a senior obama administration source. with me here still is jeffrey toobin. that's a little bit of what we were wondering allowed before we went to break exactly what the warning was relating to. >> i think it's clear that president obama understood that president trump was going to appoint people with different policy views than the obama administration. he was not going to warn him away from people who simply had different policy views. this is an -- his concern as jake tapper has learned more specifically now related to mike flynn's relationship with russia. which ultimately led to his departure a little more than three weeks into the administration. but the fact that donald trump would ignore that advice is yet another example of how the trump administration and donald trump himself have looked the other way where russia is concerned. >> it also makes me wonder what does that say also about the vetting that was under way? we played a sound bite earlier of john kelly. when i became secretary of homeland security, my la

given the highest clearance by the obama administration. we have talked about that time and again. it was in this briefing room a couple weeks ago where sean spicer was trying to make the case that listen, yes, there was some vetting that went on inside the trump transition but they were relying on the obama administration which had done a security clearance on michael flynn in the early months of 2016. and they were essentially saying and president trump is essentially saying in his tweet this morning why would we have to worry about michael flynn when he was vetted by and cleared by the obama administration? so it's not too surprising i think that, you know, when you hear these statements coming from the trump white house time and again that obama had given the skruecurity clearance, it w going to happen that obama officials were going to say by the way president obama warned president trump about michael flynn two days after he was electric elected president of the united states. president obama has with the exception of last night's rem

but the point you have to ask yourself is, if the obama administration or under the obama administration, if they reissued one of the highest security clearances that you can get, knowing what they knew then, and didn't do anything to take a proactive step to suspend it in any way, shape or form, the question is, if they were concerned, why didn't they take any steps? they're the ones who had at that point all the access and all the knowledge to everything that was on his security clearance form, not us. so if president obama or anyone else in the government was concerned, the question should be asked, what did they do? and if nothing, then why not if they really truly were concerned? that is a fair question. dave, dave, dave, dave. >> sean, over the weekend, north korea detained the fourth u.s. citizen. are you concerned that they're trying to escalate tensions even further? do you consider these americans hostages? and what are you doing diplomatically, back channel or otherwise, to get them released? >> obviously ts is concerning. we're well aware of this an we're going to work throug

the clinton administration did it, the obama administration certainly did it. the extreme ideologue, and republicans, and so they issued about a 19 page memo with a bunch of marching orders to the university which they claimed were based on title ix, sex discrimination. in fact, they were perversion and a violation of title ix, that's my interpretation, but the five specific things were you must adopt the lowest possible burden of proof, preponderance means if it's a tossup, put a feather on the women's side of the scales, the plaintiffs cited this government is guilty. a lot of colleges had previously had kind of an in between clear and convincing evidence, not the criminal standard. this loads the dice. it's not quite presumption of innocence, guilt all by itself but when you combine it with the others it is. no cross-examination. they made this kind of, they said you better not cross-examine in 2011 and in 2014 it up the ante to if you allow cross-examination then you're violating title ix may be just by doing that. >> host: you mean the accused person havin

, we imo knew there were criminal offenses. >> obama administration whatever you think of president obama, or any of the officials of his administration, they were if you would they were certainly without any question gathered together solidarity, they di did not decent, there was no leaking permitted, prosecutions by the way of those who did, this administration, has been defied by the fbi itself. by other intelligence age agency and refusal to report to the administration, those who are leaking and to pursue consequences. we are watching. i am heartened to hear you say, that this is an an attempt by what you style as a iron triangle to steal this white house, and to seize his history. a coop attempt against the trump administration. >> the issue is american people elected donald trump president could we have permanent elements in our government who think that really they are supposed to run this show. and since they don't like trump, they don't like you know his positions, they think it is okay for them to go outside of the law, and exert themselves, and understand how felonies have bee

looks as if it was abused by the obama administration. what i think we ought to be thinking about is how do you institute new mechanisms that will be, and oversight perhaps from congress but from also the courts. so that it's not abused in the future. i am worried were going to be obsessed with who did what to whom when, looking to find scapegoats and to retroactively put the obama administration on trial. there are probably abuses that ought to be exposed and people punished but that's not the major issue. the major issue, we are in the new age. we have new capacities. how do you harness it? >> bret: if there is evidence of a political element, it changes the dynamic of what we've been covering. >> it would but i think it's important to think of this, one of the things that came out was that the cia was responsible for most of the violations. that happened in the '70s when it came out that the cia was spying on americans. we had hearings to make sure we are protecting the rights of americans. that does need to happen. we just came out of

the obama administration certainly did. so, the extreme ideologue so they issued marching orders to the universities that were claimed to be on title 9 dissemination in fact they were in a violation that is my interpretation that the five specific things were you must adopt the lowest possible burden of proof preponderance that means if it is a tossup we will put a feather on the side of the scale than he is guilty, period. a lot of colleges especially have previously had kind of been in between clear and convincing evidence. it doesn't quite a presumption of innocence or guilt all by itself but when combined with others, it is. no cross examination. then they upped the ante to if you allow cross-examination then you are violating it. just by doing that. >> you mean the accused person having the right to cross-examine. >> exactly. basically not only the accused person but nobody on the half, not a lawyer or a representative could cross-examine and generally cannot cross-examine any other witnesses either. taking that away i

this comes from extreme feminist edge because pushed ahead by the obama administration for political reasons then suddenly for reasons i can describe every campus receives money not only if the woman complains or of the roommates best friend complains they get to the bottomhave investigation ever the adjudication and was designed to presume guilt. >> host: so we will come back to your comments later. >> the case that you will print the book with. so give us the highlights there were so many cases we could have led with 30 or 40 would suffice. we thought this was the one of the worst or emblematic if there was a sexual assault in this case but the way am hearst saw it it was the claim they assaulted the woman in that is typical of what goes on and she had a motive to make up the ideas that he assaulted her. >> host: so back up and give the basics. >> the guy and a woman who did not know each other well did not know each other started to make out and he was blackout drunken did not remember anything associate manner stirred oral sex to him for whatever reason then she had had enough an

the trump administration said they are going to pin it on obama. there are going to be many more questions about flynn's activities and why president trump still felt like he was a good fit for this job. >> he was also deputy secretary of state. tony, let's start by getting your reaction to the news tr former obama administration officials that it the former president himself warned mr. trump in person only two days after the november 8th election against hiring michael flynn. >> i don't have any direct knowledge of that warning. it wouldn't surprise me. i think if the president knowing -- president obama thoughing flynn was not a good manager of the defense intelligence agency and that's why he was let go and knowing he was tapped to be national security adviser wouldn't surprise me that came up in conversation, but i don't have direct knowledge of that. >> what about the argument from sean spicer that in april of 2016, the obama administration renewed his security clearances. >> it's a huge effort and distraction. in april 2016 flynn was no longe

is this latest distinction, mercedes from the obama administration, president obama himself purportedly he had given the new president to be a heads up on general flynn a game changer? how would you describe it? >> i don't see this comment from these obama administration officials to be necessarily a game-changer in any way. i think that president trump at the time did have faith in michael flynn. i do believe that following what we have seen in these events that happened in the months, in january, february, where flynn had to resign, flynn continues to be that reoccurring nightmare that does not to away for the

i'm not at all surprise that had the obama administration was prepared to flout the rules. look, their core model was a radicalism going back in which middle-class rules and middle-class laws don't out. we ought to take seriously what their intellectually pedigree is. i do believe this administration ought to be more aggressive in going after these things and more aggressive in going after these leaks. you have a news media that's totally out of control and thinks it's more important than the president of the united states, more important than the constitution, it's more important than the rule of lu and at some point they'll be collision over that and i actually applaud what the president said in the last few days, i think it'll be healthy for the white house press corps to not have a daily opportunity to taunt whoever the spokesperson is. the game that we now have going on is really sick. maria: right. >> it weakness the ability of the american people to know what's going on. maria: i'm wondering if that's one of the reasons the president fired james comey because we are

flynn was no longer working for the obama administration. he had been let go in 2014. >> president trump repeatedly defended flynn since firing the general himself. he tweeted mike flynn should ask for immunity and this is a witch hunt. similar to the complaint the president aired two days after he showed flynn the door. >> i think he has been treated very, very unfairly by the media. as i call it the fake media in many cases. and i think it is really a sad thing that he was treat sewed badly. >> i'm pleased to appear before you this afternoon. >> the president has questioned the cred wilt of former acting attorney sally yates who raised internal questions about flynn and warned the white house before she was fired by mr. trump over a different matter. he tweeted, ask sally yates under oath if she knows how classified information got into the newspapers soon after she explained it to white house council. >> does the president believe that sally yates was the leaker? this -- >> again, i think the tweet speaks for itself. what he is saying is

three obama administration officials are confirming that. much more throughout the day as we lead to the critical testimony on the hill. >>> but coming up, the hard sell back home. house republicans are getting an earful from constituents after that close first vote to repeal and replace obamacare. congressman lou meyer who voted yes joins me for what this means for the people in his party in the home state of missouri. >>> plus, a look at the wider ramifications of the france presidential vote of the party over the alt-right. start your day with the number one choice of dentists. philips sonicare removes significantly more plaque versus oral-b 7000. experience this amazing feel of clean. innovation and you. philips sonicare. save now when you buy philips sonicare. >>> we are following breaking news that came to us via the nbc news team. we are told that president obama actually warned president donald trump against hiring michael flynn as his national security adviser. this coming on a critical day at the hill when the former acting attorne

the obama administration didn't bring one person. it was entirely their right not to bring anyone to guantanamo. so there has been no isis member brought to guantanamo. and so, i think we prudently concluded that the litigation risk is well above zero, that certainty is better than lack of certainty, which stephen and others have stressed, and the senator has stressed, it was kind of him to do so. i don't know what charlie and stephen think, whether they have read the paper, but i think when you look at the litigation, just abeus litigation and you look at these isis members, i don't know who they are. i haven't been in the government for a long period of time. i can imagine that trying to connect the dots as a government lawyer between this particular isis member back to the people who could fall squarely under aumf, that might be a heavy lift for a government lawyer to do. so that is the conclusion. to your second part of your question, i don't know what this administration is going to do with respect to the periodic review board.

murray, you mentioned 63,000 jobs lost over the course of the obama administration. the latest jobs number from the bureau of labor statistics, only 72,600 jobs in the coal industry right now. do you expect that those 63,000 jobs to come back, almost doubling the coal employment? >> john, president trump by killing the ill-fated so-called clean power plant has already saved 25,000 coal mining jobs. yes, we've lost 63,000 coal mining jobs times 11. that's about 40,000 jobs in america under the democrats and obama the last eight years. the killing of the clean power plant already done by mr. trump saved the closing of 56,000 more coal-fired units on top of the 411 that mr. obama closed, illegally most of them. >> when you say illegally -- >> that saved 25,000 coal mining jobs. we've calculated that he's already saved 25,000. he will bring the economy back as he brings manufacturing to the united states. coal would grow with that because our coal-fired electricity is one-sixth the cost of a windmill or a solar panel and one-fourth the cost of electricity from natural ga

, we imo knew there were criminal offenses. >> obama administration whatever you think of president obama, or any of the officials of his administration, they were if you would they were certainly without any question gathered together solidarity, they di did not decent, there was no leaking permitted, prosecutions by the way of those who did, this administration, has been defied by the fbitself. by other intelligence age agency and refusal to report to the administration, those who are leaking and to pursue consequences. we are watching. i am heartened to hear you say, that this is an an attempt by what you style as a iron triangle to steal this white house, and to seize his history. a coop attempt against the trump administration. >> the issue is american people elected donald trump president could we have permanent elements in our government who think that really they are supposed to run this show. and since they don't like trump, they don't like you know his positions, they think it is okay for them to go outside of the law, and exert themselves, and understand how felonies have been

that is what the obama administration actually reported. it was underreported by a factor of more than three. in 2015 they were 2200 unmasking that the obama administration misreported. the trump administration just corrected it. there are much higher in 2015 and 2016. >> sean: john, this is an important question. >> that's a pretty big -- a large gap. someone is not good at math at the dni. >> sean: sara, let's go through this very closely. this is so important and i think americans need to know. if the nsa -- by the way, i have great respect for our intelligence community. their job is beyond risky. their job is to make sure that protecting our country, they have the right to surveilled a russian ambassador or in iranian investor. in the process of doing that, if an american is caught up in a conversation they are surveilling, they have a process called minimization. they are supposed to minimize what they know about the american, as long as they are not involved in sabotage or some type of nefarious activities against america. they minim

he said what happened under the obama administration would not happen under his administration. and we just haven't seen that. >> sreenivasan: what is the difference between what has been happening and what was on the books in terms of regulations or restrictions that the obama administration had put on eisen forcement and how they should prioritize who to round up and deport? >> well, the obama administration, we've reported this, deported a lot of people who had never committed a crime, got a lot of criticism for doing that and over time, the obama administration issued memos that sought to curtail exactly the types of folks immigration officials could arrest and deport. and in 2014, late 2014, that really took affect. you can see the number of noncriminals, and overall deportations going down the last couple of nears with his administration. >> sreenivasan: is there a chilling effect in terms of people that are coming forward, say whistle-blowers or witnesses to crimes or maybe even victims for fear that they will be deported in the process? >> well, at least two cities, los

there had been criticisms even from democrats that the obama administration did not do enough to respond to what russia was doing, did not do enough to publicly call attention to what russia was doing. when fbi director jim comey testified to the committee, he confirmed that he proposed in august of last year writing and not that essentially calling the russians out for efforts to appear in elections, but the obama administration turned that down, offered a 4 -- a statement in october, a few weeks before the presidential election and then did not put out a detailed accounting of what the u.s. intelligence community believed happened. before president obama left office. i expect he will offer some of that chronology and a defense of trump officials. i believe he said publicly he byer saw an active collusion the trump administration or trump transition or campaign officials with the russians. instead, he said it was more a question of russians taking various approaches and making inroads rather than any wrongdoing. hearinglking about this featuring james clapper. 2:30 this afternoon is whe

during the obama administration it was a year-long process where you had government industry come to the table and work together to develop the framework. basically it is a series of best practices of how to do cyber security the right way. it's a process they make and have in place so that you are , the best you can practices for how to do cyber security the right way. >> our guest is the cochair of the cyber security caucus and is joined by tim stark a politico and john donnelly, cq roll call. what do we do about actors in cyber security from other countries question mark will we always be taking a defensive posture? against the actors who perform these acts against the united states? >> we want to have cyber defenses as strong as possible area there are things that we need to do to better protect and inoculate us from cyber attacks going forward. i would love to see more international operation in developing the rules of the road, if you will. it would help us to better coordinate with robust information sharing, country to country, like we do with israel. i was there last may in

a lot of programs are not reauthorized, people in the obama administration, and obama holown hold overs, they really cause i think a lot of damage even beyond immediate political cur of i fluffel. >> two questions, right now it looks like most abused program of that which we know, which is in public view, but -- what happened to american citizens, what has been done politically talk about weaponize intelligence that is an example. >> congress will not reauthorize this right now until we get answers about how this information was used. if we get answers we get prosecutions so people know you can't just use this mompl information, then maybe you will be able to reauthorize, right now, i believe you will see resistance on both sides of the aisle. lou: th is up opennas produce -- subpoenas producing documents is that sufficient? >> i think this is a hopeful sign, when comey testified in march, he talked about russian investigation, he would not acknowledge they were looking into the leaks, this is really first time we know that there is concrete steps taken to get ought the unmasking and at

the obama administration spent $1.2 billion against me personally. to silence me over the last eight years. that is taxpayer money. they spend $158 million in public relations. that was taxpayer money. so the information that people get in connecticut is often very skewed. because we can't get the information out there is that they cannot afford it. we are fortunate to keep our people working.and to keep the coal at 32 percent of the energy mix where it is right now. from the 52 percent were started under president obama. >> we want to give me a chance to talk to as many callers as possible. we have a special line for the rest of the program today for coal miners and family members of coal miners, june is on that line in brooksville florida. good morning. >> good morning. sarah, i would like to say thank you for what you have done for my family. i am 74 years old. my grandfather and great-grandfather came over and had their own little coal mines. we had been coal miners all of our lives without it, we would not have survived. i can remember when i wa

lou: a new reported exposes obama administration's shocking abuse of power. circa news reporting obama's national security agency spied on american citizens with impunity, violated the constitution, and received a free pass from left wing national media for 8 fue full years, more than one out of 20 internet 70s conducted by nsa violated u.s. private information laws, fox news chief in washington correspondent, james rosen has our report. reporter: -- day president obama visited los angeles, last october to yuck it up with jimmy kimmel, lawyers for national security agency were quietly informing court that nsa ha systemicly violated rights of khan less americans. -- countless americans, a subject covered on kimmel's program. >> people expect the government to monitor this enough to protect them from bad guys, but, they worry that if government is in their too much then that who will protect them from government. reporter: declassified documents obtained by circa show fiso court rebuked the administration with greater frequency than previously disclosed to cour

the obama administration? >> yet another thing in this story that sort of defies logic. the presumption is one you sort of alluded is presuming he was speaking over open communications. if kilts kislyak was speaking over open lines, then i can guarantee what he said cannot be taken at face value. if he was not over open communications, that's another matter. the other thing is the russians would never agree to have an american, especially, you know, somebody like kushner, who is going to be part of the incoming administration sit down in front of some sort of russian communications system and communicate securely back to moscow. it would expose secrets the russians would never want to expose, and why? he could simply sit with the ambassador, convey his information and the ambassador himself could convey that information securely back to moscow. so there's a whole lot that just doesn't make a whole lot of sense why in this interim period ambassador -- professor dershowitz was correct. you have this period after

three former obama administration officials say president obama warned president-elect trump against hiring flynn when they met at the white house two days after the election. >> my number one priority in the coming two months is to try to facilitate a transition that insures our president-elect is successful. >> we discussed a lot of different situations. some wonderful and some difficulties. >> this afternoon, another major voice will be heard from. former acting attorney general sally yates will testify to the senate about her warnings to the white house about flynn's russia connections. today, president trump tweeted in defense of flynn, quote, general flynn was given the highest security clearance by the obama administration. but the fake news seldom likes talking about that. joining me now, nbc's kristen welker at the white house and two national security analysts, jeremy bash, the former chief of staff at the cia and pentagon to leon panetta, and ned price, a former cia analyst. first to you, kristen. you and your team at the white house breaking the story today. what do we kn

administration officials point out flynn was in fact fired by the obama administration over the contention management style. >> it's a huge effort at zrask wolf in april 2016 mr. flynn was no longer working for the osh administration he had been let go in 2016 o 2014. >> president trump repeatedly defended flynn since firing the general himself np in late march mike flynn should ask if for immunity this is a witch hunt excuse more big election loss by media and demless of historic proportion similar to the complaint the president aired after he showed flynn the. >>reporter: he has been treated very unfairly by the media, as i call it the fake media in many cases. and i think it's really a sad thing that he was treated so badly. >> i'm pleased to appear you this afternoon. >> the president also questioned the credibility of sally yates who raised internal questions about flynn and warned the white house before fired by mr. trump over a different matter. he tweeted ask sally yates if she knows somehow classified information soon after he explained to the white house counsel. >> does the pres

the point you have to ask yourself, if you -- if the obama administration are or under the obama administration if the reissued one of the highest security clearances you can get, knowinger what they knew then, and then didn't do anything to take a pro-active step to suspended any way, shape or form, the question you have to askoffs if they were concerned, why didn't they take any steps? they're the ones who had at that point all the access and all the knowledge to everything on the security clearance, not us. so if president obama or anyone else frankly in the government was concerned, the question should be asked, what did they do and if nothing, then why not if they truly were concerned. think that is a fair question. dave. >> [overlapping speakers] >> over the week -- >> over the weekend, north korea detained the fourth u.s. citizen. are you concerned that they're trying to escalate tensions even further? do you consider these americans hostages and what are you doing diplomatically, back channel or otherwise, to next released. >> obviously this is concerning. we're well aware of it. and we

as was the sternness of the rebuke to the obama administration over by the fisa court. ordinarily approves 99.9% of requests for surveillance. the story had not been covered on "the washington post," "new york times," or in the of the three nightly news broadcasts. >> bret: amazing. former president obama is defending his actions or inactions in syria. he told an audience in germany that not bombing syria after president bowsher al-assad crossed the redline took political courage. >> i look at a place like syria where despite our best efforts, and this is something angela and i worked on a lot. you still have a vicious war taking place, you still have millions of people displaced, hundreds of thousands killed, and as president i did not always have the tools that i wanted to affect those changes but at least we tried. >> bret: a few days ago when mr. obama made a similar statement about not bombing syria, lindsey graham replied "what president obama calls political courage most everyone else calls weakness and poor judgment." the pentagon says more than 100 civilians we

six years of the obama administration. monday night on the jeffrey ands we ask chris lewis, vice president at public knowledge, their thoughts the proposal of >> we think the rule that in the net neutrality rules are working. overwhelming majority of americans want to have clear and openher protective internet. we're concerned he's going town a path to repeal some or all the rules. >> from the internet's the day the rules were passed, the internet was free and open. problem.n't a controlled was no interpret with ips's or anybody ability toering with post content or look at the content of their choice. communicators" 2.day night on c-span announcer: this week on "q&a," law professor and author brad snyder discusses his book "the house of truth, a washington political salon and the foundations of american liberalism." brian: brad snyder, your book is called "the house of truth." where did you get the title? mr. snyder: the title is what the people l

the obama administration didn't bring one person. so there has been no isis member brought to guantÁnamo. and so, i think we prudently concluded that the litigation risk is well above zero, that certainty is better than lack of certainty, which stephen and others have stress which is very kind of them to do so. i don't know what charlie and steven pinker whether they have read the paper, but i think when you look at the litigation, just the easiest litigation and you look at who these isis member sorry, i don't know who they are. i haven't been in the government for a long period of time. i can imagine that trying to connect the dots as a government lawyer between this particular isis member back to the people who could fall squarely under the 2000 au of mass might be a heavy lift for a government lawyer to do. so that is the conclusion. to your second part of your question, i don't know what this administration is going to do with respect to the periodic review board. we had periodic reviews as you know during the bush administrati

the obama administration has helped give them a face-saving way out. it remains to be seen whether or not the trump administration is even willing to entertain the idea of using direct diplomacy or multilateral diplomacy to help find a way out of this particular problem. as it pertains to the legacy of 2009, you don't have to take my word for it. iranian voters have twice utilized present ronnie's campaign as a way to continue channeling what they thought in 2009 and 2013 and now 2017. the election was not a landslide, it was a bloodbath. he won in the provinces and the local election, he won in his rivaled home cities, he iran and one in all of the holy cities. rouhani won not only the vote he also won in the local council election. a woman one in the local council election. we have to understand the magnitude of this victory, understanding full well there are unelected officials who will try to put up tools and roadblocks, but the point i want to make is if we can acknowledge that sitting here in washington d.c., you better believe iranian voters who

administration officials point out that flynn was in fact fired by the obama administration for his contentious management style. >> in 2015, flynn was not working for the obama m, he was fired in 2014. >> reporter: in late march, the president detailed that mike flynn should ask for immunity. that this is a witch hunt. >> i think he's been treated very, very unfairly by the media, as i call it the fake media, in many cases. and i think it's really a sad thing that he was treated so badly. >> i'm pleased to appear before you this afternoon. >> reporter: the president has also questioned the former acting attorney general sally yates. he tweeted, ask sally yates under oath if she knows how classified information got into the newspapers soon after she explained it to white house counsel. >> does the president believe that sally yates was the leaker? >> again, the tweet speaks for itself. what he's saying is that the senate should ask those questions. >> reporter: the president isn't saying much about his own efforts to vet the national security advisor. but that the trump administrati

that occurred while the obama administration was still in office. if democrat are concerned, it shouldn't be with us, it should be the system under the obama administration that processed that clearance. for the democrats to take pot shots at us for a system that was in place that adjudicated his security clearance in 2015, they are misdirecting the question. howie: do you sense a change in attitude in if the press corps as a whole with this president from the beginning to now? any softening? shiewn shiewn sean: i think soms have done a good job who seek to get the facts straight or tell stories that are critical but fair. and lay out the facts as they are. but some continue to have an agenda and use the briefing to get on television or get clips on twitter. howie: the president told the associated press he has stopped watching cnn and msnbc because he believes they are so unfair to him. my question is, has he really stopped? and do you agree they are egregiously unfair to the president. sean: i know he watches a lot of fox. a lot of the cases, they

is this latest distinction, mercedes from the obama administration, president obama himself purportedly he had given the new president to be a heads up on general flynn a game changer? how would you describe it? >> i don't see this comment from these obama administration officials to be necessarily a game-changer in any way. i think that president trump at the time did have faith in michael flynn. i do believe that following what we have seen in these events that happened in the months, in january, february, where flynn had to resign, flynn continues to be that reoccurring nightmare that does not to away for the trump administration. we're all anticipating see what happens with the sally yates testimony which i think will be very telling in terms of these warnings that were given to the trump administration. but i just don't see it necessarily, what this actually brings what is a game-changer, after the president and his team said no longer they had trust in michael flynn and released him. neil: when you say things change in the white house, you haven't changed, the original argument wa

it begs the question, why did not obama administration approve his security clearance? >> the answer is that security clearances are different than the very intense vetting, separate vetting you need to become national security adviser to the president. yes, he had security clearances, once director of defense intelligence agency, three-star general. he obviously had security clearance us but you need a separate round of vetting to become national security adviser to the president. >> yes. and that was done in the obama administration. >> no, no, no -- >> yes, wolf -- show me the documents. if you think the answer to that -- if you think you have the answer and i don't yb th, t share it with me. we did parties nate a classified briefings. and mr. cummings was sitting right at my side. i think i got a pretty good briefing on this. and that is really the obama administration. >> your colleague, congressman cummings, he is calleding on you to subpoena those white house documents, specific white house documents, as far as vetting of general flynn is concerned. are you ready

sean spicer wrapping up conference moment ago and made the point that the obama administration is the one who made general flynn security clearances to begin with. so does this suggest that this is nothing other than one giant political witch hunt that the democrats are salivating at. i want to go blake berman. blake: the press secretary sean spicer wrapped briefing and confirmed that, indeed, then president elect trump sat down with president obama here at the white house in the oval office, just a couple of days after the election that president obama did warn the incoming president, hey, you shouldn't go about hiring michael flynn and days after that president trump hired flynn. that shouldn't be any surprise because as we know, then president obama who was not a fan of flynn. watch. >> president obama made it known that he wasn't exactly a fan of general flynn which shouldn't come to a surprise given that general flynn had worked for president obama with an outspoken critic of president obama'ortcomings specifically related to lack of strategy confronting isis and other threats ar

that is what the obama administration actually u reported. it was underreported by a factor of more than three. in 2015 they were 2200 unmasking that the obama administration misreported. the trump administration just corrected it. there are much higher in 2015 and 2016.at >> sean: john, this is an important question. >> that's a pretty big -- a large gap. someone is not good at math at the dni. >> sean: sara, let's go through this very closely. this is so important and i think americans need to know. if the nsa -- by the way, i have great respect for our intelligence community.ed their job is beyond risky. their job is to make sure that protecting our country, they have the right to surveilled a russian ambassador or an iranian ambassador. in the process of doing that, if an american is caught up in ass conversation they are surveilling, they have a process called minimization. they are supposed to minimize what they know about the american, as long as they are not involved in sabotage or some type of nefarious activities against america. th

to be fair here, do people believe the obama administration handled it properly? >> yeah, i think there were a few different red flags. one that he seemed to be going against transition officials, his own transition officials' warnings about contacts with russia, and they were warning him about possible monitoring of those conversations with the russian ambassador and he should have known that anyway. his background is in defense and intelligence so it's unclear why that didn't put a stop to some of this. and it's also interesting that it shows that the obama administration was being cautious as well about the information th we handing off to the trump transition team, particularly regarding the response of russian sanctions and the expulsion of diplomats over the russian hacking incident. it said that information was not disclosed to the transition official because they were concerned about potential leaks to russia, so that's all a bit of a new twist in the story. no new big bombshells but more information painting a bigger, broader picture of what was happening

why did the obama administration first put forward the theory that was described? i think that resonates with something else in the senator's remarks, which is that he didn't actually say it was necessary. in his first argument for why congress should now do this, it will make the troops feel better, we're behind them, which is a very soft argument. an aesthetically nice thing to do and maybe if the trump administration wants to bring in isis detainee to guantanamo, it would remove some of the litigation risk of whether the authority does extend to this kind of a detainee. he didn't say -- he was unwilling to say, that authority does not cover the war. this is an unconstitutional thing that now two presidents have been engaged in and we've got to clean it up and do our constitutional duty by providing real authority for this thing that has been happening for 2 1/2 years. i think the reason he didn't do that is he doesn't trust congress to do its job. he doesn't want to go out on a limb and say, if you don't, this war has to end, it is unconstitutional. in the same

jobs lostned 63,000 over the course of the obama administration. the latest jobs number from the bureau of labor statistics says there's only 72,600 jobs in the coal industry right now. do you expect those 63,000 jobs to come back, almost doubling the coal employment? trump, byn, president killing the ill-fated, so-called clean power plant, has already saved 25,000 coal mining jobs. yes, we have lost 63,000 coal mining jobs times 11. that's about 40,000 jobs in america under the democrats and obama the last eight years. killing of the power plant already done by mr. trump saved the closing of 56,000 more coal-fired units on top of the 411 coal-fired units that mr. obama closed illegally, most of the. m. that saved 25,000 coal mining jobs. a would've gone on down with 63,000 plus another 25,000. we calculated he has already 25,000. he will bring the economy back as he brings manufacturing to the united states. with thatgrow because our coal-fired electricity is 1/6 the cost of a wind or solar panel and one fourth the cost of electricity from natural