And women who work every day hard in u.s. attorney s offices. people have been there for 20 years saying they don t an objective investigation. the person who is should have been rekussed right abray this case was of, of course, rod rosenstein who was the main witness as to whether or not the president obstructed justice by firing comey. so i don t think the ig report in its merits, in its content has much to say about whether or not there is collusion. but i do think the fact that we have an ig report that is highly respected, highly recorded by both sides, neath are side is hap neither side is happy with the results, shows that we can do justice within the department of justice itself never needed a special counsel. you could argue both sides are happy they think they zbhot ammunition but that s two sides the same coin maybe. let me ask you about about something you said in the past about peter, you said you thought he should be fired something we have heard repeated
Di judiciary committee member says this puts the integrity somehow this was set to go down as going after donald trump. i understand your point here. but the fact that you have the ranking democrat member of the committee and the chair of who who are fighting any. it would certainly help. but the fact of the matter is, you had outright laws being made of the investigation. what this testimony shows is, christopher steelu conducting what is a normal objective investigation. he was told by mr. simpson, his assignment was to find out what
Committee in the house they can conduct a fair thorough and impressive objective investigation. i believe that we can. we been a very month nonpartisan committee for quite some time. we can sit back and go about our work and conduct an investigation. whether you heard something sooner rather than later we need to take a look at what s going on and find out if there s criminal activity that has taken place and who has done and why. make sure that we bring ourselves to justice. i hope we start hearing that from both sides of the aisle and move forward with our investigation. he has come under tremendous criticism. apparently in not telling a you be in the committee.
Otherwise, we re never going to get a true objective investigation. here s the timeline of the meetings that we re talking about. in terms of senator jeff sessions, the net is fairly wide with other trump campaign folks, carter paige, the son-in-law, jared kushner but as it pertains to jeff sessions, he met with the ambassador at the rnc in july and there was another meeting, a later, and as senator and then jeff sessions said there s a distinction. i mean, when he used the language as sometimes, i m described as a surrogate, so are the meetings different when you are on the campaign trail versus a senator. perhaps few referral brows when you re meeting with the ambassador as a senator, avery? met with a lot of people.
Release. mike baker is with me now a former cia operative and with me here in new york is jeff toobin our cnn senior legal analyst. mike baker let me begin with you. your thoughts on this and what kind of, if any, what kind of bomb shell might be in this carefully worded report? i don t think it s a bomb shell in this report. the warnings that went out to our facilities overseas, military embassies and others overseas in part setting the table for releasing this summary. i don t believe it s innocently a bomb shell but i think they are being cautious. that s a smart thing to do. look, it s a very emotional subject. everybody has a take on this. we ve been debating this for years. my take is frankly this is as far away from unbiassed objective investigation as you can possibly ask. what they did five years and some $40 million ago is that they decided here s a thesis. our thesis is bush is bad and