tv Cuomo Prime Time CNN January 8, 2020 10:00pm-11:00pm PST
forget the chatter, what does the evidence show so far? let's get after it. all right. the house says it's going to vote tomorrow to rein in the president's war-making powers. why? well, in large part because of wild dissatisfaction with briefings from the administration today about the strike that got u.s. bases bombed. here's a taste. >> probably the worst briefing i've seen, at least on a military issue, in the nine years i've served in the united states senate. to come in and tell us that we can't debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against iran. it's un-american. it's unconstitutional. and it's wrong. >> all of those democrats, they won't shut up. oh, it was a republican. oh, well, he just hates trump. no, he doesn't. that was senator mike lee, a republican from utah, standing alongside fellow republican rand
paul enraged and insulted, he said, to be told by trump officials, don't debate the merits of taking military action against iran. does that sound like a clear-cut case is being offered? now, house democrat gerry connolly says he left the room more troubled than he went in. the foreign affairs committee member joins us now. thank you, sir. happy new year to you and the family. >> you, too, chris. >> so, imminent, thanks to the doj, basically means anything a president wants it to mean, with such a broad explanation, how is the briefing still unsatisfied. >> well, you said it a little earlier, there was not a scintilla of evidence presented to justify the so-called imminent threat that was asserted. we got a compilation of the past
sins of a very bad actor, namely qassem soleimani, who was assassinated. but we got no evidence to justify why now and what put us over the edge in making that very fateful decision. >> so their main argument is, congressman -- >> i'm sorry? >> their main argument is, you know he's a bad guy, iran's a bad actor, he's one of the worst. he's been responsible, arguably, for millions -- millions? hundreds of american deaths in the region. and we believe he was just behind the planning of what happened at the embassy that took out an american contractor. what else do you need to know? >> to decide to assassinate a leader in another government is a very consequential decision. and it's fraught with ramifications. and iran is not a pushover. iran is a very sophisticated country, with enormous capabilities, both military and asymmetrical. and certainly in the cyber field. and you, if you're going to take that kind of action, it needs to be thought through, planned through, and carefully vetted.
none of that happened based on what i heard or didn't hear in the classified briefing today. >> now, we single out mike lee and rand paul, because any dissension in the ranks on the republican side is very rare, let alone have people who are not set up to be inimical to this president's cause. although, in general, almost all republican lawmakers and a few democrats say, look, you know, the president can do this when he wants and this is an extension of the 2002 authorization for use of military force. so, you know, we have to just go on the basis from point to point. how, how is this an extension of something that was designed in 2002 as a reaction to 9/11? >> i think that's a really important question, chris. and the answer to me is very clearly, it's not. to cite a resolution after 9/11, adopted after 9/11, for a very different set of circumstances, that is now 17 years old, is an
absurd and orwellian interpretation of language and intent. clearly, that aumf was designed for a different time and a different set of circumstances, and a different set of threats. it was not designed to justify the assassination of a foreign leader. however maligned an actor he was. and that's why i favor repeal of the aumf. and a broad and a thorough debate about war powers and what decisions we want to make as a country with respect to our relationship with iran. >> now, as you know, this is something that i've been arguing about for a long time. you've made similar arguments. i don't see trump as the problem here. this, to me, is on congress. you guys have been giving presidents your power, administration after administration. i can't tell you how many times members of congress have argued, no, no, it's okay. you know, i get it. there's no need for a new aumf. i know all the circumstances have changed and everything is different. but you know, he's the president. he should have some latitude, in
direct contravention of what the constitution has laid out. is this the proof that you gave off too much power for too long and now you've lost it? >> i think, again, you have a very good point. i think congress, for decades, has tried to have it both ways. they want the freedom to criticize decisions made by the commander in chief, but they don't want the responsibility to make those decisions in lieu of the commander in chief. and i take a pretty strict view of the constitution. today, the justification was both that aumf we talked about and article ii. well, article ii simply states that the president is the commander in chief after and only after congress has decided that a state of war exists. and then directs that commander in chief to direct the armies. and over the years, we have allowed deferred powers to article ii. and apparently, no imputed or
inferred powers to the absolute power granted by the constitution to the congress to declare war. >> there's been a steady erosion. now, the vote tomorrow, i have been told it is, does that stand? it's still tomorrow? >> yes, i believe it is. >> that's about the war powers act. people can google it for themselves at home. came out 1973, i think november 7th they passed it. and it was to better define these powers. and it plays on this idea of imminency, which has been given the most expansive definition of the word that i have ever contemplated in my life, consistently by lawyers for the department of justice working for presidents that wanted it expanded. and basically, imminent means you can look back at what this guy has done, ever, and put that together with what he might be planning now, based on some kind of intelligence, and that's enough for it to be imminent. now, that's never been challenged. do you think there is any chance of any type of bipartisan political will that this vote will pass, it will pass as a party vote? but is there any chance of bipartisanship among congress to
take back their power, lest we live through something like this again, without a lucky miss by iran? >> i wish i could tell you that there was. during the nixon years, in fact, there was. but the behavior, the herd behavior of enabling and rationalization and cover-up we've seen across the board without any exceptions among my friends on the other side of the aisle in the house, anyhow, has been breathtaking, but also something that remains unbroken. so i don't hold out a lot of hope for any kind of serious bipartisan effort. that doesn't mean we shouldn't protect the constitution. and reassert the powers of the legislative branch, even if my friends on the other side of the aisle want to take a hike. >> gerry connolly, congressman, thank you very much for being with us tonight. >> my pleasure, chris. anytime. all right. the big questions now.
is it really over? if not, what may come next? does it come here? or just abroad? we have two people who really know the region and the realities, next. the wait is over. t-mobile is lighting up 5g nationwide. while some 5g signals go only blocks, t-mobile 5g goes miles... beyond the big cities to the small towns... to the people. now, millions of americans can have access to 5g on t-mobile.
and this is just the beginning. t-mobile, the first and only nationwide 5g network. you have power over pain, so the whole world looks different. the unbeatable strength of advil. what pain? what do we wburger...inner? i want a sugar cookie... wait... i want a bucket of chicken... i want... ♪ it's the easiest because it's the cheesiest. kraft. for the win win. hour 36 in the stakeout. as soon as the homeowners arrive, we'll inform them that liberty mutual customizes home insurance, so they'll only pay for what they need. your turn to keep watch, limu. wake me up if you see anything. [ snoring ]
this talk that iran may have intentionally missed u.s. forces is being downplayed tonight by top pentagon leaders. now, you may remember, last night, i kept talking to everybody about this because it's so hard to accept that they could be that targeted, that they would have that type of benign interest. the defense secretary is backing up the top u.s. general, mark milley in his assessment that iran did intend to kill american personnel. so, what does that mean as a window into their intentionality? and what does it tell us about what may come next? let's bring in state department veterans aaron david miller and niera hawk. thank you very much for last night and tonight. i was questioning a lot about this last night. do they have the capabilities, could you really come close but miss? now we have a flood of people
saying, yeah, yeah, yeah, it could have been that. niera, do you think it is unlikely that they shot missiles 800, 900 miles looking to miss? >> i think they were hoping to resolve this most immediate cycle of retaliation. and that was to target american infrastructure in iraq. it's the first time we've seen the iranian government actually cross the border that way versus the proxies that we're used to seeing. i think that was a very intentional way of doing it. and it's a good thing, frankly, that there was no loss of civilian or loss of life. i think that makes a huge difference and allowed both sides to kind of step back and take a moment to save face with both of their publics. with that said, this is -- iran is going to serve revenge as a cold dish. they are -- they are in this for the long haul. losing qassem soleimani is a very big deal for them. and this is -- we should be expecting that there will be further activity throughout the region, that will be in the form of either cyber attacks, either something out of the proxies that they have. these militia groups that they claim they don't have direct
control over, could be oil infrastructure for our allies or even, worst-case scenario, the al quds force that soleimani used to train and head, they have shown capabilities of having civilian attacks and taking out targets in europe and throughout africa. so clearly something that needs to be monitored over the next several months, because, again, this is part of a pattern of behavior for iran. they may have resolved this one moment, but they're still in it for the long haul. >> that's what i'm saying. we don't have another example of them shooting to miss. and they did put out there that they're contemplating attacking here at home, as well. what does that do to inspire people who want to impress these lone wolves and et cetera? >> certainly, they do not want a conventional war. that does not put them on the right footing. the idea of missile attacks, air bases and then we bring in air assaults, that does not play to their advantage. >> because they lose. i get it. i get it. i don't buy that they missed on purpose.
and i don't buy how the ayatollah is satisfied with this. thank god no u.s. troops and nobody else for that matter was hurt. but i just don't buy that they were trying to miss, which is why i kept asking. now, in you're tudoring, you said this is over, this is not over. why not? the foreign minister said, we're good. we're good. >> well, that's the foreign minister, chris. the soleimani file is very much still open. arguably, the second most powerful, important man in iran, close to the supreme leader, you know, this file is open and the iranians have just begun. nayyera makes a good point. we measure our lives, or i do, in terms of administrations. they think in terms of generations. and this, frankly, is the long game and it's their neighborhood. and nobody wins. the president talks about victory. nobody wins in the middle east. i mean, the region's littered with the remains of great powers who wrongly believed they could impose their will on smaller ones. we're just the latest to arrive and it's not our neighborhood and they have a lot of asymmetrical advantage. and we're going to begin to see
it -- >> how so, in terms of what killing soleimani meant as a catalyst to what you believe comes next. connect the dots. >> i just don't think that the administration had an objective and a set of aspirations tethered to a strategy. and the reality is the iranians enjoy advantages of geography, history, demography, particularly in iraq. well we are, now, frankly, disadvantaged. 17-year-old investment, thousands of american lives, scores of thousands of iraqi lives. $1 trillion expended. and we're now on a back foot, in large part because the iranians managed to change the channel. and i think that's just the beginning. you had andy mccabe on last night talking about cyber. he's already picking up indications that we need to be extremely vigilant. and i don't think the iranians have even started what it is they intend to do. >> but the counter is -- the
counter is, nayyera, to bring you back in is, to bring you back in, is, no, no, no, iran is really bad, nobody had sent the right message, sanctions isn't enough, obama had gave them back the money, the deal was a joke, so we punched them right in the face, took out one of their big guys, trump's no joke, that's why the foreign minister said shooting and missing is good enough. this helped. >> that's a very easy middle east word salad to toss at the american public when they're not really tracking how things work in the middle east on the day to day. the 2015 marker really when it goes back to 2003 with the united states invasion of iraq. the continued destabilization of the region with the civil war in syria, of which iran is on the wrong side, the civil war in yemen, all of this and now fast forward to the administration having made this really consequential decision without any evidence of a cost/benefit analysis of why now. >> he's a bad guy. he's killed americans in the past and wants to kill more. >> he's been a bad guy for a while. if you're going to take him out, do it in a way that the public or at least congress is aware there is a longer term plan.
there is an end game in sight and you have everything positioned in the region. unfortunately, it was done in a way in which now the iraqis are not willing to cooperate and work with us, the countering isis campaign, in which we were actually allied with the iranian militias there, that's fallen apart. so it's actually put us -- so it may look on the surface, rhetorically, like we really punched them in the nose, but at the end of the day, we've lost a lot of ground and potential goodwill in the region. >> cut the head off a worm -- >> it's a hydra. >> but it doesn't move as fast when you cut its head off. soleimani is gone. bad guy. iran knows that the united states isn't a joke and we're better positioned? >> yeah, but military power, chris, untethered from attainable, realistic and sustainable political goals, i give you iraq and afghanistan. a preponderance of power, weighted in our favor. and after 17, 18 years of conflict, the standard for victory was never can we win conventionally, but when can we leave? and what would we leave behind? and iran is a much -- look, there are three -- there are three functional, powerful
states in this region today. they're the three non-arabs. the arab states are melding down, iran, turkey, and the israelis. iran is a not 10-feet tall, but a formidable power, and now they've opened the file. we've opened the file against them. bad actor. no tears shed for soleimani. but the question is, where does this go? and can we even compete. and i don't think -- we're like some modern day gulliver, wandering around in the part of the world where trump would rather not be, tied up by tinier powers whose interests are not our own. and by the president's illusions. i just think it's not smart and i think we're in for a very bad patch, in the months and years ahead. >> well, i'll tell you what's helpful. you guys dealing with what the arguments are that are being put out there by the administration and its defenders, so the audience can process the information through logical analysis. nayyera, thank you. adm, thank you, as always. appreciate it. >> thank you, chris. take care. >> so this coincidence that we
need to take a look at. same night missiles were flying from iran, this passenger plane burst into flames just after takeoff in tehran. there was video of it. there it is on the screen. not something you see very often. we still don't know why. people were shy to report it, because it may be connected to what else was going on, but a 170-plus people are gone. what do we know? forget about the chatter. we have a top aviation expert who literally wrote the book on why planes crash, next. it's a thirteen-hour flight, that's not a weekend trip. fifteen minutes until we board. oh yeah, we gotta take off. you downloaded the td ameritrade mobile app so you can quickly check the markets? yeah, actually i'm taking one last look at my dashboard before we board. excellent. and you have thinkorswim mobile- -so i can finish analyzing the risk on this position. you two are all set. have a great flight. thanks. we'll see ya. ah, they're getting so smart.
choose the app that fits your investing style. ♪ motor? nope. not motor? it's pronounced "motaur." for those who were born to ride, there's progressive. for those who were born to ride, most people think as a reliable phone company. but to businesses, we're a reliable partner. we keep companies ready for what's next. (man) we weave security into their business. (second man) virtualize their operations. (woman) and build ai customer experiences. (second woman) we also keep them ready for the next big opportunity. like 5g. almost all of the fortune 500 partner with us. (woman) when it comes to digital transformation...
verizon keeps business ready. but when we found out our son had autism, his future became my focus. lavender baths always calmed him. so we turned bath time into a business... ♪ ...and building it with my son has been my dream job. ♪ at northwestern mutual, our version of financial planning helps you live your dreams today. find a northwestern mutual advisor at nm dot com. helps you live your dreams today. i'm max, i was diagnosed with aplastic anemia and if i didn't find a donor, i probably wouldn't be here right now. be the match uses the power of the cisco network to match donors with patients faster than ever, saving lives like max's. me and dylan are dna twins. ♪ ♪
all right. there are a lot of questions surrounding this ukrainian airline jet that crashed outside tehran, killing all 176 people onboard. yes, it was happening at about the same time that iranian missiles were attacking u.s. air bases in iraq. maybe that is a reason why a lot in the media shied away from it, because they didn't want to make a connection. but i don't think we can avoid it, either. 176 people died. let's talk about it.
let's talk about what we know. cnn's safety analyst, david soucy is with us. thank you very much. you're always my first choice here. thank you for being available. now, you've taken a look at it. let's deal with the main proposition. do you believe, from what you've seen, at this point, there's any easy indication that this was done to this plane. that this was shot down? >> chris, i don't see any evidence of that right now. an accident investigation, you have to try to avoid the web of speculation and being drawn into that parlor, if you will, because the fact is, there's nothing that says, there was no witness of a missile, there is nothing that says that it was. and in fact, if you look at the evidence on the ground, the photos from -- which there are many -- photos from the site, i don't see anything in there that would give you a firm indication of any kind of missile attack at all. >> help us understand some of the speculation. you don't usually see a plane like that in fire, on fire, as it's flying.
no mayday call. what could that mean? >> well, at this point, if you look at that fire and the flame, you notice that the flame, it has trailing pieces, trailing fire coming out from behind the aircraft. now, when you look at the accident site, you don't see melted or burnt wings or aluminum. this aircraft is made out of aluminum fiberglass, so it's not something that's going to just burn and not show any evidence of that. and i don't see any of that, other than the post-accident type burning. so i would not start there with my investigation. i would look more towards the engines. >> all right. one more general point here. in terms of an engine fire or some type of internal combustion that caused this, what? what kinds of things might have happened? >> well, if you recall, we had a rupture of the engine and an uncontained failure of an engine not too long ago. it was southwest, and that, unfortunately, took the life of one person.
but these uncontained failures can cause problems. and actually bring aircraft down with fire. so that's something that i looked at when i looked at the photos. and, again, chris, i want to make sure that i'm not saying that this is problems or these are what's happening. what i'm saying is, this is where i would start my investigation. these are the things that i would look for. so in those photos i found some pretty compelling evidence that there was some engine issues. >> yeah, let's start. one of them -- let's go to the first photo here. this is of what appears to be a damaged engine itself, now, you circled three different things with color coding. pre-impact damage, post-impact damage, trailing scorching. is trailing scorching what you were talking about, that the fire that was going, as we saw it in the sky, and it sending things back that created marks on matter? >> exactly. if you look closely at this, you can see, in this particular
picture, it's a picture of the rear of the engine, which in the rear of the engine is where the turbine is. that's where all the power comes from. up to 25,000 pounds of thrust come out of this little section of the engine, and that's what's pushing the aircraft forward. you have two of those going on. >> right, so what's the difference between pre-impact and post-impact? help us understand that? >> well, so, if it's pre-impact, that means that the fire was there and the trailing scorching indicates that it was in the line of flight. that after that rupture happened that you see, there's flames coming back across, scorching the metal. and that happens pre-accident. now, what you look for post-accident are the things that are scratches and dents and holes in the wings and after the aircraft hits the ground, it breaks into pieces, it starts flipping. and it starts hitting rocks and scraping and cutting itself. and those are post-accident marks. and you can see some of those, because you can see the fresh metal scraping on that metal. >> which of them are instructive, if at all, in terms of whether this was done to this
plane or it happened within the plane? >> really, at this point, i don't -- again, i don't see anything -- if this was a missile, like we -- like an mh-17, when that sam missile, the buk missile blew it up a, there would be a pattern. i'm not seeing any of that. of course, i'm not there, but we do have hundreds and hundreds of pictures of this accident site. and i've gone through every single one of them that i have access to, and i haven't seen anything that would be anything similar to what we saw with mh-17. >> we'll put up another picture here of one of the turbines and you circled pre-impact damage as proof of what happened to this plane in and of itself. and again, it does not look to you as the type of damage that would have been caused by a munition. the black boxes, though, are always the bible on this. are they something that would tell the story of how this plane lit on fire? >> most definitely it would, chris.
you have fuel -- there's -- you can get as many as 10,000 pieces of information out of those boxes. each data set tells you and you put that over time, and you can get a lot of information about this aircraft from vibrational analysis that is recorded to the fuel pressures to the oil pressures. everything you need to know to solve this incident is in those boxes. >> now, the question is, iran is probably going to be the one to recover it. whom will they give it to, if anybody. they're not going to give it to us. and we can understand that in terms of what our right is to have them. but the company is supposed to get them. boeing is supposed to get them. the carrier is supposed to get the information. and certainly, they both have every interest in saying what to this plane and to these 176 lives. and by extension, their families. david soucie, thank you so much for helping us understand what this is and what it is not at this point. >> certainly, chris. >> appreciate it. all right. let's turn back to the crisis with iran. are we better off from the actions taken by the president? you heard gerry connolly,
democrat, not happy. you heard republicans, a couple of them, not happy. well, how about one who is happy? not happy that we're in at all, but feels it was right. he nearly gave his life defending this country. valuable perspective, smart guy, new voice in congress. mr. crenshaw, next. ah, mr. resourceful, brown-bagging it. so why you paying so much for wireless? i don't know... the new tracfone wireless gives you all kinds of control. leftovers? tracfone lets you keep your leftover data each month. what are you doing? unlimited carryover data! hey! do you know you can get unlimited talk and text on america's best 4g lte networks for $20, no contract? unlimited talk? i like that! because on sundays you know i gotta talk to mama, then on...
this is your wake-up call, people. the new tracfone wireless. now you're in control. the new tracfone wireless. it's the sleep number 360 smart bed. can it help me fall asleep faster? yes, by gently warming your feet. can it help keep me asleep? absolutely, it intelligently senses your movements and automatically adjusts to keep you effortlessly comfortable. will it help me raise my game? yup! so, you can really promise better sleep? not promise, prove. so i can be my best for these guys? yes, and those guys. sleep number. this is not a bed it's proven quality sleep. from $999. i wanted my hepatitis c gone. i put off treating mine. epclusa treats all main types of chronic hep c. whatever your type, epclusa could be your kind of cure.
i just found out about mine. i knew for years epclusa has a 98% overall cure rate. i had no symptoms of hepatitis c mine caused liver damage. epclusa is only one pill, once a day, taken with or without food for 12 weeks. before starting epclusa, your doctor will test if you have had hepatitis b, which may flare up, and could cause serious liver problems during and after treatment. tell your doctor if you have had hepatitis b, other liver or... ...kidney problems, hiv, or other medical conditions... ...and all medicines you take, including herbal supplements. taking amiodarone with epclusa may cause a serious slowing of your heart rate. common side effects include headache and tiredness. ask your doctor today, if epclusa is your kind of cure.
all right. let's clear some of the chatter here. iran is a bad actor. it's inimical to the united states. it's a bad actor in the region, period. for a long time. this general that america took out was considered a terrorist for good reason. the question is, was this done the right way? and does that matter going forward? congressman dan crenshaw knows the importance of clear intel and he knows the reality of war in the region, okay? he is a veteran who served with honor. the republican from texas joins us now. happy new year. >> happy new year, chris. thanks for having me. >> it's good to have you. i wish i had you on for a better reason. but in truth, this matters. this is good reason.
thank you for making the time. you heard me off the top. there is no discussion about whether iran is inimical to the cause, is a danger to america, nor with this individual. my question is about process here. especially as someone who has to pay the price in the past for political decisions, right? you're a fighting man. do you have any concerns about the president and the people around him doing this the way they did without congress on the basis they've provided so far? >> that's an important question to ask, i certainly don't deny that. but upon looking at the facts and being in the briefings i've been in, yes, i do believe it was the right decision and i think they made it as well as they could. we have to look at this in context, and the context of history and the escalation of violence that has occurred against the united states. over the past few years, so even as the iran deal was getting signed, the iranians were embarrassing u.s. navy sailors by capturing them, boarding
their vessel, and putting those pictures all over the internet. then we move into putting mines on oil tankers, bombing saudi oil facilities, downing a u.s. drone, rocket attacks on our bases. >> exporting and funding terror, doing stuff in syria, even feeding into the north african problems. all true. my question to you is, that also informs us that this was a longstanding thing that marries to the idea that the secretary of state reportedly was working the president on this for a long time. that does not suggest imminency. >> no, but it -- well, it was imminency, but it also culminated into attacks that killed an american citizen, and then, i think -- and then orchestrated an attack against a u.s. embassy. so the escalation had occurred and then there was good intelligence that showed that it was going to continue to escalate. and that escalation ladder needed to be disrupted. so when i hear somebody like general milley and the cia
director and the dni director say that this is some of the best, clearest intelligence that they have seen, i think we should take that into account and believe what they're saying. >> well, we would believe it more quickly, by the way, if we hadn't had a president for two and a half years pounding on us that you can't trust u.s. intel. but let's take your point. because i want people to trust intel. but i want them to trust, but verify. we should have proof. that's the media's job. senator mike lee had a different take. republican, utah, not set up to be against the president for no reason. here's what he said. >> drive-by notification or after the fact lame briefings, like the one we just received, aren't adequate. every time we got close, they would say, well, we can't discuss that here because it's really sensitive. we're in a scif. we're in a secure underground bunker where all electronic devices have to be checked at the door. and they still refused to tell us. >> rand paul went on to say they couldn't give me the details, they couldn't give me the proof
of imminency, that they had to do it now. they're relying on an aumf that has no bearing to what's going on now. i blame congress for that, not the executive branch, by the way. but why does the senator or two senators come to such a different conclusion than you? >> yeah, well, first of all, the 2002 aumf is sort of an added justification. it's meant to demonstrate that the attack happened in iraq and the counterattack happened in iraq. we already have an operational presence in iraq. the real justification is article ii of the constitution and the war powers resolution, which clearly states that the president can take immediate action to protect u.s. forces, especially when we just had two significant attacks on u.s. forces. >> but then why was pompeo working him for so long to do this? and why wasn't it worth bringing in congress and trying to get people like you into the leadership position, who have such expertise to talk about whether it's right, the way they're doing it? because really, this is your job in congress. >> i'm not aware of secretary pompeo's conversations with the president. but the other part about the
intelligence that senator lee was complaining about is, listen, i understand it. i do. but having come from the world of intelligence, i also understand that these are extremely sensitive sources and methods. and when you say what you know, you by nature are revealing how you got it. and that is of extreme concern, especially if we're still getting that intelligence. and i don't think it's out of the question or out of bounds to say that, you know, the director of the cia is not sure whether these members of congress will go out and say what they're saying. the easiest thing in the world, by the way, is to know that the cia and the dni can't reveal those intelligence sources. and then go say, well, we don't believe it. >> i hear you but -- >> that's not fair. >> but these aren't democrats, they're republicans. it's not like it's a political play. the gang of eight wasn't even talked to before this happened, which is a mechanism that's in place for a reason.
the president, who has said again and again i'm not blaming you for this, dan, i'm bringing you on to talk reason to it, he's said so many times, u.s. intel can be deep state nonsense. confidential sources and classified -- forget, declassify it all. it should all be out there. now, he doesn't want to do that. now he's told the american people nothing. why should we believe it was such a clear case? >> well, because we have so many -- again, we have general milley, we have the director of the cia, director of the dni saying the same things, as well. so valid criticisms. you know, you can make a valid critique that members of congress could have been notified, at least as the strike was happening, but that doesn't take away from the overall picture here, which is that this is a good thing. it's a good strategic decision -- >> it was a good tactical decision. >> and strategic decision. i would say strategic decision -- >> why if but they haven't articulated a strategy. they haven't articulated a strategy yet.
in fact, the president said he didn't need one. >> i'll articulate -- i'll articulate a strategy right now, which is, we are the united states of america. and when people attack us, we can't not respond. we have to respond and we have to disrupt the escalation ladder. what's happened in the last 24 hours is i believe that has happened. i believe we have restored deterrence in an effective way. >> how do you know? >> well, because, you look at the type of attack that happened last night, you look at the indications that the iranians actually let the iraqis know beforehand, so that they were completely prepared for it, so there would be no casualties. the iranians can tell their people that they did this great thing, where they took out americans, and in reality, that didn't happen. and we don't have to escalate it anymore. >> you think it's over? you think it's over? you think there was an off-ramp? >> there was definitely an off-ramp. now, as far as the long-term skirmishes with surrogate forces, say, you know, shia militias, i think smaller things like that will happen. but we had clear indications that the iranians wanted to escalate this dramatically, okay? and that is -- that is
fundamentally -- >> and you don't think that will happen now? >> no, it's already stopped. as it appears right now. >> well, it appears right now. it's been a day, dan. how do you know what's going to happen a week from now? >> i can't know -- >> why would you say with certainty that it's stopped? >> of course, i can't know what's going to happen a week from now, but it certainly appears that way based on all the information that we have now, based on what the iranians are said, look at the iranian foreign minister and what he's tweeted out. >> secretary pompeo says he's a liar and can't be believed. >> well, as of before, the iranians were committing attacks where they actually took credibility. you have to understand how different that is from years past, where they used surrogates and they tried to make -- and they tried to make their role in it unattributable. >> understood. >> and that changed recently. >> understood. >> that changed recently, and now they're walking that back. they're in a much weaker position, and the president has outlined exactly what his red lines are, and more importantly than that, the light at the end
of the tunnel wants to renegotiate the jcpoa, go back to the table. he's setting out a path for peace, but he's also set out red lines and deterrents, whereas before, we never had that. and that is really important to note. and i think there is more reason to be hopeful than there was before. >> listen, i'm all about being hopeful. i don't want to see any escalation. i'll be very clear. i am biased here. i don't want to see men and women like you fighting fights for political decisions that may not make the most sense. i'm all about keeping it about talking. he sent red lines, iranian crossed it. thankfully, that didn't trigger any further action. he wants to go to the table. every expert says this makes going to the table less likely. but dan crenshaw, i'm with you. i hope this cools it down. i hope this allows for more. i just hope that people like you in congress fight for your right to have a part in decision-making processes that may lead to war and the sacrifice of blood, forget about treasure. so thank you for being with us. >> thanks for having me, chris.
>> dan crenshaw, come on early and often. i love having you on the show. happy new year to you and your family. all right, tonight feels a little different from last night. that was a hard night. it was scary, missiles flying at our troops, we don't know what's going on, but let's not run way and just be happy with the relief. three lessons to learn from or have a fear of a repeat, next. ♪ the amount of student loan debt i have i'm embarrassed to even say i felt like i was going to spend my whole adult life paying this off thanks to sofi, i can see the light at the end of the tunnel as of 12pm today, i am debt free ♪ we have no debt, we don't owe anybody anything, and it's fantastic ♪ and now for their service to the community, we present limu emu & doug
it's an easy way to earn it's cashback on the stuff i'm already buying. when you have a child and they're constantly growing out of clothing, earning cashback from rakuten just makes everything easier. sometimes it's 3% sometimes it's 8% but you're always getting cashback. the way cashback works on rakuten is so they get a commission from the store and then they share that commission with me. and you have money, more money to spend because you got free money. go to rakuten.com and sign up today for a $10 bonus. ♪ do you recall, not long ago ♪ we would walk on the sidewalk ♪
♪ all around the wind blows ♪ we would only hold on to let go ♪ ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we need someone to lean on ♪ blow a kiss into the sun ♪ we needed somebody to lean on ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ all we need is someone to lean on ♪ feeling some relief? me too. kind of. but i argue there are three lessons that we must learn to avoid being here again this way. lesson one, declaring victory because we got bombed and nobody died, that is proof of no strategy. take a listen. >> the american people should be extremely grateful and happy no americans were harmed. in last nights attack. by the iranian regime.
>> he seems more nervous than when he was talking about that he had to attack. now, thank god nobody was hurt, but this shouldn't be about getting lucky. trump while inclined to avoid conflict nevertheless was convinced. at least in parts with suggestions how he would look. to put troops into danger but kill a powerful general in a sovereign nation and hasn't explained why. congress has to put duty before party. this is their power to give. not watch. do we really want to repeat this process and hope the enemy just misses again? is that caring about troops and our safety? be clear, congress has the power to declare war. the president, except in an emergency, is supposed to have congressional authority or at least buy-in. he has yet to prove it was an emergency. lesson two, president trump has to own what he does. he read something to you that was likely written by someone else today.
but it was also certainly not true. listen to this. >> iran hostility substantially increased after the foolish iran nuclear deal was signed in 2013. and they were given $150 billion not to mention $1.8 billion in cash. the missiles fired last night at us and our allies were paid for with the funds made available by the last administration. >> he doesn't know that. and he misled you about the money by 90 billion. but you know what? give it to him. let's say we shouldn't have given back the money. they're bad people and do bad things with money and try to hurt us. no matter. the money didn't get us here. neither did the deal. the proximate cause wasn't the deal, it was trump cutting the iran deal loose. so there was no more control and he burned our allies. and it's about iran's bad acts before and since, and the direct
cause, let's be clear, was killing the general. now, to hide from the above, he names obama all the time. like, three times a day. but here with iran, especially, this is about this president's decisions. all we know for sure is the decision about killing the general got us bombed and had nothing to do with obama. final lesson, we have trust our institutions. if we verify their information. we should be able to rely on what our president and intel says, as long as they offer proof. more importantly, we should be able to come together because we all bleed the same way if attacked. crude but true. but we can't. why? president's a sealer liar. he spent his entire presidency bashing the very intel agencies he now says are great and we must trust without proof. he won't even follow the rules that he demanded when convenient. show proof. forget about confidential,
forget about classified, put it out there, it matters. but not now. he kept warning. we kept warning that these self-serving attacks of his on truth and the institutions would come back to bite him and now it has. and he's got a lot of people in congress and the country not behind what he did, not for good reason, but because they don't have any reason, but they have good reason not to trust him and why he did it. so that's the problem. how do we fix it? i argue congress has to put country before party, at least when it comes to what may get us killed. stop defending the president for lying and deceiving. if you can't say that you would say what he said, then say it's wrong. and stop saying we live in a post-fact society. no, we don't. facts are facts. there have always been facts. thank god, there will always be facts. now, what you do with them is a separate question. lastly, let the past few days be a reminder. my brothers and sisters, we are
all in this together. you know you felt it last night. our troops are in harm's way. left, right or reasonable. if something happens here, god forbid, in the aftermath of all of this, and you better believe it's likely, whoever gets hit will bleed no matter their politics. we are all susceptible to terror and we are all capable of disagreeing with hating the opposition. we have real enemies, they're just not members of the opposing party. we were reminded of that last night. you know you felt it. please don't forget it. that's the argument. now, something else we should not forget, americans are in need of help. the island of puerto rico once again suffering from silence after another disaster. why has our president said nothing? bolo, next. what's for dinner? (fake gagging noises)
(whistling) the wait is over. t-mobile is lighting up 5g nationwide. while some 5g signals go only blocks, t-mobile 5g goes miles... beyond the big cities to the small towns... to the people. now, millions of americans can have access to 5g on t-mobile. and this is just the beginning. t-mobile, the first and only nationwide 5g network.
wthat's why xfinity hasu made taking your internetself. and tv with you a breeze. really? yup. you can transfer your service online in about a minute. you can do that? yeah. and with two-hour service appointment windows, it's all on your schedule. awesome. so while moving may still come with its share of headaches... no kidding. we're doing all we can to make moving simple, easy, awesome. go to xfinity.com/moving to get started.
bolo, be on the lookout. worst earthquake to hit puerto rico in 100 years. not a word from trump. forget they're part of the country again? upset they weren't happy enough with your tossed towels? now, to his credit, potus did approve federal relief on tuesday. the job is not just to pay. it's not his money anyway. it's give comfort and alert us to the need to show he cares to help the people there cope. and he knows it. hundreds of aftershocks, dozens of homes, buildings in ruin. two-thirds of the island still without power, two-thirds. and for those hit hard by maria, this second blow is worse. would he be silent if it was texas, god forbid? then why now? compassion counts, especially from him. but you know what matters most? it's to be careful, to know about the need in puerto rico
from our countrymen and women. be on the lookout, we will not forget them. thank you for watching. now, stay tuned. the news continues here on cnn. hello and welcome to our viewers joining us here in the united states and from all around the world. i'm roelz mary church. >> she is indeed. i'm michael holmes from cnn world headquarters in atlanta. ahead this hour on the program, promising sanctions instead of striking back. donald trump tamps down the rhetoric after the iranian missile attacks on bases housing military troops in iraq. >> investigators reveal new details about the final moments of the ukrainian plane that went down shortly after takeoff from tehran. also ahead, harry and meghan stunned the royal family, announcing they're going to spend less time in their high-profile roles and