Russia hearing: Comey says no information to confirm Trump's wiretap claims – as it happened

Or wait... should that be, Comey refuses to deny Trump is being personally investigated?

The Democrats are using the hearing, currently, about Trump family and business activities in Russia. Republicans have used the hearing to raise an alarm about leaks of classified information and to question the motives of the FBI investigation. Both vectors have prompted a lot of “I’m not going to answer that / I can’t answer that” from the witnesses.

Trump continues to spread misinformation about today’s testimony.

What Comey actually said: The White House cannot unmask surveillance targets. “The White House can make similar requests [to unmask the identity of surveillance targets] but they can’t on their own collect, so they can’t on their own unmask.”

What Trump says Comey said: Comey admits White House can unmask citizens:

Press secretary Sean Spicer has begun his briefing. He claims the ongoing intelligence hearing has revealed that there’s no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion. Of course no such conclusion has been aired at the hearing. What we’ve learned is that the FBI has undertaken an investigation. This is not a subtle distinction.

OK we’re back. Comey tells Schiff, the Democratic ranking member, that the FBI prioritizes cases it investigates. He repeats that it would not be appropriate for the FBI to follow up with reporters on stories touching on classified information. (Although that’s been known to happen.)

Rep Wenstrup, Republican of Ohio, asks Comey whether he can meet with the Iraqi ambassador, or will that bring him under FBI investigation?

The implication that Flynn’s or Stone’s or Manafort’s or Sessions’ or Page’s or whoever’s contacts with Russian operatives was small peanuts, the equivalent of a routine meeting any government figure might have with any foreign party, undeserving of investigation.

Comey says the FBI does not issue advisory opinions.

Wenstrup asks Comey whether he knows who leaked information about Flynn. Or whether the NY Times was misled in its pertinent reports.

Comey can’t comment. He won’t confirm accuracy of information in article, he won’t confirm details of investigation, he won’t [he’s interrupted].

Wenstrup: Is it possible that a so-called source to a media outlet may actually be a Russian advocate?

[Reds, reds, everywhere...]

Comey: In general? Sure. Somebody can always be something they’re intending to not.

Comey asks to pee. Permission granted.

Rep Turner, Republican of Ohio, notes that Russia, if they want to cloud American democracy, must be very happy with Comey’s announcement of an investigation into the Trump campaign’s contacts with Russia.

That seems like a fair assessment. Probably the best news they’ve gotten since... November?

Turner asks what it takes to open a counter-intelligence investigation. Is a picture with a foreign official enough?

Comey: It depends.

Turner: Let’s say it’s not clandestine. Let’s assume no intention of covertly. Is just a picture enough to spark an investigation?

Comey: Doesn’t strike me as enough. But this is hypothetical.

Turner: What about attending a conference.

Comey: I can’t say as I sit here, it would depend on a lot of different things.

They go back and forth a few times. Turner says, “I’m very concerned about the issue of how an investigation is opened.” He tells Comey to make his investigation quick because it could imperil American democracy. Not the activity under investigation, mind you – the investigation.

Here’s another video clip, of a key moment from this morning. Nunes, the Republican chairman of the committee, admitted as much at the top of the hearing: Trump’s wire tapping claim is bushwa.

Here’s a selection from our news coverage so far of these hearings:

Trump tweets a second moment from this morning’s hearing.

Our original coverage of the section is here. Nunes was asking Rogers and then Comey whether Russia had succeed in altering vote totals in various swing states.

The intelligence directors said no, Russia had not succeeded in altering vote totals.

Trump frames the moment falsely. He says the directors testified that “Russia did not influence the electoral process.”

Does the electoral process include information-dissemination by the media and -gathering by voters? In that case, the directors said the exact opposite. Comey declared at the top of the hearing that the FBI was investigating Russian interference in the election and the Trump campaign role. A bit later this morning, there was this exchange between Democratic Rep Himes and the witnesses:

Himes wonders whether “Russian hacking” refers to the fact that the intelligence community believes that Russians penetrated DNC and Podesta, stole info and disseminated it.

Is that a fair characterization?

Yes sir, says Rogers.

But Rogers did not analyze whether that activity affected the election outcome.

Of course you didn’t, Himes said.

Precisely as Trump was asserting that the intelligence chiefs had denied Russian influence, Comey and Rogers were testifying that Russian interference in the election had been “unusually loud,” as if the whole point of the interference was to destroy the credibility of American democracy by encouraging the intelligence community to flag the activity.

Something else that might erode faith in American democracy: the president running a misinformation campaign that renders sworn testimony by intelligence chiefs incoherent.