the fbi investigation on the trump campaign ties to russia. cnn learned the bureau has information that some of the president's associates may have coordinated with russian operatives in the >> there are also questions about whether the house intelligence committee investigation into russia is now compromised after it's chairman went directly to the president with new surveillance information. all of this as the show down over health care is in the final hours with republicans still divided. >> so there's a lot at stake on the 63rd day of the trump presidency. let's get after it live in washington. you have been working this story from the beginning. what's the latest? >> the fbi has information that indicates they possibly
coordinated with hillary clinton's campaign. the fbi is investigating the trump campaign ties to russia. the fbi is reviewing the information they have which includes a human intelligence travel business and phone records and accounts of in person meetings. this information is what raised the suspicions of fbi counter intelligence investigations that coordination may have taken place though we do know from officials that they have cautioned that the information is not yet conclusive and that the information, the investigation is still on going. they deny there's any evidence of collusion. >> this explains exactly what he said. if you recall in addition to saying that the investigation includes looking at the connections of trump associates
he also explained what it means that this investigation is being done. take a listen to him. >> don't you need some action or information besides attending a meeting? being paid to attention a conference that a picture was taken or travel to a country before you're open for counter intelligence by the fbi? >> the standard is i think there's a couple of different at play. the credibility allegation of wrong doing or reasonable basis to believe that america may be acting as an agent of a foreign power. >> so the information in hand suggests that quote people connected to the campaign were in contact and eight piered that they were giving the thumbs up to release information when it was ready but other official wes spoke to say it's premature to draw that from the information that they gathered so far largely because it's still circumstantial. they cannot conclude that collusion took place but it's
now a large focus on this investigation. >> we knew about the context but a little bit of it is going to be words but it's going to have huge implications of what the outcome of the investigation is. coordination, collusion, knowledge, they will be the big words. collusion would be the far end of the spectrum which is you worked with them on it but just knowledge of what the russians were doing and coordination that's very different than contact. >> that's right and at this point we still don't know who the people connected to trump that are being investigated as part of the coordination part but we do know they investigated four former trump campaign associates including michael flynn and roger page for contacts with those known to u.s. intelligence. now all four of these men have denied improper contacts and i'm going to tell you one of the obstacles and interesting things here, one of the obstacles in
finding this conclusive evidence is that communication between trump associates and the russians ceased in recent months and some of the russian officials they have been watching have also changed their methods of communications making it all that more difficult for the fbi to monitor what they're doing. >> appreciate it. thank you very much. keep us in the loop. another story. the political battle brewing over president trump's spy claims. how intelligence chairman did something very unorthodox. he went to the white house with information he learned about private communications of the president and his transition team being intercepted by u.s. intelligence monitoring of foreign officials. remember the distinction. he did not have information that they were the target of any warrant or wiretap but just like with general flynn they may have been caught up in ancillary surveillance. the key here is nunez did this
going to the white house before he talked to his own committee and it raises an obvious question. is this investigation compromised? does nunez have to be removed? joe johns is live at the white house with more. this was a big move. it was a big gamble for nunez. >> that's right, chris. with a federal investigation underway and the eyes of the nation focused on how the congress is handling this, the republican chairman of the house intelligence committee appearing to do an end run around established committee procedures raising new questions about the ability of this committee to conduct a fair and impartial investigation. >> house intelligence committee chairman stunning washington. >> it was important for the president to know this. >> rushing to the white house to warn president trump that communication involving members of his transition team may have been picked up through normal
incidental surveillance. apparently all legally conducted. >> his name and people and others ended up into intelligence reports. most people would say that is surveillance. >> nunez himself a member of the president's transition team underfire for going to the media before briefing democratic members of the house intelligence committee. >> we can't have a presidential whisperer. >> the white house seizing on nunez's statements. >> there's a lot of questions his statement raises. >> the top democrat on the intelligence committee responding to the republican chairman's actions for potentially politicizing their investigation into russia's interference in the last election tnchts chairman will need to decide whether he is the chairman of an independent investigation into conduct which includes allegations between the trump campaign and the russians
or a surrogate of the white house. >> do you feel vindicated by chairman nunes coming over there? >> i do. i some what do. i very much appreciated the fact that they found what they found. >> despite all the drama over intelligence today the big issue at the white house is health care. the president will be bringing truckers and ceos from trucking companies to the white house to talk health care this afternoon. >> thank you we have a lot to discuss with our panel. we'll bring back perez that shared his reporting with us. also maggie and we have the former cia counter terrorism official. so let's begin with, sometimes we overuse the word bombshell. however if evan's reporting is ultimately confirmed by officials and law enforcement
that there was some sort of coordination between members of the trump campaign and russia in terms of releasing the e-mails that were damaging to hillary clinton, where are we with this? >> well for donald trump that is all confirmed we're in a bad spot. i think that we are aways away from that. this seems to suggest there's a reason the fbi has been so focused on this and there's some school of thought that if they found something already we would know it and the public would know it, actually these investigations take a long time so i don't think that that is a surprise. i think that until there is anything conclusive however this is just a daily drum beat for the trump administration which is challenging for them for which they had no disciplined answer, clear answer, contradictory answers and it's
bogging them down if it's proven it raises a host of questions but for now it's shackling them to a degree they have been shocked by. >> the reporting is solid and we know the sourcing on it. if they're able to make the conclusions then you get into a different ball game but look we know that they had to be looking for corroboration, solution, knowledge, he took information that was convenient to help the white house and then he forgets he is supposed to be doing an independent investigation and runs over to the white house to try to help them and does a press conference afterwards. can he stay in charge of anything that's supposed to be objective?
>> i don't think so. if i were to go up before this committee in front of a chairman of the committee that's saying reveal what you know about an investigation that reaches the white house the second is how information is being manipulated. two things that were completely inappropriate that you touched on. we had the president misleading the american people by claiming his predecessor broke the law. they're trying to suggest that incidentally collects american citizens is somehow related to
what the president says and then the president suggests that's true. it's nonsense. the two are totally different. >> back to the substance of your reporting is it your sense that we have moved from circumstantial where it was like trump associates may be talking to russian operatives, has it advanced from circumstantial to something else? >> one of the interesting things about the investigation is the fact that you talk to officials and they are look at some of the same evidence and some of them think that looks like someone is giving the thumbs up and coordinating the release of information. someone is giving a wink and a nod to release damaging information to hillary clinton's campaign. other people are looking at the same information and the same evidence and same intelligence come back and say well we're not
there yet and that's how the fbi works. you do have differences of opinion inside an investigation as it's on going and part of it is the fact that you have intelligence. some of it in ways that you can never use in court so you do need more evidence and more information that you can present in court should you ever bring a case one of the reasons we did the story is we wanted to explain a little bit about why he did what he did. he felt not only with the information solid enough for them to share some of this with the public, at least what they're looking at he felt that it was important enough for the public to know that the fbi is not turning a blind eye to this. >> evan and the rest of the team have been reporting from the beginning that there had to be a suspicion to look at the
contacts in the first place and they have always been moving down that road and chronicling it well with the team. you have what nunez did and that's hugely compromising in this situation and it is a shock they didn't know and strains credibility so how much of this story wiensd nds up falling bac the white house anyway but the white house once again like with flynn saying we didn't know something that was totally obvious about the man's background. >> to your point, the white house has a habit of extending this story i have seen the
reports like everybody else but what i don't believe is there was a total lack of awareness about at least the representation that he had done, maybe not the details of the contract was reported on yesterday by the associated press but i find it hard to believe that nobody knew it. and they have reportedly something said that he was here for a limited time in a limited role. technically it was a limited role. he ran the campaign. he was equivalent to john and so that even having to clear that up yesterday and i just think that the more time they have to spend covering their tracks to explain things they said before it's just confusing for them and
problematic. >> what do you think of the new reporting about paul manafort or the new revelations that there might have been offshore accounts and he might have been paid $10 million a year. >> on the surface i think he has a law degree i'm not certain about that. as he said earlier there's an air gap between, there might have been contacts between campaign officials and the russians. that's not a legal case yet. however, let me give you one fact that we're glossing over here. the fbi director was castigated through the summer and into the fall for doing something fbi directors rarely do, acknowledging they had a case based on the hillary clinton e-mail issue.
months later he comes back and says i have a case open. that tells me that something is very serious and that's what we just learned. >> just to be clear it's hard to say the stuff we're hearing now is new the first interview was with us. we asked him right then. the idea that the white house didn't know about them is almost impossible to believe. lady, gentlemen, thank you very much. >> thank you for the reporting. now other top stories the show down over health care. the house expected to hold a cliff hanger vote in hours on the gop's plan to repeal and replace obamacare. republicans still deeply divided and negotiations going on through the night. president trump still at this hour as far as we know does not have the votes for this to pass. 28 republicans at this hour. what's the latest.
>> good morning, allison, well the house is set to vote for this tonight even if they don't have the support. they don't have those numbers quite yet but there's new issues at play here. this is whether or not they must cover things like maternity care, hospitalization and mental health and these are all for conservatives to get on board. >> down to the final hours. president trump trying to unite republicans behind the american health care act. we're optimistic that we can get there. >> after vowing to vote no he now says he could close the deal with the white house the president and i came to an agreement in principle. >> conservatives want to strip it of potential health benefits. something they say will lower the cost of premiums but satisfying these conservatives could mean jeopardizing support
from more moderate republicans. >> we feel like we're getting really close. >> house speaker paul ryan huddling with moderate republicans behind closed doors that are angered by some of the proposed changes declaring he will oppose the plan asaying in a statement i believe this bill in it's current form will lead to the loss of coverage and make insurance unaffordable for too many americans. the white house though remains optimistic. >> we're seeing tremendous support in our correction and the count keeps getting stro stronger. >> pledging millions of dollars to help reelect republicans that vote against the bill. >> he is set to meet with the freedom caucus again today to see what it is that they want to get them to sign on to the bill. in the meantime the house rules
committee will issue an emergency rule to allow the changes to the bill before it goes to the full house and if they do not have the count to pass that all eyes will be on the republican leadership to see if, in fact, they will delay the vote tonight. >> as you have been pointing out we don't have a time certain yet for the vote. appreciate you keeping us in the loop. thank you very much. there's no question that the gop is divided on the health care plan. will the white house postpone this vote? we don't have a time for it yet? it will be easy to set. but a near miss here is a big loss. next. ♪ if you have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis isn't it time to let the real you shine through?
introducing otezla, apremilast. otezla is not an injection, or a cream. it's a pill that treats plaque psoriasis differently. some people who took otezla saw 75% clearer skin after 4 months. and otezla's prescribing information has no requirement for routine lab monitoring. don't take otezla if you are allergic to any of its ingredients. otezla may increase the risk of depression. tell your doctor if you have a history of depression or suicidal thoughts, or if these feelings develop. some people taking otezla reported weight loss. your doctor should monitor your weight and may stop treatment. side effects may include diarrhea, nausea, upper respiratory tract infection, and headache. tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, and if you're pregnant or planning to be. ask your dermatologist about otezla today. otezla. show more of you.
>> i'm really optimistic that we can get there and there's details to workout so to say that we got a deal wouldn't be accurate. >> house republicans are still divided at this house. some conservatives are jumping on board after these proposed changes were made but those changes are angering moderate republicans. so how will this all play out?
i want to start with you. so it sounds like the president was able to make them have these last night with some of the provisions but in the process angered moderate republicans. are these much yulely exclusive? >> they're pretty close. they're still believing they will likely get there. this is what they think it's going to be close. but this will come at a cost they were surprised of the concessions. among them are proposaled like eliminating the basic coverage required of insurers on things like mental health that's going to be pretty controversial he
health. >> that is a problem. >> but there was a reason, right? everything has a reason and this is about pre-existing conditions. you can look about it or look at the facts. you can be nagsty about it or you can listen to me. >> answer my question. state by state you get different regulations. the reason they built it into the aca is states weren't
covering it because you were having short falls? right. >> they were not covering all the things sometimes including pediatric dental for single men with no children, yes i am a single mom of two that lost three or four plans since obamacare passed. when i said i would lose my plan people called me a liar when this was going on. i have had 160% increase in my premiums and i had a 300% increase in my deductible people are getting coverage they can use. one of the ways to deal with it is cutting some of these quote unquote essential health benefits because some are not essential and you can give people more flexibility to have slightly less expensive and comprehensive plans which is what many young people would like to buy but they're not allowed to because it's illegal. >> that's what people were so
angry with obamacare about ask. but donald trump pulls off surprising wins so that doesn't mean this won't go through. he has very fluid views of his own on the subject right? so there's not that many things going into negotiation that are just totally off the table we're not even going to talk about that. it has to be in the bill. having said that and i was talking last night to republican strategists that advise a number of the members of the house of representatives and the great fear now is maybe less that they don't pass something and more that they drag this bill to the right in order to pass it by one or two votes knowing full well that it cannot come close to
passing the senate in it's current form so you end up asking a whole bunch of members and also conservatives to go way out on a limb on a political vote like this knowing that the substance just isn't there and this is the big challenge in a lot of ways that it closes over and over and over and it's well articulating on the house right and far to right version on this and they're saying the things that i'm presenting out there. they're saying i don't know that i can shop. i don't know that i can deal with pre-existing conditions that way so what's the long game here? if you do cram it down in the house but you're dealing with that resistance in the senate
then what? >> they are telling themselves that failure is not an option. it will pass. it will pass and there's been little talk from their side about how they will grapple with the differences between where the house is and where the senate is. something may not end up. let's say this doesn't go to the senate. what somebody said to me last night is we're well aware there might be changes. if that is so then you have asked people to vote on something for no reason. >> on the politics of it we heard the stories about the republicans have been talking for a long time about what's wrong with obamacare. >> they're real. >> sure but whether or not a proposal they vote on in the house ever becomes law those are the stories that you'll be hearing in campaign ads in 2018.
>> got it. panel thank you very much. thank you for sharing your story as well london police making arrests. the attack could be isis inspired. we have all the latest developments for you next. calcu... shall we initiate the restart sequence? ♪ thrivent mutual funds. managed by humans, not robots. before investing, carefully read and consider fund objectives, risks, charges and expenses in the prospectus at thriventfunds.com.
then you're a couple. think of all you'll share... like snoring. does your bed do that? the dual adjustability of a sleep number bed allows you each to choose the firmness and comfort you want. so every couple can get the best sleep ever. does your bed do that? only at a sleep number store, where queen mattresses start at just $899. and right now save $400 on our most popular mattresses. go to sleepnumber.com for a store near you.
>> we do have breaking news for you right now. 8 people arrested following the terror attack in london. nick robinson is live with all of the breaking details. who are these people? do we know? >> what we're hearing is that these raids, the six different locations that police raided leaving to those were intelligence lead. they believe the attacker was isis inspired in the early hours of the morning. armed police raided the building behind me. they arrested three people the operation went on for an hour and a half in the middle of the night. we're in the city of birmingham which is about an hour and a half stride from london and what
the police are saying is that the arrest they made and they're not being specific on numbers and specific locations but between the arrests have been in london and birmingham. now what police are saying they're going to do today is a forensic search of the crime scene of the attack scene and follow up on the associates and motivations of the attacker they believe is working alone. isis inspired. that's what the police are telling us. >> thank you. so the house of parliament is back open after yesterday's horrific attack. british prime minister addressing law makers right now live outside the house of parliament where it happened. what's the message. >> we have helicopters in the air above me and as i walked through a very grave silence there compounded by the silence
held as we slowly learn more about the horrific attack. a rare piece of good news adjusted down to now three victims. a 43-year-old spanish teacher that lived in london for some years and the policeman that acosted the attacker. age 48 also lost his life at the scene there but we see them trying to get back to life here and coming to terms with a horrific attack that lead to that driven up on the curve plowing into tourists south koreans, french students before crashing into a nearby fence. one attacker is thought to be trying to make his way with a knife inside of parliament. >> thank you for all of that reporting and the updated death count. more news. we're just hours away from the critical health care vote in the
house. can president trump cut an 11th hour deal with the freedom caucus to get it passed? we have a leading member of that group joining us next. modern way to pay. you excited? it's sold out. don't fret, my friend. i masterpassed it! you can use it online and on your phone i masterpassed it. you got the tickets? onward! playing the hero: priceless
>> president trump working hard to get conservatives in the yes column and repeal and replace obamacare through the house. tonight he is optimistic a deal could be reached now. >> i am really optimistic that we can get there. i mean there's still a lot of details to workout sean so to say that we have a deal that
wouldn't be accurate. >> did you guys have a meeting of the mind? >> the president and i came to an agreement in principle. what we're trying to do now is to make sure that our agreement can be executed in a way that passes the senate. >> will we see a vote tonight and will it get through? let's get a key member in here now always a pleasure to have you on the show. do you believe that yourself close? >> we'll see our focus is to repeal obamacare and we want to bring back affordable insurance. that's what we're focused on doing. there's progress being made but we'll see if we can get an agreement that's going to do what we always had as the goal and frankly as we said before with you what the american
people sent us here to accomplish which is to repeal it and bring down the cost of insurance. >> do you think that some of the gives that were just put into the bill in the last couple of days to help with people like you like making it not mandatory to cover certain conditions do you think that could have a balanced effect? helps with you, hurts with the so-called moderates? no. i don't. i think what we're looking for and the language is going to bring down the cost of insurance. people are paying unbelievably high prem yums and if they can afford that they can't afford the deductible that goes with it. you can't change that if you don't get after the mandates and regulations that are part of obamacare. that's the key to bringing down the cost. that's why we have been so focused on it throughout the debate. do you expect a vote tonight? >> we'll see. it's got to meet those
requirements because that's what the american people elected us to do. that's what they sent us here to accomplish. that's what it was about in 2010, 2014, 2016 so we have to deliver on that fundamental promise that fundamental contract with the american people so if it does it moving forward, if it doesn't we won't. >> is it worth it to you to compromise the president's self-described need for a win. if he doesn't get this vote or the vote doesn't go through it's a big loss for him. sit worth it to you to give the president a loss? >> that's not how we look at it. that's never been the focus. the focus is the american people t. focus is the families in the 4th district of ohio who elected me to come do wha told them i was going to do. that's always been our focus and objective. that has not changed. if we can get that agreement that accomplishes that simple objective and basic objective we'll move forward. if we can't, we won't. that's how we look at it because that's consistent with what the
american people elected republicans to do. >> another topic, nunes gets some information and goes to the white house, skips over his own committee co-chair and the members and basically tries to help the white house spin it's own narrative about what wiretapping means. do you believe that he can lead what is supposed to be an independent investigation after that move? >> i do. i think he simply shared with the commander and chief the fact that people in president trump's transition team had information that was gathered when they were accomplishing the goal of transitioning to the new government. the key thing to remember in this is information that the congressman unveiled and his analysis and questioning brought forward this week. there's a number of people that had access to unmasking american
citizens information and i think he pointed this out very clearly. who are the individuals and who, in fact, leaked american citizen information to the press. that's a felony. who in fact did that? so that's an important issue as well as letting the commander and chief know what happened during that transition time period. >> we don't know that the commander and chief didn't know. this isn't new information. we know flynn was caught up in the surveillance of the russian ambassador exactly this way but what was done politically, leaks always matter. >> they matter all the time because it's a prime. >> but politics only get loud and proud their selective out rage on this issue. we both know that but let's put it to the side. what nunez did how do you see that as advancing this investigation independently as opposed to helping the white house give the president the ability to say i was right.
>> i think it's the chairman doing a good job conveying important information to the president and to the american people. plain and simple have you ever heard of this happening before? >> ever heard of someone leaking important information about a crime and important people in the white house? some of the same names that he brought forward, same names we dealt with on the benghazi committee, that's important information too and what he was trying to get at with the fbi director is are you going to investigate those people and find out who in fact leaked this information. >> you have big things on your plate. appreciate you coming on to discuss them. have you back soon. >> more on the russia investigation. did house intel chairman compromise his committees a ability to investigate by giving the president the info before his own colleagues? we're going to have a debate and hear both sides. how do you become america's best-selling brand? you're not going to make it.
do you think you can make it? uhh... make it... every time. nice! going further to keep drivers moving freely. that's ford... and that's how you become america's best-selling brand. start here. at fidelity, we let you know where you stand, so when it comes to your retirement plan, you'll always be absolutely...clear. it's your retirement. know where you stand.
for him in the supreme court. 20 hours of tough questions in two days. he frus rated democrats by refusing to say how he might rule in the future. he is expected to vote on the nomination on april 3rd. >> the secret service is asking for an extra 60 million for travel and protection of the first family. the washington post reporting half of that would go to protecting the president's family and their home in trump tower. the rest would cover travel costs incurred by the president, vice president and other visiting heads of state. we're learning the chair is asking immigration officials for more information about this 18-year-old suspect including how he was dealt with at the border. he and a 17-year-old boy are accused of rape a 14-year-old girl in their high school bathroom. >> house intel chair nunes under fire for briefing president trump and helping the white house spin a narrative of
validation about wiretapping. not even discussing with his own committee before he did it. he crossed the line. what will it mean, next. ( ♪ ) i moved upstate because i was interested in building a career. i came to ibm to manage global clients and big data. but i found so much more. ( ♪ ) it's really a melting pot of activities and people. (applause, cheering) new york state is filled with bright minds like victoria's. to find the companies and talent of tomorrow, search for our page, jobsinnewyorkstate on linkedin. search for our page, knows how it feels to seees your numbers go up, despite your best efforts. but what if you could turn things around? what if you could love your numbers? discover once-daily invokana®. it's the #1 prescribed sglt2 inhibitor that works to lower a1c. invokana® is a pill used along with diet and exercise
to significantly lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. and in most clinical trials, the majority reached an a1c goal of 7 percent or lower. invokana® works around the clock by sending some sugar out of your body through the process of urination. it's not for lowering systolic blood pressure or weight, but it may help with both. invokana® can cause important side effects, including dehydration, which may cause you to feel dizzy, faint,lightheaded,or weak, upon standing. other side effects may include kidney problems, genital yeast infections,changes in urination, high potassium, increases in cholesterol, risk of bone fracture, or urinary tract infections, possibly serious. serious side effects may include ketoacidosis, which can be life threatening. stop taking and call your doctor right away if you experience symptoms or if you experience symptoms of allergic reaction such as rash, swelling, or difficulty breathing or swallowing. do not take invokana® if you have severe liver or kidney problems or are on dialysis.
tell your doctor about any medical conditions and medications you take. using invokana® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may cause low blood sugar. it's time to turn things around. lower your blood sugar with invokana®. imagine loving your numbers. there's only one invokana®. ask your doctor about it by name. bp uses flir cameras - a new thermal imagining technology - to inspect difficult-to-reach pipelines, so we can detect leaks before humans can see them. because safety is never being satisfied. and always working to be better. >> house intelligence committee chair revealing to the media that the communications of president donald trump's associates may have been picked up on surveillance by u.s. intelligence. congressman nunes told the president and the press before
telling his fellow committee members so is that congressional investigation now compromised? let's bring in cnn political commentator and senior writer and cnn counter terrorism analyst and former cia official. did nunes compromise this information and can that committee still do their job? >> yeah, that remains to be seen. it was an unconventional move. whether it was unconventional because he thought this was a big deal which seems like a big deal if the allegations are true. are we all flip flopping on whether leaks are cool and whether -- it seems like we should have some questions about what this investigation was and why this information was distributed the fbi investigation is the right way to deal with it but the fact that we had six months of some investigation and some
surveillance of some kind and we have come up with not a conclusion is not great for democracy. i'm concerned agent both side of the story. the russia part and the leaking part. >> so phil, how should congressman nunes have handled this if he had some special information that he thought should be shared with the president? >> this is pretty straightforward. let's step back for a moment and take names out of it. the legislative branch of this government in our system of checks and balances that protects all of us is having an investigation of the executive branch. we know the executive branch in this case some people affiliated with the white house are under not just an investigation but an fbi criminal investigation. the legislative branch should speak about that in silence and in this case we have somebody from that oversight committee going directly to the target of the investigation. can i tell you what's going to happen next time an fbi person goes behind closed doors and talks to that committee? if i were that fbi person and i talked to dozens of closed committees i'd say how soon are you going to run down the street
and reveal the secrets i just told you. this doesn't make sense to me. >> so there you have it. others say it is compromised beyond repair. they cannot independently investigate this anymore when it appears that nunes is on the side of the president. >> it's a problem for him and other things are problems. i don't understand why we can't have both of these conversations and the fact that we are dismissing the idea that there were these discussions disseminated throughout the intelligence community. there were two debunkings in the comey discussion the other day. one of the wiretapping allegation and the other was of the media where he said a lot of these leaks and also said something that suggested perhaps some of the leaks didn't even exist were quote, dead wrong. so there's two parts of this story. both nunes and the russia. >> so let's break it down for a second just so that we
understand this because i don't know that comey was incorrect. the wiretapping requires an actual warrant and intentionally wiretapping donald trump's associates. we don't know that that happened because what has been suggested with nunes's revelation is that they were caught up if you were listening in to foreign conversations. so we actually don't know who it was or what they were saying that was caught up. so given that, again, do you think that nunes committee should now just recuse themselves and hand this off to an independent commission. people say that he has acted as a stooge for the white house. >> he has a problem. if you're investigating someone and you're also sending them back channel information although he did go to the press first but i think it's a
problem. >> he went to the press first. republicans are complaining about leaks and when someone sees highly classified information instead of discussing it in the committee he runs to the press and you want to complain to be about leaks you have to be kidding me. this is the funniest moment i'll have all day. >> what time am i allowed to complain about leaks. >> 7:01. >> let's get back to that. >> can i say we give the federal government incredible power to surveil so that they can do things responsibly and with great power comes great responsibility so when all of this is distributed in an improper manner it makes people wond whaer are the powers th-- wonder what are the these and is it part of the discussion. >> what's not a fact? >> you suggest this information was a widely distributed across
government, not a fact. b distributed inappropriately not a fact. it's leaked. that's illegal. that does not suggest it was connected illegally. >> i don't think it was collected illegally and i never alleged that and nunes never alleged that. >> excuse me. >> nunes did not allege it was collected illegally and i did not. the question is if it is collected illegally it can still be problematic and we can still examine the powers and how they deal with the incidental collection of surveillance on american citizens. >> last word phil. >> smoke screen. we have a conversation about the violation of the integrity of elections by the russians and what do people that don't want that investigation to proceed say? we have to discuss leaks that existed since the beginning of this country. excuse me, the russians interfering in elections is the story. the leaks is a federal violation for which somebody should be thrown in jail. >> a agree with both of those things a