specifically there's some new and very provocative news from this "washington post" piece where they describe what sounds like rather epic american capacity for hitting russia using cyber tactics. and i'm being a little vague about this because "the post" is a little vague about this, but this is new. "the post" is newly reporting that president obama approved a covert measure that authorized planting cyber weapons inside russia's infrastructure. the digital equivalent of bombs that could be detonated if the united states found itself in an escalating exchange with moscow. that work was started under a covert authorization signed by president obama before he left office. in the five months since he left office, though, that work apparently has continued on the basis of president obama's authorization. now, "the post" does not say exactly what kind of damage this new capacity the u.s. is developing, what kind of damage it could inflict on russia or even what types of russian infrastructure these things might be targeting. but, you know, even before this previously undisclosed covert pr

this story broke this afternoon by "washington post" reporters greg miller. it was confirmed by buzz feed news and by the "new york times" citing not only former u.s. officials but current u.s. officials. the post says this. president trump revealed highly classified information to the russian foreign minister and ambassador in a white house meeting. the information had been provided by a u.s. partner through intelligence sharing arrangement considered so sensitive that details have been withheld from allies and tightly restricted. quote, this is code word information said a u.s. official familiar with the matter using terminology. trump, quote, revealed more information to the russian ambassador than we have shared with our own allies. the partner had not given the united states permission. that country had not given the united states permission to share the material with russia. officials say trump's decision to do so endangers cooperation from an ally that has access to inner workings of the islamic state. senior white house officials took steps to contain

you've got to keep in mind the same newspaper, "the washington post" that has been wrong time and timejust in the last six weeks when it comes to breaking so-called new stories about the president. for example, the post was dead wrong when they reported the deputy attorney general, rob rosenstein, threatened to quit because it threatened james comey's firing. he said the exact opposite on camera and a tv station in washington, d.c. then, "the washington post" flat out wrong, the acting fbi director claiming that never happened. abc, cnn, "the new york times," they have all done the exact same thing. so, tonight, and over the next few days, when the media predictably is going to breathlessly and hyperventilate all kinds of reports and brand-new black helicopters and tinfoil hat conspiracy theories to lower the american people as they lie again, remember they have zero credibility left. it is only a matter of time before this too will be debunked. here is the on being ignored in all of this. we have actual crimes, actual collusion, that needs to be fully completed investigated, and prose

"washington post" first to report that tonight. that's happening on one track. on a second track we have this ongoing reporting on this remarkable attack on congressional republicans this morning in alexandria, virginia, and they were ambushed by a shooter who fired dozens of rounds. we will have a report from a reporter live at the scene. we have just received in the last couple of minutes, received a detailed update from medstar washington hospital where the former congressional starve shot multiple times, matt mika where he's being treated and where congressman steve scalise is being treated, the detailed report is about congressman scalise. he was shot, we knew that today, he was shot in the hip. he has survived, been through surgery. we knew that ahead of this broadcast tonight. now we have considerable more detail from the hospital. it's not great news. i will read you exactly what the hospital has just released. quote, congressman steve scalise sustained a single rifle shot to the left hip. the bullet traveled across his pelvis fracturing bones, injuring

specifically there's some new and very provocative news in this washington post piece where they describe what sounds like rather epic american capacity for hitting russia using cyber tactics. i'm being a little vague about this because "the post" is a little vague about it. "the post" is newly reporting that before he left office, president obama approved a covert measure that "authorized planting cyber weapons inside russia's infrastructure. the digital equivalent of bombs that could be detonated if the united states found i was itself in an escalating exchange with moscow. oh. that work was started under a covert authorization signed by president obama before he left office. even before this program in ways to hit russia, even before this, the u.s. has previously been clear that whenever the russians can do to us in terms of cyber attacks or whatever the north koreans can do to us or the chinese or anybody else who devotes massive state resources to developing this capacity, the u.s. has been clear in the past that they believe that our nsa, our cyber command has more firepower in that

>> comment on the integrity of the "washington post" reporting? i guess i've been around town. >> it's pretty detailed. >> i guess i've been around town long enough to say not take everything at face value that's printed in the "post." i served on the committee here and often saw that information that we had been discussed had been reported but that wasn't always accurate. but i think this is the response that i gave to the "post" was that i did not want to publicly share what i thought were private conversations with the president of the united states. most of them, almost all of them intelligence related and classified. i didn't think it was appropriate to do so in an open -- for the "post" to report what it reported or do that in an open session. >> well, it's an unfortunate situation that you're sitting there because it's classified information and this morning's "washington post" describes in some detail, not just outlined but times and dates and subjects that are being discussed, and i'm certainly not blaming you but it certainly is an intere

you've got to keep in mind the same newspaper, "the washington post" that has been wrong time and time again, just in the last six weeks when it comes to breaking so-called new stories about the president. for example, the post was dead wrong when they reported the deputy attorney general, rob rosenstein, threatened to quit because it james comey's firing. he said the exact opposite on camera and a tv station in washington, d.c. then, "the washington post" flat out wrong, the acting fbi director claiming that never happened. of course "the washington post" not the only members of this destroyed trump media that we've been talking about getting it wrong over and over again. abc, cnn, "the new york times," they have all done the exact same thing. so, tonight, and over the next few days, when the media predictably is going to breathlessly and hyperventilate all kinds of reports and brand-new black helicopters ande tinfoil hat conspiracy theories to the american people as they lie again, remember they have zero credibility left. it is only a matter of time before this too will be debunked.

adam entous, "washington post" national security reporter with tonight's scoop at "the washington post." adam, i appreciate you joining us on very short notice. congratulations on this scoop. thanks for joining us. the headline tonight, top intelligence official, director of national intelligence, dan coats, told associates, contemporaneously at the time, in late march, that the president asked him if he could please intervene with fbi director james comey to try to stop the fbi russia investigation, particularly as it pertained to national security adviser mike flynn. again, there's no allegation here in terms of "the washington post" reporting that dan coats committed his concerns about this to writing, as has been reported about similar concerns regarding james comey himself and the nsa director, admiral mike rogers, but you can expect dan coats to be asked about this tomorrow in open session. we've got more on that coming up. stay with us. do you play? ♪ ♪ use the chase mobile app to send money in just a tap, to friends at more banks then ever before. you got next? chase. helping y

what's the white house saying now following this bombshell report in "the washington post"? >> reporter: hi, wolf. what is so interesting about this russian scandal, this russian meddles in the 2016 election is that white house officials from the president on down just don't seem to want to talk about it. what we hear repeatedly is that this is the democrats excuse for losing an election they were expected to win. kellyanne conway, white house counselor, asked about this on "new day" this morning and responded to the "post pea" rep and repeatedly tried to change the subject when asked what the administration is doing to try to prevent future incursion by russia in future elections. here's what she had to say and what jeh johnson said about the topic on msnbc. watch. >> the report is new and we'll discuss it later but he's been very clear on the record that he believes in any type of numbers of measures to make sure that democracy flourishing. >> and the current president through his rhetoric is sending signals this is something that will be tolerated. >> i have not heard fro

"the washington post" reporting last night was based entirely on anonymous sources. it was followed by a "new york times" report also based on anonymous source that was a bit more tentative about whether the president was the subject of an investigation. then this morning at 6:55:00 a.m., came forward to confirm that the president is under investigation. president trump tweeted, they made up a phony collusion with the russian story, found zero proof. so now they go for obstruction of justice on the phony story. nice. with that nice tweet, the president himself confirmed that he is indeed under investigation. and once again, proved to every washington law firm that rejected him as a client that they were right to do so. president trump is the most publicly unmanageable public official as a client that any washington criminal defense lawyer has ever seen. and so president trump is stuck with the same old new york lawyer who has been on the losing side of some of donald trump's best known cases. the trump university fraud case in which president trump ended up having to

decided, two can play at this game so i started leaking leakid leaked to ben wiser, with the "washington post," and elaine from "the new york times" two papers with the most cloud in washington, as they do today and for the first self dives the tim, elaine played it straight in the "new york times." she reported what i was telling her what, the white house was telling her. a certain amount of false eye with lance. her reporting -- eye with lance. mid-we were her propertying shifted to benefiting bobgates and his confirmation, after the hearings were over, called elaine to have lunch, and i had an agenda, and halfway through the lunch i raised my agenda item which is why was so it obvious that halfway through the confirm make hearings you abandoned what was telling you which was pretty good inside information. she said i'll tell you, it was clear he was go to be confirmed and he would become the cia director and a very important source for me. you would go back to teaching the national war college and i'd probably never call you again. and i thought, this told me all i needed to know about wha

joining us now, devlin barrett, reporter for "the washington post." devlin barrett, i want to go for the moment. i know you're not going to tell us who the sources are. but because the president's defense lawyers tonight responded with a direct attack on the fbi, i just want the point out that in your article, the only phrase you use for sources are -- it just says "officials said, officials said." the most detailed description of sources is when you say five people briefed on the requests. and that is the requests for testimony from dan coats, the director of national intelligence, from mike rogers, the head of the national security agency, and richard ledger who agreed to be interviewed. the requests for those people to be interviewed by the special prosecutor have spoken to "the washington post." it seems those people could well exist outside the fbi including as possible legal representatives or people who were legal advisers who were consulted by those people who had those requests. >> well, right. and frankly, we're not going to go beyond our la

we remember what ben bradley, the iconic editor of "the washington post" used to say about "the post" doesn't print the truth. it prints what we're told. somebody told them that and they chose to print it. >> are you bothered by any of these possibilities? >> i'm bothered by the fact that -- what bothers me the most, and there must be a reason for it -- is mueller making four of his first hires so blatantly biased lawyers pro-democrat lawyers with a buy as, certainly, against the president. now, mueller must have some idea in mind. and if i put the best gloss on that i could possibly do is that maybe mueller has decided internally that this isn't going anywhere and that the only way he can have credibility on a decision saying that there's nothing there is to have that decision come from a group of lawyers that are so blatantly biased against the president. >> are you talking about the three lawyers, at least that i know of -- maybe there's another one -- who contributed to democratic candidates, one of whom contributed to both democrats and republicans, but more so to democrats? is t

he's using the washington post for power so that the politicians in washington don't tax amazon like they should be taxed. >> president trump went on to say that basos was worried that he would go after him for anti- trust violations if he was elected president. we should mention the tweet comes a week after basos and other tech leaders met with president trump during a summit at the white house and at a time when amazon is about to embark on a lengthy government anti trust review of its bid to buy whole foods and just yesterday the washington post reported a fake time magazine cover featuring trump on the cover hangs inside of his golf club. time is asking the club to take the covers down. >> did president trump flirt with the reporter in the oval office? the exchange happened during a phone call yesterday with the new prime minister. you be the judge. >> we have a lot of -- well we have a lot of your irish press watching us here just now leaving the room. and where are you from? go ahead? come here. where are you from? >> she has a nice smile on her face. i bet she treats you well.

for "the washington post." thank you all. let me start with glenn and work across the table here. let's talk about this. "the washington post" is reporting tonight that the special counsel robert mueller is in fact focusing on the president not about the russian matter so much right now, but what about he did to quash the investigation, whether he -- i think it's about comey and what he tried to get comey to do, swear loyalty to him, end the investigation of the michael flynn, and ultimately fired the guy. are they the elements of this case? >> well, you know, as people have said before, it's often not the crime but the cover-up. and we knew generally that the comey -- his interactions with comey were problematrom an obstruction of justice poi of view. i'm not say he obstructed justice, but certainly worth investigating. what's novel about this story is they're also talking to dan coats, admiral rogers of the nsa and one of admiral rogers' deputies. i'm very intrigued to figure out what they are going to talk a

"washington post" story comes out march 1st. the next day, march 2nd, jeff sessions gives a hastily convened press conference at which he announces he will be recusing himself from overseeing anything at the justice department that has anything to do with the presidential campaign. now, that recusal is often described, often reported as jeff sessions having recused himself from overseeing anything that has to do with the russia investigation. and in part, that is true. i mean, russian attack on our election, the possibility that the trump campaign colluded in it, investigations into that, that is part of what jeff sessions is recused from, but if you look at his actual recusal which he issued in print, dent just recuse himself from anything having to do with russia, but any investigation that has anything to do with the whole 2016 election campaign. so that recusal was announced on march 2nd. and that ended up being really, really important and at question, a couple months later when trump administration decided they were going

if the washington post is right, something strange.is right, something strangem by the fbi. if the washington post is right, something strange. it has and it all changed after the president got rid ofjames comey. what started off as an investigation by the fbi into alleged russian meddling in last yearus presidential election has if the washington post is to be believed now widened into something potentially much more significant, much more potentially damaging to donald trump. namely, that he allegedly attempted to obstruct justice. and that he allegedly attempted to obstructjustice. and what that is a reference to is the 10th that it is alleged the president made to get the fbi to drop its investigation into his former national security adviser michael flynn, general flynn, the man you may remember who was sacked in february this year after it was revealed he had been less tha n after it was revealed he had been less than forthright it might be said in his account of russian dealings when he spoke to the vice president mike pence. so

you've got to keep in mind the same newspaper, "the washington post" that has been wrong time and timejust in the last six weeks when it comes to breaking so-called new stories about the president. for example, the post was dead wrong when they reported the deputy attorney general, rob rosenstein, threatened to quit because it threatened james comey's firing. he said the exact opposite on camera and a tv station in washington, d.c. then, "the washington post" flat out wrong, the acting fbi director claiming that never happened. abc, cnn, "the new york times," they have all done the exact same thing. so, tonight, and over the next few days, when the media predictably is going to breathlessly and hyperventilate all kinds of reports and brand-new black helicopters and tinfoil hat conspiracy theories to lower the american people as they lie again, remember they have zero credibility left. it is only a matter of time before this too will be debunked. here is the only massive issue being ignored in all of this. we have actual crimes, actual collusion, that needs to be fully completed investi

according to "the washington post" they met in may, may of last year. a couple of weeks before paul manafort was elevated to be trump campaign chairman. and then they met again in august at a cigar bar in new york city called the grand havana room which i should tell you is located, incidentally at 666 fifth avenue which is jared kushner's family property. they met there in early august 2016. just two weeks before paul manafort ultimately resigned. previously reported by politico that after that meeting with manafort in august kilimnik went home and started bragging openly about the role he had played in changing the republican party platform on ukraine and russia. he claimed credit for that famous, weird, still unexplained incident at the republican convention last year where the trump campaign intervened in the platform writing process on one issue and one issue only and they wanted the party statement about russia invading ukraine to be watered down to make it more pro-russia. so, again, "the washington post" is now reporting that a federal grand jur

that statement again was in response to "the washington post." so let me be clear." story was based on five anonymous sources, doesn't even identify the agency. so that's it. simple explanation. >> okay, i mean, i don't think it's simple but i don't think we're getting anywhere. let me move on. former house speaker newt gingrich who is a close trump ally, spoke on friday at the national press club. let's run a clip of what he said. >> the president of the united states cannot obstruct justice. the president of the united states is the chief executive office of the united states. if he wants to fire the fbi director all he has to do is fire him. >> we're going to ignore for the sake of our conversation that when gingrich was speaker of the house he voted to impeach president clinton for obstruction of justice. let's move on to today, is it the position of the trump legal team that the president of the united states cannot obstruct justice because he's the executive, he can fire anyone in the executive branch under the executive branch? >> look, you're talking about w

the washington post with a stunning report. saying president trump is now under investigation, why special counsel robert mueller for possible obstruction of justice. this is a major turning point in the russia investigation. we have all those breaking headlines. let's go "out front." good evening, i'm erin burnett. "out front" this evening, the breaking news, steve scalise is in critical condition tonight after fire was opened on softball practice. the first shots ringing out at about 7:00 this morning. the heavily armed shooter crouching behind the third base dugout. several officers on the scene fired back. the gunman later died from his injuries. cell phone video recorded the chaotic scene. [ gunfire ] >> hey. is that guy ok out there? the guy -- has that guy been shot? is he ok. anybody talking to him? [ gunfire ] >> stay down! stay down! [ bleep ] [ gunfire ] [ bleep ]. >> shoot him! [ bleep ]. >> that's what happened in that suburban park outside washington this morning. the gunman has been identified as james hodge kins

comment on the integrity of "the washington post"? i guess i've been around town long enough to say, not take everything at face value that's printed in the post. i served on the committee here and often saw that information that we had been discussing had been reported, but that wasn't always accurate. think -- the re to the post was that i did not want to publicly share what i thought was a private conversation with the president of united states. almost all of them intelligence related and classified. i didn't think it was appropriate to do so in -- for the post to report what reporte reported. >> it's an unfortunate situation that you are sitting there because it's classified information. the post describes in some detail, not just outlined, but times and dates and subjects that are being discussed. i'm certainly not blaming you, but it certainly is an interesting town in which we exist. >> just because of published in "the washington post," doesn't mean it's now unclassified. >> unfortunately, whether it's classified or not, it's

"the washington post" says that

>> the president's tweet was in response to the "washington post" story. so the "washington post" issued a story that had five anonymous sources which they never identify what agencies those sourcesriginad out of. the response from the esen using social media, was about at story. but let me be very clear here as it has been since the beginning. the president is not and has not been under investigation for obstruction. >> okay. and why is the president confused? is this just that he thinks the media is correct here or not? i'm confused by this. why is he not taking your legal advice or other legal advice saying, mr. president, you're not under investigation so why tweet this? this is why there is confusion. >> chuck, i think you're reading more into the tweet than what's there. the president sent out that tweet directly in response to the "washington post" story with the five anonymous, unnamed sources from unnamed agencies. that's why he put that in the tweet. look, the president has been, as you know, very effective in utilizing social media. but i want t

today agot lokt out of my "washington post" subtranscription.any of this reporting before. tell me about the new morning ritual. >> yeah it doesn't happen every morning but many mornings he has been getting on the phone ernl rg 6:30 in the morning, 7 in the morning to dahl one of the lawyers or maybe outside advisers on the legal team to just walk through russia stuff. it's sort of an unstructured time for him to stew and talk over the latest headlines, to kind of do a game plan, to chew over things. and the white house advisers like him doing this. they feel it adds some structure to the morning and more importantly by the time he shows up for work in the oval office he's already gotten all of the russia stuff out of his system. that's the goal at least. >> well, it's not always achieved. they still find him tweeting and weighing in and other -- i mean he went to the rally and let it rip. are they really -- i guess it's all relative. >> it's all rerelative doesn't exactly work. he is not somebody who can compartmentalize these things well at al

," obviously this was "washington post" story about what was said by the president to coats and what was concerning to both him and admiral rogers, according to "the post" reporting, which is still unrefuted, when you've been reporting on the president's mood, the tweeting, the frustration, and his frustration with the attorney general, jeff sessions. >> if you contrast the caginess of some of these military officials to the president himself, you see quite a difference. the president i'm told from numerous people inside and outside the white house is defiant, somewhat isolated inside of the white house in terms of his strategy. he wants to punch back at his critics, whether it's former director comey or others, through twitter, not necessarily vetting all of his statements through lawyers and advisers. >> and -- and robert, when we talk about -- what the president will be doing tomorrow, now, one of his tweets just in the last 24 hours was incredible upsetting to the pentagon and to the diplomatic community, because he tweeted in support of the saudis against qatar, a huge dispu

now, we read "the washington post" article and did not get that at all from "the washington post" articlequestion. so we thought we would go to the guy who wrote the article, reporter adam entes. adam, what is your reaction to sean spicer says your story shows there was no collusion, and the obama administration knew that? >> i'm not sure where he's drawing that conclusion from. that's something we did not address in the story. in fact, what really was going on was this compartmentalization took place within the u.s. government. when the fbi launched its counterintelligence investigation, looking at possible coordination between the russians and members of the trump campaign, that was started in july before the intelligence arrives at the white house in either late july or the first few days of august, from the cia, which pointed to putin's direct involvement in ordering this operation. so there's no -- there's no intelligence that's being received at that point by anyone in the administration about these contacts. >> i reread your story from friday, and to me i just could not find anythi

so, again, you have "washington post" their source. abc has their post and meanwhile, we have not been notified of a investigation. bill and daniel alluded to this at the top that his legal team told fox news that he was not acknowledging, that he was under investigation when he sent out that tweet last week knocking the attorney general deputy. his other news of the lighthouses we, jared kushner is going to make another push to get the middle east peace project going on wednesday. he is headed to the middle east. he is going to israeli officials in jerusalem and palestinian officials. jared kushner may also be scouting for new personal attorney to represent him in the russia investigation. his current attorney who was a colleague of robert mueller. she told jared kushner that which he may want a new attorney because of the perceived closeness or connection between her and robert mueller. the present has a big afternoon. four hours, hard sessions on i.t., information technology, as well as digital security. ceos from a lot of tech comp

and what the washington post did exactly that had the president so grumpy this morning and washingtonthe time magazine cover it's fake. we have a look at that actual cover there. there we go. that's the cover in various golf clubs around the world and put it up in the golf club this apparently has headlines saying how great donald trump's show the apprentice was doing. it's possibly that story and critical washington vote and amazon and going back to the campaign in february of 2015 here's what he said at that time >> he bought the washington post and we have a different country than we used to have he owns amazon he wants political influence and that's not right and believe me, if i become president, oh do they have problems they're going to have such problems >> that was well received by the audience and the crowd will see if the white house says what the president intends to do in terms of additional taxes for amazon does he plan on taking action kbens that company today it's possible that he is reacting this morning and says the trump organization faked a cover of time magazine an

>> the president's tweet was in response to the washington post story, so "the washington post" issued a story that had five ano anonymous stories. let me be clear, the president is not and has not been under investigation for obstruction. >> why is the president confused? is this just that he thinks the media is correct here? i'm confused by this. why is he not taking your legal advice or other legal advice saying mr. president, you're not under investigation so why tweet this? this is why there is confusion. >> chuck, you're reading more to the tweet than what is there. the president sent out the tweet in response to "the washington post" starry with the five unnamed sources from unnamed agencies and put that in the tweet so look, the president has been very effective in utilizing social media but i want to be clear here and direct, the president has not been and is not under investigation and that is, the tweet was in response to "the washington post" story with no named sources whatsoever. as you know, no named agencies. >> he said by the man who told me to fire the fbi director. i

previously he was the moscow bureau chief for "the washington post" for four years. and also with us joy reid, msnbc national correspondent and the host of "a.m. joy" on weekends on msnbc. ken dilanian, i want you to take us over what nbc news is reporting tonight, adding to all of this. >> absolutely, lawrence. and first i want to be very clear about one thing. jeff sessions adamantly denies that he had a meeting with sergey kislyak at that mayflower hotel event. his spokesman denies it on the record. and this is one of the reasons, you know, i've known about this and i've been reporting on this meeting for a while as i think have some other reporters in this town. and there has been a lot of haziness about what exactly congressional investigators were learning. and that's why i was really glad to see senator al franken on your show last night go on the record and say look, we have reason to believe, that's the phrase he used, that this was not as had been first reported. recall that this was a speech that donald trump gave during the primary, sponsored by a russian

the washington post is a much respected paper, this would be a big change? it would indeed.e, that the new york times, another revered newspaper in this country, is getting at least some credence to that report in the washington post —— giving. the new york times reporting that senior intelligence officials, people not part of the trump campaign, due to give evidence to the special counsel robert mueller in the next few days, possibly even this week. that is significant because the initial investigation, the investigation that the special counsel robert mueller inherited from the fbi, was into alleged links between the russian government and the trump campaign to allegedly perverted the outcome of last year's presidential election. well, now, less than a month after he was appointed special counsel, it would be appearing if the washington post report is correct that robert mueller has widened his brief already and is looking into the possibility of obstruction of justice looking into the possibility of obstruction ofjustice on the part of the president of the united states.

joining us now is tom hamburger, a "the washington post" reporter who broke the story today., thank you very much for joining us today. >> thanks. good to be with you. >> as far as i can tell, i might be wrong here, correct me if i'm wrong, seems like this is the first reporting we have had that this federal grand yojury in virginia sent subpoenas referring to paul manafort, is that right? >> to my knowledge it's the first subpoena we have seen to target paul manafort, some of his businesses and as you said specific folks with whom he worked when he had an office doing major business in kiev, ukraine. among them, kilimnik in a sense the office manager, the translator and as you suggested was somebody who was trained at least in his youth by russian army intelligence. >> tom, do we have reason to believe or is it starting to look like all the federal investigations related to this matter are being run out of that one jurisdiction, eastern district of virginia? i feel like we're starting to sort of see that evidence pile up. do we have reason? is it fair to guess that's how thi

. >> to today's top story, the "washington post" reporting the special counsel is starting to investigateresident trump for possible obstruction of justice. eamon javers joins us from washington with the latest good morning to you. >> good morning. >> what can you tell us? >> the "washington post" story last night got all attention in washington, d.c., all of official washington focusing on the issue of whether or not the president is under investigation personally and directly for obstruction of justice that's what the "washington post" reported last night. let me run you through some highlights of their report with the caveat that i can't independently confirm this reporting. but it is not being denied by the president's personal lawyer or the white house what we know from the "washington post" is that they're saying the obstruction of justice investigation into trump began days after he fired former fbi director james comey. we know the director of national intelligence, dan coates, mike rogers and his former deputy richard ledgett have agreed to be interviewed by mueller's investigato

adam, a terrific report in "the washington post." posted online right now. thank you so much for coming on with us. appreciate it. >> thank you very much. >>> when it um cans to the investigation into russia's hacking, the president says he does not have tapes of his discussions with james comey. there are tapes of him questioning the objectivity of the special counsel robert mueller. >> should he recuse himself? >> he's very, very good friends with comey, which is very bothersome, but he's also -- we're going to have to see. i mean, we're going to have to see in terms -- look, there has been no obstruction. there has been no collusion. there has been leaking by comey, but there's been no collusion, no obstruction, and virtually everybody agrees to that. so we'll have to see. i can say that the people that have been hired are all hillary clinton supporters. >> so this tape, this tape now exists, which we'll talk about, but another one doesn't, according to the president. the president floated the idea there were tapes of his conversations with james comey an

"washington post" writer adam is joining us right now.et me read you the president's tweet again reacting to your report. just out -- the obama administration knew far in advance of november 8th about election meddling by russia and did nothing about it. why? what did the obama administration do? >> well, i mean, you know, the reality is there were a few things that were going on that prompted obama not to retaliate before the election. against what russia was doing. one of those things was that then candidate trump was talking publicly about the election being rigged and so obama was concerned that if he did something to call out the russians in a very public way and it was him doing it, that it would be seized on by the republicans and by trump in particular to basically say that the election wasn't fair and that the president was trying to help hillary clinton win. that was one of several factors that weighed on the president. one of the other major factors was the concern that if he did retaliate before the election then putin might d

"the washington post" is reporting that.'s just stop for a moment because this reporting is accurate. it's a really big deal. give me your thoughts. >> it is a big deal. in many ways, it's not surprising if you flashback to the testimony that we heard last week from jim comey and the testimony we heard the week before from dni coats and admiral rogers at the nsa. it isn't surprising. comey seemed to hint that he thought there was something inappropriate about his conversations with donald trump. he felt that donald trump was directing him to lay off him, possibly drop the russia investigation. he also said that there was interest in his memos based on his interactions with donald trump from the special counsel bob mueller. so i think the takeaway from comey's testimony last week was that donald trump was not under investigation due to any sort of possible russia collusion and that's what comey testified to and that's what trump's personal lawyer said as well. but out of that, it was clear that they were going to look into --

had >> this "washington post" report explains the possible shift there. quote, trump had received private assurances from then-fbi director james comey starting in january that he was not personally under investigation. officials say that changed shortly after comey's firing. "the post" also notes three people, current director of national intelligence, dan coats, current head of the nsa, mike rogers and richard ledget, a former deputy to mike rogers have agreed to talk to mueller's team as early as next week. a spokesman for the president's personal attorney provided this reaction, quote, the fbi leak of information regarding the president is outrageous, inexcuable and illegal. two things to note. one, it's not a denial of the story in chief and two, the post does not say that their sources, and there are five, are inside the fbi. let us at this point bring in tonight's starting panel. white house bureau chief for the "washington post," phillip rucker, white house reporter for the associated press jonathan le mere and two attorneys are with us tonight. a

this comes out after another late night drop by "the washington post." no sources.nonymous sources reporting special counsel was investigating president trump for obstruction of justice. let's explain point by point. no one else in the media will. "washington post" is nothing more than a liberal smear machine with an awful, god-awful track record. rod rosenstein threatened to quit because of james comey's firing. actually said in an interview the exact opposite. he said it on camera and they never apologized. the post also was flat out wrong about james comey. just before he got fired, he was asking for more resources. well, then, it was debunked by the fbi director andrew mccabe who testified under oath. sorry, that never happened. "the washington post" is not the only member of the destroy trump media that has gotten these things wrong. abc, cnn. one of the tops of the list, "the new york times," they evolved on the same thing. it's now very clear what is happening. there is a fourth branch of government. it is called the deep state. they are working day in and da

the washington post reports. and the second suggestion that president obama put in motion a plan to implant cyber time bombs in russian infrastructure that could be triggered at anytime. as you just said, we don't know how far that plan is in motion, but i think both of those two allegations will concern the kremlin very much. there is a source inside the kremlin, a notoriously unleaky body. secondly, the cyber implants. >> we did hear from president trump pointing the finger at his predecessor why he did not do more. when you consider the landscape where the trump administration has imposed new sanctions on russia over ukraine. it is the opposite effect of what he campaigned on. warmer relations with russia. how is that perceived there? >> reporter: you are absolutely right. it is completely the opposite of what president trump campaigned on and the opposite of what russia wanted. what did they want out of improved russia and u.s. relations? rehabilitation on the world stage. they are pretty isolated. the g8 is

that is the story from "the washington post" and here are the details. "in early march, the washington post met that jeff sessions met twice with russian ambassador kislyak during the campaign ended not disclose us of the senate judiciary committee during his confirmation hearing in january. the next day, sessions recused himself from the russia investigation and said it would be overseen by the deputy attorney general, who appointed a special counsel to handle the .robe he said, 'in light of reports recentng mr. comey's testimony before the senate select committee on intelligence, is important that i have the opportunity to address these matters in the appropriate forum. the senate intelligence committee is the most suchpriate forum for matters as it is in conducting an investigation and has access to recent, classified information.;" good, independent line, one. -- good morning. caller: i want to talk about russian interference in elections. and i felt a booth hand on my shoulder, and i turned around and looked, and it was a russian technocrat, and he

but this story in the washington post is just jaw dropping.at, particularly those who worked in brooklyn on the hillary clinton campaign, their teeth are probably aching with frustration and pain from the fact that the guy who they loved who was in the white house didn't do anything, didn't act. there are lots of reasons and very understandable reasons that were laid out in the story, but at the end of the day, you know, it's not just the current president, it's the former president who sat on his hands. >> former senior obama administration official in the saturday consolidate, rebecca, is quoted as saying, it is at hardest thing about my entire time in government to defend. i feel like we sort of choked. that after they got definitive word about putin's involvement in july, they didn't really issue a statement till really early october. the president waited till after the election to impose sanctions, some diplomatic and economic sanctions against the russians. >> right. and, so, the frustration, you can really sympathize with because they l