tv FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News November 9, 2014 11:00am-12:01pm PST
2016. gary thinks there's a master key to gridlock called compromise. that's it for us here in washington. thanks so much for watching fox news. i'm chris wallace. breaking today. two americans held captive in north korea return to the u.s. with this country's top spy. plus, with control of both houses of congress, are republicans headed for compromise with president obama or confrontation? >> we are heading to washington. and we are going to make them squeal! >> we have swept this nation with a compelling senate majority. >> tonight we shook up the senate. you shook up the senate. >> we'll talk with two republicans in the new wave of
senators. shelley moore capito and cory gardner. after the white house lunch, did the power shift in washington and the partisan gridlock? >> we do have an obligation to work together on issues where we can agree. i think we have a duty to do that. >> i would enjoy having some kentucky bourbon with mitch mcconnell. >> we'll discuss the agenda for the lame duck session and next year, with two congressional leaders who were at the lunch. republican senator john barrasso and democratic congressman xavier becerra. plus, the president authorizes sending 1,500 more u.s. troops to iraq in the fight against isis. our sunday panel will tackle that. and our power player of the week, a man who goes undercover to rescue child sex slaves. >> we kind of broke roles and said, guys, this is the sound of liberation, the sound of
emancipation. all right now on "fox news sunday". >> hello from fox news in washington. we'll get to the new balance of power in washington in a moment. but first some breaking news. two americans held by north korea are back home, and u.s. air strikes in iraq may have taken out the leader of isis. fox news chief intelligence correspondent has the latest on both stories. >> chris, senior administration officials insist there was no quid pro quo for release of two americans but now that they're home on american soil, there are new questions about the timing and motivation of north korea's secretive leader. saturday the blue and white government jet touched down in washington state. the release of kenneth bae and todd matthew after a senior intelligence officer. miller was arrested in april, accused of hostile act and sentenced to six years in prison. bae was sentenced to 15 years of
hard labor for unspecified crimes. >> i just to want say thank you all for supporting me, and lifting me up and not forgetting me. at same time, not forgetting the people of north korea. >> the director of national intelligence, james clapper, did meet with north korean officials but significantly not with the north korean leader, kim jong-un. they say it was emphasized to pyongyang they must demshgize. a new series of air strikes near the iraqi town of mosul targeted the leadership of isis. with intelligence suggesting a meeting of senior operatives, possibly including al baghdadi, damage assessments are ongoing and a defense official had no further information on the status of the isis leader. chris? >> catherine, thanks for that. a red wave swept the country
this is week, giving republicans control of congress, including their first senate majority since 2006. we want to introduce you to some of the new members of the senate as the gop sets its agenda. we'll talk with colorado's new governor, cory gardner, but first shelly moore capito is west virginia's first female senator and first republican senator in half a century. senator-elect, congratulations. welcome to "fox news sunday". >> thank you. glad to be on. >> president obama called you on election night, one of the few newly elected republican senators he reached out to. did he give you any sense he's willing to compromise? >> he did say -- he congratulated me, which was very welcome. the call was wonderful, of course. he did say, i think we can find common ground to help the people of west virginia. as you know, in west virginia the president is very unpopular, so i appreciate that sentiment.
i want to find that common ground. i look forward to that. >> but he didn't put much meat on the bones. >> well, no, it was late. you know, i'm going to take what i can get at this point. >> in his news conference the day after the election, the president was unwilling to say that he's going to change any of his policies or change the way he does business. and he also seemed to almost dismiss the message from the voters on tuesday night. take a look. to everyone who voted, i want you to know that i hear you. to the two-thirds of those who chose not to participate in the process yesterday, i hear you, too. do you think the president gets it, gets how unhappy voters are with with him and the democrats? >> not really. those comments we saw right after the election, when he says he hears two-thirds of the people that are not voting, what kind of message could he possibly be getting? i think the dysfunction,
gridlock, overreaching -- certainly in my state by certain overreaching regulatory bodies is eating away in the confidence of his ability to lead and ability to get things done. and i don't believe that, you know, i want to believe that we can do this. i do believe we can and we must. and i hope the president kind of gets on board a little more than he did in that first press conference. >> there's also a question for republicans, and that is whether they compromise with the president or whether they confront him. and there seemed to be a split in the republican parties, comments by presumptive leader mitch mcconnell and tea party favorite ted cruz. let's take a look at what both of them had to say. >> i want to first look for areas that we can agree on. there probably are some. >> the era of obama lawlessness is over.
>> so, are you with mcconnell, let's look for areas of agreement, or cruz who wants apparently to draw bright lines versus this president? >> well, let's look at one thing the president did do for the republican party on election night. he unified us. we have majorities, a larger majority in the house. we have the majority in the senate. many states -- my state hasn't elected a republican senator since 1956. and part of it was the dissatisfaction with the direction the president's going. i think what we would be smart to do, in my opinion, the way i want to move forward s score small victories. bipartisan with the president, showing and demonstrating to that diseffected majority of americans out there that we can begin to solve the problem. >> such as? >> such as keystone pipeline, such as some tax reform, transportation bill, a six-year transportation bill that -- >> do you think the president will back down on keystone pipeline? >> i think he would be smart to do it when he sees a margin in
the senate of over 65 votes. i would hope so. if we're looking at jobs, infrastructure. we have an energy growth in our country we really need to capitalize on. >> let me talk about one of the big issues in your campaign, which was what you called the war on coal, which is obviously a big deal in coal-rich west virginia. how aggressive are you going to be in the senate in trying to roll back some of the epa regulations? >> extremely aggressive. that is my promise to west virginia. we have lost over the last two years 5,000 jobs. those are just coal jobs. we have several thousand other miners under a warn notice, meaning they're going to potentially be losing their job. that doesn't count the electrician jobs, tire distributor, all the other jobs that goes with coal mining. coal mining is our base-load fuel. president's policy is disinfranchising part of the country, my part of the country.
we've been picked as a loser. i'm not going to stand for it. rolling back the epa regulations is the way to do it. >> how do you feel about the president trying to get a lot of things done in this lame duck session of congress, for instance, just yesterday he nominated loretta lynch to be the new attorney general. how do you feel about his effort to try to get that -- her confirmed by the lame duck session as opposed to waiting for the new senate with members like you getting to vote on? >> i think you see the rapid change in both houses, particularly on the senate side. i think you'll see a lot pushed to the first of the year. i think that will give us time to have the debate and deliberation the senate hasn't had over the last four years, whether it's nominee for attorney general -- >> do you think it would be a mistake to try to push a jammer through this session? >> i do. i think if we're going to have an era of good faith, we need to begin with the confirmation process for one of the most important jobs in the country, that's attorney general. >> senator-elect, thank you. thank you for coming in. please come back. >> i would love to.
thank you. >> good. let's meet another of the new gop senators in the battle state of colorado. cory gardner ousted democratic incumbent mark udall. congratulations to you and welcome to "fox news sunday". >> thank you for having me on. >> i want to start with the question i asked senator-elect capito. do you think from what you've heard from the election, do you think the president gets what voters were saying on election night? >> time will tell. look, what i saw in colorado on election night wasn't so much about republicans or democrats, but it was about a rejection of the failed ways of washington. and the democrats happen to be in charge of the senate and the president. so, the fact is, if the president doesn't recognize that people are dissatisfied with the direction of washington, then he's going to have a challenge over the next couple of years. >> and what message, senator-elect, do you think voters were sending republicans? do you think it was a mandate or do you think in a sense it was kind of hold your nose and they
dislike you less than they dislike the president and the democrats? >> people don't like dysfunction, gridlock, the way washington is working. so in two years from now, if republicans don't prove we can govern with maturity, we can govern with competence, we'll see the same result two years from now but a wave going back a different direction. >> in your campaign, you reached out to hispanics who make up 14% of the voters in your state of colorado. and you did very well in a lot of the areas of colorado where they live. since the election, perhaps the biggest issue has been the president's statement, his determination he's going to sign this executive order signing the deportation of millions in the country illegally now. here's some of the debate over that issue. >> what i'm not going to do is just wait. i think it's fair to say that i've shown a lot of patience.
>> i believe that the president continues to act on his own, is he going to poison the well. when you play with matches, you take the risk of burning yourself. >> senator-elect, do you worry that problems are going to once again be seen when this is all over, once again be seen as anti-hispanic and anti-immigration? >> i think what we have to do is make sure we work with the president, show a willingness in the house and senate to work together so that the president can ultimately do the right thing. the right thing for the president to do isn't going around congress but it's working with congress. so, i think that's the challenge that this new era of goodwill, so to speak, presents itself for us. we have to make sure that the president is willing to do the right thing. that means the congress and house, the house and senate, are willing to show an effort to work together. i think ultimately that's how we have immigration reform and we have to continue our outreach efforts in every community in our country, in every community in states like colorado, to make
sure they have the confidence we're going to look out for them and be a strong voice for them, regardless of where they are from. >> but what's going to happen when the president, and he says he's going to do it some time before the end of the year, signs this executive order, goes around congress? >> well, i hope the president between now and whenever that is mind. will decide to do the right thing. >> and if he doesn't? >> that means mitch mcconnell, leader boehner -- again, we have to encourage him to dot right thing. i don't want to speculate about an executive order that may or may not exist. we know we need immigration reform in this country because the system we have isn't working right now. the president to encourage working together, to encourage a way to go forward, if he does this, then i'm concerned he won't be doing the right thing. that would hurt our ability to move forward in the next two years. let's do the right thing, let's work together, let's find solutions. that's what the people of colorado are looking for. in large part, that's why we were able to achieve victory, because we presented that positive, optimistic vision for this country and that's what the president needs to do. >> let's talk about doing the right thing on immigration.
the hispanic vote did not play a big role in the midterms, but you know as well as i do they're going to play a very big role because hispanics play a big role in elections, play a big role in 2016. how do republicans get on the right side of the immigration issue for what is the fastest growing voting bloc in the nation? >> when you look at the issues that the hispanic community cares about, in pueblo county, colorado, i tied senator udall, one of the largest hispanic populations in the state. we did it because we talked to issues to every community, whether it's education, making sure children aren't trapped in a failing school system -- >> specifically on immigration, aren't republicans going to have to do something when it comes to legalization of the millions who are already here? >> i think when it comes to immigration, we've talked about
border security. let's start with border security, as so many people are asking for. border security in and of itself is not meaningful unless have you a guest worker program to go with it, to create that legal avenue of labor. we have to make sure we fix the entry/exit system, e-verify systems. those those are republicans can do right now. that's something the house, the senate and the president can work together. let's do the right thing. let's take those steps where i think there is a broad agreement we can get behind and make sure that we are doing the right thing. >> finally, and we have less than a minute left, for all the talk about the republican senate, you're going to find out very quickly, i know you already know it, but i suspect you're not fully up to how frustrating it's going to be, you're going to need a lot of democratic votes to hit that 60-vote super majority to get anything done. any thoughts about how to break the gridlock in the senate? >> i've worked closely with gary peterson, senate-elect from michigan, done a lot of energy
efficiency work with ron wyden from oregon. it's about putting those things on the president's desk with broad, bipartisan support. let's start by putting those solutions like keystone pipeline, repeal of the medical device tax on the president's desk. show we can do it with republicans and democrats and prove to the american people washington learned its lessons. that will ultimately help republicans when it comes to our nomination for 2016. >> thank you for your time. please come visit us when you're in washington. >> will do it. thank you. next week we'll introduce you to tom cotton of arkansas who unseated democratic tom pryor. coming up, a show of bipartisanship as president invites congressional leaders for lunch at the white house. but were there any signs of breaking the ice? we'll find out from two members of congress who were there. what do you think? will the shift of power in washington end the gridlock or only increase it? let me know on facebook or twitter @foxnewssunday and
her smile is so white. i was pretty stunned myself. oh, these aren't the messy tray things. whitestrips are so easy they just go on and get to work. removes fourteen years of stains. and that. see? [ both laugh ] [ female announcer ] crest whitestrips work on a deeper level than paste. whitening toothpaste only removes surface stains, but whitestrips go below the enamel surface to safely remove deep stains. i'd love to get my teeth whiter. i take so many photos over the holidays. here! [ both laugh ] she's the best. [ female announcer ] don't miss our buy one get one free offer this holiday season! i don't have to leave my desk and get up and go to the post office anymore. [ male announcer ] with stamps.com you can print real u.s. postage for all your letters and packages. i have exactly the amount of postage i need, the instant i need it. can you print only stamps? no... first class. priority mail. certified. international. and the mail man picks it up. i don't leave the shop anymore. [ male announcer ] get a 4 week trial plus $100 in extras including postage and a digital scale. go to stamps.com/tv and never go to the post office again.
president obama sat down with congressional leaders of both parties for lunch friday at the white house, over sea bass and pumpkin tart, they discussed the way forward with republicans soon to control congress. they disagreed sharply over the president's plan for executive action on immigration. joining us now, two of the leaders who were there, senate john barrasso is chair of the senate republican policy committee. and congressman xavier becerra is head of the house democratic
caucus. before we get to the lunch, i want to ask you about the president's decision on friday to send 1,500 more u.s. troops to iraq, almost doubling our deployment there. senator barrasso, you're on the foreign relations committee. a couple questions. one, are you going to vote for the $5.6 billion in extra money the president wants? secondly, how do you feel about this slow motion bit by bit escalation of our footprint in iraq? >> we're going to look at specifically how he wants the money spent, but it's right that the president does come to congress for an authorization for use of military force. i support that. i think congress ought to be involved in those discussions. you do get concerned about mission creep. i think they've been doing a good job in trying to degrade, but they have a long way to go in terms of dedestroying isis and trying to secure iraq. there are still big problems in syria and we discussed all of this with general austin friday at the white house, as well as the secretary. >> head of centcom.
any concern this escalation has the sense of vietnam about it and do you think the president has a strategy, a strategy and a plan, to beat isis? >> the way it was outlined at the lunch on friday, it seemed like a pretty coherent plan that was directed at the ultimate goal of dismantling isil. and my sense is this, after, as the senator said, we have an opportunity to look closely at all the details. i think most members will see this is just a build up of the original plan, which is to try to help the iraqis stand up and take care of business back home. >> where does it end? it was in the 200, now it's 2900. how many more troops? >> i think president has always said. the iraqis have to take kay of this. we're willing to help but it's their job to take care of their civil war. i don't think the president intends to have this become anything close to a vietnam. >> let's talk about the lunch, which you both attended on friday.
senator barrasso, how heat was the discussion about the president taking executive action to defer deportations of millions of people in this country illegally? and will that really, as some republican leaders are suggesting, hurt cooperation on every issue? >> well, i believe it will hurt cooperation on every issue, chris. what the president does over the next two months is really going to set the tone for the next two years in washington. you know, nobody ran for office and won a senate race based on the president having more executive authority to take executive actions on amnesty or on health care or any of the other issues. the american people want us to work together to find solutions. so, i think it would be like the president pulling the pin out of a hand grenade and throwing it in as we're trying to actually work together. i'm hoping that cooler heads at the white house can prevail upon the president to say, look, if you want to have a good constructive final two years of your presidency, don't do this now. wait until the new congress is
sworn in. let them come together and do the sort of things senator-elect gardner was talking about in terms of working together to find some solutions on immigration. >> congressman, a couple questions for you. did the president really cut off vice president biden when he started talking about this, the idea of how long would it take republicans to come up with their own bill? and do you worry that it's going to be the grenade scenario and that this will poison the well on a bunch of issues, not just immigration? >> i don't recall anybody being cut off. there was a good conversation, back and forth. on the issue of immigration and where we'll go, i think the president's been very patient. he made it very clear, he's been waiting for six years to get a bill from congress. he's been waiting a year and a half for the house republicans to act on the bill that the senate passed on a bipartisan basis. and the president for months has been saying he's going to take action where he can to try to make the law work better, smarter than what it is right now. so, i don't think there's anything strange going on here,
except for the fact that if house republicans continue to insist that the president must wait to help fix what everyone agrees is a broken immigration system, the only thing that is harmed is our security, our economy and all those families that are waiting to see some results. so i think the president is right to move forward, to do what president reagan, president bush senior, president bush jr., president clinton, all presidents have used executive orders to make the law work better. he cannot change the law. he can only try make it work better and smarter. >> senator barrasso, you say the president still hasn't come to grips with this election. do you think he's in denial? >> i don't know that, but he is sure, i think, not fully grasping the -- the significant defeat for his party and his policies. as the president said, his policies were on the ballot each and every one of them. we have now elected -- i think we'll end up with nine new
republican senators. his policies have been rejected by the voters. not just because they're unpopular. because they don't work. that's why we went to the white house to say, mr. president, we want to work with you on issues of jobs, the economy, affordable energy and health care. and i was astonished that during that whole lunch, the president didn't ask us anything about that at all. he just was so focused on this executive amnesty issue that he ignored the idea of having a dialogue on ways we could actually change the direction of the country and move forward with regard to jobs and the economy. >> is that true? >> let me disagree with the senator. the president wasn't so focused on the issue of executive action until speaker boehner was the one who raised it saying, it's going to be tough to do anything together unless you do executive action and then the president responded back. so to put the blame on the president for the speaker is unfair. the president said, we've got a lot to do together -- >> was there not a discussion back and forth about both -- both parties' ideas about jobs?
>> that was -- the president posed that as one of the issues we should have conversation about. remember, we only had so much time to discuss issues. we had a briefing by the military on the situation in syria and iraq. as the president said, he went through about four or five different issues and said, all these issues i hope we have an opportunity to work with on -- >> senator barrasso, you think there wasn't enough talk about the economy and jobs, which is, according to voters, the number one issue? >> whose fault -- john boehner started off right away, executive action, it's going to be tough to do anything. >> and the president then spent an inard ant amount of time talking about his goals for executive action and pretty much ignored the next two years. that's why i said, what the president decides to do in the next two months sets the tone for the next two years. there are dozens of bills that have passed the house in a bipartisan way, specifically related to jobs, the economy,
trade, health care. we want to put and will start putting on the president's desk -- >> none of that was discussed -- >> -- in january -- none of that came up. other than isis and ebola, the president's goal was to take executive actions when the president's policy and party were refutiated. >> he said republicans will no longer have to cowtow to republicans and tea party. here's what he said. >> means negotiations end up perhaps being a little more real because, you know, they have larger majorities, for example, in the house. they may be able to get some things through their caucuses they couldn't before. >> congressmen, do democrats have to do anything differently? >> well, all of us have to do something differently. >> i'm asking about democrats.
>> yeah, democrats and republicans. >> what do democrats have to do differently? >> i think democrats have to know now that senate and house are in the hands of republicans, we have to see where we can work with those that drive the agenda in the house and the senate to see where we can come together and find common ground. it's no longer going to be a republican houseworking with a democratic senate. it's going to be one of those areas where we have to see if we can join with republicans as they propose legislation to send to the president. and hopefully the -- the republicans in both the house and the senate propose bills that the president has said he's willing to sign versus just send him legislation that he's said, this is going to be vetoed as soon as it gets to my desk. >> finally, senator barrasso, and i want to ask a question i asked senator-elect capito, how do you feel about the president trying to get the confirmation of loretta lynch as the new attorney general to get her confirmed in this lame duck session as opposed to waiting for the new senate? how much will you resist it if he tries to get her confirmed in this session?
>> the attorney general of the united states is a very consequential position. we have not done an attorney general confirmation in a lame duck since 1906. that was in the same party. the last time we've done one with a change of party was when james buchanan was leaving the white house and abraham lincoln was coming in. so, as i say, what the president does in two months is very consequential for the next two years. she's going to have to specifically come to the hill, talk about trying to get better relations between the departments and the hill and specifically answer questions about executive amnesty. is it legal? is it constitutional? >> senator barrasso, congressman becerra, thank you for joining us. we can solve one of the mysteries about the lunch. let's solve you a picture of the leaders of congress as they left the lunch. you can see they were carrying swag bags, white house swag bags from the lunch. we wonder what had was in the swag bags.
john barrasso has given me, and i'm -- i don't know, i think i may drink it in the second half of the show, white house honey ale. did you get a six-pack? >> six pack. >> have you tried it? >> no, not yet. >> you tried it? >> not yet. will, though. >> maybe we'll have a beer summit. >> there you go. >> thank you, gentlemen. always a pleasure. we'll be watching what happens on capitol hill. up next, republicans win a big victory election night. what happens now? our sunday group joins the conversation. so ally bank really has no hidden fees on savings accounts? that's right. it's just that i'm worried about you know "hidden things..." ok, why's that? no hidden fees, from the bank where no branches equals great rates.
as president i have a unique responsibility to try to make this town work. >> we'll see if we can work with the president. i hope so. that's what he says. we'll find out. >> president obama and presumptive senate majority leader mitch mcconnell talking about cooperation after tuesday's republican wave. but will they find a way to do it? it's time now for our sunday group. brit hume, fox news senior political analyst. peter baker who covers the white house for "the new york times." republican adviser carly firorina and charles lane. when democrats lost president obama came out and called it a shellacking. but he seemed unwilling to admit how badly republicans had lost
or to talk about any changes in his policy or his way of doing business. and i guess the question is, peter, behind the scenes at the white house, are they any more realistic about what happened on tuesday night? >> well, they know it was a bad night. they're not fooling themselves about that. but they look for all sorts of reasons why that happened. it was a bad electoral map, obviously every six-year election in a two-term presidency tends to go badly, and so on. he didn't want to come out and look chaiseened, so he didn't. he didn't want to give us a word like shellacking or thumping, and he didn't. he wants to come out and be aggressive. we heard from the white house the last few days is he was champing at the bit to get out there and be aggressive but held back by senate democrats. >> during the campaign. >> during the campaign. now he's more liberated and he can be more assertive, certainly as he was on wednesday. >> brit, you and i have been
through a bunch of midterms that have gone badly for presidents. oftentimes the presidents decide to switch course as a result of the election results. bill clinton seems like perhaps the best example of that. do you think this president, this president has it in him to really change course and to work more cooperatively with republicans? >> perhaps on a few issues. but i think this president -- there's a character issue here. he seems to have-a this pathological inability to accept responsibility. the last midterm -- second-term midterm wipeout we saw was 2006. and george w. bush came out after that and said the results of the election were disappointing. he called it a thumping. he said, as head of the party, i share a large part of the responsibility for this. of course, it was in the aftermath of that he adjusted course in iraq, which was the issue that had dragged his party down to such a great extent in that election. so, he made a shift. bill clinton, as you pointed out made a shift after he got -- he lost the congress in 1994, two
years into his presidency. i don't sense this president's prepared to do that. i think he -- it's almost as if he thinks that this election was somehow not legitimate because he wasn't on the -- there wasn't a presidential race and it wasn't a big turnout. >> and two-thirds of the people didn't vote. >> and he has this among his other wonderous qualities he knows what those who didn't vote. >> apparently if there is going to be a confrontation, the first confrontation will be over immigration. as weaver been discussing today, the president seems determined to enact executive action, take executive action before the end of the year to defer deportations for millions in this country illegalpy carly, are republicans making a mistake here, with all that talk, boy, you do that, it will poison the well on every issue. should they straight it out and
say, we're unhappy about that but we'll continue to do business, or are they right to say, this will poison the well? >> well, i think, first, republicans should be reminding the american people that when barack obama was president, when he held both the house and the senate, after promising in his 2008 election campaign that he would take on immigration, he did nothing. i think republicans should be reminding the american people that it was democrats that killed comprehensive immigration reform under president george w. bush. this president has done nothing. he has not been waiting for six years -- >> wait a minute. there was a bill, a comprehensive bill passed with republican support in the senate. >> that's correct. >> and it was killed in the republican house. >> that's right. generally legislation goes the other way, although not always. that is, it starts in the house and moves to the senate and eventually gets to the president's desk. but my point is, i do not think this president wants comprehensive immigration reform. i think he wants a club to beat republicans over the head with, therefore, you think, i think he will take executive action.
i think republicans must be talking tough about the consequences of that republican action because, clearly -- that presidential action. clearly, republicans want the border secured, but they also know the current system doesn't work. however, personally, i would counsel republicans against, say, rushing off to impeach the president if he does this. and to continue in a workman like way to pass bills with bipartisan support and put them on his desk. >> your thoughts about immigration reform, who's responsible, what republicans should do. you've got a lot to talk about. >> gee, i mean, we can go on forever, arguing about who struck down immigration reform, but i think to follow up on your question, there is a risk if the republicans sort of overdue it in saying, this will kill any hope of bipartisan. i think probably they're safer position would be to say, boy, this will really cause problems but we're going to soldier on and try to pass legislation
anyway. the truth of the matter is that in the last congress, in spite of all the gridlock and so forth, a lot of work was done quietly in committees on unsexy issues. things like postal reform, cyber security, housing finance, fannie mae and freddie mac. there were bisaturday pan projects that sort of got a little traction under them and sort of died for all the reasons we're familiar with. and corporate tax reform being one of the big ones. it's not inconceivable after all this that something could get legislated. >> real quickly. we only have 30 seconds left in this segment. interesting to hear republicans talk about keystone pipeline. any responsibility the president would bend on that? >> i do. i think there's room for compromise there. i can imagine a package where he agrees to authorize the pipeline in exchange for something that he wants on energy or environment, that the republicans might not be so interested in giving him, so the question is, can they come together on that. he would argue as a tradeoff for
whatever damage, if you can argue it, might be created by the keystone, we get this benefit, it may be worth it. but we'll see if that's possible. >> all right. that was a little hopeful. we have to take a break here. when we come back, president obama is now almost doubling the number of u.s. troops in iraq. does the escalation of forces signal a change in our mission there? plus, what would you like to ask the panel? just go to facebook or twitter @foxnewssunday. we may use your question on the air. that's a fine looking group of people there. when it comes to good nutrition...i'm no expert. that would be my daughter -- hi dad. she's a dietitian. and back when i wasn't eating right, she got me drinking boost. it's got a great taste, and it helps give me the nutrition i was missing. helping me stay more like me. [ female announcer ] boost complete nutritional drink has 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d to support strong bones and 10 grams of protein to help maintain muscle. all with a delicious taste. grandpa! [ female announcer ] stay strong, stay active with boost.
the ultimate arena for business. hour after hour of diving deep, touching base, and putting ducks in rows. the only problem with conference calls: eventually they have to end. unless you have the comcast business voiceedge mobile app. it lets you switch seamlessly from your desk phone to your mobile with no interruptions. i've never felt so alive. get the future of phone and the phones are free. comcast business. built for business. they demonstrated the willingness and the skill to go after isil. so, they've reached a point where they need additional help and guidance.
>> why wasn't that done in september when it really could have helped? to him, national security and war is just politics in another form. that's what i hate so much about the obama administration. >> pentagon spokesman rear admiral john kirby and republican senator lindsey graham sharply disagreeing over the president's decision to send more troops to help the iraqi army to fight isis. we're back now with the panel. before we get to that, peter, what are your sources telling you about this u.s. air strike against isis leaders in the mosul area of northern iraq in the last 24 hours? and what about the possibility that's being mentioned they actually hit the leader of isis, al baghdadi? >> it's a very intriguing possibility. they had leaders were going to be gathering and they took advantage of it while we could. we should be cautious in suggesting that anybody specific has been knocked off at this point. we've seen again in again in the 13 years since 9/11 that reports of the demise of this terrorist leader or that militant leader
proved to be unfounded. i think -- i remember during the original iraq war, we killed a guy chemical ali, cousin of saddam hussein, we killed him five or six times. we did finally -- >> it is encouraging they had this intelligence where some of the leaders of isis were going to be meeting. >> that's right. look, you know, it's not just going to be these troops that are being sent. it's also going to rely very heavily on people on the ground who can help -- you know, spotters, figure out which targets for these strikes to hit. that's what matters at this point. >> we asked you for questions for the panel and we got this on facebook from donna robb. she writes, how is this -- talking about the escalation of troops, how is this different from when we trickled soldiers into indochino in the early 1960s? remember well where that got us. brit, do you see any similarities to vietnam here?
>> you see the gradual escalation and the first forces sent to vietnam were advisers. what strikes me about this is the rationale for this now seems to be the iraqi forces are doing so well that we need to send twice as many advisers to help them as they had before. that seems to me not to make any sense. and it suggests to me, the truth s they're not doing so well and that's why we need to send the forces, the opposite of what they're saying. and i think that was always the case in vietnam. you know, we kept -- we kept escalating and it -- we kept not quite winning and that's what caused them to keep ramping up the troops. it's a slippery slope. >> let's take a look at however long the slope s let's take a look at the escalation so far in iraq. back in june the president sent the first 275 soldiers there to help support iraqi forces. now with this new deployment, we're going to have 2,900 troops to, quote, train and assist the
iraqi army. the question, charles, is whether that is going to be enough to defeat isis or whether in a few months -- i mean, that's a ten-fold increase since june, whether in a few months we'll need even more troops. >> the honest answer, we have no idea. i do want to say it's a promising sign. that there's good enough intelligence, which was always going to be the defect perspectively in this air strike to hit what seems to have been a target-rich environment this morning. but the achilles heel of this whole project is the iraqi army. we're training it to be effective against the isis. this is an army that collapsed after $20 billion, collapsed after isis showed up in mosul a few months ago. so, that is at best a dicey proposition that we're actually going to be able to stand somebody up. i mean, there's a little bit of a vietnam analogy and also a world war ii analogy, i might say, in all of this that we're
proposing to team up with one evil, namely the shia-dominated iraqi militias and their iranian backers in what we deem to be a worse evil in isis. if you think the practical issues are tough, wait until we hear about the moral sides. wait until our side starts committing massacres and so forth. which is another thing it has in common with vietnam, the corruption and brutality of our allies. >> there is also the issue of timing. some people thought it was more than coincidental that the pentagon and the white house announced this just three days after the election. carly, what do you make of that? also, what do you make of the expansion of our deployment of u.s. forces? >> well, i think first let's pu still don't have and haven't heard a strategy. a strategy for how to get any of this done. the drone strikes are great. let's hope we took the leadership out. but the president has never put
forward his plan for defeating -- degrading and defeating isis. actually, i think this is within the envelope of the total number of troops that he at one point is with the timing, and always with this president, too little too late, senator graham had this right question, why now? why not two months ago? and why not arm the sooner rebels that we thought were med -- moderate two or three years ago. we know that the president disagrees with the moderate advice of the military staff and we have seen it over and over again, and the election may have had something to do with the timing, but frankly what had to do more with the timing is simply the president's reluctance to commit to a strategy that will win, and we know that doing something too late never works as well as something doing something on time, and this president is always too late. >> peter, what about this
question of the timing and coming just after the election? >> well, actually, i remember that this has happened before and president clinton when he was elected came to the briefing room and decided to keep the troops in bosnia and president bush sent more troops after the midterm after 2006 and his own caucus was upset that he did not fire don rumsfeld before the election instead of after it. and elections always get in the middle of the process, and always creates a suspicion about the moltvations and the timing. it is a small amount of the troops here in the end. it is hard to imagine this really would have had an effect on the election way or another before last tuesday, but it is not surprising that people want to wonder. >> and i want to go back to what carly said, brit, and that is the big question, the means and the end, and the president has a big end here, and the destruction of isis, and has he got the means? has he got a strategy to accomplish that? >> well, the means, and that is the word that you have to add to
that is the eventual destruction of isis. everything so far is about contain i containing isis from the further the advancements of iraq. and the idea of going after the isis in a serious way in syria really is on the back burner. what i think that this president tends the do ov-- tend s to do and over again is to decide the means and then tailor the mission to the means. >> and not e decide tto decide >> right. and so then he conjures a mission that will fit or seems to, and so far in this case, it seems to me that the smaller mission of trying to hold them, isis back in iraq has not been met by the means that he has chose chosen for that, and that is what 1,500 more troops over there to advise means. this is not working so far, and he needs to do more or else this
is, this piece of it is going to fail, and let alone the strategy. >> and one thing they are worried about is huge massacres in the anbar province of the sunni tribes who were our allies the first time around when al qaeda was defeated in iraq. and i have a e feeling that some of the troops are going to anbar to shore it up. in is a little bit of the effort to address that hemorrhaging that is going on in the short term. >> this ist not the last conversation about this subject. thank you, panel. see you next sunday. up next, the the power player of the week. the man on the front lines in the battle against child sex slavery. a bike ride. i didn't think i'd have a heart attack. but i did. i'm mike, and i'm very much alive. now my doctor recommends a bayer aspirin regimen to help prevent another heart attack. be sure to talk to your doctor before you begin an aspirin regimen. ♪
save your coffee from the artificial stuff. ♪ switch to truvia. great tasting, zero-calorie sweetness... ...from the stevia leaf. you owned your car for four you named it brad. you loved brad. and then you totaled him. you two had been through everything together. two boyfriends. three jobs. you're like "nothing can replace brad!" then liberty mutual calls. and you break into your happy dance. if you sign up for better car replacement, we'll pay for a car that's a model year newer with 15,000 fewer miles than your old one. see car insurance in a whole new light. liberty mutual insurance.
what if one push up couldcoli cprevent heart disease?cancer? one. wishful thinking, right? but there is one step you can take to help prevent another serious disease- pneumococcal pneumonia. one dose of the prevnar 13 ® vaccine can help protect you ... from pneumococcal pneumonia, an illness that can cause coughing, chest pain, difficulty breathing, and may even put you in the hospital. prevnar 13 is used in adults 50 and older to help prevent infections from 13 strains of the bacteria that cause pneumococcal pneumonia. you should not receive prevnar 13 if you've had a severe allergic reaction to the vaccine or its ingredients. if you have a weakened immune system, you may have a lower response to the vaccine. common side effects were pain, redness, or swelling at the injection site. limited arm movement, fatigue, head ache muscle or joint pain,
less appetite, chills, or rash. even if you've already been vaccinated with another pneumonia vaccine, prevnar 13 ® may help provide additional protection. get this one done. ask your healthcare professional about prevnar 13 ® today. he spent 12 years as a special agent for the government, but then he decided to be more productive working on his own. it is dangerous work to conduct undercover stings. this is our "power player of the week." you can see the abuse, and the worst kind of the abuse, you don't want to talk about, and that is the shocking part. >>. >> reporter: tim ballard is talking about child sex trafficking and his effort to stop it. >> they are this age and this age. >> reporter: he is the founder of operation underground railroad. he and his colleagues call themselves abolitionists.
in comparison to the civil war is intentional. >> people are being sold. human beings are being sold for benefit of others and slavery is ale live and well. >> reporter: they focus on the 2 million child sex slaves around the world. traffickers convince parents in poor countries to turn their kids over supposedly to become models, and then the traffickers sell the children for the night or permanently. >> in haiti we had traffickers sell us children for $15, and we walked out with the 2-year-old and the 3-year-old. >> wait, wait, 2-year-old and 3-year-old sex slaves? >> they didn't care what we did with them. >> reporter: ballard spent ten years working with the homeland security in the department of homeland security, but then he decided to do more out sooside the department. he and a jump team got a tip from the the colombian
government and they posed as a customers. >> a customer walks up, and says, we have this, this, this, and we said, what kind of girls? and he said 10. he didn't skip a beat like we were being sold a car. >> reporter: and they started to negotiate. >> they offered five virgins as young as 11 for $5,000 and they brought them. >> reporter: so ballard's team set up cameras to the sting, and ballard paid more than $26,000. i looked at the the kids as they were crying, and it is a punch to the stomach, because they believe you are the monster. >> reporter: but once he had the kids he called in a s.w.a.t. team who arrested the smugglers. >> reporter: usually they keep their cover for the next operation, but this time the children found out they with were the good guys. >> at one point this little girl
went up to the screen of the window where we passed by and put her little hand out, and i was able to reach out to touch her hand and we we kind of broke role and we said, guys, this is the sound of liberation, and the sound of e emancipation. >> reporter: just this year operation underground rail road has done a dozen stings and rescued hundreds of children and put hundreds of trafficker s s prison. and now ballard is the public face, so he won't go undercover again, but he is fwog be a part of the operation. >> and the satisfaction is to see every child liberated and know ing th knowing that we can do it again and again and again. it is bittersweet though how many more that are sill there. and the minutet that you celebrate, you stop yourself. you realize that you have to get to work. >> reporter: operation underground railroad is nonprofit totally funded by private donations. if you want to learn more go to
the website fox news sunday.com. that is it for today. have a great week. we will see you next sunday on fox news. this week on "the journal editorial report," democrats are going to take a drubbing in the midterm elections, but is president obama going to double-down on the past policies or is he ready to work with the new republican majority? and the gop governors have a very good night while the blue state counterparts suffer some setbacks. we will look at the secret of the success. and breaking through the blue wall. tuesday's vote exposes some cracks in the democratic coalition. we will tell you what it could mean for 2016. >> every election is a moment for e reflection, and, you know, i think that everybody in this white house is