mccabe and director comey know about the emails that were potentially relevant to the clinton administration and do absolutely nothing about it? deputy director mccabe was aware on september 28, the next day. and was notified on multiple ways on multiple occasions, as well on september 29. there was follow-up about that by strzok and others. in between september 29 and october 24 or 25, there was no activity by the midyear team or fbi headquarters. it was only re-instigated on october 21 when the new york field office went to the southern district of new york and said no one is doing anything about this. nearly a month. thank you, mr. horowitz. to clarify, it s unclear exactly what and when director comey knew, because there is
the nondisclosure agreement involving deputy director mccabe. the last i had heard, there was one issue related to this nondisclosure agreement that i thought had been resolved, but i also understand there may be some follow-up. i m going to need to look into that. i would expect that we would make sure that our agreement. jesse: fox news alert. let s listen into white house press secretary sarah sanders at the briefing room. secure the border. congress needs to fix our broken immigration system. to answer your question on this topic, i ve invited secretary of homeland security kirstjen nielsen nus customs i will be backup to take questions on other news. good afternoon. it s my pleasure to be here. i would love to see if i can help explain some of what s going on and give you some of the facts. i know there been a lot but out
corroborating evidence for an intimidation of james comey. and james comey s testimony is arguably pretty consistent on this point. it s director mccabe s statements that might be subject to credibility questions based on his history. but the democrats it s a stinging indictment, not so much of the president in my view, but of the majority republicans and their report. but danny, you bring up a good point because a large chunk of the evidence presented by the intel evidence is based on the testimony. and as you said, it could be a problem because the credibility is questionable following the firing. how do they proceed? how does the house proceed from here? well, that s the problem. i mean, this is not criminal-type investigations like this are not well-suited for congress, and they are especially not well-suited when you have a committee that divides along partisan lines. that s why we find the that s why i find the mueller
it came out that kelly called pruitt and told him to stop campaigning for session s job. it is hard to believe he did this today without talking to kelly. i wonder if kelly and sessions and again i m not defending either of them are trying to work together to prevent trump from firing mueller. it looks ridiculous. unless sessions really felt this was a moment of crises, and even if he felt it, i don t know what he felt about mccabe, that he had to do this to protect and to protect mueller. i m being generous here, i m worried in a sense that makes it clear, if i m wrong trump is politicizing justice and sessions is carrying out trump s
so, we know that we have a president whose called repeatedly on twitter for mccabe s firing. earlier in this week in the white house press briefing, sarah huckabee-sanders was characterizing mccabe as a bad guy. on the other hand we have career people in the department, folks like michael horwitz, he s worked for both administrations, a straightforward kind of guy and the folks in the office of professional responsibility. people in the deputy attorney general s office who really look at these issues with the long view. consistency in the department across a long period of time. what we have is a conflict of that professional process with this very political context. there s no reason that the attorney general had to fire andy mccabe tonight on a friday night at 10:00 at night.