>> Bret: WELCOME BACK TO
"SPECIAL REPORT."
JOINING ME LIVE IN STUDIO
FORMER FBI DIRECTOR JAMES
COMEY A LITTLE TOUGHER TO
MOTORCADE.
>> TOUGH FOR EVERYBODY
TODAY.
>> Bret: I UNDERSTAND YOU
HAVE A NEW BOOK OUT.
>> I HAVE HEARD THAT YEAH.
>> Bret: THANKS FOR BEING
HERE.
THE BOOK IS "HIGHER LOYALTY,
TRUTH, LIES AND LEADERSHIP."
BIG SALES IN ITS FIRST WEEK.
I HAVE READ THE BOOK.
I HAVE SEEN OR READ EVERY
INTERVIEW THAT YOU HAVE DONE
ON THIS MEDIA TOUR.
A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE FOCUSED
ON PRESIDENT TRUMP AND YOUR
INTERACTIONS.
I WANT TO GET TO THAT BUT I
WANT TO START
CHRONOLOGICALLY WITH HILLARY
CLINTON EMAIL PROBE AND THE
DECISIONS YOU MADE.
THERE IS IT TRUE THAT YOU
AND YOUR FBI COLLEAGUES MADE
THE DECISION TO EXONERATE
SECRETARY CLINTON WELL
BEFORE SHE WAS INTERVIEWED.
>> NO.
>> Bret: SO WHY WAIT UNTIL
THE END AND WHY WRITE UP THE
MEMO THAT YOU EVENTUALLY
BRING FORWARD FIRST?
>> THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.
COME MAY, AFTER WE HAD BEEN
DOING IT FOR ABOUT 10
PART OF MY REGULAR BRIEFING
FROM THE INVESTIGATORS, SEE
THAT THEIR VIEW WAS IT WAS
UNLIKELY TO END IN A CASE
THAT THE PROSECUTORS AT DOJ
WOULD BRING.
>> Bret: BEFORE THE
INTERVIEW.
>> SURE.
BECAUSE THEY HAD SPENT 10
MONTHS DIGGING AROUND,
READING ALL HER EMAILS,
PUTTING EVERYTHING TOGETHER.
INTERVIEWING EVERYBODY WHO
SET UP HER SYSTEM.
THEY WEREN'T CERTAIN OF THIS
RESULT.
THEY SAID LOOK, BOSS ON THE
CURRENT COURSE AND SPEED IT
LOOKS LIKE IT'S NOT GOING TO
GET TO A PLACE WHERE THE
PROSECUTORS WILL BRING IT IN
MAY I START THINKING OKAY,
IF IT CONTINUES THAT WAY AND
IT MAY NOT, IF IT CONTINUES
THAT WAY HOW DO WE END THIS
THING IN A CREDIBLE WAY.
>> Bret: WHAT, IF ANYTHING,
COULD SHE HAVE SAID IN THAT
INTERVIEW THAT WOULD HAVE
CHANGED YOUR MIND AND
SOMEHOW CHANGED WHAT YOU
EVENTUALLY DECIDED TO DO?
>> WELL, TWO WAYS.
FIRST, BY LYING IN A WAY WE
COULD PROVE IN THE INTERVIEW
OR GIVING US A HOOK TO
CONTINUE THE INVESTIGATION
TO SEE IF WE COULD PROVE A
LIE OR ADMITTING SOMETHING
THAT WOULD SURPRISE US ABOUT
HER INTENT.
NOW, A LOT OF FOLKS HAVE
ASKED GOOD QUESTION ABOUT
WHY TO DO THE INTERVIEW AT
THE END.
THAT'S FAIRLY TYPICAL FOR A
SUBJECT INTERVIEW IN A WHITE
COLLAR INVESTIGATION.
I THINK YOU SEE SPECIAL
COUNSEL MUELLER TAKING
EXACTLY THAT APPROACH WITH
THE PRESIDENT.
>> Bret: YOU ALREADY KNEW
THAT SHE HAD BEEN TELLING,
WHATEVER YOU WANT TO SAY,
INVESTIGATION OF WHAT -- AND
HOW SHE HANDLED THOSE
EMAILS.
TAKE A LISTEN.
>> SECRETARY CLINTON SAID
THERE WAS NOTHING MARKED
CLASSIFIED ON HER EMAILS
EITHER SENT OR RECEIVED.
WAS THAT TRUE?
>> THAT'S NOT TRUE.
>> SECRETARY CLINTON SAID I
DID NOT EMAIL ANY CLASSIFIED
MATERIAL TO ANYONE ON MY
EMAIL.
THERE IS NO CLASSIFIED
MATERIAL.
WAS THAT TRUE?
>> THERE WAS CLASSIFIED
MATERIAL EMAILED.
>> SECRETARY CLINTON SAID
ALL WORK-RELATED EMAILS WERE
RETURNED TO THE STATE
DEPARTMENT.
WAS THAT TRUE?
>> NO.
WE FOUND WORK-RELATED
EMAILS, THOUSANDS THAT WERE
NOT RETURNED.
>> Bret: SO IT WENT ON.
THERE WERE CLEARLY A PATTERN
THERE.
AND HAD YOU ALREADY MADE
YOUR DECISION.
>> NO.
I HAD NOT MADE MY DECISION,
BUT I COULD SEE WHAT THE
INVESTIGATORS SAW AFTER 10
MONTHS.
IF YOU DON'T HAVE A GENERAL
SENSE OF WHERE YOU ARE
HEADED AFTER 10 MONTHS OF
THAT KIND OF WORK, YOU ARE
NOT COMPETENT.
THEY COULD SEE IT WAS
UNLIKELY, ALTHOUGH NOT
CERTAIN, UNLIKELY TO GET US
TO A PLACE WHERE THEY WOULD
PROSECUTE IT AT THE JUSTICE
DEPARTMENT.
AND THE QUESTION WAS WOULD
SHE LIE TO US?
WHAT PEOPLE SAY IN THE
YOU KNOW, IN A POLITICAL
CAMPAIGN IS NOT OUR
BUSINESS.
OUR BUSINESS IS ARE YOU
GOING TO LIE TO US AND IF
YOU ARE AND WE CAN PROVE IT,
THEN WE ARE GOING TO
PROSECUTE YOU FOR IT.
>> Bret: DID YOU GO BACK TO
INTENT A LOT.
ACTUALLY THE STATUTE AS IT'S
WRITTEN HANDLING CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION GROSSLY
NEGLIGENT DOESN'T DEAL WIN
TENT.
>> GROSSLY NEGLIGENT IS
EXPRESS PRESSURE OF KIND OF
INTENT.
HOW WERE YOU ACTING WHAT WAS
YOUR MENTAL STATE AT THE
TIME.
>> Bret: YOU WERE CAREFUL TO
CALL IT EXTREMELY CARELESS
NOT GROSSLY NEGLIGENT.
>> RIGHT.
I WAS STRUGGLING WITH THE
FACT WE THOUGHT IT WAS NOT
MERE SLOPPINESS BUT DIDN'T
RISE TO THE LEVEL OF
CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT THAT THE
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
PROSECUTES.
HOW DO YOU DESCRIBE THAT?
I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE SAID
REALLY SLOPPY.
I WANTED TO BE HONEST AND
SAY IT'S ABOVE SLOPPY.
IT DOESN'T ADD UP TO THE
WHAT 1917 STATUTE MEANT WHEN
IT SAID GROSSLY NEGLIGENT IS
A FELONY.
>> Bret: WHY DID YOU ALLOW
CHERYL MILLS, SECRETARY
CLINTON'S CHIEF OF STAFF, TO
SIT IN ON THAT INTERVIEW?
SHE WAS POTENTIAL ITLY A
SUBJECT OR TARGET IN THE
INVESTIGATION.
SHE WAS A GOVERNMENT
EMPLOYEE.
SHE WASN'T CLINTON'S
ATTORNEY.
BUT, YET, SHE SITS IN THERE
AND TALKS WITH HER
THROUGHOUT THE INTERVIEW.
>> YEAH.
MY UNDERSTANDING WAS AT THAT
TIME SHE WAS ONE OF
CLINTON'S ATTORNEYS.
SHE WAS NO LONGER A SUBJECT
IN OUR INVESTIGATION.
THE AGENTS HAD SCRUBBED HER
CONDUCT VERY CAREFULLY BY
THAT POINT AND SHE WAS NO
LONGER A SUBJECT.
THAT, AGAIN, THAT'S A
REASONABLE QUESTION.
BUT THE FACTS ARE NOT A
SUBJECT.
ONE OF CLINTON'S LAWYERS.
SHE IS ENTITLED TO BE IN THE
INTERVIEW.
>> Bret: WE ASKED PEOPLE TO
TWEET IN OR WRITE IN.
WE HAVE ONE FROM JAY HARPER
WILSON I'M A RETIRED FBI
AGENT SERVING ALMOST 25
YEARS RETIRING IN 1995 AS
SENIOR EQUITIESIVE SPECIAL
AGENT PLEASE ASK THURSDAY
WHY A GRAND JURY WAS NOT
USED IN THE HILLARY CLINTON
INVESTIGATION AS WOULD BE
NORMAL AND WHY WAS IT RUN
OUT OF H.Q.?
BOOK DID NOT ADDRESS.
>> YEAH.
SECOND ONE I WILL TAKE
FIRST.
IT WAS RUN OUT OF HQ BECAUSE
IT WAS A CASE OF INTENSE
INTEREST.
OUTSIDE TO THE MEDIA, AND SO
TO KEEP IT TIGHT, IT WAS
WORKED IN THE COUNTER
INTELLIGENCE DIVISION AT
HEADQUARTERS.
YOU CAN REASONABLY DISAGREE
WITH THAT IF YOU ARE AN FBI
PERSON.
COULD HAVE PUT IT IN
WASHINGTON FIELD OFFICE.
COULD HAVE PUT IT IN NEW
YORK.
THE DECISION THAT COUNTER
INTENTION MADE IT WILL BE
KEPT TIGHTER AND LEAK-PROOF
WHICH IT WAS CRIMINAL
INTELLIGENCE DIVISION.
>> Bret: NO GRAND JURY.
>> I'M NOT ALLOWED TO
COMMENT ON THE WAY IN WHICH
THE GRAND JURY WAS USED.
I WILL SAY THIS THOUGH SHE
WAS NOT INTERVIEWED IN FRONT
OF A GRAND JURY WHICH IS
ANOTHER JUDGMENT CALL THAT
PROSECUTORS AND
INVESTIGATORS MAKE ALL THE
TIME.
>> Bret: YOU THOUGHT THAT
ATTORNEY GENERAL LORETTA
LYNCH WAS COMPROMISED THAT
YOU HAD TO DO SOMETHING
DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF THAT
TARMAC MEETING WITH FORMER
PRESIDENT CLINTON AND
BECAUSE SHE HAD WANTED TO
CALL IT A MATTER, CORRECT?
>> AND OTHER THINGS.
>> Bret: AND OTHER THINGS IN
THIS CLASSIFIED THING THAT
ENDS UP LEAKING TO THE "NEW
YORK TIMES."
SHE DENIES.
THIS SHE WRITES: IF HE HAD
ANY CONCERNS REGARDING EMAIL
INVESTIGATION, CLASSIFIED OR
NOT, HE HAD AMPLE
OPPORTUNITIES TO RAISE THEM
WITH ME BOTH PRIVATELY AND
IN MEETINGS.
HE NEVER DID.
SO, SOMEONE IS NOT TELLING
THE TRUTH HERE.
IS IT THE FORMER ATTORNEY
GENERAL OR YOU?
>> NO.
ACTUALLY, I THINK WE ARE
BOTH TELLING THE TRUTH.
I NEVER WENT TO HER AND SAID
LORETTA, I THINK YOU SHOULD
RECUSE YOURSELF.
MY PROBLEM WAS SHE HAD
ALREADY ANNOUNCED IT
AND THAT SHE WOULD ACCEPT MY
RECOMMENDATION.
AND SO AT THAT POINT WHAT DO
I DO?
AND I DECIDED AT THAT POINT
I HAVE GOT TO STEP AWAY FROM
HER.
>> Bret: FAST FORWARD A LOT
OF PEOPLE ARE UPSET HOW IT
COMES OUT AND HOW YOU TAKE
CONTROL.
IT LEADS TO ROD ROSENSTEIN.
HE CITES THIS IN WHAT YOU
DID AS A REASON FOR
RECOMMENDING YOUR FIRING.
DID YOU GO ON AFTER THAT
RECOMMENDATION YOU WRITE A
LETTER TO CONGRESS TO
ANNOUNCE THE CASE WE OPENED
BECAUSE MORE CLASSIFIED
EMAILS HAD BEEN FOUND ON
ANTHONY WEINER'S COMPUTER.
YOU SAID IT WAS, LAST NIGHT,
A TOUGH CHOICE BETWEEN
CONCEALING OR COMING
FORWARD, A REALLY TOUGH
CHOICE.
BUT THERE ARE AUTHORITIES IN
NEW YORK WHO ARE SAYING FBI
HQ WAS SLOW-WALKING THAT
CASE AND WEEKS WENT BY
WITHOUT ANY ACTION.
DID YOU KNOW THAT ANDREW
MCCABE, YOUR DEPUTY, HAD SAT
ON THAT REVELATION ABOUT THE
EMAILS?
>> YEAH, I DON'T KNOW THAT.
I DON'T KNOW THAT TO BE THE
CASE.
I DO KNOW THAT NEW YORK AND
FBI HEADQUARTERS BECAME
AWARE THAT THERE MAY BE SOME
CONNECTION BETWEEN WEINER'S
LAPTOP AND THE CLINTON
INVESTIGATION WEEKS BEFORE
IT WAS BROUGHT TO ME FOR A
DECISION.
AS I WRITE IN THE BOOK, I
DON'T KNOW WHETHER THEY
COULD HAVE MOVED FASTER AND
WHY THE DELAY.
>> Bret: WAS IT THE THREAT
THAT THE NEW YORK AGENTS
WERE GOING TO LEAK THAT IT
EXISTED REALLY WHAT DROVE
YOU TO THE NOT CONCEAL PART.
>> I DON'T THINK SO.
I THINK ACTUALLY WHAT DROVE
IT WAS THE PROSECUTORS IN
NEW YORK WHO WERE WORKING
THE CRIMINAL CASE AGAINST
WEINER CALLED DOWN TO
HEADQUARTERS AND SAID ARE WE
GETTING A SEARCH WARRANT OR
NOT FOR THIS?
THAT CAUSED -- I'M SORRY
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT
HEADQUARTERS TO THEN CALL
ACROSS THE STREET TO THE FBI
AND POKE THE ORGANIZATION
AND THEY STARTED TO MOVE
MUCH MORE QUICKLY.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THERE WAS,
IF THERE WAS SLOW ACTIVITY
WHY IT WAS SLOW FOR THOSE
FIRST COUPLE WEEKS.
>> Bret: I WANT IT MOVE ONTO
THE TRUMP ADMINISTRATION.
WE ARE TOLD AFTER THIS
AUSTRALIAN DIPLOMAT REPORTS
HIS CONVERSATION WITH GEORGE
PAPADOPOULOS, TALKING ABOUT
PLANS TO GET RUSSIA INFO OR
EMAILS ABOUT HILLARY CLINTON
THAT THE FBI IS NOTIFIED
THROUGH THE STATE DEPARTMENT
ABOUT THIS IN EARLY MAY,
TRUE?
>> NO.
>> Bret: WHEN WERE THEY
NOTIFIED.
>> FIRST OF ALL, I'M NOT
CONFIRMING WHAT THE SOURCE
WAS FROM IT.
THE FBI LEARNED THE
INFORMATION ABOUT
PAPADOPOULOS IN LATE JULY
AND OPENED A COUNTER
INTELLIGENCE INVESTIGATION
AT THAT POINT.
THE MEETING THAT YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT OCCURRED IN
THE SPRING.
>> Bret: APRIL.
>> BEFORE THERE WERE ANY
PUBLIC REVELATION OF RUSSIAN
HACKED EMAILS.
BUT THE FBI DIDN'T LEARN
ABOUT IT IN LATE JULY.
>> Bret: OKAY.
SO WHAT IS THE CRIME OR THE
COLLUSION THAT LAUNCHES THE
INVESTIGATION?
>> COLLUSION IS NOT A WORD
THAT I'M FAMILIAR WITH.
>> Bret: WHAT IS THE CRIME?
WHAT IS THE EVIDENCE
BASICALLY THAT LAUNCHES?
>> THE QUESTION IS YOU OPEN
A COUNTER INTELLIGENCE
INVESTIGATION TO UNDERSTAND
ARE ANY AMERICANS IN CAHOOTS
INTELLIGENCE ACTIVITIES OF
AN ADVERSARY NATION.
>> Bret: WHEN THE STEELE
DOSSIER COMES OUT, SOME TIME
EARLY JULY, WHEN DID YOU
PERSONALLY LEARN ABOUT THE
MEMOS AND THE DOSSIER?
>> SOME TIME IN THE FALL.
I DON'T REMEMBER EXACTLY
WHEN.
>> Bret: YOU ARE TALKING
FALL --
>> -- I'M SORRY, FALL OF
'16.
>> Bret: RIGHT.
WHO SO WHO TELLING YOU ABOUT
THEM.
>> I DON'T REMEMBER.
SOMEONE ON MY SENIOR STAFF.
>> Bret: DO YOU REMEMBER HOW
THEY WERE DESCRIBED.
>> I REMEMBER THEY BRIEFED
ME ABOUT IT EXPLAINED THEY
CAME FROM A RELIABLE SOURCE.
FORMER ALLIED INTELLIGENCE
OFFICER.
I REMEMBER BEING GIVEN A
COPY OF IT I DON'T KNOW
WHETHER IT WAS SEPTEMBER,
OCTOBER.
SOME TIME IN THAT PERIOD OF
TIME.
>> Bret: WHEN DID YOU LEARN
THAT THE DNC AND HILLARY
CLINTON CAMPAIGN HAD FUNDED
CHRISTOPHER STEELE'S WORK?
>> I STILL DON'T KNOW THAT
FOR A FACT.
>> Bret: WHAT DO YOU MEAN?
>> I HAVE ONLY SEEN IT IN
THE MEDIA.
I NEVER KNEW EXACTLY WHICH
DEMOCRATS HAD FUNDED.
I KNEW IT WAS FUNDED FIRST
BY REPUBLICANS.
>> Bret: THAT'S NOT TRUE.
>> I'M SORRY?
>> Bret: THAT'S NOT TRUE
THAT THE DOSSIER THAT
CHRISTOPHER STEELE WORKED ON
WAS FUNDED BY REPUBLICANS?
>> MY UNDERSTANDING HIS WORK
STARTED FUNDED AS OPO
RESEARCH FUNDED BY
REPUBLICANS.
>> Bret: SO FREE BEACON SAID
THAT THEY HAD GLENN SIMPSON
AND FUSION GPS ON A RETAINER
THEY DID NOT FUND THE
CHRISTOPHER STEELE MEMO OR
THE DOSSIER.
THAT WAS INITIATED BY
DEMOCRATS.
>> OKAY.
MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THE
ACTIVITY WAS BEGUN, THAT
STEELE WAS HIRED TO LOOK
INTO FIRST FUNDED BY
REPUBLICANS.
THEN PICKED UP -- IMPORTANT
THING WAS PICKED UP BY
DEMOCRATS OPPOSED TO DONALD
TRUMP.
>> Bret: SO IS THAT WHY --
DID YOU TELL PRESIDENT OBAMA
THAT THE DOSSIER WAS WHO IT
WAS FUNDED BY?
>> NO, NOT TO MY
RECOLLECTION.
>> DID HE WANT TO KNOW WHO
IT WAS FUNDED BY.
>> I WANTED TO KNOW WHAT I
KNEW WHICH IT WAS FUNDED BY
PEOPLE POLITICALLY OPPOSED
BY DONALD TRUMP.
WHICH PARTICULAR OPPONENTS
WAS IMPORTANT TO ME.
>> Bret: YOU STILL TO THIS
DAY DON'T KNOW IT WAS FUNDED
BY THE DNC.
>> I HAVE READ THAT IN THE
MEDIA BUT DIDN'T KNOW FOR A
FACT AND DIDN'T KNOW WHILE I
WAS AT THE FBI WHICH EXACT
OPPONENT OF THE PRESIDENT'S
FUNDED THAT.
>> Bret: HOW MANY TIMES AND
TO WHAT EXTENT DID YOU BRIEF
PRESIDENT OBAMA ON THE
DOSSIER?
>> I DIDN'T EVER BRIEF
PRESIDENT OBAMA ON THE
DOSSIER.
I WAS PRESENT DURING A
CONVERSATION WHERE DIRECTOR
OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE
BRIEFED IT TO HIM AS WE DID
TO THE GANG OF EIGHT AND TO
THE PRESIDENT-ELECT THE
FIRST WEEK OF JANUARY.
>> Bret: YOU CALLED THE
DOSSIER UNVERIFIED,
SALACIOUS.
WHY DID YOU USE THAT TO THE
FISA COURT TO ASK FOR
SURVEILLANCE FOR CARTER
PAGE?
NOT ONLY USE IT BUT YOU LED
WITH IT A BULK OF THAT FISA
APPLICATION DEALS WITH THAT
DOSSIER.
WHY?
>> YEAH.
THAT'S NOT MY RECOLLECTION.
BRET.
AND I DON'T KNOW THAT THE
FISA APPLICATION HAS BEEN
RELEASED.
MY RECOLLECTION WAS IT WAS
PART OF A BROADER MOSAIC OF
FACTS THAT WERE LAID BEFORE
THE FISA JUDGE TO OBTAIN A
FISA WARRANT.
>> Bret: IT WAS A LOT MORE
THAN THE DOSSIER IN THE FISA
APPLICATION.
>> MY RECOLLECTION WAS THERE
WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL ABOUT
PAGE AND WHY THERE WAS
PROBABLE CAUSE TO BELIEVE HE
WAS AN AGENT OF A FOREIGN
POWER.
AND THE DOSSIER WAS PART OF
THAT BUT WAS NOT ALL OF IT
OR A CRITICAL PART OF IT.
MY RECOLLECTION --
>> Bret: INTEL BRIEFING AT
TRUMP TOWER YOU BRIEFED THE
PRESIDENT-ELECT ON THE
SLIVER OF THE DOSSIER,
REALLY THE SALACIOUS PART
ABOUT THE PROSTITUTES IN
MOSCOW AND THAT ALLEGATION.
>> CORRECT.
>> Bret: DIDN'T INCLUDE
ANYTHING BROADER THAN THAT,
CORRECT?
>> CORRECT.
MY MISSION THIS THAT PRIVATE
BRIEFING WAS JUST TO TELL
HIM ABOUT THAT SLICE OF IT.
>> Bret: AND WHO SUGGESTED
YOU BRIEF THAT?
>> I THINK THE DIRECTOR OF
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE DID
AND EXPLAINED THE LOGIC OF
WHY IT MADE SENSE FOR ME TO
DO IT, WHICH I AGREED WITH.
>> Bret: THAT BRIEFING WAS
JUST ORAL.
JUST TALKING.
>> RIGHT.
JUST THE TWO OF US TALKING
TO EACH OTHER.
>> Bret: CNN ROARED A TIME
YOU HANDED TWO PAGE SUMMARY
OF THE DOSSIER OVER TO HIM.
>> DID I NOT.
>> Bret: DID NOT.
SPEAKING OF CNN YOU WRITE IN
THE MEMOS OF THAT MEETING
YOU WRITE I SAID TO
PRESIDENT-ELECT TRUMP MEDIA
LIKE CNN HAD THE DOSSIER AND
WERE LOOKING FOR A NEWS
HOOK.
I SAID IT WAS INFLAMMATORY
STUFF.
THE STORY OF THAT BRIEFING
LEAKS OUT ALMOST IMMEDIATELY
AFTER YOU DO IT.
CNN AND OTHERS RUN THE STORY
OF THIS UNVERIFIED DOSSIER.
DID YOU OR YOUR SUBORDINATES
LEAK THAT.
>> NO.
>> DID JAMES CLAPPER?
>> NO.
NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NO.
>> Bret: JOHN BRENNAN.
>> I DON'T KNOW WHO LEAKED
IT.
I HAD NO PART IN LEAKING ANY
OF IT.
IT WAS FOUR OR FIVE DAYS
LATER THAT IT LEAKED.
I REMEMBER BECAUSE THE
PRESIDENT-ELECT CALLED ME
ABOUT IT.
>> Bret: DID YOU EVER TRY TO
FIND OUT.
>> WHO LEAKED UNCLASSIFIED
PUBLIC DOCUMENT?
NO.
>> Bret: DID YOU INFORM THE
PRESIDENT-ELECT AT THE TIME
WHAT YOU KNEW ABOUT HOW IT
WAS FUNDED OR WHO WAS BEHIND
IT.
>> NO, I DID NOT.
>> Bret: DID YOU INFORM HIM
THAT CHRISTOPHER STEELE HAD
BEEN FIRED BY THE FBI?
>> NO.
>> Bret: OR THAT HE HAD
LIED.
>> NO.
AND I DIDN'T KNOW THOSE
THINGS AT THAT TIME ANYWAY.
>> Bret: OR HAD ABUSED AT
LEAST IN PART TO GET THIS
FISA APPLICATION TO SPY ON
SOMEBODY IN HIS CAMPAIGN.
>> NO.
DIDN'T COME UP.
>> Bret: IS IT FAIR TO SAY
THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA.
>> CARTER PAGE WAS IN HIS
CAMPAIGN WHEN THE FISA ORDER
WAS.
>> Bret: TANGENTIALLY.
>> AT ONE POINT, CORRECT.
>> Bret: IS IT FAIR TO IS A
PRESIDENT OBAMA IN HIS INNER
CIRCLE KNEW A LOT MORE ABOUT
THE DOSSIER AND SCOPE OF THE
INVESTIGATION THAN
PRESIDENT-ELECT AND HIS
TEAM.
>> NO.
I DON'T THINK THAT'S FAIR AT
ALL.
>> Bret: YOU THINK THEY WERE
EQUAL AS FAR AS THE
BRIEFING?
>> AS FAR AS I KNOW THEY
KNEW THE SAME SET OF FACTS
AS DID THE LEADERS OF
CONGRESS.
>> Bret: THERE WAS NO
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHAT THE
FBI TOLD THE FISA COURT AND
WHAT THE -- ABOUT THE
TRUMP-RUSSIA INVESTIGATION
AND WHAT YOU TOLD THE NEW
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED
STATES?
>> WHAT THE FBI AND THE FISA
APPLICATION SAID IN OCTOBER
OF 2016?
I DON'T REMEMBER CLEAR
ENOUGH ALL THAT'S IN THE
FISA APPLICATION BUT WE SURE
DIDN'T LAY THAT OUT FOR
ANYBODY, PRESIDENT OBAMA,
PRESIDENT-ELECT TRUMP, OR
THE LEADERS OF CONGRESS.
>> Bret: OKAY.
A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
INTERACTIONS WITH PRESIDENT
TRUMP AND YOUR MEMOS
MEMORIALIZING THAT.
AFTER YOU'RE FIRED ON
CAPITOL HILL, WE LEARNED
THIS: '17.
>> I ASKED A FRIEND OF MINE
TO SHARE THE CONTENT OF THE
MEMO WITH A REPORTER.
DIDN'T DO IT MYSELF FOR A
VARIETY OF REASONS BUT I
ASKED HIM TO BECAUSE I
THOUGHT THAT MIGHT PROMPT
THE APPOINTMENT OF A SPECIAL
COUNSEL.
SO I ASKED A CLOSE FRIEND OF
MINE TO DO IT.
>> WHO WAS THAT?
>> A GOOD FRIEND OF MINE WHO
IS A PROFESSOR AT COLUMBIA
LAW SCHOOL.
>> Bret: SO WHAT
SPECIFICALLY DID YOU LEAK TO
MR. RICHMAN?
>> I SENT MR. RICHMAN A COPY
OF A TWO-PAGE UNCLASSIFIED
MEMO AND ASKED HIM TO GET
THE SUBSTANCE OF IT OUT TO
THE MEDIA.
>> Bret: YOU CALL HIM A GOOD
FRIEND AND PROFESSOR BUT YOU
DIDN'T REVEAL YOU HAD HIRED
EMPLOYEE FOR THE FBI TO WORK
ON SPECIAL PROJECTS.
WHY?
>> BECAUSE IT WASN'T
RELEVANT.
HE WAS FBI SPECIAL
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE UNTIL
FEBRUARY OF 2000 --
>> Bret: DID YOU HAVE OTHER
SPECIAL ADVISORS LIKE THAT.
>> NO, HUH-UH.
>> Bret: WHAT EXACTLY WAS
HIS JOB?
>> TWO THINGS.
HIS PRIMARY FOCUS WAS OUR
GOING DARK CHALLENGE.
HELPING US THINK THROUGH AND
ARTICULATE AND FIGHT FOR
ACCESS TO ENCRYPTED
COMMUNICATIONS AND THEN LAW
ENFORCEMENT DATA WAS A BIG
PART OF HIS
RESPONSIBILITIES.
>> Bret: DID YOU LEAK OTHER
THINGS THROUGH MR. RICHMAN.
>> YEAH.
THE REASON I'M SMILING,
BRET.
I DON'T CONSIDER WHAT I
SHARED MR. RICHMAN A LEAK.
I TOLD --
>> LET ME ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION.
I GAVE HIM NOTHING ELSE EVER
TO SHARE WITH THE MEDIA.
>> Bret: FBI PROTOCOL SAYS
YOUR OWN EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT WITH THE FBI
PROHIBITS THE UNAUTHORIZED
DISCLOSURE OF ANY
INFORMATION OR MATERIAL FROM
OR RELATED TO FBI FILES OR
ANY INFORMATION ACQUIRED BY
VIRTUE OF MY OFFICIAL
EMPLOYMENT WITHOUT PRIOR
WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM THE
FBI.
DID HAVE YOU WRITTEN
PERMISSION?
>> NO.
AND I DIDN'T CONSIDER IT
PART OF AN FBI FILE.
ALL THE THINGS THAT I TALKED
ABOUT.
>> Bret: YOU WROTE IT AS FBI
DIRECTOR.
IT WAS WORK PRODUCT.
>> NO.
IT WAS NOT.
IT WAS MY PERSONAL AID TO
MEMOIR.
>> Bret: MEETING PRESIDENT.
>> I CARRIED TWO COPIES OF
IT.
ONE TO KEEP IN MY PERSONAL
SAFE AT HOME AND I LEFT
ANOTHER ONE AT THE FBI SO
THE BUREAU COULD ALWAYS HAVE
ACCESS TO IT.
I ALWAYS THOUGHT OF IT AS
MINE LIKE A DIARY.
>> Bret: WHO ELSE DID YOU
GIVE, LEAK, WHATEVER YOU
WANT TO CALL IT.
>> USE IS WHAT I PREFER.
>> Bret: THE MEMOS TO.
>> I GAVE THE MEMOS TO MY
LEGAL TEAM AFTER I GAVE THEM
TO DAN RICHMAN AFTER I GAVE
THEM TO THE MEDIA.
I'M SORRY, GAVE FOUR MEMOS
TO MY LEGAL TEAM.
>> Bret: WHICH INCLUDED
PATRICK FITZGERALD.
HE WAS A LEGAL TEAM AT THAT
TIME.
>> CORRECT, SURE.
DAVID KELLY AND DAN RICHMAN.
>> Bret: YOU SAID IN THE
MEMOS I SAID I DON'T DO
SNEAKY THINGS, I DON'T LEAK.
I DON'T DO WEASEL MOVES.
WE CAN ARGUE WHAT A LEAK IS
BUT THAT'S A LEAK, ISN'T IT?
>> IT'S NOT.
>> Bret: OKAY.
HERE'S WHAT YOU TOLD CHUCK
GRASSLEY ABOUT LEAKING.
>> DIRECTOR COMEY, HAVE YOU
SOURCE IN NEWS REPORTS ABOUT
MATTERS RELATING TO THE
TRUMP INVESTIGATION OR THE
CLINTON INVESTIGATION?
>> NEVER.
>> HAS ANY CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION RELATING TO
PRESIDENT TRUMP OR HIS
ASSOCIATION -- ASSOCIATES
BEEN DECLASSIFIED AND SHARED
WITH THE MEDIA?
>> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE.
>> Bret: SO AT WHAT POINT
WERE YOU MADE AWARE THAT
SOME OF THE INFORMATION WAS
CLASSIFIED BY THE FBI?
>> WHICH INFORMATION?
>> Bret: IN THE MEMOS?
>> OH, YEAH.
I DON'T KNOW, SOME TIME
AFTER I WAS FIRED THE FBI
APPARENTLY MADE A DECISION
THAT THERE WERE SOME WORDS
IN AT LEAST TWO OF THE
MEMOS, MAYBE ONE, I THINK
TWO, THAT WERE
DIPLOMATICALLY SENSITIVE.
AND SO MY LAWYERS RETURNED
THEM TO THE FBI.
BUT MY TESTIMONY WAS
TRUTHFUL AND I STAND BY IT I
WAS HOPING YOU WERE GOING TO
ASK ME THAT.
>> Bret: I AM.
I WAS.
>> IT WAS TRUTHFUL.
>> Bret: I WANT TO PLAY WHAT
ABOUT YOU ON THIS CHANNEL.
>> LOOK, COMEY IS A LEAKER
AND HE'S A LIAR.
AND NOT ONLY ON THIS STUFF,
HE'S BEEN LEAKING FOR YEARS.
HE'S PROBABLY BEEN USING HIS
FRIEND, THE SO-CALLED
TO HAVE FBI CLEARANCE, WHICH
HE NEVER SAID.
HE EVEN LIED ABOUT THAT.
BECAUSE HE NEVER SAID THAT
IN CONGRESS.
HE SAID HE GAVE IT TO A
FRIEND.
AND HE GAVE IT TO A FRIEND
TO LEAK CLASSIFIED
INFORMATION.
IT'S ALL CLASSIFIED.
IT WAS TOTALLY CLASSIFIED.
SO ILLEGALLY HE DID AN
ILLEGAL ACT AND HE SAID IT
HIMSELF.
IN ORDER TO GET A SPECIAL
COUNSEL AGAINST ME.
>> Bret: REACTION TO THAT?
>> HE IS JUST WRONG.
FACTS REALLY DO MATTER,
WHICH IS WHY I'M ON THE SHOW
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.
THAT MEMO WAS UNCLASSIFIED
THEN.
IT'S STILL UNCLASSIFIED.
IT'S IN MY BOOK.
THE FBI CLEARED THAT BOOK
BEFORE IT COULD BE
PUBLISHED.
THAT'S A FALSE STATEMENT.
>> Bret: WHAT ABOUT NOT
TELLING CONGRESS THAT HE WAS
AN AGENT FOR YOU OR WORKED
AT THE FBI OR SOMEHOW WAS
SOME EMPLOYEE THAT HAD YOU
35,000 FBI EMPLOYEES.
>> NONE OF THAT WAS TRUE --
I MEAN, I DESCRIBED YOU HIM
I HOPE GOOD FRIEND.
EXPOSE BIAS CONNECTION TO
THE GUY?
HE HAD LEFT HIS FBI JOB
MONTHS EARLIER.
THERE IS LOTS OF OTHER
CONNECTIONS.
I KNOW HIM BECAUSE WE WERE