government records donald trump brought with him to mar-a-lago, and ultimately returned to the archives in january, 14 had classified documents. some, including sensitive information derived from government enforcements, critical to u.s. intelligence gathering. that the linchpin of the entire affidavit. we are talking about materials that could kill people, as well as,, of course, reveal sources and methods, really undermine our national security. reporter: in total, investigators found 184 documents with classification markings, including 67 documents marked as confidential, 92 marked as secret, and 25 top secret. the documents labeled h.c.s., referring had human confidential sources stood out to acting c.i.a. director mike morell. the ones most concerning to me are the ones that were marked h.c.s., which say marking that indicates that information was derived from c.i.a. spies
but when you in totality, look at the way that carter page and papadopoulos in human confidential human sources were used to attend meetings, to set up meetings with trump campaign officials, trolling, trolling all night long. that is what they were doing. when you finish and put the bay behind the boat can you hope you get something. and yet, the fbi throughout this report, we didn t ask him to gather that information. we weren t looking for them at one point, in a position for instance on their future immigration plan. it is bizarre. comments? it is bizarre and really truly frightening. what we have here, laura, is not a rogue special agent out there investigating something that he or she is not supposed to. what we have here are a very senior officials, not just senior officials, but they include senior lawyers with the
sources and methods and make it more difficult to obtain human confidential sources. the president essentially forced them to attend this meeting and to reveal information. then the white house counsel shows up and he says, remember, justice department, under the guise of transparency, who yoatr orders are, which is to tell congress about the informants background and information. then you think fair enough, benign, really not much there. until giuliani enters the scene and says we expect essentially a full debriefing on what happened there. i think his lange wachbuage was expect to know what the informants produced and then we ll make a decision on what to do. what they re asking for is the justice department through the auspices of congressional oversight to reveal to them the nature of the investigation against them. that s problematic procedurally and appearance wise, but i m not
the presence of flood at this meeting doesn t raise any legal questions that i can think of. is it improper? it s an appearance issue. you have to remember how this meeting was birthed which is to say that the justice department was kicking and screaming against having to release this information to congress thinking that it was going to reveal sources and methods and make it more difficult to obtain human confidential sources. the president essentially forced them to attend this meeting and to reveal information. then the white house counsel shows up and he says, remember, justice department, under the guise of transparency, what your orders are, which is to tell congress about the informants background and information. then you think fair enough, benign, really not much there. until giuliani enters the scene and says we expect essentially a full debriefing on what happened there. i think his language was we