>> first of all, the cia didn't say someone at the cia said and we don't know who that is because that was an unnamed source. i think it's perfectly understandable. they have two different missions. you and i can look at the evidence the cia got and conclude russians were hacking into the american electoral process and be concerned about that. the fbi wants to know definitive proof. that's the culture. so what they have is a program, a malware, used to hack into dnc and typically that's used by russian hackers. that's what they have. so the cia can say this is what the russians always use. therefore it's russians. they were clearly interfering with the election. the fbi wants to know who did it and have proof and able to go to a court of law and prove it. they don't have that. >> david, fascinating. absolutely fascinating interagency dispute here between