white house safe. these are the defenders of the american presidency. even if we did not right now have a president who faces a heightened threat level, a failure at the secret service is not an option. drunken failure at the secret service just seems inconceivable. and you can sort of talk yourself down about this. right? sure, it's the secret service and that sounds high end, but it's a big agency. not everybody who works there is going to be one of these super elite, above reproach. one of these guys in the suit with the curly ear piece. you know, you can try to talk yourself down from the worry here by imagining that these kind of failures are happening in a lower level of the agency we don't necessarily see. where people don't have these very big responsibilities of being an arm's length away from the president. we can try to talk ourselves down about maybe this is a bigger agency and parts of it are less important than we think. except in this case one of the two guys in the car for this alleged

about how you can get the recommendation of the white house and white house correspondent.e do complaints about having to do the briefing and at a time that make sense and the 24-7 media cycle. this is not like the old days when they would wake up in the morning, call some sources go to the briefing, hear something. tunisian at 6:00 that night. now they are constantly writing and producing content. i think if you sat down with them, you might be able to find ways to make it more suitable to the current media environment with the current work patterns of white house correspondents, while at the same time preserving what i think is a very important tradition of having the white house having to answer questions on a regular basis. >> what would be an example of how you might do that? >> josh would shoot me for saying this, but i think you could do it earlier in the morning. you could do an earlier morning off camera gavel that would serve some purpose is for people writing. there is a whole host of ways to do it. i think getting additional media outlets in the room, finding wa

he set up a house in washington where they could live not and the white house, because their celebrity was so intense. host: ken walsh, you say the modern era began with fdr. how sophisticated have we gotten -- we being -- house of the skate have we gotten in promoting our presidents? guest: extremely sophisticated. i started covering the white house in 1986, this is my fifth president. we thought ronald reagan mastered the media of his time, and he did. but in those days it was the three television networks. he was a former television and movie star himself. he understood how television worked and was able to dominate the dominant media of his time, television. since then, there have been so many changes and our media world -- in our media world. today, president obama mastech the social media, using the white house website sarah promote his agenda and himself. using television shows that other presidents disdained, like the late-night comedy shows, and shows that presidents did not even have the opportunity to go on it like "between two ferns," the zach galafinakas comedy show. presi

after the woman threw the package on the white house grounds, security at the white house reacted the way you would expect them to. the woman apparently fled after flinging this thing and yelling it's a bomb. they did get her license plate number. they were eventually able to track her down. around the package that she had thrown onto the white house grounds they established a perimeter. they marked off the entire area with police tape and they called the bomb squad. this woman had reportedly yelled it's a bomb. they called the bomb squad to check and to see if, in fact, it was an explosive device. so that whole thing started at 10:25 last wednesday night. roughly 30 minutes into that whole process, according to "the washington post" shortly before 11:00 p.m., these two high ranking secret service agents arrived on the scene in a secret service vehicle with its lights on. they had reportedly been at a party about a mile away from the white house at this bar in chinatown in washington. it was a going away party, apparently, for a secret service spokesman who was retiring. the agents re

at the white house. may 21st. tom wheeler meets with the him at the white house. may 11th meets with the economic council advisers at the white house. june 18th. september 11th. tom bheeler erwheeler meets with jeff at the white house. and october 15th. tom wheeler meets again with white house economic advisers, and october 28th tom wheeler meets with him at the white house. so leading up to october 30th. you have met with the white house nine times all at the white house with mr. zeinst who's the assistant to the president for economic policy. and up through october the position of the commission, according to the "wall street journal" and your testimony in front of congress is a 706 based approach. that changes just a few days later. and i would argue it changes on november 6th when again you met with mr. zeinst. but the one difference here is mr. wheeler. the one difference is nine times you went to the white house. on november 6th. he comes to you. this is the only time he came to you as i look at th

the white house. >> -- >> i'm moving on. hold on. our time is short. this is the way it works. on september 23rd multiple people met at the white house. i'm going to enter into the record asking unanimous consent this daily collar article of february 23, 2015. white house look showing the number of people met at the white house that are activists on this topic. i want to play a video clip. this is the 6:55 in the morning of the day that the president is going to issue his statement. this is you, right? at your home? >> yes, sir. >> and you woke up that morning to protesters out in front of your house. they laid down or set dun in front of your car. wouldn't let you get out of your driveway. they were there trying to make quite a statement. and there is a long five minute video of this. at 7:35 that morning you sent out an e-mail to your fellow commissioners calling it an interesting development. and later that afternoon -- i want to put up a slide. when this was provided you redacted this. this was al

and his families in the white house. we have an active bomb threat and then we have an interference by these two agents during a bomb threat during that incident and we purged the tapes. we purged the tapes. that active bomb threat against the white house was something that should have raised red flags with personnel from the secret service. should've been on everyone's mind and i know multiple e-mails went out to supervisory personnel. everyone knew this was a bomb threat and yet we went ahead, at least that is what i'm hearing so far we purged the tapes surrounding that -- does it excuse me surrounded up bumper to the white house within 72 hours. we destroyed the evidence and that is just mind-boggling that we might do something like that. now i have a lot of questions and i know the members of the committee do as well but as a frame of reference indicating an adequacy of the 72 hour video retention policy it would help my own state of massachusetts requires state municipal agencies to wristing -- retain their video an

back to the white house, back to the white house.hide is ok. >> so they're heading back now towards the white house. and drew is flying, the driver is just hurtling down connecticut avenue. it's closed to traffic, there wouldn't be here in 1981, march 30th, because they closed the streets for the limousine's expected ride back. as they're driving along now remember the limousine is alone. they have no support. they've left the motorcade behind. the follow-up car, the armored follow-up car with two guys brandishing uzis finally catches up behind them. and they're going along. and the police cars are starting to now follow up and the police motorcycles are getting ahead of the limousine. as they're going through, right about here, jerry parr realizes that something is wrong with the president. because he's having trouble breathing, he says he's having trouble breathing, i don't know. he said what's wrong, is it a heart attack, is it your heart? and president reagan starts dabbing blood from his lips and from parr's training he knows th

white house logs showing a number of people who met in the white house that are activists on this topici want to play a video clip. this is 6:55 in the morning of the day the president is going to issue his statement. this is you at your home? chairman wheeler: yes, sir. representative chaffertz: you woke up that morning to protesters outside of your house? they were there trying to make a statement. there is a long five-minute video of this. at 7:35 that evening you send out an e-mail to your commissioners calling it an interesting development. later that afternoon, i want to put up a slide. you rejected this. this was all redacted. hard to see up on the screen but we don't understand why this is redacted. this is what you wrote. please read it, go ahead. this is the same day. all of a sudden the president's statement comes out in a very coordinated fashion. he has the right to weigh in on this. that's fine. later that afternoon, you sent out this e-mail. you say, isn't it interesting, the day of the demonstration just happens to be the day folks take action at my house? the video oppo

white house's.white house is have learned that over time and they should keep that up, but there also should be a level -- we have to earn it but a level of trust. the idea is sometimes we make a mistake and it's just a mistake. someone says the wrong thing. they did not read the talking points.of the memo and say the wrong thing. >> a. >> a couple of twitter questions. >> whose idea was it? it was not mine. i believe it was the 1st ladies communication staff. she's very good at social media. >> is another question from twitter. any topics twitter. any topics or issues high on the particle -- particular postpresidential agenda that can be priorities right now? >> i don't think so. the agenda of the president we will have is to think about what comes next right at the core of the issues. there is not a secret issue that we are waiting for the presidency the end to work on but i think certainly would imagine the economic issues of the ethical. i suspect that the work on my brother's keeper we will rem

whether other issues when meeting with members of the white house at the white house, and if so, just for the record, might you just want to share some of those? chair wheeler: thank you congresswoman, yes. so i met on national security issues. we met on trade related issues. cyber security. the e-rate and what was happening there. spectrum policy. the white house was obviously very, very involved in implementing the instructions of the congress to repurpose spectrum and we had to work very closely with all of the agencies and the white house on that. and the spectrum options obviously as well. excuse me, i forgot to turn off my phone. rep. watson coleman: thank you mr. wheeler, that gives me an illustration of the variety of issues that you had been addressing. we would love to have the opportunity to work on one thing at a time. we know that the president doesn't and we know that we can't. i don't want to suggest that that is the only thing that you were doing. it is certainly misleading. i believe it is a mischaracterization of your character and of your continued statement that yo

there is no law prohibiting the fcc from soliciting the opinion of the white house. there are no rules. it is in the discussion of whether the right house would have to -- white house -- the fcc would have to disclose that. is that correct? chair wheeler: yes, ma'am. representative norton: the white house would have to be required to submit an ex partake, only if it was upset that substantial significance and clearly going to affect ultimate decisions. chair wheeler: yes, ma'am. representative norton: it did not the white house submit and asked partake piling on november the 10th 2014? chair wheeler: yes, ma'am. representative norton: i submit, mr. chairman, the rules that followed to the letter. this has been an openly transparent matter. the president was not and should not have been silenced. if there were more americans wanting to submit their opinions, you can imagine that those americans would also want to know where the president of the united states stood on this matter. thank you very much and i yield back my time. rep. cummings: mr. wheeler where you sworn i

white house logs showing a number of people who met in the white house that are activists on this topic. i want to play video clip. this is 6:55 in the morning of the day the president is going to issue his statement. this is you, right, at your home? protesters were in front of your house. they were there trying to make a statement. at 7:35 that evening you send out an e-mail to your commissioners calling it an interesting development. later that afternoon, i want to put out a slide. when this was provided to "vice".com, you rejected this. hard to see up on the screen but we don't understand why this is rejected. this is what you wrote. please read it, go ahead. this is the same day. all of a sudden the president's statement comes out in a very coordinated fashion. he has the right to weigh in on this. that's fine. later that afternoon you sent this e-mail. saying is an interesting, the day of the demonstration just happens to be the day folks take action at the white house? the video opponents just happened to be the same. the white house and analysts saying please pass this on to any

here is white house spokesman john ernest. [video clip] >> he is someone who has a sterling reputation inside the secret service, but also outside. he has had a very high -- for himself. that positions him well to serve as a leader for that organization and to the boom in some of those changes that he has a knowledge are badly needed. host: can you talk a little bit about director clancy's background, for those who are less familiar with him and his history? guest: well, he had been an agent for a most 30 years. and he became head of barack obama's protection detail. that is when barack obama, you know developed trust in him and understand, of course, that he felt -- that obama felt positive towards him because he protected him. that doesn't mean that he knows how to manage the agency. clancy has put out the word that he removed some top managers who are part of this whole culture. host: a very high profile time right around the end of last year when it happened. guest: in fact, the real story is that he replaced them with --

it does not change when a person is in the white house. >> the white house was briefed on the march 4 incident not on march 4, but on march 9. mr. clancy: march 9 when i found out about it. scheduled and there was a conflict here chairman chaffetz: you have been in this position six months and you have never had a personal conversation with the chief of police? director clancy: since i have been back, i have not -- chairman chaffetz: in the last six months. director clancy: that is correct. chairman chaffetz: and not about this incident? director clancy: not about this incident. there is interaction with the metro every day. chairman chaffetz: i just don't understand when the principles don't ask each other. director clancy: i don't think the chief would want me to call every time we have an incident. chairman chaffetz: but i would think there would be some open minds of in the -- lines of qqq negation open lines of communication. what time did the center alert secret service personnel about the bomb -- about the e-mail about the bomb threat? i believe the answer is loving: 12:00 p.m.

what the white house has done here is greatly expand in a 2009 memo written by white house counsel gregorycuments that are not subject to these requests by redefining what the white house documents or what the white house interests are in these. >> that's what a transparent administration would do is redefine the parameters. >> it is underhanded policy in the white house. >> i didn't say it was underhanded, it's authoritarian and it's right in your face. >> not challenging, either. >> i don't know what to say. >> the ap did the story the ap is suing over the hillary clinton e-mails. they asked a number of freedom of information requests got no response. what hillary clinton did perhaps in some ways is symbolic of what the administration does it. hides what it doesn't want to you see. >> and within a few days of it coming out that her much discussed press conference to try to smooth things over a bit failing fabulously. the inspector general of the state department says we got a billion e-mails we got rid of in one year that retained only 62,000. it turns out in support of the former secret

ftc investigation with google at the white house. what i think we're likely to find out is that google is there on a regular basis on a whole host of different issues almost everything crosses google's threshold these days including intelligence matters, but also things like girls who code and other programs that google is involved with at the white house. i think you're going to see that these meetings were on a wide range of topics not necessarily this ftc case but it's going to raise the question of why the obama folks are so close to the google folks. why are they seeing them so often on all these different topics? part of the answer to that i think is you have this young tech savvy obama administration coming in after the 2008 campaign that are pushing forward on the internet and sort of culturely sim pat co-with the guys at google. from top to bottom there's a closeness with the white house and folks at google. >> the president said he'll crack down on lobbying. this would suggest that hasn't happened. >> what the pres wk on el

i'm going ask you a question about the white house. my question is basic. >> i want you to remember though that it's the responsibility of the state department to maintain their e-mail system and ensure the employees are in compliance. >> my question is does the white house believe that hillary clinton broke the law? >> john, secretary clinton's team has said at the request of the state department they have reviewed her records to make sure -- >> i know what they said. does the white house believe that hillary clinton broke the law or fully comeplycomplied? does the white house believe his former secretary of state broke the law or fully complied? >> if in fact, you'll have to verify this and the state department will have to verify this -- just give me a chance. if in fact what the secretary clinton's team said they were going to do that they did and that can be verified by the state department who is responsibility for maintaining that would be consistent with the federal records act requires. i'm not in a position -- i was not in a

let's bring in white house correspondent michelle kosinski. she's live at the white house.action to what we've just heard there from the head of the agency there and how do you expect the white house will react? >> these members of the appropriations committee did not disappoint in the tough questions they're asking the comments they're making. from what director clancy is saying to some extent is what we expected. he won't go into a lot of detail because it's under a higher investigation. there are two interesting things. he admits he did not find out about any incident at the white house until five days after it happened. that is true. he said that when we started asking around after this came out in "the washington post," that his staff did not know about it either. he says that he had a good stern talking to them about that. he also said something that stood out. there wasn't any chatter about an incident at least not as initially reported that these agents might have been drunk and they careened through this crime scene investigation and slammed into a barrier. he said

is in the white house. we have an active bomb threat. and then we have an interference by these two agents during that bomb threat, during that incident, and we purge the tapes. we purge the tapes. that active bomb threat against the white house was something that should have raised red flags with personnel from the secret service. it should have been on everyone's mind. i know that multiple e-mails went out to supervisory personnel. everyone knew this was a bomb threat. and yet we went ahead, that's what i'm hearing so far, we went ahead and purged the tapes surrounding that 72 -- excuse me -- surrounding that bomb threat to the white house within 72 hours. we destroyed the evidence. and that completely -- that is just mind-boggling that we might do something like that. and now i've got a lot of questions. i know the members of the committee do as well. but as a frame of reference the -- indicating the inadequacy of the 72-hour video retention policy, you would state that my own state of massachusetts requ

they played poker in the white house. one time, harding had had too much to drink an excellent about the whole set of white house china. harding completely disobeyed it. wilson is funny. before i did this book, i must have imagined that wilson was for prohibition. he was president. it was on his watch. when i research the book, i found out that wilson tried to be too prohibition. congress overrode his veto. pretty much didn't drink. a little bit. he diedhad had a stroke at that time. he felt a little bit of whiskey was ok to have. hoover claim that he didn't drink at all during probation. he had lots of friends in the belgian in and the sea. the rumor was that hoover would go to the belgian embassy, have a drink or two, and technically he wasn't on u.s. soil. >> did you find any evidence that presidents increase their drinking as a stress reliever when he got into office? in other words did their amount of alcohol consumption perhaps go up after they got into office because they used as a stress reducer. also do you think

you had one white house account and separate political account. you had to because you couldn't do government business or political business on the government account. how big a deal do you think this hillary clinton thing is? and how big a role will it play in her campaign? >> it will be big in that it reaffirms a vision, a narrative that people have about the clinton that they are governed by a different set of rules. we'll have throughout the entire course of the campaign, whether it's foreign contributions to their foundation. selling intelligence to foreign entities on american politics. we'll have a whole series of these things that are the clinton's operating in a sense of entitlement. i was amused at congressman schiff. you're right. rnc accounts were there for political activity at the republican -- at the white house house. we had to have a separate account. we were told these are presidential records. they were periodically swept and added into the white house archives. in fact, there was a cur flufl when they were thought to be missing

the white house requires people to preserve and save everything. other agencies, not quite as much. so it's not clear that she broke any law, but clearly the spirit of the policy of retaining things and set upping this private email raised so many questions because she made that decision on her own right before she became secretary of state in january 2009, to ket -- set up this private server. that was a decision that she made, so -- she's trying to compare herself to colin powell and others. she's the first one who has not even had a state.gov address. and emple -- email technology has changed so much from these others that the comparisons are not that relevant the gwen: here's the other thing. she says for convenience she only used one device. let'sen to her at a sillison valley conference. >> i don't throw anything away. i'm like two steps short of a hoarder. so i have a, you know, an ipad a mini ipad, an iphone and a blackberry. gwen: now, it's possible this is since she left the state department. but the idea that she's a hoarder? and we find out all these emails are missing?

white house that it applies to everybody in terms of the white house.i don't know whether it applies to the president and vice president i guess. in terms of staff who work here, i do know they have to sign those kinds of agreements. >> joining us former deputy chief of staff car rovekarl rove. is any part of you laughing at this rather clumsy effort on the part of this administration, the state department, the white house communications department? >> yeah it is. but it's also a little disturbing. look, she didn't sign the document and it took them how many days to figure that out? then they tried to say well colin powell didn't. here's the deal what we ought to stay focused on is in 2004 there were state department regulations that laid out how you could conduct your business. that she violated by setting up her own private server and e-mail account on that server to handle government business. those were reaffirmed and expanded in 2009. she is violating a fundamental principal which is the communications involving the state department documents. haro

that is apparently not that good of a fake white house.gress today they want a new fake white house to train on. something a little more of a exact replica of the actual building and the actual white house grounds. >> we don't have the bushes, we don't have the fountains, and don't get a realistic look at the white house. even our k-9. they're responding on hard surfaces rather than grass. >> the secret service director was already scheduled to testify today about the agency's budget before we got the latest round of posts after secret service agents drove a vehicle on grounds and hit a temporary barrier after a night of drinking at a washington bar. even though those on the scene wanted to arrest those agents, a supervisor reportedly ordered the uniformed officers to not arrest the agents and not be tested for alcohol, and just be sent home. clancy was grilled today about this latest incident. in particular about why he, as a director of the secret service was not even informed about this until five days after it happened. in the midst of

i realize that this has turned into a white house call. last point, there's tremendous bipartisan support in both the house and senate for providing this assistance. and i really think the administration is isolated on this issue. that is also something that is not good for the country. unless you have something you want to add, i will not cut you off, but -- secretary carter: i would simply say that, sort of a personal observation, i was in budapest in 1994 when the agreement was signed, that the russians have fire related. so i am very alive to the possibility that we had then, and i think still need to stick up for, of an independent ukraine able to find its own way politically and economically, is the only thing i would say in the first instance. it is terribly important that occur. the other thing i would say is nobody ought to mistake that ukraine is a very, very important country to us. it is not a nato ally, and i just want to make the point that as far as nato allies are concerned, that raises a whole other set of issues, that i ho

the white house was not aware of it. the interagency evaluation committee was not particularly insightful and the information they developed. it was just another your craddick gathering to try to sort through what they were willing to share -- it was just another gathering to try to sort through what they're willing to share with the white house. my office got the raw data from all the intelligence agencies related to the antiwar movement. nixon was very concerned about this. from political points, it was a negative when he was going to run again. it was also something he was concerned about with the ability to govern. if you have people rioting industries it will make it very difficult to keep the country settled and focused and doing what needs to be done. i never questioned that there was a need for the intelligence. i questioned that there was a need to block all of the rights and liberties of people and how you get that. i never got into sources and methods when i was there as to how they were getting what they were

been under scrutiny because of the number 6 -- because of a number of security breaches at the white house. the secret service director testimony is next. then fcc chairman tom wheeler. later, house republicans layout their budget plan. here are some of our featured programs for this weekend on the c-span networks. on c-span2's book tv, pulitzer prize winner historian eric fon er on the effort of abolitionists to help fugitive slaves. in sunday night at 10, abu dhabi-based journalists hassan hassan. and saturday morning, american history tv joints historians and authors at the abraham lincoln symposium live for theater. some evening at six, a visit to the national museum of health and medicine to view items from their civil war collection including artifacts related to president lincoln's assassination. find our full schedule at c-span.org and tell us what you think about the programs you are watching. e-mail us or send us a tweet @cspan #comments. >> this weekend, the c-span cities tour has partnered with media, to learn about the --mediacom. >> here are the remains of a confederate ironc

i am going back to the white house. will fill out of course whatever forms i am asked to fill out and i'll do that process tomorrow. >> well, ms. psaki just recently got a big promotion and yet another major announcement she has. go to facebook.com/thekellyfile to watch that part of the breaking news. >>> and we have breaking news about one of the pilots locked out of the cockpit and the voice recorder that captured the sound of the co-pilot trying to smash in the door. that is next. you pay your auto insurance premium every month on the dot. you're like the poster child for paying on time. and then one day you tap the bumper of a station wagon. no big deal... until your insurance company jacks up your rates. you freak out. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? hey insurance companies, news flash. nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance. with psoria

the white house can say we have turned everything over to the fbi. much later, we learn pat gray on his own initiative, and this -- i was there. he destroys that data. 2 envelopes full of it. he burns it with christmas wrappings in connecticut. this is clearly an obstruction of justice. he didn't get nailed for it. he claims he been told, to the best of our knowledge, not of it related to the break-in. that was true. [indiscernible] there was a stack of cables, who sent them back to the state department, there was one that showed hunt was playing cia forger and making the kennedy administration, if not the president responsible for the killing of dm when he was president of south, that assassination. there were memos relating to that where they try to peddle it to various people in the media. there is a lot of troublesome stuff. unrelated to watergate. i have never been sure if that was an obstruction, to do that. i had very clear instructions from peterson they were only going to look at the watergate break-in. obstruction of justice is a crime whic

the white house? is there anything the american people, congress can sia balance where there's input from the other side as opposed to one particular partisan perspective? >> you know congressman, during that period, i believe that i met more than three times as often with members of congress. my job is to take input. my job is to provide expertise on issues that are being considered. and that kind of an ongoing relationship with all aspects of government is an important role, i believe. >> thank you. my time is expired. i would yield back to the chairman. >> thank the gentleman. will now recognize miss watson coleman from new jersey. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. mr. wheeler, thank you very much for your testimony. thank you for your forbearance and thank you for the fact that it seems that you responded to the enormous interest and concern with net neutrality. i became -- i'm a newbie also. i became aware of net neutrality on social media. thank you so much for that. i wanted to just clarify

gonzalez at the white house? why is it that the secret service said he had been apprehended at the door that was not true he went all the way into the white house. why did they say that he was not armed. that was not true he was armed. and is anybody going to be held accountable? and the answer from clancey was oh there was no problem there. >> ron, respectfully in this case he wasn't told for five days. the criticism is that he was out of the loop so how can you possibly say that he's been involved in some degree of cover-up. >> because of the so-called -- >> may i share with you what most troubles me about this that hasn't been reported on in the media. i think our attention is diverted to what happened at the quote unquote crash scene which apparently wasn't a crash. a woman shows up at the white house, comes to the perimeter and she -- as initially reported drove a government car into the white house security barricades after drinking late at night at that party last week but the underlying incident was that

and it raises serious questions about just what kind of white house we could see under clinton. and more on today's historic moment. israeli prime minister netanyahu making his case to congress against allowing iran to go nuclear. the reaction we'll have it from house democrats. many of whom were big no shows at today's speech. >> in this deadly game of thrones there's no place for america, no peace for christians jews or muslims who don't share the medieval creed. no rights for women no freedom for anyone. so when it comes to iran and isis, the enemy of your enemy is your enemy. just isn't enough to ease my constipation i trust dulcolax tablets. i take dulcolax for dependable overnight relief and in the morning i am back to myself dulcolax, designed for dependable relief ♪ building aircraft, the likes of which the world has never seen. this is what we do. ♪ that's the value of performance. northrop grumman. >> fox news alert as we welcome you back to "outnumbered now." a situation we're watching, we're waiting new reaction to the netanyahu speech. i just found from our producer

did you or your staff have any conversations with any white house officials regarding their appearance? >> with the white -- no. no. >> you had no conversations with anybody at the white house. >> no. my conversations were -- actually it was through my staff with the department of homeland security. >> who at the department of homeland security is this. >> i can't answer who. >> was it mr. miorcas. >> i did not speak to mr. miorcas regarding. >> will you give us the answer to that. >> i will -- >> when should we expect that answer. >> >> i will speak to my office. this afternoon. >> thank you that would be great. if we invite these individuals and others within the secret service, if we invite them for transcribed interviews will you provide these individuals to the committee? >> i will. >> will you provide all personnel we request to the committee for transcribed interviews? >> with the department i will certainly work through this. but i answered -- >> you are the director. >> i'm the director under the department of the homeland security. >> can you make decision this by yourself. >

i covered the bush white house. if at the height of the bush energy task force scandal where there wasn't a lot of transparency, we should point that out, if we had learned during that that there was this other e-mail account, dick cheney at oil man.com and he was communicating with oil executives about energy policy, you know, every media outlet would be going crazy and rightly so. >> but on that point, everyone's been replaying this clip of hillary clinton talking about secrecy at the bush white house. and there is hypocrisy there as well. >> and karl rove and whether or not there were separate rnc the accounts as i remember, and gw bush accounts that were alledgedly used for political fundraising rightly so to keep it separate from official but there were allegations never fully proven that bush officials were using the other accounts to do official business. so that has been there before in fairness to hillary. >> you brought up whitewater. and i think a lot of people forgotten or barely even knew when hillary c

. >> we will discuss the tug of war between the white house and congress with two members of the senate foreign affairs committee senator senator barrasso and ben cardin. >> two missouri police officers were ambushed. >> this is not someone trying to bring he willing to ferguson but a punk a punk, a punk. >> we weigh in. >> our power player of the week, afghanistan's first lady ashraf ghani on taking a stand for women's right. this is all, right now on "fox news sunday." >> hello, again from fox news in washington. it began as an investigation into benghazi. now hillary clinton is being forced to answer for her handling of mails while secretary of state. the house benghazi committee has issued a subpoena for clinton's e-mails and called for an independent review of her private server. joining us now is the chairman of that committee, south carolina republican trey gowdy. the state department has turned over 300 of clinton's e-mails on benghazi, some 900 pages last month, to the benghazi committee you are the chair of. based on what you have seen, did she do anything wrong? how can you b

we begin with senior white house correspondent jim acosta.must-see tv for president obama. he's acknowledging there has been damage done to the u.s./israeli relationship but the damage will not be lasting. the white house is bracing for israeli prime minister netenyahu's speech to congress this morning. one fear is that netenyahu will reveal secret details from the iran negotiations. the white house said that would be a betrayal of the u.s. trust. netenyahu insists the talks will pave the way for iran to have nuclear weapons soon. the president maintains he does not take this rift with netenyahu personally. >> i think it's permanently destructive, i think it is a distraction from what should be our

this was 45 years ago that charles made his first trip to the white house then. was president, who famous then tried to set the 21-year-old prince up with his 24-year-old daughter trisha. you know how that worked out. tonight, though a bit more business on tap. the royals will head off to an eye vent not far from here where he'll be honored with a conservation award before they head off to louisville, kentucky. >> sounds like a great trip. >>> when we come back the nasty side of social media. [ female announcer ] hands were made for talking. feet...tiptoeing. better things than the pain stiffness, and joint damage of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis. before you and your rheumatologist decide on a biologic ask if xeljanz is right for you. xeljanz (tofacitinib) is a small pill not an injection or infusion, for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz can relieve ra symptoms, and help stop further joint damage. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infecti

>> well that's what the white house has been saying. if there's no deal what's the compromise to make sure at least the assurance that iran is not going to get nuclear weapons? now, i think what the next step would be is if iran won't come to the table they won't strike a deal, democrats on capitol hill will agree with republicans and impose additional sanctions. >> sanctions nor good if it's just americans because there's no way to get the chinese to do that. what about the russians? >> that's right. that's why any deal would go as lindsay graham was saying, before the u.n. security council not to congress. the white house has made that clear and that's not only upsetting republicans. that upsetting some democrats who want congress to have some role, and the administration says if the sanctions are lifted, well then congress would have to do that. but that could be years down the road, and remember the interim agreement that was reached to start these talks all of that was not fully made public. some was but some wasn't. only to congre

i am going back to the white house. i will fill out of course whatever forms i am asked to fill out and i'll do that process tomorrow. >> well, ms. psaki just recently got a big promotion and yet another major announcement she has. go to facebook.com/thekellyfile to watch that part of the breaking news. >>> and we have breaking news about one of the pilots locked out of the cockpit and the voice recorder that captured the sound of the co-pilot trying to smash in the door. that is next. [ male announcer ] meet jill. she thought she'd feel better after seeing her doctor. and she might have if not for kari, the identity thief who stole jill's social security number to open credit cards ruining jill's credit and her dream of retirement. every year, millions of people just like you experience how a little personal information in the wrong hands could wreak havoc on your life. this is identity theft and once every 2 seconds someone becomes a victim. lifelock offers comprehensive identity theft protection. the patented lifeloc

when i was in the white house, refused to. never did never did during my time as a witness, either. i did learn later that one of my lawyers did so, much to my chagrin, which charlie, my principal lawyer and i suspected, but he did it without my authority, and i was able to testify to the senate. i suspected who was leaking this, but i cannot tell the prosecutor, my lawyer, what have you. i do not talk to the press, but anyway. while i was still in the white house, they issued a statement that i had forced my secretary to issue a statement that they think that i will be there scapegoat, they picked the wrong guy. moderator: when does mitchell talk to you about -- john: late april when i am dealing with the prosecutors and i have told mitchell that i'm going to, you know, anybody i had any respect for, eyeball to eyeball, here is what i'm going to do, here is why i'm going to do it, here is what i hope will happen. i know you're not going to like it, we can all account for ourselves because we made mistakes and it is time to cl

to benjamin netanyahu's visit tomorrow how should the white house be handling this? re's two points. another sign of the weakness of john boehner as speaker of the house. he decided to extend this invitation in part to apiece that very right wing base of his party, to show he would stand up to president obama. instead, it's playing politics with one of our most important relationships. with the safety and security again of this process. i think the white house has tried to tread very carefully. what's interesting to note last night right here on cnn, at least reported that the prime minister netanyahu has actually started to soften his rhetoric a little bit. it will be interesting to see what he actually says in his speech tomorrow and i think you will see a reaction appropriate accordingly from the white house. >> why didn't the white house throw their arms around benjamin netanyahu when they knew he was coming instead of feeling slighted. why not take the high road. >> if i said the republicans look ridiculous with this dhs funding, the white house looks ridiculous

a big show at the white house? you think is going to be helpful for the american people? >> and certainly you wonder if now looking back at this if that's something that the white house regrets, not just because of everything that's come out about what happened with his unit, but there were uncomfortable details he didn't want to see his family after he returned. this is a man who you know, was in captivity for five years, didn't want to see his family. that raised a lot of questions about what had been going on here, what kind of state he was in, and to put the family up there on display like that i think, was questionable to some people. i think that one thing that we should watch for over the next couple of months is whether the administration asks the qataris to keep the gitmo detainees there for a longer period of time. they'd have to get agreement from the government to do that. you can imagine the administration would rather have them monitored by the qataris and u.s. intelligence agencies than sending them