ARE .
>>> REGARDLESS OF RECOMMENDATION, I WAS GOING TO
FIRE COMEY, KNOWING THERE WAS NO GOOD TIME TO DO IT.
IN FACT, WHEN I DECIDED TO JUST DO IT, I SAID TO MYSELF, I SAID,
YOU KNOW, THIS RUSHER THING WITH TRUMP AND RUSSIA IS A MADE-OPEN
STORY. >>> OPENLY ADMITTING THAT HIS
FIRING OF THE FBI DIRECTOR RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF AN
INVESTIGATION INTO THE TRUMP CAMPAIGN'S POSSIBLY COLLUSION
WAS WITH RUSSIA WAS EXACTLY WHAT -- TO MAKE THE
INVESTIGATION GO AWAY. IT WAS A STUNNING REVELATION
AFTER HIS TEAM SPEND TWO DAYS TRYING TO EXPLAIN.
THE MESSAGE HAD BEEN UNANCE MUSS, THE PRESIDENT WAS ONLY
FOLLOWINGED GUIDANCE OF DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL ROD ROSENSTEIN.
THAT VERSION OF EVENTS WAS COMPLETELY BLOWN UP BY THE
PRESIDENT HIMSELF. >> MONDAY YOU MET WITH THE
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL. DID YOU ASK FOR A
RECOMMENDATION? >> WHAT I DID IS I WAS GOING TO
FIRE COMEY, MY DECISION -- >> YOU HAD MADE THE DECISION
BEFORE THEY CAME IN THE ROOM? >> I WAS GOING TO FIRE COMEY.
THERE'S NO GOOD TIME TO DO IT, BY THE WAY.
>> BECAUSE IN YOUR LETTER, YOU SAID I ACCEPTED THEIR
RECOMMENDATION. YOU HAD MADE --
>> I WAS GOING TO FIRE REGARDLESS OF RECOMMENDATION.
>> THE DECISION CAME DAYS AFTER, ACCORDING TO "NEW YORK TIMES,"
COMEY ASKED FOR MORE RESOURCE. AND HOURS AFTER FEDERAL
PROSECUTORS SENT SUBPOENAS TO BUSINESS ASSOCIATES OF MICHAEL
FLYNN. IT SEEMS THAT TIMING IS
EVERYTHING, BECAUSE IT WAS ON JANUARY 26th THAT FORMER ACTING
ATTORNEY GENERAL SALLY YATES TOLD WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL DON
McGANN, THAT FLYNN WAS VULNERABLE.
IT'S THE ONLY DINNER THAT TRUMP IS BELIEVED TO HAVE HAD WITH
COMEY. PRESUMABLY IT'S THE SAME DINNER
HE DESCRIBED THIS WAY. >> I HAD A DINNER WITH HIM.
HE WANTED TO HAVE DINNER, BECAUSE HE WANTED TO STAY ON.
>> HE ASKED FOR THE DINNER? >> A DINNER WAS ARRANGED.
I THINK HE ASKED FOR THE DINNER. HE WANTED TO STAY ON AS THE FBI
HEAD, AND I SAID I'LL CONSIDER, WE'LL SEE WHAT HAPPENS, BUT WE
HAD A VERY NICE DINNER. AT THAT TIME HE TOLD ME YOU ARE
NOT UNDER INVESTIGATION. >> CLOSE COMEY ASSOCIATES TOLD
"NEW YORK TIMES" AND NBC NEWS A VERY DIFFERENT VERSION OF THAT
DINNER. NO, COMEY DID NOT ASK FOR THE
DINNER. HIS ASSOCIATES SAY HE WAS
INVITED BY TRUMP, AND ACCEPTED HE RELUCTANTLY, AND KNOW COMEY'S
ASSOCIATION SAY THERE WERE NO ASSURANCES FROM COMEY THAT TRUMP
WAS NOT UNDER INVESTIGATION. THE SENIOR OFFICIAL SAID COMEY
TRIED TO AVOID THE SUBJECT ALTOGETHER AND NO, COMEY DID NOT
ASK TO KEEP HIS JOB. IT WAS THE PRESIDENT MAKING
REQUESTING THAT COMEY SPECIFICALLY PLEDGE HIS PERSONAL
LOYALTY TO TRUMP. SEAN SPICER DENIED THAT CLAIM ON
FRIDAY. I WANT TO BRING IN MY PANEL
CLINT WATTS, MALCOLM NANCE, NAISMT AVICH, ERIC COLUMBUS AND
DEMOCRATIC STRAT SKIS CAREEN JEAN-PIERRE.
CLINT, I'M GOING TO START WITH YOU.
ON THIS NOTION THAT THE DIRECTOR OF THE FBI WOULD NUMBER ONE ASK
TO HAVE DINNER WITH THE PRESIDENT IN ORDER TO SAVE HIS
JOB, DOES THAT RING TRUE TO YOU? >> NO.
THE FBI DIRECTOR IS ON A TEN-YEAR APPOINTMENT.
HE'S GOING TO DO HIS JOB. IF YOU WANT THE FBI DIRECTOR TO
A MEETING, YOU DO IT IN THE OVAL OFFICE.
THIS IS THE TRUMP WAY OF DOING BUSINESS, AROUND DINNER TABLES.
HE HASN'T UNDERSTOOD HE'S NO LONGER RUNNING A BUSINESS, HE'S
RUNNING A COUNTRY. >> WOULD AN -- I MADE A GOOD
POINT. THIS GUY IS ON A TEN-YEAR DEAL.
IN THEORY HE'S GOT HIS JOB FOR TEN YEARS.
WHY WOULD HE HAVE TO ASK FOR IT. WOULD A FBI DIRECTOR OR ANYONE
BELOW HIM AFFIRMATIVELY TELL SOMEONE YOU ARE NOT UNDER
INVESTIGATION. TRUMP CLAIMS HE TOLD HIM THAT
THREE TIMES. >> I DOUBT THIS.
I CAN'T IMAGINE I WOULD SAY THIS.
IF YOU HAVE THAT QUESTION, AND THAT'S COERCION, THAT'S
INFLUENCE. IF YOU GET THAT QUESTION, YOU
EITHER DON'T ANSWER IT OR TRY AT LEAST TO GET OUT OF THE
SITUATION, WHICH IS WHAT I IMAGINE DIRECTOR COMEY WAS
DOING. >> ERIC COLUMBUS, I WANT TO GO
TO THE OTHER ELEMENT OF THIS, THE STORY THAT CAME FROM
ASSOCIATES OF JIM COMEY, THAT WHAT TRUMP WANTED AT THAT DINNER
WAS A SHOW OF LOYALTY, AND THIS COMING SO CLOSE TO SALLIE YATES,
EITHER HOURS OR THE NEXT DAY AFTER SALLY YATES HAD WARNED DON
McGAHN, THE WHITE HOUSE COUNSEL, THAT MICHAEL FLYNN WAS SUBJECT
TO BLACKMAIL, HE SUDDENLY BRINGS IN THE FBI DIRECTOR AND ASKS FOR
LOYAL. THIS IS DONALD TRUMP TALKING TO
JEANINE PIRRO ON FOX. >> I READ THAT ARTICLE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE.
>> DID YOU ASK THAT QUESTION? >> NO, NO, I DIDN'T, BUT I DON'T
THINK IT WOULD BE A BAD QUESTION TO ASK.
I THINK LOYALTY TO THE COUNTRY, LOYALTY TO THE UNITED STATES IS
IMPORTANT. IT DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DEFINE
LOYALTY. NUMBER ONE.
NUMBER TWO, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT GOT THERE, BECAUSE I DIDN'T
ASK THAT QUESTION. >> ERIC COLUMBUS, THE IDEA --
YOU NOW HAVE A HE SAID/HE SAID OR HE SAID/FRIENDS OF HE SAID.
IF TRUMP SAID THAT WOULDN'T BE A BAD QUESTION, WOULD THAT BE A
BAD QUESTION TO ASK OF AN FBI DIRECTOR, IN YOUR VIEW?
>> IT WOULD BE A HORRIBLE QUESTION.
I THINK HE'S BEEN WATCHING "THE GODFATHER" ONE TOO MANY TIMES.
>> IN YOUR VIEW, I SAID TO GO BACK TO THE MOMENT THE WAY COMEY
WAS LET GO. MR. ROSENSTEIN, WHO WROTE THE
MEMO ON THE SAME DAY OF THE FIRING, WHEN YOU READ THAT MEMO,
HOW DID IT STRIKE YOU? DID IT SEEM THAT MR. ROSENSTEIN
WAS INITIATES THE FIRING OR RESPONDING TO A REQUEST THAT HE
HAD CAN UM UP WITH A PRETEXT? >> DEFINITELY THE LATTER.
I DON'T THINK ROD ROSENSTEIN HAD ANY INTEREST IN GETTING RID OF
HIM. HE WAS ASKED TO COME UP WITH A
PRETEXT, APPEARED HE CAME UP WITH A PRETEXT THAT WOULD BE
LEAST DAMAGING TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE FBI BY
ASCRIBING IT ENTIRELY TO THINGS WE ALREADY KNOW ABOUT, AND
THINGS THAT NO ONE IN THEIR RIGHT MIND WOULD THINK THAT
TRUMP WOULD ACTUALLY WANT TO FIRE COMEY FOR.
>> MALCOLM, LET ME GO TO NAVID ON THIS FIRST, THE OTHER SORT OF
PRETEXT THAT WE'VE BEEN GIVEN FOR THE FIRING WAS THAT HE WAS
DESTROYING MORALEN SIDE THE FBI. I'M GOING TO ASK CLINT ABOUT
THIS, TOO, BUT THIS WAS SARAH HUCKABEE SANDERS, IN THE --
WEDNESDAY. >> MOST IMPORTANTLY THE
RANK-AND-FILE OF THE FBI HAD LOST CONFIDENCE OF THEIR
DIRECTOR. I'VE HEARD FROM COUNTLESS
MEMBERS OF THE FBI THAT ARE GRATEFUL AND THANKFUL FOR THE
PRESIDENT'S DECISION. >> MEAN MILE JAMES CLAPPER, WHO
WE PRESUME KNOWS SOME PHOTOS IN THAT AGENCY, TOLD ANDREA
MITCHELL ESSENTIALLY THE OPPOSITE ON FRIDAY.
>> I CAN ATTEST -- IT'S ALWAYS DIFFICULT TO ASSESS THE MORALE,
BUT FROM MY VANTAGE, AND I THINK I'M PRETTY GOOD IN ASSESSING
COMMAND CLIMATE AS WE SOO SAY IN THE MILITARY, THE MORALE WAS
VERY HIGH, AND I WITNESSED THE VERY HIGH ESTEEM AND RESPECT
THAT PEOPLE IN THE FBI HAVE -- STILL HAVE FOR JIM COMEY.
>> WHO IS MORE CREDIBLE ON THIS? >> UNDOUBTEDLY JAMES CLAPER.
THE BIGGEST THING YOU SAID IS -- AND FURTHERMORE, SORT OF APPEND
THAT WITH, YOU KNOW, LEAKED SOURCES OF WHO THE NEXT
REPLACEMENT IT MIGHT BE, I THINK WHAT THE FBI NEEDS IS A CHANCE
TO BREATHE AND STABILITY AND FRANKLY MORE FUNDING.
THE COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE FOLKS HAVE SUFFERED A PRETTY BIG
SETBACK, WHEN YOU START MUCKING AROUND WITH A LARGE ORGANIZATION
AND CHANGING LEADERS, IT CAUSES
CHAOS. >> CLINT, WAS THERE LOW MORALE
BECAUSE OF JIM COMEY? >> NO, THE ONLY MORALE KILLER
ARE THE POLITICIANS AND PART SANS ON EACH END OF
PENNSYLVANIA. IF THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO THEIR
SDWROB, THINGS WILL GET FINE. THEY'RE GET BATTERED BACK AND
FORTH, DEPENDING ON WHAT ADMINISTRATION IS IN AND WHO'S
RUNNING THE HILL. >> TOO MUCH POLITICS INVADED THE
FBI. I WANT TO ASK ABOUT JAMES
CLAPPER HIMSELF. WE ALSO HAD TRUMP ATTEMPTING TO
USING CLAPPER. THIS IS WHAT HE TWEETED.
WHEN JAMES CLAPPER HIMSELF AND VIRTUALLY EVERYONE ELSE WITH
KNOWLEDGE OF THE WITCH-HUNT, WHERE DOES IT END?
HERE'S JAMES CLAPPER WITH ANDREA MITCHELL AGAIN, SAYING THE
OPPOSITE. >> IT'S NOT SURPRISING OR
ABNORMAL THAT I WOULD NOT HAVE KNOWN ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION OR
EVEN MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE CONTENT OF THAT INVESTIGATION.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WAS COLLUSION OR NOT.
I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S EVIDENCE OF COLLUSION OR NOT, NOR SHOULD
I HAVE IN THIS PARTICULAR CONTEXT.
SO, MALCOLM, NOT ONLY TRUMP, BUT ALSO PEOPLE LIKE SENATOR GRAHAM,
ATTEMPT TO IMPLY THAT IF THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL
INTELLIGENCE DIDN'T KNOW OR WASN'T AWARE THERE WAS
MISCOLLUSION, THAT THERE COULDN'T HAVE BEEN ANY
COLLUSION, DOES THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU?
>> NO, IT DOESN'T MAKES SENSE, THE DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL
INTELLIGENCE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE OVERALL CARE, FEEDING AND
MOUNTAINS OF THE HIERARCHY, BUT IF IT IS SOMETHING AS
SIGNIFICANT AS A COUNTER-INTELLIGENCE, A
COUNTER-ESPIONAGE INVESTIGATION THAT IS GOING ON WITHIN THE PO
ADMINISTRATION, CARRIED OUT BY THE FBI, IT MAY BE IN THE FBI'S
INTEREST AND MAYBE CLAPPER HIMSELF COULD HAVE A TARGET NOT
TO TELL HIM THAT INVESTIGATION. THOSE ARE TWO COMPLETELY
DIFFERENT THINGS. HE MANAGES INTELLIGENCE.
I NOTICED HE TENDS TO SAY NO EVIDENCE WAS BROUGHT TO ME.
HE OF ALL KNOWS THAT INTELLIGENCE IS NOT ALWAYS
EVIDENCE. EVIDENCE IS A LEGAL TERM, AND
THAT'S PROBABLY WHAT HE'S SAYING.
IT HASN'T GONE TO THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT.
ONE OTHER POINT. DONALD TRUMP USED CLAPPER,
BECAUSE DONALD TRUMP TENDS TO CARRY OUT HIS CAMPAIGNS AGAINST
INDIVIDUAL THE WAY THE RUSSIANS DO WITH THEIR ACTIVE MEASURES.
THAT'S TO USE THE SAME RUSSIAN STYLE STRATEGY OF DECEIVE, DENY,
MAKE COUNTER-ACCUSATIONS, THEN HE ALWAYS THROWS A NEW ONE ON
THE END, TO DARE, TO DARE PEOPLE, TO CHALLENGE THE
AUTHENTICITY OR CREDIBILITY OF WHAT HE SAYS.
>> I WANT TO TALK A BIT ABOUT THE POLITICS OF THIS.
THE SCANDAL ON THE LEGAL SIDE IS BAD ENOUGH, BUT THE POLITICS
THAT WE NOW HAVE A PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES THAT
ESSENTIALLY THREATENED OF THE FORMER DREBLGTOR OF THE FIB VIA
A TWEET, WE HAVE HIM BEING CONTRADICTED DIRECTLY BY THE
FORMER DIRECTOR OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE.
WHY HAS THIS NOT MOVED THE POLITICS, AS FAR AS THE
REPUBLICANS ARE CONCERNED? >> THAT'S A REALLY GOOD
QUESTION. I DO NOT UNDERSTAND.
THIS COULD BE A BIPARTISAN OUTCRY.
AS WE KNOW, WE NOT FOR A FACT THAT RUSSIA INTERFERED IN OUR
ELECTION. WE KNOW THAT OUR DEMOCRACY WAS
UNDERMINED. INSTEAD OF WANTING TO FIND OUT
WHAT'S GOING ON, THE REPUBLICANS WANTS TO FIND OUT HOW TO TAX
REFORM FOR THE WEALTHY, THE BILLIONAIRES.
THIS IS TO MITCH McCONNELL AND PAUL RYAN.
THEY NEED TO BE LEADERS HERE. THIS IS NOT WHAT OUR COUNTRY IS
ALL ABOUT. AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE'S
THIS OLD SAYING IN IT LOOKS LIKE A DUCK, IT SOUNDS LIKE A DUCK,
IT QUACKS LIKE A DUCK, IT IS A DUCK.
IF THERE WAS AN OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE URGES AND IT SMELLS LIKE
IT DID AND SOUNDS LIKE IT DID, THERE WAS LIKELY AN OBSTRUCTION
OF JUSTICE. HE'S ATTACKING, ASSAULTING,
UNDERMINING IT IS BEDROCK OF OUR DEMOCRACY AND GOVERNMENT AND
LEADING US TO A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS.
>> IF WE'RE NOT IT ALREADY IN ONE ALREADY.
THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. >>> COMING UP A GROWING NUMBER
OF DEMOCRATS ARE STARTING TO USE THE "I" WORD.
IS THAT EVEN POSSIBL