this breaking news scoop tonight from "the new york times" is about the federal fbi investigation into mike flynn. that "new york times" reporting tonight is that trump himself tried to get the fbi director to shut the flynn investigation down. since that meeting where that conversation allegedly took place on february 14th, it has been reported since that the senate intelligence committee subpoenaed documents related to mike flynn for its investigation in the senate and has also since been reported that the u.s. attorney's office in the eastern district of virginia sent out grand jury subpoenas related to mike flynn. subpoenas that went out to people who had business relationships with mike flynn. that's what we've known about the flynn part of the trump/russia investigation. what we are adding to that, what we can report tonight exclusively is that there is another subpoena. it's part of a federal criminal investigation, and this new subpoena is not about mike flynn. it's about former trump campaign chairman paul manafort. this new subpoena we can report tonight relates to a loan tak

let's start with "the new york times." >> both of these are explosive reports. on the "new york times" one it is alleging that president donald trump was boasting in the oval office to russian counter parts about dismissing james comey, the director of the fbi. he dismissed him on march 9. the meeting with kis lag and sergei lavrov happening may 10. now we are have reached out to the white house. they are not disputing this report. they are providing with us a statement similar to that which they provided to the "new york times," talking about how the president wants to work with russia. how he thinks the real threat is isis in syria and that has always been his goal. i think what this tells us is three important things. number one, it is clear that president trump wants to work russia and will almost trip on himself to try to impress them. number two, his instincts are wrong. at least in the oval office, wave transcript of this, he is saying that firing james comey had make the russia investigation go away. that he has taken care of that. facts have not borne th

you seem convinced that this memo, as described in "the new york times," is accurate, number one. and number two, displays exactly what is written here. do you have any concerns that fbi director comey at the time did not tell acting director mccabe, it doesn't seem, or the deputy attorney general rosenstein who both testified on capitol hill that there was no effort of interference or rolling back the investigation in any way, shape, or form. >> i am in favor of getting at the truth. i believe that requires the appointment of a special prosecutor. if the facts lead us in the direction you suggest, i will accept that. in fact, i would prefer that. i don't want to see a cloud of legal, if not constitutional cloud, over any president. we need to be operating with cohesion. this has jeopardized all of that in a brief period of time. >> bret: what do you think are the next steps? it seems every day we have another story on this front. from a capitol hill perspective, what happens next? >> so much damage has been done. we either have to come out we have to i think appoint a special pros

do i think i would like for people to have more trust in the new york times and do i think that is an. i am just not completely convinced that the numbers reflectjust the new york times or the washington post. i think they reflect a wide definition of media. one more poll for you. a gallup poll in april that showed that two thirds of those americans who believe there is media bias think it is a liberal media bias towards the democratic party. right. i do think and i have said that the big media institutions in america happen to be in liberal cities. washington, mainly washington, new york and los angeles. i do think that skews our view of the world. i am not in denial at that. i think it is something that we need to work on. i do think that the influence... it is unfortunate that that the most powerful media organisations left standing are along the coasts. you are saying to me that you don't believe your newspaper right now truly gets middle america? i am going to make it a little more complicated than that. and not because i am obfuscating on the issue. i think there are some things

is doing 110w better the new york times is doing now than this time last year. this time last year. in fact, if you look at the numbers, if you look atjust how much income new york times made in this last quarter, they made $13 million. compare the exact same time the last year. they actually reported a loss of $8 million. a big part of the story of cause has to do with just the sheer number of new digital subscribers that they've got and a big part of it has to do with the political climate here in the us. big part of it has to do with the political climate here in the usw seems the new york times is succeeding where many newspaper and magazine publishers have struggled amidsta magazine publishers have struggled amidst a host of websites and mobile apps delivering quick news for free? well, the new york times is a subscription base and you do pay for the service. the new york times specifically isn't free. while we can talk about the successes of digital and it is important to still look at their print editions, that's where they are losing money. their ad reve

jeff, tell us what the "new york times" is reporting, because this is going to cause another uproar. reporter: it is indeed. michael schmidt who covers the justice department for the "new york times" is reporting this, that he's really laying out a series of memorandums that the director of the fbi, former director of the fbi i should say james comey wrote about the meetings that he had with the president, and one particular meeting in february when the president asked him to essentially let go the michael flynn investigation, the investigation into whether the first national security adviser michael flynn had any interaction or what interaction he had with russian operatives. the president, you know, said that michael flynn is a good guy. he asked him to let it go. now, this story is based off of a series of memorandums that the former director wrote at the time to sort of keep a record of what the president was asking him. the "new york times" got ahold of these memorandums obviously from someone who had the fbi director's point of view but it paints a contemp raise picture at the

my only demand, it's not that people love the new york times. my only demand, and my only drive, is that people outside of new york don't see us as looking down on them, don't see us as thinking less of them because they're not in manhattan. i think you've gotta have that. i think that's not only good for the people who you interview, it's also good for your audience. - are you doing ok on that front? - i think we are. let me be frank about one thing. i think during the campaign, the entire media didn't quite understand the anger of voters that led to the election of donald trump. i think that was a little bit sobering for us. i think we didn't quite have-- by the way, neither did donald trump. - you're not the only people that think that. the trump organization probably didn't understand it. - that's right, but my mission is to understand that and figure out a way to fix it. i think we didn't quite have a handle on it, and that's why we were surprised. the reason you don't want to be a coastal elite paper that only talks to people in the coastal

" report that claimed he asked "new york times" to pledge hoilt loyalty to him. >> people suggest the question that apparently the "new york times" is selling you asked

>> your reaction to the president's words as reported bring the "new york times" today? >> listen, there are a couple of things, he had several words that were reported by the "new york times" today, i think it was the nut thing with comey, and i got to say, this is a patriot, he has served his country very well, i don't agree with that assessment. but of course there is context with text, and we don't know the context of the meeting itself and what he was trying to do. we don't know that of course, but i don't agree with that assessment, obviously, i think there has been such a microscope of course, some of it legitimate, you have an nyt reporter on here earlier that said that comey was seeking more resources in the investigation when the deputy attorney general said absolutely not, that did not happen at all to his knowledge and he was even in the story. so there's this -- we have a special prosecutor who's been appointed, let the facts lay where they may and let's see what happened. >> you talk it about president trump's fitness for office. the fbi director says that t

you can also say that the new york times doesn't like donald trump survey york times doesn't like donaldare york times doesn't like donald trump survey are trying to give him some further discomfort but i think it's just good old—fashioned journalism, they've got a pictured and they wanted to be first. let us look at the financial times. staying with president trumper, he is on his first foreign trip, he has been everywhere, but that is not the case. many significant countries today. the pope had a realtwinkle in his eye yesterday when he handed across his thoughts to donald trump oi'i across his thoughts to donald trump on what to do about climate change. 186 pages. i'm not sure donald trump will get past the executive summary. we will read that. what are you going to say to him?|j we will read that. what are you going to say to him? i am dying to see the pictures of donald trump regional 186 pages. the key influences on trumper, ivanka, his daughter and her partner jared kushner. they are saying, do not pull out of the paris accord. this will be further trump triangulate oi'i. will be

transcript of the meeting, according to a "times" reporter here, the document was read to "the new york timeserican official. so someone sharing the secrecy of this meeting with "the new york times." really an astonishing leak. >> michael, let me add another part of this. they are saying a third government official briefed on this meeting with the president and the russians, saying mr. trump was using a negotiating tactic when he told mr. lavrov about the, quote/unquote, pressure he was under. michael, what do you think? >> well, i think that when you look at the definition of obstruction of justice, whoever endeavors to impede the administration of justice, then you look at the specific mental state of the person who speaks the threatening language. this, as paul said, takes you another step closer to being able to prove that as a prosecutor. you have now not only the firing of the director, not only the asking for him to stand down on the investigation of flynn, not only the handshake in the oval office and the hug but now you have him relaying specifically what he intended in his eliminati

i think the burden is on "the new york times." if they are reporting it and they've got somebody that's got the document, they need to get the document and get it released." the senator shared more than he's ever shared, something as materialist that probably would have been something he would have shared. burr said he met with director comey the day before was fired. let's bring the panel. stephen hayes, a.b. stoddard, charles hurt, opinion editor for "the washington times," and steve hilton, former advisor to british prime minister david cameron. charlie, your thoughts. >> well, i am particularly struck by the stark differences between what "the new york times" is reporting and what the white house has said. it's a flat denial. i do think, as you pointed out, it's very important to remember we are talking about parts of a letter that were read over the phone to a reporter. we don't know the full, with the full letter is. it is not in that context but we don't know what jim comey walked away from that conversation thinking, and i

i think the burden is on "the new york times." if they are reporting it and they've got somebody that's got the document, they need to get the document and get it released." the senator shared more than he's ever shared, something as materialist that probably would have been something he would have shared. burr said he met with director comey the day before was fired. let's bring the panel. stephen hayes, a.b. stoddard, charles hurt, opinion editor for "the washington times," and steve hilton, former advisor to british prime minister david cameron. charlie, your thoughts. >> well, i am particularly struck by the stark differences between what "the new york times" is reporting and what the white house has said. it's a flat denial. i do think, as you pointed out, it's very important to remember we are talking about parts of a letter that were read over the phone to a reporter. we don't know the full, with the full letter is. it is not in that context but we don't know what jim comey walked away from that conversation thinking, and i

the "new york times" and the "washington post." i think one brings a lot more specificity. the "new york times" and the reporting of what donald trump said in the meeting the other day. the key element. in story is that the white house isn't disputing it. so then it becomes a question of the white house, trump defenders coming one an interpretation of this. they will try to offer as more benign than what i think it sounds like the a lot of people. here you have a very specific account of words that were said to the russians and you don't have the white house saying no, that didn't happen. >> not denying . >> t "washington post," one, i put it more in the category of potentially explosive. potentially blockbuster. but the material, when they say person of interest. just because that is such a broad term. such a nonspecific material. that could be something devastating to the white house. that could be something that falls more in the benign end. so i look at the "new york times" one. that's immediately more difficult for the white house. >> we're getting more and more every d

reports if there was collusion between trump administration and russians, the washington post and "new york timesady. david: judy is it note -- isn't it time to release this information, i understand a lot is sensitive. both democrats and republicans, seems there a growing consensus to cut through the selective leaking and bring the information out so that american people can decide for themselves? >> i think to extend that we could do that without damaging national security or without endangering sources, it should be done. david: do you think it can be done? >> every leak damaged national security, every leak does, the leaks are more damages than what is being alleged. david: i agree, fred? is there a way to come out with this information without hurting the sources? >> my solution is we need a major house cleans of this government. i mean cia, fbi, the defense department, and there is no just obama hold overs are there are people promoted i in sensitive policy jobs who are working against the president, we need new blood to do the business of american people not spending the day undermining th

then he came to the "new york times" editorial board at the end of the campaign. > he shook my hands and he called "new york times" a national jewel. so it's just a little disorienting sometimes. >> seth: yeah. >> to kind of place him in his kind of ping pong journey between loving the press and unloving the press. >> seth: the fact that that ping pong game is being played with everything, not just the press. there's pong balls everywhere. [ light laughter ] when you saw the tweet that he asked you to resign, did you have a momet of -- was it terror or was it joy? because -- >> it wasn't joy. >> seth: it wasn't joy. see i think, when you think of it, the class you were in when he attacks you, you are now in meryl streep territory. [ laughter ] [ cheers and applause ] and i think you should enjoy it because i think you've earned it. >> oh, thank you seth. >> seth: and keep up the good work. i really am so glad i found your podcast. >> thank you. [ cheers and applause ] >> seth: michael barbaro everybody, new episodes of "the daily" are available weekday mornings. we

let's dig deeper with our specialist and analyst, matthew rosenburg of the new york times is with us.ou help break that story for the new york times. how significant is this book shell? >> i think another piece of evidence that shows donald trump when he fired jim comey wanted to shut down the russia investigation. and on top of that, this isn't a one on one conversation that we have one side of. there was a third party in the room taking notes. that's how we know. it was circulated and dozens of people in the executive branch of the government, obviously we found out about it. and it really shows that also beyond that, this incredible chumminess with the russians. i will talk about the fb i director, calling him crazy. just fired the day before to someone who is not the representative of a friendly country. put it that way. and you know i think for a lot of people in the fbi, intelligence community, they were furious about the comey firing. this won't make them feel any better about it. >> not necessarily an audio transcript of the conversation but a diplomat or some other person tak

this story first reported by "new york times". the president told comey that flynn did nothing wrong, we're told despite the fact that he was fired for lying to the vice president about his conversations with russian ambassador. sources say this encounter happened after a briefing involving vice president mike pence and attorney general jeff sessions who the president asked to leave the room, according to sources, so that he could speak privately with comey. comey was reportedly so concerned by the president's comments that he documented the exchange in just one of a number of memos he wrote out of concern. the president was trying to stop the investigation. the white house for its part has flatly denied these allegations saying the president never asked mr. comey or anyone else to end the investigation. this is not a truthful or accurate portrayal of the conversation between the president and mr. comey. now, we do know a lot of background. in a tweet last week the president threatened comey or at least warned him about potential

let's talk about this report that is raking in the new york times, these images, photographs that the newspaper is publishing on its website, here is the shredded backpack carried by the attacker. it's the blue back back, on the floor of the arena. it is very torn up. a couple of other pictures, some of shrapnel, and one that we can show you of the detonator. .. of shrapnel, and one that we can show you of the detonator... no, we don't have that picture. i'm filling you in as we are getting these pictures, but we have a picture of shrapnel and a detonator with a measuring tape next them. i think there's going to be a lot of questions as to how the new york times got access to these pictures, whether they were allowed explicit permission to publish them but these are the first bit of evidence we've actually seen. there will be probably a lot of anger about this in government circles because theresa may says she has been on the phone to her colleagues to discuss what was being leaked from the investigation, but regarding the parts of the bomb, it's difficult to say. the frenzy police ar

very interesting that edward snowden made sure his information did not get to "the new york times" because of the poor way they handled the iraq war who distorted the news they received. and the feeling that's couldn't trust "the new york times" to handle this material in a sensitive way. >> two quick questions. i know they're all flawed but which news outlet do you think is most credible in terms of reporting on this kind of intelligence information and what do you see is underlying political motivation office wikileaks? it's unclear me based on what they expose and when. >> in terms of reliability, only really three newspapers in the country, which is a sad reality that are reeling cover thing issues, "the new york times," in the "washington post" and "the wall street journal." greg miller of the "washington post" is very good. james rosen is outstanning and stood down the obama administration which was trying to put him into jail, which is an incredible violation of freedom of the press. charlie savage from "the new york times," is excellent. i also rely havely on the new york review of

time to learn more. go long. >>> our breaking news. new yorkdent trump told russian diplomats in the oval office that fired fbi director james comey was quote crazy, a real nut jub that firing comey relieved great pressure on him. meantime we are learning more about comey's attempts to get a void getting too close to president trump. brian, what are you finding out? >> wolf, we are getting new accounts from james comey's side. according to a friend of comey's, it early days, comey grew more and more uncomfortable with how the president was interacting with him. this is now documented in a report from the white house. the ousted fbi director and the man who fired him. it started a friend of james comey, says, when the fbi director arrived in the blue room of the white house on january 22. comey was hoping president trump wouldn't notice him and stood as far from the president as possible. comey's's friend says the 6'8" director wearing a blue suit tried to blend in with the blue curtains but the president singled him out. >> he's become more fam

"i want you to know that the "new york times" story is bs." the biggest way this was messed up, what happened back there in mid-february, the biggest screw-up of all of this was that the "new york times" story wasn't bs at all. "the times" published this report on february 14th. later that night, cnn reported their own version of the story. trump aides were in constant touch with senior russian officials during the campaign. then the "washington post" got the story, citing multiple contacts between members of trump's team and russians with links to the kremlin during the campaign and afterward according to officials who have seen those reports. by march it is multiply sourced, american allies including brits and dutch have provided information between european cities between russian officials and vladamir putin and associates of donald trump. further confirmation there after, british intelligence passed trump associates' communications with russians on to u.s. counter parts. further confirmation. until summer 2016 a number of western agencies s

caller: i'm calling to say about "the new york times" bragging about obama's book. if you listen closely, you'll find out that bill years wrote that book and he even admitted it. that is a crock. another thing -- we had harry truman. he went back home broke. he never went around doing speeches. he said i would not accept money for being a president. so there's a difference. host: i can give you some history on that as well. from cal thomas, "when he left office in 1953, harry truman and his wife went to independence, missouri, where they lived in a house they previously shared with her mother. he refused to serve on corporate board's and rejected other financial opportunities that might have been his because he said he did not want to diminish the integrity of the presidency. richard nixon departed from that standard, charging for $1 million for an interview with frost. to paraphrase the title of a book by joe mcginnis had begun." don is in memphis, tennessee. good morning. caller: good morning. i would just like to say one thing. for hundred thousand dollars for $4

you listen to all of this, you read "the new york times," what you make of this? >> let me read you an excerpt. "neither nbc news nor the times has seen the actual memo." come on. this is news? martha, think about what is going on. i heard john roberts report. there's a lot of questions that have to be answered clearly. but think about what the mainstream media's projected here. i won't almost say this is modernized information. we have to understand that facts are facts and everything should be laid out, regarding actual memos. think about it, why didn't that comey associate just give a copy of that memo to the reporter? i think we would all be a lot more comfortable about knowing what should come next. this is something to me that the standards of reporting keep getting lowered and lowered with these anonymous sources. part two of this, as you mentioned in the introduction, the leaks. we have an issue right now, yesterday, the information which was provided to the russians was probably sensitive, but now, all of a sudden, you guys are talking about the fact that

in our next hour we want to get your thoughts on reporting by the new york times on a memo written byames comey when he was still fbi director, in which president trump suggested to him to seize the investigation into michael flynn over his ties with russia. it has sparked considerable reaction on capitol hill, on the heels of classified information shared with russian officials from the oval office. your thoughts on this memo, we will reduce some of the contents therein. if you want to make your thoughts known, (202) 748-8000 for democrats. (202) 748-8001 four republicans. .n independents, (202) 748-8002 and onter you can post our facebook page. this is the front page story that you will find in the new york times online, michael schmidt writing "trump appealed to comey to halt inquiry into asked" going on to say he the fbi director to shut down the investigation into michael flynn. according to the memo, mr. comey wrote shortly after the meeting, goes on to document information that the president has tried to direct the influence the justice department and fbi investigation between

susan, new york times first reported this. they have a quote from the memo that comey wrote a memo that president asking comey, quote, i hope you can let this go. do you believe that if this is all rak all ra accurate and that it is obstruction of justice and impeachable? >> first there has to be an investigation and the individual needs to know about it. those two features trump clearly knows there is an investigation and clearly it existed. the third part becomes difficult. that's that you have to prove there is an improper purpose, corrupt state of mind. now notably it doesn't matter if he had proper purpose as well. if any part of trump's intention here was in order to interfere with this investigation, that's going to qualify as obstruction. >> from your experience as a lawyer in the government, can an fbi director's contemporaneous notes, assuming all this memoranda by comey, can they hold up in court as credible evidence if there's a he said/he said argument that the president denying what comey is saying? >> this is ov

" book review anddyort overseas books at "the news york times" and choose a host "newo york times" and host of valaika podcast inside "the news york times" book review pages the author of the book parenting incorporated, to start a namemae marriage and the future of matrimony which was named one of the best books of the year by the "washington post." she has appeared on uber and npr.publis she has also testified about her work and presented her research to issue currently lives in new york printer new book 'my lifer with bob" is a singer account of the readers life. it's a journal that reports every book she has ever read from anna karenina to catch-22. her fantasy is mistakes and missteps of dreams and ideas both half-baked and wholeheartei her life in turn influences the book she chooses whether for solace escape information or sheer entertainment. anders solomon writes in this hilarious wise account of a life led half in the world and have them books pamela paul writes with exuberance about the bumpy road of maturity. her voice tender moral madcap nostalgic generous for captiva

trump said, according to the document which was read to "the new york times" by an american official. "i faced great pressure because of russia. that's taken off,." mr. trump added "i'm not under investigation." once again not to be outdone by "the new york times," the "washington post" reported late today, quote, the law enforcement investigation into possible coordination between russia and the trump campaign has identified a current white house official as a significant person of interest showing that the probe is reaching into the highest levels of government, according to familiar with the matter. the senior white house adviser under scrutiny by investigators is someone close to the president, according to these people, who would not further identify the official. "the washington post" also reports today that, quote, the revelation comes as the investigation appears to be entering a more overtly active phase with investigators shifting from work that has remained largely hidden from the public to conducting interviews and using a grand jury to issue subpoenas. the intensity of th

the "the new york times" first reporting and nbc now confirming president trump asked former fbi director in february to end his investigation into former national security advisor general michael flynn. now, nbc news confirming it was at a white house dinner donald trump asked comey to end it. comey then wrote a memo saying the president told him, quote, i hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, letting this guy go, he's a good guy. nbc news saying in part the president has

was that in "the new york times," "washington post" -- oh, it was in. ran one of those news organizations at the time. nope, that's not true. "the new york times" did not run 600 days -- >> gallup had an analysis that said the only thing that the voters heard was they hurt hillary clinton's name was emai email. the word email was larger than every single other word in the word cloud through the email story dominated coverage from the very beginning. she made a mistake. >> tucker: on the right it did, but not in "the new york times," not in "the washington post." "the new york times" wrote pieces like this. three days before the election, "hillary clinton at a campaign rally. "there is an unfamiliar sense of abandonment and joy. the rain grows heavier, her wet clothes turn as shade darker, she takes in the seed around her and last before she finishes her sentence." i'm feeling creepy about it. meanwhile, same day, i won't go on, but the headline in the "times" was in line -- trump is a villain, hillary is a hero. that's the story line in every media organ

i mean, there are -- it's interesting with "the new york times," with the, you know, sean spicer's reaction"the new york times," i think they decided -- white house decides they're going -- >> lean in. ic i want to ask you a question, mike. one of the defenses i'm hearing, there's an uptick in the ignorance defense. i get it on foreign policy, on the russian collusion. the case goes like this. he can't even collude with his own press office. what are the odds he was confident enough to collude with putin? >> that's a tough defense. that's a tough defense to take. i actually thinkpolitically m l. they need to hold the trump coalition -- >> you know saying it was all streategic was never the case. >> they need to give their supporters something to hold on to, give their supporters a villain, a foe, that's comey, give them something to say, something to repeat, to hold republicans in congress back. politically that's all they're trying to do right now is survive. once republicans start piling on, they could be in major trouble. what they put out today, legally there's a bigger issue. i think t

turn to new york democrat chuck schumer. >> in a week full of revelation after revelation on a day when we thought things could not get any worse, they have. by the report in "the new york times" that allege that the president tried to shut down an active fbi investigation into a close political associate. removedre only one day from stunning allegations that the president may have doubled -- the oldest classified information to a known adversary. concerns about our national law, the the rule of independence of our nation's highest law enforcement agencies are mounting. tested iny is being unprecedented ways. colleagues inf my the senate, history is watching. amy: "the new york times" reports that the president made the extraordinary request to james comey during an oval office meeting on february 14, one day after trump fired flynn for line publicly and privately about its contacts with russian officials. trump reportedly asked vice president mike pence and attorney general jeff sessions to leave the room before asking comey to drop the investigation mike flynn. after the meeting, comey wrote a memo quoting the president saying -- "i hope you can see your way clear to lettin

in other news this morning, front page of the "new york times," on the russian investigation. ssians talked of ways to sway trump advisors. this reporting by matthew rosenberg, adam goldman, and matt puzzo in the "new york times," american spies collected information last summer revealing that senior russian intelligence and political officials were discussing how to exert influence over donald trump through his advisors, according to three current and former american officials familiar with the intelligence -- host: that in today's "new york times." the paper also has this story this morning, house panel will subpoena flynn, according to the top democrat. that is adam schiff of california, the top democrat on the house intelligence committee. he said that they will be issuing subpoenas to michael flynn. he said he hoped the committee would issue the subpoenas this week before congress leaves for a one-week recess. it was unclear whether their subpoenas would seek documents or mr. flynn's testimony or both. remember, mr. flynn denied his testimony and denied subpoena requests f

the new york times is reporting that president trump asked mr comey to drop the bureau's investigationalleged ties between russia and michael flynn, the national security advisor at the time. that's been denied by the white house, but there's no doubt just how serious this allegation is. one senior democrat said other senators were shaken and called for a special prosecutor to be appointed. well, this stunning and breathtaking revelation that the president is accused of reaching out directly to the head of the fbi did stop an investigation of general flynn under the circumstances raises serious questions about obstruction of justice. it is a fundamental question here. is anybody, including the president of the united states, above the law? can everybody be held accountable under the rule of law? and this revelation that has been alleged has raised that question. and the white house has issued this statement in response to the reports. while the president has repeatedly expressed his view that general flynn is a decent man who served and protected our country the president has never ask

the president, according to reports in "the washington post" and "new york times," may have divulged classified information to a known adversary, and actually tried to quash an investigation of a close political ally. from the president's own words, we already know that the russia investigation was on his mind when he fired mr. comey. we now know that it may not have been the first time that the president has taken an action to impede an active investigation of his campaign or associates, if the reports in "the new york times" are true. concerns about our national security, the rule of law, the independence of our nation's highest law enforcement agencies are mounting in this land. the stated explanation for these explanations from the white house have been porous, shifting and all too often contradictory. the country is being tested in unprecedented ways. what are now required are facts and impartial investigations into these very serious matters. first, the white house should make available to the intelligence committees the transcripts and any related summaries of the oval office

and richard burr saying that the burden falls on the "new york times." "new york times" is the only reason we even know that james comey wrote this memo. it was later corroborated by other outlets. they are the only reason we have heard of this. it's important to find out what really happened and what what is said during that because it's a big deal if the president of the united states asked the fbi director to shut down an investigation into someone he put in his white house and then fired him months later. brian: right. fired him months later but it wasn't right away. and that guy never secretary of defense anything and his deputy never referred to katie, going to be leaving in 48 hours going to saudi arabia and dropping by the vatican. what happens to this story? >> well, based on what i have learned from our colleague dana perino, when presidents go overseas it doesn't necessarily mean that things domestically calm down. in fact, the opposite tends to happen. so, just because the president will be overseas trying to change the narrative, meeting with

i don't trust "the new york times." i don't trust trump. i am skeptical of everyone. ay it makes me a pessimist. the investigation is continuing. >> eric: what about "the new york times"? they have to stand on their reporting and sources. >> they do. we have seen this with "the post," the number two man at the department of justice threatened to resign. that very first, the deputy attorney general, said he didn't offer to resign. there's interesting reporting. i love jim comey. he has an intimate event with the president and the president brings it up in an interview, and what does jim comey do? it's why he's not going to be the fbi director anymore. he's a political animal. he had to immediately start leaking about his end of the story paid we want something better than that in the fbi director. we don't want someone who is trying to weasel his way into every story part he always wants to be the eliot ness, and really he is the dirty leaker. >> the president issued a statement. he was very clear and precise. some of the stuff that's off the cuff. this is not off-the-c

by the way. >> the destroy-trump media is going to town with a "washington post" story, "the new york times" story, will discuss the hypocrisy. we'll get reactions and later tonight dr. sebastian corker is here on this busy, busy, nonstop breaking news against the propaganda media night. >> welcome back. we continue with more of a dnc staffer rich and the media's breakdown. joining us now is the chief counsel for the american center for law and justice and former deputy campaign manager for trump, he is also a contributor. good to see you both. let's start with the seth rich issue. and the timeline here. say what you will about julian assange, but nobody has proven him wrong. he's been defiant. he defended the sky. and then you look at the timeline you look at earlier reports. is it possible that this whole russian narrative really came from a dnc staffer and that the media has been wrong for almost a year? >> the media has not been right yet, so the presumption should be that the media is wrong with where they are laying the blame on the leaks that are going on now. i think the fact is tha

in the new york times about u.s.-saudi arrays -- relations and the president son-in-law -- president trump son-in-law jared kushner welcome the high-level delegation of saturday's to a gilded reception room next door to the white house and delivered a pep talk, let's get this done today. he was referring to a $100 billion plus deal via mis-direction hope to seal it saudi arabia in time to announce it-- deal in a hopes to seal with saudi arabia in time to announce it. host: new york times goes on to say they are expected to frame the deal as a symbol of american minute commitment to security in the persian gulf. thatr officials point out president obama, whose arms billion, had $115 already approved several weapons in the package. check, -- chuck, independent. caller: this call is concerning trump's alleged interference in the investigation of russia. host: ok. caller: i think the democrats are trying to get comey in jail. host: say that again. caller: i heard him testified there was no, under oath, that buddy trying

bush, "the new york times" would be out there pouring gasoline on themselves and setting themselves one in protest. the aclu would be riding. at the same time, some of my friends on the right would be saying this is an unfortunate overreach but it's an important program. it's necessary to keep us safe. instead, there is more outrage on the right fender would be. i think giving the middle finger to the fisa court is outrageous. if you want to reauthorize a 702 program, you better hope -- hold the people accountable. >> bret: mara, this tracks with the same, they investigation about unmasking and the politics surrounding this fbi investigation. it is different in its scope. >> we have a systemic problem with privacy and leaks and information that shouldn't be shared. congress is going to have to do something about it. donald trump can track down the leakers and try to prosecute them but congress is going to have to do something because this has been going on for a long time. even after congress wanted it stopped, we thought this program was finished. >> the issue of susan rice that there

according to a document obtained by the "new york times" or read to the "new york times" by an officiali face pressure because of russia is taking off, adding, i'm not under investigation. both of those stories will attract a lot of attention here in washington, d.c. and here in the white house as soon as i get off the air. i'll get a comment from them on both stories. separately, another development this afternoon as we can confirm, that the white house is confirming that the nominee for deputy treasury secretary is removing himself from that position. that was something that we've been waiting for, that nominee no longer going to take the position citing family concerns. it's unclear where the white house turns at this point for a number of two over at the treasury department. all of this happening just after the president has already left the white house for an enormous road trip around the world, going to saudi arabia, landing in several hours. this is a multi-stop trip. a lot of high stakes diplomacy. there you see the president and first lady shaking hands with the vice president

the "the new york times" first reporting and nbc now confirming president trump asked former fbi director james comey in february to end his investigation into former national security advisor general michael flynn. now, nbc news confirming it was at a white house dinner donald trump asked comey to end it. comey then wrote a memo saying the president told him, quote, i hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, letting this guy go, he's a good guy. nbc news saying in part the president has never asked anyone to end any investigation including any investigation involving general flynn. ken delaney is the nbc news intelligence and national security reporter. he joins us. ken, what can you tell me? >> reporter: greta, just want to clear something up because i was confused about this at first. this is such a fast moving story. it wasn't after the dinner that comey wrote the memo. it was after an oval office meeting, a day after flynn resigned about two weeks after the dinner. but the upshot is the same and we're speaking to -- we have multiple former law enforcement officials confirm

the story had not been covered on "the washington post," "new york times," or in the of the three nightly news broadcasts. >> bret: amazing. former president obama is defending his actions or inactions in syria. he told an audience in germany that not bombing syria after president bowsher al-assad crossed the redline took political courage. >> i look at a place like syria where despite our best efforts, and this is something angela and i worked on a lot. you still have a vicious war taking place, you still have millions of people displaced, hundreds of thousands killed, and as president i did not always have the tools that i wanted to affect those changes but at least we tried. >> bret: a few days ago when mr. obama made a similar statement about not bombing syria, lindsey graham replied "what president obama calls political courage most everyone else calls weakness and poor judgment." the pentagon says more than 100 civilians were killed after the u.s. dropped a bomb on a building in iraq in march. the device triggered secondary explosions. it was likely the largest single incident of ci