It could be true, it could be misconstrued information, it could be false.
"The conversations between Priebus, McCabe, and Comey have taken center stage because of Thursday’s CNN report, which gave the impression that the White House had pressured the FBI to denounce the Times story. Trump’s team disputes this account, arguing that the initiative came from the FBI. The White House claims that on the morning after the Times published its story, FBI officials—apparently McCabe—told Priebus that the Times story was false. Priebus then asked the FBI to state publicly, or at least tell reporters on background, that “there had been no contacts” between Russia and the Trump people. The FBI refused.
Preliminary signs suggest Priebus is fudging what the FBI told him about the Times story. On Meet the Press, Priebus alluded to Comey’s Feb. 17 briefing of the Senate Intelligence Committee—“I know what the intelligence committees in the House and the Senate were told by the FBI”—to support his categorical dismissal of the Times story. Sen. Angus King, who was at the briefing, responded that he was “surprised” Priebus chose to be “that categorical.” And other public officials who contacted reporters to shoot down the Times story on behalf of the White House weren’t nearly as absolute. According to the Post, “The officials broadly dismissed Trump associates’ contacts with Russia as infrequent and inconsequential. But the officials would not answer substantive questions about the issue.”
The FBI has declined to comment on any of these reports, including the original Times story and Priebus’ assertions of FBI support. In theory, this keeps the bureau apolitical. In practice, it lets Trump continue to lie without being directly exposed. In his speech to CPAC on Friday, Trump said of news organizations that publish critical stories:"
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2017/02/it_s_hard_to_trust_reince_priebus_fbi_claims.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
