tv Cuomo Primetime CNN January 29, 2018 6:00pm-7:01pm PST
breaking news, the republicans seem to have found their counter to the russia investigation, and it puts the fbi and the democrats in the crosshairs. the memo they plan to release is just the setup for what they hope will be a mass conspiracy of wrongdoing at the highest levels of law enforcement. all an alleged plot by the enemies of president trump. that's what they're selling. tonight i go one-on-one with minority leader nancy pelosi, who has seen this memo. and we have one of the republicans who is sounding the alarm. friends, it is time to get after
it. i'm chris cuomo. welcome to "prime time." all right. so here's what we know. in the last few hours, house republicans voted to release a memo by chairman devin nunes alleging fbi abuses and obtaining surveillance warrants based on classified information that the panel is not releasing. in fact, classified information nunes reportedly has not even reviewed. so in effect, they're asking you to accept their conclusions without revealing the basis. odd? just wait. the panel deeply divided along party lines, but the republicans control, say they were also able to blong a countermemo by democrats. just last week the justice department warned that releasing the gop memo without review would be, quote, extraordinarily reckless. why? the obvious. it might expose sources and methods that could compromise
u.s. intelligence work. reportedly, the republicans have since shown the memo to fbi director christopher wray, and it now it goes to the white house, where the president has five days to approve or deny the release. the top democrat on the intelligence committee says nunes, as i said, didn't read the information, this memo is based on, the memo that bears his name. to the democrats, this is proof that this is all about politics of the worst kind. >> we had votes today to politicize the intelligence process, to prohibit the fbi and the department of justice from expressing their concerns to our committee and to the house and to selectively release to the public only the majority's distorted memo without the full facts. a very sad day, i think, in the history of this committee when you have a deeply flawed person in the oval office, that flaw can infect the whole of government, and today tragically
it infected our committee. >> then there was another significant move in a related development. the sudden departure of fbi deputy director andrew mccabe, a frequent target of criticism by president trump. tonight sources tell cnn the fbi director, christopher wray, hinted to staff in an e-mail that an inspector general report about the fbi's conduct during the 2016 election played a role in mccabe's abrupt departure. all of this on the eve of president trump's first state of the union speech that is billed as a call to unity. so let's
take the breaking news one-on-one with the house minority leader, democratic congresswoman nancy pelosi of california. i heard you laughing there, minority leader. why? >> well, because unity is, of course, our goal. that's what we strive for for the american people, bipartisanship, transparency in our activities, and to do something that is unifying
rather than not. and what the president's striving for unity, that's really a sad statement. but let's get back to this point. i'm very proud of adam schiff and our house democrats for protecting the integrity of the intelligence community. this is a very big honor that the leader gives to the ranking member, that the speaker gives to the chairman, to be deputized, to protect the intelligence. intelligence for force protection of our troops. >> sure. >> for fighting terrorism and the rest of that. instead, chairman nunes has acted like a stooge with the speaker -- >> a stooge? >> a stooge of the white house the at the acquiescence or maybe the guidance of the speaker of the house. this is not about one thing or another. this is about the integrity and the safety and our national security. >> that's what he says too, though. >> they have crossed -- they have crossed from dangerously and recklessly dealing with intelligence to a cover-up of an
investigationhat they don't want the american people to see come to fruition, and that is most unfortunate. now, i have probably longer standing than anybody in the history of the congress on intelligence. i've served there as a member. i was a ranking member in my time there, and then in the leadership as a member of the gang of eight. so i've had access to all of the intelligence, which mr. nunes could have access to, but has not. >> so you've seen it? >> i've seen it. i've seen not only the memo and the basis for the memo, but the underlying documents. >> and? >> and what they're putting forth is a total misrepresentation. it is false. and they're putting it out there as if it is factual and then saying, we're going to show this to the american people, but we're not going to show the rebuttal to it by the democrats. now, the democrats have said rightfully, we shouldn't be putting anything out unless it has been reviewed and redacted by the intelligence -- the appropriate -- >> they say they don't want the
doj to look at it because they are part of their concerns about how things were done during the campaign. >> the doj is only one part of the intelligence community. the intelligence community is vast. it's the cia, dni, national defense. everybody has their element of it, and sources in that that must be protected. not only that, i can't even reference some words that are in it because that would be a violation of the confidentiality, the classified nature. >> right. >> again, putting this aside in terms of tit for tat, it isn't about that. it's about our national security, and our president of the united states is the commander in chief. and he should stop this immediately. he should stop -- >> you think he's not going to release the memo? >> he says he's going to. he hasn't even probably seen it, but he's going to release it. in fact, he should be saying -- no release should ever happen without the agencies of the
intelligence community reviewing and redacting from public review. who's going to share intelligence with us if they think it's up to nunes not even reading the stuff and releasing? >> you put a lot of this on nunes, but that means you put it on ryan. >> that's right. >> do you blame paul ryan for what's going on? >> i think he has a major responsibility and whin what i cover-up of what they're doing. it's really very sad. but, again, it's a cover-up. also it's a distraction. what really we are trying to do right now is keep government open. they have a problem with that because they're ineffective and -- >> you think they're doing this because they don't want the government to be open? >> whatever they do is a distraction. so you never know what's -- >> but that's what they say. so help me understand this. i know you can't reveal classified information. >> no, i'm -- >> i'm not going to push you on that but i will push you on this one idea. it is hard -- i have to believe it's hard for the american people to have faith that anybody in this city where we are right now is out for the truth and not out for politics.
and i can understand why they want it all released, congresswoman. i can understand why they want it all out because they say, you know what? we can't trust you guys. let us read it. let us figure it out. you can redact the names and make it safe enough for us to look at it because they say the same thing about you. that the russia investigation, there's no collusion. you guys are pushing the ball to political advantage to stymie the president. and they talk about this memo like it should have been in the raiders of the lost ark, that this is the holy grail of the truth about what was happening during the campaign and it points the finger at the democrats and the fbi. >> let me just say this. we're not going to become them, the republicans, because they are totally irresponsible in this regard. we're talking about the intelligence community. we're not talking about some issue that we're having a fight about. we're talking about our national security. as i said, when i had been on that committee and been a long time and served as leader involved in those issues. and this is not to be politicized. this is about fact.
it's about evidence, about data. it's not about making up a false memo based on a false premise that the chairman hasn't even read and then to put it out there. >> i give you that he -- if he hasn't read it, that's a problem. we'll that up with -- >> how can you decide if you haven't read it that it should be revealed to the american people? >> are you saying, without revealing anything that's confidential or classified, you're saying if the american people see this memo and they read it and they think about it, that they could not reasonably conclude that there was any problem with what happened during the election? >> of course not. >> well, then why are they so anxious to release it? >> because it's not even true. it's not even true. they have made up a memo that isn't even true, and they're lying to the american people. >> so what are you going to do about it? >> well, we have put forth a memo, which we reluctantly did, but said don't put this out unless it's reviewed and redacted. >> now it won't be out when
theirs is out. >> they say we want the american people to see our memo, but we're voting against showing the american people the democratic memo. again, let's enlarge this issue. let me not get engaged in this republican/democrat thing. this is about security or not. it's about people in our country who work so hard to protect the american people in the intelligence community and to be frivolous with their identity or roads that can lead to them. >> you're saying you think it puts lives at stake if this memo comes out? >> why would they put it at the mercy of nunes who hasn't read the memo and say the american people should see it? the american people, they have their own jobs to do. they're not there saying, now i'm going to redact a memo because i know what is true or what is false. >> i'm saying you guys redact what you need to redact, but then let the american people decide. >> but that's not the way intelligence works. that's not the way it works. it's not a -- this isn't a subject about what's in the tax bill or what's not in the tax
bill. this is a question of what is important to our national security, to be secure. again, let me take it to other subject because they do these things as a distraction. it's totally irresponsible. it isn't one person in the intelligence community recognizing the sacrifice that our men and women in the intelligence community make for our country's security that would say, this is not reckless. >> christopher wray, the director of the fbi obviously, recently selected by president trump, he got the memo. he could have come out and said, this is reckless. don't release it. >> let me just say this with all due respect. you really don't know what you're talking about right now. >> but did christopher wray look at it or no? >> i can't say whether he did or not, but he did not -- in order to redact, you have to have the people who know -- >> i'm not saying redact. i'm saying if these concerns are so sharp and obvious -- >> they've already said not to release it. they already said not to -- the justice departmentlready said it would be reckless to release it. you said that earlier.
>> the doj said it. we've been reporting it. absolutely. but now there's this word that is somewhat of a compromise. >> wait a minute. i want to tell you something. let me just say this. the republican party has, as i said, crossed over to cover-up. they're deadly afraid of the russia investigation. we don't want the investigation to be anything but based on the law and the facts and let the investigation proceed. that's the right thing to do for our country. we have to be respectful of law. we have to be respectful of intelligence and the rest. >> absolutely. >> and what they're doing is reckless in regard to both. but the fact is also that it is a distraction from the fact that the passed a tax bill that gives 83% of the benefits to the top 1%. they'd like to distract from that. 86 million middle class americans will pay more in taxes. they do give this gift to
corporate america at the expense of our children's future. they don't want to talk about. they don't want to talk about the fact that they have -- what they've done in terms of the president put forth a ridiculous memo on -- well, i don't know if you put it forth or they leaked it, on infrastructure which doesn't even go near what our country needs. they are doing bad things in terms of immigration and the rest. what they do is they give you a nugget. they say, here's what we're doing on immigration. isn't that wonderful? it looks so pretty, and while they do very unpretty things behind the scenes. same thing with the tax bill. isn't this a nice little thing we're giving you while we give -- >> all right. i want to take on each of those things, but hold on. >> and same thinggain with intelligence. we're going to show you a memo. this is ridiculous. >> all right. i hear you. >> it's beyond ridiculous. >> i want to look at those other issues you must itemized from the perspective of what democrats could have done and
did not do. >> what would that somebobe? >> i'll get to it. if this memo -- if the president says, okay, i say let the people decide. my guys seem that they're fine with it, and it comes out. what can you do to counter a narrative which they clearly believe is going to be very persuasive to people? >> no, no, no. if you lie, have no allegiance to the truth, are totally disrespectful to your responsibility of the security of our country, you can persuade of anything. it's happened before. >> so how do you counter this? >> well, hopefully with the validation of outside sources. but the american people are working hard. they're taking care of their families. they're trying to make ends meet. they're not prepared to redact a memo. >> i understand. i was never suggesting they should. i'm saying when they get this memo, they're going to read it and say, holy cow, this was happening? >> but it's not true. >> where are the facts? how do you make the case because otherwise they're going to see
this. they'll believe it. >> if i were to tell you why it isn't true here, i would be taken up by the ethics committee -- >> is that the catch 22 in this entire situation? >> they shouldn't have gone down that path. they're only going down this path to foil the mueller investigation. they should let the facts and the law take it where it goes. no other place further than that. they're so afraid of the truth. they're afraid of the truth. and the democratic memo, that's why they're not releasing it. >> why don't you put that out on the floor? as you know, i do not mean to tell you procedure. you know it better than i ever will. however, this is a relatively arcane mechanism that they're using to release this information. >> it's not arcane. it's highly -- it's not even highly unusual. it's never been done before. there was this violation of the classified nature of intelligence. >> fine. that's your description. >> no, no. that is a fact. >> i get it. that's your description of this process. what i'm saying is you could go to the floor of the house, as you know, and you can read
things. there is an immunity for speech and debate. >> not on intelligence. >> no, you don't reveal the classified intelligence, but you could read the substance of your memo that protects your sources and methods but countiers what's in this memo if you think you can. >> the only things our members are allowed to see is what they go down to the intelligence committee and -- >> so that can't happen is what you're saying? >> no, it can't happen. besides, in order to refute it, you'd have to tell the facts, and the facts are classified. >> all right. >> but you know what? i want to tell you something. you're missing it. this is very big. this is very big in terms of what line they have crossed tonight. and it's shocking really but not surprising because they're desperate. and they're desperate because, look, they can't keep government open. they're going to the 5th. now they're talking about their fifth continuing resolution because they're incompetent and ineffective, and all they have to do is sit down and say, let's come to terms on how we're going
to fund the government. let's come to terms on how we're going to protect -- >> and you're saying the democrats are willing partners in that process? >> absolutely. we have been willing partners. >> because they say you're not. >> here's their problem. this dark cloud hangs over the capitol. it's called a tax cut. it's taken us $2 trillion additional into department that makes them afraid of incurring any further debt, so they don't want to spend money on their domestic agenda. now, what we're fighting for, money for opioids, more money for meeting the needs of our veterans, money for the national institutes of health, money for pensions which are struggling in our country. in addition to that, appropriately dealing with the disaster assistance for puerto rico, virgin islands and the other areas affected by the disasters and hurricanes and the fires. >> so why did you back off the shutdown? if this is so important, why did the democrats relent? >> no, because the fact is they changed the subject.
the fact is this is about money, and all they're doing is trying to increase the defense budget, which we believe in. >> so why didn't you hold your ground and say we're going to fight? we're going to fight for this. >> we are fighting. >> you relented on the shutdown. >> no, we didn't relent. the fact is we have a better case to fight with government open than government shut. we don't believe in shutting down government. they have. they've shut it down five times now, including last weekend whether they shut down. >> why was that not on you guys? you controlled the votes. >> they didn't have 50 votes in their own caucus much less 60 votes. >> they needed the democrat votes. >> they didn't have 50 votes in their own caucus. but listen to what i'm saying to you. opioids. it's a crisis throughout america, and they are saying, well, you know, we want to spend more money on defense. we agree. do you understand that the domestic budget, which they don't want to invest in, contains -- a third of it contains security, homeland
security, veterans affairs, the state department, anti-terrorism activities of the justice department are all contained in the domestic budget. >> right. >> 34% of the domestic budget is security, and they're saying, we just want to increase defense, but we don't want to invest in homeland and domestic, and that's because their members don't want to increase the deficit -- the debt further than they already have. >> they're asking for a lot of money in your daca immigration negotiation right now. >> the mexicans were going to pay for it, right? who believes that? the fact is we shouldn't have a wall. the mexicans shouldn't pay for it. but we should have security at our border. >> whatever the context requires on the border. >> north and south. we have in our recommendations what the -- >> then why did chuck schumer say he'd give him the wall? why was that ever on the table if you're against it? >> we would give him part of the security on the border, some physical structure. but our proposal has what the
border patrol said were their needs. >> right. >> what their needs. and their needs do not include a wall. >> do you think that it helped the chance of getting a deal done by describing their offer as making america white again? >> well, that's what they're doing. i've been saying that a year ago, but the president said. he said it when he talked about certain countries and how he characterized them. but what they want to do is not let any more -- you see with their proposal, cut in half legal immigration into our country. what they want to do is send people back. that's their real goal. that's what we fear most is their domestic surveillance, their internal surveillance. and also to look what they've done with the lottery, with the opportunity, the visas that come from -- >> they say it's a security risk. >> and look what they're doing with family unification, making up a fake name. chain. i like the word chain. that sends tremors through people in our --
>> you read something into everything in terms of what they're doing. >> of course i do. i see them every day. so this is as -- i laugh. mitch mcconnell said, she shouldn't have said that. i didn't hear him say anything about the president saying anything about the foul language he used describing countries from which we receive many wonderful entrepreneurial people. you and i know being italian-americans that immigration is the constant reinvigoration of america. people come with their family values to make the future better for their families. their dreams to make the future better. that's what our founders intended, that every generation would take responsibility for the next generation to do better, and that's called the american dream. and these d.r.e.a.m.ers have inspired america. this should be so easy. if you want to talk about -- >> it's not easy, though. i mean do you think a deal is going to get done at all? >> it has to. it has to. so we'll stick with it until we can get a deal. but if they want to do
conservative immigratio comprehensive immigration, let's do that, but that takes time. the senate already did in a bipartisan way a few years ago but the -- >> it didn't get done. >> it didn't get begun. for the d.r.e.a.m.ers, there's a commensurate amount of border security that is commensurate with the number of people who are protected. there's bipartisan support in the house and the senate to get it done. let's do what is unifying, what is bipartisan, which is transparent, instead of trying to sell a bill of goods on some of these things. and in the meantime, to be so afraid of the truth that they would degrade the whole process of intelligence by taking it to a different place. i call it a cover-up. >>
nancy pelosi, thank you for spending time with us tonight. >> my pleasure. >> appreciate it. up next, we're going to test the flip side of the argument. republican congressman jim jordan says the memo is the truth, and it is a must-see for the american public.
family. w phones foe join t-mobile, and when you buy one of the latest samsung galaxy phones get a samsung galaxy s8 free. yahoooo! ahoooo! plus, unlimited family plans come with netflix included. spectacular! so, you can watch all your netflix favorites on your new samsung phones. whoa! join the un-carrier and get a samsung galaxy s8 free. all on america's best unlimited network. when you can squeeze one in wbetween friday and monday at hilton?n there's a vacation at the end of every week. whatever type of weekender you are, don't let another weekend pass you by. get the lowest price when you book at hilton.com
a place with 24-hour fvalet servicee and a boutique salon a place with all day arts and crafts it even has a day spa a place that's so much like home, because well... it is home home instead senior care when you need personalized care in the comfort of home. this valentine's day i wanted to turn everything i love about you into one thing you'll love forever. the jared valentine's day diamond event. save up to $1,000 off any diamond when you buy her setting at jared. and let our expert jewelers help you find or create the one ring that could only come from you and only be for her. only at jared.
breaking news tonight, a series of major developments that take russia out of the crosshairs and replace it with the fbi. the first salvo is a gop memo alleging fbi abuse of surveillance laws during the 2016 campaign. also fbi deputy director andrew mccabe, a frequent target of president trump, suddenly stepping down just months before his planned retirement, which could have several different explanations except the fbi director recently appointed by trump suggested to his staff that the departure has to do with an inspector general report on fbi practices during the campaign. let's take all of these serious developments up with republican congressman jim jordan of ohio,
member of the house judiciary committee. could not have a better night to have you on. thank you for making the time. >> appreciate it. >> so the memo. it's been vote the on to come out. >> mm-hmm. >> you believe it should come out. there are all these concerns about intelligence sensitivity. you know that the doj said it could be exceedingly reckless, extremely reckless to put this out, but you guys -- >> i also know chris wray looked at it. today chris wray has not said it shouldn't come out. he's been silent on the issue. what i know is i've read it, and there are lots -- we've had lingering questions about this dossier for months. and if the american people, if they're asking the question was the dossier used, that's a legitimate question. and that's something that needs answered. so this memo should come out. let it speak for itself. now, i did say i wish we had the appropriate references, citations, footnoting to the underlying source. but the fact is i think it will speak for itself, and i think it will answer a lot of questions.
>> you've seen the memo. >> i have. >> you have not seen the intelligence that it's based on. >> we're not permitted to see that. >> doesn't that concern you that something so heady, that is so provocative, and you don't get a chance to see -- >> that's why i said it should be footnoted and cited. that's not the choice the committee made. i do think the memo will speak for itself. plus i know all the other context. i know the text messages between strzok and page. we knew before the text messages come out, we suspected the fix was in on the clinton investigation. now that the strzok/page text messages have come out, we know the fix was in on -- >> how do you know that? >> because he said, trump is awful. clinton should win 100 million to zero. >> he didn't like trump, just like certain of the agents -- >> it was animus against trump. it was the most extreme bias i've ever seen. >> people have opinions. >> here's how you know the fix was in. because when loretta lynch says she's going to appropriate the decision to james comey, what
does lisa page say? this is before they've innoce interviewed clinton. lisa page that's not really a profile in courage because she already knows charges won't be brought. we know the fix was in. then these same people, lisa page, peter strzok, andrew mccabe, the same people who ran that investigation and ricked it in favor of clinton, they're the ones launching the trump investigation, the trump-russia investigation. peter strzok is the one interviewing mike flynn. so it's appropriate i think, just common sense-wise, to for americans to step back and say, hey, maybe there's something there. then you look at what they said about trump. the fact they said we need an insurance policy. we can't let the american people -- i'm afraid we can't let the american people decide who's going to be the next president. >> nobody said that. >> that's what peter strzok said. >> no, he didn't. >> yes, he did. i'm afraid we can't take that risk, that the american people might elect donald trump. >> you're reading that in. i have seen the -- >> he says, i can smell the trump supporters, the derision they had for people who voted
for president trump, that's a problem. all we're saying is this moment me gives even more context to this whole situation. >> but, jim -- >> and the american people can decide for themselves. >> there's a difference between wanting to ascribe political motivations about how people do their job, but you don't know it affected the investigation. we know they're human beings at the fbi. >> we know that. >> if we're going to deal with general common sense, withe ide the fbi is a left-leaning course would shock the conscience of most people. >> i agree with you, the rank and file. but the top people at the top. they were certainly pro-clinton. >> when they were doing the e-mail investigation and comey came out with that letter and made it public and talking about what was going on and reintroduced it back into the campaign, they were saying the same things you're saying now. these people don't like us. this is personal animus. who would inject this into a campaign? so what's the lesson? the lesson is you need proof. now you're going with a memo that by your own reckoning and
including nunes. nunes didn't even look at the confidential information his own memo was based on. >> you're going to have to ask the chairman about that. >> but you're not worried you're throwing something out into the public domain that could be very provocative and you don't even know if it's accurate? >> does it bother you that lisa page and peter strzok were the key people -- peter strzok, deputy head of counterintelligence at the fbi, saying the things he said about president trump. >> that's why mueller removed him. >> yeah, but he first picked him and put him on the team. but for the inspector general doing this investigation, we wouldn't have known this stuff. >> inspector general, which is in-house accountability by the same organization that you're saying may be corrupt. >> exactly right. >> well, that kind of fights your premise, though. you got all this information from the inspector general. it's not like nunes, who doesn't read the confidential information, dug it up himself. >> true we got it from the inspector general, but this memo is still important. as i said, i want you to see it. >> what if it's wrong. >> more importantly, i want the american people to see it.
>> i can't judge it because i don't know what it's based on. >> that's why i called for having the underlying sources referenced cited, footnoted. the fbi can release it. the justice department can say, you know what, the sources for that, they can release it. ultimately the white house can say they want to release it too. if that's what it comes to, maybe we'll have to entertain that question at that time. what i know now is this memo is something the american people should read. >> even though they won't know whether or not they can believe what's in it because they won't have the substance of the background. >> that's why i wish we had it there. >> you keep saying you wish you had it there, but you don't. >> i called for it right away as soon as i read it. >> doesn't that make you feel like it shouldn't come out? until you can release it the right way, don't release it. then to not release the democrat one at the same time. how is that -- >> it's coming out tomorrow. >> why don't you let the democrat one come out? >> it will come out when the president gives it the thumbs up. >> why doesn't the democrat one come out at the same time. >> my understanding is they're following the same process for
the democrat amendment. >> then why does yours come out first? >> first you made it available to all members to come read. then when enough members had read it and said, this needs to be made public, it was made public. that's my understanding of what they're doing on the democrat amendment. >> but there's going to be a lag. so then yours gets out there and gets all this exposure. >> there wasn't a democrat memo until today. everyone who has read it says release it to the public. >> if you were at home in ohio and were doing something else, you would be sitting with your kids that he coach in wrestling and say, never be like these peop people. look at these democrats and republicans. they're fieblghting with each or and -- >> transparent. the fbi can -- >> they think it could be dangerous to do so because of the source material. >> well, i tell you what can be dangerous is when fundamental
liberties aren't upheld and when you have top people at the fbi rigging the game, making sure hillary clinton charges aren't brought against her and those same people run the russia investigation. and everything points to putting their finger on the scale. it is not supposed to work that way in this great country. it is supposed to be equal treatment under the law. >> true. but you don't have any reservations -- >> no one should be treated different. >> you look at some texts between lovers, okay, within the fbi. >> no. she's general -- she's fbi counsel. he's deputy head of counterintelligence. >> you have to factor that in in terms of the nature of their banter. but context matters. you have andrew mccabe. now he's stepping away. maybe it's because of the inspector general report says christopher wray by suggestion. this is a man who voted in the republican primary. >> he's also a guy who sat down with terry mcauliffe, clinton's biggest supporter when his wife was running for state senator. here's a thing we always forget. when he sat down with terry
mcauliffe, it wasn't just about terry mcauliffe was the biggest clinton supporter and his wife was running for office and getting $500,000 of financial help -- >> it was a year and a half before. >> as a democrat. but when he sat down with terry mcauliffe, terry mcauliffe was under investigation by the fbi. what does andrew mccabe, deputy director of the fbi, sitting down with terry mcauliffe while he's under investigation by the fbi -- >> but the idea that a year and a half before he's in the position, you're worried about. you see a direct connection? >> when mcauliffe is under investigation, the deputy direct to or is going to sit down with him and get money for her campaign? this weekend when the eagles pull up to play the game, if the r referees get off the eagles bus, that's going to be a problem. you have to be impartial. you're a referee. you do the investigation -- >> you don't believe democrats a or people who favor democrats were in charge of the hillary
clinton investigation and they allowed what happened to her, to have that release come out that submarined her campaign. you think that was them doing her a favor. >> i was the one republican who said what comey did in october was wrong. i criticized what jim comey did in july was wrong, what they did during the investigation was wrong. they screwed this thing up from start to finish. and what comey did ten days before the election, i was the one republican who said he shouldn't have released that letter and made it public, and we opened the investigation. you know why i think he did it? because he felt like everyone else in this country. he thought hillary clinton was going to win. but guess what? donald trump kicked her tail. he thought he was covered. i can release this, and she's still going to win. i criticized it at the time. >> you got a lot of speculation. >> that's not speculation. that's what i said. >> i know, but you're speculating. you don't know why comey did what he did. why would he try to submarine her came pain because -- >> he thought there was no risk -- [ overlapping voices ] >> all i'm saying is this. i hear you. i hear the speculation, and it's
your right to have it. we only know what you show, and what we're dealing with in terms of intelligence, you better have the facts to back it up. otherwise people are going to go on the basis of suspicion. >> well said. >> jim jordan, appreciate you making the case as always. you know that. the memo, as jim jordan was just saying, is at the whiteo house tonight. the president faces a big decision, release it or keep it wraps. it's literally up to him. let's debate. it jones versus urban, the great debate, next. but some people still like cable. just like some people like pre-shaken sodas. having their seat kicked on an airplane. being rammed by a shopping cart. sitting in gum. and walking into a glass door. but for everyone else, there's directv. for #1 rated customer satisfaction over cable, switch to directv and get a $200 reward card. call 1.800.directv
♪ ♪ with the chase mobile app, michaela deprince could pay practically anyone, at any bank, all while performing a grand jeté between two grand pianos. she could... in a commercial. in real life she uses it to pay her sister, from her couch, for that sweater she stained. what sweater? (phone buzzes) life, lived michaela's way. chase. make more of what's yours.
the house intelligence panel. republicans voting to release a memo that's based on classified information that a lot of them haven't seen. the allegations are huge. anti-trump bias within the fbi. that's what this memo is about. republicans also blocked the release of the democrats' countermemo. so that brings us to round one of tonight's great debate. former obama special adviser van jones is with us along with former trump campaign strategist mr. david urban. what a mess. let's talk about what is going on here. david urban, i start with you. the first guest was nancy pelosi. she says this is nothing more than a cover-up that crosses all the lines of decency and responsibility for intelligence, that you guys don't want to talk about what matters. you're afraid of the russia investigation so you concocted this as a cover. your take?
>> chris, well, i would expect nothing less from the minority leader, and it's unfortunate that she would take such a position. look, i think the white house has made their position pretty clear on this. they're for full transparency in this, and they believe, i think, that you want to see, you know, everything put on the table. all cards put on the table. >> but this isn't even close to everything? >> i know, but i take exception. not the entire fbi is under, you know, scrutiny here. there are a few individuals. >> what do you think people are going to think when they read this memo? >> listen, i don't know. i'm not privy to what's in it, but i would just, you know, always take note that let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. the men and women of the fbi are patriots. they go to work every day, do a great job for america on so many different levels. >> van -- >> there's problems with folks in the fbi in this investigation. i think there's going to be an i.g. report coming out that may not be so favorable. i think that's what maybe the democrats are trying to get
ahead of. >> van, we don't know any of this, but this is the speculation. when this memo comes out and it says that there are problems at the top echelons of the fbi with respect to how they did surveillance or anything that has to do with the campaign, what is it going to do to the people in this country in. >> well, listen, there may well be. we don't know. but there's a process that we've always gone through. if these things are serious, you don't take serious allegations and then treat them in silly theatrical ways. there's a mishmash between what they're saying is going on. let's give them the benefit of the doubt. maybe there was some malfeasance at the top of the fbi. as a liberal democrat, i'm not surprised there may be something wrong with the fbi in certain instances. but if that is true and if there was a conspiracy at the top of the fbi to negatively impact this election, that is the most serious thing you can say about the top law enforcement agency. if that is true, you have to proceed with the utmost caution,
the utmost care to make sure you handle it and you handle it well. you don't call press conferences and just throw stuff out. it's wrong. >> also, van, i'm note quite certain. i think there's been some -- a great deal of deliberation done in the house by the committee. i would like to see both minority and majority reports released. i think that's probably -- if you have to do it, i think that's probably the fair way to do it. and that's what i would urge in this case. >> chris, can i say something? >> yeah, sure. >> when we saw donald trump winning this election, those of us who are progressive democrats were very worried. we said, oh, my god, just like richard nixon, you may have a weaponized, politicized fbi going after progressive targets. you might have -- that was a really big concern that people had. >> like the irs did against republicans? >> you get a chance to talk when it's your turn. >> that didn't happen. by the way, that didn't happen, but you get your turn in a minute.
chris, we had real concern that you might have a weaponized, politicized fbi being unleashed. you also had concerns maybe they were going to back off of these white supremacist groups and they have. we never thought that you would have the gop take a wrecking ball to the fbi, tt the would y to destroy the fbi and that you would have people like myself out here trying to defend the fbi. this is so crazy and it's so nuts that literally people don't know what to do. when the leader of the democratic party, nancy pelosi, is looking at this and she's saying herself, i can't get out here and tell you how big these lies are because if i did that, i would jeopardize national security. that's where we are, chris, and it's a frightening moment for all americans, or it should be. >> let's take a break, david. let's do a second block, all right? >> van, all i would say is this. i would be for having both memos, majority and minority. full transparency. >> good. we heard on that. let's take a quick break. while we're in the break, you should call devin nunes and find out if it's true he didn't look
at the confidential information, the classified work on this. >> that's what jim jordan told you. >> make a phone call. stick around, everybody. the president trades barbs with jay-z over black unemployment. i'm telling you, you just can't make up the headlines these days. who's right? we're going to keep talking about intelligence in america, and we're going to segue to this. round two, next. 5 days a week. so i can trade all night long? ♪ all night long... let's reopen the market. ♪ trade 24/5, only with td ameritrade.
this valentine's day i wanted to turn everything i love about you into one thing you'll love forever. the jared valentine's day diamond event. save up to $1,000 off any diamond when you buy her setting at jared. and let our expert jewelers help you find or create the one ring that could only come from you and only be for her. only at jared.
coming at you with my brand-new vlog. just making some ice in my freezer here. so check back for that follow-up vid. this is my cashew guy bruno. holler at 'em, brun. kicking it live and direct here at the fountain. should i go habanero or maui onion? should i buy a chinchilla? comment below. did i mention i save people $620 for switching? chinchilla update -- got that chinchilla after all. say what up, rocco. ♪ say what up, rocco. i tabut with my back paines, i couldn't sleep and get up in time. then i found aleve pm. aleve pm is the only one to combine a safe sleep aid plus the 12 hour pain relieving strength of aleve. i'm back. aleve pm for a better am.
. the african-american unemployment rate is at a historical low, that's a fact. but it is the result africa tre -- of a trend that's been going on for a long time. trump said, i do, but here's what jay-z told van jones. >> it's not about money at the end of the day. money doesn't equate to happiness, it doesn't. you're missing the whole point. you treat people like human beings. it goes back to the whole thing, you're going to treat me bad and pay me well. il it's not going to lead to happiness. >> before you say, jay-z, i want to hear -- the president responded when jay-z spoke about this and said, somebody please
inform jay-z that because of my policies, black unemployment has just been reported to be at the lowest rate ever recorded. facts first, right? black unemployment is at a low, that's true, 6.8%. does that number sound high? that's because it is. while it's been falling for years well before trump was in office, it is still so much higher than the rate for white workers. and that's something that has to be addressed. let's have round 2 of the great debate with van jones and mike urban. the rate is still too high, you had jay-z speaking about it. how do you see the conflict between jay-z and the president on this issue? >> we have to say we did the debut of my show on saturday, and both oprah and trump tweeted about it. it's good for my ratings but it's actually bad tore the
country becauut the president md the point. what jay-z was saying was it's good we're having these numbers continuing to improve -- obviously it started under obama -- but it still doesn't get the president off the hook for some of his rhetoric and the way he says demeaning things about people, and it's hard to raise kids when the parents are saying things like s-hole, et cetera. let me say one more quick thing. i would love to hear what david says about this. just one more quick thing here. under obama, you had the unemployment rate for black people falling 1.8%, 1.6% a year. under trump it fell 1%. so yes, the trend is continuing down, but it's actually slowing under trump. so if you want to talk about numbers, those are numbers. >> so van, first of all, congratulations. great show. you made a lot of news. congrats on that. second of all, jay-z saying that money doesn't buy you happiness is a little laughable. the guy is a billionaire.
>> almost. >> pretty close to being a billionaire. pretty successful guy. him calling the president a superbuck is not a very good argument. jay-z wrote a simple book for the oval office. i'll hand it to the president myself. love to see that. you know yourself, van, that president obama was widely criticized by the african-american community for not doing enough for the african-american community. he was widely criticized. the atlantic. why is president barack obama failing the black community? npr, the "new york times." on and on and on. >> chris, you know what's interesting about the point that you raised? african-americans wanted president obama to do more. do you know why he didn't do more? because he had to walk on eggshells because whenever he did anything to help the african-american community, republicans attacked him. >> somebody said this. the president -- this president
just passed an incredible tax reform in congress, right? there are 5 million individuals got nice bonus checks. i'm guessing some were african-americans, so he did a nice thing there. millionaires' taxes will go significantly down. apple and many other companies announced they will invest in new plants, new infrastructure in america which will help african-americans. to say the president isn't helping african-americans, he's helping all americans, which is what we want to see here. >> i gave him credit and i give him credit. you better watch my show, but i will say that i gave him credit and i give him credit, but here's what i don't do. i don't think -- if he had said in that tweet, he said because of my policies this is
happening. that's the problem. you have a bipartisan -- both political parties should be proud of the fact that for the past seven years we've had that unemployment rate coming down. obama had his share and so did trump. it's a bipartisan success. >> van, i love hearing you say president trump did a good job. >> if the president got out of his own way, dave, and said less inflammatory things, he would hear that more often. let's see what he says tomorrow night. stick around. "the final fact" is next. samsung galaxy phones get a samsung galaxy s8 free. yahoooo! ahoooo! plus, unlimited family plans come with netflix included. spectacular! so, you can watch all your netflix favorites on your new samsung phones. whoa! join the un-carrier and get a samsung galaxy s8 free. all on america's best unlimited network.
i cannot imagine managing my diabetes without my dexcom. this is the dexcom g5 mobile continuous glucose monitoring system. a small, wearable sensor measures your glucose every 5 minutes and sends the data to a dexcom receiver. dexcom helps lower a1c and improves quality of life. if you're over 65 and you have diabetes, you should have a dexcom. if you get a dexcom, you're going to be very glad that you did. visit dexcomnow.com to learn more. you're going to be very glad that you did. if yor crohn's symptoms are holding you back, and your current treatment hasn't worked well enough, it may be time for a change. ask your doctor about entyvio, the only biologic developed and approved just for uc and crohn's. entyvio works at the site of inflammation in the gi tract and is clinically proven to help many patients achieve
both symptom relief and remission. infusion and serious allergic reactions can happen during or after treatment. entyvio may increase risk of infection, which can be serious. pml, a rare, serious, potentially fatal brain infection caused by a virus may be possible. this condition has not been reported with entyvio. tell your doctor if you have an infection, experience frequent infections or have flu-like symptoms or sores. liver problems can occur with entyvio. if your uc or crohn's treatment isn't working for you, ask your gastroenterologist about entyvio. entyvio. relief and remission within reach.
we use so why do we pay touters thave a phone connected. when we're already paying for internet? shouldn't it all just be one thing? that's why xfinity mobile comes with your internet. you can get 5 lines of talk and text included at no extra cost. so all you pay for is data. choose by the gig or unlimited. and now, get a $200 prepaid card when you buy an iphone. it's a new kind of network designed to save you money.
call, visit, or go to xfnitymobile.com. all right, as a treat tonight i'm going to give you two final facts. first, the reason that the president relies on wall street so much is because that's an indicator that is really high without qualification. when he talks about jobs, 2 million, the growth rate 3%, these numbers are either wrong or they are not historically great, okay? if you do the google research and you look at the tax policy, you look at the economic numbers, you'll see the numbers are good but they're continuing a trend and often they're not even improving on it. so do the homework. the other fact is, i'm sorry, but all this stuff about the memo, it just reeks of politics. and it is the politics of the worst kind, left and right engaged in a dynamic where you are going to be held hostage. and the fbi may be made victim by their own struggles. if this isn't about facts and
they don't prove things, it is going to be dangerous for everyone. that's all for us tonight. "cnn tonight" with don lemon the man starts right now. so i want you to, as we go over the next couple of hours here on cnn and throughout your day, any time i want you to ask yourself these questions. what is donald trump trying to hide? why doesn't he want the mueller investigation to continue? why did he decline to impose new sanctions on russia today as he had been ordered to do by congress? what is going on here? this is "cnn tonight." i'm don lemon. i'm live for you in washington. thank you so much for joining us. can we kill the music? i want people to pay close attention to this. there is a lot of breaking news tonight and we're going to go through all of it. we're going to try to make sense of all of this t