Thirteen Russians and three Russian entities were charged Friday with an elaborate plot to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, federal prosecutors announced Friday.

The indictment, brought by the office of special counsel Robert Mueller, alleges that Russians used bogus social media postings and advertisements fraudulently purchased in the name of Americans to sway political opinion during the race between Republican Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent.

The charges are the most direct allegation to date of illegal Russian meddling in the election.

The goal, the indictment says, was to "sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 presidential election."

Charges include conspiracy, wire fraud, bank fraud and aggravated identity theft.

The charges arise from Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the election and whether there was improper coordination between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Before Friday, four people, including Trump's former national security adviser and former campaign chairman, had been charged in Mueller's investigation.

The White House had no immediate response to the indictment.

Washington DC - 16 February 2018

1. Wide, Rosenstein walking into news conference

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General:

"A grand jury in the District of Columbia today returned an indictment presented by the special counsel's office. The indictment charges 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies for committing federal crimes while seeking to interfere in the United States political system including the 2016 presidential election. The defendants allegedly conducted what they called information warfare against the United States with the stated goal of spreading distrust toward the candidates and the political system in general. According to the allegations in the indictment 12 of the individual defendants worked at various times for a company called Internet Research Agency LLC, a Russian company based in St. Petersburg. The other individual defendant Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin funded the conspiracy through companies known as Concord Management and Consulting LLC, Concord catering and many affiliates and subsidiaries.

3. Cutaway reporters

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General:

"Two of the defendants allegedly traveled to the United States in 2014 to collect intelligence for their American influence operations. In order to hide the Russian origins of their activities, the defendants allegedly purchased space on computer servers located here in the United States in order to set up a virtual private network. The defendants allegedly use that infrastructure to establish hundreds of accounts on social media networks such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, making it appear that those accounts were controlled by persons located in the United States."

5. Wide, Rosenstein speaking

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General:

"The indictment includes eight criminal counts. Count one alleges a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States by all of the defendants. The defendants allegedly conspired to defraud America by impairing the lawful functions of the Federal Election Commission, the United States Department of Justice and the Department of State. Those organizations of the U.S. government are responsible for administering federal requirements for disclosure of foreign involvement in certain domestic activities. Count two charges conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud by Internet Research Agency and two of the individual defendants. Counts three through eight charge aggravated identity theft by Internet Research Agency and four individuals. Now there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charge conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election. I want to caution you that everyone charged with a crime is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court. At trial prosecutors must introduce credible evidence that is sufficient to prove each defendant guilty beyond any reasonable doubt to a unanimous jury. Special Counsel's investigation is ongoing. There will be no comments from the special counsel at this time. "

7. Cutaway

8. SOUNDBITE (English) Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General

"This indictment serves as a reminder that people are not always who they appear to be on the Internet. The indictment alleges that the Russian conspirators want to promote discord in the United States and undermine public confidence in democracy. We must not allow them to succeed. The Department of Justice will continue to work cooperatively with other law enforcement and intelligence agencies and with the Congress to defend our nation against similar current and future efforts."

9. Mid, Rosenstein walking out

Thirteen Russians and three Russian entities were charged Friday with an elaborate plot to interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, federal prosecutors announced Friday.

The indictment, brought by the office of special counsel Robert Mueller, alleges that Russians used bogus social media postings and advertisements fraudulently purchased in the name of Americans to sway political opinion during the race between Republican Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, his Democratic opponent.

The charges are the most direct allegation to date of illegal Russian meddling in the election.

The goal, the indictment says, was to "sow discord in the U.S. political system, including the 2016 presidential election."

Charges include conspiracy, wire fraud, bank fraud and aggravated identity theft.

The charges arise from Mueller's investigation into Russian interference in the election and whether there was improper coordination between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

Before Friday, four people, including Trump's former national security adviser and former campaign chairman, had been charged in Mueller's investigation.

The White House had no immediate response to the indictment.

Washington - 16 February 2018

1. Wide, Rosenstein walking into news conference

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General:

"A grand jury in the District of Columbia today returned an indictment presented by the special counsel's office. The indictment charges 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies for committing federal crimes while seeking to interfere in the United States political system including the 2016 presidential election. The defendants allegedly conducted what they called information warfare against the United States with the stated goal of spreading distrust toward the candidates and the political system in general. According to the allegations in the indictment 12 of the individual defendants worked at various times for a company called Internet Research Agency LLC, a Russian company based in St. Petersburg. The other individual defendant Yevgeny Viktorovich Prigozhin funded the conspiracy through companies known as Concord Management and Consulting LLC, Concord catering and many affiliates and subsidiaries.

3. Cutaway reporters

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General:

"Two of the defendants allegedly traveled to the United States in 2014 to collect intelligence for their American influence operations. In order to hide the Russian origins of their activities, the defendants allegedly purchased space on computer servers located here in the United States in order to set up a virtual private network. The defendants allegedly use that infrastructure to establish hundreds of accounts on social media networks such as Facebook, Instagram and Twitter, making it appear that those accounts were controlled by persons located in the United States."

5. Wide, Rosenstein speaking

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General:

"The indictment includes eight criminal counts. Count one alleges a criminal conspiracy to defraud the United States by all of the defendants. The defendants allegedly conspired to defraud America by impairing the lawful functions of the Federal Election Commission, the United States Department of Justice and the Department of State. Those organizations of the U.S. government are responsible for administering federal requirements for disclosure of foreign involvement in certain domestic activities. Count two charges conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud by Internet Research Agency and two of the individual defendants. Counts three through eight charge aggravated identity theft by Internet Research Agency and four individuals. Now there is no allegation in this indictment that any American was a knowing participant in this illegal activity. There is no allegation in the indictment that the charge conduct altered the outcome of the 2016 election. I want to caution you that everyone charged with a crime is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in court. At trial prosecutors must introduce credible evidence that is sufficient to prove each defendant guilty beyond any reasonable doubt to a unanimous jury. Special Counsel's investigation is ongoing. There will be no comments from the special counsel at this time. "

7. Cutaway

8. SOUNDBITE (English) Rod Rosenstein, Deputy Attorney General

"This indictment serves as a reminder that people are not always who they appear to be on the Internet. The indictment alleges that the Russian conspirators want to promote discord in the United States and undermine public confidence in democracy. We must not allow them to succeed. The Department of Justice will continue to work cooperatively with other law enforcement and intelligence agencies and with the Congress to defend our nation against similar current and future efforts."

9. Mid, Rosenstein walking out

President Donald Trump and his lawyers are laying out an extraordinarily expansive vision of executive authority that scholars say is mostly untested in court and could portend a drawn-out fight with the prosecutors now investigating him.

A memo submitted by the president's lawyers to special counsel Robert Mueller asserts as fact that presidents cannot obstruct justice because, as the country's chief law enforcement officer, they have ultimate control of the Justice Department and executive branch.

His lawyers have repeatedly insisted that it's beyond dispute that a sitting president cannot be criminally prosecuted, while Trump tweeted Monday that he has the "absolute right" to pardon himself.

As Mueller's investigation moves forward, courts may have to confront questions with minimal if any historical precedent.

Those include whether a president can be forced to answer questions from prosecutors, whether it's possible for a commander-in-chief to criminally interfere in investigations and whether a president's broad pardon power can be deployed for corrupt purposes.

Mueller is investigating whether Trump associates coordinated with Russia during the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump took steps to shut down that investigation through actions including the firing of FBI Director James Comey.

Though Trump insists he did nothing wrong, the statements from him and his lawyers, including the January memo to Mueller, make clear how much of their defense revolves around establishing that he was constitutionally empowered to take the actions he took that are now under investigation.

The defense argument suggests that protocols meant to protect against abuses of power are merely norms the American public has come to expect, rather than laws binding upon a president.

There's some historical precedent for the court clash that could be instigated by the Trump investigation, but in many ways the arguments remain unsettled and tested.

The Supreme Court has never definitively ruled on the question of whether a president could be forced to testify, though the justices in 1974 did rule that President Richard Nixon had to turn over recordings and documents that had been subpoenaed.

TWITTER @RealDonaldTrump

Internet - 4 June 2018

1. Donald Trump tweet reading (English) "As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong? In the meantime, the never ending Witch Hunt, led by 13 very Angry and Conflicted Democrats (& others) continues into the mid-terms!"

2. Donald Trump tweet reading (English) "The appointment of the Special Counsel is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Despite that, we play the game because I, unlike the Democrats, have done nothing wrong!"

ASSOCIATED PRESS

3. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So President Donald Trump tweeted this morning that he has the absolute power to pardon himself if he wants to, though he quickly added that he has no intention of doing so because he's done nothing wrong."

POOL

Washington - 1 June 2018

4. Trump walking toward camera

ASSOCIATED PRESS

5. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So what the president is getting at is actually something that has been historically untested, so nobody actually really knows whether it is true or not if the president can pardon himself because there's never been a Supreme Court that's weighed in on the opinion because frankly no president has ever thought to try to pardon himself or been in the position where they were going to do that. So, we're getting into unchartered territory to the extend that we're talking about this is a reasonable possibility. It's never reached the Supreme Court. I would however note that there is a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinion from 1974 that suggests the president cannot act as his or her own judge. And so therefore would mitigate against pardoning himself or herself."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington - 1 June 2018

6. Trump walking on White House lawn

ASSOCIATED PRESS

7. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So what we're seeing from the series of public statements and tweets both from the president and his lawyers are really expansive visions of constitutional presidential authority and power. And so we are realizing that the defense for the president in the Mueller investigation is not so much a factual defense about what I did or didn't do as much as as I am president and therefore I am entitled to carry out the very acts that you're now investigating me for and so if I want to fire the FBI director, I can. If I want to ask the FBI director to shut down a particular investigation. I can. I'm the president. I control the executive branch. And so we are now getting into fairly untested arguments about the scope of the constitutional authorities vested in the president."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington - 13 June 2013

8. Robert Mueller testifies on Capitol Hill

ASSOCIATED PRESS

9. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So a lot's going to depend on whether the president consents to an interview. So if he agrees to an interview, that would sort of seem to suggest there won't be a hugely drawn out court fight. If he rejects the interview request formally and then Mueller chooses to subpoena, him which is not something that we're aware that he's going to do. But should he subpoena him, we will anticipate a very significant court fight, potentially up to the Supreme Court that will really test some of these issues that we're talking about, whether the president can be subpoenaed for his testimony, whether he could be compelled to speak to investigators. These are really significant issues that suggest that a big court fight could be ahead."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Beijing - 13 June 2013

10. Mueller at news conference

ASSOCIATED PRESS

11. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"I guess what's really interesting to me, at least, is how much of this is truly unknown. So you have legal experts and academics on one side of the spectrum who say this can never happen. You have others who say, 'well actually, technically when you look at the Constitution it doesn't preclude the types of behaviors or responses that the president's talking about.' So to the extent that we are moving into areas that we've never been before. I think there's going to be an opportunity to create new law and there's not going to be much to look at that guides us in terms of this is the one true right answer. So it's sort of fascinating in that sense."

POOL

Joint Base Andrews - 31 May 2018

12. Trump walking up steps to Air Force One

President Donald Trump and his lawyers are laying out an extraordinarily expansive vision of executive authority that scholars say is mostly untested in court and could portend a drawn-out fight with the prosecutors now investigating him.

A memo submitted by the president's lawyers to special counsel Robert Mueller asserts as fact that presidents cannot obstruct justice because, as the country's chief law enforcement officer, they have ultimate control of the Justice Department and executive branch.

His lawyers have repeatedly insisted that it's beyond dispute that a sitting president cannot be criminally prosecuted, while Trump tweeted Monday that he has the "absolute right" to pardon himself.

As Mueller's investigation moves forward, courts may have to confront questions with minimal if any historical precedent.

Those include whether a president can be forced to answer questions from prosecutors, whether it's possible for a commander-in-chief to criminally interfere in investigations and whether a president's broad pardon power can be deployed for corrupt purposes.

Mueller is investigating whether Trump associates coordinated with Russia during the 2016 presidential election and whether Trump took steps to shut down that investigation through actions including the firing of FBI Director James Comey.

Though Trump insists he did nothing wrong, the statements from him and his lawyers, including the January memo to Mueller, make clear how much of their defense revolves around establishing that he was constitutionally empowered to take the actions he took that are now under investigation.

The defense argument suggests that protocols meant to protect against abuses of power are merely norms the American public has come to expect, rather than laws binding upon a president.

There's some historical precedent for the court clash that could be instigated by the Trump investigation, but in many ways the arguments remain unsettled and tested.

The Supreme Court has never definitively ruled on the question of whether a president could be forced to testify, though the justices in 1974 did rule that President Richard Nixon had to turn over recordings and documents that had been subpoenaed.

TWITTER @RealDonaldTrump

Internet - 4 June 2018

1. Donald Trump tweet reading (English) "As has been stated by numerous legal scholars, I have the absolute right to PARDON myself, but why would I do that when I have done nothing wrong? In the meantime, the never ending Witch Hunt, led by 13 very Angry and Conflicted Democrats (& others) continues into the mid-terms!"

2. Donald Trump tweet reading (English) "The appointment of the Special Counsel is totally UNCONSTITUTIONAL! Despite that, we play the game because I, unlike the Democrats, have done nothing wrong!"

ASSOCIATED PRESS

3. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So President Donald Trump tweeted this morning that he has the absolute power to pardon himself if he wants to, though he quickly added that he has no intention of doing so because he's done nothing wrong."

POOL

Washington - 1 June 2018

4. Trump walking toward camera

ASSOCIATED PRESS

5. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So what the president is getting at is actually something that has been historically untested, so nobody actually really knows whether it is true or not if the president can pardon himself because there's never been a Supreme Court that's weighed in on the opinion because frankly no president has ever thought to try to pardon himself or been in the position where they were going to do that. So, we're getting into unchartered territory to the extend that we're talking about this is a reasonable possibility. It's never reached the Supreme Court. I would however note that there is a Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel opinion from 1974 that suggests the president cannot act as his or her own judge. And so therefore would mitigate against pardoning himself or herself."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington - 1 June 2018

6. Trump walking on White House lawn

ASSOCIATED PRESS

7. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So what we're seeing from the series of public statements and tweets both from the president and his lawyers are really expansive visions of constitutional presidential authority and power. And so we are realizing that the defense for the president in the Mueller investigation is not so much a factual defense about what I did or didn't do as much as as I am president and therefore I am entitled to carry out the very acts that you're now investigating me for and so if I want to fire the FBI director, I can. If I want to ask the FBI director to shut down a particular investigation. I can. I'm the president. I control the executive branch. And so we are now getting into fairly untested arguments about the scope of the constitutional authorities vested in the president."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington - 13 June 2013

8. Robert Mueller testifies on Capitol Hill

ASSOCIATED PRESS

9. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"So a lot's going to depend on whether the president consents to an interview. So if he agrees to an interview, that would sort of seem to suggest there won't be a hugely drawn out court fight. If he rejects the interview request formally and then Mueller chooses to subpoena, him which is not something that we're aware that he's going to do. But should he subpoena him, we will anticipate a very significant court fight, potentially up to the Supreme Court that will really test some of these issues that we're talking about, whether the president can be subpoenaed for his testimony, whether he could be compelled to speak to investigators. These are really significant issues that suggest that a big court fight could be ahead."

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Beijing - 13 June 2013

10. Mueller at news conference

ASSOCIATED PRESS

11. SOUNDBITE (English): Eric Tucker, AP Writer:

"I guess what's really interesting to me, at least, is how much of this is truly unknown. So you have legal experts and academics on one side of the spectrum who say this can never happen. You have others who say, 'well actually, technically when you look at the Constitution it doesn't preclude the types of behaviors or responses that the president's talking about.' So to the extent that we are moving into areas that we've never been before. I think there's going to be an opportunity to create new law and there's not going to be much to look at that guides us in terms of this is the one true right answer. So it's sort of fascinating in that sense."

POOL

Joint Base Andrews - 31 May 2018

12. Trump walking up steps to Air Force One

On May 3rd 2017 US President Donald Trump abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey, ousting the nation's top law enforcement official in the midst of an investigation into whether Trump's campaign had ties to Russia's election meddling.

In a letter to Comey, Trump said the firing was necessary to restore "public trust and confidence" in the FBI.

Comey has come under intense scrutiny in recent months for his role in an investigation into Democrat Hillary Clinton's email practices, including a pair of letters he sent to Congress on the matter in the closing days of last year's election.

Trump made no mention of Comey's role in the Clinton investigation.

But the president did assert that Comey informed him "on three separate occasions that I am not under investigation."

***

President Donald Trump abruptly fired James Comey as director of the FBI in the midst of the law enforcement agency's investigation into whether Trump's presidential campaign was connected to Russian meddling in the election.

In a letter to Comey, Trump said the dismissal was necessary to restore the public's trust and confidence.

Often lauded for his independence, Comey had come under intense scrutiny in recent months for his role in the agency's investigation into the email practices of Trump's opponent, Democrat Hillary Clinton, including a pair of letters he sent to Congress on the matter in the final days of last November's election.

A look at key moments in Comey's tenure and the lead-up to Trump's decision to fire him.

July 5, 2016: Holds news conference to announce that "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring criminal charges against Hillary Clinton, the Democratic presidential candidate, over her email practices as secretary of state, but criticizes Clinton and her staff for being "extremely careless" in their handling of classified material.

July 5, 2016: Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump calls the FBI's decision not to bring criminal charges against Clinton the greatest example yet that the system is "rigged."

July 7, 2016: Comey vigorously defends the decision not to prosecute Clinton over her use of a private email server as secretary of state. Under an onslaught of Republican criticism, Comey says that to charge Clinton would have been unwarranted and mere "celebrity hunting."

Oct. 28, 2016: Days before the election, Comey informs Congress by letter that he was reopening the investigation into Clinton's email practices based on new evidence, citing the discovery of emails on a laptop used by a top Clinton aide. Justice Department officials warned Comey against sending the letter, saying that doing so would be inconsistent with department policy meant to avoid the appearance of prosecutorial interference or meddling in elections.

Oct. 28, 2016: Trump reacts to FBI's decision to investigate new messages related to Clinton's emails, telling a campaign rally that he has "great respect for the FBI for righting this wrong."

Nov. 6, 2016: Comey tells Congress in a follow-up letter that a review of newly discovered Clinton emails has "not changed our conclusions" that she should not face criminal charges.

Nov. 6: Trump criticizes Comey's second letter to Congress, saying Clinton was being protected by a "rigged system" and pronouncing her "guilty," despite the FBI's conclusion that criminal charges were unwarranted.

Nov. 8, 2016: Trump is elected president.

Nov. 12, 2016: During a telephone call with top campaign donors, Clinton blames Comey for her defeat by Trump. Clinton said her campaign was on track to win the election until Comey sent the letter to Congress on Oct. 28.

Nov. 13, 2016: In a CBS "60 Minutes" broadcast after the election, Trump said he hadn't decided whether to keep Comey.

Jan. 6, 2017: Comey is among a group of four top US intelligence officials who briefed then-President-elect Donald Trump on their conclusions that Russia meddled in the presidential election on his behalf. Trump told The Associated Press by telephone after the meeting that he "learned a lot" but declined to say whether he accepted their conclusion about Russia.

Jan. 22, 2017: Two days after taking office, Trump appears to single out Comey at a White House reception to thank law enforcement officers and others that helped during the inauguration. Trump called Comey over to where he was standing in the Blue Room to offer a handshake and a partial hug, then commented that Comey has "become more famous than me."

March 8, 2017: During a cyber security conference at Boston College, Comey said he planned to serve his entire 10-year term, quipping, "You're stuck with me for another 6½ years."

March 20, 2017: Comey testifies to Congress that the FBI has been investigating possible links between Trump associates and Russian officials since July, the same month he held an unusual news conference to discuss the investigation into Clinton. Comey had previously refused to acknowledge the parallel Trump investigation, and his disclosure enrages Democrats who already blamed Comey for costing Clinton the presidency.

March 20, 2017: Comey testifies at the same hearing that the FBI and Justice Department have no information to substantiate Trump's unsubstantiated claim on Twitter that former President Barack Obama wiretapped him before the election.

May 2, 2017: Clinton again lays part of the blame for losing the election on Comey's Oct. 28 letter. "If the election were on Oct. 27, I would have been your president," she tells a women's luncheon in New York.

May 3, 2017: Testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Comey insists that he was consistent in his handling of the separate investigations into Clinton and Trump. Comey also said it made him feel "mildly nauseous" to think his actions in October might have influenced the election outcome. But he told senators: "I can't consider for a second whose political futures will be affected and in what way. We have to ask ourselves what is the right thing to do and then do it."

May 9, 2017: Comey sends Congress a letter correcting his prior sworn testimony regarding emails handled by longtime Clinton associate Huma Abedin. Comey had told Congress that Abedin had sent "hundreds and thousands" of emails to her husband's laptop, including some with classified information. The two-page, follow-up letter said that, in fact, only "a small number" of the thousands of emails found on the laptop had been forwarded there while most had simply been backed up from electronic devices.

May 9, 2017: Trump abruptly fires Comey. "It is essential that we find new leadership for the FBI that restores public trust and confidence in its vital law enforcement mission," Trump states in a letter addressed to Comey.

***

White House officials say Trump's confidence in FBI Director James Comey had been eroding for months and that he was ultimately fired because he was 'not fit to do the job'.

"Frankly, he'd been considering letting Director Comey go since the day he was elected," White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said, a sharply different explanation from the day before, when officials put the emphasis on new Justice complaints about Comey.

Days before he was fired, Comey requested more resources to pursue his investigation, U.S. officials have said, fueling concerns that Trump was trying to undermine a probe that could threaten his presidency.

The White House appeared caught off guard by the intense response to Comey's firing, given that the FBI director had become a pariah among Democrats for his role in the Clinton investigation.

***

Former FBI Director James Comey arrived on Capitol Hill June 8th for his much anticipated testimony at a the Senate Intelligence Committee hearing.

***

Fired FBI Director James Comey says, "Lordy, I hope there are tapes," of his conversations with President Donald Trump.

Three days after Trump fired Comey, the president tweeted that Comey should hope there are "no tapes" of their conversations.

Comey documented his conversations with Trump in memos after the encounters.

During his first public appearance since he was fired, senators asked Comey about his responses to Trump.

Comey says he chose his words carefully when responding to Trump because he was "so stunned" by the conversation.

Comey was recalling a February conversation in which, Comey says, Trump said he hoped Comey could let go the FBI's investigation into Trump's first national security adviser Michael Flynn's calls with the Russians.

***

Former FBI Director James Comey said at the end of his testimony to a Senate committee that he believes he was fired by President Donald Trump in an effort to affect the Russia investigation.

Comey said on June 8th that it's a "very big deal and not just because it involves me."

He said political considerations shouldn't influence the FBI's work.

Comey also said that if any American helped Russia in trying to influence the 2016 election, "that is a very big deal."

The former FBI chief said he's confident an investigation led by former FBI Director Robert Mueller will be conducted thoroughly.

00:00:00

Trump fires FBI director James Comey

4095532

POOL

Washington,D.C. - 3 May 2017

1. SOUNDBITE (English) Senator Chuck Grassley, (R) Iowa, Chairman Senate Judiciary Committee:

"A cloud of doubt hangs over the FBI's objectivity. Once you buy into the claim of collusion, then suddenly ever interaction with a Russian can be twisted to seem like confirmation of a conspiracy theory."

2. Various of Comey being sworn in

00:22:22

Key moments leading up to Comey's firing

4095630

ASSOCIATED PRESS, POOL

POOL

FILE: Washington DC - 22 January 2017

++AUDIO AS INCOMING++

3. Various of US President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence applauding officers, first responders in Blue Room at a White House reception UPSOUND (English) President Donald Trump:

"So let's, oh and there's James (Comey), he's become more famous than me. (James Comey, director of the FBI embraces the President).

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington, D.C. - 9 May 2017

4. Letter by President Donald Trump regarding the firing of FBI Director James Comey

00:40:15

WH: Comey 'not fit to do the job'

4095896

ASSOCIATED PRESS

Washington DC - 11 May 2017

5. White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders walks in for press briefing

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Sarah Huckabee Sanders, White House Spokeswoman:

"He fired him because he was not fit to do the job. It's that simple.

00:45:04

Comey Arrives on Capitol Hill For Senate Hearing

4100575

POOL

Washington, D.C. - 8 June 2017

7. Former FBI Director James Comey arriving in room for Senate Intelligence Hearing,

00:49:06

Comey: 'Lordy, I hope there are tapes'

4100597

POOL

Washington DC - 8 June 2017

8. SOUNDBITE (English) James Comey, Former FBI Director:

" Look, I've seen the tweet about tapes, Lordy I hope there are tapes. I remember saying I agree he is a good guy, as a way of saying, I'm not agreeing with what you just asked me to do,

01:05:08

Comey: 'Fired Because of Russia Investigation'

4100613

POOL

Washington DC - 8 June 2017

9. SOUNDBITE (English) Sen. John Cornyn, (R) Texas:

"And let me ask you as a general proposition, if you are trying to make an investigation go away, is firing an FBI director a good way to make that happen?"

10. SOUNDBITE (English) James Comey, Former FBI Director:

"It doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but I'm actually hopelessly biased, given that I was the one fired.

An FBI agent who worked on separate investigations into Democrat Hillary Clinton and President Donald Trump's campaign testified behind closed doors to two House committees Wednesday as GOP lawmakers stepped up efforts to highlight what they say is bias at the Justice Department.

Peter Strzok exchanged anti-Trump texts with a colleague, FBI attorney Lisa Page, as both worked on the Clinton investigation and briefly on special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into ties between Trump's campaign and Russia. House Republicans have seized on the texts as part of investigations into the Justice Department, the FBI and decisions that both made during the 2016 presidential election.

In one of the texts, from August 2016, Strzok wrote, "We'll stop it," in reference to a potential Trump election win.

Mark Meadows, one of the most vocal critics of the Justice Department, said as he walked into the interview that he had several questions about the beginning of the Russia investigation in 2016 and informants used to question Trump campaign staff.

"Ultimately you cannot have bias within the FBI and DOJ and expect justice to be meted out equally," Meadows said.

The barrage of GOP criticism against the Justice Department comes just a few months before the midterm elections, and amid intense sparring between the parties over the FBI's role in the Russia probe. The House could vote as soon as Thursday on a resolution demanding the department hand over thousands of documents that Congress has requested by July 6. The resolution was approved by the House Judiciary Committee.

Washington - 27 June 2018

1. FBI Agent Peter Strzok walks through Rayburn House office building

2. SOUNDBITE: (English) Rep. Mark Meadows, (R) North Carolina:

"Well, I think that we should have actually been a little bit more deliberate bringing him here. We've had to collect documents. One of the problems is we're still getting documents from DOJ (Department of Justice) that really are a predicate to this interview. We have documents that we've requested from DOJ that they continue to hold onto, that they will not give us. You know that we got text messages the day of the IG (Inspector General) hearing. Now it's time for DOJ and FBI to be transparent. But it's also time for the American people to see the truth. Hopefully, they will be able to do that. We'll have hours of interviews today to get to the bottom line. But, ultimately, you cannot have bias within the FBI and DOJ and expect justice to be meted out equally. And so hopefully we'll rid the FBI of any inherent bias."

3. Various of meadows speaking with reporters

4. SOUNDBITE: (English) Rep. Mark Meadows, (R) North Carolina: (referring to texts between Strzok and Lisa Page)

"If you have intimate personal conversations between two people, that normally would show the intent more so than perhaps something that would be said out in public."

5. Reporter asking Meadows question

STORYLINE:

An FBI agent who worked on separate investigations into Democrat Hillary Clinton and President Donald Trump's campaign testified behind closed doors to two House committees Wednesday as GOP lawmakers stepped up efforts to highlight what they say is bias at the Justice Department.

Peter Strzok exchanged anti-Trump texts with a colleague, FBI attorney Lisa Page, as both worked on the Clinton investigation and briefly on special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into ties between Trump's campaign and Russia. House Republicans have seized on the texts as part of investigations into the Justice Department, the FBI and decisions that both made during the 2016 presidential election.

In one of the texts, from August 2016, Strzok wrote, "We'll stop it," in reference to a potential Trump election win.

Mark Meadows, one of the most vocal critics of the Justice Department, said as he walked into the interview that he had several questions about the beginning of the Russia investigation in 2016 and informants used to question Trump campaign staff.

"Ultimately you cannot have bias within the FBI and DOJ and expect justice to be meted out equally," Meadows said.

The barrage of GOP criticism against the Justice Department comes just a few months before the midterm elections, and amid intense sparring between the parties over the FBI's role in the Russia probe. The House could vote as soon as Thursday on a resolution demanding the department hand over thousands of documents that Congress has requested by July 6. The resolution was approved by the House Judiciary Committee.

Washington DC - 27 June 2018

1. FBI Agent Peter Strzok walks through Rayburn House office building

2. SOUNDBITE: (English) Rep. Mark Meadows, (R) North Carolina:

"Well, I think that we should have actually been a little bit more deliberate bringing him here. We've had to collect documents. One of the problems is we're still getting documents from DOJ (Department of Justice) that really are a predicate to this interview. We have documents that we've requested from DOJ that they continue to hold onto, that they will not give us. You know that we got text messages the day of the IG (Inspector General) hearing. Now it's time for DOJ and FBI to be transparent. But it's also time for the American people to see the truth. Hopefully, they will be able to do that. We'll have hours of interviews today to get to the bottom line. But, ultimately, you cannot have bias within the FBI and DOJ and expect justice to be meted out equally. And so hopefully we'll rid the FBI of any inherent bias."

3. Various of meadows speaking with reporters

4. SOUNDBITE: (English) Rep. Mark Meadows, (R) North Carolina: (referring to texts between Strzok and Lisa Page)

"If you have intimate personal conversations between two people, that normally would show the intent more so than perhaps something that would be said out in public."

5. Reporter asking Meadows question

An FBI agent who worked on separate investigations into Democrat Hillary Clinton and President Donald Trump's campaign testified behind closed doors to two House committees Wednesday as GOP lawmakers stepped up efforts to highlight what they say is bias at the Justice Department.

Peter Strzok exchanged anti-Trump texts with a colleague, FBI attorney Lisa Page, as both worked on the Clinton investigation and briefly on special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into ties between Trump's campaign and Russia. House Republicans have seized on the texts as part of investigations into the Justice Department, the FBI and decisions that both made during the 2016 presidential election.

In one of the texts, from August 2016, Strzok wrote, "We'll stop it," in reference to a potential Trump election win.

Mark Meadows, one of the most vocal critics of the Justice Department, said as he walked into the interview that he had several questions about the beginning of the Russia investigation in 2016 and informants used to question Trump campaign staff.

"Ultimately you cannot have bias within the FBI and DOJ and expect justice to be meted out equally," Meadows said.

The barrage of GOP criticism against the Justice Department comes just a few months before the midterm elections, and amid intense sparring between the parties over the FBI's role in the Russia probe. The House could vote as soon as Thursday on a resolution demanding the department hand over thousands of documents that Congress has requested by July 6. The resolution was approved by the House Judiciary Committee.

Washington - 27 June 2018

1. FBI Agent Peter Strzok walks through Rayburn House office building

2. SOUNDBITE: (English) Rep. Mark Meadows, (R) North Carolina:

"Well, I think that we should have actually been a little bit more deliberate bringing him here. We've had to collect documents. One of the problems is we're still getting documents from DOJ (Department of Justice) that really are a predicate to this interview. We have documents that we've requested from DOJ that they continue to hold onto, that they will not give us. You know that we got text messages the day of the IG (Inspector General) hearing. Now it's time for DOJ and FBI to be transparent. But it's also time for the American people to see the truth. Hopefully, they will be able to do that. We'll have hours of interviews today to get to the bottom line. But, ultimately, you cannot have bias within the FBI and DOJ and expect justice to be meted out equally. And so hopefully we'll rid the FBI of any inherent bias."

3. Various of meadows speaking with reporters

4. SOUNDBITE: (English) Rep. Mark Meadows, (R) North Carolina: (referring to texts between Strzok and Lisa Page)

"If you have intimate personal conversations between two people, that normally would show the intent more so than perhaps something that would be said out in public."

5. Reporter asking Meadows question

A legal fight over what should happen to records the FBI seized from US President Donald Trump's personal attorney took a surprise twist Monday when the lawyer, Michael Cohen, was forced to reveal a secret _ that he had also done legal work for Fox News host Sean Hannity.

The disclosure came as a New York judge disappointed a lawyer for Trump by letting prosecutors proceed with the cataloguing of evidence including multiple electronic devices that were seized in raids while a system is set up to ensure they are protected by attorney-client privilege.

Lawyers for Cohen and prosecutors had reason to claim success after three hours of arguments left U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood saying she may appoint a special master to help decide how much of the materials are subject to the privilege.

The only disappointed party seemed to be Trump's attorney, Joanna Hendon, who said she was objecting to any plan by prosecutors to search for how many times Trump's name appears in documents as they try to decide how many might be subject to attorney-client privilege.

Prosecutors promised not to study the contents of the materials while the process of protecting privileged materials is resolved.

Wood also denied Hendon's request that lawyers for Trump and Cohen get the first crack at designating documents and other evidence that might be subject to the privilege.

The Hannity revelation came after Wood required Cohen to divulge the names of the clients he's worked with since the 2016 election.

One, of course, was Trump himself.

Another was Elliot Broidy, a Trump fundraiser who resigned from the Republican National Committee on Friday after it was revealed that he paid $1.6 million to a Playboy Playmate with whom he had an extramarital affair. The Playmate became pregnant and elected to have an abortion.

With Cohen by their side on Monday, lawyers initially resisted revealing the name of the third client for privacy reasons, saying it would be embarrassing for the client and that the client had asked that they immediately appeal any request to divulge his name.

But Wood pressed on.

When the name was announced, there were gasps and some laughter in a courtroom packed with journalists. A few of them raced from the courtroom.

Cohen's lawyers did not detail the type of legal work he did for Hannity.

On his radio show, Hannity said Cohen was never involved in any matter between him and any third party.

Hannity, an outspoken supporter of Trump, has been a fierce critic of special counsel Robert Mueller, who is looking into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Monday's hearing began with an appearance by porn actress Stormy Daniels, who was swarmed by photographers and nearly fell as she was hustled into the courthouse, a scene that captured the sensational atmosphere around the case.

The last to enter court, she was among the first to leave.

While in court, she smiled several times as she observed the proceedings from a folding chair near the back of the room.

Outside afterward, she said Cohen has acted like he's above the law and that she and her lawyer are committed to making sure everyone learns the truth.

The April 9 raid on Cohen sought information on a variety of matters, including a $130,000 payment made to Daniels, who alleges she had sex with a married Trump in 2006.

New York – 16 April 2018

1. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"Prosecutors were saying that lawyers for Michael Cohen and President Donald Trump were just trying to delay proceedings by asking for a process where they would look at all the evidence that was seized last week first, and then decide what was not violated by attorney-client privilege, and what prosecutors could use in their criminal investigation. Prosecutors say that's not the way to do it. They want a process whereby attorneys for Donald... President Donald Trump and Michael Cohen have a role in the process but aren't able to control the process. The judge seems eager, she said, to make whatever occurs not to...not slow up the process so that the government can do what it needs to do in its investigation, and yet, the attorney-client privilege is protected."

++BLACK FRAMES++

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"The judge did say that she may, and this is something that Michael Cohen's lawyers were requesting, that she may appoint a special master to at least have a limited role in deciding how the evidence is viewed and how they ultimately decide what is subject to attorney-client privilege. But she seemed also to be giving the government what it wants in letting the prosecutors, the special taint team they have –not their criminal prosecutors—get a look at all the evidence of putting it together so that they can hand it over to the attorneys for Michael Cohen and President Donald Trump to look at and for them to flag whatever they think should be subject to attorney-client privilege."

++BLACK FRAMES++

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"Prosecutors revealed that when they did the raids on Michael Cohen's residence and his office, that they had numerous electronic devices, including telephones, and that for what they could, the computer devices, they actually took images. So, his lawyers, they say, already have much of the evidence and know what's there."

++BLACK FRAMES++

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"The surprise moment in court came when the lawyers for Michael Cohen did not want to divulge one client who had asked to remain anonymous, saying that it could be embarrassing being associated with someone who's under criminal investigation. The judge forced them to divulge the name, it turned out to be Sean Hannity, a Fox News personality. And as soon as that name was announced, there was an audible gasp in the courtroom that's largely crowded with journalists, and some journalists immediately ran outside court, and you could see Stormy Daniels smiling on the side of the courtroom in the back, a little bit after this happened."

++BLACK FRAMES++

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"Stormy Daniels has a role in this because Michael Cohen played a part in ultimately a payoff that she got to remain silent after what she says was an affair with the president."

++BLACK FRAMES++

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"So, I think, ultimately, she has a role in the investigation because the settlement that was paid out to her. Michael Cohen says he paid her the money and he did it out of a home equity loan. So that's presumed to be part of the government's investigation."

++EDIT ENDS ON A SOUNDBITE++

Special counsel Robert Mueller did not find evidence that President Donald Trump's campaign "conspired or coordinated" with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election but reached no conclusion on whether Trump obstructed justice, Attorney General William Barr declared Sunday.

That brought a hearty claim of vindication from Trump but set the stage for new rounds of political and legal fighting.

House Judiciary Committee chairman Congressman Jerrold Nadler said Sunday night that Congress needs to hear from Attorney General Barr about his decision and see "all the underlying evidence."

Mueller clearly and explicitly is not exonerating the president, said Nadler but Barr is telling the American people that while the president is not exonerated, there will be no action by DOJ.

"I would hope that it would not be necessary to use subpoena power to get the attorney general to appear before the committee," Nadler told reporters at a news conference in New York.

"We also want to see the full report and if necessary we'll use subpoena power to get that too."

In a statement, two other top Democrats, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, said Barr was "not a neutral observer" and they also urged the full release of special counsel Robert Mueller's report.

New York - 24 March 2019

1. Pan Rep. Jerrold Nadler walks to microphones

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Democrat - New York, House Judiciary Committee chairman:

"Good evening, earlier today I received a four-page letter from Attorney General Barr outlining his summary of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report while making a few questionable legal arguments of his own. I take from this letter, three points. First, President Trump is wrong. This report does not amount to a so-called total exoneration. Special Counsel Muller was clear that his report quote does not exonerate close quote the president. The special counsel spent 22 months uncovering evidence of obstruction and other misconduct. Attorney General Barr, who auditioned for his role with an open memorandum suggesting that the obstruction investigation was unconscionable and that a president and that it was almost impossible for any president to commit obstruction of justice since he is the head of the executive branch, made a decision about that evidence in under 48 hours. His conclusions raise more questions than they answer. Given the fact that Mueller uncovered evidence that in his own words does not exonerate the president.  It is unconscionable that President Trump would try to spin the special counsel counsel's findings as if his conduct was remotely acceptable. Second, given these questions it is imperative that the attorney general release the full report and the underlying evidence. The entire unfiltered report, as well as the evidence underlying that report, must be made available to Congress and to the American people. As much information can be as can be made public should be made public without delay. I intend to fight for that transparency. We will ask the attorney general to testify before the House Judiciary Committee. We will demand the release of the full report. The American people are entitled to a full accounting of the President's misconduct referenced by the special counsel. Third, the attorney general's comments make it clear that Congress must step in to get the truth and provide full transparency to the American people. The president has not been exonerated by the special counsel, yet the attorney general has decided not to go further or apparently to share those findings with the public. We cannot simply rely on what may be a hasty partisan interpretation of the facts. Earlier this month the House passed a resolution calling for a full and complete release of the special counsel's report by a vote of 420 to nothing. We now call on the attorney general to honor that request, to release the report and the underlying evidence and to appear before the Judiciary Committee to answer our questions without delay. "

3. Wide news conference

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Democrat - New York, House Judiciary Committee chairman:

"Reporter: Would you be willing to use subpoena power if necessary?

Sure.  I would hope that it would not be necessary to use subpoena power to get the attorney general to appear before the committee. We also want to see the full report and if necessary we'll use subpoena power to get that too."

++SOUNDBITES SEPARATED BY BLACK++

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Democrat - New York, House Judiciary Committee chairman:

"Now, it is as far as I know unprecedented for a special prosecutor not to make that decision one way or another one way or the other and certainly unprecedented for an attorney general to arrogate himself that decision and certainly precedent for an attorney general who campaigned for the role by saying presidents can hardly ever commit obstruction of justice. All right. Thank you very much everybody."

6. Pan Nadler walks away

A legal fight over what should happen to records the FBI seized from US President Donald Trump's personal attorney took a surprise twist Monday when the lawyer, Michael Cohen, was forced to reveal a secret _ that he had also done legal work for Fox News host Sean Hannity.

The disclosure came as a New York judge disappointed a lawyer for Trump by letting prosecutors proceed with the cataloguing of evidence including multiple electronic devices that were seized in raids while a system is set up to ensure they are protected by attorney-client privilege.

Lawyers for Cohen and prosecutors had reason to claim success after three hours of arguments left U.S. District Judge Kimba Wood saying she may appoint a special master to help decide how much of the materials are subject to the privilege.

The only disappointed party seemed to be Trump's attorney, Joanna Hendon, who said she was objecting to any plan by prosecutors to search for how many times Trump's name appears in documents as they try to decide how many might be subject to attorney-client privilege.

Prosecutors promised not to study the contents of the materials while the process of protecting privileged materials is resolved.

Wood also denied Hendon's request that lawyers for Trump and Cohen get the first crack at designating documents and other evidence that might be subject to the privilege.

The Hannity revelation came after Wood required Cohen to divulge the names of the clients he's worked with since the 2016 election.

One, of course, was Trump himself.

Another was Elliot Broidy, a Trump fundraiser who resigned from the Republican National Committee on Friday after it was revealed that he paid $1.6 million to a Playboy Playmate with whom he had an extramarital affair. The Playmate became pregnant and elected to have an abortion.

With Cohen by their side on Monday, lawyers initially resisted revealing the name of the third client for privacy reasons, saying it would be embarrassing for the client and that the client had asked that they immediately appeal any request to divulge his name.

But Wood pressed on.

When the name was announced, there were gasps and some laughter in a courtroom packed with journalists. A few of them raced from the courtroom.

Cohen's lawyers did not detail the type of legal work he did for Hannity.

On his radio show, Hannity said Cohen was never involved in any matter between him and any third party.

Hannity, an outspoken supporter of Trump, has been a fierce critic of special counsel Robert Mueller, who is looking into Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

Monday's hearing began with an appearance by porn actress Stormy Daniels, who was swarmed by photographers and nearly fell as she was hustled into the courthouse, a scene that captured the sensational atmosphere around the case.

The last to enter court, she was among the first to leave.

While in court, she smiled several times as she observed the proceedings from a folding chair near the back of the room.

Outside afterward, she said Cohen has acted like he's above the law and that she and her lawyer are committed to making sure everyone learns the truth.

The April 9 raid on Cohen sought information on a variety of matters, including a $130,000 payment made to Daniels, who alleges she had sex with a married Trump in 2006.

New York – 16 April 2018

1. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"Prosecutors were saying that lawyers for Michael Cohen and President Donald Trump were just trying to delay proceedings by asking for a process where they would look at all the evidence that was seized last week first, and then decide what was not violated by attorney-client privilege, and what prosecutors could use in their criminal investigation. Prosecutors say that's not the way to do it. They want a process whereby attorneys for Donald... President Donald Trump and Michael Cohen have a role in the process but aren't able to control the process. The judge seems eager, she said, to make whatever occurs not to...not slow up the process so that the government can do what it needs to do in its investigation, and yet, the attorney-client privilege is protected."

++BLACK FRAMES++

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"The judge did say that she may, and this is something that Michael Cohen's lawyers were requesting, that she may appoint a special master to at least have a limited role in deciding how the evidence is viewed and how they ultimately decide what is subject to attorney-client privilege. But she seemed also to be giving the government what it wants in letting the prosecutors, the special taint team they have –not their criminal prosecutors—get a look at all the evidence of putting it together so that they can hand it over to the attorneys for Michael Cohen and President Donald Trump to look at and for them to flag whatever they think should be subject to attorney-client privilege."

++BLACK FRAMES++

3. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"Prosecutors revealed that when they did the raids on Michael Cohen's residence and his office, that they had numerous electronic devices, including telephones, and that for what they could, the computer devices, they actually took images. So, his lawyers, they say, already have much of the evidence and know what's there."

++BLACK FRAMES++

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"The surprise moment in court came when the lawyers for Michael Cohen did not want to divulge one client who had asked to remain anonymous, saying that it could be embarrassing being associated with someone who's under criminal investigation. The judge forced them to divulge the name, it turned out to be Sean Hannity, a Fox News personality. And as soon as that name was announced, there was an audible gasp in the courtroom that's largely crowded with journalists, and some journalists immediately ran outside court, and you could see Stormy Daniels smiling on the side of the courtroom in the back, a little bit after this happened."

++BLACK FRAMES++

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"Stormy Daniels has a role in this because Michael Cohen played a part in ultimately a payoff that she got to remain silent after what she says was an affair with the president."

++BLACK FRAMES++

6. SOUNDBITE (English) Larry Neumeister, Associated Press Reporter:

"So, I think, ultimately, she has a role in the investigation because the settlement that was paid out to her. Michael Cohen says he paid her the money and he did it out of a home equity loan. So that's presumed to be part of the government's investigation."

++EDIT ENDS ON A SOUNDBITE++

Special counsel Robert Mueller did not find evidence that President Donald Trump's campaign "conspired or coordinated" with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election but reached no conclusion on whether Trump obstructed justice, Attorney General William Barr declared Sunday.

That brought a hearty claim of vindication from Trump but set the stage for new rounds of political and legal fighting.

House Judiciary Committee chairman Congressman Jerrold Nadler said Sunday night that Congress needs to hear from Attorney General Barr about his decision and see "all the underlying evidence."

Mueller clearly and explicitly is not exonerating the president, said Nadler but Barr is telling the American people that while the president is not exonerated, there will be no action by the Department of Justice.

"I would hope that it would not be necessary to use subpoena power to get the attorney general to appear before the committee," Nadler told reporters at a news conference in New York.

"We also want to see the full report and if necessary we'll use subpoena power to get that too."

In a statement, two other top Democrats, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, said Barr was "not a neutral observer" and they also urged the full release of special counsel Robert Mueller's report.

New York - 24 March 2019

1. Pan Rep. Jerrold Nadler walks to microphones

2. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Democrat - New York, House Judiciary Committee chairman:

"Good evening, earlier today I received a four-page letter from Attorney General Barr outlining his summary of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's report while making a few questionable legal arguments of his own. I take from this letter, three points. First, President Trump is wrong. This report does not amount to a so-called total exoneration. Special Counsel Muller was clear that his report quote "does not exonerate" close quote, the president. The special counsel spent 22 months uncovering evidence of obstruction and other misconduct. Attorney General Barr, who auditioned for his role with an open memorandum suggesting that the obstruction investigation was unconscionable, and that a president - and that it was almost impossible for any president to commit obstruction of justice since he is the head of the executive branch - made a decision about that evidence in under 48 hours. His conclusions raise more questions than they answer, given the fact that Mueller uncovered evidence that in his own words does not exonerate the president.  It is unconscionable that President Trump would try to spin the special counsel counsel's findings as if his conduct was remotely acceptable. Second, given these questions it is imperative that the attorney general release the full report and the underlying evidence. The entire unfiltered report, as well as the evidence underlying that report, must be made available to Congress and to the American people. As much information can be as can be made public should be made public without delay. I intend to fight for that transparency. We will ask the attorney general to testify before the House Judiciary Committee. We will demand the release of the full report. The American people are entitled to a full accounting of the President's misconduct referenced by the special counsel. Third, the attorney general's comments make it clear that Congress must step in to get the truth and provide full transparency to the American people. The president has not been exonerated by the special counsel, yet the attorney general has decided not to go further or apparently to share those findings with the public. We cannot simply rely on what may be a hasty partisan interpretation of the facts. Earlier this month the House passed a resolution calling for a full and complete release of the special counsel's report by a vote of 420 to nothing. We now call on the attorney general to honor that request, to release the report and the underlying evidence and to appear before the Judiciary Committee to answer our questions without delay. "

3. Wide news conference

4. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Democrat - New York, House Judiciary Committee chairman:

Reporter: "Would you be willing to use subpoena power if necessary?

Sure. I would hope that it would not be necessary to use subpoena power to get the attorney general to appear before the committee. We also want to see the full report and if necessary we'll use subpoena power to get that too."

++SOUNDBITES SEPARATED BY BLACK++

5. SOUNDBITE (English) Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Democrat - New York, House Judiciary Committee chairman:

"Now, it is as far as I know unprecedented for a special prosecutor not to make that decision one way or another one way or the other and certainly unprecedented for an attorney general to arrogate himself that decision and certainly precedent for an attorney general who campaigned for the role by saying presidents can hardly ever commit obstruction of justice. All right. Thank you very much everybody."

6. Pan Nadler walks away