Because in todays White House Briefing press Secretary Sean Spicer read a long list of media reports that he seemed to believe back um the president s claims. Media reports. Sean hannity, judge napolitano, the New York Times, the very paper the president of the United States has referred to as failing and fake. Sean hannity said judge Andrew Napolitano made the following statement days after election, heat street reported. January 19th, the new york travel times reports we know the president has no facts because he was on fox news last night and finally explained where he got the alleged information that led him to sweet the substantiated allegations against the former president. Watch. Ive been reading about things. I read in i think it was january 20th the New York Times article where they were talking about wiretapping. There was an article. I think they used that exact term. I read other things. I watched your friend bret baier the day previous where he was talking about certain very complex sets of things happening and wiretapping. I said, wait a minute, theres a lot of wiretapping being talked about. Ive been seeing a lot of things. The president on fox last night. Hes been seeing a lot of thing, he says. He read a report in the New York Times. He heard bret baier say something. A lot of wiretapping being talked about. Now we know. The thing is the report in the New York Times the president seems to be talking about, it doesnt say anything about president obama ordering a wiretap. Weve interviewed the New York Times reporter who wrote the article and were going to do it again tonight. In a minute, you can hear for yourself. As for bret baier, whose work i certainly respect, as for sean spicers comments today, we believe the president is referring to brets show on march 3rd. That show doesnt sitecyte any evidence of wiretapping. It references other unspecified reports, again, nothing about president obama wiretapping President Trump. Before sending those tweet ace tacking the former president , the president could have picked up a phone, called the fbi, the cy, national intelligence, could have asked for the information. He didnt. Theres also Something Else in that interview hes said before. In the world of television its what we call a tease. Listen. Wiretap covers a lot of different things. I think youre going to find some very interesting items coming to the forefront over the next two weeks. . Thats the tease. Basically its stay tuned, because theres something very interesting coming up up. The president has done this before notably as a citizen. Right now i have some real doubts. I have people that have been studying it and they cannot believe what theyre finding. You have people now down there searching i mean in hawaii . Absolutely. And they cannot believe what theyre finding. By the way, the payoff for that tease, that never came. In fact, there has never been any evidence at all that then citizen trump actually had people down in hawaii searching for information. The time he claimed he did we actually did have people down in hawaii searching for information interviewing all the people somebody would interview for information and none of those people we interviewed ever reported being approached by anyone working for then citizen donald trump. Well, it was quite a press Conference Today at the white house. Jim acosta was in the thick of it. Well talk to him in just a second. First, some of the exchange jim had with sean spicer. You were just quoting sean hannity there. The house and Senate Intelligence committees i also quoted youre going to cherrypick youre citing sean hannity in a you also tend to overlook all the other sources. Because i know you want to cherrypick it. No, no, but you do. But where was your concern about the New York Times reporter . You didnt seem to have a concern are with that. We have done plenty of reporting on all of this. You want to cherrypick one piece of commentary. Associates of the president to the russians, has all been looked at. How do you know all this . How do you seem to be such an expert in this . Im saying this has been looked at, sean. How do you know . Hold on. Im sorry. Im afraid to can you tell me how you though that all of this has, quote, been looked at . Youre asking me whether or not you made a statement, you said, quote, all of this has been looked out. Other outlites have reported so when your outlet says its all been looked at the president and the campaign it sounds like during the context of that investigation there might have been some intercepted communications, the House Intelligence Committee chairman did mention that and we have reported that, others have reported that on our air and various publications. But, sean, what you are refusing to answer, the question that youre refusing to answer is whether or not the president still im not re i said it to jonathan. You have a senate and House Intelligence Committee both leaders from both parties on both of those panels saying that they dont see any evidence of any wiretapping. How can the president go on and continue to because youre mischaracterizing what chairman nunes said. He said, quote, its possible hess following up on this. To suggest that, youre stating unequivocally you said if you take it literally weve cleared that up. The president has said clearly when he referred to wiretapping he was referring to surveillance. What that sounds like sha you and the president are saying we dont mean wiretapping anymore, thats not true anymore. So now were going to no, thats not other forms of surveillance. Whats it going to be next . Jim, thats cute but at the end of the day, what the president had wiretapping in quotes, he was referring to broad surveillance. Now youre basically going back. We talked about this several days ago. The bottom line is that the investigation by the house and the senate has not been provided all the information. When it does but where was hold on not evidence no, no. I think the president addressed that last night and said theres more to come. These are merely pointing out i think there is widespread reporting throughout the 2016 investigation there was surveillance done on a variety of people that came up investigation whether there was i find it interesting that ow you his campaign that you of course theyll be looking at these various i get it. Somehow you seem to believe you have all this information, youve been read in on all these things which i find interesting. I havent been read in by fbi. Coming to serious conclusions for a guy who has zero intelligent class well give me some credit. Ill give you some. A little intelligence, maybe. Clearance. I wasnt done. Clearance. Maybe both. Those two panels. Those two panels have spoke within the fbi director and i understand that. Told theres no evidence of this. I think this question has been asked and answered. President saying its interest hough you jump to all these conclusions about what they have and what they dont have and you seem to know all the answers. At the end of the day there was clearly a ton of reporting hold on, jim. Let me answer i think that theres been a vast amount of reporting which i just detailed about activity that was going on in the 2016 election. Theres no question that there was surveillance techniques used throughout this. I think by a variety of outlets that have reported this activity concluding. So and i think when you actually ask those two people whether or not as chairman nunes said yesterday, when you take it literally, wiretap, the president has been clear he didnt mean specifically wiretapping. He had it in quotes. I think to fall back on that is a false premise. Thats not what he said. He was very clear about what when he talked about it yesterday. And jim acosta joins us now. Why didnt you press sean spicer on those sources . Well, because before i asked that question why are you quoting sean hannity, which is a bizarre question to ask during a briefing, by the way, sean spicer went through this long list of news articles and i guess posts on websites, obscure websites that would lead them to conclude that the president has some backing for his claim that he was wiretapped by former president obama. But by the way, one of those articles and i think you just mentioned this, that the white house is relying upon, was written by the New York Times. The president has called time and again the failing New York Times. On the face of it right there, theyre leaning on information that theyve questioned as not reputable in the past. Add to that during that long list of sources he also cited sawn hannity and something that was said on his show and something that judge Andrew Napolitano said, another fox news contributor. As you and i both know, those are not nonbiased sources of information. They tend to be sources of information that feed a lot of the president s conspiracy theories that we hear about all the time. Weve interviewed the New York Times reporter who wrote that article the white house is referencing and were about to do it again and it doesnt say anything about president obama wiretapping. Also what judge napolitano, andrew that poll ta toe was talking about, the British Intelligence service have said thats ridiculous. Knocked that down. Are you seeing the white house backing down from the president s original claim . Im trying to remember any time that President Trump as a citizen or as president has admitted he was wrong about anything. I think weve asked him that question as a candidate. Are there things youve said which are wrong and i dont think hes ever admitted hes wrong. Reporter i dont think ive ever heard him admit hes wrong. That was one reason i pressed sean spicer on that in the briefing. They started with the original tweets from the president , that former president Obama Wiretapped him. When that claim proved to be baseless and false and proven wrong and said as much by members of his own members on capitol hill, they then expanded the definition of wiretapping and now it means all these different forms of surveillance. So the question becomes when that doesnt work anymore because keep in mind the Senate IntelligenceCommittee Statement said today surveillance, not wiretapping, we did not find evidence of surveillance, so it seems to be knocking down the latest excuse from the white house and so instead of trying to find some kind of refuge in the form of an apology or a retraction or withdrawal of that statement, you have the president and his spokesman doubling down, anderson, and there was no sign of an apology coming but of course we know that because weve been covering donald trump for some time now. Jim, stick around. I want to bring in perhaps the mostly widely mentioned New York Times reporter of the night, matthew rosenberg. This reminds me of the scene in annie hall where woody allen gets annoyed and says i happen to have marcia mcclune right here. Were happy to have you here. What do you make of the white house citing your article as part of the evidence . Bizarre a point. Anybody can read the story and see thats not what it said. This bizarre circular thing happening where the president cites a theory that he was wiretapped which twopointed on kind of fringe rightwing media and after his tweet storm, info wars says it was the New York Times that reported it, citing our story, and now a few weeks later the white house and the president are citing info wars. So theyve got one kind of bizarre right wing theory to depend another bizarre right wing framed theory, both of which theres no evidence to support. Just to be clear, theres nothing whatsoever in your reporting in the New York Times that indicates president Obama Wiretapped or ordered wiretapping of then candidate trump, correct . Nothing. I mean, if we knew that, that is a fantastic story. We would be rushing i would not be sitting here with you. Id be home writing it or out reporting it. We said there were intercepted communications. We said they were russians talking to each other about contacts with trump associates. We know that there were intercepts with say the russian ambassador, on the phone with michael flynn, the former National Security adviser. And so flynn was picked up talking to the russian ambassador, whos under surveillance. But this is all routine work by intelligence agencies and fbi. This isnt, you know, they especially put the trump people under surveillance. We have no evidence that that happened. In fact, i just want to read the sentence in the article that you just talked about that i just think its important to have the sentence. You wrote one official said intelligence reports based on some of the wiretap communications had been provided to the white house. I know you cant obviously get into your sources for your reporting, but the wiretapping you reference, thats the russians communicating theoretically with other russians but in one case i guess with flynn. Much of it. I need to be a little careful here partly because our visibility is limited, obviously. I dont have the security clearance and cant see things personally. You know, these intelligence reports then go to the white house isnt that unusual either because in almost all of them the names are masked. So if theres an american named in this, its almost always masked. Its only unmasked for context or if the president asked for it. We have no evidence that happened. This is intelligence agenciesing to their jobs and picking up things that were going on. Youre also working for a News Organization that the president of the United States has repeatedly referred to as failing or fake news. Interesting that the times seem to be one of the, you know, main white house sources that they are pointing to to try to now buoy their defense. They believe its fake news, its odd they would now be kind of embracing your reporting or what they believe your reporting is, which its not. Its kind of an honor i guess to be cited by the president but its a complete misreading. And trump, he usually refers to us as failing, usually sees us as something is wrong with us. On occasion he once called us a national treasure. I think theres a bit of a competing viewpoint within his own mind about who and what we are. Well bring jim back in. The president is scheduled to hold a joint press Conference Tomorrow with german chancellor angela merkel. Do you foresee wiretapping coming up, and any idea of how he might respond . I think it will be a critical moment for President Trump in the early days of this administration. We saw in some of these joint news conferences with other foreign leaders that he preferred to call on conservative news outlets to basically fix the game in order to not get tough questions during some of these news conferences, and so the choice that is set before the president tomorrow is does he go down that road, does he decide to just stick with conservative news outlets because he knows theyre not going to ask this question about wiretapping, or does he call on a cnn or New York Times or Associated Press or one of the other broadcast networks or so on and is he going to ask this question and how does he answer . That will be a critical moment for this president. Well have to see if he chooses the road less traveled because hes certainly in a very difficult poxover his own making and i think the only way he can see his way out of it at this point is just to acknowledge the truth that the wiretapping claim that he tweeted about is just false and that he made a mistake. Well see about that. Jim acosta, thank you. Matthew rosenberg, appreciate you being on again. Up next, breaking news on the congressional side including the head of the House Intelligence Committee responding directly to one of the claims you heard sean spicer make. At the top of next hour, van jones, Kareem Abduljabbar and another town hall. With advil, youll ask what twisted ankle . What muscle strain . Advil makes pain a distant memory nothing works faster stronger or longer what pain . Advil. Afoot and lighthearted i take to the open road. Healthy, free, the world before me, the long brown path before me leading wherever i choose. The east and the west are mine. The north and the south are mine. All seems beautiful to me. To take advantage of this offer on a volvo s90, visit your local dealer. E trades powerful trading tools, give you access to indepth analysis, and a team of experienced traders ready to help if you need it. Its like having the power of a trading floor, wherever you are. Its your trade. E trade i use whats already inside me to reach my goals. So i liked when my doctor told me that i may reach my blood sugar and a1c goals by activating whats within me with onceweekly trulicity. Trulicity is not insulin. It helps activate my body to do what its supposed to do release its own insulin. Trulicity responds when my blood sugar rises. I take it once a week, and it works 24 7. It comes in an easytouse pen. And i may even lose a little weight. Trulicity is a onceweekly injectable prescription medicine to improve blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes when used with diet and exercise. Trulicity is not insulin. It should not be the first medicine to treat diabetes, or for people with type 1 diabetes or diabetic ketoacidosis. Do not take trulicity if you or a Family Member has had medullary thyroid cancer, if youve had multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if you are allergic to trulicity. Stop trulicity and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms such as itching, rash, or trouble breathing; a lump or swelling in your neck; or severe pain in your stomach area. Serious side effects may include pancreatitis, which can be fatal. Taking trulicity with a sulfonylurea or insulin increases your risk for low blood sugar. Common side effects include nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, decreased appetite, and indigestion. Some side effects can lead to dehydration, which may make existing kidney problems worse. With trulicity, i click to activate whats within me. If you want help improving your a1c and blood sugar numbers with a noninsulin option, click to activate your within. Ask your doctor about onceweekly trulicity. Welcome back. More on the president s wiretapping case. The breaking news is in reaction to sean spicer suggesting that defari vip nunes still backs the white house despite the chairmans statements yesterday contradicting the president s wiretap claim. When nunes said its very possible yesterday there was crickets from you guys. When he came out and said there was no connection to russia, crickets. When tom cotton said the same, you dont want to cover no evidence of wiretapping no, hold on. Youve had the house and Senate Intelligence committee heres the direct quote. I think its very possible, end of quote. Joining us from capitol hill manu raju. You just caught up with congressman nunes. What did he say . Hes not on the same page with the white house. What sean spicer was referring to there was comments that devin nunes made yesterday in a press conference saying it was possible that incidentally during the broader surveillance that was taking place during the obama years perhaps some of Donald TrumpsCommunications May have been swept up and thats something theyll look into. When i caught up with partly sunny skies pl nunes today i asked him specifically does that mean youve seen any evidence . He said no. And also said he does not believe President Trump was wiretapped under the orders of barack obama. Take a listen. You said yesterday i dont believe what the your words. Yeah, i dont believe that the president ordered a fi cal wiretap of trump tower. And what do you make of the physical wiretap or other surveillance activities, which is the question. And today . We want to make sure no surveillance was used for political purposes. Do you have any evidence anything picked up donald trump . Other than general flynn, we dont. Thats the first time were hearing are from devin nunes saying theres no evidence to suggest any incidental collection of communications from President Trump. Undercutting a key argument that sean spicer was making today nunes saying you take Donald Trumps tweets literally, no, he was not tapped. But perhaps broadly under this new definition of surveillance maybe. But well look into it. Obviously no ed theyre seeing or the Senate Intelligence committee is seeing. What are you learning about the latest response from james comey from the fbi . Reporter were expecting him to speak publicly monday at a hearing that the House Intelligence Committee is having on the issue of russia meddling in Campaign Contacts that may have coccurred during Campaign Season with Donald Trumps campaign and any russian officials. Im told by adam schiff that he expects james comey to publicly rebut trumps suggestion that he was wiretapped under the orders of donald trump. I asked adam schiff that directly today and he said thats what he expects. Schiff would be in a position to know. He has spoken multiple times with comey. They had a private briefing talking presumably about this topic as well. So well see if comey goes forward and goes public on monday night. But this is a question that will come up at this highprofile hearing and well see if comey expresses reservations or goes out and publicly rebuts donald trump the way that hes now expected to do so. Monday. Joining us is kirsten powers, kayleigh mcenany, van jones, busy tonight, messy truth town hall after this show. And jack kingston. Keirsten, im not sure where to begin but that press Conference Today at the white house, the white house has gotten in deep on this and doesnt seem to be able to back out. Theyre in a situation because sean spicer has to defend donald trump because he doesnt want to back down from this. What struck me the most was when he rolled out the evidence basically, right. And so donald trump tweeted i just found out then went on a ram page about how he was wiretapped. When most of us hear that, we think i just found out, someone came in and briefed you. If i said i just found out something and then you found out i just found out by reading the newspaper, Everybody Knows that. What it was he found out is he was watching fox news so he found out something from sean hannity and from Andrew Napolitano, thats embarrassing for the white house. This isnt how we think of the president making an accusation based on Something Like that. Kayleigh, having believed that, p tt could call the director of national intelligence, the fbi, and find out was there a fisa court warrant, you know, issued . Seems like none of that was done. Sean spicer said that because the media would go crazy because theyre interfering in the Intelligence Communitys activities. Thats his reason or not. There are two important things we need to separate. One, devin nunes has said, democrats and republicans alike have said obama did not order a direct wiretapping of trump. Doesnt seem like that happened based on all we know. That being said, theres another serious matter i think is what the tweet was getting at which is mike flynns conversations were transcribed in the course of surveying a foreign diplomat. When you come across american citizens, stop unless you have a evidence of a crime. Why didnt they stop . Why were the conversations transcribed when an american citizen was involved . That incidental wiretapping, those questions arent answered and that could validate what he was getting at. In certain circumstances the name can be unredacted if they believe a crime perhaps has been committed. Thats certainly true. But at the same time they still need some sort of evidence before they transcribe and disseminate around government mike flynns conversation, was disseminated far and wide. Why werent the procedures followed . That is not what President Trump was tweeting about at 6something a. M. On a saturday morning. There are all kinds of things in our government that can be improved. Frankly i was concerned under the Obama Administration that, you know, the Intelligence Community might have these super powers and that stuff, new tools. There is a way to have that conversation. You could say, listen, i am the president of the United States, im concerned about intelligence, i want to have tweeting out some completely madeup nonsense two weeks ago is not how you have a conversation about any of these issues. I think you need to talk about whats going on here. Heres whats going on. Two weeks ago the president gave a speech that was well received by many including myself, quite famously, and the next day, rather than getting his wonderful high praise, people Start Talking about the fact that Jeff Sessions had committed an act of treason, that the top come had committed a crime and donald trump, by all reports, started going off on people, screaming and yelling, and guess what . He tweeted out nonsense to change the subject. Were not sitting here talking about the fact that the top cop committed an act of perjury. Were talking about ftotal nonsense. Trump is winning againwy doing nutty stuff and having us chase the rabbit around the barn. There is no way in the world you can spin or polish that tweet. You cant do it. In fact, i dont think trump is that man, talking about Jeff Sessions. Congressman kingston, van is saying this is a machiavellian way to turn the attention awayer or go down the rabbit hole, but you cant ignore the president of the United States when hes making allegations against the former president of the United States, allegations which are incredibly serious. I dont think you can ignore it if. You listen to what sean said today he said one of the things that bothered the white house is on his way out the door president obama apparently opened up the surveillance or the investigation into 16 other agencies who had not been involved in it and thus spreading the information, continuing surveillance, continuing whatever investigation level there was, and improving the likelihood of this laebs. I think that is something that the white house is very concerned about. One thing i also want to mention, if nunes and other republicans come out and say there was no evidence to wiretapping in two or three weeks, whatever it is, when they come out and say theres no evidence of collusion, i hope that the democrats equally embrace their statements at that time as they have today. Quick break and well continue this conversation. More to talk about in the hour ahead including what paul ryan said about the lack of evidence for the wiretapping claim and whether he thinks President Trump should apologize to the American People. So you dont miss his first birthday. Tickets, i need to see your tickets sir. I masterpassed it. Feeling like father of the year priceless masterpass, the secure way to pay from your bank dont just buy it. Masterpass it. Except when it comes to retirement. At fidelity, you get a retirement score in just 60 seconds. And well help you make decisions for your plan. To keep you on track. Its your retirement. Know where you stand. It can seem like triggers. Pop up everywhere. Luckily theres powerful, 24hour, nondrowsy claritin. It provides relief of symptoms that can be triggered by over 200 different allergens. Live claritin clear. As weve been reporting, the unfounded wiretap allegation took some interesting turns today. Began with bipartisan members of the Senate Intelligence committee saying theyve seep no evidence that president obama ordered President Trumps phones tapped during the campaign. Came out at a perez briefing where sean spicer gave a long and winding and contradictory defense saying President Trump stand by the claim. Paul ryan and others have been briefed. Heres what he told wolf blitzer a short time ago. We have not seen any evidence that there was a wiretap or a fisa court order against trump tower or somebody in trump tower. So should the president of the United States, do you believe, apologize to former president obama and apologize to the American People for making such an assertion . Im going to leave it to him to make his decisions. You still personally trust President Trump . Yes. Back now with the panel. I was trying to remember an incident where the president or donald trump as a citizen really has apologized. We asked him about that during the campaign and he couldnt if memory serves me correct, he couldnt come up. Kayleigh, do you think he should . He should clarify, especially if its not direct evidence of obama tapping trump. And i agree with van, twitter was not a place to raise this. I fully think there was something suspicious going on, maybe not orchestrated by president obama, people within, thats not hard to believe based on the felonious leaks weve seen. So i do think there was something strange going on. I think theyll provide some sort of evidence of surveillance. Whether it was ordered by the commander in chief, thats a far stretch. This is why twitter doesnt limit itself to making these allegations. If theres no evidence i think he should clarify like the democratic senator who tweeted she never met with the russians, i had no room in my office. Congressman kingston, the current president of the United States calling the former president of the United States a bad or sick guy, i think was the terminology. Should he apologize . I think his words may have gotten ahead of himself in terms of wiretapping versus surveillance. And maybe we will know something as he said last night to Tucker Carlson in the next couple of weeks. There will be more stuff coming out. That is sort of his poker tell. He often uses that phraseology of, you know, Something Big is coming or just wait or, you know, im finding out some amazing things. Hes a hollywood guy and theres that teaser element to him. It seems to always be out there. Right. But im going to quote paul ryan, im going to let him make his decisions on terms of apologizing or taking it back. But i do think if we listen, part of what sean was saying is surveillance, wiretapping, almost synonymous in the usage, that would not be accept to believe many people, but i do remember you asked about him apologizing, during the Campaign Early august right afl Kellyanne Conway took over the campaign he did apologize in sort to the kahn family and other people for offending i think his phraseology was not an apology, it was more like i said something or i regret yeah. Frankly unlikely there will be unlikely but i think the answer is yes, he should apologize. I dont think theres any question. I dont know how you guys can even say that. I mean obviously if he accused president obama of doing something that he didnt to and called him sick, he should apologize. I dont even understand how this is eve an debate. Some waiting for lois lerner to apologize holding up the tax returns or how the thats like this is the problem we have is that there should be a standard and if anybody should meet that standard it should be the president of the United States and he shouldnt meet the standard if, you know, joe meets his and if skippy meets hers. Thats a conversation i have with my kids. Im not going to do it until he does it. Part of i think whats going on here, the damage is not visible yet, its like termtermites. All of these things are undermining basic trust and correct. Guess what, tomorrow always comes. There will be a moment where this man has to stand in front of the country and say we have to go to war or we have a serious threat. Youre going to have a lot of people saying should i take this literally or seriously . People will be debating whether or not the president of the United States is serious when hes talking about something that could be of life and death. So right now this is all fun and games, we can all joke around, but termites are eating through the fundamental structure of our country and its dangerous. Interesting the president is constantly staying, jon stewart pointed to this out and others, constantly saying believe me, believe me. At a certain point the president of the United States shouldnt need to say that phrase, like you should just believe what hes saying. Did ask for two weeks and doj asked him for one more week. If he does come up with something because there was a suspicious headline, wiretap data used in investigation of trump associates, that was a New York Times head line of scrimmage on january 19th. If in two weeks weve had that report on multiple times who keeps pointing out the article was not talking about president obama wiretapping, it was about russian surveillance. But in the course they might have picked up on an american citizen. There could be something that comes out in two weeks and if there is were having a different conversation. But if theres not doesnt trust the Obama Administration because of the irs bullying tweeted and alleged and now thats a change. If youre the president of the United States, you make one allegation and then it starts to fall apart and then you start to move the goal post, thats lucy with the football. Then his flawed spes fisz ti, if thats the case. If something nefarious comes out, he wasnt specific enough. Ive been trying to follow your argument. But because there were leaks that somehow were supposed to think something happened . People leaked all through the Obama Administration. And the bush administration. That doesnt whether you think its right or wrong, its not something that specifically happened to him pap lot of the leaks were happening frankly i think because the Intelligence Community is so concerned about what they believe was going on. So i think that i cant quite follow the lonlic of it. What is wrong is spying and. Ing on american citizen without a reason. Who was spied on . Mike flynn. He was not. I want to know why his conversation was transcribed. The New York Times reporter has been on here saying this was not this was collective what crime was mike flynn committing when he was talking to somebody else. What was the crime . [ talking over each other ] it seems they were surveilling the russian ambassador. When you stumble upon an american citizen conversation, you stop unless theres evidence of a crime. What crime . We dont know. The only crime we can be sure of is the felons who have leaked information. That is a felony. We know the russians hacked into the election which is nothing of collusion. Thats one of the things comey will say next week and one of the things sean spicer talked about today. So frustrating to him, whenever somebody says theres no evidence of collusion, crickcri, to quote clapper said when he left he saw no evidence of collusion. Important point. Democrats are out on a very thin, you know, shaky limb and well see what happens when the evidence i will say this. All of us remember when conservatives were patriotic and concerned about foreign governments attacking us in in different ways and that would have been an outrage to them. Interesting to hear such little concerns from the republicans about the fact our election was attacked by a foreign power. I want them to get back to their job of defending the country because its weird how little you care about that. Coming up, the white house is promising to appeal soon after two federal judges blocked the latest travel ban. And van is heading downstairs getting ready for his town hall. Wheres the car . Itll be here in three. Uh, four minutes. Are you kidding me . No, looks like he took a wrong turn. Dont worry, this guys got like a fourstar rating, were good. His name is randy. Thats like one of the most trustworthy names ordering a getaway car with an app . Are you randy . Thats me awesome surprising. Whats not surprising . How much money erin saved by switching to geico. Everybody comfortable with the air temp . I could go a little cooler. Ok. Fifteen minutes could save you fifteen percent or more. I wanti did my ancestrydna and where i came from. And i couldnt wait to get my pie chart. The most shocking result was that im 26 native american. I had no idea. Just to know this is what im made of, this is where my ancestors came from. And i absolutely want to know more about my native american heritage. Its opened up a whole new world for me. Discover the story only your dna can tell. Order your kit now at ancestrydna. Com. Bring you more ways to helps reduce calories from sugar. With more great tasting beverages with less sugar or no sugar at all, smaller portion sizes, clear calorie labels, and signs reminding everyone to think balance before choosing their beverages. We know you care about reducing the sugar in your familys diet, and were working to support your efforts. More beverage choices. Smaller portions. Less sugar. Balanceus. Org. I realize that ah, that 100k is notwell, a 103fortune. Yeah, 103. Well, let me ask you guys. How long did it take you two to save that . A long time. Then its a fortune. Well, im sure you talk to people all the time who think 100k is just pocket change. Right now were just talking to you. I told you we had a fortune. Yes, you did. Getting closer to your investment goals starts with a conversation. Schedule a complimentary goal Planning Session today. President trumps travel ban was set to be in effect by now but was blocked by two federal judges, one in hawaii, one in maryland. Last night in nashville, he called it overreach and the Justice Department is exploring all options. Jessica schneider, the Trump Administration took great pains to rewrite this executive order, both judgments who halted it are saying its the president s own campaign statements in part that gave them pause. A majority of both of thee opinions, they painstaking det the comments the president and his team made specifically referring to a muslim ban. Both judges cited his interview on cnn with you where he said i think islam hates us and referred to a press release from the Trump Campaign team calling for a complete and total shutdown of muslims entering the u. S. The court said those statements coupled with steven millers tv appearance when they were rewriting this order saying the new order would have the same basic policies of the old, that all made it clear the intent all along the judges said was to ban muslims from entering the u. S. The m. D. Ed in judge used a great quote saying, the world is not made brandnew every morning and reasonable observers have reasonable memories. Simply put, the administration can try to rewrite this, but even on their second try people would remember their words. Jessica, thanks very much. Jessica, i understand there was something new about ruling in washington also. Just in the past minute or two, i just got an alert actually. The judge out in seattle, it was the same judge that initially put a halt to President Trumps First Executive order, theres a lot of legal wranglings out in washington still, but there was a minor ruling that the Trump Administration might be able to claim some victory about. The judge out there has just refused to grant the state of washingtons request to enforce that preliminary injunction that extended to the first travel ban. The judge there refused to extend that preliminary injunction to this current travel ban. So they still have more legal fight out there in washington. This was just one part of it. So its a little bit of a victory for the Trump Administration, but who knows how else this judge will rule. With me the Washington State attorney general bob ferguson who successfully challenged the first travel ban. And brian frosh and jeffrey toobin. What do you make of what jessica just reported about the preliminary ruling from the judge in washington . That was a decision that judge robart made yesterday in oral ruling. If im understanding her correctly he simply put that in writing. That goes to we had two arguments. Our first argument was the original injunction that judge robart in seattle applied to the First Executive order should still apply to the second executive order. He denied that. We still have our main argument that of course like hawaii and maryland the new executive order should also be under an injunction and will be continuing our process with that claim. Attorney general, both rulings last night, including one from your state of maryland, krilted the president s statements from the campaign trail about a muslim ban, one of the interviews i did with him at maralago. But campaign statements are often different from subsequent policy. Why is it prudent to apply what the president said last year to this executive order . Why isnt the executive order judged on its own . Well, you know, no judge as the judge in maryland said is born yesterday. You look at it in context. President trump promise ld a travel ban, a muslim ban, while he was campaigning, said he was going to implement it after he was elected. Rudy giuliani said President Trump came to him, said i want to do a muslim ban, make it legal for me. The judges understand that. Theyre supposed to take it in context. And they did. Its a muslim ban, a violation of the first amendment, prefers one religion and disfavors another. Its a classic constitution nal violation. Attorney general ferguson, to that point, the executive order does not have any language in it that refers to trying to ban muslims or keep them out of the country. I know the six countries are muslim majority countries. How on paper is that a muslim ban . Yeah. So a document, a piece of legislation or in this case an executive order, can buy on its face, on the words of a document, seem to be benign. But when you look behind the motivation for that legislation and that executive order, courts are allowed to look at motivation because it could have an anticonstitutional effect in the motivation behind it. Thats what were getting to. The statements behind it are whats causing concern from med ral judge after federal judge. Six have looked at this and reached the identical conclusion. i dont know. I have to say i spent the day with these two rules, they are both 43 pages long and focus so heavily on what donald trump said in the campaign. In all of american legal history, as far as i can tell, there has never been a court ruling that declared a president of a president unconstitutional based on something he said in the campaign. It never happened before because thats not how courts usually deal with questions like this and i just think as this moves through the appeal process, the attorneys general are going to have a hard time persuading judges that, you know, we have to look at what candidates say in their debates and fundraisers and thousands and thousands of words they say. Yeah. I just it seems very puzzling. Jeff, i know you got questions for the attorneys general. I just i mean, am i wrong about that . Has this ever happened before that a judge has said because of a campaign promise, an action by a president is unconstitutional . Attorney general ferguson . Sure. So it may be an unusual situation and thats due in part, what the president said and his advisors have said as my colleague brian pointed out have been breathtaking and they are whats unprecedented is the president of the United States as a candidate saying im going to create a muslim ban. The courts are allowed to look at the motivation behind a document and keep in mind, what the courts have done is said this cannot go into effect while we proceed on the merits of claims to say this is unconstitutional. Well be asking for additional documents and taking more depositions but the courts look at the harm done to people in my state and brians state, the harm is so great, that they wont allow it to go forward while we proceed. Why is a statement by steven miller, who is like this 31yearold punk in the white house, why is that more important constitutionally than what the attorney general says, what the secretary of Homeland Security says, what the secretary of state says . All of whom have endorsed this and said this is a valuable tool for National Security. Well, actually go ahead. There is very little evidence it does impact National Security. The department of Homeland Security said it doesnt. And as bob said, its not just rare but unprecedented a president of the United States doing, saying something illegal and unconstitutional and thats what happened here. I dont see how the courts can possibly ignore it. But you your opinion about whats in the interest of National Security and some judge sitting in a room with four law clerks is of more value of National Security than the attorney general, secretary of Homeland Security . They say it helps National Security. Why are they wrong and youre right . The department of homeland securities says the opposite. They say it doesnt help National Security in the government in bobs case in washington came in with three examples of instances in which somebody in one of the countries had done something wrong in the United States, two of them were from iraq, not one of the banned countries and the other was somebody who came here as a toddler. Yeah. Attorney general bob ferguson, brian frost, we have to end it there. Appreciate your time. Jeff toobin. Not just unfounded claims president Obama Wiretapped now President Trump. Sean spicer says mr. Ocho boll obama got a British Intelligence agency to do the dirty work for him and that British Agency are doing something they rarely do. They are publicly responding to what the white house said. Thats coming up next. Times and bad. Good. At t. Rowe price. Weve helped our investors stay confident for over 75 years. Call us or your advisor. T. Rowe price. Invest with confidence. On your phone and online. S a modern way to pay. So you dont miss his first birthday. Tickets, i need to see your tickets sir. I masterpassed it. Feeling like father of the year priceless dont just buy it. Masterpass it. Wont replace the full value of your totaled new car. The guy says you picked the wrong insurance plan. No, i picked the wrong insurance company. With Liberty Mutual new car replacement™, you wont have to worry about replacing your car because youll get the full value back including depreciation. And if you have more than one Liberty Mutual policy, you qualify for a multipolicy discount, saving you money on your car and home coverage. Call for a free quote today. Liberty stands with you™. Liberty mutual insurance. [ om[ sniffs ]c ] little girl daddy trapped by your unrelenting nasal allergies . [ meow ] [ sneezes ] try clarispray clarispray provides unsurpassed relief. Its 24 hour, nondrowsy and prescription strength. Free yourself with clarispray, from the makers of claritin. More breaking news, British Intelligence is responding to an acquisition one of the agencies spied on President Trump. Its coming from the white house. Press secretary release was filtered through him as he read out multiple reports today. It came from a fox news legal analyst. Hear is sean spicer today. Last on fox news on march 14th, judge napolitano, three intelligence sources informed fox news president obama went outside the chain of command, he didnt use the nsa, cia, fbi and he didnt use the department of justice. He used gchq. Thats the initials for the British Intelligence spying agency. By having two people said president needs transcripts of conversations involving candidate trumps conversations involving president elect trump, hes able to get it and there is no american fingerprints on this. That British Intelligence agency just responded. What are they saying . Well, i got to tell ya, i speak to British Intelligence fairly often. They are very loathe to make Public Comments but in this case they were very happy to go public and these are the words they used. They said this report is nonsense, utterly ridiculous and should be ignored from the gchq. It was a remarkable moment because you have the fbi director, attorney general and leaders of the Senate Intelligence committees, house speaker, republicans rejecting the narrative. Sean spicer there resorting to news reports, somewhat incredibly of that particular one that the british knocking down immediately. Jim, what are you hearing from the Intelligence Community here . How are they reacting to the president sticking to the wiretapping claims . I think the word is mess moorized, confused. There is no evidence of it. They cant say that. Many of them cant say that in public but thats okay because youre hearing it in public from many politicians and others. Some appointed by President Trump. Many republicans briefed on the intelligence to say there is no evidence. So behind closed doors, the people producing the intelligence behind those statements, they just dont know what the president is trying to accomplish with this. And it does raise hard questions again because its another case of the president to some degree undermining the Intelligence Community because in public, hes saying that what they are saying isnt true. And monday we expect comey to testify and talk publicly about this now. Thats right. We do. Listen, comey is tight lipped as you know but on this issue, there is expectation that will make some Public Comments saying there is no evidence of these wiretap climbs by the president. All right. Jim shoe toutto, thanks very mu the messy truth starts now. [ applause ] welcome to the messy truth. Im van jones. Now look, today was a cry sea day even by trumps crazy standards. Okay . We had sean spicer in the briefing in a scene that really just cou