tv Special Report With Bret Baier FOX News June 8, 2017 1:00am-2:01am PDT
listening. >> jesse: i choose to believe! >> kimberly: did they investigate this? >> jesse: i want to believe this is >> bret: this is a fox news alert. i am bret baier in washington. the testimony for the testimony. former fbi director james comey says and prepared opening remarks released today that president trump asked him for loyalty and that he hoped comey could help his way to let go of the investigation into former national security advisor michael flynn. comey says he did not take that to mean the president wanted him to abandon the broader investigation into possible russian interference in the election or links to the trump campaign. and he did not pass it onto fbi investigators at that time. comey also didn't tell president trump, according to the detailed notes comey took at the time of those one-on-one
meetings, that the president was not personally that target or focus of investigation. an assurance comey offer three separate times, as president trump told nbc. those are some headlines from the prepared testimony that hit washington today like an earthquake. tomorrow, comey will deliver those remarks and take questions from the senate intelligence committee. that will be the main event in that dynamic double-header of senate hearings concerning investigations and what the president did not request or order. today, the men who guard america's secrets said they do not feel any pressure to squelch or silence any investigation, but they would not directly discuss specific discussions they had with president trump. we have fox team coverage, john roberts of the white house. plus a surprise personnel move a day ahead of the comey hearing. how a in the white house briefing room fact-checking the
media. we start on capitol hill and catherine herridge. >> these seven pages of prepared testimony for the record contained one revelation after another. after a january 6 briefing at trump tower to discuss unverified intelligence targeting the incoming president, james comey had already discussed with senior fa leadership whether he should be prepared to tell mr. trump he was not under federal investigation. we agreed i should do so if circumstances warranted based on president-elect trump's reaction to the briefing and without him directly asking the question, i offered that assurance. at a dinner later, president trump asked comey if you wanted to stay on as a fair director. the president said i need loyalty. i expect loyalty. i didn't move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed, comey writes but we simply looked at each other in
silence. later in the conversation, the president returned to the subject. i need loyalty. i replied he will always get honesty for me. he paused and then said that's what i want, honest loyalty. i paused and then said you will get that for me. after a february 14 meeting, the president raise the issue of national security advisor michael flynn who resigned a day earlier. "i hope you can see her weight cleared to letting this go, letting flynn go. he's a good guy. i hope you can let this go." comey stated i understood the president to be requesting that we drop any investigation of flynn in connection with false statements about his conversations with the russian ambassador in december. i did not understand the president to be talking about the broader investigation into russia more possible links to his campaign. comey continues. it was very concerning, giving the fbi's role as an independent investigative agency. fa leadership agreed that it was important not to affect the
investigated investigative tea. we concluded there was nothing available to cooperate my account. in march, comey made a public statement. >> i've been authorized by the department of justice to confirm that the fbi, as part of our counterintelligence mission, is investigating the russian government's efforts to interfere in the 2016 presidential election. >> ten days later, comey got a call from the president where he described the investigation as a cloud impairing his ability to act on behalf of the country. he asked what we can do to lift the cloud. i responded that we were investigating the matter as quickly as we could at that there would be a great benefit if we didn't find anything. he agreed. but then reemphasized the problems it was causing him. comey's testimony overshadowed today's hearing with top intelligence leaders. >> this pattern where the president seems to want to
interfere or downplay or halt the ongoing investigation, not only that the justice department is taking on, but this committee. >> in the time i've been the director, to the best of my recollection, i've never been directed to do anything to be illegal, immoral, unethical. >> intelligence related matters or any other matters discussed, it's my belief that it's inappropriate for me to share that with the public. >> traveling overseas, coats' predecessor said. >> i have to say you compare the two, that watergate pales really in my view compared to what we are confronting now. >> the committee's ranking democrat said he will bring forward a witness, former administration official, who saw
political interference. senator mark warner did not identify the witness by name. >> bret: thank you. just hours ahead of live testimony from the former fbi chief, president trump has announced his pick for a replacement at the fbi. she white house correspondent john roberts says that an reaction from the republican pay and reaction from the president to comey's comments. >> good evening. no official reaction from the white house to comey's prepared testimony but the outside counsel acting on behalf of the president did weigh in. in a statement to fox news, saying the president is pleased mr. call me -- mr. comey has confirmed that the president was not under investigation in in ah probe. he's eager to move forward with his agenda. the president took action on the front, moving to get ahead of comey's testimony tomorrow by announcing his pick to replace him at the fbi.
president trump in cincinnati to talk about rebuilding the infrastructure of our inland waterways. preemptive strike against testimony from james comey. the president's choice is christopher wray, a high-powered criminal attorney who represented new jersey governor chris christie in the bridge gate scandal. after four years as a assistant u.s. attorney in georgia, he was appointed to the department of justice by president bush. in 2003, he was confirmed ahead of the doj criminal division. president trump was down to two finalists, christopher wray and former administrator john pistole. the president said of wray "he's an technically qualified individual and i know he will serve his country's of years guarding of the law and model of integrity." wray's announcement came an early-morning tweet from the president. much of his staff, including the
communications team, weren't aware of the pick. the president didn't inform the chairman of the senate judiciary committee will lead wray's confirmation hearings. >> i believe he probably tried to get a hold of me but i wasn't available. i was in the house testifying. >> he didn't tell the speaker of the house either. >> i don't know the guy but i've looked his resume. seems like to me he is the perfect kind of person. >> reaction from democrats has been muted. ranking member of the judiciary committee, dianne feinstein, saying "he may be fine." nancy pelosi said only that in the current environment, wray "should be subject to the utmost scrutiny." white house was on full mute or reports attorney general jeff sessions offered to resign because of rising tensions with the president. president trump is said to be still fuming that sessions recused himself the russia investigation, eventually giving way to the appointment of special counsel robert mueller. the president made clear his thoughts just hours before
sessions took himself out. >> mr. president, did sessions recuse himself? >> in preparation for tomorrow's test want to buy james comey, the republican national committee has launched a major rapid response organization. they will flood the zone with surrogates on television and radio and will also have a major fact-checking operation going on social media. in response to comey's testimony this afternoon, source close to the president told me that he was interested to note there was not a single act of either collusion or obstruction that was noted by james comey. the reason this person said, because he can't identify one. >> bret: john roberts live on the north long. thank you. today's seven comments have answered a few questions about what went on between the fbi boss on the president from comey's perspective. howard kurtz looked at with the media may have gotten right and gotten wrong about the comey
testimony. he is in the white house briefing room. >> now that we have james comey's testimony, how does it stack up against félix? abc news reported that the fired fbi director "will dispute the president's contention that comey told him three times he's not under investigation." a source tells abc news that the former fbi director will directly contradict what the president wrote in the letter notifying him he was fired. i was wrong, comey says. in the dinner and to phone calls, he did discuss president trump was not personally under fbi investigation, just as mr. confed said. abc also reported that comey will testify that he does not believe the president was obstructing justice and asking him to consider dropping his probe of michael flynn. comey's testimony offers no opinion on whether it was obstruction or not. testimony confirms "new york times" story saying that the president told him "i hope you can let this go."
of the flynn investigation. >> i want to find out if there was a problem with an election having to do with russia. >> saying he understood it to be talking about the flynn inquiry, not the broader investigation. comey confirmed the story that the president asked for his loyalty. the president denied asking the loyalty question. comey's language almost perfectly matches some of the linked stories. >> bret: thank you. let's get reaction to comey's prepared testimony. and a look ahead, a look back at today's hearings. james lankford is a member of the senate intelligence committee. he joins us. senator, thanks for being with us. he read the testimony, i'm sure. your take initially. >> i was pleased with how frank
jim comey is in a day and age when you often get, i will think about this. he was clear. give details. we look forward to an open conversation and getting the rest of the information tomorrow. >> bret: you have heard people talk about the specifics, the february 14 oval office meeting. president trump "repeated that flynn hadn't done anything wrong and his calls with the russians but had misled the vice president. he said i hope you can say you were a clear to letting this go, to letting flynn go. he's a good guy, hope you can let it go." i had understood the president to be requesting we drop investigation flynn and false statements about his conversations with the russian investor. i did not understand the president to be talking about the broader investigation into russia or possible links to his campaign. i could be wrong but i took him to focus on wattages happened
with lynn's departure and the controversy around his phone calls. there are some tonight were saying this is obstruction of justice. >> i would disagree. we will get greater details tomorrow. jim comey was concerned that he didn't want to be alone with the president. he mentioned it leader on it is written prepared statement. what's clear is the president wasn't saying to him you've got to do this or else. or get into the russia probe or anything else. what i hear is the president just fired flynn we liked and respected but understood he lied to the vice president. trying to say we fired him. that's enough. is it going to go into a probe? sku and i have heard supporters of the president saying this is how he talks. he's a real estate developer
from new york. he's not used to the washington ways of dealing with this. is that how you see it? >> the first time i read this earlier today it was it reads like the president tocsin it sounds like a guy who's not a washington guy. america did not select a washington guy. they hired a new york business guy. he came in and he's in the process of hiring people. doesn't surprise me he's sitting down with people and saying i need you to be loyal. that's part of being a part of this. we have for term over and over again from other cabinet officials and folks that when the president meets with them. he sits down with comey and says the same as everyone else. comey is thinking i'm not like everyone else. i'm an independent investigator. the president sees him as another part of the team. comey seems to see it as we are independent. >> bret: i know you are going to press the former director tomorrow and he will be pressed on a number of fronts.
his explanations in the prepared testimony about why he doesn't tell the fbi investigators about this concern and others up the chain of command. do you buy it? to go i do. comey's excavation was that he didn't see it as anything off. >> bret: he says he's concerned. >> bret: several months down the road and you get down to the michael flynn conversation that raises a concern to say i don't want to be alone with the president. at the time, there was no one to report it to. >> bret: is it right for a president to ask an fbi director, i need loyalty. >> with this president and his background and business dealings, i would give them the benefit of the doubt of the first month, in the first week he's in the office. what i didn't see is him being pressured by anyone else.
jim comey doesn't articulate anyone else pressuring him. >> bret: i want to talk about today's hearing. >> i've never been directed to do anything i believed to be illegal, immoral, unethical, or inappropriate. i do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so. >> i've never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shipping intelligence in a political way. or in relationship to an ongoing investigation. >> there's a chance to lay to rest some of these press reports. these facts have to come out. >> with all due respect, i think you have cleared up substantially your direct testimony that you've never been pressured by anyone, including the president of the united states, to do something illegal, immoral, or anything else. >> bret: not surprisingly, how you look at that depending on
which side of the isle you sat on. you heard senator risch saying they did answer your question. but the democrats and others commentating on it say why couldn't they answer the direct question? >> democrats wanted to get into specific conversations. they didn't want to get into specifics at all, things were not going to talk about it. conversation with the president for it will only tell you in a general sense we've never been pressured emma never felt pressured, never been asked to do anything that was inconsistent morally, legally. democrats hated it. republican said that's good to know. the one before that you go, you just got back from syria and iraq. we have a couple pictures. your assessment of how the fighting is? >> what's remarkable is the
iraqis are fighting in mosul. we are advising for the iraqis are fighting in iraq. the serious are fighting -- the syrians are fighting in syria. isis only has control of three areas, smaller regions in the far western side of iraq, including the center of mosul. and in syria, it's really only the euphrates valley. the noose is being circled around them. >> bret: we appreciate your time. a blistering report tonight out saying the obama administration in general and former attorney general eric holder in particular repeatedly lied to the family of a slain border patrol officer about the weapons used in his death and stonewalled efforts to get at the truth. william la jeunesse on operation
fast and furious. >> my only goal was to make sure he was laid to rest with honors. that honor has been insulted by coverups and deception by the very people he served. >> border patrol agent died in december 2010, killed by guns tied to an obama administration plan that armed mexicans. officials tried to hide the scandal. >> the belated admission that those 64,000 pages are not privileged for gold seal of authenticity on the house's partisan vote to hold the attorney general in contempt. >> emails in the house oversight committee reports show top officials new guns were sent to mexico. it's a tricky case, said a deputy attorney general. a colleague replied it's not going to be a surprise a bunch
of u.s. guns are being used in mexico. months later, two guns were used against the agent. >> only one possible motivation remains for all those involved who have covered up fast and furious. that is to conceal their own shame and disgrace. >> the border patrol which sent the team in the desert, to know about the operation. >> i believe it brian terry and his team had known this information, chances are fried would be alive today. >> the report claims the administration try to stop the investigation by discrediting whistleblower don dotson. >> i was publicly attacked. i've been transferred 11 times, denied promotion, ostracized. >> lawmakers noted no one from the atf or justice department was fired or disciplined for the cover up. >> bret: thank you. the justice department is ending the practice of allowing big companies and banks to settle
parts a and b and want more coverage, guess what? you could apply for a medicare supplement insurance plan whenever you want. no enrollment window. no waiting to apply. that means now may be a great time to shop for an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. medicare doesn't cover everything. and like all standardized medicare supplement insurance plans, these help cover some of what medicare doesn't pay. so don't wait. call now to request your free decision guide. it could help you find the aarp medicare supplement plan that works for you. these types of plans have no networks,
>> bret: another fox news alert. major breaking news out of south korea. the new administration is pulling the plug on the latest high-tech american missile defense system. jennifer griffin is at the pentagon. >> in an apparent concession to china, unofficial for the south korean government announced today that it would suspend the deployment of a
crucial u.s. missile defense system designed to intercept long-range north korean missiles. the official said the two launchers of the terminal high altitude area defense system, or thaad, can remain but the others will be put on hold. the pentagon has not been officially informed of the decision. issued the following response. "the u.s. trusts the official stance that the deployment was an alliance decision and it will not be reversed. the top democrat said the decision shows a potential rift with seoul. >> tactical implications for deterring north korea that are deeply concerning. >> china and north korea view the thaad radar as a threat. the pentagon deployed two launchers in april. on a trip last week, officials
traveling with traveling with defense secretary jim mattis seemed to indicate the deal was complete. >> we've been consulting with the government throughout the process. to get the entire battery to the korean peninsula which includes six launchers. >> pentagon taking a wait and see attitude but some see it as a challenge for president trump's north korea policy at a time of uncertainty on the korean peninsula when they would prefer to present a united front. >> bret: news about the pentagon's ability to defend the homeland against an incoming missile. >> pentagon officials say this is the equivalent of getting upgraded to a triple a+ rating and comes in the wake of the successful missile defense test at the air force base in california. fox news has obtained a memo sent june six to the defense secretary which says that the u.s. missile defense agency is now for the first time capable
of defending theo's homeland. the memo was written by the independent operational test and evaluation director. >> bret: jennifer griffin live the pentagon. thank you. terrorism has come to iran's capital tonight. isis terrace claiming responsibility for attacks on the country's parliament and a major shrine that left at least 12 people dead. john huddy tells us what happened. >> a country accused of state-sponsored terrorism now the target of terrorism. gunmen and suicide bombers attacked iran's parliament building and the ayatollah khomeini mausoleum today in tehran. the bloodbath lasted for hours. in one picture, a little boy is lowered from a window. police eventually shot and killed the gunman but today's pilots was a blow to iran's elite security forces and perhaps a sign or more.
>> people were panicked and started running away and seeking shelter. then ambulances arrived and gone gone -- gunfire sounds increase increased. >> iranian backed forces have been fighting isis in iraq and syria, and isis has threatened reprisal. isis purportedly released this video showing the attackers on their blooding rampage praising god while opening fire. a man covered in blood is covered up motionless on the floor while iranian officials called the attackers terrorists and stopped short of blaming isis. >> translator: this attack will fortify our people against -- in the fight. the people and the military will resist. >> the foreign minister said multilateral cooperation is needed in fighting terrorism. other iranian officials meanwhile blame saudi arabia and even the united states for
today's violence, violence the u.s. state department condemned as depraved with no place in a peaceful world. >> bret: john huddy in the middle east newsroom. the former wife of one of the london bridge attackers hairs she's deeply shocked, stagnant, and numb. the mother of another attacker says her son was always very hard on himself and became radicalized in the last year while living in london. eight people were killed and nearly 50 injured. the three attackers were killed by police. tomorrow voters participate in early parliamentary elections called by prime minister theresa may. terrorism is expected to be a major issue. here in the u.s., stocks rebounded. the dow gained 37, s&p 500 finished ahead, nasdaq jumped 22. up next, the panel on the james comey testimony.
>> did you at any time urge james comey in any way, shape, or form to close her back down the investigation into michael flynn and also -- >> no, no. next question. >> can they halt the fbi investigation? >> in theory, yes. >> has it happened? for going on in my because it would be a big deal to tell the fbi to stop doing something without an appropriate purpose. i'm talking about a situation where we were told to stop something for political reasons, it would be a big deal. it's not happened in my experience. >> bret: that was may 3. we have prepared testimony for jim comey tomorrow in which a meeting on february 14, he says i hope you can let this go about the michael flynn investigation, former nsa director.
comey says it was concerning when the president told me that. january 27, at dinner, the president began by asking me whether i wanted to stay on as fbi director. my instinct told me that the one-on-one setting, that the pretense that this was our first discussion about my position at the dinner was at least in part an effort to have may ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relationship. that concerned me greatly. some of the prepared testimony from jim comey and tomorrow's hearing. let's bring the panel. byron york, mollie hemingway, charles lane, and
charles krauthammer. byron, your thoughts great >> the first thing was he confirmed some reports we've seen that the president asked him if he would consider letting go the michael flynn investigation. this was after flynn was fired. he confirmed what you were just reading, the loyalty request, although it's something we hear the president has asked almost everybody he's hired. on the other hand, he did confirm with the president said which was that call comey saidn three occasions donald trump was not under investigation. we've seen a brief statement from the president's lawyer saying he feels completely and totally vindicated. my guess is tomorrow what you're going to see is democrat saying that comey has just given them solid evidence of obstruction and republicans saying this makes us feel a lot better. we think it can be explained. >> bret: the president talk to
lester holt, laid out the different meetings, said he'd been told he wasn't under investigation. then we have a series of stories from anonymous sources saying that comey was not going to say that and it was not true. but comey does say that in this prepared testimony. >> and a sense, comey is the most helpful to trump's case. we have had so many anonymous sources claiming trump -- or comey would undermine what trump said. even the detailing of the meetings paints a picture of trump going out of his way to talk to comey, try and work with him. he is told repeatedly he's not under investigation. dealing with an fbi director for some reason is going on the hill and making it seem like he is under investigation. and these stories are actually i think pretty favorable to donald trump, even if he is very different from a typical politician. comey comey -- >> bret: comey ss
the reason he was -- the investn that was ongoing. the leadership agreed with me it was not -- it was important to not infect the team. we concluded given it was a one-on-one conversation, there was nothing available to corroborate my account. we concluded that it made little sense to reported to attorney general jeff sessions. this is what he writes, but i played them a three sound bite where he suggests he hasn't seen any pressure. it would be wrong if there was pressure to drop an investigation. >> that's probably the hardest question for comey in this whole business. if it was so terrible, why didn't you take it up the chain?
i interpret that statement to mean it's an extremely complicated explanation as to why it would've been more trouble than it was worth to take this up the chain even that it would've been a he said-he said situation. this comey statement from today does not resolve this matter. it's going to be viewed through a partisan lens on the hill. i think it is marginally helpful to the president. there is no endorsement of an obstruction of justice charge in here anywhere. that's the most helpful part for the president. for the damages the president is that comey clearly portrays himself as someone trump was trying to manipulate and steer into making sort of compromising statements like yes, sir, i will be loyal to you, sir. comey was fired in a situation where the administration offered inconsistent or differing accounts of the rationale for
aspiring. i think if i were on the committee, what i would be asking or trying to get out of these hearings would be mr. comey, in light of everything you say, why was that, in your view, that you were fired? there is the appearance that because trump didn't get this guaranty of loyalty. >> but he did. there were a lot of words here that comey put out that he did pledge his loyalty. >> he said honesty. >> he said you have my honest loyalty. >> he didn't give trump the words he wanted. >> bret: my point is, is it appropriate to? jonathan turley, who i respect a lot, says he doesn't see anything that rises to the level obstruction of justice but "the comments are grossly inappropriate but we do not indict people for being boorish
or clueless." that is jonathan turley commenting on what he reads comey saying the president said. >> as usual, jonathan turley is right. what the president was doing was trying to seduce him, but seduction is not an impeachable offense. perhaps in the '90s but not anymore. the most important passage in the comey testimony as this. the president went on to say that if there were some satellite associates of his who did something wrong it would be good to find that out. but that he hadn't done anything wrong but hoped i would find a way to get it out that we weren't investigating him. look at it from trump's point of view. the head of the fbi has told him three times he's not the subject of an investigation by the press is in a frenzy over what did he do, when did he do it, what did he know. comey says we didn't tell the
president why we were not going public. it's a plausible reason. he said because if we did, then we would have a duty to undo it to tell the world that he was under investigation if there were a change, though he did with hillary. >> bret: it's almost exactly the same. it's not getting too, i'm not going to say whether there is a crime here or not. i'm going to tell you this and then you decide. >> from trump's point of view, i am the one who is getting pilloried. fbi director agrees but they won't say it out loud. i am stuck. and he also said there are people, satellites, associates, then go get them. this is not obstruction, not shunning the investigation down. could be throwing some people under the bus but it saying on the big one, was i involved. you are telling me i wasn't. how about letting the world know? that's a totally plausible
scenario to me and it's the one comey is offering. >> bret: he says lift the cloud. >> if you look at the context of trump's remarks, this been reported in "the washington post" that the fbi found nothing illegal in flynn's conversations with the russians. trump has fired flynn, so he says to the fbi director, come on. you haven't found anything. i have fired the guy, can you move on? >> bret: we don't know what flynn told the fbi. if he told the fbi what he told vice president pence that he is at risk. >> comey raised the issue that trump may not have known about flynn lying to the fbi if he di did. but that's the context for trump actually making this statement. >> bret: i want to play sound bite from former director of national intelligence, james clapper.
>> i have to say i think you compare the two, that watergate pales really in my view compared to what we are confronting now. >> this moves us into the same realm as nixon's obstruction, may be worse. this is the equivalent of the nixon tapes. and we are headed into very, very choppy waters. >> bret: i spent, i don't know, two hours watching cable coverage. it was all over the board and more towards that that it was anything else. >> whenever anyone makes a comparison to watergate, it's usually a desperate plea for attention. the only similarity you have are highly placed intelligence officials leaking to the press. we don't have a crime yet.
it is far past time for the intelligence officials who've been playing this game and putting out innuendos to give us substance. put up or shut up. >> bret: when you read this half way through, we don't get a sense of collusion. we have not had any leaks of specific collusion. as of yet. but we are starting to get that the focus is on possible obstruction. >> well, i don't know if jim clapper spoke before or after this comey thing came out. whether his view would've been different if you'd read it but i do think he's just going off half-cocked. too early to draw the comparison. i find it ironic that, considering jim clapper was in the middle of the last big scandal that was supposed to be worse than watergate, the thing about the nsa were a lot of people don't think he was forthright with congress but he's doing some stuff there. it looks to me like what we know
is that the president, in my judgment, had a conversation with jim comey he shouldn't have had. trying to get them to relieve the pressure on my client over his russia ties or whatever it was, that was inappropriate. not willing to say that it rises to obstruction of justice. but then later on firing him, it's bad conduct. you call it whatever you want but i think that's the stuff of a legitimate congressional investigation. >> bret: i want to play this one long sound bite from today. that i have breaking news talk about in the minutes. we don't have that one. let's talk about this briefly. this is the back-and-forth toda today. intelligence officials who say i've never felt pressured, never
felt directed to squelch her silence and investigation but the committee was not having it, or at least democrats. you do have it? let's go. >> i've never been directed to do anything i believed to be illegal, immoral, unethical or inappropriate. i do not recall ever feeling pressured to do so. >> i've never felt pressure to intervene or interfere in any way with shaving intelligence in a political way for in relation to an ongoing investigation. >> can you set the record straight? >> i don't feel it's appropriate for me, in a public session in which confidential conversations between the president and myself. >> what is the basis for your refusal? >> i do not believe it's appropriate for me. >> i'm not satisfied.
i want to understand the legal basis. you swore the oath to tell us the truth. the whole truth and nothing but the truth and today you are refusing to do so. what's the legal basis for your refusal? >> i'm not sure i have a legal basis. >> bret: they pressed and pressed and pressed. they wanted to find out about specific conversations. on one hand, they have a point. they didn't exert executive privilege. they went to testify under oath and they wouldn't answer yes or no, did the president say this? but they answer broadly on the overall question. >> i think the advantage here is to the senators. if you're going to go up there and say i refused to talk about what was said, then invoke executive privilege. but to say i don't think it's appropriate, i think the senators are right. on the basis of what? if you listen to what the
intelligence chiefs were saying, they were saying we were not directed. they were asked, were you asked, and they return to the language "directed." this is a lawyerly stuff. i hate to say it but it's clintonian. depends on what "directed" means. sounds like it's very crafted. let us know, otherwise if you're going to testify, speak. >> i have to agree. dan coats was in effect saying i will tell you a private session. can we just go into private session? we don't know what he said, whether he satisfied them at all but seems odd that in a conversation they are not claiming privilege for that they won't talk about it. >> bret: more on this but breaking news out of north korea after this break.
feels totally vindicated. >> ahead of a crucial election that could shape the future of u.s. elections. live in london. ♪ ♪ >> finally an award show that you might have enjoyed. the one thing missing was politics. "fox & friends first" start right now. ♪ >> today is a big day, that's for sure. lots of news happening today. good morning, you're watching "fox & friends first" on this thursday.
rob: beautiful day. i'm rob schmit. straight to fox news alert. totally vindicated as james comey prepares to testify. ellison barber is live with the details. >> we are hours away from former fbi director james comey's testimony before congress and we already have a pretty good idea of what he's going to say because the senate intelligence committee released his prepared opening statement yesterday and in those prepared statements comey says that he did tell president trump he was not under investigation. he also claims president trump asked for a so-called loyalty pledge and suggested fbi drop investigation into former national security adviser michael flynn, the latter happened three months ago in oval office. quote, we were alone,