tv Fox News Sunday With Chris Wallace FOX News August 6, 2017 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
leaders. this comes as we learn that rob relishes taking the russian investigation to a grand jury. on friday the attorney general announcement
is to try and stop leaks he said that endangered american security. joining me now for the first sunday show interview is rod rosenstein the deputy attorney general and the one who appointed the special counsel after sessions vacations of the mr. rosenstein, welcome to fox news sunday.>> thank you. >> attorney general jeff sessions is that there has been a surge in criminal referrals from intelligence agencies about leaks of classified information since the president took office. he says they have been as many in just these six months as they were in the previous three years. my question is, do you see a concerted effort by people inside this government to hurt or take down or try to take down president trump? >> we evaluate every referral. and every particularly.
so we've had a surge in this and we are responding appropriately. we have more resources and reevaluating procedures and making sure to investigate every week in an appropriate way. >> you must have some thoughts about why there has been a surge in the referrals as many in the six months in the trump presidency as in the last three years of the obama presidency. >> we have seen a surge and will respond appropriately and try to prevent this. >> the attorney general says that your department is pursuing three times as many criminal investigations as you inherited from the obama administration. give us a sense of scale. are we talking 1-3? >> we cannot talk about this in terms of proportion but that
has made an increase for resources. we reprioritize cases. we are providing supervision at a high level. we created a new unit in the fbi to focus on the leaks. we're going to devote whatever resources necessary to get them under control. >> he says you cannot give us the exact number but can you give us a scale? >> that would give the number. but there have been a tripling in the number of referrals. >> a ticket if they were 1-3 there would not be a serious problem. >> 1-3 would not be as many as we have. that is true. >> i had a feeling this was going to be tough interview. i am preparing for it! some of the people to engage in leaks. i do not know this is the deep state faceless bureaucrats tells their weak house officials, members of congress. if you find any of them have committed these leaks, have
disclose classified information, will you prosecute? >> but we need to look at in every link is the fact and circumstance. what was the potential harm caused by the leak? what were the circumstances? then who it is and so forth. if we identify someone no matter what their position is that they violated the law we will prosecute them. >> including white house officials and members of congress? >> including anyone. >> the attorney general says that you are going to also review the policy when it comes to reporters and whether or not you will try to subpoena information from them to disclose their sources. here is how mr. sessions felt. >> we respect the important role that the press plays and we will give them respect. but it is not unlimited, they cannot place lives at risk with impunity. >> the head of the reporters committee for the freedom of the press says what the attorney general is suggesting is a dangerous threat to the
freedom of the american people to know and understand what their leaders are doing and why. your response? >> i think is an overreaction. whereafter the leakers not journalists. people that commit crimes. we are going to use our resources to identify who is responsible for the lease and who has violated the law and hold them accountable. >> there some aspects to that. you are after the leakers, not the report as you say. the president has reportedly suggested at one point. prosecuting the reporters if they leak i mean if they published classified information. are you ruling that out? >> we are on the same position as the attorney general. we look at the facts and circumstances of each case. we determine whether somebody has committed a crime and if it is appropriate to hold them accountable care. >> so you do not consider publishing that classified information a crime?
>> generally speaking those that publish not committing the crime but there might be a circumstance. i'm not seen any of those to date i would not rule out an event that they were a case where a reporter was purposely violating the law. then they might be a suspect as well. but that is not our goal here it is to prevent the leaks. that is what we are after. we have not revised the policy. >> there is another aspect to this which is if a reporter gets information from somebody, puts it out and at the beginning of the amount administration they were very aggressive in going after their sources. and if you subpoena information than they refuse to disclose it they could still end up in jail. at the end of the obama administration after a backlash they loosened up. it has to be approved specifically by the attorney general and it was a last resort signal after reporters sources. you are reviewing that? >> yes. that policy has been in existence for a very long time.
the attorney general revised in 2015. it is possible he got exactly like that maybe did not. we will take a fresh look at that. we have gotten feedback from our career prosecutors and agents. like some of the procedural hurdles delaying investigations so i think it is important for us to take a fresh look at it and evaluate whether or not there are any improvements to be made. >> and that would make any effort to get sources that unit putting a reporter refuses to disclose that source in jail -- >> we learned this year that special counsel robert miller is taking his case to a grand jury. and he can't and will not talk about the details of the case. but as a general proposition, does the fact that a prosecutor takes a case to a grand jury come what does it say about the likelihood of indictments? >> chris, you're right. i'm not going to comment on the case. i'm not going to comment whether director mo has or has not had a grand jury. i read a lot about middle
investigations the media. some of the stories are false. just not comment on investigations. it is important for a number of reasons. first of all we do not want to discard anyone that may be a subject in the investigation. number two we do not want to interfere. >> the what does it say when prosecutor takes a case in general to a grand jury about the likelihood of indictments? >> in general it does not say anything about the likelihood of indictments. because we conduct investigations and make a determination at some point whether charges are appropriate. >> what is the advantage in terms of the investigation to taking a case to a grand jury? >> many of our investigations involve the use of a grand jury. it is an appropriate way to get the documents, sometimes you have witnesses to get the full testimony.it is just a tool that we use like any other. >> there are reports that miller has expanded his investigation to go into the president's finances. he was asked about that
recently. >>. [video] [inaudible] >> when you, i know i am on dangerous territory here but hear me out on this because i'm not asking about the investigation. when you appointed muller, you had to sign in order authorizing the appointment of a special counsel. he said that he was authorized to investigate any coordination with russia and i want to put these words on the screen, any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation. my question is, does that mean that there are no redlines that muller or any special counsel can investigate under the terms of your order anything he finds? >> the special counsel subject to rules and regulations of the department of justice. we do not engage in fishing expeditions. the order that you read is not detailed specifically who may be the subject of the
investigation. because we do not rebuild it publicly. but robert mother understands and i understand the specific scope of the investigation and so no, it is not a fishing expedition. >> i understand it is not a fishing expedition but is there any in the course of the investigation of the mothers that he is looking at if he finds evidence of a crime can he look at it? >> if he finds evidence of a crime it was within the scope of what we have agreed as the appropriate scope of the investigation and if it is something outside of that scope he needs to come to the acting attorney general to expand the investigation. but we do not talk about it publicly so the speculation you are seeing news media is not anything that i have said, anything robert mueller has said. >> people ask about is because you have this that began with a failed real estate deal in arkansas and ended up with monica lewinsky. to expand here need to get approval to expand this.
>> yes. just as did ken starr. he received an extension initiated by the traffic. >> in a speech on thursday the president of the russia story a total fabrication and said here is what justice department people should be investigating. >> what the prosecutors should be looking at our hillary clinton's 33,000 deleted emails. >> dv that is an order from the president? >> chris, the president has put very responsible people in charge in the department of justice. sessions, rachel brandt, christopher wray and others that will be joining us soon. i can assure you that we will do the right thing and follow the rule of law. but the president can order the justice department to do things
and he says what it appears a prosecutor should be doing is looking at hillary clinton, do you view that as an order? >> no chris, i view with the president is publicly something is it publicly. if he wants to give orders to us in the department he does it privately. and then if we have any feedback we provide it to him. >> and can you tell me whether or not he has given you an order? >> i will not. but as a he did not ask us to investigate particular people. that would not be right and it is not how we operate. >> and some other issues. let's turn to the department crackdown on illegal immigration. the attorney general sent a letter this week to four cities struggling with gun violence. -- unless they cooperate with immigration officials. how do you respond to people that say the solution here which is to cut off federal funding to the cities have a real crime problem is worse than the problem? >> the challenge that the attorney general is addressing there is that cities that release criminal aliens, put
everyone at risk. they put citizens at risk and we have seen most recently in this horrible case in oregon where we had an illegal alien who was subject to the caymans. it was ignored by local authorities and was released committed a violent crime. but law enforcement officers at risk. someone is already ngl, if they put them back on the street in his own federal agency did not track them down. that is another risk. that is a kind of danger the attorney general is seeking to address.>> the final thing here, they are saying mandatory minimums, conservatives like rand paul and mike lee, who have been pushing for criminal justice reform say that the results of this is going to end up feeling the prisons with nonviolent low-level offenders instead of going after serious criminals. violent criminals. your response to that? >> percival the priority is to
prosecute high-level drug dealers. not to fill the prisons with low-level drug dealers or drug users. in the policy just returns the department to the traditional policy we've been following since the carter administration. that the presumption is case is to charge the most serious criminal offense but in the event that the prosecutors believe it is not justified, they can make an exception. they just need
to document it. >> thank you mr. rosenstein. thank you for your time. i've got to say, it was a challenging interview but i really enjoyed it. it was really quite interesting. thank you. >> thank you, it is good to be with you. >> up next, thom tillis has introduced a new measure. at them show me minivans with no reported accidents. boom. love it. [struggles] show me the carfax. start your used car search at the all-new carfax.com. it's looking up, not down.ng fit's being in motion.
at the queens city. charlotte north carolina. as robert muller's investigation heats up there is a moved by senators from both parties to protect his special counsel from being fired. our next guest, thom tillis cosponsored a bill this week to do that. senator, why did you introduce the legislation and how would it work? >> well, the reason we introduced legislation, this is something that i talked about last year and the year before under the obama administration. for the legislation does is codify the recent procedures in the department of justice for the only thing it as is a review after the fact, after special counsel has been removed subject to a three-judge panel. so we can make sure that it was done for proper cause. >> your cosponsored democratic senator chris coons says the
reason that this bill was introduced and is on the screen, is to expressly design to threaten the president's power to act in an abrupt and inappropriate way. he say you have been thinking about them for years. but there seems to be some belief in this and it is certainly backed up by what the senator said about this president and his reaction. very negative reactions to special counsel robert muller's investigation. >> i think that is right. that is where we put the effective date back to the date of the current special counsel. but this is an opportunity often times when you have the other party and the other white house, people want these kind of things but they do not have the majority support to do it. this is an opportunity to put something on the books that applies to the current situation that will be in effect going forward for this is something important. it is an important part of what
we need to do to reestablish the public trust and the department of justice. that is why i am taken the opportunity to do it now. this is another very people on my side of the aisle may have some concerns with it. they would be pounding the table for this if we were taught in the present hillary clinton and investigation on something that may or may not involve her. >> but is some of this directed at the president? >> there is no question that it is. because clearly the date that we have made it retroactive? this is about my confidence in the attorney general and in the department of justice to move forward in an appropriate manner.we just want, we do not want to disrupt the authority or the department of justice from removing a counsel to make that so the american people are shirtless on for the right reasons. >> let's talk about the lack of -- the president has quality investigation a hoax and hunt with russia. this is what he said.
>> the russia story is a total fabrication. it is just an excuse for the greatest loss in history of american politics. that's all it is. >> senator, do you think that the russian story is a total fabrication and a hoax? >> i do not know. i think what we have is an investigation that if we allow it to lead us to a conclusion we get a definitive answer to the question. i do not believe that the investigation is a witchhunt for example. i think that this is just a way to put this behind us because there are so many other things that we want to get to. healthcare, tax reform, infrastructure. i'm trying to do everything cancer remove distractions so that i can continue to support the president's agenda. >> what you make of the big news this week that the special counsel is taking his
investigation to a grand jury? >> i think it is just part of the process. i cannot read anything into it. grand juries are convened all over the country for good reasons. i do have a concern. i am not an attorney, i am not a lawyer. i'm not going to get into the procedures. if it gets us to an expedient conclusion, i'm for anything that says that. i happen to think that it will turn out just fine.i want to get this nonsense and get to our dentist. >> will visit the agenda in a minute i want to ask you about something else. apart from the rush investigation that surprising, republicans have recently been pushing back on this president. i'm going to put up a list. you passed a bill limiting his ability to lift sanctions on russia that was bipartisan republican and democrat figures are built to protect the special counsel from being fired. and republicans are keeping the senate technically in session 2 black recess appointments. senator, that is something that one party usually does to the
president of the other party. >> well, i think actually maybe the republicans should get some credit for showing independence and not necessarily different to a white house that happens to share their party. one of the mistakes congresses have made over the past 70 or so years is convey a lot of authority down the street they should never have allowed to leave the congress physical is the difference is made to all of these bureaucrats writing regulations with very low control on congress. there are a number of things i think that we should focus on that wrestled back power that is appropriately centered in the congress. not down the street. this is not about the president is about our institution. >> lester to healthcare. the president said that congress should stay in session and should move and try again to repeal and replace obamacare. senate republican leaders decided to go on recess. they are talking about both moving on from healthcare. where are you on this dark? >> unsigned a letter to extend
into recess. we got a b. i would have been here all my pretty much as i love being here in the queen city i prefer to be in dc. fulfilling the promises we made with healthcare or tax reform. i still believe we will continue to work. being a solution to healthcare. the fact that we did not get the votes a few weeks ago does not mean that there is not a problem. so we have to stand that and get onto test. >> let's talk about the problem. are you willing, because it seems out of repeal and replace is dead. to work with democrats to find ways to help deal with the immediate problem to stabilize the obamacare marketplace? and how would you respond to conservatives who may say hey, instead of trying to repeal obama care. you will work not to prop it up. >> well, i think that propping up a failed platform is problematic. i'm willing to look at anything that may soften the blow as we continue to convince our
colleagues on the other side of the aisle. and some in my own conference that we've got to fix this problem. i will continue to support a measure that will go through reconciliation, the 51 vote threshold. i'm willing to look at what the democrats may be willing to offer. the problem is, it seems to be nothing more than whipping around the edges. and we simply cannot do that. we cannot sustain it. it will continue to destabilize the markets and i think will put people at risk more so than what we try to get done she weeks ago. >> in a timely left lester lightning round for quick questions and answers. one of the things that you have to do when you get back is to raise the debt limit of the country where it will default on its obligations for the first time in history. are you willing to pass a clean bill without attention spending cuts to a?>> yes, that is with necessary good hope we can get the spending cuts. at the end of the day chris, the american people need to know that all we're doing is saying we are committed to
paying our bills. this is not about new spending. it is about agreeing to pay for the obligations that have already been made. many of which incidentally, i disagree with. we should not be spending the way we are spending in this country. >> what are the chances for tax reform this year? and remember we do not pass a budget, do not get the reconciliation process where you can pass tax reform with just 51 votes.>> we have got to pass a budget. so that we have the reconciliation vehicle. we did tax reform in north carolina, it had extraordinary results. we have to do for the nation. it is a promise we made and a promise we need to keep. >> finally the president this we propose cutting legal immigration and have especially cutting lower skilled, lower paid workers. would that be good or bad for your state? >> i think it can be bad. and being anything to look up numbers because of minutes, aquaculture, we have an immigration system here that is broken. i do not know what the right numbers are pure for think an
arbitrary cut living without data is problematic. after we got -- released a couple of weeks ago there are number committees have applied to include mar-a-lago. so there's obviously a need out there that has not been fulfilled. by that work was good and it was american jobs and risk. i'm glad that senators offered something at least to get the debate going but now is get to the facts and make sure that we not harming american businesses in american jobs by doing this in a way that is not driven by information. >> senator, thank you for joining us, sir. >> thank you.>> next we will weigh in on the administration's plan to go after leakers. plus what would you like to ask the panel about special counsel robert muller taking his brush investigation to a grand jury? go to facebook or twitter at "fox news sunday" and we may use your questions on the air.
[upbeat music] >> announcer: no one loves a road trip like your furry sidekick! so when your "side glass" gets damaged... [dog barks] trust safelite autoglass to fix it fast, and we'll get you back on the road! [dog barks] ♪safelite repair, safelite replace.♪ so she only earns double miles on purchasesit card. she makes from that airline. what'd you earn double miles on, please? ugh. that's unfortunate. there's a better option.
the capital one venture card. with venture, you earn unlimited double miles on every purchase, everywhere, every day. not just airline purchases. seems like a no-brainer. what's in your wallet? you're searching for something. whoooo. like the perfect deal... ...on the perfect hotel. so wouldn't it be perfect if... ....there was a single site... ...where you could find the... ...right hotel for you at the best price? there is. because tripadvisor now compares... ...prices from over 200 booking... ...sites ...to save you up to 30%... ...on the hotel you want. trust this bird's words. tripadvisor. the latest reviews. the lowest prices. >> most people know there were
it is time now for our sunday group jason riley from wall street journal editorial board/fox news contributor and author of a new book falls black power. we have charles lane, editorial writer for "the washington post"/fox news contributor, we have rachael bade, politico congressional reporter. and rich lowry, editor, national review/fox news contributor. robert muller is taking his case to a grand jury and seminar reports that his investigators have gone to the white house and are asking for documents concerning the former national security advisor general michael flynn, rich, where is this investigation now? >> i do not think that robert mueller is going away until he indicts people get busy michael flynn and paul manifort are in a lot of jeopardy. others could be as well. it is increasingly wide ranging probe into question is how much tolerance is the president of the niceties have for that?
i think the president needs to realize if he fires robert mueller there is a chance that he could be the lead witness in impeachment hearings. >> and of course if you get those legislation into the telus past he may not be able to fire robert mueller. >> i'm skeptical if this will pass to even more skeptical that it should pass. i think there are serious constitutional problems. you can have the judiciary deciding whether to be head of the executive branch to fire someone that works for him or not. >> 20 think specifically that michael flynn and paul manifort are involved in this? >> i think michael flynn has had to serially redo his financial disclosure forms. some of the payments from this firm that might have been a cut out for the turkish government are highly suspect. i think that is the very center of the criminal investigation. but one last point chris and you brought this up with the deputy attorney general. i think that he may have made a really momentous mistake in not
being more specific in the initial charge to robert mueller about what exactly, what specific crimes he should be invested getting and let robert mueller come back and be very public about what new friends he might be investigated because there is no way to know now whether it is a fishing expedition on it. and robert mueller could be by the assumption. next we asked you precisely on this issue. got this on twitter from tom h. he writes, how does an investigation of russian hacking and 2016, get to private business deals eight years passed? how do you answer tom and also this question, obviously i discussed this at considerable length with rod rosenstein. what if the special counsel's investigation goes into donald trump's finances over the years? >> i guess the theory of russian collusion has always depended on the russians having some sort of leverage over
donald trump. some ability to exercise blackmail type control. we have this dossier out there that is really salacious stuff but - >> completely uncorroborated. >> yes but the more plausible theories of russian leverage had to do is somehow russian institutions financing his business enterprises in the last eight years. is that -- in some ways i guess i'm agreeing with rich. there is a risk that if this becomes perceived as ranging way beyond the question of who might have manipulated the 2016 election? the michael flynn stuff is fascinating because it is about turkey now. not about russia. and undoubtedly, michael flynn has got all kinds of problems with this foreign agent registration and so forth. but after all, he was only national security advisor for
24 days. and it is going to take some explaining to length that somehow back to the mission of the investigation. presumably with what robert mueller is up to her. like if they are finding leverage on michael flynn to flip him to tell what he may know about russia. >> then there was as we discussed with the deputy attorney general the barrage of leaks this past week. and in your effort to find leakers. this is the director of national security. >> understand this.if you improperly disclose classified information, we will find you. >> jason, we have been through this before. what is the likelihood that they can find the leakers and really stop and i have to say, there has been a torrent of leaks since this president took office. >> was also distillers between the types of leaks he appeared there is leaking about what's going on in the west wing in terms of personnel and then there is the leak that we had
this week with regard to conversations that donald trump has been having with other leaders. which are much more serious. the president of the states not speaking confidence to world leaders. >> there has also been about michael flynn the intel picked him up in surveillance. >> those are going to be that as well.the leaks however, regarding brush investigation i think will be very difficult to stop. the independent prosecutor on bill clinton, his office also had lots of leakage during the investigation. a lot of it was to gain leverage on witnesses. by the way. so there will be very difficult to stop. i think a problem that donald trump has states back to the campaign the fear that has been his treatment of the intelligence community. he has a very dicey relationship with people who weapon eyes information for a living. and it has dragged into his presidency and it still is haunting him. and one thing that attorney general jeff sessions that a
news conference this week is that the cabinet, the members of the administration need to be more disciplined in terms of leaks. and i think he is absolutely right. the president himself i think has to also delete here and he has to change his tone and how he is dealing with members of the intelligence community. >> rachel, it is not just these members that are leaking we know that we've known for years members of congress leak, their staff leaks, white house officials leak. often times for political gain. what do you make of what rod rosenstein said in the interview which is, look if it is a white house official or member of congress, we are going to prosecute them. and as someone who covers congress, how much concern is there up there with leaking being rampant? >> i think it certainly shows that the department of justice is suspicious that things are coming from the hill.
regarding the leaks announcement seems like they have had mixed reception and i talked to lawmakers about after the press conference. on the one hand, a lot of them are just as upset as trump. they find this to be a distraction from talking about their agenda. there at press conferences talk about goals they working on regarding veterans and their saying what you thinking about these leaked conversations that the president had with you know mexico and these comments? in that regard they're happy about them going after the leaks. but the second piece of this, they seem a little weary about going after reporters. i think that is when you might see some of the republicans on the tail stock short. right now, the last in the republican party is when they tried to get there agenda living as a bunch of headlines saying that the trump administration is dealing with reporters that give over their sources.that is not something they want to see pernod. >> rod rosenstein seemed to be making a distinction, not where
the president is apparently gone where is prosecuting reporters for doing the job. he said we're not going to do that. but he indicated that it might be tougher about trying to get reporters to disclose their sources. so you can find over the leakers are. >> that is the most direct and simple way to find out who is leaking. it is also the most radioactive way and if they end up subpoena reporters and they do not give up in the jail it will be a more on the present and portrayed as negative coverage because all of the coverage has been negative. >> how do you feel about it? >> i do not think that the press has immunity by any means. but i think in a highly damaging week that really hurts national security, as a last resort, it is something they should be willing to do. >> all right, we have to take a break. when we come back, congress is off on summer break with a lot of unfinished business left behind. will they get anything done when they return?
in congress is not be distracted by the stories of the day. i understand you'll have to cover those but we don't. but we need to do is maintain our focus on getting our work done. >> the number two republican in the senate warning congress cannot afford to get sidetracked from its long legislative agenda.when he returns from recess in september. we are back now with our panel, we have rachael bade, with someone who covers congress, or the chessboard bipartisan compromise that i was talking met with senator tillis to try and stabilize the obamacare
markets? >> from talking to republicans before they left for recess, i can say that most of them are saying privately that they think repeal and replace is dead for now. we are hearing a lot of chatter about bipartisan bills basically to make some fixes which is interesting because it is very different from what the campaign was. but trump, trying to get this moving and was calling lawmakers critters saying they need to get this done. and he actually made a threat unilaterally about insurance exchanges by stopping federal payments for subsidies. that has actually pushed republicans closer to democrats such that all of the chatter we are hearing now is about bipartisan fix that would force him to make these payments. >> as i was discussing with senator tillis, you'll get a lot of people back home saying you promised to repeal it, now you're propping it up. >> oh yeah, absolutely! rand paul, mike lee, a lot of
guises in lester's repeal in that we can work on replace in the next two years. the problem is the republican party on the hill is subdivided on this. yes everyone must get rid of obamacare. but when it comes to actually putting together the replacement, they are all over the map right now. >> jason, healthcare is only part of this. when they get back in september, they're only going to have about a couple of weeks. they have got to raise the debt limit, they are nowhere on tax reform and this republican-controlled congress has yet to pass and send to the president a civil major legislative goal. >> i think the difference here is that while the president doesn't seem to be to particularly worried about big legislative accomplishments, nor does his base, a lot of these republicans up for election next year, invokes the senate and in the house, want something to run on. and so they need something to go back home and campaign on. i agree, i think that the healthcare reform repeal and replace is probably dead.
i think you have to bail out the insurers. i'm hoping they can get something in return for doing that. perhaps something with medical device tax, perhaps something on the individual mandate.but something in return. >> at the time i spoke with nancy pelosi last week. i said that, what are you going to give in return and she looked at me like i was speaking martian! >> well, the democrats are very and bolded right now. i think that chuck schumer as well as nancy pelosi. both leaders are very and bolded. that i hope mcconnell invokes can wrangle something out of this in return. but i think that this idea that trump has that they can let the exchanges failed and avoid being blamed i do not think is realistic. i think both the media and will blame republicans if this fails. and if there is no replacement in place. >> then there is the news from the white house this week and that is that retired four-star general, john kelly has taken
over as chief of staff. the president gave his new man a big welcome. >> we just swore in general kelly. he will do a spectacular job i have no doubt. as chief of staff. rich, how much of a difference do think john kelly can make? >> i think you can make a pretty serious difference. with reince priebus he never really had the authority to do the job properly. and then he didn't really have, he was a nice guy and did not have the personal bearing to make people pay attention to him. that is not a problem with john kelly on either story. he has the authority from the president, he has the military bearings, a little intimidating to people and make people pay attention to him. the problem obviously ultimately is at the top. there is no changing donald trump's character and the way he operates. although we saw the campaign there was a marginal difference
between -- the difference might have just been enough to get him over the top in the election. hopefully the kelly difference will also be telling here. >> you know, even before he took office with this past monday, kelly already was assuming power. he apparently called jeff sessions, the attorney general, the attorney general to tell him he was safe in his job. and a fight with conservatives who are going after the national security advisor. another general hr mcmaster. he has sided with mcmaster and strengthen him. and i want to bring up this picture that has just come out. this is john kelly over there on the far left. this is in the old executive office building address and the entire white house staff late this week. telling them their responsibilities, the chain of command and saying, your duties are first to country, second to the president and as far as your own self interest is concerned, that does not count. some trump supporters
suggesting this could be a turning point in the trump presidency. is that overly dramatic? >> you know, it depends on which kind of trump supporters you're talking about. some see john kelly as a savior. someone who will stabilize and it will be a turning point. and there are some trump supporters that see this as a betrayal of the true trump. that john kelly is in some way being brought in to blunt the sharp ideological edges of nationalism and so forth. that trump had promised.and look, that white house is a snake pit. you talk about the military bearing of john kelly impressing people. hr mcmaster has i believe three stars on his shoulder and his military bearing has not protected him from a campaign of vicious leaks coming from people within the white house and regarding him as sort of a sellout on foreign policy. john kelly has got to get, he has his hands on the problem right now and i think a lot of
people inside the staff are looking to see if he can really get control of it. because if he can well, i think you will have established his authority and people will do what he says. by somehow people find ways to work around even john kelly with back channeling directly to the president and sending him memos that reflect the latest alex just appears he continues i think that kelly has a problem on his hands. >> is interesting because we're learning more about the transit white house under reince priebus hearing the changes that are being made now jason. one of the things that apparently john kelly has done is closed the door to the president's office because what used to happen is that people would just walk in. poor people would bring in articles or - >> like an episode of seinfeld! people just barging in the door. [laughter] >> i had not thought of that! >> putting kelly in charge is a good move. but we've seen this before. they do not seem to last very long and that is the problem. and there is only so much that
john kelly can do. obviously trump is still active commenting on an ongoing investigation regularly. when he should have been answering questions as coyly as the deputy attorney general was with you earlier. i mean that is the way you handle this. yet all. , investigations are going to hang over all of this in the west wing while donald trump is trying to govern this. and pursue his agenda. >> is a interesting contradiction about donald trump and his lawyer food the day before so we look forward
to cooperating fully. that is a kind of stuff that just continues. at the top! >> i have about 30 seconds here rachel. the view from capitol hill. how should they see dysfunction in the white house and how hopeful are they about john kelly? >> i think everything is going around color and after a lot of talking about what he will do the white house but this is an opportunity to push the reset button with the hill. i think increasingly are seeing a dynamic shift between the republicans on the hill and the trump white house. and the president is tweeting at lawmakers climb them quitters. and i lawmakers are pushing back against trump and we need to get a stronger check on him. the other day at a republican conference, somebody stood up and blamed the president for why healthcare fails. so kelly can repair those relationships i think. >> thank you panel. see you next sunday. up next, jane goodall on her decades long work on chimpanzees and her continuing
raising awareness and money to protect the planet and the animals that live here. >> one of the greatest rewards i have is the number of people around the world who say thank you jane, you taught me that because you did it i can do it too. >> why are you still keeping on such a schedule? >> because we humans, the most intellectual beings who ever walked the planet, are very busily destroying our only home. how's that possible? >> it was 1960 when jane goodall, then 26, sent out for the animal preserve which is now in tanzania. she was trying to find the link between man and ape. >> exciting moments when i first saw a chimpanzee eating meat. >> observing chimpanzees in the jungle by herself, she discovered a number of links. the chimps can show compassion or wage war. but most important, the way that they used twigs to hunt
for termites. -- >> why was that such an important discovery? >> because science thought at the time that humans and only humans, used and made tools. we were defined as man the toolmaker. [video] >> in 1965, national geographic did a film about her work. it created a sensation. >> it was kind of beauty and the beast. i mean, the whole thing was not really about science it was about this young woman going out into the jungles and became a geographic cover girl. >> the fact that he was such a striking girl, did not hurt either, did it? >> it did not hurt at all. >> is with the chimpanzee, she even learn their language.
>> the dominant male, because they're dominant and i would be -- >> interviewer laughing? that is a laugh? >> yes. that is as if i am being tickled. >> jane goodall ended her career as a field biologist 30 years ago. but she set off the institute to continue research. as well as choose to turn young people and 98 countries into activists. time is all she thinks about now. >> i did not know how far it is. but the end is there. i still got so much to do. >> this year, the jane goodall is it is opening its 40th anniversary. to learn more about jane goodall, go to our website fox
news sunday.com. that is it today. have a great week. we will see you next "fox news sunday". >> the russia story is a total fabrication. it is just an excuse for the greatest loss in the history of american politics. we did not win because of russia. we won because of you. >> welcome to "the journal editorial report" i am a paul gigot. that was president trump in huntington west virginia thursday night going on offense filing reports a -- robert mueller and the investigation into esrussian interference in