nunes once again is doing the bidding of the white house? >> it is an interesting story, but it may be the secondary story. the core question here is what the russians did and whether there was any collusion and so forth. the unmasking was part of the effort by the obama administration to understand the intelligence reports we're seeing. i can understand their confusion because even to this day, long after they left office, four months after they left office, we're still trying to understand what the nature of the relationship, if any, was between the trump transition team, the trump campaign before that and the russians. you can't get at that information if, in looking at the intelligence reports, the identities of those in the united states were fully masked, and that's why susan rice and others asked to unmask them. it is not an unusual procedure. it has happened across republican and democratic administrations. the way the president phrased his tweet, though, he walked back to looking at the question of surveillance of him. i think we pr

the devin nunes track includes devin nunes and he's making himself heard loudly and clearly. phil mattingly, thank you. rick santorum is a former republican senator from pennsylvania and cnn political commentator. brian fallon's here, cnn political commentator. and page pate, legal attorney and analyst. i want to talk about executive privilege. "the new york times" questioned whether james comey will be allowed to testify, saying the president could try to invoke executive privilege here. would that apply, especially since the president seems to have no problem talking about the conversations he may have had with james comey? >> john, i think that's an important point. yes, the white house could try to assert executive privilege to prevent jim comey from discussing any sort of meeting he had with the president, but every time a white house has tried to raise executive privilege and a court reviewed it, the court looks for two things. number one, is executive privilege being raised for the public's interest or to try to protect the president? and number two, is executive privi

and that he believes that nunes is overstepping. >> he basically said if nunes was going to recuse himself he should not be involved at all in this investigation. also if the attorney general jeff sessions recused himself from the russia probe, why was he writing recommendations that the man leading that this line of questioning in terms of obama's behavior, in terms of suzsan rice. at one point he accused susan rice of a crime in unmasking people. and alleged that obama wire tapped donald trump which of course none of this has been proven to be true. there's no evidence that any of those things happened. but on this line of argument, that the real story is the unmasking, is the -- is surveillance as well, you have heard other republicans pick up on this. it's almost like their talking point to get away from this other issue of russia, of possible collusion between people in trump's circle and russians. so i think this is something we'll continue to hear. it's not making the investigation itself go away. it's not making, you know, the big story, the surveillance, even though that's somethi

they are saying that claim nunes didn't recluse himself. merely that he was stepping aside.eaker paul ryan is saying that chairman nunes is still the leader of the committee. he still has work to do and saying this doesn't per pain to the russian investigation. but the ranking member adam shift is saying it's what they want to play into his hands. >> jessica schneider, thanks. >>> jackie spear is a member of the intelligence committee. i sfoek her earlier. >> when chairman nunes said that he was stepping aside, did v you did believe that he would have no involvement with the russian envegs gags? >> i think that is what everybody believed. that is what rescusal means. you are no longer associated with anything in the investigation. >> did he have the thought? >> the rules of the house intelligence committee require that the chair or the chair incon just with a ranking member or a committee as a whole has to issue the subpoenas bay vote. this case, he acted arbitrarily and did not consult with the ranking member, adam schift. and it was all for three yeatri. there is no a relu

sources say those subpoenas came from committee chairman devin nunes, not from the committee's russia investigation, and they were issued without the consent of democrats on the panel. >> the move raises questions about nunes and his role in the russia probe. he had said he was stepping aside temporarily from that investigation, though you know, he never officially recused himself. we also learned recently that nunes was still reviewing intel on the russia investigation. >>> later today, president trump expected to announce the united states is pulling out of the paris climate accord. white house officials caution nothing is final until the president speaks this afternoon. it's not clear how a potential withdrawal would work, but pulling out of the climate agreement would be a major blow to the legacy of president obama and a significant break from international partners in the fight against global warming. so, how's this playing out with america's allies? let's go live to paris and bring in cnn's melissa bell. good morning to you, melissa. great to have you. it is strange optics, to

now, nunes supposedly stepped totally aside from all things russia investigations. on capitol hill with more. so if he stepped aside from all things russia, how is he justifying issuing these subpoenas? >> well, he is simply saying, as he has said before, this is a temporary thing that he temporarily stepped aside. that he did not officially recuse himself. that is not something that's going very well over with democrats. but as you had mentioned before, what we are seeing here is a committee that cannot even agree on what they are investigating. those four subpoenas on one side signed off by democrats and republicans that are focussing on russia's meddling in the 2016 election. on the other side you have those three subpoenas unilaterally issued by nunes himself focussing on obama administration officials. those from the fbi, the cia, the nsa, people like susan rice, as well as john brennan. that focussing on leaks and the unmasking of these officials. so you see where this is going here. not even an agreement among the committee in terms of what they are really ta

do you trust nunes? that's part one. the second part is, do you know if the republicans are disturbed that he is acting unilaterally? >> so, to answer the question do i trust him, it's really not, you know, an interest of mine to trust or untrust him. >> he's the chairman. he is the chairman of the committee you're sitting on and he's obviously got some power. he can issue subpoenas. >> well, he does have the power. he's supposed to do it in conjunction with the ranking member. he did not do so in issuing the subpoenas to the various intelligence agencies. again, there is no need to do it. so, it was again, just theatrics on his part. >> what do the republicans say? what are the republicans saying about him, do you know? >> i don't know, but i would venture to say they were disturbed by it. and in the end, i think what he's trying to do is sabotage this investigation on the house side. and in so doing, kind of sideline it. and that would be devastating, i think, in terms of our responsibilities to do an investigation. >>

reneweduse: there is turmoil about devin nunes where democrats were to learn this week that devin nuneset on the fresno radio station he never did recuse himself and that was misreported. temporarily aside and that caught many democrats by surprise. said i said it would be temporary. david: let me ask you about who democrats would like to hear from. we have not heard from a lot witnessed. is there a lateness -- is there a list they would like to hear from? billy house: they have already subpoenaed 2 key witnesses. the trumphael cohen, lawyer, and michael flan. by --oth have to return they both had to respond by september 5. on the top of the list is jared kushner and others like roger are to a lesser degree interested and a number of individuals involved. as part of that, definitely yes has gone rogue -- devin nunes has gone wrong on finding out which obama administration officials were involved in the unmasking. great to talk to you. somebody on the committee to give us insight. joins us nowey from capitol hill. i'm sure you caught a little bit of what to billy house was saying, good t

hear here is the question is chairman nunes cause ago distraction for your bipartisan effort with thatits by raising all the unmasking requests? >> well i think he is doing that for one reason. he is doing it on behalf of the president, again to create a distraction so that we aren't focused on the investigation into russian interference but into this bog bogus unmasking issue which has been put down by the then director comey and nsa director rogers. it's a nonissue. but it's one they are using as a deflection. >> the speaker by the way speaker paul ryan he supported chairman nunes in this motion. spokesman for the speaker put pout a statement. let's move on. what can you tell us about the other four subpoenas issued which the committee those four do relate directly to the russia probe and were supported by members of both parties, the republicans and democrats. >> so those subpoenas have gone out in part because when we requested information from those individuals any declined. and so subpoenas were then required in order to compel their testimony. >> and tell us about those four sub

. >> yesterday representative schiff said regarding chairman nunes speed is true just a little out of? >> yesterday representative schiff said regarding devin nunes and the subpoenas being issued in the russian probe, he said that you have spoken with paul ryan about this. can you tell us about your discussions and your concerns about devin nunes continued role in the probe? >> i probably won't share the entire conversation i had, conversations i've had with the speaker on the subject. let me just put it in this context. the intelligence committee is a small committee of the congress. the leader in speaker, the speaker and the leader, a point of those members. they are not subject to any approval by the rest of the -- it is our appointment. we deputize people to serve in inches of our national security, and to do so with integrity, patriotism and in the most apolitical way possible. the behavior of nunes, chairman, recuse, whatever that loosey-goosey is, is beneath the dignity of being a chairman of intelligence community which a special status. the chairman and the ranking member, de

, but nunes recused himself from the investigations for now. >> you're right. and the fact that devin nunes has subpoena power despite removing himself from the russian investigation, that has the concerns. he can in fact unilaterally issue subpoenas, and one senior aide tells us, those three subpoenas, that likely came from chairman nunes himself without any consultation with democrats. adam schiff, he talked about and said he wanted a committee vote on all subpoenas that were issued. but, anderson, in this case it looked like that didn't happen and chairman nunes issued these three unilaterally. >> what exactly are we expecting to hear? >> so the details, they're still being worked out. but sources, they do say that fbi director comey fired fbi director comey. he will once again go before the senate intelligence committee. and this time we're expecting he'll recount his run-ins with the president. if comey recounts that february 14th, meeting with the president, where the president allegedly asked comey to drop the investigation, sources tell us of course tha

nunes recused himself from the investigation for now? >> this has been stirring a lot of contention within the committee. the fact that devin nunes despite subpoena power, that's drawing concerns. chairman nunes can in fact still unilaterally issue subpoenas, one senior house intelligence aide tells us those three subpoenas likely came from chairman nunes himself this was discussed a few days ago. he talked about, and said he wanted a committee vote on all subpoenas that were issued. this this case it looks like it didn't happen and it looks like he entered these independently. >> what are we expecting to hear? >> the details are still being worked out, sources say that comey fired -- he will go before the senate intelligence committee. and this time we are expecting he will recount his run-ins with the president. the most intriguing details that could come if he recounts the meeting with the president. where he was asked to drop the investigation into michael flynn. comey wrote this all down, and we do know that comey has spoken with sp

but dhar mchairman nunes can't f in and half out. items mess upg t it's messing up the investigation. >> putting yourself in his shoes, what do you think he's trying to accomplish? >> i have no idea. this whole unmasking issue is not the main story. the main story is was there russia collusion, what did trump officials say to the russians and vice versa. that's what we quant wt we wan. >> and james comey will testify in front of the senate intel sxhitsi i committee this thursday. he spoke to rosh robert mueller. do you think because mueller spoke to comey about the skoechg the witness and witness tampering could be involved? >> i think that the testimony will be remarkable. americans will watch in real time as they see evidence of obstruction of justice by the president unfold. comey is wlid expeildly expecte that president trump pressured him to drop the michael flynn involve. >> so you don't have a problem with mueller giving him parameters about what he can discuss? >> i do not. i think that is preept. proept. >> and what is your

but it turns out, chairman nunes still has subpoena power. and that's actually stirring a lot of concern within the committee. chairman nunes can, in fact, unilaterally still issue subpoenas and one senior house intelligence aide tells us that the unmasking subpoenas, three of them, likely came from nunes himself, without any consultation with the democrats. and like i said, this has stirred up some controversy. ranking membership talked about it a few days ago, saying he wanted the full committee vote on all subpoenas, but it doesn't look like that happened. >> next week, we're expecting to see former director comey testifying before the senate intelligence committee. do we know what to expect and what day that will take place? >> reporter: sources are telling me comey will likely publicly recount his run-ins with the president. likely to happen next week, not sure on the date. but when he does get up there to testify, the most intriguing details may come if james comey recounts his february 14th meeting with the president, where the preside

the democrats claim that should constrain nunes' involvement. but nunes told me recently he is an active chairman. >> what i have done because i thought it was appropriate, as long as there were bogus charges against me, i was going to set at least the russian investigation aside 'cause i didn't want to become the face of this investigation. but everything else i'm still in charge of. >> including the unmasking inquiry? >> especially the unmasking. >> judicial watch asked a house ethics committee to examine adam schiff's public discussion of classified material. it's been several weeks. no word from the committee whether they will take that up. >> jenna: the naming of samantha power in these subpoenas is a new development. we really haven't heard her name regarding this story. tell us why it's significant. >> the former u.n. ambassador had not previously figured any unmasking controversy, but house investigators tell me that they are intensifying their focus on ambassador power who declined our request for comment. she seems to have been the sub

, from the president, that he was subject to surveillance by president obama, to comments by kevin nunes about potentially illegal unmasking. so this creates an atmosphere of distrust, what the intelligence community does, and you see, it seems to me people who know better i think on the right embracing those views to support the political position that the president has taken. that is the best i can say. down.'s break that you raise to issues is the messe useident alleging illegal of surveillance authorities and the illegal unmasking of people. traditionally we have relied on the executive branch not merely not to engage in illegal wiretapping with either however many spaces, however between wire and tapping. not merely enough to engage in it but to be the explainer of the legality of the intelligence communities behavior. and i think it does create a very difficult environment when the president is saying things that we would regard as people like me anyway, would regard as wildly irresponsible if, say, the aclu said then, which by the way the aclu wouldn't. and so i don't really under

why is nunes involved at all if he supposedly recused himself? >> that's an dependent questiex and one, frankly, democrats have been quietly talking about. i talked to one last week who said, you know, i'm not so sure that devin nunes really did recuse himself and really has separated himself from this investigation because he is still -- it looks like he's still taking responsibility for the subpoena power which in the house the chairman can do without a vote. and so that is certainly seems to be the case. and you remember, the whole reason why he got himself into so much hot water is because he had this sort of moment where he said he saw intelligence, that he was worried about, that it hurt somebody at the white house, so he went over to the white house to tell them about it and then he came out to talk to the press and it turned out that the information came to him from the white house to begin with and it was complicated and odd and weird and, you know, that and he got in trouble. and now he's actually being investigated by the ethics commit

devin nunes has said that the obama white house abused that or has intimated they have. this is from "the washington post" just shortly ago. the republican controlled house intelligence committee asked u.s. spy agencies late last year to reveal the names of u.s. individuals or organizations contained in classified intelligence on russia's meddling in the 2016 election, engaging in the same practice that president trump has accused the obama administration of abusing current and former officials said. what do you make of that? >> again, chris, the unmasking claims by the president or by chairman nunes have always been a distraction from the russia investigation. unmasking is a standard practice that intelligence officials take when they need to learn more about information they receive. sometimes it's done in the executive branch, and as you saw in "the washington post" story, sometimes it's done by house committee members that the chairman oversees. he actually has to sign off on those unmasking requests. >> individually? >> yes, he does. >> so he knows how much unmaskin

so, if you remember, devin nunes made a big deal out of this during one of the hearings, and he's very much interested in sort of part of the leak investigation into who was unmasking u.s. officials that may have been caught on intercepts, overseas intercepts, people who were maybe talking to russians or whose names was mentioned by russians. we've done some reporting where russians were talking about u.s. officials, russia to russia, not necessarily that u.s. officials were talking -- >> talking with them. >> but, so, he's sort of making a big deal out of it, because certainly he feels michael flynn's name was let out and that was illegal. look, john brennan, susan rice who was the national security adviser at the time, they have asked her to come testify. she has refused. samantha powers is interesting. i don't understand exactly what they're looking from her, but she would have been in on some of the intelligence, certainly. and interestingly, john brennan, who just recently testified -- >> right. >> he said that he doesn't remember ever asking for anything, you know, to unmask anyt

when did you first learn there was three more subpoenas that had been issued by the chair by devin nunes apparently on his own? >> there are two issues here, first mr. conway and agree tha en we ask people to cooperate and they don't, we will subpoena them and they were not willing to cooperate, so we agreed to the approval, and now the chair has to sign the subpoenas unless that authority is delegated to someone else and it should have been for mike conway. i think it is a violation of the recusal by the gentleman. i think it should have covered whether or not he participated at all in the firing of the person leading the fbi investigation. so i think in both cases, commitments to recuse themselves have not been fully honored. i hope that will change, but the second issue involvements three other subpoenas that went out without consultation. i only learned about this late the night before, and that is a problem. these were sent out unilaterally by the chairman, and i think they're part of the white house desire to shift attention away from the probe and on to the issue of unmasking, but

is devin nunes still in charge? sure he's not there in spirit. it's been reported he has gone over to receive briefings on this investigation. if that's true that would be a problem. it would only be appropriate if he has truly stepped aside, that he is fully out. not half out, not looking at the subpoenas. we need him to step outside this investigation. >> do you have any recourse? >> speak er ryan, if he wants te house intelligence committee to conduct an honest, credible investigation, he should fully pull chairman nunes out of this investigation. >> tapes, sean spicer said we could get an answer about tapes at the end of this week. friday is the deadline that your committee sent to see these tapes, to have them handed over. has there been an answer as to whether they exist? >> the president intimated that they did exist. at this point we have not received them. i hope if they are not, if our request, which is a voluntary request, is not complied with, the committee would agree by friday we should compel them by

what it didn't mention was the committee chairman, devin nunes, in april recused himself from leading the investigation, apparently on his own, without telling the democratic members of the committee, issued three other subpoenas, to the national security agency, the fbi and the cia. what they were asking for, according to sources we talked to, any information of requests for president obama's former national security advisor, susan rice and ambassador, samantha power and former cia director, john brennan, to unmask the names of trump campaign associates inadvertently picked up in foreign intelligence monitoring operations. he goes apparently -- devin nunes does this also he publicly recused himself from the investigation, nowhere in the committees official announcement of these three subpoenas are these three subpoenas mentioned. >> would they normally need to subpoena something like that? couldn't they get that through the normal oversight function? >> my understanding is they would normally contact these three agencies and request this or have discussions with them before ever issu

but i think it's going well. >> did you know chairman nunes could still issue subpoenas? because he stipped aside from the leading the russian investigation, but he still has subpoena power. do you think he should continue to have that power? >> well, this is sort of a technical glitch that gepd. and yes, we all knew about it because under the rules of the committee the chairman issues subpoenas. if you're really observing as a recuseal as he said he would do, you would delegate the authority for russia-related subpoenas to mike conaway, and you'd hope it'd be mike conaway or you could have the committee vote on subpoenas. that's not what haepd. and devon nunes' signed the subpoenas that were russia related, and again that doesn't look right to my eyes. and then you have these other subpoenas for the so-called russia investigations. >> congressman, thanks very much. appreciate it. >>> coming up a string of presidential tweets. be the you who doesn't cover your moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. be the you who shows up in that dress. who hugs a friend. who is done with t

i do think the nunes thing is bizarre. a step back but then you are issuing subpoenas without talking to your partisan counterpart, the democrats, i do think that's a little strange. >> juan: is this more explosive than the russians? >> greg: subpoena is such a funny word. and when i spell it, it makes me feel dirty. >> kimberly: that is your state of mind. >> greg: i hear the name devin nunes and i'm like, who is that? >> dana: maybe that's why he issued the subpoenas. >> greg: what's subpoenas for 10 years my tempur-pedic has adapted to my weight and shape. so i sleep deeply and wake up ready to perform. now through june 11th, save $600 when you buy select tempur-pedic adjustable mattress sets. find your exclusive retailer at tempurpedic.com. ♪ >> dana: time now for "one more thing." greg. >> greg: i hate these people. you know what this is? just show it. it is antidiarrheal medication. >> kimberly: oh, my god, what is wrong with you? >> greg: this is antidiarrheal medication. this is not the kind of packaging you put a

i do think the nunes thing is bizarre.e taking a step back but then you are issuing subpoenas without talking to your partisan counterpart, the democrats, i do think that's a little strange. >> juan: is this more explosive than the russians? >> greg: subpoena is such a funny word. and when i spell it, it makes me feel dirty. >> kimberly: that is your state of mind. >> greg: i hear the name devin nunes and i'm like, who is that? >> dana: maybe that's why he issued the subpoenas. >> greg: what's subpoenas? >> juan: let's get out of here, now! "one more thing" up next. and what adjustments you can make. she likes the bed soft. he's more hardcore. so your sleep goes from good to great to wow! only at a sleep number store. now it's our lowest price ever on our temperature balancing i8 bed, save $700. ends sunday. go to sleepnumber.com for a store near you. there's nothing traditional about my small business. i count on my dell small business advisor for tech advice. with one phone call, i get products that suit my needs, and i

i was not aware that chairman nunes was holding on to power over subpoenas.uted to the heavens and something ought to be done about it. that's not recusal. >> you just shouted it to the heavens. harold? >> can you imagine a more powerful responsibility on a committee that issues subpoenas and making a decision on subpoenas? >> this is like jeff sessions being a part of the conversation about firing james comey. either you're recused or you're not recused. you're not half pregnant. if you're recused, you get out of the room. >> on all matters. >> everyone knows, we were all warned. you know, if the democrats take control of congress, we won't have the power of subpoena anymore. or, you know, if the democrats take control -- that's the power and nunes is still holding it. he's not recused. republicans need to pass that along. >> the trump administration has us a lot of things we've never seen before. and one of them is apparently a definition of recused. >> what level will they stop cooperating? i'm recused, still signing the subpoenas but the democrats are con

democrat on that committee is calling out her chairman devin nunes. despite stepping aside side from all things russia related on his committee we learned yesterday that nunes acted aown issuing three subpoenas seeking information on possible unmasking of trump associates by obama administration officials. here is how intelligence committee member jackie spear of california reacted to that niece tonight. >> the problem, of course is that he has his hand in cookie jar. the cookie jar is trump's interest in wanting to deflect any interest in this hearing and in this investigation into whether or not the trump operation was engaged with the russians in interfering with our elections. i just feel that he has really, doing his level best to try and sabotage the investigation. it was really a blunder in my mind, and it once again shows that he is really a puppet of the president in trying to promote this alternative set of facts and this alternative narrative. >> all this russia news competing with the headline today that we have a firm date for james comey

i got a call myself during the devin nunes fiasco. but some have answered the call, which we know came from the white house. by and large, what's interesting is most of the president's appointees are refusing to do this. >> we're less than an hour away from really what is all of a sudden really big testimony. tomorrow was supposed to be the huge day, gloria. >> it's going to be big. >> and it will be big. and you have been reporting specifically the parameters where james comey feels comfortable talking. >> i think first of all comey, we have been told, is not going to come out and say the president obstructed justice, i believe the president obstructed justice. what comey is going to appear as, we've been told is a fact witness. he's going to go through his notes. we don't know whether he is going to have his notes right there or whether he certainly hasn't shared them with the committee, at least not so far. and he's going to say, this is what occurred in my conversations with the president. and he wants to lead the legal analysis a

trump campaign officials in nunes' okacase. like it's an attempt to move the story away from russia, move it away from president trump. there's a very good chance i'm told you will see similar types of inquiries tomorrow. the hearing is not supposed to be about russia. everybody that's involved that i have spoken to, they are aware while this is a very important intelligence program, a debate that is going to happen going forward, it's necessary going forward for the reauthorization, russia is where this hearing is going to be focused. everybody understands what's at stake when it comes to the hearings. everybody understands what's coming just 24 hours later. expect some fireworks, i'm told, when the senators take the stand tomorrow. >> phil mattingly, thanks very much. >>> tweet or not to tweet? will the president live tweet during director comey's testimony? how if guests book direct ater, choicehotels.com and stay twice they'll get a $50 gift card? summertime. badda book. badda boom. got you a shirt! ...i kept the receipt...

democratic aide tells nbc news the unmasking subpoenas were sent under authority of chairman devin nunes but who recused himself. this week the los angeles times reveals nunes told a republican fund-raising dinner in april that democrats want an russian investigation to justify hillary clinton's loss. take a listen. >> they want to continue the narrative that vladimir putin and donald trump are best friends. that's the only reason -- hillary clinton won't have lost on her own. so, they have tried to destroy this russian investigation. they aren't serious about it. one of the great -- aside from this russian investigation. >> in six months after her election loss, hillary clinton, is going into new detail about her defeat. speaking at the code conference in california, the former presidential candidate blamed a number of factors, including russia, james comey and dnc for contributing to her loss. >> the overriding issue that affected the election that i had any control over, because i had no control over the russians, too bad about that, but we'll talk about it, i hope, was the way that t

tonight, a top democrat is accusing devin nunes of violating his pledge to step aside from the investigation. >>> we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. >>> breaking news tonight. a major decision by president trump that may have huge global consequences. he just officially announced that the united states is withdrawing from the landmark paris climate agreement aimed at combatting global warming. the president says he's willing to negotiate a new deal that's more fair to americans but the backlash is already unfolding this hour. also breaking. james comey's bomb shell testimony about his confrontations with the president. that will happen one week from today. the senate intelligence committee setting a date for the fired fbi director to speak publicly. comey is expected to confirm that president trump urged him to end his investigation of former national security advisor michael flynn. >>> also tonight. renewed focus on attorney general jeff sessions russia contacts.

. >> did you know that chairman nunes could still issue subpoenas? he stepped aside from leading the russia investigation. it surprised people in the public. do you think he should have that power? >> well, this was a technical glitch that developed. we all knew about it. under the rules of the committee, the chairman issues subpoenas. if you are really observing a recusal as he said he would do, you would delegate the authority for russia related subpoenas to mike conaway. you would hope it would be him in conjunction with a democrat. you could have the committee vote on subpoenas. that's not what happened. in fact, devin nunes signed the subpoenas that were russia related. that doesn't look right. and issued other subpoenas that were about the so-called unmasking allegations he has been making for a while. i hope when we get back that we can come to a cleaner way of some combination of mike and adam doing the work to issue the subpoenas. >> congressman, thanks very much. >>> the string of presidential tre tweets that have ignited a controversy. you

it troubles me because from the president to devin nunes to democrats on my side presuming an outcome, we just don't know. this is serious enough that people should stay quiet until we have enough evidence, until these investigations have gotten to the point to form a conclusion. >> you hear from the rnc to the president on down, they say you've had almost a year. what's taking so long? why can't you say anything definitively yet? >> on the congressional side, we haven't had seven months. the congressional investigations have been under way since january or february, so that's a couple of months. comey suggested that the fbi investigation which started with -- remember, seven months refers to the russian hack which is where it started. long ago, well over a year ago the fbi had evidence there was a russian lack. this notion that this has been going on too long is just crazy. we're talking about the very core of our democracy here. i really wish people would take a step back and say let's do this right rather than doing it quickly. and whether you're the president of the united states,

. >> i want to also ask you about the intelligence share devin nunes who according to "the washington" himself asked for unmasking of the identities of officials from the intelligence community to be shared with your committee. given the fact that he has gone after obama officials for doing what arguably there's supposed to do under their -- under the mandate of their office to unmask people when they need to know the names, but was it appropriate for him to do the same as committee chair? >> i think the intelligence committee, again, i'm on the committee but the intelligence committee certainly we're going to investigate whether or not the obama administration acted improperly as far as surveilling people or getting into improper unmasking. i think the only way we can find out is to find out who was unmasked, who did it and how the process worked. otherwise they're no way we can find what happened if we didn't have access to the information. >> that's not just a white house distraction to try to take away from the larger issue of russian hacking and whether there was any collusion, s

de devin nunes says one of the biggest flaws is not throwing the intentions of vladimir putin.hat was coming from him over a year ago. so maybe there could be a better communication going on between both parties, we'd have a better shot at unity as a nation. >> and quickly you heard the breaking news we were covering out of afghanistan. sense y since you sit on the house foreign affairs committee, any thought you have on that. the >> well certainly it's important that the government of afghanistan can can do more to stabilize halilize their govern control more territory and defeat those terrorist threats that exist where you saw this attack take place. so this is a very real threat at we face wherever we engage in coalition operations, where in-fill administration can tafi. >> sir, thank you so much. >>> gist one wejust one week af terror attack this is london, a major shakeup. two of theresa may's top aides have resigned. the latest on that ahead. i can't wait for her to have that college experience that i had. the classes, the friends, the independence. and since we planned f

the batch includes some signed by chairman devin nunes, who promised to step aside from the russia investigation. >>> tures, attorney general sessions, capitol hill, and intelligence sources telling cnn investigators focusing on a trump campaign event. it came at washington's may flower hotel last april. then-senator sessions and russian ambassador sergei kislyak attended a small vip reception. among other things the fbi wants to know if there was an additional private meeting between these two. >> sources say if there was such a meeting it may have been just incidental. sessions has previously failed to disclose meetings with russian officials. he testified to congress he had not had communications with the russians but in fact he had met with kislyak twice during the campaign. that was the gaffe that forced sessions to recuse himself from the russia investigation. >> responding to the latest questions, the department of justice says sessions did not have any private or side conversations with any russian official at the may flower. doj adding, the department of justice appointed special counse

what i will tell you is mike, the republican who stepped in subsequent to devin nunes's recusal has been doing a terrific job and working hard under circumstance that is are challenging for everybody. >> you do not think devin nunes should take part? >> as much as that may be related to russia and it may be, no. i don't think he should. no. there's a whole other question around the activity of unmasking and how is that monitored. by the way, as an oversight committee, that's what we do. we make sure they are doing it correctly. in as much as this were purely abstract about unmasking, it's not inappropriate. if the recusal is going to mean anything, the chairman would not be in the room for that conversation. >> congressman, since the president isn't letting it go away today, i do want to ask you, when you saw president trump's tweets attacking a female journalist, what did you think? >> well, i mean, i thought probably four or five things in quick succession. we have huge problems around the world, skearry things. north korea, challenges domestically. the notion that the president wakes

this investigation into russia completely political so, of course, there are now accusations that nunes is trying to do the work of president trump. democrats on the house intelligence committee very i would say angry and frustrated behind the scenes that nunes issued those three subpoenas that. >> that is a story line to be watching when lawmakers get back into town next week. i want to bring in my panelist, guys, thank you for being on set on this pretty perfect day here in washington. let's talk about what kasie was just referencing, this unmasking issue. we saw the president tweet about it calling this the big story. we know that there is the continued drip, drip, drip of the russian investigation happening even as the white house wants to be talking about let's say the president keeping his campaign pledge with paris or health care, for example, as vice president pence is doing. how do these story lines coexist simultaneously? >> i think that with what's happening is going to test the white house's resolve to not talk about russia anymore. i mean you're going to have -- >> the whit

as you know, the chairman of the house intelligence committee, devin nunes, says he can retake controltigation at any time if he wants to. he said he temporarily stepped aside from the investigation. did not recuse himself. what do you make of that? >> well, he never has used the term recusal, and he said he wanted to focus on this ethics investigation, and not have any of the two things mix, and i think chairman conaway. mike conaway is doing a great, great job of continuing the investigation in a thorough, bipartisan manner and we need to continue to do that so that the american people trusts what comes out once this is all complete. >> from your perspective, it's best that congressman conaway and the ranking democrat, adam schiff, if they continue to lead the house intelligence committee investigation and let the chairman devin nunes stay aside? is that right? >> well, it's his prerogative and recusal is a very specific legal term. and he hasn't yuused that. nobody on the committee used that, but while he has stepped down from this investigation, i think chairman conaway has been do

by the way, nunes will probably become a witness of mueller because he's going to want to know what is guys were talking about in the dead of night at the white house? >> recusal with this group is just a suggestion. they never carry through. >> let's talk about that big developmt today ich is mueller, who could really be the m marshal dylan and clean up this thing. he's grabbing hold of the criminal investigation of paul manafort. he's going to bring in for questioning rod rosenstein, the guy who aintereppointed him, th deputy attorney general. he is widening this investigation. >> and think of the developments such as those that have happened since we last heard from james comey on capitol hill. i think a big line of questioning is going to be jared kushner. we did not know about jared kushner's involvement with the russians, the meetings, the last time comey testified. so i'd imagine we'd hear it. i also think maybe this might not be the big to-do that we expect because comey has come to an agreement with mueller about what he can and can't say, right? mueller is not going to let hi

i'm glad to be on. >> there are new complaints from democrats that nunes is interfering, even tryingprotect the president. what's your take? >> he recused himself, he ought to stay out of this. we ought to put a special investigation together. let's take it out of the hands of the democrats and republicans. let's have a special committee take a look at what happened in this last election and make recommendations on how we prevent this in the future. >> i think this is a fair question. how can you maintain the integrity of the investigation with all of these reports of frankly political infighting? >> right. you can't. look at what we did post-9/11. you took it out of the hands of congress, took it out of the hands of the politicians and put together a special investigation that did a thorough job, came back with recommendations to protect the country. we know a foreign government interfered with our elections. that shouldn't be a democratic or republican issue. let's prevent this from happening again. >> well, the house has issued subpoenas to michael cohen and general flynn. what in

>> another development, michael, we know the house intelligence committee chairman nunes by this pointerybody knows who he is. he's concerned about the unmasking of americans in classified reports. the "washington post" is reporting that his committee engaged in the same practice late last year, and it is something president trump is accusing the obama administration of abusing. it seems there is a whole lot of -- or at least some hypocrisy here. >> the whole unmasking issue is murky, or at least what is driving nunes and some of the other republicans on this. as we know from everybody we've spoken to, current and former administrations, republicans and democrats, it is not all that unusual for senior intelligence officials, foreign policy officials, to request unmasking, to understand what u.s. persons are having conversations with people that are under -- that are being monitored by the u.s. government. >> as it relates to the russia investigation, can't we call it for what it is, a deflection? maybe there is investigating that needs to be done for unmasking. when it comes to this, i

nuÑes calling for, quote, major changes to federal law on who can unmask u.s. tweeting today: seeing a lot of fake news from media elites and others who have no violations of americans' civil liberties via unmasking. joining us now is, to discuss this, is tara mahler, a former cia analyst and senior policy adviser for the counterextremism project. good to have you here. >> thank you for having me. arthel: is there evidence to support claims that east the obama administration or the trump -- that either the obama administration or the trump administration made politically-motivated unmasking requests? >> we haven't seen the specifics about what motivated the requests and the nature of the request itself and what the intelligence itself was that warranted the request. to me, there's no evidence that it was political yet. in fact, you have requests for unmasking not just made by the obama administration, but there have also been unmasking requests by the house intelligence committee. so we've seen these requests across time and space. this is nothing new. this is