tv New Day CNN May 12, 2017 3:00am-4:01am PDT
president contradicting himself in an interview we will bring you this morning. the president acknowledging he actively tried to interfere in the russian investigation. that it was his displeasure with that probe that drove his ouster of the fbi director. >> the president also detailing for the first time those three conversations he claims he had with director comey about the recommend implementation. this as the white house is struggling to keep up with the firestorm, but changing its story time and time again. all of this effectively stalling the agenda. we have it could have behave it. let's start with joe johns at the white house. >> reporter: good morning, poppy. the latest interview is a fascinating look inside his head with contradictions and also key admissions. eliminating almost any doubt about the president's motivations for the firing of the fbi director. >> i was going to fire comey.
>> reporter: president trump changing the messages again saying now it was his decision to fire james comey not the recommendation of the top two justice department officials. >> he made a recommendation. regardless of recommend men indication, i was going to fire comey. knowing there was no better time. >> reporter: contradicting days of statements from the white house. >> he provided strong leadership to act on the recommendation of the deputy attorney general. >> the president took the advice of the deputy attorney general. >> reporter: the president personally castigating comey. >> look. he's a showboat. he's a grandstander. the fbi has been in turmoil. >> reporter: for the first time, admitting the fbi investigation into possible collusion with the campaign and russia was on his mind. >> when i decided to do it, i said to myself, i said, you know, this russia thing with trump and russia is a made up
story. an excuse by the democrats for having lost the election that they should have won. >> reporter: a source close to comey telling cnn he was fired over the accelerating russia investigation and comey's refusing to assure the personal loyalty. the president was pressed about this paragraph in the letter firing comey. comey assured him three times he was not under investigation. trump explaining how it transpir transpired. >> i think he asked for the dinner. it was arrange. he wanted to stay on as the fbi head. i will consider what happens. he said it once at dinner. >> did you call him? >> one casey called him. one case he called me. >> did you ask am i under investigation? >> i said if it is possible would you let me know am i under investigation. he said you are not under investigation. >> reporter: that exchange raising eyebrows. >> isn't it inappropriate for
the president of the united states to ask the fbi director directly if he is under investigation? >> no. >> reporter: comey has not confirmed the white house account as they change the assertion why he was fired. comey's interim replacement andrew mccabe contradicting this from the white house. >> the rank and file from the fbi lost confidence in the director. >> the fbi director had broad support within the fbi and still does to this day. i don't think there is a crisis of confidence. >> reporter: the trump administration suggesting firing comey would help end the investigation into the russia election meddling. >> we want to come to its conclusion with integrity. we have by removing director comey to take steps to make that happen. >> reporter: something the interim director vowed. >> you cannot stop the men and women of the fbi from doing the right thing. >> reporter: the president
claiming he wants answers on russia. >> there is no collusion between me and my campaign. if russia hacked and did anything having to do with our election, i want to know about it. >> reporter: insisting he did not try to interfere with the fbi investigation. >> did you ask him to drop the investigation? >> no. >> did anyone from the white house? >> i want the investigations. >> reporter: president trump explaining why it took 18 days to fire national security adviser michael flynn after sally yates met with the white house counsel to warn that flynn was vulnerable by blackmail to the russians. >> my white house counsel did not sound like an emergency of any sort. he did not sound like it was. she actually not make it sound that way either in the hearings the other day like it had to be done immediately. i believe it would be unfair to
hear from somebody and run out and fire a general. >> reporter: trump defending flynn who lied to the vice president about his contacts with russia and for concealing payments from foreign governments. >> this man has served for many years. he's a general. he's a -- in my opinion, a very good person. >> reporter: a little bit more about the timeline that dinner that the president had with james comey appears to have occurred one day after acting attorney general sally yates warned the white house counsel that the president's national security adviser michael flynn was compromised by the russians. there have been some expect tae takes that the president may visit fbi headquarters today have been scrapped continuing the uproar over the firing of james comey. >> joe johns, thank you. let's bring in the panel. david gregory. associate editor for real clear
politics. a.b. stoddard and we have errol louis. the acting ag goes there and despite what the president said. you have trouble with flynn, act on it. the next day, the president meets with the director of the fbi and acknowledges he tried to interfere with the investigation and make sure that he was clear. we focus on that second paragraph in the letter dismissing comey for a reason. it is a window into what this was all about and the major concerns for impartiality into the matter going forward. >> that's the important point here, chris. two aspects of this which are troubling. the president of the united states on record on twitter and in person dismissing the importance of a probe into russia's attack on america to hack the election to manipulate
the results. that is not to say they had an impact on the results. the president won fair and square. it was an attack on america. those are the words of republican senator john mccain. two, his open contempt for the investigation followed up by the fact he demanded loyalty of the fbi director who is responsible for that probe. demanded loyalty of a person who runs an independent agency who gets a ten-year term so he can be independent of politics or the political party of a president. we must focus on the act. no matter the future of the russia investigation. this act is done in such a way that these two facts combine to undermine the democratic institutions. full stop. >> a.b., the president when k counter of the white house in
the last 48 hours. when lester holt asked why you fired comey and why you did it when you did. he said, quote, when i decided to do it, i just said to myself, you know, this russia thing with trump and russia, it's a made up story. the president inserted that in his answer. not once in his answer did he bring up hillary clinton's e-mails which was the justification they tried the first time around with rosenstein's letter. how critical is that? how does the white house get around that? >> they can't. the president weresident went o interview and spoke extensive limit. someone in the stall did not think it was good for them to do that interview. he threw them under the bus. they said this was all on the recommendation of rod rosenstein. all on comey's performance during the last year. particularly with the clinton e-mail server investigation.
now trump has said that he cooked up this idea because he believes russia investigation is a fake story and just as david gregory says he has never treated -- forget the collusion which may end up being unfounded. there are new leads excaccelerig the part. trump, president trump has never acknowledged the gravity of russia interfering in our election and france and brexit vote and what they may attempt to do in the angela merkel election in germany. this doesn't concern him. he doesn't talk about it. it is really time for republicans and congress and all of trump's supporters to realize he doesn't have a problem admitti
admitting. about or not he is a target. he gave himself a way in the letter thank you for exonerating me three times. he basically felt it was fine to fire a guy who was running the fbi investigating connections between russia and his team. so there is no more cover up. he has blown the lid off it. it will be a new line today for senators and members of congress when asked about this to defend. >> a little bit more troubling, until we hear from james comey, there is every reason to believe the conversations never happened. everybody around james comey, those with him and close with him at the fbi cannot imagine him having ever given that comfort to the president. not just because it was inappropriate, but inaccurate. too premature to make that call. the differences with the truth and the white house are so stark
that we put together a mendacity mentage. here it is. >> i was going to fire regardless. he made a recommendation. regardless of the recommendation, i was going to fire comey. >> he took the recommendation of the deputy attorney general who oversees. >> that makes no sense. >> he made a determination that the fbi director lost confidence. made a recommendation. >> president took strong and decisive leadership here to put the safety and security of the american people first biceping the recommendation of the deputy attorney general. >> the president accepted the recommendation by the deputy attorney general to remove comey from his position. >> in his letter, he said it was about the recommendation. and errol, he exposed that for the b.s. it is.
this is a got ya' moment? absolutely not. this is the open window into the open and honest decision to thwart an investigation into russia and get rid of the man he didn't trust to conclude it the right way. how big a deal is this? >> it is a big deal. within that it is worth keeping in mind, chris, he is talking about somebody worried about his personal position. he is not saying manafort had nothing to do with it. he is not saying michael flynn was okay. he is not saying everything was okay with the transition and campaign. he said the fbi director told me permane personally. he is talking about certified letter to make it more credible. sort of saying i have no investment in russia. that has never been the question. the question is what are the russian oligarchs invested in the campaign?
and perhaps president trump himself? that is the question. it was as clear to me as day for him to say to lester holt that i've got nothing that -- i asked myself about russia. i use that as the reason to fire him. to me, it is game, set, match. that is why there's been so much frustration within the white house. they don't speak with one voice. the president counters everything said. >> and david gregory, we talk about the contradictions of the white house, et cetera, et cetera. senator markey, a democrat. he said this is a constitutional crisis. how big is this? >> i was reading something on that this morning from constitutional scholars who know more about this than i do. i don't know that is where we are yet. the president is within his rights to fire any senior
officer like this. i think he is both within his rights and undermining democratic institutions at the same time. >> he is not within his right to obstruct justice. >> in that is a judgment others have to make. it strikes me as highly inappropriate to have the conversation that the new york times reported on where he demanded loyalty and calling on him and saying could you let me know if i'm under investigation. we should point out as a matter of law it is possible that comey would have said to minimuhim. at this point you are not under investigation. that does happen. it could change tomorrow. it could change with different circumstances. i don't know we should think about that as being completely outlying. i think we have to focus on the issue of what we see with the firing. if the president wanted to fire him all along, it goes back to the original point. he wanted the fbi director to be loyal.
he had open contempt for the investigation. both of which is troubling which i talked about. the whole issue with rosenstein. i pointed out before. there was already a justice department inspector general investigation of comey and happened thing of the clinton e-mail investigation. why turn to rosenstein and say look at this again. were they setting him up? a guy with a sterling reputation to use him to say we fired him on his recommendation. that happened. that is the original narrative. the white house misled the american people. and rosenstein says to the counsel and says you back this off and take responsibility here. trump comes out to soften. he says i was going to fire him all along. rosenstein wrote to it. did rosenstein stand behind it the entire time? >> we will have a man join us
later on. we will ask about that. stick around. we have a lot more coming up on all of this, including more of the president's interview. why it took 18 days to fire michael flynn. a man under investigation. the man the president called a very good person, but james comey's firing much quicker than that. what the president says about that next.
former national security adviser michael flynn. the president justifying the 18 days it took to fire him after repeated warnings from the justice department. let's bring back the panel. david gregory, a.b. stoddard and analyst phil mudd. let's show the clip from the nbc interview. >> sally yates testified that the white house notified he was compromised and at risk of blackmailed. 18 days later he was finally fired. during the 18 day, he had access to the nation's top secrets. one day you meet on the issue of comey and you fire him. in a humiliating way. he is sitting in the room with colleagueses. >> my white house counsel not sound like an emergency of anything. didn't make it sound like anything. she did not make it sound that
way either in the hearings. this man has served for many years. he's a general. in my opinion, he's a very good person. i believe that it would be very unfair to hear from somebody who we don't even know and immediately run out and fire a general. >> your acting attorney general at the time. >> phil mudd, the difference in disposition to the president was one guy he liked. so he took it slow. one guy he didn't like so he did it right away. >> i think it is more basic than that, chris. if you go back a few months. look at the president attacking the former cia director. he did not nominate that director. that director was among those who participated in the russian meddling conversation. james comey embarrassed the president by getting in front of the american people and talking about the investigation and saying the president's allegations about wiretapping
trump tower were wrong. flynn by contrast is an embarrassment to the president if the president doesn't come out and say he is a good guy. the message is straight forward. if it is an embarrassment to the president and doesn't know you, he will throw you under the bus. if you are his guy, he will pretend you are a good guy because appointing you suggests his pick of you is poor. >> it could be true. the president could be telling the truth about his conversat n conversations with comey. we cannot get anyone at the fbi who would think that it would be appropriate for the director to tell the president or anybody whether or not they were the subject of an investigation. and personally to comey people who know him can't imagine him ever saying that. what is your take on the likelihood that a conversation like that taken place once let alone three times? >> the likelihood of that.
we will see the situation like we saw in the wiretapping situation of trump tower. when comey came out to testify on that. he said clearly there is no information from the fbi that indicates that anybody wiretapped trump tower. james comey despite mistakes is an honorable man. he womill be in open testimony coming months. somebody will say did you tell the president of the united states he was not the subject of the investigation during three conversations. i'll lay money on the table. he will say no. >> a.b., lost in all of that is also the fact that as lester holt rightly pointed out, the president said i didn't have to fire flynn right away becaus this person we don't know came to the white house and told us that maybe we should. that person, the acting attorney general. granted on her way out likely and he fired her for not implementing the travel ban. the significance of that he is so obsessed with loyalty.
he asked comey for the loyalty pledge according to the new york times and the acting attorney general didn't know what she was talking about. >> poppy, loyalty is the key word. if you prove your loyalty to donald trump, you are unassailable in his eyes. corey was one. trump stood by him until his kids insisted he be fired as campaign manager. some time in the summer of last year. he sticks by people even when things are tough if they have been loyal to him. i believe that donald trump will continue to run his administration like his family business and he according to the new york times account asked
comey at the dinner on january 27th to be loyal to him. there is an interesting timeline of when sally yates actually told don mccann, the white house counsel, about flynn to be compromised and blackmailed by the russians and 18 days they took to act on it within the white house. then after he learned of that information, he took comey to dinner and framed account of who asked for dinner. the reporting shows comey told associates of the fbi. he was afraid to turn the president down, but was concerned of being chummy with the president. loyalty is everything to trump. people need to realize the way the west wing operates. it is all based on that. people are given an extraordinarily long leash. michael flynn was always on the
plane and supporter at the rallies. michael flynn could do no wrong. he continues to compliment him. the story in the daily beast, they have been desperate to reach out to him begging him not to speak with a witness under investigation investigations. >> you know you hear that? the sound of republican leadership standing up and talking about the interview. crickets. they were asked to come on the show. we asked them on a regular basis. nobody has said anything meaningful of what to do in light of the obvious allegations that the president didn't like what was happening with the russian investigation and moved to stop it. to a.b.'s point. put up the timeline. it smacks you in the face. she wasn't alone. she came with a senior official to give some heft to the message communicating. the next day is the trump-comey
dinner. trump seemed curious about his exposure to what was going on with the flynn and russia investigation. a few days later, yates is fired over the travel ban. now you have to ask was it really just about the travel ban or what she started in the mind of the president and people around him about exposure in russia. then you start to t the chronology. the pivot point, david gregory, the washington post article that made it public. it wound up precipitating action. back to where we started. what happens now? who stands up? what can be done? >> congressional leaders are not standing up. republican leaders are not standing up. it is unclear to me who is going to fight for democratic institutions and appropriate way to protect the system.
i will say that those on the senate intelligence committee, richard burr and mark warner are working hand in glove together and showing a lot of integrity of pursuing the investigation. you will not get a wider investigation. we have to say something else. president trump is bringing the same intellectual rigor to the russian hacking investigation that he brought to the birther lie that he perpetuated into national prominence against president obama. he has the blind spot and conspiracy theory that all of these investigations are a way to delegitimize him and they are all after him and president obama personally wiretapped him. it is nonsense. it is all nonsense. it clouded his and those around him judgment. when you have somebody saying to him, look, you have a national security adviser compromised by
a foreign power. he thinks it should be laughed off and this is a general and he is a good guy. it should be fine. have lavrov into the white house. let's kick out the u.s. reporters. oh, it's amazing how the russians tricked us. it never occurred to him the russians could do this. >> he said in the interview, if russia hacked. when lester holt points to the 17 intelligence agencies. he says i don't think we have 17 intelligence agencies. >> he is wrong. to hear from the president directly is powerful right now. panel, stay with us. up next, what does all this mean to the fbi ongoing russian investigation? that is the question. how do you get an impartial administration of justice? next.
discover card. hooh, you're real?? you know i'm real! at discover, we're always here to talk. good, 'cause i don't have time for machines. some companies just don't appreciate the power of conversation! you know, i like you! i like you too! at discover, we treat you like you'd treat you. get the it card and talk to a real person.
president says comey told him three times he was not under investigation. >> you were the centerpiece of the trump campaign. >> i know that i'm not under investigation. me. personally. i'm not talking about campaigns. i'm not talking about anything else. i'm not under investigation. >> so, by all accounts, if james comey told that to the president, he should not have. it was wrong to do so. the president asking could be seen as active interference in the investigation. the overall question becomes how can you trust the investigation now if you know the president is willing to manipulate. let's bring back the panel. sda david gregory and phil mudd and errol louis. >> is it wrong? does it not happen that the fbi would indicate to you, look. you are not under investigation
at this time. i'm aligning for the possibility it could have been mi misinterpret misinterpreted. >> let's get a check from the bird-like man sitting to your left. phil. >> i think david is right. it is not just a question of whether someone is a subject of the investigation. the inappropriateness is a dinner with the fbi director whos hwho has a ten-year term. are you loyal? this is not appropriate. you captan't do that. >> i agree with that. people are focused on the wrong thing. will the investigation move forward? yes. it will. again i think we have to focus on the act the president trying to undermine the investigation demanding loyalty oath. we don't know if that person will carry it out. who the fbi director does matter. look at the clinton e-mail matter and the role comey played. no matter who the fbi director
is, who is in charge will matter in terms of what is done and how it is done and emphasis. we don't know the future. >> there's a reason, errol, you don't have that so the fbi director can act independently. if nothing were illegal here, it is not intended to have the conversations to have the c confiden confidence. andy mccabe said the president lost confidence in comey. andy mccabe said that is not true. >> mccabe was the top aide to comey. we can't know for sure what is going on within the fbi. >> and largely -- >> the reporting is right and solid and unanimous. the fbi feels like it is under
attack. i know some folks over there. the morale is rock bottom. there is a question of what is going on and what they will do to rescue institution. look, j. edgar hoover was there from 1969. 40 years later, he is still dominating it. that is where the idea of the ten-year term to insulate them from politics. i think people don't understand. this is like the white house butler or something like that. you can be fired or changed around. this is an important institution that is supposed to be held in check and held outside of politics. clearly the president doesn't believe that. >> phil mudd? what is your level of confidence this is done the right way and do you think there needs to be a different level of independence? >> i don't think morale is rock bottom. we know what is happening. i know andy mccabe. take it to the bank. chris, this looks simple from the outside. the story on the inside is
fundamentally different than any american who thinks you can shutdown the investigation. we are ten months in. there is a ton of data on the floor. there are dozens of people who know the details of the investigation. including what individuals in the trump campaign did. they can speak to the press inappropriate or other avenues this will get out if it is ever shutdown. the congress can pull them behind closed doors and say what happened. number two, this sounds inside baseball. do not under estimate the power of the inspector general at the department of justice to look into this. this story will get out regardless of what the president wants. i guarantee it. >> david gregory, reporting in the wall street journal that rosenstein less than happy how the white house tried to lay this on him. we saw the white house change narrative. he according to the journal went to the white house counsel and said correct the record. i'm not comfortable working in
this environment if you don't. he has been invited to the all senators briefing as early as next week. a, do you think that happens and what is the goal of that? what do they need to get from him? >> i think they want to understand what role he played. remember, he is new to the justice department at this level. just a couple of weeks in. has a sterling bipartisan reputation. career prosecutor. idea person to level judgment on comey. he like others whose behavior in the clinton investigation and how he wahandled that would be inappropriate. i'm wondering if the firing was appropriate to him or if he recommended it. if he did not, this is the time to do the right thing and stand on principle. i'm not inside his mind. i don't know. i think congress has a right to know how this went down. >> when you read that letter carefully, not one line does he
explicitly say i recommend the termination. >> you want to hear from him. obvious question is what did you think they wachwanted this for? they want your thoughts on why comey has to go. he should speak for himself. errol, how big a crisis is this? you can really look at it two ways. we need to be objective. one is he can fire anybody he wants. fire the fbi director. nobody liked the handling of the e-mail. trump did not like how he handled the russia investigation. if nothing comes from the investigation that fingers his people, he's fine. or it is everything that we're talking about right now which is a much bigger window into the president's willful disassociation of checks and balances and influence of the federal investigation. >> there are a lot of people, i happen to be one of them, who are unnerved. the president is unable to let go of the idea.
he tells us it is nothing to it. it is fake news. he keeps bringing it back up. he tweeted yesterday he thinks the u.s. is tearing itself apart and russia is laughing at us. he seems to not be consistent and he is really concerned about it in a way that is not quite comfortable. the question is about checks and balances and institutions. everybody should be concerned about that. how are they working in. >> appreciate it. another bad headline for united airlines. the passenger dragged off the flight. for the second time in a month, a report of a scorpion. >> no snakes on planes movie. >> you can't make it up. another report of a scorpion on a plane. what does this mean to the beleaguered carrier? next. whoa, this thing is crazy.
if it is expanded to europe, more than 350 flights a day could be impacted. terrorists can hide explosives in laptops and other large devices. voter outrage in north dakota. police escorting two people from the congress member's event after heated discussion of the health care. >> will the rich benefit from the health care -- if the health care is destroyed do the rich get a break? >> of course not. >> this man showing his disgust with the congress member's support of tax cuts for the wealthy. one part of the gop plan right now. he doesn't have to agree with constituents, but does have an obligation to listen. a scorpion scare on the flights in houston thursday night. according to united, a scorpion
crawled out of the passenger's clothing as it was taking off to ex-with ecuador. passengers were put on a new aircraft and took off three and a half hours late. the second time in a month that a scorpion has been reported on a united flight. at least they didn't, you know, grab the scorpion and stomp on it. >> bloody it. this is no snakes on plane. >> progress. moving on. did president trump admit to obstruct justice? in that interview he did with the firing of the fbi director. our legal experts weigh in. what they make of the president's own words next. for years, i suffered from abdominal pain and bloating.
nonprescription ibgard - calms the angry gut. the ouster of james comey is leading many critics to ask if president trump impeded the russian investigation. li listen to what the president told nbc. it is helping to raise eyebrows. >> in fact, when i decided to do it, i said tos myself, you know, this russia thing with trump and russia is a made up story. it's an excuse by the democrats for having lost an election they should have won. the reason they should have won it is the electoral college is almost impossible for a republican to win. very hard. you start off at such a disadvantage. everybody was thinking they should have won the election. this was an excuse for having lost an election. >> the legal question becomes was this an attempt to obstruct justice by the president and
firing comey? let's discuss with mark tushnet and alan dershowitz. harvard on harvard. for us without the pedigree. let's put up the definition of obstruction of justice requires in terms of elements. you have that defendant acted with corrupt intent. intent is important in the crime. the defendant wanted to interfere with pending judicial proceeding. the proceedings were pending. actually going on at that time. the defendant's actions were likely to affect the judicial proceedings and the defendant knew that the proceedings were pending. so, first, on the prosecution side of this. professor, what do you think? >> i think at the moment we don't know enough to say that the president had what the statute called corrupt intent.
we'll find out over time more about what he was thinking when he has done what he's done. >> so we don't know enough. it is not out of the realm of possibility. professor dershowitz? >> every civil libertarian should be outraged by the breadth of the statute and applying it to the president's decision to fire comey. think of the implications of that for the rest of us. anybody could be charged with obstruction of justice for doing something lawful. there is a case, i worked it, for someone allegedly being convicted for doing lawful things. filing privilege lefrivolous ap. this is a disaster from the civil liberties point of view. it is a terrible mistake if you are a liberal and don't like trump to broaden the statute to go after trump and stuck with
the precedents to diminish the civil liberties of all americans. >> the fact he had the lawful right to remove the fbi director under law. why he did it doesn't matter? >> we don't put people's motives on trial. there has to be an illegal act. there are some cases that say that if the whole scheme was corrupt, you could look at it as a totality. >> how about the acknowledgement he pressed the fbi director by his own admission for a loyalty oath on this matter and insisting he was not being investigated? >> good reason for voting against him. making him pay a political price. i'm sure that trump did demand loyalty. he demands loyalty of everybody. i suspect the conversation whether he was under investigation probably went something like this. am i under investigation and the fbi director could say look if you are a target, would you have
gotten a target letter. you can surmise from the fact you cannot gotten a target letter that you are not a target. i had that conversation. >> you know comey. do you think he would have been in any way eager to give any offering like that to the president? >> of course not. >> back to you, professor. we don't know enough. what are your concerns in the situation? legally? morally? ethically? >> well, what we are dealing with now is a combination of a problem that is a little bit law and mostly political. the way the political process works is that people draw inference from what they see in the press as more smoke accumulates people begin to think there may be a fire there. as they think that there may be a fire there, pressure will build on politicians to investigate even more completely. >> and one way the president can put out the fire. he has to appoint somebody
better than comey. senator lee came up with a brilliant idea. merrick garland. the guy was superb prosecutor. he was appointed by democrats. wow! that would put out all fires for months and months. will the president do that? i doubt it. >> what if it became known that the reporting that the firing came after comey had put in a request for more resources to ramp up the investigation? if there was a connection between not just the timing, but intention to get rid of comey after the request, does that change analysis professor tushnet? >> i don't think it makes difference in thinking of criminal prosecution, but again we're dealing with something that combines law and politics and on the face of it, yes, it would make a difference to some politicians that this action, firing occurred after comey said
he was going to intensify the investigation. i don't think there is much question. >> chasing the ill legality is ill advised, but not wrong? >> here is how we know it is wrong. if there was a conversation of resources and he appoints somebody who is a crony. the crony says we have too many resources and cuts it down. i hope he doesn't do that. i hope he appoints somebody of distinction and not a crony. >> professors, thank you for the perspective. poppy. smart minds on the show this morning. thank you, gentlemen. more on president trump's interview and growing fallout from the firing of fbi director james comey. is the white house in crisis mode? we dig in next. when heartburn hits, fight back fast with tums smoothies. it starts dissolving the instant it touches your tongue. and neutralizes stomach acid at the source. ♪ tum -tum -tum -tum smoothies! only from tums
at lincoln, we're all about making things simpler for you. like, imagine having your vehicle serviced... from the comfort of your own home. introducing complimentary lincoln pickup and delivery servicing. because the most important luxury of all... is time. pickup and delivery servicing on the entire family of lincoln luxury vehicles including a complimentary lincoln loaner. iwithout writing a single word. this mother's day create a gift from the heart that could only come from the pandora boutique at jared. a world of pandora... including exclusive pieces designed just for jared. ready to be mixed, matched and stacked with help from jared's own pandora expert. the one gift that speaks volumes, you'll both treasure forever. that's why he went to jared.
i was going to fire comey. my decision. >> the initial explanation was untrue. >> i know you love to report that we were misled. >> we have a nice dinner. >> he demanded loyalty of the fbi director responsible for the probe. >> did you ask him to drop the investigation? >> no. >> our committee will get to the bottom of what happened during the 2016 presidential election. >> the russia thing with trump and russia is a made up story. >> we want to this come to its conclusion. >> there has been no efrfort to impede our investig
Uploaded by TV Archive on