draw from that an assumption that that means that the answer is yes. >> okay. fair enough. >> i also think if i may sir that this straets what i was trying to get at in my statement about the unique position that the fbi straddles between intelligence and law enforcement. >> okay. i just want the country to know that whatever they're doing on the counterintelligence side mr. clapper didn't know about it, it didn't make it in the report and we'll see what comes from it. ms. yates, what did you tell the whi

[applause] ms. yates: i really can't let this moment pass, this moment of your last commencement here as dean, without also recognizing the inspirational leadership and vision that has marked your tenure. and, to the student award recipients today that we all just heard about, and to all the students here today that were recognized for their pro bono service, i have to tell you, i am humbled by your unselfish dedication to justice, dedication you have exemplified even before you even graduated from law school. i have really been excited about the opportunity to talk with you all today. as the date grew closer, i admit that i started to get a little anxious. this is a big moment for you and i wanted any words i had here today to be commensurate with that occasion. the anxiety got a little worse a few weeks ago when i was at breakfast with my family. my husband and my daughter kelly, who is here with me, and my son-in-law zach, they knew that i was going to be giving this speech. the topic of commencement t

ms. yates, what are the consequences for white house staffers to disclose their contacts on their security clearance forms? >> there can be a variety of ramifications. you can lose your clearance, your job, or you can be criminally prosecuted in certain circumstances. >> is it up to the department of justice or fbi to pursue these allegations against staffers who do not disclose appropriately? >> it would depend on the circumstances of the nondisclosure, whether it was willful and the circumstances of the conduct underlying it. it's going to be fact specific. >> i agree it should be fact specific but considering the allegations, i hope the fbi or department of justice is pursuing an investigation into these matters. again, under what circumstances was the department of justice deciding to bring charges against someone? you said it would depend on the fact of the situation. if the president or someone close to him knew that a white house official failed to disclose work on behalf of a foreign go

. >> ms. yates, do you have any evidence, are you aware of any evidence that would suggest that in the 2016 campaign anybody in the trump campaign colewded with the russian government in an improper fashion? >> senator, my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information, ask so i can't answer that. >> i don't get that because he just said he issued the report and he said he doesn't know of any. so what would you know that's not in the report? >> are you asking me? >> her. >> director clapper also said he was unaware of the fbi counterintelligence investigation. >> would it be fair to say that the counterintelligence investigation was not mature enough to come to his -- to get in the report? is that fair? >> that's a possibility. >> what i don't get is how the fbi can have a counterintelligence investigation suggest colugs and you not know about it and the fbi sign on to a report that basically said there was no collusion. >> the evidence, if there was any, didn't reach the

ms. yates is the former deputy attorney general, people in the legal profession, please rise. affirmed the testimony, affirm the testimony are about to give us the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help you god. mister clapper. >> certainly didn't expect, i thought it was all done with this when i left the government. this is only the first of two hearings this week. understandably, and so serious to focus, hopefully bipartisan focus by the congress and the american people. and russian interference, in this presidential election process, and the community assessment or ica. and whatever information, and came up with an the congress and the classified form. and against the ica was produced, and classification and executive -- to what i can discuss. my direct official knowledge stopped on 20 january when my term of office was over. the ic was a coordinated project from three agencies, cia, nsa and fbi, not all 17 components of the intelligence community, those three. under my f

. >> and ms. yates, same question to you. >> i'm not aware of any interceptions of the trump campaign. >> are and you aware of any intercepted communications of any other candidates or campaigns? >> no. >> okay, because earlier when chairman graham asked you, that i thought you declined to answer. perhaps i misunderstood. >> and i may have misunderstood the question. i thought the question i declined to answer is a different one that. th glad i got to clear it up. >> you have no information of interceptions of the bernie sanders campaign, the hillary clinton campaign or any other candidate or campaigns? >> no. >> okay. >> let's revisit the topic, ms. yates that and you senator cornyn were talking about. >> okay. >> is it correct that the constitution vests the executive authority in the president? >> yes. >> and if an attorney general disagrees with a policy decision of the president, a policy decision that is lawful, does the attorney general have the authority to direct the department of justice to de

. >> ms. yates, do you have any evidence that would suggest that in the 2016 campaign, anybody in the trump campaign colluded with the russian government or intelligence services in improper fashion? >> and senator, my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information and so i can't answer that. >> well, i don't get that because he just said he issued the report and he said he doesn't know of any. so what would you know that's not in the report? >> are you asking me -- >> no, her. >> i think that director clapper also said that he was unaware of the fbi counterintelligence investigation. >> would it be fair to say that the counterintelligence investigation was not mature enough to come to his -- to get in the report, is that fair, mr. clapper? >> that's a possibility. >> what i don't get is how the fbi can have a counterintelligence investigation suggesting collusion and you as director of national intelligence not know about it and the fbi sign on to a report that basically

ms. yates: not to my knowledge. senator grassley: next question, have either of you ever been an anonymous source in matters relating to mr. trump or rush yab's attempts to medical in the election? did either of you ever authorize someone else at someone else at your respective organizations to be an anonymous source in a news report about mr. trump or his associates? >> no. >> no. no. >> as far as either of you knowt had any government agencies referred any of the leaks over the past several months to the justice department for potential criminal investigation? >> i don't know. as you know, senator, there is a process for that, for doing that. i don't know if that, that's happened. >> ms. yates? >> i'm not at doj anymore so i i don't know what's been referred. spirit so then i guess kind of sum up, neither one of you know whether the department authorized a criminal investigation of the leaks? >> i do not, sir. >> no, sir. >> okay. have any of you been questionedn mark the fbi about any leaks?

ms. yates, are you aware of any evidence that would suggest that in the 2016 campaign, anybody in the trump campaign colluded with the russian government or intelligence services in an improper fashion? >> and senator, my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information and so i can't answer that. >> reporter: overall the hearing was a tale of two hearings, democratic senators focused mostly on flynn, republican senators focused mostly on leaks. >> have you ever been part of anonymous source about the trump associates intention to meddle in the election. >> do we know who unmasked the conversation between the russian ambassador and general flynn? was there unmasking in this situation? >> i don't know. >> do you, ms. yates? >> i can't speak to this specific situation. >> jim sciuto joins us, despite all these different topics, this was actually learning about russian interference in the u.s. election. >> reporter: general clapper confirmed this before that russian hacker

ms. yates: thank you for a beautiful and generous introduction. the distinguished faculty, family, friends, and, most of all, the graduates of the harvard law school class of 2017, thank you for inviting me

president trump was tweeting about ms. yates earlier today, ask sally yates under oath if she knows how classified information got in the newspapers soon after she explained it to white house council. trish, the cameras will be trained on yates on capitol hill. trish: very interesting. blake berman, thank you so much. joining me right now for all analysis, former cia officer buck sexton and gina and stewart holiday. good to have you here. buck, you're a former intelligence guy. i'm going to start with you here. she's plain training that she somehow gave the information this heads up, that she actually gave them information that was relevant to general flynn whic shou have nt him running for the hills but at the same te if that information did exist, why the heck did he have hearing in the obama administration to begin with? >> well, we have to know what the information was that was passed along in terms of whether it was just we don't trust this guy, we don't like him or if there was greater specificity, that hasn't been made cl

. >> ms. yates, do you have any evidence or are you aware of any evidence that would suggest that in the 2016 campaign anybody in the trump campaign colluded with the russian government or intelligence services and in a proper fashion? >> and senator, my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information and so i can't answer that. >> over all, the hearing was a tale of two hearings. many democratic senators focused mostly on flynn, many republicans focused on leaks. >> have either of you ever been an anonymous source in a news report about matters relating to mr. trump, his associates, or russia's attempt to meddle in the election? >> and unmasking. >> do we know who unmasked the conversation between the russian ambassador and general flynn? was there unmasking of this situation? >> now on the issue of general flynn's security clearance, you heard from the president, white house press secretary, again today that he had security clearance from the obama administration. but you

. >> ms. yates do you have any evidence are you aware of any evidence that would suggest that in the 2016 campaign anybody in the trump campaign colluded -- colluded with the russian government or intelligence services in an improper fashion. >> and more my answer to that question would require me to reveal classified information and so i can't answer that. >> overall the hearing was a tale of two hearings many democratic senators folksed on flynn many republicans focused on leaks. >> have either of you ever been an aanonymous source in a news report about matters relating to mr. trump, his associates or russians attempt to meddle in the election? >> no. >> absolutely not. >> and unmasking. >> do we know who unmasked the the conversation between the russian ambassador and general flynn. >> was there unmavericking in this situation? >> i don't know. >> do you ms. yates. >> i can't speak to this specific situation. >> jim skrut ofr joins us dpiet all the different topics this was a hearing about russi

ms yates was asked by the trump administration to stay on in the role until the president's nominee, n fired yates injanuary after she refused to defend his travel ban immigration order. in a statement, sean spicer accuses sally yates of betraying the department ofjustice. today, congress will question ms yates about her warnings to the trump team about the former national security advisor michael flynn and his contacts with russia. among those questioning her will be democratic senator amy klobuchar, and i spoke to herjust moments ago. are you surprised that president obama intervened personally on the issue of donald trump hiring general flynn, and how unusual would that be? i would imagine it is pretty unusual but this is someone that president obama had fired from his administration, so that is also really unusual. president obama didn't terminate a lot of his senior people, so that would be why it would be so unique. the second thing it is that it backs up other things we had been hearing. i haven't heard about the president obama news until today. we have heard the actual attorn

>> ms. yates, what did you tell the white house about mr. flynn? >> sally yates speaks out. >> we believed that general flynn was compromised with respect to the russians. >> for the first time ever, former acting attorney general on what she told the white house about michael flynn. >> the underlying conduct that general flynn had engaged in was problematic in and of itself. >> tonight, what we now know about what michael flynn was doing with the russians and why president trump ignored all the warnings. >> president obama had told the incoming president elect that two days after the election, don't hire this guy. >> then, the kushner family caught selling real estate visas and access to the white house, why jared kushner's family is today apologizing with the reporter who broke the story, all of that and plus house republicans feel the heat at home over trump care. >> nobody dies because they don't have access to health care. "all in" starts right now. >> good evening from new york, i'm chris ha

thanks for being with us, all in with chris haiyes starts right now. >>> tonight on "all in". >> ms. yatesite house about mr. flynn? >> sally yates speaks out. >> we believed that general flynn was compromised with respect to the russians. >> for the first time ever, former acting attorney general on what she told the white house about michael flynn. >> the underlying conduct that general flynn had engaged in was problematic in and of itself. >> tonight, what we now know ab

sen grassley: ms. yates, have you? sally yates: yes, i have and, no, i can't give you details.l: intel officials say their activities aren't political. republican senator rand paul and former congressman dennis kucinich, a democrat, are among those who say they believe they were caught up in government surveillance. coming up next week on "full measure." for all the concern about russian influence over u.s. elections, what's rarely talked about is that many foreign interests try to shape u.s. policy every day through paid lobbying. next week, the incredible story of some u.s. military veterans who claim they were duped into lobbying on behalf of a foreign government. >> i said, so by the way, who is paying for all this? he said, the kingdom. i said, the kingdom of saudi arabia? he said, yeah, man. so, this was unraveling into something i wanted no part of. sharyl: foreign lobbying in america, next sunday on "full measure." that's all for this week. thanks for watching. and thanks to our departing interns, mabel and courtney. we will see you next week. this morning on "governmen

. >> ms. yates. >> not to my knowledge either. >> have you ever given information to a reporter that you didn't want to have your name connected with but wanted to see it in the paper? >> i have not. charles: here to discuss, nan hayward, carl higbie and michael maltby. you have been the hearing, obviously they pressed hard, we know there were leaks and still this is an area we can't get resolved. >> well, yes, but clapper and yates made quite clear, it wasn't them, we don't know, we will probably never find out. leak investigations rarely come to fruition. it's worth looking at but a bit beside the point what i thought was the heart of their testimony which was the warning to the white house. charles: the warning about michael flynn? >> yes, sir. charles: okay, nan, what are your thoughts? i thought it was interesting that they drove home the point that you have, a difference between unmasking which happens in the course of a 702 when we're surveilling someone outside of this country and a u.s. nam

ms. yates first visited the white house on january 26 and invited back to answer followup questions on january 27. those followups include questions about general flynn's potential criminal exposure. what else happened on january 27? the president of the united states brought in f.b.i. director james comey for a one-on-one dinner where he reportedly asked director comey for loyalty. is the timing of this comey dinner curious? you bet it is. according to press secretary sean spicer, president trump was briefed by white house counsel mcgahn after ms. yates' warning. that means they knew about the justice department concerns with flynn when he met director comey for dinner. was the president's request for loyalty from director comey an attempt to impeat the investigation into -- impede the investigation into general flynn? was it to eye knock late himself from -- when director comey did not -- last tuesday evening president trump fired director comey while comey was giving a speech to f.b.i. agent

engel, do you agree with ms. yates' description of the function? mr. engel: i agree that the office must look only at the law. it is not its job to consider questions of policy. they have no operational responsibilities. they are a legal advisor to i do take issue with the description ms. yates gave of the function as being intended to review if there is some way of defending an executive order. we are not litigators in court coming up with reasonable arguments. the job of the office of legal counsel is to review executive orders as well as other proposals that come before it to ensure that they meet the requirements of the law. and that is how, if i'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, i will discharge those responsibilities. sen. grassley: also, the question of independence has come up. a lot of people before this committee, under the trump administration appointing, starting with the time you began assisting the trump transition team effort, has anyone come meaning anyone can ask you to make a commitment to reach a certain legal conclusion on behalf

[applause] ms. yates: thank you for a beautiful and generous introduction.he distinguished faculty, family, friends, and most of , all, the graduates of the harvard law school class of 2017, thank you for inviting me

. >> ms. yates, what did you tell the white house about mr. flynn? >> i had two in-person meetings one phone call with the white house counsel about mr. flynn. the first meeting occurred on january 26th. i called done mcbegan first thing that morning and told him that i had a very sensitive matter thievd discuss with him, that i couldn't talk about it on the phone and i needed to come see him, and he agreed to meet with me later that afternoon. infield i took a senior member of the national security division who was overseeing this matter to meet with me. we met in his office at the white house which is a skiff so we could discuss classified information in his office. >> again, it is remarkable here that this is not even one week into the new administration. swearing in was a friday, this is the thursday after the inauguration. this is six days into the new presidency. and the serving attorney general, the act attorney generally, has gone to the white house counsel's office which has a sensitive kpartmented information facility a skiff where they can

>> no, i can't. >> ms. yates, have you? >> yes, i have. and no i can't give you details. >> you cannot allow intelligence to be politicized. i want to give the bottom line of who did that. >> we learned nothing today that we didn't know yesterday. >> it didn't advance the ball very much on the unmasking and didn't advance the ball at all on collusion between russia and the trump team. >> undertaking a bombing campaign against isis. >> on back foot in syria and iraq. so the fight goes on. >> anonymous sources have been telling us that they believe that the obama administration was spying on other presidential candidates other than trump. >> it would be one of the biggest scandal the country has ever seen if that's proven. >> according to reports, a record number of french voters turned in blank ballots for the election yesterday. apparently they couldn't find le pen. ♪ who are you ♪ who are you ♪ who who. brian: this isn't live, right? steve: who are we? we are fox news and we are live in that building right there

can you give us details here. >> and no, i can't. >> ms. yates, have you?s i have and know i can't give you details. >> martha: what you make of that? >> complete contrary to what they told me earlier pet i asked point-blank was there any incidental collection of campaign operatives are candidates? now we know at least there is at least one in this matter. i want to know what kind of system we have in america. i thought the foreign leaders all the time it as a united states senator. if the intelligence capturing our conversation, focus on the guy i'm talking to her the gal i'm talking to you, i want to know what they can do with my part of the conversation because i might be talking about things that no business for the executive branch no. so i'm really very much concerned that we've got a system in place where you can capture a conversations between american citizens little coleaders and somebody with a political bent can take that information and use in a political fashion like leaking it to "the washington post." i'm very worried about what russia did i

ms. yates: we weren't the only ones who knew about all of this. the russians also knew when general flynn had done, and the russians also knew that general flynn had misled the vice president and others. in the media accounts, it was clear from the vice president and others that they were repeating what general flynn had told them. and that this was a problem, because not only did we believe the russians knew this, but they likely have proof of this information. that created a compromise situation, a situation where the national security adviser essentially could be blackmailed by the russians. tim: prior to her evidence today, we also learned that during their chat immediately after last year's election, former president obama warned then-president-elect trump against hiring general flynn . today the white house press secretary was quick to downplay that revelation, saying it was the former administration who kept flynn's security clearance active. mr. spicer: it is true that mr. obama made it known that he was not a fan of general flynn's, which

if you look at the timeline of ms. yates' testimony yesterday, you look at the actions today, you look at the fact that we were moving forward with our investigation now in terms of getting information and scheduling the more interesting witnesses, this is more than a little bit curious that they chose today to fire jim comey. >> final question, about rod rosenstein, we've heard sally yates, you're saying tonight, the reason he gave to the president for firing jim comey are laughable. >> they're not believable on any order. you know, i voted for this gentleman based upon his reputation in maryland. but i am deeply disappointed and i if i could have that vote back, but i will be voting in a difference way. because the explanation is so patently laughable that i'm just very disappointed in the deputy attorney general based upon his reputation that he would put his name to that kind of letter. >> senator mark warner, vice chair of the intelligence committee, thank you very much for joining us on this important night. really app

and let's just remember this week we had the testimony of ms. yatesan't fire anymore, and we had the revelation that the director was asking for more resources to complete this investigation. >> what do you think the impact was of ms. yates' performance that we all watched on television and you watched it on the hill? what do you think the impact of that was on trump this week? >> yeah, i'm sure it wasn't his best day. the fact is whenever he's confronted with reality, he behaves poorly. she has brought the reality back to the situation, that the white house new far before they fired general yates, what had taken place, that he was susceptible to blackmail, that he had lied to them, and that there were other issues with him. they just can't accept the reality of the situation, and they certainly won't cooperate with this investigation. >> thank you so much, u.s. congressman mike quigley of illinois. up next, the "hardball" roundtable will tackle why we're getting so many mixed messages from the white house. plus they'll have reaction to what president

[applause] ms. yates: thank you for a beautiful and generous introduction. the distinguished faculty, family, friends, and most of , all, the graduates of the harvard law school class of 2017, thank you for inviting me to share in this special day with you. it is such a privilege to be here. to the graduates of the class of 2017, i want to say congratulations. you have worked incredibly hard to get here today. i hope that you are going to take a moment to let the full accomplishments sing in and that you are going inrebel -- going to revel this a little bit. to the parents of the graduates here today, you have to feel a tremendous sense of pride and sheer joy in what your children have accomplished. congratulations to the moms and dads here as well. [applause] really can't let this moment pass, this moment of your last commencement here as dean, without also recognizing the inspirational leadership and vision that has marked your tenure. and, to the student award recipients today that we all just heard about, and to all the students here today that were reco

. >> ms. yates? >> not to my knowledge either. >> next question. have either of you ever ben an anonymous source in a news matters in russians attempt to medal in the election? >> absolutely not. >> she was emphatic about that. some people have called the president's tweet witness tampering. >> it was asked in fact by the chairman of the judiciary committee and both wpss answered. he's been on a tweet-a-thon and he blamed president obama because flynn once worked for president obama. he seems to forget that president obama actually fired general flynn and had also warned president trump about not hiring general flen. it's one thing after another where they just decided no we're going to keep him in because he was loyal to the president and i think when you're dealing with russia where director clapper made clear they're going to do this again and emboldened, you don't put that person in as your national security advisor. >> it's been said maybe the president had animosity towards flynn. the former president clearly had animosity towards michael fly

. >> ms. yates, have you? >> yes, i have.ou cannot allow intelligence to be politicized. i want to give the bottom line of who did that. >> we learned nothing today that we didn't know yesterday. >> it didn't advance the ball very much on the unmasking and didn't advance the ball at all on collusion between russia and the trump team. >> undertaking a

whoa. >> thank you, ms. yates.know the answer. >> touch them all. >> going up. all right. >> they were trying to set her up as someone who acted out of politics. that travel ban is a completely separate issue. >> they just punched him in the nose. >> he should have known. it's sally yates. that's just -- that's just bad theater. that's just bad politics. he should have known that sally yates was going to hit his hanging curveball 470 feet. >> yeah. >> that was just too -- you could see while he was setting it up. no, don't do it. don't do that. no. no. no. just talk to her. put her -- give her, you know, an intentional walk. take the signal. is it the same thing this year? >> that one didn't break. that was a hanging curveball. >> it hung up there. >> it wasn't just senator cruz. there were other senators who tried to frame her as someone who acted out of politics, who acted out of partisanship. she cited line by line the law under which she acted. she believed that the travel ban is unlawful. >> again, importantly

ms. yates isn't going to be able to answer that in testimony. but the white house has got to answer what happened in that 18 days. did they take the information seriously? then why did it take 18 days. and general flynn resigned on the day that "the washington post" story popped. they were driven by news and the potential for embarrassing stories, rather than trying to do the right thing and trying to discern what exactly happened here. >> when you see it on the calendar, that's a long time. >>> hillary clinton getting candid about the final days of the cam pain and what she believes cost her the presidency. >> i was on the way to winning until the combination of jim comey's letter on october 28 and russian wikileaks raised doubts in the minds of people who were inclined to vote for me, but got scared off. umbrellas!! you need one of these. you wouldn't put up with an umbrella that covers you part way, so when it comes to pain relievers, why put up with just part of a day? aleve, live whole not part. tell you what, i'll give it to you for half o

it seems as if when ms. yates appeared yesterday i said to myself we're going to have to a new issue tomorrow and we have constantly seen this movement of hocus-pocus when something seems to get close to the russian investigation. the next thing you know we've moved on to anothier issue. one of the reasons why -- comey came to our committee, the it oversight committee in the summer and made this announ announcement of how he thought hillary clinton was sloppy but me wasabon't going to prosecuto. i said they are coming after you and they are going to put you on trial. the thing your guests don't know is that after that decision was made not to prosecute, they basically -- the republicans on the oversight committee subpoenaed almost every single document in the fbi file and what happened with comey is that he came back later on closer to the election to make those announcements because i think he was concerned they would come after him. that's what i believe. but again i think the timing is horrible. if we look at i

. >> ms. yates, have you? 's to go yes, i have a know it can't give you details. stick another could get the details. later in the hearing, he said later she alerted the white house that national security advisor was not being honest with vice president mike pence about discussions flynn had with the russian ambassador concerning u.s. sanctions against the kremlin. and that made him susceptible to blackmail. listen to her again. >> it was clear from the vice president and others that they were repeating what general flynn had told them. and that this was a problem. because not only do we believe that the russians knew this but that they likely had proof of this information. >> michael flynn was of course fired for not telling his bosses about his talks with the russians. today, president trump tweeted quoting big history today between klapper and yates is on surveillance presumably the president's talking about him being surveilled. he goes on to say why doesn't the media report on this? hashtag fake news. the president also said the russia-trump collusion story i

they asked for flynn's resignation, something i'm hoping ms. yates can she had light on in her testimonied. dismissing fact as fake news and downplaying the significance of individuals involved. more than 100 into the trump administration and nearly two years after he declared his candidacy for president, only one person has been held accountable for improper contacts with russia: michael flynn flynn. some were saying his actions were not improper, he just lost trust with the president. an 18-minute gap filled well. in this case we have an 18-day gap between the notification of the white house that a senior oe fes officials' role. these irregularities may compromise corruption at the hands of the russian intelligence. my hope is that these hearings and yet to come will help us find out. thank you, jeremy. >> our two witnesses are well known and i will be sworn in. but mr. clapper, the former director of national intelligence, has served. thank you both for coming raise your right hand, please. >> do you confirm that the information you're about to gi

. >> ms. yates, what did you tell the white house about mr. flynn? >> sally yates speaks out. >> we believed that general flynn was compromised with respect to the russians. >> for the first time ever, former acting attorney general on what she told the white house about michael flynn. >> the underlying conduct that general flynn had engaged in was problematic in and of itself.

. >> thank you, ms. yates. >> for an awful lot of people, malcolm, that was a smackdown won by sally yates handily. if you listen to conservative radio and television, they saw it very differently. did we get anything out of this hearing and where do we go from here? >> well, i think we did. everybody knew that when we went into this hearing, there would be two different hearings. there would be the hearing about russian infrutrusion and involvement in the united states elections. that is a fact. the united states was attacked in a massive cyber warfare operation last year. there may be people who have colluded or corroborated -- collaborated in that effort. the fbi is still investigating that. then there was the misdirection you got from the republican senators. they seem to want to go after leaks and go after anything except for the key question. lindsey graham aside, the investigation did move forward yesterday. sally yates did say significant things in there, and jim clapper affirmed he was not aware that

. >> ms. yates have you? >> yes, i have and no, i can't give you details. >> how did the conversation between the russian ambassador and mr. flynn make it to the "washington post"? >> i don't know the answer to that. >> nor do i know the answer to that. liz: judge andrew napolitano was adamant it is a crime to leak this information. >> i think this shows a couple of things. one, there's too much raw intelligence data in the hands of too many people that can use it for bad purposes, because two, the political use of raw intelligence data is a very, very serious crime and is a threat to the freedom of the united states of america. there's too much spying, too much information and too many people have it. i'm convinced that there were efforts to destabilize him at the outet and appears that the president of the united states, barack obama, was aware of this. liz: fox news "war stories" host retired lieutenant colonel oliver north. colonel, so good to see you. >> thank you, liz. liz: what is the issue here in the

. >> ms. yates. >> yes, i have. can't give you details. >> he was pressed on the conclusion there was no evidence of collusion with the trump campaign and moscow. >> i was not aware of the counterintelligence investigation. >> neither witness could explain today whether the white house blocked flynn's access. >> bret: thank you. let's talk about what we heard. senior political analyst brit hume joins us. >> the take away was after we heard this and what we heard what the justice department said about general flynn and we could see he was lying about the extent of his discussions with the russians and warned the administration about it. my take away was, they better get rid of flynn. but he is long gone. there were probably be discussion about why it took them 18 days or something for him to be gone but in the end, what sally yates said about flynn was that he was lying to the administration and lied to the vice president, and that's what he got fired for. i don't think as a political matter that that revelation with

no -- they are a legal advisor to i do take issue with the description ms. yates gave of the function as being intended to review defending an executive order. the job of the office of legal counsel is to review executive orders as well as other proposals that come before it to ensure that they meet the requirements of the law. and that is how, if i'm fortunate enough to be confirmed, i will discharge those possibilities. sen. grassley: also, the question of independence has come up. a lot of people before this committee, under the trump administration appointing, starting with the time you began assisting the trump transition team effort, has anyone come meaning anyone can ask you to make a commitment to reach a certain legal conclusion on behalf of the transition or administration? lawyerel: senator, as a in the transition, i would not want to get into attorney-client discussions on the legal front. certainly with respect to this position, nobody asked me to make any conclusions or had i even discussed decisions i would make if i were fortunate to be confirmed a

. >> thank you, ms. yates. i would note that might be the case if there's reason to suspect partisanship. >> an aggressive back and forth there. senator, do you think cruz has any point, that yates may be motivated by personal and political reasons? >> i think it's not only wrong. i think it's really low. this is a woman who has worked in the department of justice under republican and democratic administrations without blemish for 27 years. she has risen to the top of her profession, and did a terrific job as deputy attorney general with broad support from republicans as well as democrats. you know, in this particular matter, she has been -- by the courts that looked at the same order and said, yeah, sally yates was right. this is unconstitutional. we throw it out. so the idea that you can cobble together some partisanship on her part out of making the right legal decision after 27 years of loyal service to the country, it was a low moment and a low blow. >> from senator cruz. well, thank you very much, senator

>> well, of course i don't know what their conversations were between ms. yates and the white house counsel, nor do i know what president obama said to president trump about general flynn. but certainly if they raised red flags, i'm not sure it was the wisest decision in the world for the president to have proceeded to hire him. he did end up firing him, and it seems to me that that is behind us other than the ongoing investigation. if >> bret: have you heard that michael flynn is now cooperating with the fbi? >> i have not heard that. >> bret: in context, i asked the senator and senator joe manchin this. when is washington going to start working for me. can things get through things that affect the american people in this partisan environment? >> well, i certainly hope so. we have been working to try to get the administration stepped up, and that has taken longer than it should have because they democrats have greatly slow walk to the process, which i don't think is right. i am pleased we were able to confirm neil gorsuch for the supreme court. that's a major ac