tv Americas News HQ FOX News August 22, 2017 11:00am-12:00pm PDT
>> america's news hq starts now. >> sandra: fox news alert. secretary of state rex tillerson set to speak at any moment just hours after president trump laid out his strategy for afghanistan. secretary tillerson's expected to give more details on american involvement in that country. president trump called on afghanistan's neighbors, pakistan and india, to help the united states fight terror groups in that region. we watched the president just a short time ago board air force one, taking off for arizona. he'll first go to the city of yuma along the u.s. border with mexico. more on the details of why that trip with a guest later in the hour. and then he'll sit down for a
campaign style rally in phoenix. we have team fox coverage. mike emanuel with the news in phoenix ahead of the president's arrival there. we begin with allison barber. we're listening for secretary tillerson and a new development that has just come in. we're trying to learn more on this. but word that some of the first fighting forces leaving for afghanistan could arrive later this week, early next week. that's the only line we have. we'll work the story. now to you. >> reporter: welsh shortly after president trump gave his speech last night, secretary of state rex tillerson released a statement of his own, saying with this new strategy in part, it is a good thing in part. he said, quote, we are making clear to the taliban that they will not win on the battlefield. taliban has political legitimately through a negotiated political settlement to end the war. tillerson went on to say the u.s. is ready to support peace talks between the taliban and
the afghan government without preconditions. he also emphasized something president trump emphasized last night. that in order for lasting peace in afghanistan, the country's neighbors, pakistan and india, need to help. trump focused on the military side of things, at one point saying the u.s. the not nation building, they're killing terrorists. he did touch on diplomatic efforts down the road. >> some day after an effective military effort, perhaps it will be possible to have a political settlement that includes elements of the taliban in afghanistan. but nobody knows if or when that will ever happen. we are a partner and a friend, but we will not dictate to the afghan people how to live or how to govern their own complex society. we are not nation building again. we are killing terrorists. >> reporter: based on tillerson's statement released last night, the state department and the white house seem to be
on the same page. we expect tillerson to focus his press conference today on the new strategy in afghanistan. of course, harris, other top eubgs could come back to you. >> harris: as we mentioned at the top of the hour, right now air force one is in route to phoenix. the president will hold a large campaign style rally, three hours from now. immigration and border patrol will be big themeses in toepblt's speech, we are told. mike emanuel live in phoenix ahead of that. what are the expectations since the president's arrived? >> reporter: well, harris, coming here to phoenix, president trump will visit the border region, yuma, arizona, first. that should set the stage for the president making a forceful case for building that wall. and to push congress to get it done when they're handling fiscal issues in september. mike pence told fox and friends today that when the president speaks tonight, he will lay out the agenda for why congress returns. >> repealing and replacing
obamacare. bringing about the kind of tax cuts that will get this economy moving father. even though we've seen a million jobs created and companies around the country investing in america again instead of investing around the world. the president is going to call on congress to move an agenda forward that will make america great again. >> reporter: there was some buzz that the president could pardon a sheriff who he called a great american patriot. but there are reports suggesting there won't be a pardon announced tonight. harris? >> harris: i know politics always seep in no matter what. so what are the democrats doing to prepare for the president's visit? >> reporter: it's interesting. the phoenix mayor actually called on the president to postpone his visit. mayor stanton is basically blaming the president for a lot of tension we are feeling these days, accusing him of dousing racial tension with gasoline. stanton is calling folks who turn out today to be civil,
respectful, peaceful. other democrats are trying to put arizona republicans in an awkward position. >> republicans have refused to stand up and tell him to stay home. it is simply not enough to make comments worse. republicans must disavow his presidency and his actions across the country. >> reporter: many downtown businesses are expected to close early today to make sure their people do not get caught between those for and those against the president's rally. harris? >> harris: mike, thank you very much, we appreciate it. president gave a nod to the turmoil after charlottesville in his speech last night. watch. >> we cannot remain a force for peace in the world if we are not at peace with each other. as we send our bravest to defeat our enemies overseas, and we
will always win, let us find the courage to heal our divisions within. >> harris: so some asking the question today, will the president go down the same path and touch on those same points tonight or in a different course? joining me now is former special adviser of the trump transition team jeff dewitt is with us. always great to see you. thank you. >> always great, harris. thank you for having me. >> harris: let's start there. campaign rally is very different than a speech you give in front of your generals and the rest of the nation, as the president did last night talking about afghanistan. that audience tonight will be decidedly different. so will the message be, is the question? >> i'll tell you last night's speech i thought was perfect. it was right on target explaining to the american people why our military fights for our freedom and calling for us not to let our opinions divide us back at home. i really am disappointed in the
other side of that argument, who are still trying to divide us, especially in items of national security. i think it's a great time for him to come here to arizona. this has been a huge base of support for him. also where he did his first campaign rally in july 2015. arizona loves president trump and i think we're going to see some of the same. i think we will see some calls for unity and coming together. because we really need to, as an american people, and i know the president understands that. >> harris: jeff, you know this president so well. so the arizona republic has something to say about him coming. i'm curious to get your thoughts. let me read with what they printed. quote thrb rally represents an opportunity for trump, and i'm sure they meant president, to begin acting like a president. arizona has no control over whether he meets that challenge, but the rally also represents the opportunity for arizona to distinguish itself as a state that values peaceful protest and rule of law.
arizonans have full control over that, end quote. what are your thoughts? >> well, again, i expect a peaceful rally tonight. i really think that everyone's starting to realize around the country that we need to come together. and the president, i firmly support everything that he's been doing. he's been doing a very very good job of that. tonight what you're going to see is a lot of very very strong supporters in there. i think you're going to see calls for unity. i hope the protests are peaceful. there's always bad apples in every crowd. but i think it's going to be a very good event. there's a heavy police presence to make sure everything stays good. we have a lot of people showing up to see the president and to hear his message. because i will tell you, arizona loves donald trump. >> harris: real quickly because i want to move on to the border. the governor, not gonna go to this rally tonight, governor of arizona. he said he'll meet the president at the tarmac. why is that?
>> you know, i don't know answer to that. the governor will be there, as you said, to meet at the tarmac. you never know, he might show up for the rally. we'll see if that changes. it's time for us all to come together. i am excited to see him there at the tarmac. as you mentioned, too, the president will be visiting the boarder to assess situations there. >> harris: he's going to yuma city to do that first. for anybody, i had to read this to remind myself today. the last time a president was in yuma, arizona, was 2007. that's when president george w. bush went to check on his massive fence building project which has now turned yuma out as one of the great success stories for building fence line, of which some have said that's some of what the president meant by a wall. there is money already allocated since 2006 for people to do that. it also showed building up the
border presence would also help down there. so yuma is a success story. you know the politics better than i do in arizona. his visit there first. >> absolutely. whether you call it a wall or fence, the bottom line is a physical barrier. the physical barriers work. and they work in securing the border. and the president will see that later today. now, if you were to go to the southeastern part of the state, you would see a whole different story. where it's almost a free for all in some place, of people running over the border. fences and walls work. and the physical barriers, yes. that's what we need to get done along our southern border. it is time to build the wall and protect our country. it's not just about immigration. it's about drugs pouring over the border, weapons and all sorts of things. the president will see, yuma is a success story. it has worked very well there.
>> we appreciate your time. thank you very much. >> thank you, harris. >> harris: a new warning from iran. that country's atommic chief said his scientists need only five days to ramp up uranium enrichment to make a nuclear bomb. the push back from iran comes as president trump is threatening to renegotiate or walk away from the 2015 nuclear deal. however, washington recently certified iran as in compliance with the deal, leaving it in place. a lot to talk about with that later. some remains of the ten missing sailors from the collision of the uss john s. mccain have been found. divers performing recovery operations inside that ship today, and they have located bodies in flooded compartments near where the ship took damage after colliding with a tanker vessel. that happened on monday. the royal malaysian navy is also discovering the remains of another sailor missing from the mccain. the navy is still working to identify those. new threats from kim jong-un in
north korea. we are waiting to hear from secretary of state rex tillerson. he may address that. as the u.s. begins joint military exercises with south korea, the new report that links the north with syria's chemical weapons program. i'm certain the secretary may be asked about that. we'll take that live when it happens. plus, president trump is spelling out his strategy for afghanistan. it happened in his speech last night. information that troops may be arriving soon. what he's saying about the timeline for u.s. involvement in afghanistan. they close. >> the vacuum we created by leaving too soon gave safe haven for isis to spread, to grow, recruit and launch attacks. we cannot repeat in afghanistan the mistake our leaders made in iran. what was the worst thing you saw?
don't you get lonely? have you ever killed anybody? ♪ what did you think when i asked you these questions? i had never met anybody from the navy that's why i was, like, asking you all kinds of questions. yeah. i honestly didn't know what the marines did. everybody's experience is unique. you got musicians, you have cooks, you have admin people. ♪ i just think people should be more open minded. just get to know the person. ♪
>> harris: this is breaking. the top u.s. commander is saying that the first new forces will arrive in afghanistan within days or weeks. quote, what's most important for us now is to get some capabilities in to have an impact on the current fighting season end quote. joining me now is congressman peter king of new york, member of the house homeland security committee. congressman, always good to have you especially when news the breaking. so this is a new detail. i want to just learn from you your thoughts on the significance of the timing. this is very quick after the president last night. >> this is what has to be done. the president makes his statement last night. then you see quick action following up on that. that helps the president and the secretary mattis and general mcmaster. they would also follow up with
speeches and statements to keep this going. it's important for the general in afghanistan to say what he did, to show this is part of a synchronized policy. that it was already in place before the president made his statement last night. >> harris: all right. i'm going to ask you to stay with us for this breaking news. secretary of state rex tillerson is speaking at the state department. >> -- delivering results that they were intend to deliver. some of that has been challenged by the security environment. it's very difficult for many of our aid workers to operate in afghanistan. so as the security environment improves, we expect to adopt a different approach as to how we deliver on the development and assistance that supports the afghan government and their performance as well. i think the president was clear this entire effort is intended to put pressure on the taliban to have the taliban understand, you will not win a battlefield victory. we may not win one, but neither
will you. so at some point we have to find a way to bring this to an end. this is a rouge nall approach. part of why this effort took as long as it did, we chose to not just focus on afghanistan. but we under took a fairly come phrepb -- comprehensive view in pakistan and iran. we used pakistan, india to also bring pressure to bear on the situation in afghanistan. pakistan in particular can play an important role here, certainly in delivering the taliban to the negotiating table. pakistan suffered acts of terrorism, their citizens have suffered acts of terrorism i think as dramatic as any we have seen anywhere. we stand ready to help pakistan address terrorist organizations inside of their country, but they must, they must, adopt a
different approach themselves. pakistan and the u.s. historically have very good relationships. but over the last few years there's been a real erosion in the confidence between our two governments. there's been an erosion in trust because we have witnessed terrorist organizations being given safe haven inside of pakistan to plan and carry out attacks against u.s. service men, u.s. officials, disrupting peace efforts inside of afghanistan. pakistan must adopt a different approach. we are ready to work with them to help them protect themselves against these terrorist organizations, but certainly to begin to end their attacks that are disrupting our efforts at peace. we are going to be conditioning our support for pakistan and our relationship with them on them delivering results in this area. we want to work with pakistan in a positive way, but they must change their approach. india's emerge as a very important regional strategic
partner with the united states and has played an important role supporting the afghan government and in particular supporting their economy. it is provide development assistance. they've provided economic assistance. they are hosting an important economic conference in india this next week. all of that is important to stablizing afghanistan as a nation. get their economy functioning, stablize the country so that they can provide more opportunities to their citizens. these are all elements of what will lead to stability and ultimately a peace agreement. but the effort is, again, a regional effort. put pressure on the parties to understand that this fighting is going to take everyone nowhere. it is time to begin a process that may very well be a lengthy process of reconciliation and peace accord and afghanistan, as the president said, can choose its form of government that best suits the needs of its people, as long as it rejects terrorism, never provides territory in
afghanistan to provide safe haven for terrorists and accommodates all of the groups inside afghanistan, ethnic groups and others. how they want to organize themselves is up to them, but we have recognize their culture is a tribal culture and their history accommodates the nature of those relationships. there's no reason their government cannot accommodate that as well. we want to facilitate a peace process and facilitate them coming to some conclusion around how they want to govern themselves. that's really the essence of the strategy. before i take your questions, i do want to make one comment on north korea. i think it is worth noting that we have had no missile launches or provocative acts on the part of north korea since the unanimous adoption of the u.n. security council resolution. i want to take note of that. i want to acknowledge it.
i am pleased to see that the regime in pyongyang has certainly demonstrated some level of restraint that we've not seen in the past. we hope that this is the beginning of this signal that we've been looking for. that they are ready to restrain their level of tensions. they're ready to restrain their provocative acts. and perhaps we are seeing a path way to sometimes in the future having some dialogue. i want to acknowledge the steps they've taken thus far. i think it's important to take note of that. with that i'm happy to take your questions. [ inaudible ] >> i'll be brief. it seems like to me with the no nation building by the president, the main difference, other than the timetable part of the military stuff, the main difference between this new approach and the old one is that you're eliminating two thirds of
what used to be known as the clear hold and build strategy. in other words, you clear, you will hold and we won't build, you will. so if that's correct, what happens to the anti-corruption efforts that you mentioned, the good governance, the counter narcotics, the education programs? what happens to those? and more specifically, what's that gonna mean for particularly afghan women and girls who have been assured for the last 16 years by two separate administrations that they wouldn't be abandoned. >> i don't want to suggest that there's that dramatic a difference in terms of our expectations for afghan government performance. as you point out, there's been enormous strides achieved in afghanistan, both in terms of the numbers of millions of children that are in school being educated, the role of women in the afghan economy now has been dramatically changed. i don't expect any of that to be
rolled back. i think that has become part of the afghan government structure. it's become part of what the afghan people expect. if you go back many years ago prior to all this disruption, that was afghanistan. that was the nature of afghanistan 30, 40, 50 years ago. so i think it is part of their culture already. we want to support that. in terms of the clear and hold, that is still the approach. areas will be cleared and afghan security forces can hold those areas. thereby enabling some growth in the afghan economy. part of what afghanistan's under is they do not have control over a portion of their economy. so as the forces are able to either hold areas and stablize them, certainly not give up further ground, they're still losing ground today as you well know. this will take a little while. to stablize and then hopefully begin to regain control and as ground is gained it will be held by afghan security force. while allowing the afghan
government to continue what has been doing under our assistance now for many years and not roll back any of those gains that have been made. i don't think that's the aspiration of the afghan government or afghan people. we may be taking different approaches and not putting so much of the u.s. taxpayer dollar on the ground, building schools and building infrastructures. we think there are plenty of others that we are going to call upon for assistance as well. rather, we're there to facilitate and ensure that there is a path way for reconciliation and peace talks as this pressure begins to take hold. and we believe we already know there are certain moderate elements of the taliban who we think are going to be ready and want to help develop a way forward. how long that will take will be, again, based on conditions on the ground. >> thank you very much. mr. secretary, a question that
embraces both the military side and the diplomatic side. on the military side, won't the new rules of engagement mean that in the short term, at least, our forces will be more at risk because they will be potentially doing night raids against the taliban again, not just training, but actually supporting in a more active role because the afghan troops are not all up to par here, to push back against the taliban advances? and on the diplomatic side, why didn't the president mention russia's dearming of the taliban which general nicholson has been talking about very openly. seem to be letting russia off the hook in his speech. and do you have enough people, given the fact that there are not trump confirmed diplomatic appointees in many of these positions in the region. >> well, on the military operation side of it, i really defer to the department of defense to answer that one.
other than i know the approach is going to be, as i said, similar to what we have had success wells, as secretary mattis describes it. it's a by, with and through approach. that's part of why the need for step up and troop levels is so we can now at the battalion level organize and help the afghan army fight in a different way with close ground advisement at the battalion level and the ability to call in support on a more timely basis as needed to ensure victory as opposed to either stale mate or defeat. with respect to the comment about russia, to the extent russia is supplying arms to the taliban, that is a violation, obviously, of international norm, violation of u.n. security council norms. we certainly would object to that and call russia's attention to that. if anyone's going to supply arms, it needs to be through the afghan government. in terms of our footprint on the ground, we have very competent
capable experienced people there now. our afghan ambassadors remaining on the job at this time. we have a pakistan ambassador that's been nominated. we hope to have that person cleared through the process soon. even in the transition in afghanistan, as ambassador hail transitions out, we've nominated ambassador bass, very experienced diplomat, been running the embassy in turkey. very complex place. he's very well equipped to step into this place as well. we are looking at a couple different people for the special representative to afghanistan, pakistan position. it's open currently. it's been filled with a very experienced individual today. so we're ready to get going with very competent people we have. i'm not at all concerned about the competency level or the experience of the people that we have working on this. i'm quite confident with them. >> martha radditz. secretary tillerson, i know you don't want to talk about the military, but you were just
using some military terms a battalion level and that. i understand why the administration does not want to talk about tactical moves. but strategy. don't the american people deserve to know approximately how many more of their sons and daughters will be going back to afghanistan in a war that's lasted nearly 16 years? >> i don't want to speak for secretary mattis, but there will be visibility to troop levels once the decision has been made. i think what the president has conveyed, and i agree whole heartedly with him, is that we are not going to signal ahead what our plans are. we're not going to signal ahead an increase, a decrease, the timing of any of that. it will be driven by conditions on the ground. the only way we can defeat an enemy that is as nimble and as cagey tactically as this enemy is we have to be as cagey and tactical as they are. and we've not been fighting that way. >> could that include strikes in
pakistan? >> i'm not gonna comment on what it could include. but the president's been clear that we are going to protect american troops and service men. we are going to attack terrorists wherever they live. and we have put people on notice that if you are harboring and providing safe haven to terrorists, be warned, be forewarned, that we are going to engage with those providing safe haven and ask them to change what they're doing and help us help them. because in my view, the best, the greatest benefactor other than testify afghan people themselves are the people of pakistan. they will benefit more than any other nation. >> mr. secretary, you said no preconditions to talks. specifically, are you saying that the u.s. no longer expects the taliban to accept the afghan
constitution and specifically the rights of women? and on pakistan, did you articulate to pakistan the consequences of their actions? whether it be sanctions, dropping their nonnato ally status? what exactly have you communicated or do you plan to communicate? >> well, i had a good call with the prime minister of pakistan yesterday afternoon. to give them a bit of a forewarning of what they were going to hear in the president's speech. also, we did touch on the points that i have made to you today. we are going to be engaging with them in a very serious and thorough way as to our expectations and the conditions that go with that. all those things you just listed are on the table for discussion if, in fact, they're unwilling to change their posture or change their approach to how they're dealing with the numerous terrorist organizations
that find pakistan. it is in pakistan's interest to take those actions. when we say no preconditions on the talks, i think what we are saying is, look, the government of afghanistan and the taliban representatives need to sit down and sort this out. it's not for the u.s. to tell them it must be this particular model, it must be under these conditions. i think that's what the president means when he says we're no longer nation building. look, we've tried taking certain principles and forums around the world. sometimes it works and a lot of places it doesn't work. we don't know what's going to emerge here. we're going to be there, obviously, to encourage others, but it's going to be up to the afghan government and the representatives of the taliban to work through a reconciliation process of what will serve their needs and achieve the american people's objectives, which is security. no safe haven for terrorists to
operate anywhere in afghanistan now or in the future. >> mr. secretary, you mentioned the force protection concerns and ambassador bass going to afghanistan and the discussions. but how are you going to get someone who is able to go out beyond the wire and negotiate functionally, regularly in that weekly basis with individuals where you can't force protection? >> we are going to have to improve the security environment. the environment today is not conducive to carrying out those types of activities. you're exactly right. so part of what we're going to have to do is first ensure we're ready to engage when conditions permit us to engage. why pakistan is very important in this discussion. pakistan can facilitate much of that discussion. and there are other reasonable players to which this particular conflict and this unstable situation in afghanistan are important. we've had discussions with the
chinese about a role they might be able to play. we've had discussions with the russians about the role they could play if they choose to. and certainly reasonable players in the gulf. gcc member countries are very interested in seeing this area in afghanistan stablized as well. so there are a lot of partners out here on the troop that i think will have important roles they can play. ultimately it comes down to the two parties. the afghan government and the taliban representatives. >> thanks, mr. secretary. going back to pakistan, officials for quite some time, democratic and republican administrations have tried to get the government to stop giving safe haven to the network terrorist group. what leverage do you think you have? >> well, i think it's obviously we have some leverage that's been discussed in terms of the amount of aid and military systems we give them, their
status as a nonnato alliance partner. all of that can be put on the table. but the end of the day, pakistan has to decide what is in pakistan's best long-term interest from a security standpoint for themselves and for their people. quite frankly, as i evaluate pakistan's current situation, if i were the pakistan government, i would have growing concerns about the strength of the taliban and other organizations inside pakistan who seem to be growing their numbers in their presence to the point that at some point they become a real threat to the stability of the pakistani government themselves. i think they need to be thinking about what is in their best long term interest and how we can work with them to achieve a safer, more stable pakistan in the next decades to come as well. i think it really is up to them. they've got to ask themselves that question. why does this work for them and
why is this going to continue to support their stability and the survival of their government in the years ahead if they continue to allow these elements to just grow and maintain their presence inside of pakistan. >> last question. >> thank you. thank you, mr. secretary. don't you fear on the other side too much pressure to put pressure on pakistan islamabad and -- destablize all the region with having taliban strong hold in the country. >> that is a concern. that's why i made the comments i just made that i think it's important for pakistan to think about its ability to contain these groups as well. it's why though we take a regional approach. the u.s. alone is not going to change this dynamic with pakistan. india/pakistan, they have their own issues that they have to continue to work through. but i think there are areas
where perhaps even india can take some steps of reapproaching their issues with pakistan to improve the stability in pakistan and remove some of the reasons why they deal with these unstable elements inside their own country. as i said, other regional players have strong interest in pakistan. china has strong interest in pakistan. having a stable, secure future pakistan is in a lot of our interests. they are a nuclear power. we have concerns about their weapons, the security of their weapons. there are many areas in which we believe we should be having very productive dialogue that serves both of our interests and regional interest as well. so this is, again, this is not a situation where the u.s. is saying, look, it's just us and you. what our approach is you bring these reasonable approaches. you bring all the other interests into this effort. much as we've done with north korea in assembling this global effort in north korea, i think
too often we try to disstill these challenges down to where it's just the u.s. and some other country and only between the two of us can we solve it. we have to enlarge the circle of interest and bring others into the effort as well. that's what we'll be doing with pakistan as well. >> thank you, mr. secretary. we'll see you tomorrow. we'll have a press briefing on cbs. thanks. >> harris: and there you have it. the president's top diplomat and all of our land there making some news on this tuesday. a couple of points that i want to point out before we move forward here. i'm gonna ask my team if representative king is still with us. one of the things that he talked about was just simply furthering the direct words to pakistan on terrorism and how they can come on board in the region. you heard a couple of the reporters there just asking about that at the very end. he says that afghanistan in particular has a choice to govern as it wants to. that the united states will not get in and decide what their government should look like if,
one, they reject terror. two, they never provide a safe haven for terrorists. now, remember, that's where they got osama bin laden, was in pakistan. the third thing being to include all parties, all groups, within the country of afghanistan at the table of governing. so that point. and then the last one, north korea showing restraint. that's interesting. let's bring back the congressman peter king of new york, a member of the house homeland security committee. so, i detailed a couple of the highlights there. what stood out to you? >> i would think overall point was secretary tillerson is following up on the president's speech last night to show this is going to be a very concerted effort. i agree with you. first of all, as far as north korea was concerned, i feel it is a very significant signal. i think small progress is being made. as far as afghanistan, he laid it out. secretary mattis will do what
has to be done militarily. the state department is going to work diplomatically. by bringing in pakistan and india into a regional approach, that is something that's not been tried effectively before. the fact that they are so intent on this is extremely significant. that could be a game changer. >> harris: would you understand, congressman, if people took, i don't know, just exception to the idea now that we're not completely coming out. you've got lawmakers like barbara lee who say, no, no, no, we need to bring all of our troops home. there is this concern over the last 16 years of what we call mission creeps in the military. you go in with the best intensions and then you drift. what is the end game here? >> well, first of all the last 16 years we have not been attacked by al qaeda. >> harris: amen to that. >> that's important to note. overall it has been successful. lot of suffering, lot of pain. i'm not diminishing that at all. but the consequence of pulling out would be far worse than staying in.
i think the fact that we have general mattis, general mcmaster and also general kelly, three of the greatest military minds, and the president giving them leeway. he's empowering him. it's not going to be like president obama where he had the troop increase. he was half hearted, apologetic about it. instead of increasing troops, we're gonna pull them out. president trump is saying we'll do whatever we have to do militarily. he has three of the greatest military minds working on it. that is significant. secretary tillerson showing how this will be an all out diplomatic offensive and bringing in two nuclear powers, pakistan and inia into the equation. >> harris: this do you think is something the president leans on tonight in his rally in arizona? >> i would hope that the president, he can touch on some campaign issues at the rally, but i really hope that he would focus a lot on afghanistan. should be calling the trump doctrine. the fact that the strong
military power and the same time diplomatic pressure and not going into there to nation build, but going in there to provide security, and bring other powers in with us such as pakistan and india. he should e spouse that and dwell on that. good development, good diplomacy and good politics. >> harris: we have a political panel coming up. i'm gonna clip your words and play your words with them. that was very interesting, the trump doctrine. always good to see you representative king. >> thank you very much. thank you. >> harris: secretary of state rex tiller son also talked about north korea at the state department just a few minutes ago during his briefing. the secretary said he's happy about possible recent progress with the north. >> i think it is worth noting that we have had no missile launches or provocative acts on the part of north korea since the unanimous adoption of the u.n. security council resolution. i want to take note of that. waeupbt to acknowledge it.
i am pleased to see that the regime in pyongyang has certainly demonstrated some level of restraint that we've not seen in the past. >> harris: a new confidential report from the united nations says member states have intercepted two shipments of chemical weapons from syria headed to north korea in the past six months. more on this when we come back. it's just a burst pipe, i could fix it. (laugh) no. with claim rateguard your rates won't go up just because of a claim. i totally could've - no! switching to allstate is worth it. year with the new sleep number 360 smart bed. it senses and automatically adjusts on both sides. the new 360 smart bed is part of our biggest sale of the year where all beds are on sale. and right now save 50% on the labor day limited edition bed, plus free home delivery. ends saturday!
>> harris: let's jump back in now on the fact that secretary tillerson said there were no recent missile launch in recent days. william le jeauness joins us. >> reporter: in substance and tone the remarks we just heard is a radical departure from where we were last week. secondly, it comes from secretary tillerson himself, not a lower level diplomat or ambassador. number three, it's an olive
branch or opening lot of experts say are necessary to jump start talks, if you will. finally to end this stale mate most people believe it has to begin with diplomacy. and it probably doesn't mean direct talks because of the conditions we've set, but it is a beginning. it's not to say everything is well. as you mentioned on the intro, just today the u.s. treasury department has basically accused 16 company individuals of doing business with north korea disfight ban against it. they range from companies that are buying coal and iron ore which provide north korea with the money its needs for its nuclear program to companies actually supplying the technology for the missiles themselves. companies are from china and russia. this means the companies cannot use international banks. it's a big deal. which is why just moments ago china said the u.s. should, and i'm quoting, immediately correct its mistake because this could affect broader u.s./china relations. also today, the u.n. accused north korea of supplying syria with chemical weapons and
components in the last six months just after that 90 died in the sarin gas attack in syria for which president trump retaliated with cruise missiles. also, we've got a situation here where we've got these conditions in south korea where we have war games going on, simulated war games, where we're playing out different war scenarios. north korea said, please stop that. the u.s. has refused. >> we have a responsibility to provide military options to our national leaders. exercises are a way of making sure the option is the ready option. it's a capable option. that really under pins deterrents. >> reporter: now, secretary tillerson said there was no -- he's happy that north korea hasn't responded with weapons or a missile attack but they did put out a propaganda video that did show u.s. officials dying in a ring of fire, if you will.
that is controversial. that was put out on state run media today. back to you. >> harris: william, thank you very much. so we've been telling you this hour the president is headed to arizona where he will continue to talk politic, no doubt. but will his attack on gop senators continue? we'll talk about that with our political panel. stay with us. you always pay
your insurance on time. tap one little bumper, and up go your rates. what good is having insurance if you get punished for using it? news flash: nobody's perfect. for drivers with accident forgiveness, liberty mutual won't raise your rates due to your first accident. switch and you could save $782 on home and auto insurance. call for a free quote today. liberty stands with you™ liberty mutual insurance.
katie pathledge town hall.com editor. great to see you. let's begin with the attacks inside the republican party by this president. does he continue against jeff blake or does he stop? >> we'll have to see if the chief of staff, john kelly, decides at this point to be a distraction from the agenda that they're pushing forward from the afghanistan speech last night. i think the president tonight is going to talk a whole lot about the border wall. he's specifically going to yuma, arizona today, because a decade ago yuma didn't have a border wall. we saw human trafficking, drug trafficking, crime from mexican cartels. now 90% of that has stopped. he's going to emphasize that. however, if he does go to the place of attacking jeff blake, he will be in very good company. jeff blake's approval rating starts at a low of 18% and goes to a high of 35% so it won't necessarily be bad for him. >> harris: all right. you mentioned the border and the fact that george w. bush was the last president to visit down there. so that makes it a success city
among those that we look and talk about. the trump doctrine, kind of all fits into that. you heard representative king call it that earlier in the hour. where are democrats on this? because this messaging just might be very strong among debates and now we'll have a lot of members of the base in front of him tonight. >> yeah. i think we have a lot more to learn about what we're doing in afghanistan. certainly, it's a huge escalation, it appears, of our military activity. the president obviously promised something other than that. we're also waiting to learn about what the specifics are of the plan. what we really got was an outline in a sense of a new direction, a direction very similar to where barack obama had been taking his policy for many years and very different from where president trump had been before. but i think we're going to get, as secretary tillerson said, we're learning more about this every day. i think democrats are showing restraint right now and want to have a better understanding of the specifics of the policy
recommendations. >> harris: all right. i want to borrow that word, restraint, because rex tillerson just a few minutes ago used it in regard, katie, to north korea. the president may not be getting credit, or his administration, but we are walking a very different road now with north korea. >> right. after all the criticism of president trump being too bombastic with his fire and fury comment, after all the criticism of him being too harsh with his rhetoric on north korea, here we are now with them backing off a little bit. we'll see how long that holds. they do deserve credit for making sure that the north koreans haven't fired off any new missile test. both through rhetoric, but also through the u.n. sanctions that nikki haley was able to get through with russia and china. >> harris: i have just a minute. simon, does the president talk about charlottesville more than he e clueded to with unity talks? >> tonight you mean? my guess is that what we're
going to hear a lot about tonight is the wall and also about the congressional agenda after labor day when congress comes back. i will say that very importantly, arizona's not friendly territory for the president any longer. his approval is negative. in the mid 50s. there's opposition to his border wall plans in arizona. there's dramatic opposition to the way he's been attacking mexico and his discussions of nafta. the southwestern part of the united states is moving dramatically away from the republican party. so i think he's going there in part to stop the bleeding, the political bleeding. >> harris: i'm going to step in due to all the breaking news, we're out of time. but simon and katie, thank you very much. we'll be right back.
of house republicans yesterday. we're waiting to hear the good word of when he will go home. we'll let you know. it's been a busy hour. more news to come. i'm harris faulkner. here's shep. >> shepard: it's 3:00 on the east coast. noon in phoenix where president trump is set to hold a rally. we're expecting thousands of supporters and demonstrators at the city's convention center. comes during tension between john mccain and jeff flake. both have been critical of the president's comments. president trump also telling american people a bit about his strategy for afghanistan. promising u.s. troops will have a clear path to victory. what is victory? what exactly does his plan change? what does it mean for thousands of brave military heros risking their lives in a war zone? today some answers including when they wind up on the