Andrew a pleasure to be with you guys. Some of it happening under our noses. Sandra you been watching every minute of it so lets get started. Attorney general Jeff Sessions going before the Senate Judiciary committee for the first time as our nations top Law Enforcement official. Lawmakers questioning him on everything from the travel ban to immigration to Voting Rights and russia. Chief intelligence correspondent Catherine Herridge is live from capitol hill. Sandra, we are entering our three of this oversight hearing here on capitol hill and theyve been covering the waterfront, immigration, daca, the Opioid Crisis but there is one issue that republicans and democrats have agreed on. They wanted more answers from the attorney general about his role and knowledge of the firing of the former fbi director james comey. Because the American People have a right to know why he was fired. Especially in the middle of so many high profile issues going on including the investigation into russian interference in the 2016 election. Its important, i believe, to understand what role you have in this process. Including conversations with the president and others in the white house. For the last hour, Democrat Senior said that he felt sessions had misled the committee about his contacts with the russian, the attorney general said there may have been casual contacts or conversations with the Russian Ambassador but there was no coordination for collusion with the russians to help the Trump Campaign. We also had a series of questions from the senior ranking democrat on the committee, dianne feinstein. She wanted to know from the attorney general whether the president had ever discussed lifting the russian cloud that hung over his administration in reference to the firing and many of these issues he could not discuss because of the confidential nature of those conversations. I can neither assert executive privilege nor can i disclose today the content of my confidential conversations with the president. Under the administration of both parties, it is wellestablished that a president is entitled to have private confidential communication. Around the House Intelligence Committee, weve had a significant develop in this morning with two of the principles from the Operation Research firm fusion gps. Fusion gps matters because it was the firm that commissioned the unverified antitrump a dossier that was one of the linchpins that kick started the fbi russia investigation last year. Thomas could tan, two of the principles and fusion have been behind closed doors of the House Intelligence Committee and they have taken the fifth to every question that was posed to them about their role in putting that dossier together. Clint simpson who is one of the founders of fusion gps is under subpoena to appear before the committee at a later date but based on everything we have learned from his communications to the committee through his attorney, they do expect him to also take the fifth. A couple of things that jumped out at the sessions hearing this morning is that on some of these really key issues whether its the clinton email case, or its the russia case, attorney general said that he has knocked himself out of the box on this. During his confirmation hearing, he said he would not get involved in the clinton email investigation because the statements he had made during the campaign about the clinton email case and then onto russia, he has also recused himself so those decisions largely he said rested completely rested rather with the activity to the back. Sandra thank you. Lets dig right into this. This particular point, the attorney general defending the firing of the former fbi director james comey. Andrew is very frustrated to the senators in both parties and to those of us watching when he doesnt give an answer. But the answer hes giving of the is the right one. The president is entitled to know that he can speak to his cabinet officers without the press or the public or another branch of government intruding into that conversation. So im yearning for an answer, im wishing he would give us some sort of answer. Did you decide to fire him or to the president ask you to come up with a reason to justify the firing . The attorney general has given the right answer. Having said that, the president gave three versions of firing fg him. I dont like the way he handled it. Two, the russian thing. Three, he has showboating a hot dog and the president s words, not mine. Can you drag the attorney general into this mack know. Why did the democrats wanted to drag him into this . Because one of these is a great interest to bob mueller and that is the russian thing. So what they want to get Jeff Sessions to say is donald trump told me to do something to stop the Russian Investigations, but hes not going to answer that because even if the president said it, the president is entitled to have that kind of conversation kept secret. Marie let me ask you a question. Bob mueller has interviewed Jeff Sessions or talk to him. Can he ask him in a closed interview to divulge that information . Andrew s, and if he refuses, it has happened, bring him before a grand jury and if he refuses there, they can get a federal judge to order him to answer because a grand jury proceeding is secret. Before dozens of president have the authority regardless of what the reason is to fire him so was in at the heart of the answer right there . Andrew it is. The mother investigation is to determine whether that authority was used, im going to use the language of the statute, corrupt purpose. If it was used for corrupt purpose, an example would be to get the fbi off of my back, then it would be an improper use of that authority and that might be a part of the puzzle of whatever muller is putting together. Space we will keep monitoring this hearing. Meanwhile attorney Jeff Sessions defended the travel ban today but he did so after two judges ruled against President Trumps version of the band. It wouldve barred certain people from syria, libya, iran, yemen, chad, somalia, north korea, and venezuela from coming into the country. First a federal judge in hawaii temporarily blocked it from going into effect for all of those countries except for north korea and venezuela. It plainly discriminate based on nationality. A second judge in maryland also blocking at writing it in his the initial announcement of the muslim ban offered repeatedly and especially through President Trumps own statement forcefully and persuasively expressed his purpose in unequivocal terms. Again, new restrictions on travel from north korea and venezuela were not impacted. The white house is planning to appeal saying in a statement blocking the band from going to affect undercuts the president s efforts to keep the American People safe and enforces minimum Security Standards for entry. A lot to get to her. Andrew we examine them upstairs before the show started and these judges have begun to call it the muslim ban. Which is a very, very unusual for the judiciary to be so disrespectful. Harris or political. The disrespect is one thing. That falls in the category. Andrew heres a mistake that the government made, and ive never seen this in the years that i was there. The government said to the judge, federal judge in maryland we have a report from the department of Homeland Security demonstrating how dangerous the like propensity of refugees from this country and the report also shows how the danger would be diminished if we block everybody from coming in except for those have have bona fide relationships. The judge, let me see the repor report. The u. S. Attorney. We are not showing it to you. Now ive never seen that before. The judge will examine the report in what we call in camera, in secret, and private and see if they come to the conclusion that they says it comes to credit by not showing him the report, the judge concludes quite properly so he stopped the order for the band from coming into effect. Harris weve got a lot of judges. Were glad we have one on the couch. Let me just put that out there. How would you have looked at that differently though . What you are saying is the judge wasnt given all of the information that he needed to see, i. E. The report. Before i wouldve ordered them, wouldve ordered them to give them to me. Harris why didnt they do that . Andrew the rule of thumb is if they have evidence that they say will help them and they dont produce it, you assume that it would not help them. Otherwise they went. Marie which is common sense and i think the other thing that shows yet again that President Trumps statements including his tweets do have consequences. And im not saying they should or shouldnt legally, youre the expert on that, im not, but clearly these judges entered into evidence and theyve put in the ruling that how could they not listen to some of the things he said as he was describing this travel ban . Andrew should have the president be treated differently when hes in office then what he said of when he a candidate . Harris them he had to what youre saying. If you are saying that his tweets have an efficacy in all of this and they are effective as shaping the message then if they are using labels like muslim ban, they are watching other media. They are getting information coming from everywhere. In all fairness, theyre going to get it from everywhere, then how can you single out one . Marie which is a key difference here because the light has had to come out and say yes, those are official. Before my understanding of this as they have done an extensive review on document sharing from other countries and have determined what they deem appropriate from these countries, they share that information with them. If they did not comply, then they got put on this list ready get places like north korea, places like somalia where they had a massive terror attack a couple of days ago. And my question to you judges how is of legally different than president obama taking a 2015 law, expanding upon it, and adding various countries to it . Andrew the religious aspect to it would be upheld by this court. Harris weve got a lot of judges. Glad we have our own. Sandra the republican budget taking center stage today. It has to pass to pave the way for the republican tax reform plan. One of the party and the white house are going to be able to actually get it done. And if they dont, what happens next . And new calls for former fbi chief james comey to testify again after fresh questions over his handling of Hillary Clintons email probes. The president tweeting today that it was in all along. Is he right . Will we ever get answers . Alright, i brought in high protein to help get us moving. And help you feel more strength and energy in just two weeks ill take that. Yeeeeeah ensure high protein. With 16 grams of protein and 4 grams of sugar. Ensure. Always be you. Tech dont wait for a chip like this to crack your whole windshield. With safelites exclusive resin, you get a strong repair that you can trust. Plus, with most insurance a safelite repair is no cost to you. Customer really . singers safelite repair, safelite replace. Harris we want to go back to capitol hill now. A senator al franken is talking with the attorney general Jeff Sessions about russia and whether or not he has meeting and part of that original conversation on the hill. Lets watch together. At any time to discuss any Political Campaign. On twitter, you said i never met with any russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign so confronted with the truth, you started to qualify your answer. Later in the letter you sent to this committee to clarify your testimony and to disclose two of your three meetings, you wrote i do not recall any discussions with the Russian Ambassador. Or any other representative of the russian Government Regarding the Political Campaign on these occasions or any other occasion. This summer, the Washington Post reported that american intelligence agencies intercepted communications between the Russian Ambassador in moscow in which he described two of his conversations with you. The april meeting at the Mayflower Hotel and the july meeting at the Republican National convention citing both former and current u. S. Officials, the intercepts reportedly indicate that you had substantive discussions on quality policy matters important to moscow. Intelligence reports, the investor was well known for accurately delaying his interactions with u. S. Officials back to the kremlin. Attorney general sessions in response to this report, the Justice Department declined to comment on the veracity of the intelligence intercepts but doj did assert that you did not discuss interference in the election. Which is also how you described your communications to the senate Intelligence Committee. So again, the goal post has been moved. First, it was i did not have communications with russians, which was not true. Then it was i never met with any russians to discuss any Political Campaign. Which may not or may not be tru true. I did not discuss interference in the campaign. Which further narrows your initial blanket denial about meeting with the russians. Since you have qualified your denial to say that you did not discuss issues of the campaign with the russians, what, in your view, constitutes issues of the campaign . Let me just say this without hesitation that i conducted no improper discussions with russians at any time regarding a campaign or any other item facing this country. Let me say that first. Thats been the suggestion that you raised and others that somehow we had conversations that were improper. You had a long time, senator franken prayed id like to respond. Senator cruz went 2 minutes over. Theyre going to cut me off. I want to ask you some question questions. Im not that chairman fred i dont have to sit in here and listen. Youre the one who testified prayed without having a chance to respond. Give me a break. Thank you. Go ahead. It was not a simple question, senator franken. It was not a simple question. The leadin to your question was very, very troubling, and i answered to you in a way that i felt was responsive to what you raised in your question. Let me read it to you. You said cnn has just published a story, meaning that day, while we were in the hearing. That i had never heard about. And i am telling you this about this new story that has just been published. Im not expecting you to know whether or not its true, but cnn just published a story alleging that the Intelligence Community of the United States of america provided documents to the president elect last week that included information that russian operatives claim to have compromising personal and Financial Information about mr. Mr. Trump. You went on to say these documents also allegedly say there was a continuing exchange of information during the campaign between trumps surrogates and intermediaries for the russian government. Now, again, i am telling you this as its coming out, but if its true, its obviously extremely serious and if there is any evidence that anyone affiliated with the Trump Campaign communicated with the russian government in the course of this campaign, what will you do . So taken aback by this dramatic statement that ive never heard before and knew nothing about, i responded this way. Senator franken, im not aware of those activities. I have been called a surrogate a time or two in this campaign, and i did not have communications with the russians, and im unable to comment on it. I dont think that can fairly be interpreted as saying i never had conversations with any russians. It was referring directly to the suggestion that there was a continuing exchange of information between trumps surrogates and intermediaries for the russian government, which is not happen, at least not to my knowledge and not with me. And thats why i responded the way i do. I am disappointed, yes, you can say what you want to about the accuracy of it, but i think it was a good faith response to a dramatic event at the time. I dont think its fair for you to suggest otherwise. 3 minutes and then finish. He took more than 3 minutes. Took about two and a half. How much do you want . I dont want to spend time bargaining with here. The guy didnt take as much time as senator franken prayed let me just deal with senator franken prayed three more minutes please. First of all, you said i didnt have communications with the russians. This is about ongoing communications, you had three communications and now you cant recall answering senator leahy, you can cant recall what you discussed with him. Go ahead. You go and make a lot of allegations, its hard for me to respond. Can i have a little bit more time . Okay. Youve said today in response to senator leahy that you dont recall whether you talked about the campaign, you dont recall whether you talked about issues and trumps views on issues with russia. Those are very, very relevant to the campaign. Whether a surrogate from the campaign is talking with the Russian Ambassador about the candidates view on russian policy, especially at the Republican National convention at the Mayflower Hotel the day before trump is going to give his first maiden speech on Foreign Policy . Thats a very different n