time he served of this year. what basis can you feel confident saying that the director of national intelligence oversold something? i don t think it was deliberate, but all i can tell you is reviewing the evidence that i have, i don t think you can conclude that at all, far from it. reporter: but you admit, all you have right now is a circumstantial case. actually, no, chuck. i can tell you that the case is more than that. and i can t go into the particulars, but there is more than circumstantial evidence now. so, again, i think. reporter: you have seen direct evidence of collusion? i don t to want go into specifics, but i will say that there is evidence that is not circumstantial, and it very much worthy of investigation. so, that is what we ought to do. now, again, i think we have been
to anyone in the trump organization. the fact his name is mentioned is considered incidental collection. his name would then be masked. his name could be unmasked if it was important to understand the significance of the intelligence. what i gathered from the chairman was, the names of the u.s. persons, if they were names were in fact masked. so it s very difficult to disearn what s the relevance here? even on the basis of what the chairman said, doesn t cast doubt on what we ve heard from both directors this week and that is there is simply no evidence that the president was the subject of wiretapping by his predecessor. didn t we already know what trump officials were caught up in the fisa wiretaps? mike flynn and his conversations with the ambassador. it was putting this way, everybody in your situation that has got an briefing implied, of course the russian ambassador is
intelligence community it ought to be shared with us by the intelligence community. i don t know if that s the source of it. and he also went and called the nsa, cia, and the fbi. you would have to ask the chairman. again, we have no idea where these documents came from, whether they even show what they purport to show, but even if they do on the basis of what the chairman said, the underlying fact is still the same. there is no evidence to support the president s contention that he was wiretapped by his predecessor. so i m not sure what the point of this extraordinary process is, and i have to hope that this is not part of a broader campaign by the white house aimed to deflect from the director s testimony earlier this week. but again, not having seen the documents, not having the chairman share those documents with either democrats or republicans on the committee, there s simply no way for us to
commonly under surveillance. chuck, i don t know. i assume that s it is not that simple because the chairman says it doesn t involve russia. but nonetheless, we really have no idea. and again, we will be requesting in the committee access to whatever evidence the chairman has received. if it can be called evidence to see whether it has any pert pans in whatsoever to this investigation. and if indeed if it doesn t involve russia that raises a profound question about whether it is pertinent. nonetheless, in the absence of that, we can t evaluate any of these claims. i have to ask you something that you said also to me on sunday. is that you took you thought that at the time, form er james clapper was definitive at the
jeremy, sounds like he is taking your advice, don t walk away from this yet. yeah, i think he wants to be in the room. he wants to issue the subpoenas, get witness testimony, look at documents, maybe even give immunity to some witnesses to turn, if you will, state s evidence against the target. i ve got to say one thing, put one thing on the table. the president has a nuclear option here as well. he could pardon the people in his inner sucker who will are under investigation. it would extinguish the fbi criminal investigation and take a lot a wind out of the investigation. it s a big move, but don t put it past them. manafort and a stone. people that are not in the administration? yes, op the grounds that this is a sham. deep state trying to attack him. wow. meanwhile, russia attacked our government. russia attacked our elections. and i want to use jeremy s phrase, reminder of the 20