this is why the fbi chose this moment. there were 34 warrants, 33 were served and the one guy who got away was the irishman who was the only one of this entire group who had a problem with the office, and he ordered -- he convened a meeting at one of the bars with a couple of the germans hand they brought siebold in and had a stiff interrogation of what was going on through the office and the irishman, a guy by the fame of sean connolly never bought it, and he fled before the fbi could get him hand whatever happened to him, who knows. during the six-week trial in brooklyn federal court siebold was finally able to tell the truth. the defendants and their lawyers portrayed him as a fearsome nazi who coerced them into joining the spy ring. one of the marine spies testified that siebold testified he would never see his mother again if he didn't support the cause and another said i was afraid of him, and this was a potent charge in german america. memories were fresh of those of german birth who were imprisoned on sketchy alleg

and she cooperated fully with the fbi three days later. and her two in-laws wanted nothing to do with it. her husband, who wasn't with her, almost broke off their engagement. they were engaged at that a time, because she talks to the fbi. in-laws were really upset that she gave them their names, but they refused to talk. they saw what she did. maybe they had good reason. on the same day that steve balmgard is protesting to the cia in washington or new york, he's down in north carolina interviewing -- probably unknown to him -- sandy. same day. because the cia said, oh, we'll take care of it. yeah, they took care of it. they put a new 302 into her file, okay? and here's what sandy told me when we talked in 2009, because i asked her, i said tell me about the second interview. she said, oh, there's a lot you don't know about that. i said, what? she goes, well, in the second interview -- she has just found out about it -- it said i had had several long island iced tea cocktails that night -- [laughter] and i said, and? she goes, i don't even k

the fbi agent. rick your left, we have from florida. >> i've got a two-part question. can you tell us about the sentences for the germans who were convicted and the saboteurs who came with the mission to get seabolt? the sentences were very interesting. the stiffest sentences were 20 years. 20 years and they were all out by the early 50's. either deported back to germany or remain in the united states. that wouldentences not be meted out at such a light level these days. because of this case, 33 german spies were wrapped up. and hitler'sbegan declared war on the united states, there was no germans have a tour or spy in the united states. there were two u-boats sent to the united states. one landed in long island and one in jacksonville, florida. and were quickly discovered all the saboteurs were quickly arrested. six of the eight were executed and the two who were not were cooperating witnesses. one of them noted in his memoir that one of their missing -- one of their missions was to get seabolt. >>

the fbi more conservative. they believe the russians were simply trying to be sort of nasty and undermine the u.s. election system. they were under the assumption that hillary clinton was going to win. they just wanted to muddy it up a bit. that's the difference. but they both believe the russians interfered. >> i think it's probably true that the russians interfered, that the iranians and the chinese may have also played some different games going on in the election. this is what intelligence communities do each and every day. they try to either get secrets or try to make life miserable for their opponents and their enemies. i don't know exactly what mr. trump is thinking or talking about but i think where this whole thing is going astray because it's starting to -- the allegations now with the clinton team saying you need to brief the electors, this is starting to undermine or they're trying to undermine the election of mr. trump, and there is no evidence at all that that is even a valid approach or a valid a

when newspapers covered the trial, there is no photograph taken and i'm sure the fbi and fbi and the u.s. government insisted -- i also considered this part two, adn this was a different kind of story. german americans turning against the fatherland. >> a question to the back and right. >> thank you for your presentation. how were the saboteurs identified and by which agency? how were they apprehended? >> are you talking about the u-boats? i'm not an expert and don't have it at the top of my head michael dobbs has a very good book about this. the long island side, they screwed up from the get-go. they were leaving stuff behind. people here may know that story. they messed it up from the beginning. i can repeat it. >> we will get it on the microphone. >> just to point out before agency landed in new york ran into a coast guard and two of the others ratted out the others, but my question is the fbi kind of lucked into these things. j edgar hoover says the fbi broke the case. but the case was handed to them. did the fbi ever do an investigation where it tracked down people that did not

i needed the fbi to make it happen. we are going to persuade the fbi that ana montes was the spy we were looking for. i realized that i had to attack the trump card. or fill a big order or expand your office and take on whatever comes next. find out how american express cards and services can help prepare you for growth at open.com. find out how american express cards and services it's your tv, take it with you. with directv and at&t, stream live tv anywhere, data-free. join directv today starting at $35/month. no extra monthly fees. imy moderate to severeng crohn's disease. i didn't think there was anything else to talk about. but then i realized there was. so, i finally broke the silence with my doctor about what i was experiencing. he said humira is for people like me who have tried other medications but still experience the symptoms of moderate to severe crohn's disease. in clinical studies, the majority of patients on humira saw significant symptom relief. and many achieved remission. humira can lower your ability

he faulted failures at the fbi and podesta called out fbi director james comey. now the fbi however is pushing back. evan perez joins me now. evan, you've been reporting on fbi warnings of attempted hacks since the summer. how do you recall officials describing their response? >> jake, i think what's happening right now is members of the clinton campaign are trying to explain to their supporters how they lost this election and hillary clinton met with some of our donors and she described it this way. take a listen. >> we have to recognize that, as the latest reports made clear, vladimir putin himself directed the covert cyber attacks against our electoral system, against our democracy, apparently because he has a personal beef against mimi. against me. >> hillary clinton's campaign manager john podesta wrote an op-ed in "the washington post" in addition to the fact that the fbi director sent these letters just before the election that talked about the finding of new emails, he also said that the fbi did not work hard enough to investigate the dnc hacks, certainly

we reached out to the fbi for comment. and no response. >> joining us now with more, anthony scaramucci and robert wolf. good to see you both. >> great to see you. >> i want to talk through some of the things we've outlined here. there are some trying to throw muma abedin under the bus. >> he has the right to be furious. i like the idea he said this should be a bipartisan commission looking at the hacking. with respect to the election i'm probably going to align with anthony. it's over and time to move on. you know? i don't like what happened with comey. i thought wiki leak thing, i hated that as well. at the end of the day, like the president just said, the election is over and we have to move on. >> there is no comey letter without those decisions that led to that path. >> there is no question the e-mail server was over our heads for 18 months. >> because of shugss she made. >> i'm in the questioning that. but i'm not that familiar with when the fbi should or should not engage publicly. i'm not going to be here and someo

guy he will reveal to the russian hacker that fbi is on to them. sew simply calls them and said look in your system and the i.t. guy thinks it is a hoax. the fbi guy keeps calling him again and again and again. it goes on for two or three months. and this drags on for months unfortunately. >> is this person, this i.t. guy, a political person? a political person would know this is very important. this would be -- this is hot stuff. that the russians are trying to get into your system. gis that's the hard part that someone wouldn't think it is politically frightening that you're getting hacked in the beginning of a presidential campaign. that that wasn't news. >> and there is multiple problems. first of all this is a not a cybersecurity guy but like the i.t. help guy. and the dnc did not have money to have a proper security team or at least hadn't budgeted the money for that. he is a consultant and he is a guy who got the phone call and he handled it. he fielded it. and the other problem was that, i mean, the fbi was not very specific with the inform

director for the fbi's priorities. quote, comparing the fbi's massive response to the overblown e-mail scandal with the seemingly lack daadaisical response to the very real russian plot to subvert the election, shows something is very wrong. >> i think the bigger thing i saw from the op-ed is, what happens next, right? the concern of donald trump's closeness with putin. especially when you look at tillerson, and flynn and what does that mean for the american people, right? so i do believe that, i do believe that the comey letter and, you know, the russia impact did have an influence. did it sway the election. we just don't know yet. i believe it would be great for the president to declassify the evidence on what the fbi and cia have. and let the american people decide. because we're about to see a president who has a long list of potential conflicts of interest. it will be good for the american people to see what's going on. >> what was interesting, podesta was pretty critical of the fbi and comey. president obama defe

and this is the imagine the fbi is getting. and it took until april and they finally found what was happening behind the scenes. >> thank you so much. >>> plenty more to talk about. you heard evans reporting there saying the john podesta letter about the op ed is a little overblown. the fbi did reach out several times, albeit not in person. but should the fbi in your mind have done more? >> i think in your mind the overall conduct of what they did is not that bad. they made some mistakes. but we you will do that. what i can't really understand is why they talk so much about it. those three letters from comey and so forth. they puzzle me and weaken the position in the debates with the discussion. but if you look back in what they did and tried to investigate they may have slipped up a bit here and there but i feel generally responsible. >> phil? >> on the surface this looks simple, of course. and i would agree with this, the fbi should have been gone down the street in washington d.c. and had a face-to-face conversation with the

he didn't know exactly who had tipped off the fbi but he knew that even if the fbi resented these letters, these anonymous letters in court, they would have a hard time showing that these letters were actually sent to an embassy and so he attempted to blackmail the government by saying look, i'm not giving anything up. and i think that i deserve less than nine years in prison for what i've done. and only if you give me that short sentence, relatively speaking will i help you to dig up the secrets that i have buried and so this was highly unusual and this was i think, this was probably the worst, this was the worst judgment call that brian could have made and that's what fascinated me. and i wanted to dig deeper into his life to understand what kind of childhood and adolescence and youth he had had that would lead him to think in this way, that he could outsmart and outmaneuver the government after being caught with his pants down. >> so he tried to outmaneuver the government in the legal phase . the chase itself, the letter comes in. you have this fantastic fbi agent, your protagonist. ta

we just had our fbi expert tom fuentes on and he said the fbi has to deal in facts. they have to go into a court. they have a law enforcement foundation. they need actual proof and the cia can operate more on like a hunch. so how do they know what russia's motives were and that they wanted donald trump elected? >> you ask a superb question. and i think you've got a very good point. the fbi is a domestic law enforcement agency and when they go and do prosecutions they have to do it with the thought of getting to beyond a reasonable doubt. that is not the standard used by intelligence agencies, which are asked to come up with facts or analysis, and analysis that is not necessarily going to hold up in, you know, in a court level with proof. and so that could be part of it. the second thing is foreign intelligence agencies can do something that the fbi cannot do. which is, they can go look in to the implants they may have in foreign computer networks. they can listen to the conversations they may have had with foreign leaders or others abroad. and so they can gather the

which is what the fbi had done. and it took them a couple years of talking to him and coaching h coaxing him to get him to that situation. i hope you will think of the negative impact that these surveillance lawes have on muslim-americans. and not just muslim-americans. especially in light of our new president-elect things could get very bad very fast. even worse than they are. the japanese internment camps are an example. i would like to remind that you the supreme court never overruled that decision, i think that is a total cop-out. it is completely contrary to our constitutional rights and it is disgusting that something like that might recur. potentially in the next few years. so i will leave it on that note. only a few books in the hallway, hopefully you will buy them. mostly because i don't want to carry them back into the airport. hopefully that gives you context around my views, on the situation and on the situation that i experienced with my dad. i also hope that for the people that are looking into forensi

el fbi investiga casos de corrupciÓn cometidos por agentes fronterizos. algunos de los cuales, han terminado en prisiÓn. partidos polÍticos en mÉxico culpan al presidente por la escasez de combustible a tan sÓlo dÍas de que se produzca un alza en el precio de la gasolina. comenzamos. " este es un noticiero univisiÓn. edición nocturna,, con enrique acevedo y milly calderÓn." joana: el tiempo corre para 35 diplomÁticos de rusia que tienen un plazo de 72 horas para salir de estados unidos con sus familias. el fbi y el departamento de seguridad nacional difundieron un reporte en el que se detalla cÓmo los investigadores federales lograron vincular al gobierno ruso con el saqueo de servidores del partido demÓcrata. arellano, nos cuenta cÓmo funciona. arellano: en 13 pÁginas, el fbi el departamento de seguridad nacional presentaron hoy un reporte de cÓmo piensan que se produjo el saqueo de los servidores del comitÉ nacional demÓcrata. en palabras simples, el gobierno de estados unidos encontrÓ a dos grupos que se unieron e intervinieron para re

the fbi has a dual role. it has a traditional law enforcement function that is carried out through which criminal investigative divisions. then it has a national security function. is national security branch part of the intelligence community. 11,icularly after september the fbi has gone through a significant transformation to enhance its intelligence and security capabilities. the workforce looking on intelligence assessments, bigger picture issues, and not gathering intelligence for a crime. i view these fbi-cia issues as perhaps overplayed. what susan and matt were describing, we have to look at the role of the intelligence community. it is twofold. one is to provide tactical - -lligence to or fighters warfighters, intelligence analysts trying to generate information that supports some particular investigations. the other function is to provide bigger picture assessment, and assessment of various national security issues going on around policymakersinform and the president, who is their number one policym

or something going on they were trying to hide from the fbi? they didn't want the fbi around. what do you think. are they connected in some way to the murders? >> they haven't released shannon gilbert's 911 call and in which she's referring to a police official on the tape saying that is the person trying to kill her or get this person. >> the 911 call is long. not like it is seconds. >> it is 23 minutes long. what were you told about the tapes. >> we are told they are part of evidence and we say as does the estate lawyer saying we need to know what is on the tapes. at this point it is it a public safety issue. >> especially if the killer is out there. and we did our own investigation as well, and some say it is a coincidence. and this is a area bodies can be dumped. but that is what we were told when we asked questions and. s now there is information about body parts that are found. and if you can can summarize and there is another twist as well. >> one of the last things we were doing wrapping up the series and wanted to get jane doe number three in a public database so peop

just the language the fbi has used. look, before i wrote my book i was involved in a counterintelligence operation with the fbi and i would tell people i was involved in a successful counterintelligence operation with a successful outcome which told you nothing and the language itself as jason suggested even though it doesn't tell you something actually does tell you. >> what does it tell you? what does that sort of language means? >> it's an interesting point. normally they say we can't confirm or deny and that's the standard case. we know, for example, paul manafort, there's a clear connection there whether at a minimum whether he registered as a foreign agent. the fact that they say thing using the glomar term. they had nothing, neither want to say the investigation is open, but it's clearly something where they could say we holding in, and there's nothing here or they could just, if there is nothing, they could release something that said we're into it and here it is, it's over. clearly not the case so it begs the q

on the same page, cnn has learned that the fbi now agrees with other intelligence agencies about russia's role in the cyber attacks. we'll tell you what top officials in america's spy organizations are saying tonight. >>> lowering the temperature, president obama voices a sharp criticism of donald trump for his embrace of putin and refusel to accept russia's role in the hacking. will the trump team follow his lead? >>> who is to blame, hillary clinton and her campaign chief now claiming vladimir putin's grudge and the fbi played a pivotal role in their defeat. we'll talk about the political and legal implications of the election blame game. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in "the situation room." >> announcer: this is cnn breaking news. >> obama virtually confirming russia's vladimir putin ordered hacking attacks that influenced the american election. the president stopped short of directly blaming putin citing the ongoing investigation of russian hacking. mr. obama made it crystal clear and i'm quoting him now "not much happens in russia without putin knowing about it. the cia director sent an

that is an appalling thing for an fbi director to do. >> sure. how do we know that the race was over? i mean, on a separate point, don't we now know for sure that the polling was off in a lot of states and some of the national polls so for you now to say the race was over and hillary clinton was going to win and this is the reason, with all due respect, that part is flawed. >> well, i don't think it is. lock, two things can be true at once. you can look to other reasons why hillary clinton lost if she had had a different message. if she had not had the email problems in the first place, can you come up with those things and say if those had gone differently she would have won. that would be true. it can also be true that she was going to win despite some of those problems. i think if you look, you know, one of the best analyses i have seen is one that nate silver reported on last week that showed a 4 point swing to trump's in trump's direction after the comey letter came out in those last, you know, 10 or 11 days of the election. without a doubt,

how do they contradict the professional ambitions of the fbi. i knew that this was an important part of the story but i knew that that was just sort of the beginning of the story. i was happy enough to let that lie really because i needed all of these agents to talk to me for the next two years telling me how they cracked the case. and if i've gotten hung up on how they got the tip. and just insisted on fighting that out. this book wouldn't be here. i didn't think it was germane to the story. when i saw the lengths to which the government had to go it to build the case without bringing it the informant i knew how important it was to keep the performance behind the scenes. i learned that there could be tremendous risks to this individual. he could've immediately been killed by the gadhafi regime. was us a concept of great mail in the u.s. public prosecution. as they're bringing the evidence we can tell you how we got what we got and then they will have the private security conversations. a government would not be able to bring in this informant.

of course, you're former fbi. julie, back to you, because we learned maybe an hour ago that john podesta, hillary clinton's campaign chairman, today is now backing these electoral college electors who are saying, yes, we want these intel briefings on any kind of foreign intervention in the presidential elections ahead of the big vote december 19th. do you think he's hoping they will change their minds? >> i think that they want to create not doubt about the outcome of the election but some doubt as to who was to blame for hillary clinton's loss. you've seen a lot of people in the clinton campaign with their backs up against the wall, trying to point to comb y trying to point to other outside factors. again, i don't think you're seeing them challenge whether donald trump won the election or not, but they're certainly trying to point their fingers to other people besides hillary clinton and their own decisions. >> now, dave, to you. just the fact that mr. trump does not believe the cia's conclusions from your intel

the fbi on the other side. and what's so fascinating is the roles are opposite of where they were with water boarding and suddenly the cia is the democrats best friend and the only agency to trust and suddenly republicans are embracing the fbi's conclusions. >> first of all, the cia didn't say someone at the cia said and we don't know who that is because that was an unnamed source. i think it's perfectly understandable. they have two different missions. you and i can look at the evidence the cia got and conclude russians were hacking into the american electoral process and be concerned about that. the fbi wants to know definitive proof. that's the culture. so what they have is a program, a malware, used to hack into dnc and typically that's used by russian hackers. that's what they have. so the cia can say this is what the russians always use. therefore it's russians. they were clearly interfering with the election. the fbi wants to know who did it and have proof and able to go to a court of law and prove it. t

what do you make of this fbi story, "the new york times" story today, about the fbi's looking at this hack, going back to september of '15, more than a year ago, the dnc's apparently faulty effort to react to it. the fbi's lack of zest in pursuing it. and the white house's failure to move on it. and your guy, donald trump's denial that it was, in fact, the case. is he going to keep up that denial after the -- >> look, i -- >> the top floor tomorrow? >> well, with look, i'm with him all day. it's not that he's denying it, he's just waiting for more evidence to come out. listen, we stand alongside of everybody else that thinks that hacking the dnc or hacking any american organization, corporations like sony or the american government, is not something that we want happening. we denounce all hackers out there. i just think, i said this to you last week and i'll say it again today, even john clapper today said that there's some conflicting information that's come out between the cia and the fbi. so -- >> conflicting about whether -- now, just a minute there. we've got cozy bear and we've

the fbi does not do a good job explaining it. the fbi doesn't say by the way here are your options in challenging this if you want to challenge it except for the statue for the bulk of my work and my career is figuring out what the government is entitled to get and hope providers give it to them. the reason i mention this is for balance. the provider service as kate keepers and it's imperative that government follow their procedures in order to get data and providers follow proper process and he said talk about why he spent much of your career on these cases and why you may privacy data a centerpiece of your product base and why did you have 25 lawyers deal with it. it's a good question because you don't stop and think about it every day in the simple answer and probably the answer in this room is way out what to do some thing that matters and i've always thought this matter. and i still believe that and i believe that more today even then i did one month ago. because being a gatekeeper for consumer data for technology companies

the fbi, the federal government is out to get my dad. it was like one of those double '07 movies that seem so surreal at the time. after just even a few days of learning about the allegations which assumes we did learn of those allegations and hearing over and over that it's 100% think print match, it became very, very serious and very scary. that's an understatement. i am now 12 years detached from that moment and it's still very harrowing, as my dad describes it think it back to coming back that they and not seeing my dad, being told by lawyers that at best even if he is innocent it would take eight months or more just to litigate. and at worse, he could be deemed an enemy combatant. he could be sent to guantÁnamo bay and face the death penalty. serious allegations. but there's a lot of stuff happening behind the scene. you would think how good my dad be implicated in a terrorist attack that had nothing to do with lexi never left how he had never been to spain. his passport was i think over 0 years expired. he was very patriotic, serv

which is what the fbi had done. and it took them a couple years of talking to him and coaching h coaxing him to get him to that situation. i hope you will think of the negative impact that these surveillance lawes have on muslim-americans. and not just muslim-americans. especially in light of our new president-elect things could get very bad very fast. even worse than they are. the japanese internment camps are an example. i would like to remind that you the supreme court never overruled that decision, i think that is a total cop-out. it is completely contrary to our constitutional rights and it is disgusting that something like that might recur. potentially in the next few years. so i will leave it on that note. only a few books in the hallway, hopefully you will buy them. mostly because i don't want to carry them back into the airport. hopefully that gives you context around my views, on the situation and on the situation that i experienced with my dad. i also hope that for the people that are looking into forensi

that's not what the fbi did. i worked with both of these organizations intensely and given the jobs i had before. in my view, i think we have gotten too hung up on focusing on too much on intentions, we need to focus on the consequences and on that, does anybody seriously believe that the wikileaks data dump or the podesta dump had no effects on our elections. that to me is what they have been debating about and it sounds like they're coming to some agreement. >> michael mcfaul on the other side of our country. on the left hand side, you may have noticed, all the kr correspondents, standing straight and talking to the anchor. we are fallen of a two-minute warning period where the president will be emerging from the blue door from the briefing room and coming out of his opening remarks of his folder placing there. here we are coming up at 2:40 p.m. here is the president for his end of the year press conference. >> good afternoon. this is the most wonderful press conference of the year. i got a list of who's been n

so if the fbi, with all of its tools and apparently it must have these warning signs can't predict who is going to be violent, how does this program suppose that some layperson is going to be able to predict who's going to be violent in the first place and in the second place, when you look at the models that have been promoted like the fbi radicalization model which said one indicator of potential dangers is this growing a beard, you can't protect yourself because shaving your beard is also an indicator of danger, which is hilarious, but what laid on top of that is that there were a lot of very common behaviors in the muslim community, wearing muslim garb, these sorts sorts of things were designated as indicators of dangerous things. that is out there on the web. national counterterrorism center week to document that was a practitioner's guide and it was a four-page checklist in one of the things the teachers are social workers were supposed to evaluate on a five-point scale was whether there was sufficient parent-child bonding. now first of all, i'm not aware of any study that sugges

now, the fbi's not really ready to go that far. they are still looking at a variety of different motivations that they view might have prompted the russian intelligence agencies to do this. i think part of the issue for the fbi is that they are looking at it not just as intelligence but also potentially to try to bring a prosecutorable case against whoever might have carried this out, wolf. that's one of the things, one of the differences you see between what the cia does and what the fbi -- i think we should note, however, wolf, that they are in agreement on this one fact. which is -- they know, they believe there is enough evidence that the russians did carry out these hacks of the dnc and tried to embarrass democrats by releasing those e-mails through wikileaks. >> what are you hearing, you've been doing a lot of reporting on these reports that russians also got into, let's say, the republican national committee's computers. their system, or at least elements close to the rnc? what are you hearing than? >> reporter: it's been a

the fbi is releasing that among those who are wanted by the fbi alexsey belan. when you say they are it is against international law to go after these individuals, what to the issue of whether hacking is breaking any law and what kind of response is coming from vladimir putin's office on the actual notion of infiltrating cyber tacking, especially as it pertains to u.s. elections? >> in terms of the legality of the united states putting pictures out there, the u.s. will have taken on its own advice. i'm merely passing on what the kremlin say their position. but it's an interesting development. they put these names out there, they put these photographs out there as well and i think it's interesting because it's the one thing that can't be overturned when donald trump comes into office in three weeks from now. he may be able to get rid of the sanctions, he may be able to kind of paper over the differences when it comes to these expulsions of diplomats and he may even be able to overturn the sanctions that have been imposed on russia by the united states over the pa

fbi agents. i know director comey. they take their job seriously. they work really hard. they help keep us safe and save a lot of lives. >> well, they obviously are on opposite ends of the spectrum here. who's closer to the larger portion of the democratic party now, the president or what we're hearing from podesta and the clinton campaign and secretary clinton herself? >> i heard the president there, victor, as being, you know, sort of diplomatic about the public servants who serve under him. i didn't hear anything inconsistent with a very hard-working core of dedicated fbi agents who serve the country well. there's no contradiction between saying that and saying at the top there are some people who are playing politics in this particular election, in this particular way and who really seem to have a thumb on the scales when it came to the clinton e-mail questions compared with this much larger, much more serious kind of problem involving outside interference. i mean, it's really kind of apples

>> guest: apple in the fbi differ. it probably reflected the failure of many different things but i'm not sure it's a story of lack of technical sophistication if you look at what the fbi asked apple to do it actually was a pretty sophisticated ask. if you look at the way they responded to objections from the encryption community, sure they disagree but i don't think it's accurate to say they fundamentally misunderstood what they were telling them. i chalk it up more to problems and one in which --. >> host: professor was a lot clear? >> guest: one of the problems with the case is the law was old so you have a very old very broad law at the justice department. again quite aggressively was trying to use a buried in his set of circumstances. that's the reason why i think the judge quite reasonably could have said you are asking too much. what i'm trying to push back on is the critique that the fbi just doesn't understand. and i think we all regret that we didn't get to see this play out in the courts and it was fascinati

the fbi worked that case in cooperation with local police. now another string of 7-eleven robberies is plaguing our area. six convenience stores have been robbed in prince george's county since december 21st. a single gunman is believed responsible. police sent us this video of the man wearing a mask and black

okay, so what does that have to do with apple/fbi? to me, at least -- and i think reasonable minds can differ -- probably reflected the failure of many different things, but i'm not sure it was a lack of technical sophistication. so if you look at what the fbi asked apple to do, it actually was a pretty sophisticated ask. if you look at the way they responded to okays from the encryption -- to objections from the encryption community, sure, they disagreed with that community, but i don't think it's accurate to say they fundamentally misunderstood what the clipping toker ins -- cryptographers were telling them. i chalk it up to it's a hard problem and one on which reasonable minds absolutely can differ. >> host: professor, was the law clear in that case? >> guest: right. i mean, one of the big problems in that case was the law was old. so you have a very old, very broad law that the justice department -- again, quite aggressively -- was trying to use in a very new set of circumstances. and so that's the reason why i think a judge quite

>> well, first of all the fbi did warn that the fbi would be briefing the white house continuously through the process of what type of hacking is going on against the u.s. systems, or involving the political process of the campaign. we've seen this repeatedly the hacking of opm believed to be by the chinese. the sony attack by north korea. so you know we -- >> so, tom, let me just stop you there. you're saying that the fbi would have briefed the obama white house but you don't know if they briefed the clinton campaign. >> i don't know it directly whether they did. my understanding from talking to some people was that it was. and that they did brief. and that later on, the democratic national committee did hire a company, crowd source, to do something about it. this past summer. but the point is that this kind of hacking has been going on a long time and it's normal trade crap, especially with the russians, to try to disrupt our elections, no matter who they're for. just to create a disruption -- >> so, does that mean no biggie? >> i didn't say no biggie. i'm just saying that this is what t

he's been in the fbi's list for some time. the reward for him is $3 million. >> to be clear that picture, that's one of the gentlemen named. we did not have pictures of the other three. >> what are these agencies and what do they do? >> we are going to have to come back on that of institutions and what their i mplications are. i have to do a little me digging before i get a precise answer on that. >> we'll come back and stick around hans nicolls if you can. let me bring in tammy leitner here with president obama on vacation there in honolulu. lets talk about how we got to this point and have we heard of anything new from president obama out of all of this? >> hey, craig, as you know this did not happen over night. we know that president obama had multiple conversations with putin and warning russia not to do this. our presidential election was hacked back in october. russia was responsible for the hacks a f hacks. before that, there was an exec ti exec -- the one thing that's becoming clear is that the obama administration is

that have to do with apple via the fbi? they probably reflect the failure of many different wasgs, but i'm not sure it a story of a lack of technical sophistication. at what the fbi was aapple to do, it pretty sophisticated task. if you look at the way they responded to objections from the encryption community, sure they disagreed with that community, but i don't think it is accurate to say they find old -- they fundamentally misunderstood what the cryptographers told them. it is a devilish problem. host: was the law player in that case? paul: the lawn that case was old. so you have a very old very that the justice department was aggressively trying to use in a new set of circumstances. that is the reason why a judge could have reasonably said you are asking for too much. what i am trying to push back on is the critique that the fbi just didn't understand. i think they knew what was going on. i think it would have been fascinating to see what the judge did. day, the judgehe had the technical consultation it needed and it wa

it was clear it was the fbi demonstration -- and the fbi opposes now, and have started a letterwriting campaign to obama saying do not release him, do not release him. that is why it is so important that your viewers respond, either by going to the amnesty international's right, but t by themselves writing to the president. amy: we see the fbi directors extremely powerful james comey, who may have tipped the election for donald trump -- >> if it is not done now, .resident trump highly unlikely the next pardon is 2014. leonard is sick. he will not make us to his next pardon. he will not make it through a trump presidency, i fear. amy: what word have you gotten from the white house? >> no word. we estimate it to the pardon attorney's who then have to send it on to the president. we understand it has left the pardon office and now on the president's desk. amy: i want to thank you very much for being with us. i want to thank norman patrickk brown for joining us from albuquerque. one of theus, leading trial lawyers in this country. we will continue to follow the call for clemency for leonar

when way were parking together the fbi guy would get a piece of information and the fbi is not particularly well suited to track that information do you down. cia would come back in a day and with their an littal capables saying he's talking about this guy because we looked at the travel, et cetera, that's how they got to jose padilla, so you have to understand who brings what to the table. cia does not not a skill set of interrogating people. >> what did we learn collectively from interrogations of islamist extremists? >> well, we learned that -- their networks. once they do -- they did breck this -- break this guy down and got to get intelligence. the template they designed -- the fbi from interviewing the serial killer guys, interviewing the behavioral science guys, interviewing would-be suicide bombers, they built a template of interrogation, understanding the motivations of an islamic extreme wist who wants to kill himself and use that as a template to interrogate or interview the would-be times square bomber, shahzad, the would-be new york subway bomber, can't remember his name -- taz

the fbi. this is basically a publicity stunt. a last-ditch every for any democrat to get last dig in on james comey and fbi. i don't see it going anywhere. >> how about this, david, i end with you where i started, the merits. there is such thing as freedom of information act. valuable tool. meghan: classified information? >> never classified. in general, things the public should be exposed to. do you think there is anything in this. >> yeah, i think everybody wants to know, it may take years, maybe 30 years from now, writing definitive book what made comey go back and forth on hillary clinton probe. so everybody wants to find out but, i think the motive of the people involved in this is just to get payback for what happened to hillary and wikileaks. harris: i think american public is waiting for the movie. meghan: i am. sandra: will they believe it? nb. >> nba superstar lebron james making a political statement on cover of "sports illustrated." what the giant safety pin signifies and what he h

did the fbi and cia act with a sense of urgency. john po defta who is also close to president obama doesn't believe that. the president chose not to go there at all. it seems as if his goal was to preserve the integrity of this process as best he could in trying to get as much partisanship out of this discussion as possible. i just don't know how effective it was. i have to tell you this. i don't know if the message that was just sent to putin just now, it was almost you might not be hearing from us any time soon or it may not be as rough as you think. it struck me on this front as odd. >> we will talk to an expert about that in a moment. that was there portion to your previous point where he said to the collective press corps, you guys covered this every day in realtime. this was an ongoing attack and by broadcasting stolen goods, the details from john podesta's details, his recipe, you covered this in realtime. >> right. i think it was almost simultaneously saying the public knew there was hacking going on and by the way, the medi

hillary clinton blames the fbi for her loss. now the attorney general weighs in. >> it was painful for me. >> what lioretta lynch wishes they could take back. our exclusive exit interview with her next. family business. the trump kids have a seat at the transition table and a hand in the family global business empire. democrats cry foul. will trump sell any of these businesses. the best political minds will be here with insights on what happens next. hello. i'm jake tapper in washington where the state of our union is walking through a winter wonderland more specifically we are wondering what 2017 will be like in the shall we say unprecedented nature of it all before heading to florida for christmas, donald trump gave what he said would be the final rally of his so-called thank you tour and then promised to do more rallies. >> this is the last time i'll be speaking at a rally for maybe a while. you know. they are saying as president he shouldn't be doing rallies. but i think we should, right? we've done everything else the oppos

and he doesn't believe it is an fbi agent. the fbi agent calls back, back, back. leaves voice mail messages. >> and the guy doesn't call back because he said there was nothing new to tell the guy about. >> and dnc didn't have sophisticated monitoring software to look for intrusions. and the guy did some checking and he didn't see anything. and because he didn't see anything he didn't return the calls. and this went on for months. >> and this didn't go up the chain at the dnc. >> no. >> i don't understand why the fbi. as you point out the dnc is close to the fbi. why didn't the fbi show up at the dnc? >> hard to explain. the only explanation is that the fbi gets lots of these reports of potential intrusions and it is charged with notifying businesses and other individuals. and makes the call and tells people to if they don't respond that is the end of it. in this case they should have known. the presidential elections previously were both cyberattacked. this they should have done. and they questioned why didn't the fbi escalate is this. >> and john podesta gets a p

today we got there 13 page fbi report on russian malicious cyberactivity which fbi and dhs assert they agree with the cia that russia engaged in the attacks. provides details on the tools, infrastructure used to compromise and exploit networks and end points associated with the election. be clear for anyone keeping track at home. not the report from the full investigation president obama has ordered. don't know results of that until probably next year but it's something real. fbi and dhs, details that showed them this is russia behind the hack. what is your reaction to the report? >> frankly ari, i thought the fbi and dhs could have and should have gone considerably further than what they released today. for those of us following this story most of the year, there was little in the fbi report that you could not have gotten from the report turned out by crowd strike and by other private companies that do internet security, crowd strike is the group that had been brought in by the dnc after their hack. it confirmed the crowd strike conclusions but didn't get you where i think the u.s. go