Another light crowd today. Good afternoon. First off, before we get started i would like to bring up Homeland Security adviser tom mosser to tell you about executive order on Cyber Security at the president just signed. He will take a few of your questions and respectfully i ask that you keep your questions for him on the topic of the executive orders. Dont worry, i will come back and answer all the rest of your pressing questions as soon as he wraps up. I will turn it over to tom. Thank you. Thank you very much for your time. A couple things positive to report. About one hour ago President Trump signed an executive order on Cyber Security. That executive order is going to keep his promise that he has made to the American People to keep americans safe. I would like to do a few things. If i could preview the executive order for you, we will get through three primary sections and then take questions. Among other things, at least an observation for me, i think the trend is going in the wrong direction in cyberspace and it is trying to reverse that on behalf of the American People. We have seen increasing attacks from allies, adversaries , primarily nationstates and other nationstate actors. Sitting by and doing nothing is no longer an option. President trumps action today is a heartening one. There are three sections in priority order. The First Priority for the president and the government is protecting our federal networks. Works often contain the american information and data. Not defending them is not an option. We have seen past efforts that have succeeded in we need to do everything we can to prevent that from happening in the future. A few things about federal networks. We have practiced one thing and preached another. It is time for us now to implement the Risk Reduction framework. From this point for department it is something we have asked the are to implement. From this point forward, department and agencies will practice what we preach. Second, we spend a lot of time and inordinate money protecting antiquated and outdated systems. We saw that with the opm hack and other things. From this point forward the president has issued a preference in federal procurement on federal i. T. For shared services. We have to move to the cloud instead of fracturing our security posture. The third point, the executive order directs all department and agency heads continue key roles but also centralizes risks to review federal i. T. As one enterprise network. If we dont do so we will not be able to adequately understand what risks exist and how to mitigate it. A number of thoughts on that. Among other things that will be a very difficult task. Modernizing is imperative for our security. But modernizing will require a lot of good governance. The president s American Technology council will run that on behalf of the president. We have great hope there will be efficiency but also security. I would also note that other countries have taken two or three years to learn what we came up with in a few months and as we cannot promote innovation without first thinking through Risk Reduction. Do you together is in message we would like to encourage private sector folks to adopt. Point two is Critical Infrastructure and Cyber Security effort. The president has directed the cabinet to begin the hard work of protecting our nations most Critical Infrastructures. Utilities, financial and Health Care Systems, telecommunications networks. He has directed them to identify additional measures to defend and secure our Critical Infrastructure and has continued to promote the message that do nothing is no longer an option. Doing nothing is no longer an option. The executive order not only requires departments and agencies to help those operators in the most important ways but to do it in a productive sense. Important ones but to do it in a proactive sense. His message is towards action. We have seen bipartisan studies over the last eight years, both parties have made powerful recommendations that have not been adopted for various reasons. This executive order adopted best and brightest of those recommendations, in my view. Im going to stop with those three and take questions. Actually, if i could first, was the russian hack in any weight in him way an impetus for this . I have talked to i. T. People who said putting things on the cloud can be problematic for security. What additional security measures will you apply to the cloud to make sure it is not as dflsas some of the i. T. Would be . Three things the third section might be the one i skipped over. It speaks to not only the needs to develop the norms and interoperable open Communication System that is the internet the u. S. Invented the internet and it is time to maintain our values on it but it speaks to deterrence policy which is long overdue. The russians are not the only people that operate in a negative way on the internet. Other nations are motivated to use cyber capacity and cyber tools to attack our people and the government and data. That is something we can no longer abide. We need to establish rules of the road we also need to deter those who dont want to abide by those rules. To answer your first question, no it was not a russian motivated issue. It was a United States of america motivated issue. The second question about the cloud. We have 190 agencies all trying to develop defenses. I dont think that is a wise approach. There will owe be risks. We still at risk . Yes. I will say he has created a cyber secure world. That is not the answer. If we do not move to secured and shared services we will behind the eight ball for a long time. Sitting around doing nothing, is it your intention at the Obama Administration, that was its approach to Cyber Security, sitting around and doing nothing . And he talked about one enterprise network. You talked about what enterprise network. Does that mean every make them all the same or protected in the same way . No. We need to do is view the federal government is enterprise as opposed to just viewing. Each agency has its own enterprise. Implementing the president s executive order. Their network covers 340,000 employees and contractors. They are responsible and the secretary of each department and agency will remain responsible for securing those networks. We need to look at the federal government as an enterprise as well so we no longer look at opm and say you can defend that with the money for the responsibility. Opm is the crown jewel of our security clearances. We want to look at that it said that is a high risk, high cost for us to bear. Maybe we should look at this as an enterprise than we would otherwise put into opium looking at the relevant importance to the entire thing. Not just their budget, but based on what they do. Each agency has a responsibility to identify the risk to the president so they can look at what they have done and importantly, what risk they know they are accepting but not mitigating. There is a lot of identified and not remediated risk. That will have to come through a centralized place. We have seen other countries adopt a centralized view. Thats the answer to your question. The previous administrations approach from your Vantage Point i think that the observation is that we have not done the basic block and tackle. Thinking of the internet is something that the American People benefit from. What we have done is focus on the federal i. T. Of it. Looking at this from the perspective of a deterrence strategy, yes, i think the last administration had an obligation to do that and it did not. Does the administration have a view on what might constitute an act of war, what cyber activity might constitute an active war . I think the most important answer to your question is that were not going to draw a redline with a cyber war at this point. It is not within the scope of the executive order. It would also violate the president s primary mission to not telegraphed our punches. If something does something to us that we cannot tolerate, we will act. You said the goal is to secure the internet as something that americans use and enjoy. Well, the technical standards for most things on the internet are put together by Many International standards organizations and engineers, things like that that often are not in the United States. Has there been any talk of outreach to the sources to build in security for the next generation of protocols . Absolutely. Not just protect the people of america. We have an american first perspective, but the idea of having likeminded people like our allies developing with us the open operative internet is something key to figuring out how we will do fine what is and is not acceptable. We cant cut off the internet at our borders and expected to operate in a viable way. If their ability is coming out of germany, we will take them. We do have much of an indication there will be a significant Silicon Valley or tech leaders coming here. We know we had reports of phone calls with someone like Mark Zuckerberg. Who can we expect to see coming to the white house next month . Someone like Mark Zuckerberg working closing with the administration . Let me tell you the president did or did not talk to. I will probably get that wrong anyway. There is a lot to talk about with private industry. Among other things that stuff needs to come into the white house in the appropriate way. We talk on a regular basis to leaders. Some technical leaders, some is some that are business leaders. My point was that they are going to have a leadership rule in for modernizing our federal i. T. That has a lot of reasons. There is efficiency and cost savings cost savings. I would direct you to the American Technology council as you think about efficiency. As an example we have heard numbers that suggests that the federal government spends upwards of 40,000 per employee i. T. Costs. Those costs are so out of line with private industry that secretary ross and others probably have a very easy time making money off it company that is so poorly investing their dollars. I think youll see that innovation come from that group of leaders. In terms of what youll see over the next month i would say i dont know how to enter that specifically without like to take the opportunity before sarah pulls me to bank two to to thank two or three people. One of them high on the list is mayor giuliani. I would like to thank him for his advice. I would like to thank representative maccoll. A few member others of congress. Representative nunez, senator collins, senator mccain, senator burr. There are a number of people who provided thought leadership and have taken action in pass legislation. It has improved our Cyber Security over the last eight years. I didnt want to be critical of the last eight years but i want to look forward. For Obama Administration official who dealt with other countries and other entities and other countries, he said they were tens of thousands of attempts to hack into Government Systems daily. Can you quantify or confirm or deny that . The answer is no. We see that happen that we start getting into a numbers game. What i think would be a better argument right now, not to cut off your reasonable question, but the better answer is for us to figure out a better defense. If we do it based on an individual attack basis were probably looking at it in the wrong way. But was this person correct when they said entities from around the world daily without numbers the trendline is going in the wrong direction. We see additional attacks come additional numbers and volume in occasionally additional successes that trouble us. That is the best way i can quantify that. Can you just say why the Cyber Security order was delayed . To come out one day earlier in the administration and there had been talk about concern from Silicon Valley and tech leaders with the direction it was going in. Do you have some sense of the support that this order has or not from the tech world . I want to answer and reject part of your question. I think that will be clarifying. First, i will reject one part of your question. We did see concerns, but i dont think they remain. Concerns arose when they read the voluntary call that we reduce greatly the number of botnet attacks in the United States. That is going to require voluntary Cooperation Among owners and operators from service providers, manufacturers of goods. Those will happen to have to happen voluntarily. Without the finding who is in and who is out his involuntary operation but we know they have the technical capacity to come together on behalf of the American People and reduce botnets dramatically. The president wants them to do that. The secretary of commerce will facilitate that. We saw a reflection of a concern that there would be a compulsion. Broader question of the lake, i dont take that either. I think we have been criticized for doing things too quickly and now we are being criticized for doing things to slowly. Maybe we are in the sweet spot. I think the president has hit the timing perfectly. One of the things he directed us to do was to get the money right. He has picked a cabinet full of people that no business functions have to follow people that know business functions have to follow properly. If you dont have the infrastructure, you have to change her vision or amount of money. Off the top of my head i thought you might ask that. The first i answered and that is we do not want to innovate policy on the innovation side. He saw the president signed off last friday on the Technology Council and he signed today the Cyber Security order. That was done intentionally. Will the president s fy 2018 billionllocated 4. 5 across departments involved in cyberspace. The right sizeve of money to keep america safe and that might answer all three components of your question. Thank you so much for your time. About political motivation that the Cyber Security concerns . Im sure hell be happy to come back to questions later. Thank you so much. He was wrong on one thing. I would gladly have let him stay up your and talks Cyber Security all day. A few announcements and i will get to all of your many pressing questions. The president also signed another executive order establishing a bipartisan president ial Advisory Commission on election integrity. This will be chaired by Vice President mike pants. That is what the commission is tasked with doing. The Bipartisan Commission will be made up of around a dozen members, including current and former secretaries of state with kansas secretary of state kurt co. Bark serving as vice chair. It will also deal with Election Fraud detection and voter integrity efforts. Five additional members that have been announced are connie gardner, matthew dunlap, the secretary of state of maine, kim blackwell, former secretary of state of ohio, and christy mccormick, a commissioner on the election assistance commission. The commissioner will review policies that enhance or undermined the American Peoples confidence in the integrity of federal elections and provide a report that identifies older abilities in improper identifies vulnerabilities in improper voting. Will be and hearings open to the public for comment an input and we will share updates as we have them. Secretary purdue is in the Agriculture Department is planning to reorganize to divide Better Service to the American People. With the barges of the ohio river behind him, many of which contain products beginning a journey that will take them will recognize the importance of growing International Trade due to the Agricultural Sector of the economy. Immigration and Customs Enforcement will hold a press conference at 2 15 today to announce the results of a successful recent gang surge operation. The president has made enforcement of our nations immigration laws a top priority, and todays announcement will underscore not only that commitment but his focus on targeting transnational gangs and prioritizing the removal of criminal aliens who pose a threat to public safety. Also today, secretary mattis met with the turkish Prime Minister in london to discuss a range of bilateral security issues, and as secretary reiterated the u. S. s commitment to provide commitment to protecting our nato allies and providing security in iraq and syria. One other thing i want to point out. Last night obamacare suffered another serious blow. Aetna announced the decision to pull out the nebraska and delaware marketplaces which it ends their participation in exchanges completely. Theyve sustained hundreds of millions of dollars over the last several years and is projected to lose more than 200 million in 2017. The company attributes those losses to structural issues within the exchanges, quote, that have led to coop failures and carrier exits and subsequent risk pool deterioration, end quote. This latest news adds to the mountain of evidence that obamacare has completely failed the American People and reinforces why there is no time to waste in repealing and replacing this law before it takes our entire Health Care System down with it. Finally, i know hold those hands. I know we sent out a timeline regarding the firing of director comey yesterday because there seemed to be some misperceptions about the meeting between the president and the attorney general and the Deputy Attorney general on monday. But im going to read it to you all again just to make sure were all on the same page because i want the sequence of events to be perfectly clear to everyone. The president over the last several months lost confidence in director comey. After watching director comeys testimony last wednesday, the president was strongly inclined to remove him. On monday, the president met with the attorney general and the Deputy Attorney general and they discussed reasons for removing the director. The next day, tuesday, may 9, the Deputy Attorney general sent his written recommendation to the attorney general and the attorney general sent his written recommendation to the president. Hopefully that clears up some of those things. And with that i will take your questions. Reporter sarah, why did the lester holt interview the president had made a number of remarks, why did the president think that james comey was a showboater and a grandstander . I think based on the numerous appearances he made and i think its probably pretty evident in his behavior over the last year or so with the back and forth and i think that it speaks pretty clearly. Those words dont leave a lot of room for interpretation so i think its pretty clear what he meant. Reporter when were these three conversations that the president had with james comey whether he was under investigation or not . He said one was at dinner, two phone calls. Was that since january 20 or when . Sarah i dont have the exact date when those phone calls took date. Reporter two parts of the comey question regarding the interview the president just gave. First off, isnt it inappropriate for the president of the United States to ask the f. B. I. Director directly if hes under investigation . Sarah no, i dont believe it is. Reporter one of the conversations the president said happened at a dinner where the f. B. I. Director was asking to stay on as f. B. I. Director. Dont you see how thats a conflict of interest . The f. B. I. Director saying he wants to keep his job and the president is asking whether or not hes under investigation . Sarah i dont see that as a conflict of interest and neither do the many legal scholars and others that have been commenting on it for the last hour. So, no, i dont see that as an issue. Reporter sarah, the other thing i want to ask you is, i asked you directly yesterday related to comey i asked you directly yesterday the president already decided to fire james comey when he met with the Deputy Attorney general and attorney general. And you said, no. Also, the Vice President of the United States said directly to the president took the recommendation of the Deputy Attorney general to remove the director of the f. B. I. Sean spicer said its all him, meaning the Deputy Attorney general. The president decided to fire james comey. So why were so many people giving answers that just werent correct . Were you guys in the dark . Was the Vice President misled again . Sarah i know you love to report we were misled and we want to create hold on, jonathan. I let you finish and read off every single one of those statements. Unless you want to trade places i think its my turn now. I think its pretty simple. I hadnt had a chance to have the conversation directly with the president to say i had several conversations with him but i didnt ask that question directly. Had you already made that decision, i went off of the information that i had when i answered your question. I since had the conversation with him right before i walked on today, and he laid it out very clearly. He had already made that decision. He had been thinking about it for months, which i did say yesterday and have said many times since. And wednesday i think was the final straw that pushed him and the recommendation he got from the Deputy Attorney general just further solidified his decision. And, again, i think reaffirmed that he made the right one. Reporter was the Vice President was the Vice President in the dark too . Sarah nobody was in the dark, jonathan. You want to create this false narrative. If we want to talk about contradicting statements and people that were maybe in the dark, how about the democrats . Lets read a few of them. You want to talk about them, heres what democrats said not long ago about comey. Harry reid said comey should resign and be investigated by the senate. Senator Chuck Schumer said, i dont have confidence in him any longer. Senator Bernie Sanders said it not be a bad thing for the American People if comey resigned. Nancy pelosi said comey was not in the right job. Former d. N. C. Chair, Debbie Wasserman schultz said comey couldnt serve in a neutral and credible way. Obamas advisor valerie the gentlelady reserves the balance of her time urged him to fire comby. Just yesterday representative Maxine Waters said Hillary Clinton would have fired comey. If you want to talk about people in the dark . Our story is consistent. The president is the only person that can can fire the director of the f. B. I. The president made the decision. It was the right decision. The people that are in the dark today are the democrats. They want to come out. They want to talk about all of these they love comey and how great he was. Look at the facts. The facts dont lie. Their statements are all right there. I think its extremely clear that and frankly i think its kind of sad. In washington we finally had something that i think we should have all been able to agree on and that was that director comey shouldnt have been at the f. B. I. But the democrats want to play partisan games and i think thats the most glaring thing thats been left out of all your process stories. Reporter sarah, you said from the podium yesterday director comey lost confidence of the rank and file of the f. B. I. On capitol hill today, the acting director of the f. B. I. Directly contradicted that. What led you and the white house to believe that he had lost the confidence in the rank and file of the f. B. I. When the acting director says its exactly the opposite . Sarah well, i can speak to my own personal experience, i heard from countless members of the f. B. I. That are grateful and thankful for the president s decision and i think that, you know, we may have to agree to disagree. I am sure there are some people that are disappointed but have certainly heard from a large number of individuals and thats just myself and i dont know that many people in the f. B. I. Reporter what you were saying about the democrats, clearly they didnt like james comey too much after the october 28 announcement that he was reopening the investigation into Hillary Clintons emails. Their point now is that timing is different. That this was in the middle of an investigation. Do they have a point . Sarah not at all. I think one made that point far better than i could today when he said theres been no impediment to the investigation, and as i said before, any investigation that was taking place on monday is still taking place today. So i think thats, again, another sad story by the democrats that theyre trying to peddle. Reporter sarah, thank you. Another comment from the hearing today. The acting Deputy Attorney general said sorry. Mccabe said he considers the investigation into russian meddling in the election to be highly significant. In the past the president said that said the investigation was a hoax and he questioned even recently maybe it wasnt russia, might have been china. Does the president consider this investigation to be highly significant . Sarah look, i think he would love nothing more than for this investigation to continue to continue to its completion. I think one of the reasons that the hoax component is the conclusion component that has been the false narrative that you guys have been pushing for the better part of a year. I think thats the piece that he is repeatedly talking about being the hoax. Reporter but in terms of the threats to National Security, does he take that seriously . Does he think thats significant . Sarah of course he takes National Security seriously. To hint he doesnt i think is to misunderstand this president completely. From the very moment that he stepped onto the Campaign Stage to the day that he took the oath of office to become president , hes talked about National Security. Hes made that one of the biggest priorities in the administration. You just saw tom talking about cybersecurity on all fronts, whether its securing the border, whether its protecting people abroad, here, the president has been focused. Reporter was a threat to u. S. National security . Sarah you know, i havent had a chance to ask about that. I think were waiting on the final conclusion about that investigation. Look, i think anytime we have somebody interfering with our election, that would be considered a problem and i think the president would certainly recognize that. Matthew. Reporter two questions. First as been mentioned, Vice President pence said yesterday the firing was based on the recommendation of the attorney general and Deputy Attorney general. We know now thats not true. Was the Vice President misled again or did he misled the American People . Sarah i believe i answered that question. Reporter i dont believe i caught it. The Vice President said yesterday the president was to accept and support the decision of the Deputy Attorney general and attorney general. Sarah he certainly accepted the deputy that doesnt mean that he wouldnt still accept his recommendation. I mean, theyre on the same page. Like, why are we arguing about the semantics of whether he accepted it . They agreed. I mean, im not sure how he didnt accept the Deputy Attorney generals recommendation when they agreed with one another. Reporter if i may switch topics slightly. If you knew if the president knew he was going to do this, why ask for those memos to begin with . Why not just fire comey . Why have these memos put out and explain he did it because of the memos but then say he was going to do it either way . Im confused why he got those memos . Sarah look, i think he wanted to get the feedback from the director of the attorney general who the director of the f. B. I. Reports to. Again, it further solidified the decision he made. The only person that can fire comey was the president. He made that decision. It was clearly the right one as evidence by all of the comments, both by house and senate democrats, republicans, and many people within the f. B. I. I think instead of getting so lost in the process that this happened at 12 01 or 12 02, did he fire him because he wore a red tie or blue tie, he fired him because he didnt fit the job. Its that simple. It shouldnt be a complicated process. The president knew that director comey was not up to the task. He decided he wasnt the right person for the job. He wanted somebody that could bring credibility back to the f. B. I. That had been lost over this last several months. The president made that decision. He made it. He moved forward. It was the right one. I dont think that, you know, the back and forth makes that much difference. Reporter sarah do you follow me . Sarah yes, sorry. Reporter sarah, going back to what you said about democrats. Yes, there are some democrats that said comey should have been fired but theyre questioning the timing. Why now even though the Deputy Attorney general did do that theyre questioning why now . Sarah i think ive answered this. I hate to, again, just keep repeating myself. Were kind of getting lost on the same questions here. He he had decided that he wasnt fit. Theres never going to be a good time to fire someone. Whether its on a tuesday or a friday. He decided he wanted to give director comey a chance. He did. And he felt like he wasnt up to the task. Reporter and then last question. Monday, sean spicer when he was at the podium he said after the testimony with clapper and yates he said he talked about there was no collusion but he said the investigation into russia should continue. Which one is it, should it continue or end because spicer said the president want it had to end monday and then yesterday you said it should continue. Sarah i said we want it to come to its completion. We want it to continue until its finished which wed like to happen soon so we can focus on the things that we think most americans, frankly, care a whole lot more about. I think the people in this room are obsessed with this story a lot more than the people that we talk to and we hear from every day. Wed like to be focused on the problems that they have. Thats the point is wed love for this to be completed. We also want it to be completed with integrity. I think that was one of the other reasons frankly i think the decision the made made was the right one because i think it adds credibility and integrity back to the f. B. I. Where a lot of people frankly were questioning this. Reporter we now know the president fired the f. B. I. Director with six years less on his 10year term because he was a showboater, grandstander. How important is it for the next f. B. I. Director not be a showboater or a grandstander . How important is it that this person show loyalty to the president . Sarah i think the main factor theyre looking for is theyre loyal to the Justice System, theyre loyal to the American People. This president is looking for somebody who can come in that is independent and has the support, i think, across the board, whether its republicans, democrats, members of the f. B. I. And certainly the American People. Again, it wasnt just one thing that caused the president to make this decision. A large part of why he made this decision was because he didnt feel like director comey was up to the job. He had watched it was just an erosion of confidence that he had in his ability to carry out the task that needed to be done. Hes looking for somebody to do that. Jordan. Reporter thank you, sarah. Two questions. First, i want to talk about the rank and file of the f. B. I. Dont you think the acting director of the f. B. I. Has a better handle on the rank and file than you do . Sarah look, i am not going to get a back and forth on who has the better handle. Again, i heard from multiple individuals that are very happy about the president s decision, and i know that it was the right one. I believe that most of the people that weve talked to also believe it was the right decision to make. Reporter and about the meeting yesterday between President Trump and the Russian Foreign minister. Can you walk us through how a photographer from either a russian state news outlet or the russian government got into that meeting and got those photographs out . Sarah yes. The same way they would whoever the president was meeting with when it comes to a foreign minister or a head of state. Both individuals have official photographers in the room. We had an official photographer in the room as did they. Reporter usually independent media in the u. S. Is typically invited into those meetings. Why didnt that happen in this case . Sarah it varies actually. Not always particularly. Sometimes the protocol when it is not the head of state and prior to the president meeting with the head of state that wouldnt always take place. So, again, proper protocol was followed in this procedure. Reporter has the president been questioned by the f. B. I. With regard to their investigation to russian or interference in the election . Sarah not that i am aware of. Reporter does he expect to be . Sarah i havent had the answer to ask that question. I am not trying to guess. Major. Reporter there is a general protocol that discourages conversation with the president of the United States by the f. B. I. Director about anything that might involve the president. Thats a general aspect of the protocol. To ensure there is no confusion about political interference or any kind or even the impression or the appearance of political influence on the f. B. I. Thats the standard procedure. You just sat here said its appropriate for the president to ask if hes under investigation. Why is it appropriate if thats not consistent for the guidelines at the Justice Department to avoid that very encounter . Sarah we talked to, again, several legal scholars weighed in on this and said there was nothing wrong for the president asking that question. Reporter so the department should change their protocol . Sarah i am speaking to the information i have. Its not what i think. Look at the people that followed up the interview. There were multiple attorneys that came on after and specifically stated that it was not inappropriate, it wasnt wrong for the president to do so. So, again, i can only base it off. I am not an attorney. I dont play one on tv. What i can tell you is what i heard from legal minds and people that actually are attorneys and thats their opinion. So i have to trust the Justice System on that fact too. Reporter would you say based on the experience that you and sean and this Communications Office had tuesday and wednesday that you were given all of the best information to relay to the American Public through us and your job is to relay that information to the American Public, were only intermediaries, about what happened with this firing sarah you seem to take a much proactive approach most of the time but i will take intermediaries today. I think we were given the information that we could have at that time. It was a quickmoving process. We took the information we had as best we have it and got it out to the American People as quickly as we could. Reporter and would you say that that information was accurate then or more accurate now . Sarah i would say after having a conversation with the president you dont get much more accurate than that. Reporter by that standard, should reporters and the country essentially wait for a pronouncement from the president before believing that which is stated on his behalf by the White House Communications staff . Sarah look, major, i am not going to get into a back and forth. Like we have to have a direct quote every single time. In this process, i gave you the best information i had at the moment. I still dont think that it contradicts the president s decision. He doesnt want to get lost in the process. Its very simple. Reporter lost in the process, with all respect, sarah. Sarah im answering those questions. Its very simple. The president decided to fire director comey. Nobody else gets to make that decision. And he made it. He stands by it as do the rest of us. Thank you. Mike. Reporter two questions. Following up on the back in i think october of last year, the former president was highly criticized by members of the f. B. I. And other outside of the f. B. I. For making comments on television that were sort of suggested that he had an opinion about how the Hillary Clinton email case should go. And the charge was that he was interfering, that he was putting his thumb on the scale of an ongoing active investigation. There was a lot of criticism from republicans on that. Talk to me how that how what this president did in his series of conversations with the f. B. I. Director doesnt go far beyond what former president obama did and to majors point, how can you argue regardless of maybe some pundits on tv who might be saying otherwise, how can you argue that doesnt have an appearance of trying to influence an investigation thats actively going on . Sarah look, i think the president s encouraged this investigation to take place and complete so we can move forward. Weve been as compliant as possible throughout the entire process. We will continue to do so. Nobody wants this investigation to go forward and complete and end with integrity more than the president. Reporter people clearly want to know which way he wants it to come out. Sarah on the right side. I think he wants it to come out hes very well aware of the actions or actions he did not take. I think hes ready for the rest of you guys to understand that as well. Reporter and one last question just to followup on the f. B. I. Thing. And im not trying to be overly combative here but you said now today and i think you said again yesterday that you personally have talked to countless f. B. I. Officials, employees since this happened. Sarah correct. Reporter like, really . Sarah emails, text messages, absolutely. Reporter 60, 70 . Sarah look, we are not going to get into a numbers game. I heard from a large number of individuals that work at the f. B. I. That said theyre very happy with the president s decision. I dont know what else i can say. Reporter sarah there is a report from multijournal, the Deputy Attorney general [inaudible] correct the versions coming out. Is that accurate . Does that contribute knuckleball does i contribute to that over the last 48 hours . Sarah i am not aware of a specific ask for a correction. I know we want to make sure we get this right and thats been our you know, what we attempted to do all along. Its the reason we sent the update last night. I know there were several questions after the briefing yesterday and i addressed that again in the opening today. Our goal is to get this as right and clear as we can. Reporter did the president know that comey had sought [inaudible] before he made the decision . Sarah no. Based on what ive seen, the department of justice has also pushed back and said thats not accurate. But i would refer you to them. Reporter was it a mistake for the white house to try to pin the decision to fire james comey on Rod Rosenstein . Sarah i dont think so. I think his recommendation, again, it was extremely clear. The president makes the decision. The buck stops with him. Nobodys ever tried to say that this wasnt the president s decision, that he wasnt the one that carried it out and to try to, i think, complate those things is not what took place. We know that the president s been thinking about this for a long time. Wednesday it certainly, i think, expedited that, the directors testimony last wednesday, and then getting the recommendation from the attorney Deputy Attorney general excuse me i think just further solidified the president s decision. Reporter just to clarify one thing you said. The president encouraged this investigation into russia. He wants to see a completion sooner rather than later. How has he encouraged it if he is [inaudible] sarah there are multiple people part of this. You have the house committee, the senate committee. Look, again, the point is we want this to come to its conclusion. We want it to come to its conclusion with integrity and we think by removing director comey taken steps to make that happen. Thanks so much, guys. [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] why not have an independent investigation, then . This morning former First Lady Michelle Obama will talk combating childhood obesity. Combating childhood obesity. Coming up democrat 86 nation nal Committee Chair tom perez discuss how to find common round in washington. Next, newsmakers with chuck grassley. He talks about President Trumps firing of f. B. I. Director james comby, his expectation force the next f. B. I. Director, and Senate Efforts to come up with a health care law. This is 30 minutes