you know sally yates.elieve would have happened today if that hearing had happened as it was supposed to? >> don, i don't think there is any question at all that the white house does not want sally yates to testify. they may say they do. i heard spicer today say they would be happy to testify. there's no credibility coming out of the executive branch right now. i think also when you think about it you're likely to hear that president trump's vindication has turned into implication. the worst thing that can happen from a lawyer's point of view is for your client to get caught up in somebody else's wiretap. that's what it sounds like has happened here. somebody in the trump team either in the transition team or the executive branch now is probably caught up in a tap. i don't think there's any question they did not want her to testify. i'm not surprised to hear him say, oh, we're all for it. i think probably a week or so now when the hearing gets rescheduled you'll start to hear things from white house lawyer

sally yates the acting attorney general. james clapper, the former director of national intelligence. john brennan, the former cia director both of whom served during the obama administration. we are anticipating that hearing today, but you're absolutely right, it was canceled. the other hearing was canceled, that of mike rogers and james comey. we'll see if they are rescheduled. jeff, let me get back to you because we're standing by for this press briefing. sean spicer getting ready to answer reporters questions. i assume a lot of the focus will be on russia, the investigation. other issues coming up as well. stand by. i think spice ser about to start. >> are you done? okay. thank you. i appreciate that. i know the pool is gathering at 1:30 so i'm going to try to keep this on the shortened. this morning there was a listening session with the attorney general to discuss law enforcement issues related to violence. the fraternal order of police is the larger organization of law enforcement officers. they represent those who de

sally yates can shed important light on that. i think for that reason the white house does not want her to testify. let's bring her in. let's hear what she has to say. >> today's open hearing was postponed by chairman nunes along with a closed hearing with fbi director comey, nsa director rogers. and today the "washington post" reported that the trump administration was in fact seeking to block sally yates from testifying on russia at all. the post report details the back and forth through both letters and meetings between the justice department and yates' own attorneys. the doj reportedly considers, quote, her public testimony including on the firing of former national security adviser michael flynn for his contacts with the russian ambassador to be offlimits in a congressional hearing because the topics are covered by attorney-client privilege or the presidential communication privilege. critical wording there. yates and her attorneys argue that the administration waved any privilege because of past white house statements and p

let's start with sally yates. you have the top democrat on intel raising questions about what went on there, because she sought permission, could she not have gotten it? difference of opinion of what she should or shouldn't have discussed, we'll leave that to jeffrey toobin. looking at the timeline, what is devin nunes as the chairman's role in all of this? >> again, totally unclear right now because he hasn't been very open about what he learned and where he's going to go with it. in fact, we talk about how a lot of democrats are upset with devin nunes, but here are quotes from three republicans this morning. john mccain, speaking of chairman nunes -- "he has a lot of explaining to do." susan collins, another republican senator -- "i believe our senate investigation has more credibility than the house." senator lindsey graham on another network says "i think he has to repair the damage. my belief is that the house is off track and probably can't get back on track." so, when you talk about sally yates, the idea th

but sally yates was going to be one of the star witnesses. now you'll remember she was a deputy attorney general in the obama administration and healedover. acting attorney general in the first days of the trump administration until she was fired. that's a bit of background here but the press briefing today sean spicer said they would welcome her testimony. >> on the 24th ms. yates sent a letter to wlous council specifically stating that if they did not receive a response by march 27 at 10:00 a.m. they would quote conclude the white house would not assert executive privilege over these matters. the white house did not respond and took no thaks prevent ms. yates from testifying. that's the story. that's what documents show. >> i hope she testifies. i look forward to it. let's be honest. the hearing was never -- was actually never notified. if she choose to move forward, great. we have no problem with her testifying plain and simple. >> but the question here is executive privilege here and now the issue we're talking about, wolf, is the investi

we moved off of sally yates' testimony.were talking about concern that some in the legal community and department of justice that sally yates -- >> you should understand, that is very uncommon. the trump administration, the bush administration, going back to the clinton administration, they hold these privileges jealously. >> for people that don't follow this closely, that's conversations that are taking place in the white house, the president has to be able to feel that conversations he's been having with people. >> ever since george washington and the jay treaty, the president has said we need some confidentiality. and nixon supreme court, really recognized that in a substantive way, and say, yes, there's this executive privilege not in the constitution, there's a lot of am bbiguit ambiguity. and the precise thing that yates was doing is investigating. when you have a prosecutor, which she was, talks about an ongoing investigation, it raises a question about fairness. for civil attorneys like myself, we tend to fall in th

you know sally yates.elieve would have happened today if that hearing had happened as it was supposed to? >> it's getting to the point where they told you the sun rose in the east you better go check because there's no credibility coming out of the executive branch right now. think also when you think about it you're likely to hear that president trump's vindication has turned into implication. the worst thing that can happen if you think about it from a lawyer's point of view and i've both prosecuted these cases and defended them, the worst thing is for your client to get caught up in somebody else's wiretap and that's what it sounds like has happened here. somebody in the trump team is probably caught up in a tap and i think that was set to come out. so i don't think there's any question they did not want her to testify. i'm not surprised to hear them say that oh, we're all forit. i think probably a week or so when the hearing gets rescheduled you'll start to hear things from white house lawyers say ther

cecilia. >> couple things on sally yates. how and when did the white house encourage her to testify? >> the letter that her attorney sent literally says, that if we do not receive a response by march 27th at 10:00 a.m., i will conclude that the white house does not assert executive privilege over the matters with respect to hearings or otherwise. i don't think you can be any clearer than that. >> and so you're saying executive privilege does not -- >> i'm not saying anything. i'm literally -- that's what she wrote, the action was, if you don't act we will assume the following. great. i don't think that you can read that any other way. it was very -- she's i'm sure a very talented -- he is a very talented lawyer and wrote it specifically for her. we read it that way and chose not to act because we have no problem with her testifying. >> executive privilege is not an issue for sally yates, would not have been an issue for sally yates' testifying. >> that's correct. >> you want to add? >> you're -- i don't, it's interesting. thi

sally yates to testify. i think that starts pealing the onion away from why devin nunes didn't want her to appear. i've been told from multiple sources that she did not go to see the white house counsel just to give him a heads up about flynn's communications as had been said by reince priebus and sean spicer. but in fact she went over to say she had significant concerned about an issue of compromised and that he may have been compromised and then we have to ask the question about after she went to the white house why did it take so long for them to finally decide they were going to fire general flynn only after the washington post had revealed in a story about his communication only after it became public. >> see in real time a house intelligence committee essentially break down. even their regular meetings have stopped. >> it's amazing. and we've heard the same thing and that sally was going to get up there. sally was going to get up there and talk about conversations they had in the white house about flyn

topping our agenda right now, sally yates. >> i hope she testifies. i look forward to it. >> the former acting attorney general was supposed to testify today in an investigation into russia's meddling in the election until her hearing was canceled. we will take you through what we know at this hour. also on the agenda, the status of chairman devin nunez. >> he has to step down. even if it were only the appearance of what he has done. >> it's not just the issue of sally yates. every hearing of the house intelligence committee this week on russian meddling has been canceled as chairman devin nunez faces calls from democrats and even some concerns from republicans now to step down about his leadership of that committee. can he survive? also this hour, debate and switch. >> we've never had anything like this happen in any of our elections before. >> that was a great pivot off the fact that she wants open boarders. >> we never had anything like this happen in any of our elections before. >> ta was a great pivot off the fact that he wants open boarders. >>

yates wanted to know if the white house was bluffing or serious. sean spicer responded. >> i hope she testifies. i look forward to it. the hearing was never -- was actually never notified. if they choose to move forward, great. the report in the washington post is 100% false but to suggest that we stood in the way of that is 100% false. >> this is where it comes back to chairman nunes. he is the one that canceld the hearing where we would have heard from sally yates and he did so before the administration would have been forced to somehow forbid her testimony. the leader of the free world was back on twitter tonight. another version of nothing to see here on the russia story. another attempt to diminish our institutions, promote fox news. quote why doesn't fake news talk about podesta ties to russia as covered by fox news or money from russia to clinton. sale of uranium? politico senior foreign affairs correspondent crowley is with us. and host of the national public radio talk show, indevisible, our friend, charl asiekz. michael, did spicer just t

yates' lawyers are arguing it does not apply here.there there has been public commentary already about this stuff. the important question about yates, though, is what does she know about mike flynn? she informed the white house that flynn was subject to blackmail regarding his conversations with the russian ambassador and the way he represented them to the vice president, which apparently wasn't true. what else is there, though? because she has got a lot of access to the intercepts, signals intelligence, eavesdropping on the flynn/kislyak conversations and other evidence in the russia investigation. adam schiff, ranking democrat on the house intelligence committee was explicit the other day after devin nunes canceled the open hearing saying he is trying to choke off information and he specifically referred to yates. >> congresswoman jackie speier echoed that. she is a member of the house intelligence committee a democrat. she said she believes this, in relation to the story, is an effort to essentially muzzle the house intelligence co

people feel sally yates will testify under some arrangement. right now, it feels like sand bagging both ways. it looks like the republicans can't get their gist at the white house. they can't get their stories straight. >> devlin, what could sally yates say? >> i have been told that sally yates is obviously key point of interest. what was the conversation with the white house when she warned them about the issue of possible bla blackmail of michael flynn because his statements regarding his contact was the russian ambassador did not match up with what was picked up about the conversations. i'm told that some of the what she would say and as patrick pointed out, what will be said some way. some of the white house statements of the conversation are not correct. >> that sounds important. that sounds like something would be helpful to hear if it hasn't been cancelled. >> thes white hou white house t frame sally yates, not the white house, but republicans as barack obama holdover. she will be able to go to the hill and say this is what we saw. >> le

but yates was not ultimately called to testify today. and according to documents obtained be i the "post," the trump administration may not have wanted her to. in a letter dated last friday, march 24th, a justice department official notified yates' testimony. her testimony would be likely covered by executive privilege. as such, quote, she needs to consult with the white house before appearing in front of the committee. yates' attorney penned a letter to the white house march 24th asking if they did intend to evoke executive privilege, that same day, devin nunes called off the hearing, claiming he was being pushed back to make room for a second private session with comey and the nsa director. >> that hearing, however, did not happen today either. and ranking member adam 65 was not buying it. >> it was very apparent from the beginning that was a dodge, the whole idea of having a second hearing, with comey and rogers was designed to camouflage the real object, which was cancellation of the hearing which sally yates. >> a spokesman for nune

did they try to block sally yates to testifying before the panel? the white house flatly denied seeking to block her testimony, but when pressed nunes would not discuss the administration's role. >> did the trump administration seek to have sally yates not testify before your committee? >> look, you guys are just speculating. i'm sorry, wherever there's time we'll do a presser. >> did they ask you to cancel the hearing today? >> come on, guys. i mean, why did you cancel the hearinging? >> nothing has been cancelled. >> now, on the senate side, mark warner, the top democrat wants to hear from sally yates and i asked the fame question. he did not want to discuss any witness, likely testifying under oat in a private setting and no death yet set for that very important private interview. >> manu rajjo joining us from capitol hill. joining us now, democratic congressman from california. thanks for joining us. >> good evening, wolf. >> earlier today referring to the behavior of your chairman devin nunes and you said and i'm quoting you now. this is what a

there was talk about sally yates. you mentioned this at the top. story was this morning that the white house was trying to block sally yates from testifying before the house intelligence committee and revealing some privileged information. that would be information that went back and forth between the white house, specifically information about deliberations. well, when you take a look at the letters that were sent between attorneys for sally yates, the department of justice, attorneys for sally yates and the white house, it tells a different story. i managed to obtain these letters. there's a specific clause in these letters at the end where sally yates attorney has been asking about whether or not they can get permission to put out this privileged information in the intelligence committee. the attorney writes, quote, if we do not receive a response by monday, march 27th at 10 a.m. i will conclude the white house does not assert executive privilege over these matters. well, the white house didn't respond, so the attorneys did not hear back, theref

department to yates attorney. it does state in regard to her testimony that she would need to consult with the white house. when asked about this, when pressed on this, white house press secretary, sean spicer, denied this was any attempt by the white house to try to block sally yates from testifying before the house intelligence committee. you heard him say they welcome this testimony. if that hearing ever comes back to life, and we do expect it will, she will be testifying. the white house said they are not going to stand in the way. >> on the senate side, just to get this in for everyone watching, we heard from senator mark warner, a ranking chair on the senate side. she will testify there but no word to your point as far as the house intel committee is concerned. let me move on, because on top of all of this today, you have the republican in charge of the house intelligence committee who is still refusing to recuse himself over questionable actions involving their committee's investigations. you know the story

on march 24th, doj writing yates would be limited on what she could y. doj also saying yat needs to consult with the white house. her lawyer responding that it would be unu tennellable not the talk about information and that same day, this happened. >> postpone the previously scheduled march 28th hearing. >> we strongly object to the cancellation of this hearing. i think this is a serious mistake. >> chairman nunes denies he talked to the white house about yates. that committee hearing was supposed to be today with a rhered hot spotlight on sally yas. back in january, she refused to defend the president's travel ban. it led to this. >> a major breaking news this evening. attorney general of the united states has been fired. >> after yates was fired, we learned she had told white house con sell she was concerned about then national security adviser, michael flynn's contact with the russian ambassador and believed he was vulnerable to blackmail. today, she would have broken her silence. what does schenn? she know? with me, jeremy bash. nice to see you. fir

yates has to say or had to say in past tense. >> well, let's break it down. my understanding is that yates' testimony would have differed from the official white house accounts. now we don't know exactly in what way her testimony would have differed from the official white house accounts but we can think about two potentialities. what she told to white house counsel and said hey, you've got a problem on your hand with your national security advisor. that's point one. the second thing she could have talked about is what she heard in response from the white house. what did he say back to her or other people in the white house. did he say we don't care or we're not interested at all? or did they say oh, my goodness this is a surprise to us? in either case, 17 days pass and these are the 17 days that i think require emphasis. so from january 26th, which is when she went to talk to the white house about mike flynn to february 13th, the day flynn resigns, he was fired. 17 days elapsed. what was happening during that time? if the president knew flynn had misled seni

jeff pegues is on capitol hill with the new controversy over sally yates. jeff, good morning. >> good morning. the house investigation has been officially stalled, bogged down by finger-pointing. the latest testimony was to be of sally yates who also informed the white house that former national security adviser michael flynn had misled the vice president about his contacts with the russian ambassador. >> the white house did not respond and took no action that prevented miss yates from testifying. >> they sought to delay former attorney general sally yates from testifying. >> we encouraged them to go aheading but to suggest in any way, shape, or form that we stood in the way of that is 100% false. >> reporter: cbs news has testified. it warns that there is a limit to what she could reveal in her testimony and that she needs to consult with the white house. on the same day she received this letter, the chairman of the house intelligence committee congressman devin nunes canceled yates' testimony. >> it gets stranger and stranger and frankly more bizarre ever

the letter from the justice department to yates' lawyer appeared to advise that yates would need to consult with the white house before testifying stating she needs to consult with the white house. show need not obtain separate consent from the department of justice but the white house insisted it would not stand in the way. >> i hope she testifies. i look forward to it. it was never -- let's be honest. the hearing was never -- was actually never notified. if they choose to move forward, great. we have no problem with her testifying, plain and simple. . >> reporter: yates was scheduled to testify before the house intelligence committee along with the former director of national intelligence and former cia director, but that hearing was scrapped by nunes, and there's no word yet as to when yates will be rescheduled to testify and we should point out white house press secretary sean spicer was asked whether he could provide new information about how nunes made his way on to the white house grounds last week. spicer at the briefing yesterday, john, indicated that perhaps he might have that inf

yates had evidence from the u.s. intelligence community that was not true, and she went to the white house to alert the white house counsel's office that public statements were being made about these conversations that were not factual. the intelligence community had evidence that flynn had in fact talked about sanctions. as a justin is that he was telling the russian ambassador, don't worry about what president obama has just done. we're going to take another look at all of this once we come into office in a few weeks. that, arguably, was undermining what the then president of the united states had just done. we only have one president at a time. was the whitesue house is saying things that publicly -- saying things publicly that are not true. that is ultimately borne out by the fact that the white house fired michael flynn over this issue, over misleading vice president pence about the nature of these conversations. all of this was something that sally yates was going to address in her public testimony. i should po

but there is no reason why sali yates can't testify in public. reporter: speaker ryan said that this is a whistleblower person. [indiscernible] mr. schiff: you know, it certainly doesn't sound like what i would consider a whistleblower. we have procedures for whistleblowers to come to the committee. when they come to the committee, they are protected and provide whatever materials or information they have and they are protected. that procedure wasn't followed here. and if we're talking about not people from the agencies -- and again i don't know whether the "new york times" has it right or wrong, but if we are talking about national security staff, they could go to white house counsel. there are mechanisms in place to share this information. if the object here was to give it to somebody to give it to the president, it makes it bewildering why it wasn't taken president, the particularly if one of those individuals is the director of intelligence at the national security council. they have frequent access to the president. they don't need our chair

jeff is on capitol hill with the new controversy over sally yates.f, good morning. >> reporter: good morning. the house intelligence investigation has officially stalled, bogged down by finger pointing and accusations. the latest flash point is the testimony of sally yates, who was the official who informed the white house that former national security advisor michael flynns misled the vice president about his contacts with the russian ambassador. >> the white house did not respond and took no action that prevented miss yates from testifying. >> reporter: an exasperated sean spicer dismissed accusations that the white house sought to delay sally yates from testifying. >> we encouraged them to go ahead. but to suggest in any way, shape or form that we stood in the way of that is 100% false. >> reporter: cbs news has obtained this letter from the trump justice department to the attorney representing yates. it warns that there is a limit to what she could reveal in her testimony and that she needs to consult with the white house. on the same day she rec

the white house has made clear yates to ant sally testify. we want sally yates to testify. i think she's fully prepared to testify. so the only obstacle at this point is the signature of the we rman, and we hope that get that. reporter: okay. the rote a letter first or white house council? rep. schiff: the white house wrote a letter to us that i the president's press secretary referred to in his conference. e received that simultaneously announcing during the press conference, in that letter, invited the chair and i to -- in to questions i had raised, to review these materials. we've accepted. i'll go read them. i look forward to it. be s ultimately going to necessary if the white house eally wants us to answer the questions they've raised, with the full committee to look at ranking and t the chair, and we'll need the full support of the agencies, because information d the about how the materials were gathered and what procedures they followed. do this in uld you the same format as the chairman format he saw or what setting the white house saw these, would do you that in th

yates followed up with the white house lawyers on friday. they never responded, and the same day nunes canceled the s aring. press secretary sean spicer said technically the white house didn't stop her testimony. >> the white house did not respond and took no action to preventing miss yates from testifying. >> right now i should be sitting in a hearing and the american people should be hearing from sally yates. >> reporter: democrat eric swalwell is a member of the intelligence committee. >> this is what cover-up behavior looks like. >> that's pretty strong to say that. >> it's our job to get to the bottom of what's going on, but right now the american people want transparency, and what they are getting are more and more smoke bombs. >> reporter: while some gpublicans have been critical of nunes, only one g.o.p. member of the house has joined democrats in calling for him the step aside. today north carolina's walter jones broke ranks and said nunes should recuse himself. >> pelley: jeff pegues in our washington newsroom. thanks. today presid

yesterday we learned that the trump administration tried to limit former deputy attorney general sally yates testimony on russian interference in the 2016 election. as reported in "the washington post," sally made threer their testimony would contradict statements made by officials at the white house. the hearing which they were to testify has now been canceled and all of us have a responsibility to ask why. if there is nothing to hide about his ties to putin's russia, then why doesn't president trump want sally yates to testify? if there is nothing to hide why does president trump continue to withhold his tks returns? if there is nothing to hide why won't president trump make public the visitors logs at mar-a-lago. we're now in day 68 of the trump administration. each day more and more information emerges about ties between putin's regime and trump's inner circle and campaign officials. each day the white house scrambles to contain the damage. it's time for the president to come clean with the american

yates needs to check with the white house. then a letter was sent to the white house. it said "if i do not receive a response by march 27, i will conclude the white house does not exert executive privilege". the white house never responded to the letter. that was de facto. a tacit approval of her going before the committee. and then of course we found out today the hearing was not going to happen. devin nunes saying the hearing was never officially scheduled. they wanted to make sure they would hear from comey in a closed-door session so they would have more information to talk to people in the open session, that would includes yates, bremer and clapper as well. it was a big topic as you can imagine in the white house press briefing. i asked sean spicer about it. >> there's reports that the hearing that was set for the 27th was not scheduled, it was cancelled by devin nunes to prevent this white house from publicly invoking a claim of executive privilege. can you speak to that? >> the report in the post is 100% false. the letters this they publish on their website all

lastly, i want to make a comment on a false report regarding former acting attorney sally yates. as a matter of fact, i would like to walk you through the sequence of events to make sure everyone is abundantly clear on what happened. march 14th, chairman nunes and reiki membership invited sally yates to testify on march 28th it on march 23rd, sally yates attorney sent a letter to the department of justice asking for their consent to testify without restraint peer march 24th, the department of justice said they could only discuss those issues they were authorized to talk about and referred them to the white house but also on the 20th, the lawyer sent a letter to the white house counsel requesting that consent specifically saying if they did not receive a response by march 27th at 10:00 a.m. they would "conclude that the white house does not exert executive privilege over these matters" p the white house did not respond and took no action that prevented miss sally yates from testifying peer that is the story peer that is with the documents show. with that, i'm glad to take some que

to claim that yates' testimony could not be disclosed without the consent of the white house.he had been scheduled to appear yesterday before the house intelligence committee. well, that was until republican chairman devin nunes canceled the hearing last week. nunes denies that the white house was involved in that decision, but his actions today to effectively shut down the investigation in the house at least for now. here's what ranking democrat adam schiff said about that canceled hearing late today. >> there's no reason to delay the hearing that we had scheduled for this week. as we were talking about earlier, if this is all about trying to avoid sally yates testifying, we now have the white house saying they're in favor of it. we're in favor of it. the public is in favor of it. so there's no reason to put this off. >> joining me right now is msnbc political analyst robert acosta and april ryan, white house correspondent. i want to start with april here. let me ask you this. the white house claim is that -- well, i should say chama nunes' claim is he hasome secret deal wher

you have the whole sally yates part of this playing into it. where are we with this? >> we're on the verge of a constitutional crisis. why i say that is why do we let in our government people do secret things, the intelligence agencies? it's a democracy and republic and they're supposed to answer to the public, but they do many things we don't know about. the reason we let them do that is because people we elect in the legislative branch oversee these people. that's the only reason why we let them do secret things. what we see now thanks to nunes he is destroying the congressional oversight president over whether putin meddled in our election and we know he did and to see if there was any degree of encouragement between the trump campaign and moscow. you have the president tweeting out this is a hoax. i hope sean spicer gets a lot of questions about that today. it's not a hoax. why does he keep insisting this is made up? you have nunes twice running to the president's aide la last we with his bizarre press conference and then now cancelling the sally yates hearing whi

they did not want miss rogers, miss yates to speak. they didn't want a repeat of last week's disastrous first meeting in which director comey said there is an investigation. the russians attempted to help the trump campaign and hurt mrs. clinton. there was no truth in the fabrication that president obama wiretapped trump tower. those are facts we have ascertained. the fact that the white house has a two-prong attack is pretty obvious, obstruction and distraction. >> you say it is obvious. would you consider that move just to scrap the hearing with sally yates, do you consider that to be a cover-up at all? >> look. it is evidence of a cover-up. it is hard to read their minds but what it says by its action is we don't want that testimony. we don't want further political damage by others in the intelligence community telling them what happened here. there is no rational explanation for the cancellation of that meeting. to say that there was a meeting already scheduled with mr. comey and mr. rogers is simply not true. the brutal fact is th

flynn resigned and yates was fired for travel ban. was supposed to testify tuesday as part investigation but in a letter the justice department warned her conversations with the white house wereikely covered by that presidential communications privilege." adding she needs to e could testify. yates' attorney then wrote to the white house counsel insisting she should be allowed to als have already been speaking publically about the matter but she no response and that same day congressman nunes postponed the russiar. did anyone at the white house direct you to postpone the yates testimony. ver and over again but did they, did in itone at the white house. >> no, that's a total false story. >> reporter: when paul ryan should step down on the speaker simply said no. in washington, janai news"." >> a.m. mixup left a five-year-old girl alone on aer and her mother in a panic. amber was waiting to are her daughter alexis to afternoon. when the bus arrived alexis she was mistakenly placed on the wrong bus and dropped off at her former stop in ch

there was supposed to be a hearing with the director of intelligence and sally yates. that got canceled late last week. nunes said that was to make room for the fbi and nsa director to come back to capitol hill and talk to committee members behind closed doors and that was never scheduled either so it's ab and people aren't sure how long the pause is going it last. >> charlie: what's happened to the credibility of the committee? >> it's taken a hit in other parts of the congress. you've seen most republicans in the senate do not want to say one thing or want to comment and you heard john mccain saying it's time to put this to a committee or independent commission because congress has shown it can't do its job itself anymore. there's a lot of faith in the senate intelligence committee and in the fbi process as well though there are criticism of the fbi director and how forthcoming he's being with information though most were pleased with his open hearing the house committee held to grill him and the nsa on issues. clearly there's a lot of discord in the house among the

the white house has made clear now they want sali yates to testify. we want sali yates to testify and she is fully prepared to testify, so the only obstacle is the signature of the chairman and we hope we get that. reporter: you wrote a letter first? mr. schiff: white house counsel wrote a letter to us, i think the white house press secretary referred to, we received that effectively at the same time with him announcing it during the press conference and that letter invited the chair and i, in response to questions i had raised, to review these materials. but again, we have accepted. i'll go read them. i look forward to it. it is ultimately going to be necessary if the white house really wants us to answer the questions they have raised, with the full committee to look at this, not just the ranking and chair and we need support of the agencies, because they will be the depository information about how the materials were gathered and what procedures were followed. [inaudible] reporter: if you do it in the same format as the chairman -- would you do it

flynn later resigned and yates was ultimately fired for refusing to defend the president's travel ban. she was supposed to testify tuesday as part of the russia investigation but in a letter the justice department warned her conversations with the white house were, quote, likely covered by presidential communications privilege adding she needs to consult white house about whether she could testify. yates' attorney wrote to the white house counsel insisting she should be allowed to speak because top administration officials have already been speaking publicly about the matter. but she got no response and that same day congressman nunes postponed the russia hearing altogether. >> did anyone at the white house direct you to postpone the yates testimony? >> gosh, you guys ask the same questions over and over again. >> reporter: but did they? >> no, that's a total false story. >> reporter: and when house speaker paul ryan was asked if he thinks congressman nunes should step down from the investigation the house speaker simply said no. diane, kendis. >> janai norman for us with the latest t

-- d sally yates sally yates, what could she tell the committee? was the first acting attorney general. going back when we sought a reports about who was meeting with various russian officials, it appears some of that information came from the justice department, whether or not it was yates herself. those are the earlier chapters that we have probably almost forgotten about. issue is how forthcoming and open they were about meetings more so than the fact they met with an ambassador. that is a fairly commonplace thing when you are open about it. that is what they were not, in this case. a lot of people are curious to hear what yates does now. i'm assuming she might be more open to talking about it. as we reported earlier today the white house went, through length to keep yates from testifying in front of the committee as she was originally scheduled to do today. it is supposed to be happening at some point in the future, but not the four comey and rogers come back from behind closed doors. according to letters we gublished, they were allegin some of

did nunes conform with the white house with sally yates?tomorrow. the president says it will be easy to get a deal on health care and we are doing well in iraq. for getting the u.s. just killed 100 civilians. what does day 69 hold for president trump? let's start with sara murray. >> reporter: a beating in the house as they stumble with how to move forward with the russian investigation. one thing is clear. the white house is in defensive crouch. >> are you going to stay as chairman and run the investigation? >> why would i not? >> reporter: devin nunes defiant amid calls for him to step aside on the russian investigation. >> are you going to recuse

it is unclear about sally yates. if she was being blocked from giving her testimony by the white house or if they went silent and let her hang out there not knowing if they were giving her approval or needed approval. where are we with this, mark? >> sean spicer said he hopes she testifies. door is open. whether it is before the house or before the senate remains to be seen. with the house in disarray, it looks like the senate will have to step up and very well might and probably will. they will have a news conference later today. to talk about the next steps. >> here is what spicer said about it. >> i hope she testifies. i look forward to it. let's be honest. the hearing was never notified. if they choose to move forward, great. we have most problem with her testifying. >> they have timing issues here. this was a little bit of a convaluted process. yates' attorney went to the white house and there is a question of privileged communication. the attorney informed the white house that some of the testimony would contra

the white house did not respond and took no action that prevented miss yates from testifying. >> i hope she was the. i look forward to it. >>> there's one investigation moving forward in a bipartisan spirit today that's the chairman and ranking democrat on the senate intel. they will offer an update today at 2:30. >>> spicer, sean spicer may be running out of ways to downplay the administration's ties to russia. listen to the press secretary getting into a heated exchange with reporters after suggesting that reporters are looking for a kremlin connection that don't exist. >> i said it from the day that i got here until whatever, that there's no connection. you've got russia. if the president puts russian salad dressing on his salad tonight somehow there's a russian connection. i appreciate your agenda here but the reality is -- no, no, hold on. at some point report the facts. the facts are that every single person who has been briefed on this subject has come away with the same conclusion. i'm sorry that disgusts you. you're shaking your head. i appreciate it. okay. but unders

also tonight, was there an effort by the white house to keep the fired acting attorney general, sally yates, from testifying? the white house firing back tonight, and you'll hear it. >>> also tonight, tracking severe storms hitting now. the tornado watch, large hail, damaging winds. the new system we're watching as we come on the air, million of americans in the path tonight. >>> the police officers ambushed, rushed to the hospital in the back of a pick-up truck. their unmarked vehicle riddled with bullet holes. >>> good evening. we begin with several major developments involving the white house and the pressure mounting on capitol hill. the congressman who's leading what suppose to be an independent investigation into russian meddling with the trump team. from democrats saying his on jikt ifr jiktivety is under question. a secret meeting on white house grounds on on the night before that happened. no word who he met with. will this investigation truly be independent. the white house was asked about the cloud of this investigation hanging over the president. the press secretary lashing out.