let's ask you about jeff sessions and this testimony before the senate intel committee. a lot of questions, is it open, is it closed? what will be asked? why does it matter whether it's open or closed? what do you expect the big question? >> in his letter to lawmakers over the weekend, sessions explained that the reason he's doing it in front of the intel committee is because this is the committee that sort of read in on all of the issues related to russia, and it's the committee that can do this in a classified setting. should there be any information that he can't discuss publicly this would be the place to do it. he actually scrapped plans to go to the committees we thought he was going to on tuesday, the house and senate appropriations committee, to talk about his department's budget. instead he's going to send his deputy, rod rosenstein. it appears as though even though he is recused from everything having to do with the fbi investigation of the russia probe, that he does really want to confront what james comey had to say. because obviously there were a lot of quest

it is the intel committee to follow-up on the investigation. the more that is public, the more that is transparent, the better for democracy with a civics stress test. >> margaret, one more issue in the game. are there tapes? are there not tapes? will the white house release them? it seems the white house sees utility in stringing the american public along. >> there is an interest if sessions testifies in open the way jim comey did. the differences are obvious. one is sessions himself may be to some degree in the cross-hairs of the investigation. jim comey intimated that is the case. the attorney general recused himself from the russia investigation. it seems there will be limits on what he could say whether in open session or in closed session. to me, what i'm interested in is really where the boundaries are on the topics. >> i was struck that the intelligence committee set a precedent already by allowing dan coats and admiral rogers to answer questions because they did not feel it was appropriate. in the 1990s and the tobacco executives broug

it is totally different in tone and tenor than the senate intel committee. now remember we have the special counsel with mueller, which is an entirely sort of removed from the capitol hill antics investigation. so nunes now getting back in the game here and trying to play the president's part here on unmasking i think just adds more to the sideshow nature of what the house intel committee has been doing thus far. >> next topic, david, we all know that one of the big things that president trump loves is a good reveal as we call it in the tv business where there is a surprise and you work up the anticipation for the surprise. and, so, there is going to be a reveal today about whether or not he stays in the paris accord. what do you think is going to happen? >> yeah. in the rose garden. but no rose ceremony at this reveal, i don't think. yes, obviously our reporting indicates that he is posed to withdraw from the agreement. politically, i find this such a fascinating moment that donald trump is in because clearly if indeed he does withdraw, it is part of his pro

the mob. warrens, intel, people inside. this is a dirty job. g we are seeing in london is going to come here. the security needs to reflect the amount of time it's going to take for the americans to develop the multilayered plan to put these guys down. security has to happen as well. so much work ahead of us, the fact that there is this kind of yapping from the other side of the media and putting handcuffs and restraints on the counterterror development is really disturbing. >> mike: good point because when you talk about how the mob gets taken down, it's a bit apples and oranges from an operational perspective incentive sources and recruiting sources. you get people inside the mob. getting people inside these terrorist organizations, al qaeda, boko haram, isis, insanely difficult. it can be done. >> aaron: it is all money. it >> mike: it causes a greater reliance on technical collection, technical coverage would goes back to what we were talking about earlier. you've got to expand the playing field, white and the parameters so we can do more to

, right the democratic and republican leaders of the intel committees. i was surprised to read the republicans were surprised and resistant to release the information f that was wasn't the only place where there was railroadsantsens to doing anything. can you talk about where the intel community sort of hit up against resistance to making the information public and doing anything about it. >> well, the -- the white house wanted to get a bipartisan statement of -- from congress that would come out and say, russia, was behind this influence campaign, this effort to interfere in the action. and as you note ran up against resistance from republican leaders like senator mitch mcconnell, the leader of the senate, who actually questioned whether or not there was evidence for that -- for that statement. whereas the democrats wanted to get the statement out and the republicans didn't. so in the end what you saw was the two democratic leaders of the intelligence committees, senator feinstein and adam schiff of the house put out their own statement the end of septem

i think burr as the chairman of the intel committee is moving forward with the investigation in an acceptable way. >> right. >> i think more resources need to be given to that committee. i still think there should be a special select committee. again, these intel committees -- they are doing various things but, you know, when you look back at committees that the republicans have set up to investigate, for example, clinton, the benghazi committee had about 40 staff members, millions of dollars. this is much, much bigger. nobody has lost their life as a result of this directly but this is about our ability to chose our own leaders. this is a strategic threat of the worst kind and we need more resources. >> putting on your cia operative hat, any piece of information that you heard from the teimony? we also had the reporting there from jeff stein of newsweek who said he got some indication of what was discussed behind closed doors. anything standing out to you, putting on your cia hat? >> i don't know about that. i'll tell you that when comey says that flynn was in legal jeopardy, to me that seem

but this was his first formal briefing by all the intel chiefs. and at the end of it, comey stayed behind to say, you knonk one more thing. he got the short straw and he had to brief him about reallyicky stuff that was out there about him that was not corroborated by the fbi. it was just intel matter. and it involved really salacious personal stuff. donald trump flew into a fit of rage when another network, not this one, reported some of those details. he had been made aware of it by the intel community just on the sort of are grounds of hey, this is out there. and it had fallen to comey to tell him about it and we learned from comey's testimony that one of the first things trump asked him to do that he felt icky about, he had asked comey to get more information about it. and this is where you first begin to learn that comey -- light bulbs are going off in comey's head about just how uneducated the president was in the matters of appropriate lines of responsibility, appropriate conduct for a president and his intel agencies, a president and his law

one of things that came out was about that "washington post" article that pointed to the intel, the top chief intel all perhaps having had some conversations with the president regarding michael flynn. i'm wondering from the testimony that you have there. i know, john, you're still making your way through it, how that might play a role, too. because whether james comey comes online and says any more detail about his conversation with the president, now you have something else cooking out there. >> reporter: you do. definitely. looking ahead to tomorrow's testimony, this is just his opening statement. it's eight or so pages long. could be wrong about that. believe it's eight pages long. seven pages. sorry. obviously he'll be asked a lot of questions about this as well. the opening statement tells one story, but under probing from the senators we may start to get some more of the finer parts of the story. it is possible though that comey will say i can get into that because it might conflict with robert mueller's investigation. the two of them have had talks with each other, deconflict sh

side than the house intel side, or you seem to be working in a more bipartisan fashion on the tel committee than the house is. >> i think we always strive to work in a bipartisan way, just had another session with senator warner, the vice chair. look, we have spirited differences of opinion. there is no differences of opinion. there is no secret about that. but we understand that we have an incredibly important job. different than bob mueller's. bob mueller is focusing on the criminal side. it is our job to explain to the american people how our democracy was hacked and do it in a way that protects sources and methods and that means we got to try to find some common ground. >> are your republican colleagues doing that with you? >> we certainly made some headway here recently when the agreement between chairman burr and senator warner was put together, i insisted on open hearings, subpoena power, the ability to declassify. we got a ways to go, but i think we made some progress. >> senator, good to talk to you. thank you for being with us. >> thank you for having me. >> senator r

the senate intel committee released comey's prepared remarks a day early. telling trump to lift the cloud of russia hanging over the trump administration. he is asked for loyalty and drop the flynn investigation. >> he told president trump he was not under investigation, but comey says he refused the president's request to say that publicly. several big questions in play today. do the president's actions amount to obstruction of justice? whose word will america believe? james comey or president trump? how will the president respond to comey? will it be in real-time on twitter? let's begin our coverage with cnn's jessica schneider live on capitol hill. jessica. >> reporter: chris, james comey will start with seven pages of opening statement in his testimony. in the statement, we know he document and recount five of the nine encounters with president trump. encounters that comey felt necessary to document. it is something that james comey said he never did with president obama. concerning, awkward, inappropriate. these are the words fired fbi director james co

the senate intel committee released comey's prepared remarks a day early. ft the cloud of russia hanging

first, ann dote on the eyes of the intel being hand-delivered to the president by the cia. that laid out vladimir putin's, quote, specific instructions, defeat or at least damage the democratic nominee hillary clinton and help elect her opponent, end quote. this paints a picture of the obama administration divided and worried putin would escalate. we heard from two members of the trump white house. >> what is the current white house doing about this? >> well, allyson, the president has said about this previously, he would be concerned about anybody couldn't win here at home. >> you were asked whether the president believes russia interfered with the 2016 election you said you hadn't had a chance to have a talk with him about it. >> i have, thank you. and the only point that i would make just by way of clarification, he commented on january 5th, something like that, that russia interfered and maybe other countries as well. >> he said, i think it was russia but i think we also get hacked by other countries as well. >> is he concerned? >> of course. he's concerned by any count

i thought all of the intel chiefs made every one, every single one of the democratic senators who got up on their high horses and went as low as they could, looked like what they were. de-- deminimus and petty. >> mike was a steel first in vidinside a velvet glove. lou: i thought all of the people represents whether it be the fbi or nsa, or whatever the agency, they did it just a terrific job. i thought that the line of attack from the left in that hearing. i don't know about you, but i was surprised by the shallowness, partisan fo fervor expressed and rudeness that resulted. >> this is one that i think that the president and the white house in general the dang administration and professional appointees like mike rodgers did very well by the country in the government to put some things straight that had been garbled before. >> and the washington post continues to be an activist organ of the democrat coulic party, today was slapped down in real-time by the very officials, the leaders of those agencies themselves about whom they had written. and the post must be wondering how it could r

if you think that the senate intel committee will be in possession of the same information by the end of the day tomorrow? >> well, we know they already are because after that public testimony, james comey went behind closed doors and briefed the senate intelligence committee. our sources are telling us that he discussed this april 2016 event at the mayflower hotel and talked about some reporting that the fbi and the intelligence community is aware of that suggested there may have been a private encounter. now, jeff sessions denies through a spokesperson has denied that there was any private encounter at that meeting between him and the russian ambassador, sergey kislyak. what i'm watching for tomorrow is whether he's going to repeat that denial under oath or whether he says something more qualified like i can't recall or there may have been. to me it's a really important moment for sessions. if he does deny this meeting under oath, then it's up to the people who have evidence to the contrary to put up or shut up, to prove it. >> now, what is bob mueller watching for tomorrow? obvious

on wednesday, the house intel committee served cimino subpoe. n rice, john brennan and samantha power. the inclusion of samantha power has raised some red flags. judge andrew napolitano said this. >> should've had nothing to do with this unless it was for political purposes, so the unmasking is a below the radar screen crisis. occurred at the tail end of the obama administration when they began to fear hey, donald trump might win. >> eboni: michael, i appreciate the judge's enthusiasm. we all know unmasking is not a legal and we the definition, it's a subjective standard. i think that's what's frustrating. eric, you point out how dangerous it is. all anybody has to say is susan rice, she said she needed to know who these people are. where is the crime? >> michael: we have political warfare in this country and we had it for decades. it's only now that the right has started fighting the left, yesterday was having awful comedian with the horrible cartoon. >> eboni: who? >> michael: kathy lee gifford i think. when the corporate press thinks it's her

so, it sounds like the intel chiefs and the senate on the intel and the house intel, they believe russia meddled in the russia -- into election hacking or caused election hacking, but the president does not. >> well, he's had trouble believing this right from the beginning. recall the first report of this from the intelligence world came in early october, and then in january three of the major agencies said they had very high confidence in this conclusion. that is something they don't say unless they're standing on very solid ground. when i saw that phrase "high confidence" i said okay, you can take this to the bank. either the president hasn't learned that yet or it's just hard thing for him to accept. >> as i look back at all the testimony, not one of them that's in public testimony has undermined the voting. no one said the vote was wrong because of it. the intelligence received so far. so, the president can have confidence in that. but they're saying there were all these efforts to hack and get involved and do nefarious things. >> that's right. the real -- >> so, why should the presi

the intel guys didn't speak publicly until middle october. when they spoke publicly they didn't even name vladimir putin. if the president had been more prominent, we're talking six weeks before the american election, if the president had been more prominent in october or november last year, i can guarantee what people would have said. i'm skeptical of the intel because this suggests to me that the president of the united states is trying to make this campaign more about hillary clinton as the victim of russian attacks and favor donald trump. the white house had a difficult choice. talk about it and look like they're favoring hillary, or not talk about it and you see what they get now. they're too soft. >> we knew they were favoring hillary. >> this is using intel as a hammer against republicans. >> because the president was informed in july by the cia they had the evidence, super secret, that putin personally ordered this intervention, and it wasn't until, what, october 7 when that statement from the administration was put out basically sayin

but the intel committee will be asking him tough questions on this. thel: do you think it questions will be politically motivated or compromised? >> i think they will be politically motivated in that the democrats are anxious to get as many people in the trump administration tarred with the idea of possible russian collusion as possible. republicans have mixed feeling about this. they think there has been some wrongdoing and that's the reason jeff sessions reduced himself from this. they don't want it to look like this investigation is not going to be fair. because they want the truth to come out if there was no collusion, and they want the american people to be confident the investigation was done fairly. >> thanks so as much for joining us. take care. >> there are new details coming to light about the london bridge attackers. british police say the three terrorists wore the fake suicide belts because they were possibly planning to take hostages. but police were able to shoot and kill them first. >> we continue to get a look at the evidence and learn

james comey testifying before the senate intel committee. but it is going to be a gauntlet of left and right and in the cross hairs will be comey and the president of the united states. in his opening statement that he released a day early heightening the drama, comey says president trump demanded his loyalty, pressed him to end the michael flynn investigation and asked what could be done to lift the crowd of russia bogging down the administration. >> president trump says the president feels totally indicated by the comey testimony, but the hearing is sure to raise questions. who will the american people believe today? president trump or mr. comey. let's begin with jessica snyder live on capitol hill. things are getting really exciting there. >> reporter: they are. just two hours until james comey begins his testimony, his testimony we all got a preview of when they released the prepared opening statement one day only that was at james comey's request, something really unprecedented. we know that james comey will be recounting nooif out of hi

we have all the intel for you right after this. s in technology, apple's ceo tim cook, amazon's jeff bezos meeting today at the white house with president, trump administration focused on domestic agenda. these ceo's have not been fans of donald trump clashing with the president over immigration and decision to pull out of climate axe cord in paris. adam shapiro is live at the white house with a look how this all may go down. hey there, adam. reporter: trish, this question was asked to zahn spicer during briefing some critical ceos been critical of mr. trump. mr. spicer said said whatever the beliefs in the past, that they are not willing to work with us and that they are not willing to work wik with them. they are working on modernizing the u.s. government. when you hear some of the i.t. civiles are dating back almost 50 plus years, it is clearly time for modernization. they pointed out that the dod in some of its systems uses 8-inch floppy disks. that is what the focus of this is about. it will save tremendous amounts of money. ab

saturday attorney general jeff sessions accepted an invitation to self on tuesday in front of the senate intelommittee, but it likely will be behind closed doors sparing him a public grilling in front of another committee. a live report >>> and later, a sunday sit down with jon hamm on the sometimes bumpy road to "mad men" fame and now life after don draper. >> you always think i'm never going to work again. that's really what it is, for me anyway. i'm just like, i will never work again or i will never work at that level again. >> you live in that fear. >> i try not to live in it, but it's always there. >> our sunday sit-down with jon hamm plus a return to orlando one year after the pulse nightclub shooting a bit later in the show. >>> let's begin this morning with the ongoing investigation into the trump campaign's alleged ties with russia. and news that attorney general jeff sessions has now agreed to face the senate intelligence committee days after former fbi director james comey did the same. nbc's kelly o'donnell is in branch burring, new jersey, not far from the president's club where h

exactly june 8, when millions of people watched former fbi director james comey testify before the senate intel june 8, the number was 97.9, after, 86.7. most disheartening problem here, self-identified republicans are beginning to lose faith that the swamp can be drained. gop enthusiasm down 9%. dementhusiasm down almost 7%. independents down 11%. here to discuss it with me. glenn hall. glenn, not just consumer sentiment, homebuyer enthusiasm. buyer traffic, despite the september, back to november levels. do you see what i'm saying here? >> there is a definite sort of slowdown in the making. we can't say each month you got to factor in the fact it might be one month's dip and could be back on track next month. that's what people think about the consumer sentiment at the moment, but you're right, though, we saw chief economist in the survey was saying, yes, we are starting to see indications that political unrest can start to have implications for the economy. charles: the national federation of independent businesses holding strong. that might be the sentiment number at strongest point, small

capitol hill next week when former fbi director james comey takes the hot seat, testifies before the senate intel committee, about what he knows and about the circumstances surrounding his ouster. of course, there are reports that in a memo that he wrote, he described the fact that president trump pushed him to drop the investigation. some critics wondering if it could, in fact, amount to obstruction. those are among the questions he's going to have to answer next week when he testifies. steph, president trump trying to turn the page today. tweeting this, let me read it, the big story is the unmasking and surveillance of people that took place during the obama administration. now, of course, that's going to be at issue, as well, next week, during that senate intel committee hearing. all of it will be on the table. it's notable that you have president trump tweeting about it today because just yesterday, his press secretary, sean spicer, referred all russia-related questions to his outside counsel. saying we're not going to discuss this from the podium. we want to focus on jobs, on the economy, on

even before he takes the oath, comey has already changed the dynamic. intel releasing comey's opening statement a day ahead of time. it confirms the president asked comey to help lift the cloud created by the fbi investigation. >> it also confirms president trump demanded loyalty, and it contradicts the president's claim he never asked comey to back off on investigation of former national security advisor michael nin. it supports the president's clime claim that comey assured him he was not personally under investigation. >> comey said the president brought that subject up over the course of multiple conversations. today is the first time comey has spoken out at all since president trump unceremoniously fired him last month. manu raju begins it this this morning on capitol hill. >> reporter: he will take the senate intelligence committee after weeks of anticipation. this coming after he released his testimony he's going to deliver in his opening statement, laying out in vivid detail his interactions with the president trump, some interactions which he said, f

tomorrow invoke executive privilege thereby blocking attorney general sessions about telling the intel committee about conversations he may have had with the president about russia and former director comey and more. >> from the perspective of president trump what role did attorney general jeff sessions play in the firing of james comey? >> i'm not going to discuss private conversations between the president and the attorney general. >> to that end, when jeff sessions testifies tomorrow, do you believe he should invoke executive privilege on conversations between him and the president as it relates to james comey? >> it depends on the scope of the questions and to get into a hypothetical at this point would be premature. >> in any way, did jeff sessions folks at the doj ask for the white house's permission in essence for him to testify publicly tomorrow? >> i don't know the answer to that question. i know congress generally speaking sets the -- whether a hearing is open or closed, based on the sensitivity of the subject. >> is the president okay with him testifying in this open setting

we have all the intel on this story. see you right here next. looking from a fresh perspective can make all the difference. it can provide what we call an unlock: a realization that often reveals a better path forward. at wells fargo, it's our expertise in finding this kind of insight that has lead us to become one of the largest investment and wealth management firms in the country. discover how we can help find your unlock. your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance. trish: 22-year-old american student jailed and most likely beaten in north korea for stealing a a political banner is finally coming back home to the united states. the father of otto warmbier speakin

democratic member of the house intel committee joins us on that next. garden weeds are scoundrels. with roundup precision gel®, you can banish them without harming plants nearby. so draw the line. give the stick one click, touch the leaves and the gel stays put killing garden weeds to the root. draw the line with roundup precision gel®. "america" by simon and garfun [ snoring ]ental) [ deep sleep snoring ] the all-new volkswagen atlas. seats seven, sleeps six. life's as big as you make it. i just saved a bunch of money on my car insurhuh. with geico. i should take a closer look at geico... geico can help with way more than car insurance. boats, homes, motorcycles... even umbrella coverage. this guy's gonna wish he brought his umbrella. fire at will! how'd you know the guy's name is will? yeah? it's an expression, ya know? fire at will? you never heard of that? oh, there goes will! bye, will! that's not his name! take a closer look at geico. great savings. and a whole lot more. >>> all right. should jared kushner have his security clearance pulled? what are the democrats going to do

today they are going to hear from the top intel official dan coats. ates the president asked him, too, if he could intervene in comey's michael flynn probe. >> and, chris, the main event tomorrow, of course james comey on the hot seat. comey is expected to refute the president's claims that comey told him on three separate occasions that he was not under investigation. we're also learning that attorney general jeff sessions offered to resign at one point after heated exchanges with the president. we have all this for you. live on capitol hill with our top story. jessica. >> reporter: president trump trying to steal back

but the intel chips cannot support it. does not want to make some iphones faster than others so it has to pare down the capability of the units. emily: the market has become so competitive. innovation is so incremental. it is down to small details. how optimistic are you about apple's iphone future? george: i think they keep having to find new innovations where it really matters to the user. new applications will make all the difference. the question is whether the applications will take advantage of it. i think downloading a movie slightly faster probably will not make a difference, so they will fundamentally need to be new user applications that take advantage of it. emily: we have been reporting on new phones. how is the market different that apple will be entering in september which is when we believe the iphone eight will be unveiled? >> it is a whole different ballgame. when iphone came out, it was in a league of its own. samsung is as hot as ever. google will have their new one later in the year. there are a lot of n

what's interesting is that the individual is still alive, which is great that they can get some deep intel from him as to what his motive is. that's going to be the key part here, what is his motive. i mean, you have to jump right to the assumption that this is some type of terror attack, but confronting security forces that are armed is pretty much, as we all know, a suicide mission. >> yeah, but also, attacking law enforcement, attacking the public with anything you can get your hands on is also one of the directives that we have heard recently in recent times, right, art, from terrorists. >> no, no, absolutely. we've been through this scenario, unfortunately, for the past year and a half or so, where this information has been put out on the internet to grab a knife, grab any type of weapon at all, grab a vehicle, and do as much damage as you can. the fact that they're attacking security forces, hopefully trying to inflict some damage there, is something a little different, although we have seen it in the past. but to me, it seems like this is a scenario that when you attack a law enforc

thinking about how you coordinate the intel in law enforcement, local law enforcement and the private arena in order to have a strategy on how we're going to deal with this ideology is hard. the bipartisan ship that y'all showed, that exists. today's event is a perfect example. >> nick, what tools do you want that you don't have right now? >> i would turn the question a little bit and instead of identifying a single tool, saying if i could just go off the shelf and buy that, we'd be set. i look at more as a transformational exercise. the discipline of intelligence analysis for understanding the modern terrorism threat is literally changing under our feet as we're doing the job every day. so i often think about this. the analysts we probably hired ten years ago who came with really strong social science backgrounds, good writers, good thinkers who had language skills and understood the dynamic in places like iraq, we need that. but we also need people now who know how to look at haystacks of data, sift through that data and draw nonobvious connections that help us shrink the size of th

notion that is tested this week when the former fbi director james comey testifies in front of the senate intelommittee? >> i think in some ways, people that are on the chopping block this week, even more than donald trump, are republicans on the committee. the republicans on the committee voted to confirm james comey, many of them know him personally. the white house will send them talking points, they're supposed to call comey a liar, a nut job, and i think the question will be do republicans on that committee do the white house's bidding or stand up for james comey's integrity and for the fact that even if he made wrong decisions, i think he was wrong how he handled the e-mails, i don't know anyone other than donald trump that said that james comey is a liar. that's really going to be the question when he testifies. his conversations with donald trump in the oval office, are people going to believe him or the president. what are the republicans on the committee going to say about who they believe? >> i'm going to deal later in the program with the legal aspects of executive privilege. i want

committee, the senate intel committee, could figure out whether tapes exist. >> form/substancei'm not sure what we're arguing about here. at bottom, let's start with the first thing. before we get to the tapes, bottom, both men could be telling the truth. the president is correct to say i didn't order or direct the attorney -- >> he hoped. >> -- the director of the fbi to stop investigating. jim comey can also be correct to say, this is what the president hopes and intimations were, which i took as a direction to stop investigating michael flynn. >> is it fair to parse what hope means? when my children say, i hope santa brings me a train, they're hoping. when i say to them, i hope you get your homework done. nobody is hoping. i'm the boss. the president is the boss. >> with your children, you're absolutely right. i faced this issue before. with regard to hillary clinton and the ordering of the firing of the white house travel office, she claimed and asserted later under oath, i didn't direct anybody to fire the white house travel office employees, except for the fact that she m

even after the intel community went public on october 7th. sponse to the wash wash post report that we first featured on our show friday about the obama administration's five-month debate over how they should respond to that meddling. the post reported that president obama liberated and had some options, including cyber attacks on russian infrastructure, the release of intel that might embarrass putin and sanctions that could crater the russian economy. in the end the president did little to nothing. president trump tweeted just out. the obama administration who far in advance of november 8th about election meddling about russia. let me say that again. they knew about the election meddling by russia and did nothing about it. why? in all caps. on saturday tweeted again. since the obama administration was told way before the 2016 election that the russians were meddling, why no action. focus on them. not t. yo, not t. just like mr. t. what's your favorite -- >> president. >> i got one. >> do you have a favorite mr. t story? >> mine comes in epis

lieutenant colonel ralph peters is here with all the intel on it next think again. we are building new airports all across the state. new roads and bridges. new mass transit. new business friendly environment. new lower taxes. and new university partnerships to grow the businesses of tomorrow today. learn more at esd.ny.gov trish: all right, russian is claiming it has killed the most wanted man in the world isis leader abu bakr al-baghdadi. al-baghdadi has not been seen in public since he declared as leader of isis. u.s. military is work to go confirm death. if true this would be a significant blow to isis. this would be good news. colonel, what do you think? do you think that the russians got him? >> if i had to bet today i would say no. but i hope they did. if this guy abu bakr al-baghdadi self-proclaimed, he want him dead. [laughter] >> he's a very dangerous man. trish: i will interject. you're not a fan of vladimir putin, you want this guy dead. you'll be happy to see vladimir putin take him out. >> you know, i will send vladimir putin flowers if he kills abu ba

you're on the house intel committee. i'm having a hard time understanding this. you have subpoenaed michael cohen and apparently he's going to comply with the subpoena, whether it's testimony or documents for september 5th. this is still june. you all take off the whole month of august and i'm sorry to drop this on you because you're the one who showed up. if you really want to move this along -- >> my job. >> why don't you move this fast and why not move it up to july fifth? >> i want to move as fast as we can. and that also includes having all of the documents that this individual can provide. some witnesses have suggested that they want to come in, but they don't want to give us the documents. and, greta, that would be like a doctor examining a patient, but only making an analysis based on what the patient says and not using all of the tools at his or her disposal. we want to review records. we want to go through the time line, the correspondence with individuals in russia. so, we'll hear from them when we're ready and i hope that's sooner rather than later. >>

keep in mind the senate intel committee doesn't have plans to meet on tuesday so it could be difficultor the committee to prepare quickly for a hearing of this magnitude. at this point, committee leader from both sides of the aisle have yet to acknowledge they have received this letter so, at this point, we have to wait and see if and when jeff sessions ever appears before senator. >> ryan nobles, thank you for the update. >>> this gives us a lot of good talking points here. let's bring in he will roerrol kate page. maria cardona. and julian zellner from princeton university. >>> this seems to be, if it happens, a lot of if's here, but if this testimony takes place, it seems pretty politically risky. so why would the attorney general want to do this? >> well, i think a couple of things. for the first time, of all you're right. we don't know if this is going to happen and it's very possible it doesn't. number two, it sound like a little bit knee-jerk reaction on behalf of sessions because of comey's testimony last week on thursday, where he i want mated there was yet another meeting tha

the simple fact is that we have to have intel agencies that are monitoring radical conversations. no one cares if you are having -- no one in the government cares if you are having an affair on your spouse. those worries are silly, we have to demand are that politicians, digo after conversations held fm radicals that does not mean just one religion. it could be an atheist, we have to go after radicals. >> white house just came out, and said that president trump has been briefed on the situation in london, and following it. tonight, are we doing enough here in the u.s.? what do you think about president trump's so far. almost about 6 months into his presidency. are we protecting ourselves here in u.s. >> i certainly think that we should be thankful we have president trump, and not hillary clinton. because president trump will implement policies that are not politically correct but are focused on stopping the radicals, i have to going fa to his speech in saudi arabia. to the gcc it was really an amazing moment to hear a president of the united states go after the motive of these terr

the russians in my opinion and based on the intel encounter and tell people i have talked to could not have known how best to weaponized that information and i think it's fair to ask how did that actually influence the campaign? kennedy: how did that actually influence the campaign? that the question she doesn't have an answer for, at least not the measurable and speaking of heavy artillery she was the beneficiary of a weaponized foundation that took shady filthy money from godforsaken regimes and was certainly interested in their own form of measurable collusion. that would make russia seemed docile. so as this catastrophic fungus takes over her brain and gives her a singular unknowing focus she has one last ominous promise her sad friends in giddy enemies who would use the word as a fund-raising weapon. >> i'm not going anywhere. [applause] i have a big state and what happens in this country, i am very unbowed and i'm broken about what happens because i don't want it to happen to anybody else. kennedy: what, losing? it happens in every election. she just can't come to ribs with the f

and a former staffer for the house intel committee. ken, i have to bring you back to the beginning of president trump's interview with "fox & friends" where he talks about heck yeah, i said that. i said that to make sure he stayed honest. but he was lying when he said that. so tell me how this revelation and his own description of what he did which was to lie, right, furthers or playing into the investigation. >> you know, it was hard to make sense of that trumpian word salad because i think his view is i wasn't lying because i might have been talking a about other sub surveillance -- >> can i stop you. is he re-upping this claim that there were -- that he was being wiretapped by the previous administration? did you hear that? i heard echoes. >> he's never backed off the idea. i think he's backed off the direct wiretapping. but still raising the specter of a fisa warrant or a surveillance and throwing it out there. i mean, look, legal experts today though are saying that it's possible that these comments could be strewed as an attempt a

the challenge that we face in the intel community is this. people believe that they are the judge, jury, and execution of our political process. it's not -- it's the vast majority of folks. they are not doing this, they are doing their good work. but it's all these people and they need to be properly vetted. in this case, it just wasn't done. >> tucker: you think? at 25-year-old political activist who almost immediately get security clearance, did anybody look at our social media accounts? echo that happen? >> it sure should have. in this case, clearly you didn't come i guarantee the security folks that are going back over, how in the heck she got through, and why they didn't better information. i can guarantee you that is happening tonight. >> tucker: i certainly hope so. easier in hindsight. krystal, i'm not against all leaks. i have benefited from many of them. i think the public has a right to know much more than it does. they hide too much from us and it's our country. but these leaks are not designed to inform the public. they are design

. >> reporter: the chairman of the intel committee has not said if the hearing will go forward tomorrow. sessions is expected at the white house later this morning for a cabinet meeting. his first after days of deflection of whether the president has confidence in the attorney general. >> not a hard question to answer. laura, thank you. >>> president trump cannot seem to stay quiet about the russia investigation. the president slammed james comey again. retweeted about the chance of impeachment. why is he doing this? cnn's jason carroll is live in washington. no tweets yet this morning, jason. >> reporter: it is still early, john. the he said-he said battle under way. president trump has offered to testify under oath about what he said or did not say to comey. all this as he continues to attack his former fbi director in the wake of last week's testimony. president trump on the defensive. retweeting a tv news clip downplaying the chances of his impeachment just one day after lashing out at the former fbi director james comey. the president suggesting comey acted illegally by leaking not

let's take a listen with the top intel officials there speaking. >> i'll ask both of you the same question. why are you not answering these questions, is there an inthe vocation of executive privilege? is there or not? >> not that i'm aware. >> why are you not answering? >> i feel it's appropriate. >> what you feel isn't relevant, admiral. what you feel isn't the answer. >> trying to squeeze thens as out of the officials there. >> i'm sorry? >> really trying to squeeze those answers out of the intel officials there, to no success. no avail. >> right. well, i think it's also important to note that according to an abc news poll from yesterday, 61% of americans think trump fired comey to protect himself so i think that senators and americans alike need more answers than we have now and because comey released his public remarks ahead of time he is giving them an opportunity to formulate questions ahead of his testimony today. if he simply said i don't feel comfortable answering that then that would look bad on his part. >> are we going to hear more from donald trump via tweets or the rnc? >> y

how are you as the new director, you were on the house intel committee for a number of years before you came over, so you were aware of this, how are you trying to change the culture where people just give stuff away for political vendetta, or in the case of treachery, treason? >> in some ways, i think it's accelerated, hugh. i think there is a phenomenon, the warship of edward snowden, and those who steal american secrets for the purpose of self-aggrandizement or money or for whatever their motivation may be, does seem to be on the increase.

and then that was backed up and doubled down on on may 11th before the senate intel committee when the said as much. so it's going to be difficult here because someone's either lying or this deputy director from the national security agency, his version of events just doesn't seem to square with those other four gentlemen. >> the white house response on all this was to blast the leaking, the fbi leak of information regarding the president, outrageous, inexcusable, and illegal, from trump's private attorney marc kasowitz. the talking points are illegal leaks are the only crime, that the committees have struck out on collusion, there is no case here, and this is a fishing expediti expedition, when will this end? two different -- two polar opposite views here we're seeing. >> yeah, two completely different views, two completely different points being argued. i think the long-term implications of this we've already kind of seen the last few months about how this environment of leaking is, for better or worse, depending on where you fall down on this type of stuff, but it pollutes the polit

let's start with the expectations surrounding the intel committee's proceedings. this is being hyped, if you will, like it was the biggest carnival ever to arrive in any urban center in the country. this time, the fanation's capital. are things getting overblown by the national left-wing media and a few politicos? >> there's no question that thursday is going to be a big day not just in the nation's capital, but throughout the company. look, your point is well-taken. the hype might exceed the reality. at the same time this is going to be the first team we're going to hear former director comey tell his side of the story and reveal what it was the president said or didn't say to him and how he responded. so, you're right that the media is hyping this like there's no tomorrow, but i think it will look for interesting viewing if you ask me. lou: that may be every network in the country is going to be carrying it, but at the same time james comey's credibility has been shredded. the conflict between the leaks from comey through his-- well, enablers in the leak process