if i was pointed to this blog tonight, i would say, by somebody who s a friend of james comey, who said to me, you ought to read them. so i m wondering whether that was a signal to us that, perhaps, this is, in fact, what occurred. i think that he most certainly sidestepped this question when the president, assuming he did ask this question if i m under investigation, look at the way he answered that question in his congressional testimony. he said that i m not going to comment on who s under investigation but i don t want anyone to read into this. he kept saying that, don t read into my no comment. so you can interpret that, well, i m not under investigation, or you can interpret it, maybe you will be someday. depends on which side you sit on. and we don t know that. right. we know this is the thing that kept really annoying the president. he could not understand why if members of congress are being told this, right, and we know that senator grassley has now gone out and essen
committees and that s upsetting some members. it s interesting to think about the way the president was receiving this information because he s not an attorney, he s not a washington person, and there s another point that ben wittes made in this article which is, you know, comey s very careful with his language, as you point out, and that a counterintelligence investigation and these are ben wittes thoughts, not mine, is generally an investigation of a person or an entity. so if the president asked, am i the subject of your investigation? because there may not have been an investigation on the president, specifically, alone, then james comey would have said, no, you re not. not the target. you re not. here s what we know, what we ve reported, that part of robert mueller s probe will be looking into obstruction of justice which would include the interactions that president trump had with james comey > in other words.
widens her lead in the polls deploying her daughter chelsea, michelle obama and bernie sanders to arizona in hopes to turn that red state blue. reporter: now the obama administration has been on the defensive on whether or not the fbi and state department engaged in any sort of quid pro quo to clean up hillary clinton s e-mails over her private e-mail server. john kirby, the state department spokesperson, was on new day this morning pushing back. not only is there no proof, it s absolutely not true. completely false allegation. it just didn t happen that way. now what did happen, half of what you said is right. pat kennedy did call the fbi and try to get a little bit better understanding about why they wanted one particular e-mail classified secret. we didn t see it that way. we didn t think it needed to be held classified. the fbi held and it remained classified. the e-mail redacted is on our website. you can go look at it. there was no bargain sought by
on members of congress and white house officials taking on jobs as lobbyists. this will go a long way to ending our government corruption. reporter: a proposal sparked by his accusations that the fbi and state department engage in a criminal conspiracy. this is felony corruption. reporter: after newly released documents suggest a top state department official pressured the fbi to declassify an e-mail about benghazi that was on the private server clinton used while secretary of state, possibly in exchange for offering to help station fbi agents over seas. the allegations of any kind of quid pro quo is inaccurate. there was no quid pro quo. reporter: clinton has not been commenting. she s been off the campaign trail for days preparing for tomorrow s final debate. clinton s campaign setting its sights on historically conservative states as she
media. what do you think? well, it was the media. it was nbc. it was access hollywood. it was left wing and left wing media. and you could see that, and the way it comes out is everything was organized. every friday. every friday something comes out. so they play, they play, they play and it was hour after hour. i watched tv, it was hour after hour bashing him because they want to influence the american people how to vote and they are influencing in the wrong way. information about your husband s 1995 taxes were released right before the debate first debate, then this came out days before the second debate. you re saying that s not a coincidence? no. that was all organized, yes. they planned that way. they don t want to talk about the position doesn t want to talk about the wikileaks,